PAGENO="0001" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 75729 HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NINEI TETH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H.R. 8311 AND VARIOUS BILLS TO PROVIDE AN IMPROVED CHARTER FOR ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT PROGRAMS, TO AUTHOR- IZE FUNDS FOR THEIR CONTINUED OPERATION, TO EXPAND SUMMER CAMP OPPORTUNITIES FOR DISADVANTAGED CHIL- DREN, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES PART4 HEARINGS HELD IN WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 20, 21, 24, 20, 27, 28, 31; AND AUGUST 1, 1967 Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman 0 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE ~O~84 WASHINGTON: 19G7 PAGENO="0002" COMMflI'EE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR CARL D. PERKINS, Kentucky, Chairman EDITH GREEN, Oregon PRANK THOMPSON, Ja., New Jersey ELMER J. HOLLAND, Pennsylvania JOHN H. DENT, Pennsylvania ROMAN C. PUCINSKI, Illinois DOMINICK V. DANIELS, New Jersey JOHN BRADEMAS, Indiana JAMES G. O'HARA, Michigan HUGH L. CAREY, New York AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, California SAM GIBBONS, Florida WILLIAM D. FORD, Michigan WILLIAM D. HATHAWAY, Maine PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii JAMES H. SCHEUER, New York LLOYD MEEDS, Washington PHILLIP BURTON, California CARL ALBERT, Oklahoma IL WILLIAM H. AYRES, Ohio ALBERT H. QUIE, Minnesota CHARLES E. GOODELL, New York JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio ALPHONZO BELL~ California OGDEN R. REID, New York EDWARD J. GURNEY, Florida JOHN N. ERLENBORN, Illinois WILLIAM J. SCHERLE, Iowa JOHN DELLENBACK, Oregon MARVIN L. ESCH, Michigan EDWIN D. ESHLEMAN, Pennsylvania JAMES C. GARDNER, North Carolina WILLIAM A. STEIGER, Wisconsin PAGENO="0003" CONTENTS Hearings held in Washington, D.C.: Page July 20, 1967 2471 July 21, 1967 2565 July 24 1967 2643 July 26, 1967 2841 July 27, 1967 2979 July 28, 1967_ 3129 July 31, 1967 3353 August 1, 1967 3529 Statement of- Addonizio, Frank, city councilman, Newark, N.J 3536 Anderson, Nace, president, Morganfield National Bank, Morganfield, Ky 3151 Baptista, Sister Marie, director, Boorady Reading Center, Dunkirk, N.Y 2593 Benson, Mrs. Bruce B., second vice president, League of Women Voters of the United States 2511 Bernstein, Leo, city councilman, Newark, N.J 3536 Biemiller, Andrew J., legislative director, AFL-CIO, accompanied by Julius Rothman, assistant director, Department of Insurance, AFL- ClO 2841 Boone, Richard W., executive director Citizens' Crusade Against Pov- erty, Washington, D.C 3009 Brand, Cabell, president, Ortho-Vent Shoe Co., Inc., Salem, Va 3288 Burkhart, John, president of the College Life Insurance Co. of America, and Richard L. Breault 3166 Button, 1-Ion. Daniel B., a Representative in Congress from the State of New York 2736 Clancy, Hon. Donald, a representative in Congress from the State of Ohio 3048, 3064 Defino, Tony, chairman, Area Board 9, Newark, N.J 3538 Douglass, Paul F., professor of government and director, Center for Practical Politics, Rollins College, Winter Park, Fla 2896 Dawahare, Hon. William C.. mayor, Hazard, Ky., accompanied by Paul T. Townes, city manager 3185 Dawson, Commissioner Leslie, iventucky Department of Economic Se- curity, Roger Crittenden. and Leonard Kelsey 3193 Dunn, Mrs. Mary Jane, director, community development compo- nents of the community action program 3130 Flanders, Donald, secretary-treasurer, Fond du Lao Area Economic Opportunity Commission, Inc. 2684 Flemming, Arthur S., president, National Council of the Churches of Christ of the United States 2862 Frazier, Lynn, information officer, Kentucky OEO 3143 George, Dr. Zelma, director, Women's Job Corps Center, Cleveland, Ohio 2737 Hansan, John E., executive director, Community Action Commission, Cincinnati, Ohio 3029, 3058 Harris, Louis, president, Louis Harris & Associates, Inc 3375 Held, John E., member of the Cincinnati City Council and chairman of the Crime Study Committee, Cincinnati, Ohio 3050 Holmes, K. David, president of the Connecticut Poverty Council, Waterbury, Conn., accompanied by William Harris, Waterbury; Samuel Russel, Hartford; and Mrs. Jackie Shaffer, Hartford, all of Connecticut 2623 Horton, Hon. Frank, a Representative in Congress from the State of New York 2471 in PAGENO="0004" IV CONTENTS Statement of-Continued Mallard, William, police intelligence officer, Police Department of the Page City of Newark, N.J 3539 McDermott, Hon. Leo, commissioner, County of Chester, Pa., ac- companied by C. D. Ward, general counsel, National Association of Counties 2750 Odham, Brailey, president, Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., Orlando, Fin 3524 Olivarez, Mrs. Grace, consultant on behalf of the National Associa- tion for Community Development, accompanied by Mr. Allan Ma.ley, Jr., member, board of directors, NACD, and executive director of the Dallas County Community Action Committee, Dallas, Tex 2664 Panel composed of Mr. D. M. McElroy; Mr. Donald Flanders; Mr. Ben Day; Mrs. Annie Lee Small; and Mr. Jim Templeton 2676 Parkinson, George A., director, Milwaukee Vocational Technical and Adult Schools 3353 Parsons, Miss Cynthia, education editor, Christian Science Monitor - 2756 Perimutter, Dean 0. Williams, State University, New York____ 2743, 2794 Pepper, Hon. Claude, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida 31~9 Pollock, Hon. Howard W., a Representative in Congress from the State of Alaska 3529 Pomeroy, Kenneth B., chief forester, American Forestry Association_ - 2554 Ramey, George, director, Mayo Vocational Technical School, Paints- ville, Ky 2943 Robie, Edward, vice president, Equitable Life Assurance Society of New York 2983 Rockefeller, John, member of the West Virginia Legislature, Charles- ton, MT. Va 2565 Rogers, Hon. Paul C., a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida 2643 Schulz, Rev. Larold, chairman, Antipoverty Task Force, National Council of Churches of Christ; Rabbi Richard Hirsch, director, Religious Action Center and George L. Haitheock, director of field service, National Catholic Community Service 3306 Seagren, P. MT., director, Lindsay Hopkins Vocational School, Miami, Fin 2940 Shriver, Sargent, Director, Office of Economic Opportunity 3415 Small, Annie Lee, director, Action, Inc., Athens, Ga_ - 2686 Smith, Dr. Spencer M., Jr., secretary, Citizens Committee on Natural Resources, Washington, D.C 2534 Speiser, Lawrence, director, Washington Office, American Civil Liberties Union 3027 * Stubblefield, Hon. Frank A., a Representative in Congress from the * State of Kentucky 3150 Templeton, Jim, director, Northeast Community Action Committee, Olive Hill, Ky 2688 Watson, Don, director, Trumbull County Vocational School, Vienna, Ohio 2913 Whitakër, Gaylord C., chairman, Gra~ex, Inc 2474 Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.: Bailey, Stephen K., dean, Syracuse University, the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, and president, American Society for Public Administration, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 28, 1967_ 3427 Batista, Sister Marie, director, Boorady Reading Center, Dunkirk, N.Y.: Cohen, Alan, director, reading center at Yeshiva University to the New York State English Teachers Council, excerpt from address of 2611 "Dunkirk, New York," from pamphlet entitled "17 Projects"_ 2615 "OEO Officials Visit Boorady Reading Center," newspaper article 2613 "Reading Center Needs Help," newspaper editorial 2612 "Reading Center's Director Upset by Fund Cutback," newspaper article 2614 PAGENO="0005" CONTENTS V Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.-Continued Batista, Sister Marie, director, Boorady Reading Center-Continued "Report Bleak on Aiding Disadvantaged Pupils," newspaper Page article 2614 "State OEO Aides Inspect Dunkirk Reading Center," newspaper article 2613 The American Potential, report from Boorady Reading Center, Dunkirk, N.Y 2605 "The Bright Underachiever," excerpt from the National Ob- server 2611 Victor Arnold B. M.D., F.A.A.P., letter to, dated January 18, 1967 2611 Benson, Mrs. Bruce B., second vice president, League of Women Voters of the United States, samples of recent comment from local leagues on the poverty program 2528 Brand, Cabell, president, Ortho-Vent Shoe Co., Salem, Va.: Letter to Mr. Arch Booth, Chamber of Commerce of the United States, dated July 5, 1967 3303 Letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 7, 1967 3301 Prepared statement of 3297 Brandborg, Stewart M., executive secretary, the Wilderness Society, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 20, 1967 2552 Brown Grace, Lyndhurst, Ohio, telegram to Chairman Perkins.~ 3288 Caplan, Gerald, M.D., clinical professor of psychiatry, Harvard Medi- cal School, letter to Lee B. Macht, M.D., deputy medical director and principal psychiatrist, Job Corps, OEO, dated May 31, 1967~ 3081 Carstenson, Blue A., assistant legislative director, National Farmers Union, testimony of 3327 Carter, Lisle C., Jr., Assistant Secretary for Individual and Family Services, HEW, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated August 10, 1967_ 3114 Comments from the viewpoint of the title V, work experience and training program on the "Case Study "of Leslie, Knott, Letcher, Perry (LKLP) Community Action Council, eastern Kentucky (Whitesburg, Ky.) 3115 Interpretation of section 503(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act 3115 Specific comments on staff paper prepared for the subcommittee by Dr. Sar Levitan entitled, "Work Experience and Training" 3121. Statement regarding the staff paper entitled "Work Experience and Training," prepared by Dr. Sar Levitan 3119 Work experience and training program: Other reasons for ter- mination by sex, December 1964-April 1967 (table) 3114 Clancy, Hon. Donald, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio, letter from Lewis H. Evans, area manager, Ohio Bureau of Unemployment Compensation, Ohio State Employment Service Division, dated July 25, 1967 3065 Clapper, Louis S., Chief, Division of Conservation Education, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 18, 1967 2537 Cosand, Joseph P., president, the Junior College District of St. Louis, Mo., letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 17, 1967 308Z Curtis, lion. Kenneth M., Governor of the State of Maine, letter from, dated July 7, 196L 2831 "Cutting Relief Rolls-Administration, States Step Up Effort To Put Welfare Clients in Jobs," article Wall Street Journal, July 3, 1967 - 3283 Day, Ben, lawyer, Medford, Oreg., prepared statement of 2678 Dean, James C., Chicago, Ill., thesis entitled, "The Developmental Significance of Expenditures of Participants in the Work Experience and Training Program" 3209 Dechant, Tony T., president, National Farmers Union, statement of 3339 Docking, Hon. Robert B., Governor of the State of Kansas, two letters from, dated July 7, and 20, 1967 2833 Dolbey, Mrs. James M., president, Church Women, National Council of Churches, telegram to Chairman Perkins, dated August 1, 1967 3073 Douglass, Paul F., professor of government and director, Center for Practical Politics, Rollins College, Winter Park, Fla.: Prepared statement of 2896 Resolution, Board of County Commissioners, Orange County, FIa 2900 PAGENO="0006" VI CONTENTS ~tatements, letters, supplemental material, etc-Continued Ellmann, William M., president, State Bar Association of Michigan, (enclosures): Page Letter to Hon. Charles E. Chamberlain 3074 Funded programs (table) 3078 Programs in progress 3080 Resolution of the Board of Commissioners, State Bar of Michigan 3076 State Bar Committee on Office of Economic Opportunity, 1967 3077 Evaluation of the Cincinnati community action program, prepared for OEO 3086 Evans, Lewis H., area manager, letter to William Wichman, city manager, city of Cincinnati, Ohio, dated July 7, 1967 3085 Farbstein, Hon. Leonard, a Representative in Congress from the State of New York, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 24, 1967_ 3430 Flanders, Donald, secretary-treasurer, Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Commission, Inc., Fond du Lac, Wis.: Articles from the Fond du Lac Commonwealth Reporter: Area Group Will Elect 2728 Economic Committee Plans Annual Meeting 2727 "Headstart" Plan OKd~~_ 2729 Include Poor, Poverty Units Told by United States 2728 806 Families List Income Less Than $1,000 Yearly 2728 Summary of community action programs 2714 Community Action Means You Working to Help Your Com- munity Become a Better Place for All Its Citizens, pamphlet~ 2727 Community action programs 2723 Component program status report (table) 2715 Conduct and administration program 2716 Full-year Headstart program, Ripon 2718 Headstart, daycare center program 2716 In planning stage-Neighborhood Youth Corps, in school and summer programs 2724 New careers program, title II, section 205(e) EOA_ 2725 Opportunity center program 2719 Services in action, a resource fair 2722 Special services to the aged 2721 Summer Headstart program 2718 Through conduct and administration, special project 2721 Youth employment service program 2720 Flemming, Arthur S., president, National Council of Churches of Christ of the United States: Resolution on funding antipoverty programs, adopted by the general board on February 21, 1967 2894 "The Church and the Antipoverty Program," pamphlet 2891 Folson, Marion B., telegram to Chairman Perkins, dated July 26, 1967 3081 Gardner, Hon. John W., Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, letter to Chairman Perkins, concerning differences of opinion about relationship between Upward Bound and Talent Search, dated July 3, 1967 3113 Gladieux, Bernard L., Knight & Gladieux, management consultants, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 28, 1967_ 3429 Goldberg, Ned, consultant, antipoverty programs, National Federa- tion of Settlements and Neighborhood Centers, statement of 2636 Gurney, Edward J., a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida, letter from William H. Foiwell, rector, All Saints Municipal Church to the Office of Economic Opportunity, dated July 20, 1967_ 2906 Gutermuth, C. R., vice president, Wildlife Management Institute, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 18, 1967. 2554 Hansen, John E., executive director, Community Action Commission, Cincinnati, Ohio: Heisler, George S., presiding judge, Cincinnati Municipal Court, letter to Ralph F. Crisci, attorney at law, Legal Aid Society - 3038 Quarterly progress report, Legal Aid Society, Cincinnati, Ohio, legal services project 3040 Special summer project 3063 Who took part in riots 3039 PAGENO="0007" CONTENTS VII Statements, letters supplemental material, etc.-Continued Harder, Robert C., Th. D., coordinator, Kansas State technical Page assistance program, letter and summary progress report_. 3286 Hawkins, Hon. Augustus F., a Representative from the State of California: McCarthy, George D., Assistant Director for Congressional Rela- tions, OEO, letter to, dated July 21, 1967 2828 "Los Angeles Grad Is Placed With Trans World Airlines," article from The Corpsman (enclosure) 2828 "TV Repairman: `I Am Working with a Skill I Really Enjoy'," article from The Corpsman (enclosure) 2829 "Women's Job Corps Marks second Birthday, Graduates 53," article from the Los Angeles Times (enclosure) 2829 "What Will We Gain From a Riot?, paper entitled 3572 "Heckel Reviews Antipoverty Battle," newspaper article 3601 Held1 John E., councilman, Cincinnati, Ohio, statement of 3085 `The Poverty Probe Is Needed," newspaper editorial 3056 Hoff, Hon. Philip H., Governor of the State of Vermont, letter from, dated July 5, 1967 2835 Hughes, Hon. Richard J., Governor of the State of New Jersey, letter from, dated July 10, 1967. 2830 Kelly, W. P., Director, Job Corps, letter from, dated July 26, 1967~ - 3533 Locker, Ralph S., mayor, city. of Cleveland, Ohio, letter to Chair- man Perkins, dated July 25, 1967 3073 Maryland State Conference of NAACP Branches, telegram to Hon. Edward A. Garmatz, a Representative in Congress from the State of Maryland 3082 McColough, C. P., president, Xerox Corp., letter from, dated July 10, 1967 2508 Mitchell, Clarence, director, Washington Bureau of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, prepared statement of 2972 Parsons, Miss Cynthia, education editor, Christian Science Monitor, series of articles 2757 Parkinson, George A., director, Milwaukee Vocational Technical and Adult Schools, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated August 1, 1967 - 3373 Letter to Dr. Walter M. Arnold, director, Division of Vocational and Technical Education, U.S. Office of Education, dated July 18, 1966 (enclosure) 3373 Regular meeting of the local Board of Vocational and Adult Education (enclosure) 3374 Peach, W. F., chief of police, Newport News, Va., letter to Hon. Thomas Downing, a Representative in Congress from the State of Virginia, dated July 21, 1967 3082 Pomeroy, Kenneth B., chief forester, American Forestry Association, "How Much Is a Boy Worth?", editorial from American Forests - 2555 Price, Don K., dean, Harvard University, John Fitzgerald School of Government, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 27, 1967~. - 3426 Quie, Hon. Albert H., a Representative in Congress from the State of Minnesota, excerpt from "Job Corps," by Christopher Weeks - 2493 Robie, Edward A., vice president and personnel director, Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States: Olcott, D. Smith, chairman Aetna Life & Casualty, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated July 18, 1967 3007 Report on the Community Action program in Hartford, July 1967 (enclosure) 3007 Statement by 2979 Rockefeller, I-ion. Winthrop, Governor of the State of Arkansas, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated June 30, 1967 2830 Rogers, Hon. Paul C., a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida: Report on investigation of alleged political and union activities by certain grantees under grants by OEO, by the Comptroller General of the United States 2645 Report on Office of Opportunity programs within the Ninth Congressional District of Florida (news release) 2660 PAGENO="0008" VIII CONTENTS Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.-Continued Schulz, Rev. Larold, chairman, Anti-Poverty Task Force, National Council of Churches of Christ; Rabbi Richard Hirsch, director, Religious Action Center, and George L. Haithcock, director of field service, National Catholic Community Service, prepared state- Page mentof 3307 Shostak, Dr. Arthur B., associate professor, Department of Social Sciences, Drexel Institute of Science & Technology, Philadelphia, Pa., statement of 2633 Shriver, Sargent, Director, Office of Economic Opportunity: Crook, Bill, Assistant Director, VISTA, telegram to Sargent Shriver, dated July 31, 1967 3425 Denver Department of Health and Hospitals, maximum family income for eligibility to receive benefits under Children's Bureau (HEW) and Neighborhood Health Center (OEO) programs 3504 Excerpt from booklet, "Guidelines-Comprehensive Health Services Programs," February 1967 3495 ~`Job Corps," code of behavior (pamphlet) 3433 "JOI) Corps Staff Code," pamphlet 3439 OEO budget dat.a (table) 3473 Smith, Dr. Spencer M., Jr., secretary, Citizens Committee on Natural Resources, prepared statement of 2535 Speiser, Lawrence, director, Washington office, American Civil Lib- erties Union, statement of 3022 Still, Timothy, president, United Community Corp., Newark, N.J. : Prepared statement of 3592 Prinz, Jonathan J., United States II. & D. Corp., letter to, dated August 10, 1967 3599 Statement before the the board of trustees 3599 Smith, Hon. Hulett C., Governor of the State of West Virginia, letter from, dated July 19, 1967 2835 Strittmatter, Father Lawrence H., letter to Hon. Donald D. Clancy, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio, dated July 21, 1967_ 3083 Sullivan, Rev. Leon, chairman, O.I.C. National Council, telegram to Chairman Perkins 3288 "The Poverty Probe Is Needed," article from the Cincinnati Enquirer 3084 Turner, Bailey W., president, Avondale Community Council, letter to Chairman Perkins, dated June 25, 1967 3080 Turner, Irvine I., councilman, member, Council Committee To Study the Antipoverty Program for the City of Newark, N.J., minority report 3603 "Turner Rebuts Criticism of Newark Poverty Agency," newspaper article 3602 United Community Corp. to the city of Newark, relating to the his- torical development and performance of the UCC and in response to the report of the Newark Municipal Council Committee To Study the Antipoverty Program for the City of Newark, N.J., statement of 3607 Appendix 1.-Statement by C. Willard Heckel before Municipal Council Committee To Study Antipoverty Program, on Sep- tember 9, 1965 3630 Appendix 11.-Letter, Councilman Addonizio to Dean Heckel, September 2, 1965 3634 Appendix 111.-Letter, Dean Heckel to Councilman Addonizio, September 8, 1965 3635 Appendix IV.-Letter, Councilman Addonizio to Dean Heckel, September 10, 1965 3635 Appendix V.-Letter, Dean Heckel to Councilman Addonizio, September 29, 1965 3636 Appendix VI.-Letter, Dean Heckel to Councilman Addonizio, October 30, 1965 3636 Appendix Vu-Bylaws of the UCC, as amended, May 27, 1965 3637 Appendix VIII.-Extract, bylaws of UCC as submitted to city council committee 3640 Appendix IX.-Recommendation re hiring, personnel committee to hoard of trustees of UCC 3641 PAGENO="0009" CONTENTS IX Statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.-Continued United Community Corp., to the city of Newark, etc.-Continued Appendix X.-Agreement between UCC and Cyril D. Tyson, ~ dated December 21, 1964 3642 Appendix XI.-Minutes, board of trustees of UCC, December 21, 1964 3642 Appendix XII.-Notice and minutes, membership meeting of UCC, January 1, 1965 3643 Appendix XIII.-Memorandum re comptroller, Walter D. Chambers to Cyril D. Tyson, March 22, 1965 3640 Appendix XI V-Summary of job description of DCC 3649 Appendix XV.-1-Iiring procedures of DCC prepared by per- sonnel department, September 7, 1965 3651 Appendix XVI.-Personnel roster of UCC, as of September 7, 1965, as submitted to city council committee 3651 Appendixes XVII-XX.-Statements by Hirrschoff, Rountree, Pitrelli, and Wendell 3651 Appendixes XXI-XXV.-Salary comparison charts-UCC. far- you Act, Mobilization for Youth, Inc., city of Newark 3653 Appendix XXVI.-Resolution on political activity of UCC board members, adopted August 19, 1965 3657 Watson, Don E., director, Trumbull County Vocational School, Vienna, Ohio: Prepared statement of 2917 Attachment A-Cooperating agencies 2934 Attachment B.-A selective listing of eniployers of Mahoning Valley Vocational School graduates 2934 Breakdown of training costs (table) 2908 Student year cost, August 1, 1964-June 3, 1966 (table)_~ 2908 "Ohio Is Leading the Nation in New Education Concept," news- ~a~er article 2935 "Pioneer Vocational School Helps Disadvantaged Boys," news- Iaper article 2935 Whitehouse, Albert, director, Kentucky Office of Economic Oppor- tunity, testimony by 3143 Wheeler, Harry, secretary, Newark, N.J., Board of Education, at a special board meeting, statement by 3583 PAGENO="0010" PAGENO="0011" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 THURSDAY, JULY 20, 1967 HousE OF REPRESENTATIVES, C0MMPrrEE ON EDuCATION AND LABOR, Wathington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :45 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Hawkins, Gibbons, Meeds, Quie, Goodell, Bell, Dellenback, `and Steiger. Also present: H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; Robert E. MeCord, senior specialist; Louise Maxienne Dargans, research assistant; Ben- jamin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, in- vestigator; Marian Wyman, `special assistant; Charles IV. Radcliffe, minority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minority research assistant; and W. Phillips Rocke- feller, minority research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. I am delighted to welcome an outstanding gentleman from the Grafiex Corp., whom I feel I know about because of the efficient oper- ation of Camp Breckinridge. Without any further statement, I am going to call upon you, Representative Horton. STATEMENT OP HON. PRANK HORTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OP NEW YORK Mr. HORTON. Mr. Chairman, it is my pleasure to introduce Mr. Gay- lord C. Whitaker to you and your distinguished colleagues on the House Committee on Education and Labor. Mr. Whitaker, a close personal friend of mine for many years, serves as chairman of Grafiex, Inc., which is one of the most respected indus- tries in the congressional district I represent. Mr. Whita.ker and Graf- lex have long recognized their responsibilities to our society, and have been active in civic and governmental affairs. He is here this year to suppor~ the program and offer his eva1ua- tion of it. Because Grafiex operates the Job Corps center in Breckin- ridge, Ky., Mr. Whitaker has been able to observe this phase of the poverty program from a unique vantage point. Therefore, his anal- yses of the program have been particularly perceptive. I am confident that his testimony today will reflect this same keen insight. Earlier this year I toured the Breckinridge facility and exhaustively studied the manner in which Grafiex is fulfilling its contractual respon- sibility to the Federal Government. I was most favora~biy impressed by what I saw during that inspection trip. 2471 PAGENO="0012" 2472 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJYITY ACT AMEND~IENTS OF 1967 Mr. Chairman, among the exhil)lts which Mr. Whita.ker is submit- ting to accompany his testimony are letters of recommendation from several Job Corpsmen as well as letters from prominent people in all walks of both public and private life. Chairman PERKINS. I am delighted he is submitting those. exhibits, and without objection all of those exhibits will be inserted in. the record. Mr. HORTON. I am most pleased that among these letters is one from anot.her good friend, Dr. Louis K. Eilers. president of Eastman Kodak Co. Dr. Eilers said in his letter to Mr. Whitaker: "I have been more than impressed with the progress you have made in 1 short year, educating and finding gainful employment for people who might find it very difficult to obtain work." Mr. Chairman, I certainly join in commending Mr. Whitaker and Graflex for a job that is being well done. And I might acid here, parenthetically, it has been my pleasure also to visit the Huntington Job Corps center, which is operated by another constituent of mine, Xerox, and I certainly want to indicate from my personal experience with these two corporations, and partic- ularly my personal relationship with Mr. WThit,aker and my personal visits to these two Job Corps centers, as well as my conversations with those who are working in these two Job Corps centers and based on my conversations with those who were taking these courses, that I am very much impressed with this program. I hope that this committee will give every consideration to its con- tinuation. I think it is a very important step forward in the right direction to take these dropouts and give them confidence and hope that will permit them to go back into their home communities or elsewhere to make themselves productive citizens. Chairman PERKINs. Let me state before you go any further that I wholeheartedly agree with your viewpoint. We are dealing here with a type of youngster that has never received the appropriate considera- tion that he should have received in my judgment in the past. We are dealing here with a group of youngsters who need to obtain the best possible help our present day know-how can provide, and I feel that we are in the process of developing better ways of dealing with these youngsters in order that they may make their contribution to society. You and I both know up until this time that with all these. dropouts from our educational institutions throughout America that there has been something lacking and from this know-how that we will gain from efficient operation of the Job Corps, which in my judgment is taking place a.t the present time. especially through people like Graf- lex, that we are going to obtain information tha.t is most valuable that can be fed back to the vocational schools, the elementary and secondary schools and to our colleges. A lot of people say, well, you can put him in a regular training pro- gram, but regular training programs have already rejected or refused him or lie has completely rejected them. I am deeply impressed and appreciative, and I am completely sold on the great gains that have been made by the Job Corps in the past year. The experience gained is such that I think we can all be proud. PAGENO="0013" 1~CONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2473 I have personally observed some of the fine things that have been done down at Breckinridge, and I agree wholeheartedly with your statement. Mr. HORTON. I know you and other members of your committee have toured other installations. I have not had that privilege, but I have visited these two, and I am very impressed with this relationship where private industry works with the Federal Government to solve these problems. I want to underscore one of the points you made; namely, the in- novation which has been made possible by industry getting involvedi in this very important aspect of our society. I know from my personal experience of the innovations that Grafiex has made with regard to the- operation there at Breckinridge. I just want to say another personal comment with regard to what I found. Chairman PERKINS. I want to point out that the business people we have engaged in these efforts have come up with a lot of helpful an- swers to the problem. The innovation that has taken place is most re- markable, and it convinces me beyond any doubt that the Congress would be derelict in its responsibilities if we cut back the funds or altered the major thrust of this program. Mr. HORTON. I feel it should be recognized, Mr. Chairman, from the standpoint of my personal experience with these two companies, and particularly with Grafiex, that they are making financial sacrifices to take on this responsibility. They are not making any money out of it. The return they get is a very small return, and certainly not anything that they could justify to their stockholders, certainly, in connection with comparison with their other aspects of business. So this, in my judgment, is a contribu- tion that is being made by industry to help solve this problem. I want to agree with you, too, that it seems to me this is the only way it can be done. I was impressed when I was there at Grafiex. They have a dental dispensary, and they have medical attention for those boys. And they said 80 percent of those boys in there never had any dental care whatsoever. When I was at Hunting-ton girls were being treated and helped to learn how to make up their fingernails and make up their hair just to give them this personal confidence, which to them is so important in going out and finding a job. I found the same thing there at Breckinridge. So I want to indicate to the chairman and the other members of the committee that based on my personal experience I have a very strong feeling it is very im- portant for us to continue the Job Corps Center program and for us not to make any cutbacks at this time. I think that we should give this program an opportunity to continue to prove its worth, and I think it will. Chairman PERKINS. Representative Horton, in danger of monopoliz- ing your time and that of our colleagues, I should not continue this colloquy. but you have made such an outstanding statement, I again wish to concur and state I agree wholeheartedly that the corporations involved in operating the Job Corps are not there for their own pe- cuniary gain, that they could spend their money far more wisely in other areas of their business, but they feel that they should make a PAGENO="0014" 2474 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 contribution in trying to solve the problem. And they are comino up with some answers dealing with these youngsters who are under t~heir custody 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, and that existing educational institutions have never tried. We are going through a period here that is most important to con- tmue to obtain answers and mformation of this kind for several years to come. That is the reason I am delighted we have a witness here today who took over a camp where the sentiment of the whole community at the time they took it over was 100 percent against. They found answers to a lot of these problems, and now, I am happy to say, the whole community is supporting the continued operation of this camp. Another amazing thing is the way it has brought down the costs per enrollee. Mr. HORTON. I might say this in continuation of my introduction of Mr. Whitaker, that Mr. Whitaker is the chairman of the board of a very important corporation, and Mr. Whitaker in spite of his very arduous duties as chairman of this very important industry has taken his personal time to spend to see and to personally oversee this opera- tion there at Breckinridge. He is a very dedicated man, and he is very sincere. So it gives me a great deal of pleasure to introduce to you and other members of the committee the chairman of the board of Graflex, Mr. Whitaker. STATEME1~TT OP 1+AYLORD C. WHITAKER, CHAIRMAN, GRAPLEX, INC., ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM C. DWYER, DARCY & ASSOCI- ATES, ROCHESTER, I~.Y. Mr. IVHITAKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I feel what I will say will be anticlimatic after the fine statement you and Mr. Horton made. I would like to say what a pleasure it is to be introduced by Repre- sentative Horton, who is a friend, a. sportsman, a father and a fine gentleman. We have known each other for years and this is the first opportunity that I have had to talk to him and to you as a. team of Goveimment and business unified in the same objective. I would like, if I may, to introduce William Dwyer, former a.dmin- istrative assistant to Frank Horton in his office, who is working for IDarcy & Associates in Rochester. They are in the public relations busi- ness, and Mr. Dwjyer is here to back me up and to provide things I nmy not be in a position to answer. In the interests of conserving your valuable time, I am furnishing herewith, for each of you, the following: 1. R~sum~, telling you who I am. 2. Synopsis, "Graflex Capabilities," dealing with Graflex/Gen- eral Precision as an organization, with particular reference to education and training. 3. "Fact Sheet," dealmg with questions most frequently asked about Job Corps and Breckinridge Job Corps Training Center. 4. Brochure, entitled "This Is Breckinridge Job Corps Center." 5. These remarks as prepared for you, for delivery this morning. In addition, I have one complete set of exhibits and supporting mate- rials which I will leave with the clerk of your committee. These in- clude examples of commendatory letters from community leaders in the PAGENO="0015" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2475 Breckinridge area; Government leaders, including Congressmen; heads of industrial, civic and service organization; corpsmen and their families; newspaper clippings; extracts from the Congressional Rec- ord, and so forth. If you will permit me to deliver my remarks, I will do my best to answer your questions, if any, at the conclusion thereof. As one who believes in the free enterprise system and our democratic way of life, I consider it a distinct honor and privilege to be called upon to appear before this Committee on Education and Labor, and this is a very warm feeling I have because of the fact, Mr. Chairman, you visited Breckinridge, as have other members of your committee, and know from firsthand experience what I am talking about. First, may I say that as a citizen taxpayer, I share your concern regarding the rising costs of Government. The impact on Government expenditures of the legislative branch and House committees, such as this, is indeed great. Your `actions `help determine how the fruits of our labor are spent. At the `same time, as the truly elected represent~tives of the people-and I mean that sincerely-you have a particular obli-, gation to safegu'ard our country's future. Education `and training are vital to modern society, where, according to Lawrence A. App'ley, president of the American Management Association- We will see more progress, more change, in the next quarter century than during any previous 1,000 years in human history. We must plan now to cope with this. Despite our economic affluence, I don't need to tell you that we have pockets of poverty amid plenty. If neglected, these disadvantaged seg- ments of our society can become cancerous, and undermine the entire structure. If we don't face the facts, therein could lie the `seeds of our own destruction. The effe~tive use of education and training is the means by which we can `substitute a "controlled reaction" for what might `be called "social dynamite." Much has been tried, and many approaches have failed. But I'm `here today to `tell you something about one approach which, despite some imperfections, really works. I refer to OE'O's Job `Corps program, as exemplified by Breckinridge Men's Training `Center near Morganfield, Ky., as operated by Grafiex/General Precision. Grafiex is a `subsidiary of General Precision Equipment Corp. and our parent company. However, the contract is `with Grafiex, so I spe'ak with authority in this respect. I am also a director of General Preci- sion Equipment Corp. Like many pioneering programs, Breckinridge was plagued with problems in the early stages. In `fact, during the first year under South- ern Illinois University's direction, there was a riot and, according to the newspapers, very little was right. Let me quickly point out that it's easier to "second guess" than to blaze new trails. Despite their mistakes, SIU did some things very well. When Graflex became prime contractor in July 1966, we were able to profit by their mistakes. We applied commonsense, businesslike methods, with extremely gratifying results. Let me tell you what happened: 1. When `~raflex first came to Evansville to determine whether or not Breckinridge could be `salvaged, we were met with mixed reactions. PAGENO="0016" 2476 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Nearly everyone privately believed in the Job Corps program and ~vhatit could do for disadvantaged youth, but few were willing to be quoted as wanting it in the immediate neighborhood. It was sort of like the observation of the English Duchess in 1860,. when Professor Huxley announced that man had descended from the ape: "Let's hope it isn't true but, if it. is, let us pray that it will not become generally Imown." Despite this, there were some who were willing to stand up and be counted. I shall never forget what it meant to us (and the youth of the Nation) when Evansville's Mayor Frank McDonald and Janet Walker, executive director of the Mayor's Commission on Human Re- lations, announced publicly at a luncheon that we could count on their support. This was the turning point. Before long, industrialists, churchmen, and various civic leaders representing over 50 different groups, wrote us expressing words of encouragement or pledging cooperation. Since then, we have tried to reciprocate in behalf of the. corpsmen and the center. Perhaps the best evidence of the relationship that exists just 1 year short of our coming to Breckinridge, the Evansville Christian liaison group gave a pa.l dinner to welcome Graflex and hoped we would continue the ope.ration we had and that they would do all they could to support the 100 corpsmen they invited to be. guests at that dinner. 2. A look at Jobs Corps overall, and Breckinridge in particular: Since January 1, 1965, the following centers have been established: . .~ Number of centers 1 Number of enrollees 1 Men's conservation centers 91 Women's centers 18 Men'surhancenters 10 Demonstration centers 8 ~ 15,000 9, 000 15000 2570 375Q 1 Aporoxiniate. 2 Men. 3 Women. 3. Companies involved in women's centers operation include Pack- ard Bell, Burroughs, Xerox, Avco, General Electric, Philco/Ford, and RCA. 4. Companies involved in men's centers operation include Westing- house, Thiokol, U.S. Industries, Federal Electric/ITT, Northern Natural Gas~ R.CA, Litton, SRA/IBM, a.nd Graflex/General Precision. That is quite a list of bluebloods. 5. Miscellaneous facts on. typical enrollees: Remember: Corpsman arrest rate is one-half of the national youth rate. Unfortunately, what would be regarded as a "prank" in college too often becomes "malicious mischief" for a corpsman. (a) Reading level, 4.7 grade. (b) Years of school. seven. (c) Eighty percent have never seen a doctor or dentist (7 pounds underweight). (d) Previous behavior: 63 percent no adverse record, 27 per- cent minor antisocial,. 10 percent one serious conviction. PAGENO="0017" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2477 (e) Family pattern: 45 percent from broken home, 65 percent from family where head of household is unemployed, 50 percent from family on relief (some third generation). It is unthinkable, but we do inherit boys who make good products who are from third generation unemployeds. (/) Earning capacity: 90 percent unemployed, 10 percent em- ployed at less than 80 cents per hour. I know this figure has been questioned by some, but this has been our actual experience-lO percent employed at less than 80 cents an hour.. (g) It is necessary to recruit and screen two people for each one enrolled. 6. Ratio of staff to corpsmen: Overall, 1 :2.5; Breckinridge, 1:2.6. 7. Breckinridge enrollment: Now, 2,007 corpsmen (as of July 14, 1967) ; average, 1,900 corpsmen. 8. Breckinridge staff: Now, 700 (approximate); planned, 713. 9. Breakdown of Breckinridge staff at 2,000 enrollee population: Administration 130 Training 360 Overhead and maintenance 193 Subcontractor 30 Total 713 10. Dropout rate: This dropout rate does bother us greatly. It is 30 percent, mostly in the early months-less than most colleges, even t.hough we start with 100 percent dropouts. The 19,200 enrollees: We have graduated, not dropouts, 1,137 in t.he first year of our operation; 601 of these have been placed and they are earning good money and 466, we hope, are placed for the most part, but we don't have reports on them because they are too recent in graduation. Those who took jobs, continued school, or joined the military are about the same percentage in our experience as in the oTverail reported above. The report on graduation is monthly from Breckinridge, and Chair- man Perkins and some of you committee members attended one of the graduation ceremonies when you visited there; during April there were 109, May, 107, and June, 250. We estimate in July to have 150, in August, 165 and in September, 175. Cost per cor~psman-year-Congressionai ceiling, $7,300: overall, 1967, $6,950. This includes approximately $1,500 per year paid by OEO directly t.o corpsman. Breckinridge, 1967-68, $6,700. I might point out there is no fee with respect to what they pay directly. For the fiscal year ending 1968, we have brought our operating costs down to $5,200 which, with the $1,500 added, becomes $6,700 and for a frame of reference your bill provides a ceiling of $7,300 on this. I think it is interesting to make just a quick casual observation with respect to the cost to society. The cost for the average Breckinridge graduate, because it takes less than 9 months to graduate a student, is actually $5,025, including that $1,500 expense that I referred to above. If we were to let these fellow~s just be on their own and let them become a drag on society and if they 80-084-67-pt. 4-2 PAGENO="0018" 2478 ECONO~'IIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 were to become prisoners, the cost of the average prisoner in most States is about $12,000. If they were to continue on relief and were to have families, the average cost of a. family on relief for its iifetime is $75,000. That $5,000 is a real investment in our future and eventually will be paid back by tax collections by these very students. To give you just a brief concept of the community cooperation which we have enjoyed and believe me, ladies and gentlemen, this works both ways. Some of the projects are listed below. 1. Welding swings for Evansville playgrounds. 2. `Cleaning up and landscaping Evansville Settlement House areas and parks. 3. Bolstering Morganfield Police force. The little Morganfield. Police force-which you know, Chairman Perkins, consists of three people-were in an automobile accident and were completely with- out a police force one morning, so we sent our security police bol- stered by trainees in to Morganfield to maintain the law and order, which was required, which was a very simple proposition, but they appreciated it. Mayor Bell acknowledged this in one of the letters that is a. part of this exhibit. 4. Volunteering blood. Our corpsmen almost 100 percent have volunteered blood. 5. Community groups use Breckinridge facilities. We have a number of community people who attend our courses and are tak- ing the regular tests in GED high school equivalency, thus ex- panding their possibilities as well as the corpsmen. 6. At Ohristmastime we have a "Toys for Tots" program. 7. Don't laugh when I tell you this one, but our corpsmen have been very successful in teaching water safety and swimming and lifeguard patrol duty to Girl Scouts. We have had no incidents or problems in that respect. 8. Our Gospel Tones entertain shut-ins and the aged. 9. There are our courses in GED to local adults as well as corpsmen. 10. We have exhibits at fairs which are manned by the corpsmen. 11. We share functions of public interest. For example, if we have the St. Louis Hawks to town and use our basketball court, we invite the community to share in that pleasure. 12. One of our dormitories has adopted an orphan, which they are supporting in Japan by proxy. 13. Cleaning up storm damage in Clay, Ky., is a typical opera- tion. 14. Erecting street signs in Corydon, Ky. 15. Directing traffic as requested in nearby communities, and contributing to fund for cows for Vietnam. I could carry this list on almost indefinitely, but these are the kind of young men you are helping to build at Breckinridge and at other Job Corps operations. Summation: I realize fully that it takes more than one swallow to make a drink, and that it takes a lot of living to make a lifetime. Even though we've been involved at Breekinridge for only a rela- tively short period of time, from March 1, to July 1, 1966, as subcon- PAGENO="0019" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2479 tractor to Southern Illinois University; and from July 1, 1966, until now, as prime contractor, we have already achieved a great deal: 1. Out in the world are 1,137 graduates, proving themselves as good citizens. 2. A policy of "firm but fair" discipline and "sound business methods" pays off in educational endeavor, just as it does else- where. 3. Typical American communities such as Evansville, md.; Henderson, Ky.; and Morganfield, Ky., will cooperate if kept in- formed and invited to participate in support of the program. See the letters of commendation received. 4. A well-planned "security" program, alertly implemented, earns the respect of the local citizenry and corpsmen alike, and can succeed. 5. Innovative techniques and good communications can help meet the demands of the "educational explosion." Just as teachers impart values, so also do equipment and materials.convey informa- tion. It is a function of the approach plus motivation. If you com- bine the two, you can't lose. So much has been said and written about Job Corps-some favor- able, but much unfavorable-that I would like to cite some of the facts of Job Corps life: 1. It is something of a popular sport to take potshots at OEO~ Great Society, Shriver, and President ,Johnson. 2. It is much more tempting to play up an altercation or a demonstration involving corpsmen (Reader's ID igest for Febru- ary 1967) than it is to emphasize achievements of Corps: (a) In May 1967, 76 percent sent home $1,327,020 in one. month ($25 from adjustment allowance and $25 matching). (b) Allotments from July 1966 through April 1967 equal $10,418,540 ($706,630 in New York State alone). (c) Approximately 30,000 men en- rolled currently, approximately 9~000 women enrolled currently. (ci) Of 75,410 total enrollees (June 1967), apj)roxinhately 63,000 have been placed mmcl others are in the process of being placed. Of those placed, there are 53 percent in jobs (at $1.71 per hour), 10 percent in school, and 7 percent. in the military. I might point out our experience, at Breckinridge is that many boys who are flunked in their military examinings because of physical examina- t.ions or because of their inability to read or write do pass the military examinations when they do again apply. I dare say the percentage is about one-fifth of those who re.apply and are re- jected are accepted after the Breckinridge training. (e) Indica- tions are that the invest.ment in corpsmen will be paid back in 21 years, through taxes alone, assuming, continuation of starting salary, which we know they will not do. 3. Byproducts of the program: (a) Evolving and proving new teaching techniques in control group of exclusively disadvan- taged. (b) Learn how to motivate-group interaction counseling. (e) Self-governing dormitories.. I might say thereby making it an honor tradition to have a few dormitories without counselors, the boys are more strict and the boys do better than we can do with counselor control and this saves costs as a byproduct. (d) Audio- visual techniques. (e) Programed instruction. (f) Single-concept PAGENO="0020" 2480 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 approach. (g) Self-confrontation. This is the boys seeing them- selves on television, seeing how other people see them. (Ii) Inter- relationship of academic, vocational, and life adjustment. I might point out we found out something the hard way that. should have been obvious. If you can interest a student in his vocation, he does more readily learn the reading, writing, and other necessary things to support that vocation. If you try to teach him spelling and arithmetic as such, he is less apt. to be concerned with it. In conclusion, I would like to quote Bruce Lansciale, director of the American Farm School, who happens to come from Rochester: "Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." Admittedly, the JOb Corps is controversial by its very nature, but, as imperfect as it is, we are doing something about it. Instead of "social dynamite," we have substituted an attempt to achieve a "con- trolled reaction." Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Whitaker, I would be delighted for you to expound a little more on your placement record insofar as em- ployment is concerned of your graduates from Breckinridge. Has that been successful in your judgment? Mr. WHITAKER. We have actually placed and have the record of placement of over 600 of our 1,100 graduates. Remember that 400 of those 1,100 graduates have graduated so recently that we don't have the reports back. Chairman PERKINS. That is better than 53 percent of the reports that you do have back? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes. I think we do have an advantage as a Job Corps center over the conservation centers we work toward the known existing. We work with the National Conference Board and we learn what the needs are and train toward that objective. Chairman PERKINS. Will you tell us what type of trades and so on are studied for at Breckinridge. Tell us just how you instruct this particular youngster? Mr. WHITAKER. We have a threefold objective. One is to teach him enough reading, writing, arithmetic, so he can adjust to a changing situation. Chairman PERKINS. You have certain classes along that line sepa- rate from the other training ? Mr. WHITAKER. Exactly. About one-third of the students' time is spent in academic training to bring him up to essentially high school equivalency. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have people especially trained in that field to give the youngsters this type of basic education? Mr. WIIITAKER. That is right.. They are the type of teachers you would have normally in secondary schools but who are given special rules to go by and special techniques and audiovisual supports to help their case. Chairman PERKINS. And special type of equipment to use in the teaching of these cases? Mr. WHITAKER. You are getting very close to my heart in that that is our business because we make overhead projectors, strip film pro- jectors and so on amid by doing what. we can best do we practice what we preach and we find it works very well. PAGENO="0021" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 2481 Chairman PERKINS. I want to find out how you are equipped to reach the problem or extremely disadvantaged youth that you are than say a vocational education center. Mr. WHITAKER. Sir, may I go back to your original question? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. WHITAKER. The first third of the effort is on the academic side, the third third is on life adjustment aspects, how to meet people, taking instructions for getting up, reporting for your job, and things of that nature. The last and perhaps the most important phase is the vocational. We teach 11 vocational c~lusters as we refer to them. One of them is the automotive cluster which is service station operator, body repair, motor repair. Another group that we have is small motor repair dealing with outboard motors, lawnmowers. I might say parenthetically that we had a boy graduate last week who is now employed by Sears in Louis- ville, Ky., at $2 an hour who has done so well they have let him set up his own lawnmower department within Sears. We teach electronics which is broken down into radio, TV, oil burner repair, small electric motor repair. We teach culinary arts, we have a landscape gardening course. We teach photography. I am not doing this in as orderly a manner as I should but this is nicely listed in the fact sheet that is part of our folder. Chairman PERKINS. I am trying to build a record here the best I know how in my feeble way, but going through your center at Breck- inridge it was a real education to me. Naturally, I am quite mindful of all of the criticism and the fact that the community even though it is not in my district wanted to get that camp away from there and get those boys away at one time. They wrote to me that it was a complete failure. I was completely surprised when I got down there and reviewed the center when I saw the 100 percent change in sentiment in the Morganfi~ld community and surrounding communities, about the tremendous support, the 100 percent support. I want. to reiterate again, the support. came from zero percent when you took this operation. We might as well admit here that mistakes had been made, but what impresses me so much is the fact that you people have profited by those errors and did something about it. Now my real question is whether our present schools, vocational schools as presently constituted, are prepared to handle the type of youngster you are now assisting in Breekinridge, Ky. Mr. WHITAKER. I don't feel, Mr. Chairman, that they are. This is a nuts and bolts operation. It is preparing a boy to become self- sufficient, self-reliant and to have a trade that he can put to work. I don't want to overstate the vocational side. We have to recognize that these boys will have to be adjustable and flexible enough to change jobs as the economy changes in this respect, so you can't have The vocational only. Chairman PERKINS. Many of these youngsters, perhaps the ma- jority of them, have been juvenile offenders. Am I correct in that? Mr. IT-TITAKEP. Sixty-three percent have no adverse record but some of them are juvenile offenders. (Thairmar PERKiNS. The remaining~ percentage beyond 63 have had police records? PAGENO="0022" 2482 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. WHITAKER. For the most part minor, but they have had records. Chairman PERKINS. But we are dealing here with the problem child. That is the point. This is the child who requires most careful and prudent consideration and training that he has never received up until this time; is that correct? Mr. WHITAKER. Absolutely, sir. Chairman PERKINS. From your experience, do you feel that we would be doing this country a great disservice if we cut back this Job Corps training funds at this time? Mr. WHrrAi~ru. I feel, sir, that we would be doing ourselves a great disservice. Unwittingly, we would be sowing the seeds of destruc- tion that we see in these riots around us. This is a real investment in the future taxpayers of America. Chairman PERKINS. Some of the people who criticize this pro- gram- Mr. GIBBONS. May I interrupt there, Mr. Chairman? I think coming from a man such as this that that is a very important statement. I wish more people understood really the full meaning of what you are talking about. It seems to me we are flirting with the destruction of this program. I say flirting-I don't think we are going to destroy it. We are really reaping almost the same kind of harvest we did yes- terday when 73 percent were killed on an airplane. The day before that we cut 5 percent out of the safety budget of the Federal Avia- tion Agency on a little binge that we occasionally go on from time to time. I hope more people with background and responsibility such as you have will speak up because Congress needs to hear those words. ~\Te have a serious problem ann I think what you are doing at Graflex, and what Congressman Frank Horton did regionally `are the things we need to do more of. We need less of the scare articles like we have seen in the Reader's Digest. Chairman PEInicIxS. You can tell this Congress and truthfully tell this Congress you are not in the job for a pocketbook venture for your' own pecuniary interests because your profits are marginal and would, be much greater if you were investing your funds in some other facet but that you feel as a corporation you need to obtain information as' to how we can better train this problem youngster and feed that inform- ation back to schools, vocational educational institutions and to indus- try. Is that what you feel and is that the case? Mr. WHITAKER. You have stated it better than I could have. Let~ me put it in these words: Our Associate Director is a former high. school principal. He expects to get back to become a high school principal again but this is the most learning experience he could, ever have and this will spread this gospel across the board on a greater basis than we could see in this room. Chairman PERKINS. All this polyglot about the cost exceeding $10,000 per enrollee is nothing but propaganda for the gullible so far as I am concerned because they go back to the first year of operation and they do not consider what you are doing and have been doing in the past several months. How did you manage to bring this cost down to an average of $5,900 per enrollee throughout the country on a 12-month basis? PAGENO="0023" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2483 Mr. WIIITAKER. One thing we have done is that we have kept our salaries and wages in line with those in the surrounding community. We have not abused that situation. No. 2, we have tried to sell teachers on the fact that this is a way to get ahead in their profession, to get direct experience in this regard. Number three, we have complete control through 25 different cost centers of the actual aspects of the operation and have a review of those costs every quarter. I am going out there on the 25th of this month for the review of the last quarter's operations. We control through data processing the expenditures that are made. We know how much is being paid for everything. We feel that we have a complete business-like, sound, well-adjusted approach to this just as we would have in our own business. Chairman PERKINS. As a businessman and as head of one of our leading business corporations, how much do you anticipate that you may be able to bring the costs down by July 1, 1968, from the present cost figure? Mr. WHITAKER. I would be unreasonable and unfair to the boys themselves if I said at all we could come below the $2,500 base that we have now achieved. We could limit the program and we could bring costs per head down by increasing the number of enrollees but for the same number of enrollees and the same program I doubt if we could effect substantial savings beyond what we have spent. Chairman PERKINS. Have you had a chance to look at these Harris Surveys? Can you give us any views or point up any weaknesses inso- far as these Harris Surveys convey to the general public on their face? Mr. WHITAKER. I saw the Lou Harris Reports yesterday for the first time and I read them until late last night and I had figures coming out of my eyes and ears. First, I think OEO was courageous for asking the report because it pointed out definite things that can be corrected and about which things are being done. For example, the screening practices are being improved by reason of what that report points out. No. 2,1 feel Mr. Harris and his interrogators learned from the actual making of the report. If you read volume 4 you will find he says the statements contained in volume 3 with respect to employment before and after are exaggerated in some respects to the disadvantage of the corpsmen. Chairman PERKINS. He says that himself? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, he does in volume 4. Chairman PERKINS. He says that the reports, insofar as the unem- ployment figures are concerned, the youngsters finding jobs is exag- gerated in some respects. Harris says that. Mr. WI-IITAKER. Exactly. I feel this was an excellent objective at- tempt to find out helpful information to do an improved operation. Some of the observations are subpoints made without sufficient knowl- edge to draw total and general conclusions for the whole Job Corps program. Chairman PERKINS. Just based on employment and the Job Corps following up for employment? Mr. WHITAKER. That is right. PAGENO="0024" 2484 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I have one other salient point. I would like to make. These reports, for the most part~, were based on graduates who graduated before Au- gust 1966. This meant that they were in Job Corps during the early days or the weak da.ys of the program. Chairman PERKINS. And that means that these youngsters were in the Job Corps in the wea.k da.y.s of the program.? Mr. WHITAKER. Exactly. And an attempt to draw conclusions from t.hese reports would be basing the Job Corps on what t.hey did at the beginning da.ys and that would be completely erroneous to do that. Chairman PERKINS. There is a statement there that you and I know that 30 percent of our youngsters are not being reached either in the elementary or the secondary schools and they a.re the dropouts. I think that points out the reason why we should continue this Job Corps and, in fact, enlarge it. It is not reasonable that a youngster who drops out of vocational school will go back to vocational school. Am I correct in that assertion? Mr. WHITAKER. The greatest concern I have over the statement that you have just made is that we are exceedingly eager to teach a voca- tion so that a boy can immediately go out and earn his living and this should be our prime objective; but I want to emphasize that you ha.ve to recognize that in our present society every laborer is retrained at least three times during his laboring life. If he does not sufficiently know reading, writing, and arithmetic and social adjustment to cope with that situation, he is not fully geared to contribute to society. Chairman PERKINS. I want to ask you another question. Do von feel your greatest period of program development and impact lies ahead, and do you need more time to test and e~~aluate new tecimiques in order to learn how to deal with the hard core idle youth? Is that your view ~ I have understood your statements? Mr. WHITAKER. I feel keenly with the population explosion and with the greater demand on technical approaches to work that we are more and more dependent on education as we go on. This means that there is a greater demand on teachers and there are not enough of them to go around. We have to find ways to support them in their activities and allow the teacher to do only that which lie can do best a.nd this is a part of what. we are learning in the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. Here is what appeals to me in this thing. My mail was just 100 percent against Breckinridge. They wanted that camp closed down, the people in that. community clown there, and they wanted it closed at. t.he earliest possible date. I am talking about. even before you obtained your subcontract. to begin a different operation down there. But when I was down there along with other Members of the Congress and viewed this Job Corps camp to see a gymnasium filled with practically the whole coin- munity supporting the Job Corps and supporting the efficient. opera- tion that you were carryin~ on down there at that; times it made me feel, insofar as this legislation is concerned, that you more or less had just served your apprenticeship and were just beginning to find the answers to these problems: that you needed to continue for a greater period of time and that, if anything, we would be helping and assist- mg vocational education in the country: that we would be assisting all educational systems in the country if you people would be per- PAGENO="0025" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2485 mitted to continue this operation and feed back your valuable experi~ ences to tile industry, to our educational systems in America. Is that your feeling at this time? Mr. WHITAKER. Sir, you have said it very well. Just as we have on-the-job training for our corpsmen at Breckinridge, so also we. have been learning as we go on the job training at Breckinridge, and I would be less than sincere if I did not admit that we found many things in this period of 1 year that we can do a better job as we go on and this would be a continuing process. Chairman PERKINS. You conclude that there is much to be lost if we cut the operation of the Job Corps 1 dime at the present time? Do you view cuts as a great disservice to America or do you feel we should expand the present Job Corps operation? Mr. WHITAKER. I feel that the limit of 45,000 which is now in the: new proposed legislation is small. I feel that by continuing this process we can reach more boys who will not be reached in any other way and I mean women when I say "boys" just as well, because this is a vital segment of the United States, men and women who will become our future citizens. If we can develop them into self-reliant taxpayers, we have done something for the country and for ourselves. Chairman PERKINS. I think you have had enough experience to know that one of our real problems in the vocational educational field is dealing with this hard-core youngster who needs special attention and basic education training before he can succeed in vocational educa- tion, and it is a great problem likewise insofar as the hard-core unem- ployed are concerned. Am I correct about that? Mr. WHITAKER. Absolutely. Incidentally, I didn't mention it in my written testimony, but from reading the Harris report last night, I gathered that there are some people who feel that the performance of the graduates has been only satisfactory. I can speak from our own direct experience at G-rafiex that it has been preeminently satisfactory and some of the folks we have hired have left us to go to Kodak, for example, to improve their lot. We have no special control over what we do with them. It is how well they operate. Chairman PERKINS. I very seldom take this much time but since there has been so much controversy in my home State I feel bent more' or less to go along here this morning and ask you several questions. There have been many questions asked about so many of these young- sters being trained for special trades and vocations and have not been able to obtain a job for which they were trained in the Job Corps.. Do you care to comment on that? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, Mr. Chairman. You have put your finger on a real problem. If a boy comes to us' at age 16, and you know that 16 to 21 that they are eligible, and he graduates at age 17 and he is a welder, for example, he may not be able to find employment as a welder because. that is a hazardous' operation. Therefore, he will take a job as materials handler or anything as a holdover until he can get the job for which he has bee.n tra.ined. This I see is a misjudgment in the Harris report. At least I did not see this explained. PAGENO="0026" 2486 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 I feel that something should be done to correct this from either one of two points of view. Either allow the center director to certify that this young man is capable of taking that profession or that occupation and thus waive the laws that restrict him from taking that occupation now or since there are many more needy cases than there are spaces in these 45.000 allowed, we should change the age from 16 to 21 to 17 to 21 so that we can be working where the odds are best in those with whom we are allowed to work. Chairman PERKDS. I recall the old CCC days. In fact, many of my neighbors were youngsters back in 1933 and some of them had to drive 153 miles to enroll at Middleboro, Ky. I have seen much good come from that program. I have always agreed that learning how to work in the forest a.nd so forth and other types of training should not be a lost art and, while conserving our natural resources, does build healthy bodies and more responsible and alert minds. I feel that this experience of work is most useful in many respects. If a youngster can obtain confidence and hopefulness, I think that is most important for that youngster and it will do more than anything else to instill in a youngster that which is necessary for him to make his own way in society. Do they receive experience and training of this type that instills this confidence and hope and has it been successful, in your belief, in building these boys to the point where they have confidence that t.hey can make their way in the world? M:r. WHITAKER. Most decidedly, sir. The thing that I want to qualify before I give this more complete answer is tha.t we still have a problem with respect to dropouts from Job Corps itself. I cannot speak for them. The Harris report made quite a. study of the dropouts and the discharges which needs to be taken into account and much availed of as possible. But as far as the graduates are con- cerned, everything you have said is true. You can observe a new boy coming to Breckinridge with long hair and retiring and does not know whether to run or fight and does not know what the situation is and then at the end of 90 days you see that same boy and the change is just unbelievable in terms of his hope and confidence in what he can do for himself. Chairman PERKIN. I observed youngsters at the graduation func- tion down there. I knew the grandparents of some of these youngsters. Mr. WHITAKER. I saw you speak to some of them. Chairman PERKINS. In speaking to some of those folks, they were real hanpy on that occasion. Do you feel that you have been successful, even though some of them are not now employed in instilling in them a desire and greater capacity to learn and go out in the world? is that an accom}?lishment from your viewpoint? Mr. WHITAKER. Absolutely. If the screening is properly done-and it is now improved-if we have the rate base, we can make good tax- paying material out of that citizen. Chairman PERKINs. Mr. Quie. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Whitaker, you mentioned in your testimony a. figure of $6,700 for Breckinridge. Is that right, the average cost per enrollee for a 12-month period? PAGENO="0027" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2487 Mr. WHITAKER. That is correct, that is the cost per enrollee per year. That includes that $1,500 that is given as mustering out pay. Mr. QUIE. The Office of Economic Opportunity provided us with a big document listing all of the centers. They list for Breckinridge $7,737 as the experience to date. Mr. WmTAKE1i. Mr. Quie, that is past information. It has cost us more to operate in the past than what it will cost us to operate in the future. The figure I gave in my testimony is for the year ending June 30, 1968. That is the basis under which we accepted the contract. Mr. QuiE. So this is an estimate for next year that you are using rather than the figure that actually is the cost in this past year? Mr. WmTAKER. It is more than an estimate now. We will live within that figure, and I can assure you of that. Mr. QUIE. What was the average cost this past year? Mr. WHITAKER. I am guessing, but I would say it was between $7,000 and $7,500. Mr. Quii~. Then where did OEO get these figures for fiscal year 1967? The cost-per-man-year was $7,737 at Breckinridge, wasn't it? Mr. WHITAKER. That could be correct. One of the reasoiis, Mr. Quie, that the cost is high is the number of enrollees was clown last year. As we get the number of enrollees up, the cost per individual can come down very dramatically. Mr. Q.uir. You say your capacity is 2,000 enrollment and that at the end of the period it was actually 1,098. And you are going to get it up to 2,000 this year. Mr. WHITAKER. The average I am talking about will be 1,900, but the actual enrollment as we are sitting here is 2,007. Mr. QIUE. What was the difficulty this last year in not operating at capacity as you expect to operate next year? Mr. WHITAKER. They were not fed to us. The recruiting is a responsi- bility of OEO, and they were not fed in as rapidly as the projected schedule intended. Mr. Qiiri~. How do you expect that they will be fed in that rapidly this year? Mr. WHITAKER. It is apparent they will be because we are already at the 1,900 to 2,000 level, and last year we were building up from the inherited level. The SITJ had its problems, and it was impossible to feed in enrollees when we first took over the contract. There were 400 enrollees, and `we had to build up to the 1,900 to 2,000 level. Mr. QUIE. What was the month and year you took over? Mr. WHITAKER. We took over as prime contractor on July 1, 1966. Mr. QIUE. What was the amount of your contract for that, then, the fiscal year of Juiy 1966 through July 1967? Mr. WHITAKER. It was 12,300,000 approximately. Mr. Quii~. What is your contract for this coming year? Mr. WHITAKER. Approximately 12,150,000, but let me correct both aspects. 1~\T0 voluntarily extended the period of the first year by 2 months, making it a 14-month contract when it was intended to be a 12-month contract, and the new contract is a 14-month contract. PAGENO="0028" 2488 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT A~TENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. Mr. Horton indicated that you were losing money under your contract with Breckinridge. How much money do you lose each. year? Mr. WHITAKER. I hope he didn't say that. I didn't hear it that. way.. He said we could do much better with our regular business than we could with this type of operation. Our profit is 4.7 percent exclusive of rehabilitation and exclusive of. payments made directly to the boys. Mr. QIJIE. In other words, you are not losing any money. It is just. that your profit is not as great here as it is in other operations of the corporation? Mr. WHITAKER. I am going to be exceedingly disarming in this. respect. From the standpoint of our stockholders, this is not. considered a successful operation profitwise. From t.he standpoint of the social con- tribution that it makes, it is a really effective operation. Mr. QmE. Then comparing t.he Job Corps project with your other operations, how does Gra.fiex fit into the other operation? This is the subsidiary of a larger corporation. Mr. WHITAKER. Grafiex is a subsidiary of General Precision Equip- ment Corp., and we make cameras and audiovisual equipment which is. used in the educational field. Both Gra.fiex, the subsidiary, and General Precision are desirous of being in the middle of this exploding educa- t.ional market. I don't want to cover up that fact.. We have a. dual purpose in being there. Mr. Q.uii~. Grafiex has subsidiaries as well, does it. not? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, one of our subsidiaries, for example, is the Society for Visual Education. Mr. QmE. I thought I noticed you were on the board of that orga- nization. Mr. WHITAKER. Yes; I am the chairman of SVE. Mr. QmE. You are presently chairman and director of SVC. What other subsidiaries do you have? Mr. WHITAKER. We have Visual Programming, which is an educa- tional operation directed specifically to preparing special programs for special purposes, training hotel managers, and things of that. description. Are you asking about subsidia.ries of Grafiex? Mr. QmE. That is right.. Mr. WHITAKER. Dorn Optics, which makes optics for use. in projec- tors a.nd similar devices. Mr. Qrni~. Do you have sales from these subsidiaries to the Gov- ernment? Mr. WHITAKER. I want .to answer that carefully. That. is not their basic business. There may he occasional sales to the Government by these subsidiaries, but basically it is a domestic busi- ness that we operate. Mr. Qtru~. The sales to the Government, the corporation of which Grafiex is a subsidiary, are mostly in Defense contracts? Mr. WHITAKER. Are you switching to General Precision Equipment Corp.? Mr. Q,UIE. Yes. PAGENO="0029" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2489 Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, they have subsidiaries such as Link Aviation and Librascope and other companies that do sell to the Government in the Defense posture, that is right. Mr. QUJE. I noticed in Standard & Poors that 43.8 percent of the sales of the corporation go for Defense as space products. Mr. WHITAKER. That is correct. Mr. QUIE. It also indicates that you had net sales in 1965 of $240 million and this jumped in 1966 to $440 million. Mr. WHITAKER. That was especially through the acquisition of two additional companies, the American Meter Corp. and the American Vapor Co. & Controls Co. of America, which greatly increased the total sales of General Precision Equipment. I am delighted to answer your questions, but I am not sure this relates to Grafiex and the educational operation. There is a marked distinction. Mr. QUIE. I just wanted to. see the correct involvement you had with the Federal Government. Do any of the subsidiaries with which you are involved-the So- ciety for Visual Education and the other two you mentioned, Dorn Optics and Visual Programming-do any of these three subsidiaries have any involvement in the Job Corps contract that you have, or any of their personnel? Mr. WHITAKER. Dorn has no connection. That is the optical-VET has no connection because it is too recent. I will not say they will not have. If they could make a contribution, we would call on them as we would any other source. SVE has had expertise to contribute but not a product. "SVE," ladies and gentlemen, is the Society for Visual Education in Chicago. They have been in business in the educational field for over 40 years. Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. QUIE. Yes, I yield. Mrs. G1i~EN. On the Society for Visual Education, you say they only gave expertise. Did you subcontract anything to them? Mr. WHITAKER. None whatsoever. Mrs. GREEN. Did you use their personnel? Mr. WHITAKER. We used their president, Jack Kennon, and others from their organization to help us with educational problems at Breckinridge. We did not use their film strips, because they are geared for secondary schools andnot for Job Corps usage. Mrs. GREEN. There was no subcontract with them at all? Mr. WHITAKER. None whatsoever. Mrs. GREEN. Was there any subcontract with any of your subsidiary companies or any other companies of the parent organization? Mr. WHITAKER. Mrs. Green, I see what you are reaching for, whether we gained in other ways. `We did sell some of our equipment to Breck- ~inridge, but these were at the GSA published prices. Mrs. GREEN. What was the amount of that contract? Mr. WHITAKEii. lit wouldnot have exceeded $100,000. Mrs. GREEN. Was any profit from that included in your 4.7 profit? Mr. WHITAKER. No. Mrs. GREEN. So that would be additional profit, in the total? Mr. WHITAKER. A very modest profit, if any, because the equipment PAGENO="0030" 2490 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 was special and it was sold at GSA prices, the lowest price we would sell to any member of the military. Mrs. GREEN. And this was the only one? Mr. WHITAKER. That's right. Chairman PERKINS. If the gentlewoman will yield, this is the same type of equipment under regulations that you sell to the military at very little profit, if any? Mr. WHITAKER. That is correct. Mr. Qm~. Was it that there was no profit in sales to the military? Mr. WHITAKER. Maybe you can say we are doing a poor job, Mr. Quie, but we have not found it at Grafiex profitable to deal with the military. I think that we have contributed as much as we have made in this respect. I am not talking about General Precision Equipment Corp. I aim talking about Grafiex. Mr. QuJE. That is considerably different. Chairman PERKINS. Where you make your profit is dealing with the domestic field and not with General Services and the military or the' Job Corps? Mr. WHITAKER. That's right. Mr. QtrrE. General Equipment Precision Corp. makes substantial and handsome profits dealing with the military and the space pro-- gram. Grafiex is a subsidiary of them. I hope we don't have the impres- sion that the whole operation out of the goodness of their heart is dealing with the Federal Government. I think any of these corpora- tions that are dealing `with the OEO and the Job Corps centers seem to be doing quite handsomely in their trade with the Government. Mr. WHITAKER. I object to the "handsome profits." They make profits' and they are in business to make profits and we don't apologize for' them. I am a director of General Precision and we are trying to get our profits up. Mr. GIBBONS. The profits pay the taxes in this country. That is what runs this thing. I Imow that my colleague understands that better than I do; but that is what pay the taxes and run this place-those nasty old~ profits. It might be funny coming from a rather liberal Democrat. Mr. QuiR. I wonder what impression it gives when we think that the corporation is doing this purely out of goodness of their heart. Mr. WHITAKER. I said we have a dual objective. Mr. Qure. How does the corporation use the Job Corps enrollees after they have been in 3 months and they leave and are considered as' graduates? Do you have a placement program for them back into Grafiex or any of the corporations in General Precision Corp.? Mr. WHITAKER. Our objective in the General Precision family is to hire approximately 50 per year. Mr. QUIE. What is the percentage? I don't recall the graduates. Mr. WHITAKER. 1,100-some in the first year. Mr. Qtm~. What other kind of followthrough program do you have for them? Mr. WHITAKER. Sir, I am not duckmg the question, but the ques- tion is basically a responsibility of OEO. We make sure, however, that each graduate has on the average of three interviews~ lined up ahead of him before he leaves our center. Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield there again? Mr. QuIB. Yes, I yield. PAGENO="0031" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2491 Mrs. GREEN. How do you define "graduate"? Mr. WHITAKER. One who completes the vocational training in the vocation of his choice. He receives a certificate just as does a graduate of a high school or elsewhere. Mrs. GREEN. That training period is how long? Mr. WHITAKER. On the average, 8.8 months, just under 9 months.. Mrs. GREEN. On the average? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, ma'am. Mrs. GREEN. And it would go from what to what? What are the extremes? Mr. WHITAXER. Some do it as rapidly as 6 months and some take it a year and a half. Mrs. GREEN. Do you consider a boy who goes into the military a graduate? Mr. WHITAKER. I am not sure I understand your question corn- pletely. A graduate can go into the military if that is what he likes ~ yes. Mrs. GREEN. But if he has not completed the course and goes into the military, do you consider him a graduate? Mr. WHITAKER. No; I would not. Mrs. GREEN. That is not included in this? Mr. WHITAKER. No. Mrs. GREEN. "Graduate" is pretty loosely defined by OEO. Mr. WHITAKER. The graduates are certificate-bearing graduates from Breckinridge only. Mr. QUIE. You don't use the same definition of graduate that OEQ uses. Mr. WHITAKER. I assume, from the way the questions are being asked, apparently I am not. I apologize if I am not. Mr. Qurs. It sounds like a better definition than OEO uses. I wish they would use that one, too. Have you tried to develop a placement program as a part of your contract with OEO so that you can follow through rather than de- pending on them? You say this is a primary responsibility of theirs. Have you attempted to assume this? Mr. WHITAXER. We feel placement is important, whether it be in military, in a continuing school, or in an earning job. Even though it is not spelled out as such as a definite key responsibility in the contract, we have worked very diligently in this area; yes, sir. Mr. QUIE. Is there any possibility of securing in the future more of the responsibility for placement or have they turned you down? Mr. WHITAKER. No; they have not turned us down. I want to be just as frank with you as you are with me, sir. If the contract were to require us to place every graduate, this would probably be an im- possible thing to accept because we don't know what the economic future of the country is going to be and what the situation will be with each graduate when he comes through, but as a practical matter we feel we are judged by you and others on how well placed they are and we try to do that job. Mr. Qurs. Regarding the 50 you have an agreement to take, is this with Grafiex or is this with General Precision? Mr. WHITAKER. General Precision is targeting for 50. We have not agreed to take 50, but that is our target. PAGENO="0032" 2492 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QuIE. Have you attempted to work out any contracts with other corporations for placement so they will have a similar target? Mr. WHITAKER. We work with other corporations such as Cater- pillar Tractor, who are mightly pleased with our welding graduates, and Johnson Motors, ~ho are pleased with our small-motor-repair graduates. Right now we are working with the Governor of Kentucky to establish an industrial committee whose job it will be to concentrate solely on this placement problem. Mr. QuiE. One other question which indicates I came in a little late here. Who is the individual sitting next to you? Mr. WHITAKER. This is Bill Dwyer, vice president of Darcy Asso- ciates, our public relations people. He was formerly administrative assistant to Congressman Horton. Mr. QUIE. Do you have a contract with Darcy Associates? Mr. WHITAKER. Long before. Bill was associated with them; yes, sir. Mr. QuIE. Do you mean with your Job Corps? Mr. WHITAKER. Grafiex has had a contract with Darcy and as a part of that, we also have them do Breckinridge assignments. Mr. QuIE. Is that part of the contract? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, a portion of it is; ~-es, sir. Mr. Q.UIE. Breckenridge had a. lot of trouble before you took over. but we have not seen much in the paper since then. Mr. WmTAKER. I hope you have seen some good things in the paper. Mr. GIBBONS. It might be because of Mr. Horton's administrative assistant that you have not seen anything bad. * Mr. QUIE. I note at the end of June the Job Corps Recreation Cen- ter caused you some trouble. A Mr. and Mrs. Fitzgerald threatened to picket city hall unless the situation improved, complaining that Job Corps youths were drinking, chasing small children, trespassing on the lawns, and so forth. Did that get resolved? Mr. WHITAKER. First, let me say we are not perfect and we have not hit the millennium, but basically the things that are being done in the community relations are ideal. There was a bit of feeling expressed because of a Job Corps recrea- tion center that we established in Evansville in an unmixed neigh- borhood because of the fact that some of the colored boys were not* welcome in that area. We feel that we ha.ve overcome that and that we have a good feeling now due to the fact that the neighborhood is now using the facilities in the daytime and we are using it at night. There seems to be a good feeling about it. Mr. QuIE. How did you go about working out better community relations? Mr. WHITAKER. First of all, before we accepted the contract or be- fore we said we would accept the contract, we went out-I went out personally with a group from Grafiex, talked with the industries, with the chamber of commerce, with the service clubs to find out if Breck enridge was salvageable. WThen we came to the conclusion it was, we told them of our plans and asked them if they could help us improve those programs. WTe have committees in Evansville, Henderson, and Morganfielch and in other surrounding towns. that work very helpfully with us in e~f~b- PAGENO="0033" 1~MIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2493 ~ig the program. We had good communications and a good under' si nding of what our objectives are, both theirs and ours Mr. QUIE. Do you recommend similar action by other contractors at Job Corps centers who have problems with communities, as a sub- stantial number of them have had and a number of them still do? Mr. WHITAKER. The bill before the House, as I read it, does provide for this. I think you have done a good job of anticipating what we have already found through experience works. Mr. Quu~. Last year one of our amendments that was adopted on the floor required the same thing, so there is nothing new in the bill this year, which I found interesting because they call it a new program. The last question I would like to ask is a little bit on the philosophy of the Job Corps. I was reading Christopher Weeks' "Job Corps," where he goes over the history of it. As you know, he was on the Job Corps staff here in Washington. He talks about the negi~tive side of the sheet. * Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, so that what I quote here will not be taken out of context by anyone who reads it, and since the last chapter is very short, I request that the conclusion be placed at this point in the record. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it can be placed in the record. (Excerpt from "Job Corps" by Christopher `Weeks follows ) CONCLUSION As Sargent Shriver led off the poverty program hearings on St. Patrick's Day of 1964, he pledged that "if, as time goes on, we find that any of these programs is not making a contribution to the total effort, we will change that program or get rid of it In 1966, Congress came close to asking Shriver to make good on that pledge. Obviously riled at the administration of the program, Congress tacked several amendments onto the Job Corps section of the legislation designed to force tighter discipline, better evaluation, and a different method for assigning enrollees to centers. Well-founded rumors disclosed that a proposal to transfer the entire program to the Labor Department was beaten down by the closest of margins in the House Education and Labor Committee. And it was a grudging Congress that approved $211 million to continue operations for another year, $17 million less than the Administration asked for. Had it not been for that fact that the Job Corps had already spent more than $100 million in building, modern- izing, and equipping more than one hundred centers, the cuts might have been far deeper. Clearly the Job Corps has fallen far short of tli e goals set out for it in 1964. In part this is because the program. was oversold to begin with. Its superficial similarity to the Civilian Conservation Corps led many to hope that it could emulate its predecessor's success. But the similarity was only superficial. In fact, the Job Corps was an incredibly more complex undertaking. The Civilian Conservation Corps was concerned only with taking men off the streets and putting them to `work; it was a solution to an economic problem. But the Job Corps was designed to solve a social problem; it had to do everything the CCC did, and on top of that it had to figure out ways to rework social attitudes, build work skills, and imbue its enrollees with the habits of. good citizenship. Moreover the Civilian Conservation Corps was able to use existing organiza- tions to overcome the challenge of getting into operation fast. This option was closed to the Job Corps by the early demise of the proposal to use the Defense Department to handle Job Corps planning and logistics. Operating without funds, the Jobs Corps planning group in 1964 was hobbled in any attempt to mobilize talent, start construction, purchase initial allotments of equipment, or develop training materials. `Once appropriations became available, the task of recruiting staff and putting together an organization took months. Then the J~ob Corps success formula of remedial education and job training in residential centers proved illusory. There w-as, in fact, no success formula which the Job Corps could rely on to achieve its stated objectives. SO-084-07-pt. 4-3 PAGENO="0034" 2494 ECONO~IIC ~ OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF'7~ ~ Other parts of the poverty program faced a similar crisis ~ as they got under way. And in retrospect, it is evident that even the experts, in 1964, underestimated the deep-rootedness of poverty, and consequently overestimated the country's ability to devise effective solutions for those caught in its clutches. So rapidly had the social consensus of the country changed inthe early 1960's, and so quickly had this change been translated into political action, that neither our understand- ing of the complexities of the problem nor our technologies for solving it could catch up. As a result, the Job Corps was caught in a hopeless position-reliable technologies simply didn't exist for achieving the extremely ambitious goals which had been set for it. In short, overoptimistic expectations are largely responsible for much of the disappointment and disillusionment over the Job Corps today. But this is hardly a reason for crossing it off as a failure. And there is a far more important problem which-needs to be considered in determining its future. The Job Corps was enacted by Congress as a program to help eliminate pov- erty. But there are real questions as to whether on balance it has reduced or aggravated the problem. Job Corps press releases stress the number of graduates now leaving centers and taking jobs, or joining, the Armed Forces, or returning to school. And there is little doubt that some of these graduates are clearly better off than they would have been without the Job Corps experience. Unfortunately, follow--up data on Job Corps graduates is so sketchy that it is impossible to tell just how many graduates have gained a lasting benefit from their Job Corps expe- rience, and what the degree of that benefit is. But there is a negative side to the Job Corps balance sheet. For tens of thousands of trainees, the program which seemed to offer one last chance has turned out to mean only disillusionment, frustration, and finally defeat once again. No one know-s what the social cost of a Job Corps dropout is-what price must eventually be paid to overcome the effects of reinforced failure on the teen-agers who have found they couldn't make it even in this "last resort" salvage effort. But it is certain these social costs are sizable, a fact which was documented by a Job Corp- financed poll of Job Corps dropouts carried out by the reputable and experienced survey firm of Louis Harris and Associates. The Job Corps attempted unsuccess- fully to suppress the results of the survey, which showed among other findings that unemployment was higher among Job Corps dropouts than before they en- rolled, and that more than half of the unemployed dropouts were either working or in school before they entered the Job Corps. After twenty months of operation, there were six dropouts or kickouts for every Job Corps graduate-six defeats for every victory. As time passes, this ratio may improve. But until the Job Corps can demonstrate that its successes outnumber its failures, it cannot claim that it is making a positive contribution to the elimination of poverty. And `so long as its'contribution to the elimination of poverty remains debatable, then its essential justification is subject to serious question. If it is questionable w-hether the Job Corps is helping to eliminate poverty, then it is reasonable to ask why it should be continued any longer. Why not shut it dow-n now and stop throw-lag good money after bad? The answer is that the problem the Job Corps was designed to solve still exists in massive proportions. There are still hundreds of thousands of teenagers at the bottom of the economic ladder with little hope for moving up. Every year more than one hundred thousand new- candidates for unemployment and frustra- tion turn sixteen. Out of this group, some can be helped by simpler, less costly, and more reliable programs of job training, remedial education, w-ork experience, counseling, and other uplift aids in their own hometowns. But there still remain a large number-no one knows how- many-who will get little or no help unless they get out of w-here they now- live nnd into another setting. For this group, there is no alternative but the Job Corps. No War on Poverty worthy of the name could leave this portion of the battle- front untouched. Therefore, some program like the Job Corps must be continued as a part of the effort to eliminate poverty. Furthermore. even though the Job Corps has scored only a few breakthroughs in social technology to date, it still has great potential for advancing Our under- standing of the complexities of teen-age poverty and for developing-more effective solutions. As a program, it is not tied to any particular professionalism; there- fore. it is free to blend different systems and approaches in almost infinite varie- ty. It is nationwide in scope, with small and large centers in both rural and urban settings. It still has great potential to mobilize brainpower, and Congress has opened the door to day students at Job Corps centers, adding even furtfler flexibility to the kinds of approaches that can be planned and tested. PAGENO="0035" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2495 * But if the Job Corps is to achieve this potential for developing new, more effec- tive techniques foi so1~ ing the most conip1e~ teen `ige povert~ pioblenis it iiiu~t change its administrative priorities. In simplest terms, it needs to give far more attention to the quality of its effort, and far less to the quuntity. Thei~e is little to bt gained from pushing larger and larger numbers of trainees through pro~,i TillS of doubtful effectiveness which many of `them fail to complete. There is much to be gained from puttins~ far greater effort into finding out w hat it t'il e~ to hold the enrollees in the program and what makes a successful graduate. In short, it would be bitter irony `indeed if Congress were to shut down one of the programs most likely to produce new breakthroughs in social technology at precisely the time when our existing technologies for dealing with social prob- lems simply do not measure up to our goals. The country needs the Job Corps to- day not to solve the problem of teen-age poverty, but to find a way to solve it. Mr. QULE. He talks about the 30-percent dropout at Breckinridge and he speaks of the social cost of this being quite high because the Job Corps is the last resort and salvage effort and if the enrollees lose again, it would seem they would cease to have hope any more. He says this fact was documented by the Job Corps finance poll of Job Corps dropouts carried out by the reputable survey firm of Louis Harris & Associates. The Job Corps attempted unsuccessfully to sup- press the results of the survey, which shows unemployment was higher among Job Corps dropouts than before they enrolled and more than half of the unemployed dropouts were either working or were in school before they entered the Job Corps. Also, after 20 months of operations there were six dropouts or "kickouts" for every Job Corps graduate, six defeats for every victory. As time passes, thisratio may improve, but until the Job, Corps can demonstrate its successes outnumber its failures, it cairnot claim it is making a positive contribution to the elimination of poverty. So' long as this contribution to the poverty program .remains debatable, then its essential justification is subject to serious question I don't want to give you the impression that Christopher Weeks says we should do away with the Job Corps-he does not-but raises some of these questions. I assume you don't count these people as dropouts until after they have been in the camp for a month, so there is an additional, number who have left and are not benefited by the Job Corps. `When do you think we will re'tch the point of positive contribution ~ 1 `tssume you are not satisfied with the 30 percent either Wh'~t point do you think we ought to ieach in the whole Job Corps dropout picture before we can really say this is succeeding :and the number of dropouts is negligible ~ Mr. WHITAKER. You have asked a number of questions and I will try to answer them one at a time. While we are trying to improve the dropout rate, it is understandable when you are working with this kind of material. Second, the Harris report is in my judgment, while accurate, as to facts, misleading in some respects. First of all, it was made in August of 1966 of those who dropped out or graduated before that date. So you are looking at much material that comes from training that was done in 1965 and early 1966. The third thing I would like to say is- Chairman' PERKINS. You mean that was during the early period that many mistakes were made and the Job Corps was under attack resulting in much criticism? PAGENO="0036" 2496 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. WETrAKER. It is vastly improved from the days when this was evaluated-vastly improved. Congressman Quie, the next thing I wanted to say is if you read volume 4 of the Harris report, he admits or states in that volume that the extent of employment of the Corps men before they went into the Job Corps was greatly exaggerated, their memories of the job would extend back a year or 6 months, a year and one-half, 3 months, and they would report as if they were working when they went in the Job Corps and this was a mistake in the earlier volumes. `I don't know what the correct figure is but he states the figure he quoted was wrong. Mr. QUIE. He did not upgrade the report in any way and give more correct figures? Chairman PERKINS. If the gentleman will yield, on page 52 of the Harris report, he states that one should not conclude from the above data that those who never, go into the Job Corps can do as well as those who are in for a short time and t.1~en drop out. The sample of no-shows is distinguished by the fact that., they did not join mainly because they were able to get jObs. Their experience is not necessarily representative of the group that has not come into contact with the Job Corps at all. Mr. GIBBONS. May I make an observation here? These figures have worried me but the very process of just being interviewed, and screened for this Job Corps is a big educational proc- ess for some. It is probably more time than they ever used to sit down `with a mature adult and examine themselves. I think the education of a Job Corps man begins from the time he makes the decision to walk into tha.t place and get interviewed. Certainly, he begins to learn from the very moment he is touched by a skilled interviewer and goes through these very searching ques- tions and has to lay out his past record `and experience and reexamine himself. I would say that the success, of course, in this program is `very hard to measure, but success is a rather intangible thing anyway. I think he begins to learn at the time he is interviewed and ut the time he makes the commitment. This is an extreme example and `I hope you won't hold me to this as a measure of success but I think you can measure the success of a fellow who stayed in the Job Corps a week, if he went there and understood himself well enough t.o, realize that his place to start and place towork was back in his own community. That would be a success. for . an individual. `While I think these statistics and surveys a.re important, I think based on the human un- derstanding we all have as parents, and t.his man is a grandfather of seven, the Job Corps is successful. It is a' successful experiment in getting something done that we have not been too successful with. It is not the only solution. I hope as we go along we will try to find other ways of solving t.his problem. I just wanted to interrupt there because I did not know whether you are going to filibuster or not. ` ` Mr. QUIR. I must say if that is' a good experience, and undoubtedly it is~ there must be' more expensive ways to bring that about. An air- plane trip may enable them to stay in a camp closer to home or have some of that same activity closer to home. ` ` ` ` PAGENO="0037" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2497 Mr. GIBBONS. I wish it could be closer to home. I regret that we don't have any of these cities in my part of the United States. Perhaps if there had not been as much unfavorable publicity about these centers,. maybe we could get some of the Governors down in our part of the country to allow these centers to come in because that is a real problem.. Mr. QUIE. I would like to have you make a comment on the second-~ to-last paragraph of his book. He said: But, if the Job Corps is to achieve this potential for developing new, more effective techniques for solving the most complex teenage poverty problems, it' must change its administrative priorities. In Simplest terms, it needs to give far more attention to the quality of its effort, and far less to the quantity. There Is little to be gained from pushing larger and larger numbers of trainees through programs of doubtful effectiveness which many of them fail to complete. There is much to be gained from putting far greater effort into finding out what it takes to hold the enrollees in the program and what makes a successful graduate. You have had a year now, 14 months of operating at Breckinridge. Have you been able to identify the means of successfully holding them there since you moved from 100 percent dropout to 30 percent dropout? I do not mean necessarily 100 percent under your experience. Also you have had a number of graduates now that have been placed even in your own corporation. Mr. WHITAKER. Congressman Quie, we have not solved the problem. We think we have made great strides and if I can `believe the reports of the last 2 months, we are much improved over the past 10 months. The key to the dropout problem in my judgment is to make sure that the orientation is so well done that they don't make missteps and choose the wrong vocation when they start and keep them as busy as cats on a tin roof so they don't get homesick and want to go home and make sure that the communications are clear cut. We have made great success in reducing the number of dropouts by what `we call group interaction counseling, by having the boys work on the other boys to not want to give, up this wonderful opportunity that they have and I think this is helpful. I don't want to sound like a psychologist but you can do things that way that you can't get `adults to do when working with young men. Mr. QUIE. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green? Mrs. GREEN. You are chairman of the board of Graflex? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes, Ma'am. Mrs. `GREEN. And you serve on General Precision? Mr. WHITAKER. I `am on their board also. Mrs. GREEN. How many are on both boards? Mr. WI-JITAKER. Three are on the Graflex board and. 23 I believe on the `General Precision board. Mrs. GREEN. Do you serve on both of those? Mr. WHITAKER. Yes. Mrs. `GREEN. Where is your office? Mr. WHITAKER. In Rochester, N.Y. Mrs. GREEN. Could you tell me approximately how much of your busy life you spend `at Breckinridge? Mr. WHITAKER. I am there at least once every month and some- `times twice a month. I will be there next on the 25th of this month. PAGENO="0038" 2498 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs~ GREEN. How much time do you spend there?~ Mr. WHITAKER. One to three days. Mrs. GREEN. Who wrote this report;? Is this your P.R. firm? Mr. WHITAKER. No, I wrote it personally. Mrs. GREEN. How do you account for the difference OEO gives us on the cost of Breckinridge, not talking about your estimate of this year ahead but on the cost of the past year? How do you account for the spread of about $1,000 per enrollee? Mr. WHITAKER. I think there is a misunderstanding on that, Con- gresswoman Green. Would you refer me to the page you are looking at? Mrs. GREEN. I thought you gave the cost of $6,900. Mr. ~\%HITAKER. The ~G.900 was the overall. Mrs. GREEN. $6,950 and I think OEO gives $7,700. Mr. WHITAKER. I gave the overall cost for all Job Corps of $6,950 which was the figure 1 obtained from OEO. Mrs. GREEN. I thought, in response to a question from Congressman Quie, that you gave the Breckinridge cost. Mr. WHITAKEII. No, I said I w~s not certain, that I was guessing; but I thought it was in the $7,000 range. The $6,950 figure is the overall cost for all corpsmen in the Job Corps and the $6,700 is the cost for this year of which we are now operating for .Breckinridge only. Mrs. GREEN. This is a new figure to me. It is not one I have seen in any other report. Mr. WHITAKER. My source for it was from the New York Times on June 11, 1967.1 have the clipping in my materials here and those released by Mr. William Kelly. Mr. Qrn~. Would the gentlewoman yield? Mrs. GREEN. I yield. Mr. QUIE. From this a.n~dysis of Job Corps reports from the Office of Economic Opportunity, they give their estimate for this next fiscal year as exactly the same amount Mr. Whitaker does, that of $6,070 for Breckinridge in round numbers. Mr. WHITAKER. That is a firm contract at this figure. Mr. QUIE. Overall estimate of all, of the urban men's centers. Mr. WHITAKER. It may come back to $6,700, so apparently we are apart. Excuse me, Congresswoman Green, I did not mean to stray from your question. Did I answer fully what you asked? Mrs. GREEN. Yes. On the contract. you said you have $12 million; is that based on man-months? Mr. WFIITAKER. Yes, it is based on a population of 1,900 corpsmen average for 14 months. Mrs. GREEN. If you do not have that many man-months, the fixed fee of the Grafiex remains the same and the contract remains the same? Mr. WHITAKER. That is correct. Mrs. GREEN. I am thinking of one contract where the contract was for a particular number of man-months but. during the year they only provided less than half the number of man-months for training. Mr. WHITAKER. That is correct. We have to gear to that population and we are confident we will have that population. PAGENO="0039" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2499 Mrs. GREEN. In one place in the report you say in your achieve- ments, I think, tknt you take 100-percent dropouts. What do you mean by `that, that your Breckinridge enrollment is made up of 100-percent dropouts? Mr. WHITAKER. I meant in terms of school. Perhaps like Ivory soap it may be a shade under 100 percent; but that was my way of ex- pressing the fact that, for the most part, we are working with school dropouts. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have the actual figures `of t'he enrollees at Breckenridge in terms of the number t'hat caine directly from school to the Job Corps center and the number who came directly from a j oh to the Job Corps center? Mr. WHITAKER. I would be glad to get. that information. I don't have it offhand; I can supply it to y'ou. Mrs. GREEN. Acc.ording `to most of the reports I have seen, that is quite a substantial percentage, and this figure of 100-percent dropouts intrigues me. Mr. WHITAKER. I should have said 100-percent school dropouts. Mrs. GREEN. Most reports I have seen show a substantial number across the country-I don't know the ex'act figure for Breckenridge- a number go directly into the Job Corps directly from school and some go directly from jobs. Mr. WHITAKER. I rea'd late last night what you are quoting from in the Harris report, and I had not seen it before. I did also read in volume 4 of the same report some of `t'he earlier information was due to lack of experience on the part of the interrogators and misiemem- brance on the part of the corpsmen. `This was particularly true of thos'e who held jobs. Mrs. GREEN. `On the achievements, I notice you say 1,137 graduates are out in the woi~ld proving `themselves as good citizens. Who has made a study of these 1,137 graduates? On what do you base this? Mr. WIIITAKER. I am basing it on the information that we do have which `is not a total, complete picture because they have not been out long enQugh'to justify that kind of a statement. Mrs. GREEN. What information do you have? You say you are basing it on information you. have. What is this information? Mr. WHITAKER. I have placed in file with this committee letters from Job Corps men and their families indicating that they are successful after they graduate. Mrs. GREEN. Letters from how many of the graduates did you place in the record? Do you know? Mr. WIIITAKER. Only a few, but I believe them to be typical, Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. On that basis you would say that 1,137 are out in the world proving that they are good citizens? Have you made `any evalua- tion of how many out of the 1,137 have jobs, how long they stayed on the job, what they are doing, what their record is now? Mr. WHITAKER. We hope to do so but it is too early to give that as final statement. Mrs. GREEN. I do not understand the information on which' this statement is based. If this is correct, you have achieved a great deal. PAGENO="0040" 2500 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. WHITAKER. We know, of the 1,100 graduates, we know over 600 have received jobs. There are some 400-odd that have graduated so recently that we don't have the reports fed back. Mrs. GREEN. Of the 600 out of the 1,100, who got jobs, how many of the 600 stayed on the job for, say, for 6 months? Do you know? Did you make any study? Mr. WHITAKER. No; it is too recent to give you that information. Mrs. GREEN. On the basis of it not being too recent or anything I am just trying to find out on what your facts are based. Do you know how many of the 600 that got jobs stayed on the job for more than 2 days? Mr. WHITAKER. I can't answer that with absolute assurance, but I would be willing to say that most of them held jobs and are continuing to be wage earners and are satisfactory taxpayers. Mrs. GREEN. On what do you base that statement if you have not made any evaluation or study. How do you know this? Mr. WHITAKER. On the limited information I do have. All I can say is this: If a young man obtains a job and has a home and lives in that home and is a resident of a community, the chances are that he will continue and particularly if this is the situation that was not as successful as the case before. The important thing is as they go on and get experience, they won't keep the same job. They will go from Grafiex to Kodak to Bausch & Lomb. Mrs. GREEN. I want to know how many "ifs" are facts and how many are still "ifs" out of the 1,100. Mr. WHITAKER. All I can say is we want to know the same answers to the same questions, too. We feel what we say is the case and we want to have further. evidence toverifyit. Mrs. GREEN. What you are saying is in accordance with what you feel rather than being based on any study? Mr. WHITAKER. That particular statement is what I feel; yes. Mrs. GREEN. The agreement then is that he sign a paper saying he would like to have the Federal Government match his $25 and send it to his home free for his family for future use? Mr. WHITAKER. Are you questioning whether the money ever got to his home? Mrs. GREEN. No, not at all. I am putting it down as one of the major achievements of the Job Corps. Mr. WHITAKER. I think this illustrates he was thinking of someone other than himself or lie would not have given up $25 for that purpose. Mrs. GREEN. A moment ago in response to another question, and I agreed with this, I think we are learning from the Job Corps program. There also have been some critical reports of past achievements in ~Job Corps, and your statement was that conditions are now vastly im- proved in Job Corps centers. Again may I ask on what basis you make that statement? Is there a study that is later than the studies we have and, if so, I would like to see them. Mr. WHITAKER. Congresswoman Green, I can speak with authority with respect to Breckenridge only. With respect to the rest, I have a PAGENO="0041" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2501 feeling that what I have said is correct, but as far as Breckenridge is concerned, I know the situation that existed when we entered the pic- ture and I know what it is now and I will back theY statements that I have made. Mrs. GREEN. In terms of what? Mr. WITITAKER. In terms of enrolles, the relationships with the community, the number of placements. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have a study now? I am really seeking informa- tion. Do you have a later study, for instance, that is on the number of placements and the number of kids that stay on the job, and so on, that you could make available to this committee? Mr. WHITAKER. The center provides its record each month to the OEO. We have complete and full records that we make out and submit moothly. Mrs. GREEN. What do these records show? Mr. WHITAKER. What I have stated here. Mrs. GREEN. What? Mr. WHITAKER. The 1,100 graduates of whom 600 are placed, with 400-odd not yet reported. I can find it, if you would like me to repeat that. Mrs. GREEN. I though we determined a moment ago this was based on what you felt and not what you studied. Mr. WHITAKER. You asked me could I make the statement with as- surance that there 1,137 graduates were out in the world productively occupied. WTith respect to those 1,137 graduates, I can say this: That 601 had been specifically placed and as `far as I know are still on jobs. Mrs. GREEN. As far as you know, but do you know how many of the 600 are on the job? Do you know whether they stayed for more than 2 days? Most of the studies show that these kids `after they are graduated don't stay long, and this is what I am trying to find out. Do you know? I think it would be helpful for us to know this. Mr. WHITAKER. We have followup questionnaires and we try to keep track of what happens after the first experience. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have any of those that we can see so that you can tell us specifically "we do know, based on a study, how many of the 600 stayed for more than 2 days, 2 days or a week." I understood you to say a moment ago that youdid not. Mr. WHITAKER. I will try to get the information that you are asking, but I don't have it with me. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bell. Mr. BELL. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Gibbons? Mr. GIBBONS. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Do you believe that private educational estab- lishments are better equipped to reach these hard-core youngsters to train them in employment or in skills rather than switching over to residential centers operated by vocational educators at this time before you pass on any experience? Mr. WHITAKER. I feel the educational people are excellent in the edu- cational side alone. From the administrative standpoint, the industrial or businesslike approach is much more successful and a fair and firm technique with the corpsmen is the only thing that works. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel within the next few years that you PAGENO="0042" 2502 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 will gain valuable experience that you can communicate to the educa- tOrs and operators of the vocational schools? Mr. WHITAKER. I feel certain of this. Mr. QmE. How do you account for the fact that Gary which is run by educators in Texas is supposedly the most successful urban Job Corps center in the country? How do you account for the good success of a residential vocational school like Mahoning Valley Vocational School run by educators? Chairman PERKINS. Let me make an observation that Mahoning- I have been there and I know it is a great institution, but equipment- wise, trainingwise it does not compare with Breckinridge at the present time. Mr. Q.UIE. If the chairman will yield, they do not have the equip- ment that they have in these 100-percent federally funded programs, but the results of the graduates are far superior. Mr. GIBBONS. I am willing to have the witness answer this question, but I can help give you information. Mr. WIJITAKER. I hope I am remembering the right part of the ques- tion. You asked, How did Gary succeed? Mr. QOIE. In light of your answer to Mr. Perkins and the impres- sion t.hat private industry was doing a far superior job than the educa- tors, how do you account for the fact. that a vocational educator, like, say, at Gary which is supposed to be the best one in the country and run by the educational system of Texas, and also an educational system like Mahoning Valley has had great success with its graduates. Chairman PERKINS. I think the gentleman will find the Gary school is operated by a businessman and not an educator. Mr. WHITAKER. I. have been out to Gary and I have been through their operations and plans. The board is made up essentially of businessmen. Mr. QmE. That. happens in many boards of the country in voca- tional education. For instance, in Milwaukee, the great job they do in their out-of-school programs is a day school instead of residential school. The same thing is true of the board, but still it is the vOcational educa.tors. The businessmen are not serving on the staff. Mrs. GREEN. Would thegentleman yield? Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. It seems.that we are not contributing much to the Job Corps center ~vhen we say it has businessmen on the board.. 1 don't know of a school in the country that does not have businessmen on the board, but they are not on the staff. . . . .1 Is there any experience or study that would show this, or is this your feeling? I don't know of any study that says private industry can do a better job with vocational training than the.schools have done. Mr. WHITAKER. Congressman Quie mentioned a specific school which was run by educators. I did not intend to say educational people a.re not capable of doing a good job,. but I do feel, Congresswoman Green, with the type of people we are. dealing with in the Job Corps, industry is better equipped to deal with them than educat.ors. Mrs. GREEN. On what basis? .. ., Mr. WHITAKER. They are doing the sort of thing we tra.in for and have had experience in training for and trained for all the time. We at Graflex,. for example, have to tra.in our own nrnchini~ts to man ôu~ PAGENO="0043" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2503 machines. We can do this much more effectively than the University of Rochester and Alan Wallace would agree with me on that statement Mrs. GREEN. We are talking about people at the fifth grade level. What experience do you have in training fifth-grade-level youngsters? Mr. WHITAKER. We employ teachers who do~ Mrs. GREEN. You mean you go tci these people who have failed and get them to do this job for you? Mr. WHITAKER. I did not say t.hey failed. I think that is an over- statement of the case. Mrs. GREEN. I accept that. Mr. WHITAKER. Congresswoman Green, before you came in, I said when we inherited Breckinridge, we found many things that Southern Illinois University did extremely well. We are in the position of being able to second-guess and maybe that makes it easier to do the kind of job we are doing, because we profited by their experience. I would like to say the president of SIU cooperated with us fully in making a painless changeover. Mrs. GREEN. Would you not agree, though, that there is really no time yet to evaluate and there is just no hard evidence that shows that private industry can do a better job than the schools have done. Would you not have to agree to that, as a person I presume who wants information, before you make a judgment? Mr. WHITAKER. Being an industrialist, I don't feel that I should answer that. Mrs. GREEN. Do you know of any study, do you know of anything that would deal in hard, cold facts and is there enough experience to show and prove that private industry can do a better job? Mr. WHITAKER. I feel in quotes, Congresswoman Green, if a study were made of the graduates who are now coming out of Breckinridge, and I think they are representative of those gi'aduating from other Job Corps centers, you would get a vastly improved picture over what is in the Harris reports. That is the feeling. A study has not been made, but we hope it will be made. Mr. GIBBONS. I see Mr. .Quie has left, so I will not try and enlighten him Chairm'rn PERKINS Mi Meeds Mr MEED~ I hai e no questions I am sorry I did not get to he'tr the gentleman's testimony. I had to go to another committee hear- ing. I wish I could have heard his testimony. Chairman PERKINS. Even though no study has been completed as to the effectiveness of the job being done in the Job Corps by people with your experience, you feel th'~t you are better equipped to mana2e a total problem to rehabilitate, so to speak, the problem youngster who is lacking in basic education because of all of the experience von have g~uned in the p'~st in this `~nd other aieas, approaches not taken by our est'~bli~hed educ'itional institut1on~ Is that `~bout ~ oui feel lug, the reason for th~tt st'ttement9 Mr. WHITAKER. We feel this way mind we feel the survey we hope wi'l be made will verify what I have said. Mrs GREEi~ I have a serious suggest1On I think this committee might well have `~ couple of controlled groups We would take one of our best vocational schools which is run by educators, since this charge which we have heard has been made not only by this gentle- PAGENO="0044" 2504. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEXDME~TS OF 1967 man but by other witnesses appearing before us. And 1 suggest we take a good vocational educational school, define it in the legislation, and give to that vocational school $7,000 per kid per year and give to the teachers and principals the salaries that are comparable to the salaries which we pay for staff of the Job Corps and give to that school the same kind of student-teacher ratio. I think the ratio in the Job Corps is one staff member to one and a half or two kids. I~t's give them this kind of ratio in the classroom and then say to the school, to the teachers and to the principals, at the end of the year, "You not only have the salaries that are probably twice as much as you received in the past, in some instances; at the end of the year we will give you a 4.7-percent bonus on the total con- tract for your school." Then you know we will have a ba.sis of cowparison and will really be able to make the judgment of whether or not schools are failures in the country or, if as a society we were willing to finance them, whether or not they could do just as fine a job as private industry. Mr. GIBBONS. I think that is a good suggestion. Let's put it in the legislation. Mrs. GREEN. I think it would once and for all end this criticism that the schools have failed. It is not the schools that have failed. It is the society that has failed. We have asked the schools to produce absolute miracles. We give the. schools and teachers classrooms with 35 or 40 children to teach; we pay the teachers considerably less than many nonprofessionals are paid; and then we raise hell at the end of the year because a teacher ha.s not turned out 40 ideal students. I am really getting pretty tired of hearing this. I don't know of any- thing that is more damaging to schools, when we desperately need teachers, than to hear these constant. attacks. For the past 150 years schools have been charged with responsibility, rand I think, with the money we have given them, they have done an :amazingly good job. I would say there is less graft and corruption rand less wrongdoing in the schools than any other segment in our society in the United States today, and I for one am getting tired of this constant criticism when we won't finance our schools, and when we say to these other people we will give you any amount of money you want. Mr. WHITAKER. I say amen to that, Mrs. Green. I believe in our school system, too. Chairman PERKINS. I am a great believer in vocational education. I think there is room for everybody in this area when we have dropouts of~approiima.tely 500,000 youngsters a year. There is room for resi- dential centers and room for the Job Corps, but it is my feeling that some invaluable experience and training and techniques are resulting and being obtained from your period of experiment.ation. It would certainly be detrimental to the progress that we are taking if we cut back any operating funds on the Job Corps at this time. I think you will agree with that statement. Mr. WHITAKER. It would be just shameful. We would be throwing away much of what we have learned and not gaining what we are all on t.he threshold of achieving. PAGENO="0045" ECONOMIC. OPPORTUNITY ~~ACT AMENDMENTS OF *1967 2505 Chairman PERKIN& And you will be depriving vdcational educa. tors of our general school system in general of all of this knOwledge and valuable information. Is that statement correct? Mr. WHITAKER. Absolutely. Chairman PERKINS. It is your purpose to cooperate and feed the schools now any information `that you have and you do `that and many schools and vocational educators. visit your center just to see how you are treating this problem child and how you are bringing the problem child to the present time. Mr. WHITAKER. This interchange of staff will be helpful, too. Chairman PERKINS. I personally want to compliment you on your testimony. I feel it has been most outstanding and most helpful to the committee. To my way `of thinking, we just cannot afford not tO back the Job Corps and its operations. In fact, we ought to make more funds available to expand the Job Corps. I am sold on it, and I feel, furthermore, that there is nothing wrong with making available supplies to residential schools which I feel like- wise could do a good job, but they can profit tremendously from the know-how that you have already obtained and they will profit more within the next few years. Mr. WHITAKER. The peripheral benefits may prove to be even greater than the benefits to the young men and women. Before you conclude, may Mr. Dwyer make a comment? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. DWYER. As Mr. Whitaker's friend and also as one who serves him in a public relations capacity in connection with his important responsibilities, I would merely like to express the hope at the con- clusion of this hearing that the record not reflect any misapprehen- sion with regard to Mr. Whitaker's personaj `feelings for the Graflex Co. regarding `the role of the professional educator in our country. Certainly for much longer than `the existence of any economic op- portunity program, there has been a congressional concern for voca- tional education and very thoughtful application of Federal funding for vocational education. The results are plain to see. They have meant a great deal to the economy and forward progress of our Nation. How- ever, new problems come along and they haye to be met with new solutions Graflex hopes to be a part of that just as it has been a part in the past of vocational education and' continues to be. It is a major pro- vider of the tools that are used in today's educational sy~tem: It is thankful to Congress and particularly to this' committee for all that it has provided to vocational education. However, this committee and the Congress, in its wisdom, iii recog- nition of the new problems, of the poverty-stricken person, of the family caught in a cycle of poverty, decided on the Economic Oppor- tunity Act. It has extended and expanded that program in the past couple of years. It has sought a public and private partnership with industry such as General Precision and Graflex. It structured the Job Corps. Graflex was happy to enter into that partnership. Its role today is one of trying to assist wherever it can in programs that the Federal Government sees as being able to aid those who are less advantaged, who have fewer privileges. PAGENO="0046" 2506 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 * I do thank the committee and its chairman and its members for this opportunity to speak in Mr. Whitaker's behalf at this point and sug- gest again that Graflex is as much a part of vocational education as it is any speci't.hzed program such as Job Corps `md others that this committee, the Congress, and the executive bi'anch ma~ bring along. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you are stating that Grafiex is as much a part of vocational education as it is involved in the oper- ation of the Job Corps. Mr. WHITAKER. We serve both to the `best of our ability. Chairman PERKINS. To what extent would you say you serve voca- tional educators? Mr. WHITAKER. I don't kilow how `this gOt twisted around to where industry was fighting the educational. system, but we are not. I am a trustee of Rensselaer Institute of Technology, which, as such, is a voca- tional school and I have done much more for it aiid contribute much to it every year and so does the company. Chairman PEIIKINS.. Nobody is fighting education. We are all for education. We have, a problem in this country with the problem young- ster, and I think the vocational educators would be the first.to admit that the hard-core unemployed and the problem youngster with the lack of basic education is. one of their greatest problems that they want to help solve in this country. They want all of the information that you can give them that you are learning and can transmit to them in this connection. Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman would yield, I would like to put this in the right context. I don't think anyone is impuning the educational departments or the vocational educational departments or any other business inter- ests. I don't think that is the ioint here. The point is that some of these things have to be done and we are trying to do them. Which is the best. route to take in educating some of these deprived children? Do we educate them through the OEO using different methods outside the educational system or. do we use the `on- going established educational system to continue and develop the edu- cation of our children? I think that is the basis of the issue we are discussing. Mr. WHITAKER. It is a good point. Mr. Chairman, there was one thing I had hoped to say while Mrs. Green was here. She suggested this evaluation and mentioned a num- ber of the ingredients for the evaluation. One thing we want to be sure of is we start both comparisons with deprived young men or women, as the case may be. I did not hear her say that and that would be very vital. I am sure she meant to start off in the same phase, but this is one thing that is different from our normal educational system. We start with folks who, for the most part, maybe not 100 percent, but for the most part, are dropouts and are unsuccessful on the scene. Chairman PERKINS. At your center you have practically 100-percent dropouts. Mr. WHITAKER. That iswherein lies the problem between the educa- tiońalcenter and the Job Corps center. PAGENO="0047" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 2507 Chairman PERKINS So many vocational educators have children who are going right on to advanced training, going into technical training, and so on. . . .,. . . . Mr WHITAKER Exactly Chairman PERKINS Mr 2 Mr~ QUIE. No further questions. . . . Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Bell? Mr. BELL. No questions. Chairman PERKINS Mr Meeds ~ Mr MEEDS No fujther questions Chairman PERKINS. If you have any further comments that you feel we have not .asked you about or if you have additional statements, furnish them tome and.I will see that theminorityand~Mr. Quie are~ furnished a copy and we will insert the material in the record after the minority sees it Mr WHITAKER Mr Chairman and members of the committ~, I appreciate more than I can say your patience and the understanding way in which you have asked the questions I hope the answers have been as good as your questions I do have a statement I ~s ould like to make as a concluding remark Chairman PERKINS. Go right ahead. Mr WHITAKER Grafiex and our associates in GPE feel that profits alone are not enough, that a truly successful business must have a* social conscience Today economic and social health go hand in hand We regard education and training as means for achieving a controlled: reaction instead of social dynamite where we have pockets of poverty in the midst of plenty F'ulure to recognize this could lead to the cancerous growth of social unrest and unwittingly to our own destruction. Job Corps is as sig- nificant an approach to the crux of this problem, the dis'tdvant~ged youth of America Think of it as transforming school dropouts, some of them. as much as third-generation relief into self-reliant taxpaying citizens. . As imperfect as it is, Job Corps is doing something about it, helping youth to help themselves, at the same time revealing useful leads on success, innovative learning techrnques I thank each and all of you. Chairman PERKINS. You are excused, and thank you very much. Mr WHITAKER Thank you all We appreciate your patience Mr. Quiii. May I make this one comment for the record? I noticed the comment from the State leagues give the inference that Community Action w ould be ended, that there wouldn't be any Heidshrt progr'1/m and so on It gives that impression I want to say for the record for anybody who reads it, Community Action and Headstart and none of these programs would be eliminated under the Opportunity Crusade. . Mr. BELL. Mr. Chairman, may I add a point to this? * It does indicate to me also a general lack of understanding that the issue here is not the elimination of any of t.hese programs. The issues are pum'trily mechanical ~s to `where the progr'~ms cm be pl'tced more efficiently That is the issue, not the question of elimination of any of these programs. . .. . * . * * . * I think that is the program, Mr. Chairman, that seems unfortunately to be misread by many people throughout the Nation. PAGENO="0048" 2508 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF `1967 * Chairman Pr~uxiNs. Let me say that all of these statements will be inserted immediately following the prepared testimony of Mrs. Benson and the comments of Mr. Quie and Mr. Bell, so we can. have some con- tinthty. At this point in the record I would like to insert a communica- tion from C. P. MeColough, president of Xerox Corp. (The communication referred to follows:) XEROX CORP., Rochester, N.Y., July 10, L9~7. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman Committee on Education and Labor Hcmse of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAiRMAN: I regret very much that a long-standing travel corn- mitment prevents me from testifying in person before your distinguished com- mittee on July 13. I do, however, want to make available to the Committee some of the conclusions we at Xerox Corporation have drawn from experience gained in operating the Job Corps Center for Women in Huntington, West Virginia. By way of preamble, let me explain why Xerox is a contract Job Corps operator. We are participating in the program primarily because we believe in it, be- cause we feel that the United States cannot afford to waste the human resources of young people who need help in order to fit successfully into our economy and because we. recognize our responsibility as an industrial organization to con- tribute some of that needed help. At the same time, I by no means want to suggest that our Job Corps participa- tion is a one-way street. Xerox has undertaken a major commitment to serve the broad field of edu- cation. We hope to provide the educational community with the means to impart knowledge more effectively. First-hand experience on the firing line, working with youngsters who have some of the most difficult learning problems of any student group, is therefore extremely helpful to us. In undertaking to operate a women's Job Corps, Xerox never thought that the task would be an easy one. It hasn't been. Like our brother contractors-and indeed like the Office of Economic Opportunity itself-we have been exploring new routes and navigating uncharted waters. Inevitably, we have come up against our share of sandbars and other hazards. But we have profited from such painful lessons. For example, the first young women trainees arrived at Huntington in January, 1966. Four months later, we found we were spending about $1,198 a month for each enrollee. This figure seemed obviously excessive to us, even though it in- cluded the anticipated high cost of starting up the program. Since then, through stern self-examination and with the invaluable coopera- tion of OEO cost analysis, we have trimmed that $1,198 figure to a monthly cost of $546 per enrollee. But much more significant in my view is the fact that from January, 1966, to the end of May, 1967, we have graduated 230 young women, the great majority of whom are now making a real contribution to the national economy rather than becoming wards of that economy. We take into our Center girls who are out of school, out of work, really out of any sort of productive society. In six to nine months, we return them to society with the skills to command an average annual income of more than $3,000. We teach them not only how to be employable, but how to be sought-after for employment, and we also teach them living skills vital to their personal and family lives. We send them out in the world with a new born realization that hope and ambition are as much their legitimate possessions as they are for those born "on the right side of the tracks." For what, in the broad view, is an extremely modest cost, we take young women who might otherwise become lifetime recipients of relief-net losses to the economy-and turn them into productive contributors to that economy. I would like to describe some of the things we are doing in Huntington that I think are particularly noteworthy. Before vocational training can take hold, a student must have a foundation of basic knowledge-reading, elementary mathematics, and the like. This founda- PAGENO="0049" ECQNOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEN~MENTS ~ OF 1 9 6 7 2509 tiOn is proylded. Because we feet reading is particularly important, Huntington girls are required to read a book a week Each of our graduates leaves the Huntington Center with at least the equiva lent of ninth grade ability in the baisc education areas One of our major problems is the fact that most of these girls come to us not only wtib an extremely ion level of learning but with no idea of how to go about studying Therefore we have instituted a Learning Skills Development course A required subject for all students, it shows the girls the different approaches needed to study reading as opposed to arithmetic It also prepares them for taking Civil Service and general education des elopment tests Because we recognize that a major goal of a Huntington Job Corpswoman Is to be an effective wife and mother we give her a very generous helping of education in the ~ arious home economics skills In further pursuit of this total approach we ha~ e instituted evening cultural sessions designed to teach the girls to spend their leisure time in a constructive and personally-rewarding manner., This program has given many of the girls their very first exposure to good music, opera, ballet, handcrafts. We feel this exposure will lead them, when they return to their homes, `to participate in community activities, from hobby groups to civic organizations'. An intrinsic part of our approach is to tailor a girl's vocational training to a realistic appraisal of her interests and abilities. It is not only pointless, but destructive, to encourage a student to take up a vocation for which she has little or no aptitude. We would much rather train a girl to be happily productive in food service than see her adding a new frustration to a long' line of failures in a vain attempt to become a typist. We have graduates successfully working in a broad gamut of career fields. keypunch operators, PBX operators, clerk-typists, file clerks, nurse's aides, prac- tical nurses, institutional aides, retail sales clerks, and graphic arts. In order to follow the progress `of each trainee-and at the same time obtain some measure of our program's cost effectiveness-we have instituted an indi- vidual tracking system.. It is set up for automatic data processing based on four electronic tabulating cards for each girl: a vital statistics card, a "mile~ stone" completion card, a behavioral analysis card and a cost analysis card. This system permits us to monitor with great accuracy the progress of each girl and the performance of the Center's program as a whole. It has been our good fčrtune to enjoy fine support from the Huntington com- munity. Our girls are invited into many private homes for dinner. They are welcome In the youth activities of local churches and sing in church, choirs. Our Job Corpswomen have been invited to special s'howings of motion pictures, to the Marshall University artist series and to a host of other community activitien Library cards, wh:ich cost college students $1 in Huntington, are given free of charge to our girls, and many Huntington citizens have taken the time to give talks, before a highly-responsive Job Corps audience, `on topics ranging from national affairs to flower arranging. Some 2,000 Huntington citizens have toured our Center, and a number of com- munity organizations have held their meetings there. We are deeply grateful, not only for' what the Huntington community has done for the Job Corps Center, but for what it has permitted our girls to do for it. Our students, for example, devoted many hours of extra-curricular work to the last two Mental Health Society campaigns. They have participated in the Christmas drive and the 1~1arch of Dimes, and they are currently working on a civic clean-up drive of the Junior Chamber of Commerce~ The girls have taken food baskets to needy families at Christmas, they have made gifts and given a party for mental patients of the State Hospital, they have baked and mailed more than 3,600 cookies to Huntington-area servicemen serving in Vietnam. Our corpswomen have also benefited greatly in their training from the coop- eration of the Huntington business community. More than 250 of them have enjoyed on-the-job training in such local enterprises as insurance offices, florist shops and hospitals. For all this progress, we are very much aware that the past 20 months of operation in Huntington are but a modest beginning. But it is a significant beginning. ` I think we can all be proud ~f the dedication brought to the Job Corps pro- gram by its administrators in the Office of Economic Opportunity and by the 80-084-67-pt. 4-4 PAGENO="0050" 2510 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 ~eop1e on the firing line, operating the Centers. In this regard, I would like to single out :two individuals who, in my mind, typify this dedication. One is Dr. Bennetta Washington of OEO. The other is our own George Mayer until very recently director of the Huntington Job Corps Center. It was with regret that I learned of Dr. Washington's planned resignation from OEO. It was she whO nurtured and brought to maturity The' Women's Job Corps She pioneered a new obstacle-laden frontier Her efforts and her guidance were crucial to our success. George Mayer has brought imaginative and highly-effective leadership to his ~assignmeflt as director of the Huntington Center, what must be one of the most difficult-and frequently exasperating-job extant. For nearly a year now, he has -been responsible for the day-to-day remolding of the lives of 250 to 300 young wOmen, many of whom came to the Center with problems that would seem -unthinkable in this country today. Mr. Mayer is being replaced by Mr. Willard Duetting, one of our most able executives, and I am sure he will be a worthy ~suceessor at Huntington to Mr. Mayer. The Bennetta Washingtons and the George `Mayers of Job Corps have- caused this program to come of age. They have developed a viable organization, a well- functioning team, with centralized responsibility and a developing set of stand- erds and goals agaimst which to measure the program. These are some of the observations we can now make from first-hand opera- tion of the Huntington Job Corps Center for the past 18 months, and they are ~espectful1v subimtted to your Committee Cordially, C. P. MCOOLOUGH, President. Chairman PERKINS. We will recess at this time until 2 p.m. - (Whereupon, at 12:40 p.m. the committee recessed, -to reconvene at 2 -p.m. -on the same day.) - - -. - - AFTERNOON SESSION - Chairman PERKINS. The committee wifi come to order. - A quorum is present. - I certainly `want to take this opportunity to welcome you here today, Mrs. Benson, and the other women' from -the League of Women Voters. I personally appreciate the support you are giving this legislation. - You are serving a very worthy purpose and performing one of the functions that the League of Women Voters so `ably performs and `has performed throughout the years working for the general welfare of -the public. I am sure you know Congressman Meeds and he will `introduce you. Mr. MEEDS.' Thank you, Mr. Chairman. it is a real pleasure and honor to present to the committee Mrs. Bruce B. Benson, representing -the League of Women Voters. Mrs. Benson is the second vice president of the national board of the iNational League of Women Voters and chairman of the development of human resources on the national board. -She `is the former president of the League of Women Voters of iMassachusetts and the vice chairman of the Massachusetts Advisory Council on Education. ` ` She fills a number ,of other positions quite well and I have a personal `friendShip `and knowledge of her activities and her competence. It is a pleasure to introduce her to speak in behalf of what I con- Sider to be one of the best associations or organizations in the United States, the League of Women Voters, which has a long and as far as I am concerned spotless history of nonpartisan objective ability to re- search problems of national, local, and State problems and to come -lorward with some pretty objective conclusions. PAGENO="0051" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2511 Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I think particularly for this purpose the testimony and the advice and suggestion of the League of Women Voters will be valuable to us because I know of the method they use in arriving at their conclusions, having been a county official at olle time and having been subjected to their sc~utmy in form ing positions for their members and for informing their members. I know they do a very thorough job. I know that during the 2-year period of time they have been study- ing the poverty program they have done a' very thorough job. For that reason I think this committee, this Congress, and this Nation would place a lot of credence in your testimony. Mr. HAWKINS. (presiding). It is a pleasure to welcome you to the committee. You may proceed to present your testimony in any :w'ay you care to do so. Mrs BE~ SON Thank you very much, Mr Hawkins and Mi Meeds STATEMENT OP MRS. BRUCE B. BENSON, SECOND VICE PRESIDENT, LEAGUE OP WOMEN VOTERS OP THE UNITED STATES Mrs. BENSON. I am Mrs. Bruce B. Benson, second vice president of the League of Women Voters of the United States and chairman of the league's national work on human ;r,esQu~ces, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to present the position of the members of the League of Women Voters-in 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the CpmmŘnwealth of Puerto Rico on the poverty program and: on the proposed Economic Oppor- tunity Amendments of 1967 Since 1964, when league members first began to study the problems of poverty and eqinality of opportunity in education and employment, they h'us e explored with gre~t interest the Economic Opportunity Act and the programs developed' ~ fUnded under it iii their `local communities across the U~nited States. After a 2-year study, l~ague members in 1966 agreed on a position of strong support fOr a whole range of programs, many of which have been developed under the Economic Opportunity Act. The members of the League of Women Voters of the United, States believe that the Federal Government must continue to assume a l:arge share of responsibility for providing equality of opportunity in edu- cation `md employment for all persons in the United States Local and' St~te `governments have important responsibilities in this area. However, we believe the Federal Government must provide leadership and' increased funds if we as a country really mean to carry out our commitment to overcome poverty by making it possible for all persons to have an effective opportunity to get an education and to find employment. Since employment opportunities in modern, technological societies `tre tightly rel'mted to educ'mtion, w e therefore Rupport Feder'ml pro grams to. greatly increase the education and training of disadvantaged people-of all races and ethnic groups. The league supports a. number of different kinds of programs to provide greater education'ml `md employment opportunities Fm in stance, we support prOgrams to provide basic education, occupational PAGENO="0052" 2512 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF. 1967. education and retraining when needed at any point in an individual's working career; apprentideship and on-the-job training programs; day-care centers for disadvantaged preschool children to give parents. the opportunity for employment;~ compensatory programs for disad- vantaged children beginning at the preschool level and extending through. secondary. education; and Federal financial help to aid needy students remain in high school and to take advantage, of post-high- school. training and educatiOn. ;. J know . that~ many of our leagues have already written to you de- scribing specific poverty programs in their communities. Today I should like briefly to present to you an overall picture of the national league's assessment of the poverty program based on re- ports in various forms which have come to us from our more than 1,200 local leagues. (We are also attaching to our statement a number of league comments.) At the outset I should like to stress that the League of Women Voters of the United States strongly supports the efforts which have been undertaken by t.he Federal Government following passage of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. We believe that progress is very definitely being made. It also seems very clear to us that we have a long way to go before we can begin to feel that we are getting the upper hand over the root causes which continue to generate poverty. The job the country is trying to do-to remove inequalities and actually to create the conditions under which equality of opportunity will be a reality for all persons-not only is going to take a great deal of time, but also it is going to require more, not less, conimitment of ideas, energy, and funds. Of the programs established by the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, Community Action has at.tracted the greatest interest within, the League of Women Voters. Our members support its basic goals of encouraging local initiative and innovation. By requiring participation of the poor, it has enabled many people for the first time to work to solve their own problems and to plan their own lives. It gives them an important part in defining their own needs, in suggesting priorities and in devising ways to meet them. By offering people who have never before had the opportunity a chance to develop leadership, Community Action has added a vital and fundamentally. constructive new element to the local political scene. We have received many reports from our local leagues about the Community Action program as it has been implemented across the country. There has been a variety of successes and problems. Many of the Community Action programs were started relatively smoothly; some were not. There have been-and there undoubtedly will be-conflicts with established agencies a.nd with local government in some communities. We expect that problems of implementation and coordination will continue. We know more time is needed for local Community Action Agency councils or boards to analyze and agree upon priorities and upon ways in which to meet them. People who have not worked together before as members of a group need to learn how, and the poor and the nonpoor must learn PAGENO="0053" ECONOMIC OPPOFtTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF' 1967 2513 to communicate and to work with one another in a framework of mutual respeët. We cannot emphasize too strongly the need for enough time to allow Community Action programs to develop and to work out solutions to the many problems, involved in organizing. The most serious problem our local leagues have described, however, does not concern administration. Many of Our leagues have reported difficulties and bitter disappointments as a result of the drying up of versatile funds, resulting from the stringent earmarking of the 1966 amendments. While the league supports national emphasis programs, such as Headstart, which receive earmarked funds, it is extremely important that there be enough available unrestricted money for locally developed programs and experimentation. Another widespread problem is difficulty with redtape, overly com- plicated administrative procedures, and long delays in funding. We recognize, of course, the need for proper oversight of the ex- penditure of funds, but we hope that the Office of Economic Oppor- tuni'ty-with the help of the Congress-will continue to push for simplified and consistent guidelines and procedures for applications. Paralleling our interest in local community action umbrella agen- cies is our interest in the administration of the poverty program at the Federal level. We think it is necessary to have a single Federal agency to focus on the needs of the poor and to be responsible for the difficult and indispensable job of originating, coordinating, and evaluating programs to meet those needs. The league therefore strongly supports the continuation of the Office of Economic Opportunity. We think that the Office of Economic Opportunity has, by and large, performed its job well-particularly as the innovator of programs aimed at finding solutions to a multifaceted, extremely complicated problem. We do, recognize that coordination of the various poverty programs run by different Government agencies is difficult and has not always been smooth. Simultaneously, we think that there is little reason to see why disbanding the Office of Economic Opportunity or "spinning off" major programs would improve the relationships between, for ex- ample, Health, Education, and Welfare and the Departments of La- bor, Agriculture, and Housing and Urban Development. In fact, we believe that, if anything, the coordinating role of the OEO should be buttressed in order to better insure that poverty pro- grams administered by other agencies-including delegated Economic Opportunity Act programs-actually are directed to the needs of the poor. I do not mean to imply that league "members believe current OEO administration or programs are perfect, but it seems to us that now is the time for continued `and sophisticated evaluation of results and for adaptations based on those evaluations rather `than drastic changes and cuts. Our comments about the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967 can be relatively brief. Basically, it seems to us the amendments make no major changes in the present program. We understand that the $2.06 billion requested by the administration would allow for a PAGENO="0054" 2514 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNIT)~ ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 modest increase in all programs. We thiiik. $2.06 billion is the absolute minimum and we would be far happier with a larger sipn, considering the magnitude of the need. We do note with approval that the bill would not earmark title II funds. Our experience has been that earmarking funds for certain programs limits the freedom of local initiative, limits the flexibility of the OEO, and inhibits and frustrates innovation at the local and Federal levels. In the interest of flexibility we also question the wisdom of writing out in the law many detailed regulations which are already admin- istratively in operation. Those on the Job Corps, for instance, seem to us rather rigid- especially in view of the fact we have heard only favorable reports on the Job Corps from leagues near Job Corps centers. Finally, the league supports the amendments to the present act which provide more specific provisions for evaluation both by the OEO itself and outside professionals. The league also supports in- creased funds for research and pilot demonstration projects. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, none of us imows as yet if the poverty program will, in fact, be successful in removing the root causes of poverty. That task will eertainly involve a joint effort by many agen- cies, all levels of government, and the private as well as public sector of American society. * It is clear, however, that some progress is being made. The League of Women Voters believes we should continue to maintain, and in- deed, increase, the momentum of this country's effort to provide equal- ity of opportunity for all its people. Mr. HAWKINS. Tha.nk you, Mrs. Benson~ for .a very excellent state- ment. I notice you do have other members of the league present. Would you like to introduce them? Mrs. BENSON. There are quite a few here. Perhaps we should go on. Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Meeds, do you have any questions? * Mr. MEEDS. Thank you.' * First let me compliment you on your testimony personally and also compliment the organization which you. represent. .1 am particularly interested in your observation that you gather from comments of your local leagues that the effort with which we are involved here is to a great degree experimental. Frankly, I am very pleased to see, that you are taking the position that this is a social experiment, because I fear that some of us have felt from the outset that'it might be an overnight cureall for problems' and feel it is a solution rather than an experiment. I think this.is the first step that has to be taken in corrective evalua- tion of the program. It seems to me of particular value in your stateTment is the ~fact that you support a continuation of the heading up of these many programs, experimental programs, by the OEO. ., Does this come about from or is this expressed by `the letters which' you receive from your groups r~nd by res~irch which has been done by your local chapters of the League of Women Voters? `Mrs. BENSON. Yes; it does. It has come to us in many forms-letters, reports. We have an annual time of the year when annual reports come' in and many of their comments were included' on these. * PAGENO="0055" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2515 The leagues have been. since the programs first started to be estab- lished. watching their development in their local communities and. sometimes becoming involved in them in one way. or another. Their feeling apparently, as it is very clearly expressed, that they feel the great need to have a single agency which can concentrate on and, as one of the leagues said, zero in on the problems of the poor be- cause they are peculiar problems to deal with. We have tried maybe not successfully to deal with this. problem. before. Now we are trying in a different way and our leagues appa.r- ently feel this requires the concentration of one agency rather than many agencies trying to work together on this. Mr.. MEEDS. Mrs. Benson, I think it might be of importance here if you were to inform this committee as to the 2-year process that your organization has gone t.hrough in fact-gathering with respect to this. program. In other words, how does a loca.1 unit come to the conclusion which. they submit to you? Mrs. BENSON. It is actually a long, drawn out process. Actually, it has taken 4 years in two sections. Our local leagues decided in the spring of 1964 a.t a national convention to undertake a study of pro- grams and policies provided by the United St.ates to provide equality of opportunity which meant that all of the local leagues all over the country started after that convention to look into what were our poll- cies and what are our programs. Of course, just at this time the Economic Opportunity Act shortly thereafter was passed and the programs began t.o be started in various places in the country. During that first 2-year period from 1964 to 1966 the league studied the Economic Opportunity Act and studied anything any `of us could. get our hands on a.nd how it was implemented in various parts of the country and then we went through the process of consensus which means the chapters send in their positions and out of that came our posit.ion. Since 1966 when the league arrived at t.his .posit.ion of support for the variety of programs, they have been studying them at the local level as they have been implemented at the local level and observing them and constantly keeping up with what is going on. Mr. MEEDS. When you say studying them at the local level, I recall as a prosecuting attorney . in Snohomish County, Wash., having two league women descend. on me one day and ask me questions for 2 or 3 hours about the operation. Mrs. BENSON. It sounds like kind of an ordeal. Mr. MEEDS. I was very.happy to do it and I was surprised that any private, non-profit agency was doing this, but this is the type of study you are talking about. Is this what your members did? Mrs. BENSON. This is part of what they do... It is a st.andard method of finding out either how Government operates or how a particular program is working. The members attend school board meetings, city or town council meetings or whatever it may be with great regularity. To take a community action program in a given community, the league migh.t be on the council itself, might be an observer at meetings, attend all of the meetings of the Community Action Agency or council, whatever it is called; it frequently observes the programs as they ale PAGENO="0056" 2516 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 implemented in the community, talks with the people who are involved with the program and running the program such as the director and also with the people for whom the program is intended to see that they are really doing what they were intended to do. Mr. MEEDS. Additionally, as a Member of Congress, I and four other members of the Washington State delegation attended and participated in about a 3-hour session of intense questioning by league members in six different groups about programs-not only the OEO but other programs with which we were engaged here in Congress. Mrs. BENSON. I know the meeting to which you are referring. I read about it in the `Washington Voter. This would have been part of their effort to bring to the attention of the public these various pro- grams and also to learn more about them themselves. Mr. MELDS. `When you talk about a study and an evaluation you are really talking about a. lot of effort that has gone into this by people at the local level and the conclusions you give the committee today are the consensus of those studies and evaluations made; is that cor- rect ~ Mrs. BENSON. That is correct. I should perhaps say so there will be no question about it, we don't claim unanimity in the League of `Women Voters. We have overwhelming majority. Mr. MEEDS. I would just comment it is a woman's prerogative to retain the right to dissent. I am also interested in your observations about the earmarking and categorizing which was done by the amendments of 1966 and the effect on local community action programs. You might expand a little bit on the conclusions you have in your prepared testimony with regard to the results that your people ob- tained. Mrs. BENSON. The effect of the earmarking would not make any difference if there were no ceilings on how much money is appropri- ated. It would not make any difference if you earmarked a couple of million dollars if there were money left over for the additional programs the local agencies might decide to set up. Since there is a large ceiling and not very much overall available for title II, if the money is ahead of time earmarked it cuts down the flexibility at each local level to institute programs other than those earmarked programs such as }Teadstart. We submitted with our testimony a number of samples of recent comments from local leagues and a number of them in this sampling refer to the problem of getting started, going through a great deal of planning, getting people together to come to a. meeting when they have never been to a meeting before and get them to sit. down and-talk to people a.nd talk about what they mean and finally manage as these examples show an agonizing period of time to determine what is needed. Then they apply for funds and then there are no funds available because of earmarking and the ceilings on the appropriations. `We recognize there has to be a ceiling on appropriations but we would rather see this flexibility with the local communities and the Ilocal community action groups should have greater flexibility in de- riding what should be spent. PAGENO="0057" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2517 They should be able to decide what kinds, of programs they need. In some communities it may be a Headstart program or in others a combination of centers, day care, health centers, whatever it might happen to be. Mr. MEEDS. Don't you think they will make errors? Mrs. BENSON. Undoubtedly there will be errors but the whole his- tory of programs we have instituted at all levels of Government in this country-local and national-errors are always going to be made. You have to learn from your errors and go on and not make the same errors again hopefully. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you, Mrs. Benson. Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Steiger? Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mrs. Benson, it is a pleasure to have you here before the committee representing the league. I was very much interested in your comments and `do appreciate the processes by which the league `arrives at its con- sensus and therefore does appear before the committee. There are portions of that consensus with which I might not agree. There are, however, portions of it with which I `do agree. I notice that you do raise the point which has been of concern to many of us on page 3 of your testimony about the difficulty with redtape, overly complicated administrative procedures, and long delays in funding. I could not help but notice the statement from the Champaign County, Ill., League of Women Voters in which t'hey said: Another `real stumbi:ing block is the utter ch'aos in our Chicago `Regional Office. Personnel turnover is high, agreements made with one administrator may `be annulled by his successor; decisions seem often arbitrary and irrational. Since Wisconsin is serviced by the Chicago regional office, I `fully appreciate how the Champaign County, Ill., chapter of the League of Womeii Voters feel. Mrs. BENSON. I' should say since this report came in we understand there has been a change in the staff. in the Director of the Chicago regional office. `We `had a report not too long ago from another com- munity which is serviced by that office and things seem to `be on the upswing ratherthan the other `way around. Mr. S~rEmER. As far as I know, it `has greatly improved and I think we can all be grateful for that. It is a very serious problem `and it is' one to which the Congress must give attention. I also agree and was very interested in your very pertinent remarks regarding versatility. This is something which I know is looked upon with great concern by many because it does as you have so ably stated,, limit the flexibility of the local community to determine its own priorities. While it may be that the Congress can assume there are certain priorities throughout the country, it is much more difficult for us to do so than it is for a local community action agency to `do so and I think your statement adds a great deal to the cause of those of us who want to continue the versatility `and not go to either the kind of ear- marking that we have had in the past or as some have suggested, we ought to have in the future. On page 5 of the testimony you have given you make reference to' the evaluation by OEO and also support increased funds for research. and pilot demonstration projects. PAGENO="0058" 2518 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 This is something which is of interest to me. As you may know, the House Government Operations Committee estimated OEO spent some $70 million on research and evaluation. I wonder what kind 0ą work you have done in terms of reviewing any of the research or eval- nation that has been done thus far by OEO. Mrs. BENSON. Do you mean our assessment of such evaluation? Mr. STEIGER. Have you had a chance to review it and assess it? Mrs. BENSON. Not really. We have been so busy trying to keep up with and gathering together the reports from our local leagues that we really have not had a chance, although we know they exist, to thoroughly go through the evaluations which have already been made. Mr. STEIGER. Would you have any comment. for the conmuttee as to where you feel the league might place the greater emphasis? Would it be in research done by OEO or would it be done in research available through outside professionals rather than an inshop type that often- times is used, I am afraid, more as a justification rather than a real evaluation. Mrs. BENSON. I don't know that we could say that we would have a very specific type of opinion about that. I think both kinds of evalu- ations are needed. Any Government agency, any agency at all or in- stitution has to do evaluations of its own in order to hopefully hon- estly assess how it is doing and what it is trying to do but I think the other kind of evaluation which is done by outsiders with professional expertise is also necessary. We feel very strongly both are needed. The OEO or any other agency, HEW or Labor, must be constantly involved in evaluating what they are doing so they can know for them- selves whether or not they are achieving what they want to achieve. While I suppose it is possible that some efforts at justification are made by evaluations I am sure that is not always the case, and evalu- ations have to be done both within and without an agency, we feel. Mr. STEIGER. Has the League of Women Voters nationally, or have any of the State or local leagues become directly involved with the OEO? Have you, for example, ever received any research grants from OEO? Mrs. BENSON. Certainly the League of Women Voters of the United States, the national league, has not received anything of that order at all. As far as I know, no local league or State league has received any kind of contract or grant or anything. I can't say they haven't because not having asked them "Have you ~" I can't be absolutely certain, but I feel sure we would have heard of it had it been so. Leagues have been involved with Community Action programs. They have been asked, for instance, to run voter education or voter registra.tion courses. They have been, in several comm~mities, asked to set up the election process for electing the boards, but. nothing more formal than that. Mr. STEIGER. I know the leagues, of course, throughout the country and certainly in the Sixth District, with which I am familiar, are very dedicated on this question of voter registration. What kind of work has been done by local leagues in terms of what you indicate are the courses for the local Community Action agency in this area? Mrs. BENSON. I was just reading a report this morning from a local PAGENO="0059" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2519 league which has been asked to set up a Series of discussions as to how government works. First, they went through a series of meetings with the people in the neighborhood that the Community Action Council had decided to provide this service for. This was Springfield, Mass. These were so-called block groups. They decided what they wanted to learn about the Government and what the league learned what they wanted to know was how to be a part of it. They had the traditional feeling of the alienated voter that we have all heard so much about. Over a couple of meetings, they planned out these courses, starting out with how the city council operates and the school board and I presume that is as far as they got in this report. I presume they will go on to other levels of government in the same fashion. Mr. SmIGER. Are you aware of any local leagues which have par- ticipated with local community action agencies in voter registration drives? Mrs. BENSON. No. There may be some local leagues which have actually done voter registration drives. I know it has been talked about but I don't believe that I-at least not here with me today know anything I can put my finger on saying yes four, five, ten, or even one hundred have done this. Mr. STEIGER. Would it be possible for you to go back and perhaps supply of the committee any information on that question you can locate? Mrs. BENSON. I will see what we have. It may be a very small amount. Right at the moment I am not sure I can distinguish whether it has been voter registration drives they have worked on or whether it has been setting up elections for electing the council of the com- munity action agencies, but I can certainly check into it and let you know. Mr. STEIGER. I would certainly appreciate that. I believe you have reviewed the Opportunity Crusade. While you `obviously could not agree with the provisions of it that might spin off existing OEO agencies and place them in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, what kind of reaction do you have to the concept of the industry youth corps, for example; attempting to in- volve private industry to a larger extent in job training and job opportunities? Mrs. BENSON. We think it sounds like a very good idea and would like to see some of these established, but not as a substitute for the Job Corps. We are supporting the continuation of the Job Corps but there isn't any reason at all why there couldn't be either in addition to the Job Corps or on an experimental basis to begin with something that could be called the Industry Youth Corps. I think we would say the same thing about the residential skill centers; that is, tied in with the Vocational Education Act. This is another approach which sounds as if it would be very worthwhile to try. I don't think that any of us believe we have found the final answer to how to overcome the overwhelming effects of poverty and what causes this kind of overwhelming effect. We do not feel it is time to give up the things that are presently being tried. We do not think there has been enough time but we also PAGENO="0060" 2520 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 feel we should keep on experimenting. It is quite possible that the residential skill centers would be just what certain kinds of young- sters need whereas others might need the Job Corps type of approach. I think we can only find this out by experimenting. Mr. STEIGER. The Industry Youth Corps as proposed in the Oppor- tunity Crusade as you imow is not involved with the Job Corps. It is not a replacement for the Job Corps in any sense of the word. It is a totally different type of organization, just to clarify that in your mind and for the record. Another of the ideas that is proposed in the Opportunity Crusade is the Council of Economic Opportunity Advisers. I wonder if you feel that this might be valuable both in promoting coordination and policymaking at the level of President? Mrs. BENSON. Yes I think we think it is a very good idea. I will have to confess that it is not clear to me what is the difference between the Council of Economic Opportunity as the Opportunity Crusade proposes it and that which already exists and which is strengthened by the administration bill. I went over both of them again last night and I am not sure what the difference is but in any case the functions as outlined by the Oppor- tunity Crusade for this Council we approve of highly. We would not like to see it substituted for the Office of Economic Opportunity. Mr. STEIGER. I think the basic substantive difference between the two is the fact the existing Council is related to the programatic opera- tions of the agencies involved. The COuncil f Or Economic Opportunity Advisers is envisaged as an organization totally separate with three full-time men which is. again a difference from the present operations of a part-time, once-a- month, sometime twice-a-month, meeting. I think this is one of the real difficulties and is why I think the Council of Economic Opportunity Advisers with a full-time staff and full-time people would make some sense in doing a. better job. Mrs. BENSON. It is quite possible as you outline this would be a stronger way to do it. We would support this. We think that the func- tions as we understand them are important functions and these func- tions are necessary. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Benson, very much. I have no further questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HAWKINS. May I ask whether any of the leagues in the State of California have participated in the recommendations you have made? Mrs. BENSON. Yes; vast numbers have. We have many reports from California. Mr. HAwKINs. Have all of the leagues in all of the States partici- pated? Mrs. BENSON. I would have to check our statistics, but I cannot think of any State offhand from which we have not heard. I think we have heard from all of them. Mr. HAWKINS. Generally speaking, this does represent the league on a na.tional basis? Mrs. BENSON. Yes, it does. PAGENO="0061" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2521~ Mr. HAWKINS. Were there any dissenting opinions? Mrs. BENSON. `I am trying to think back to the time when we went through the formal consensus procedure, which was 1966. The reports we have had since then are implementing the original position and I would have to look that up, Mr. Chairman. I do remember that not everybody agreed in every way with even the idea of the role of the Federal Government in this but the agree- ment among the leagues-and there was no regional difference in this-was really very overwhelming. Mr. HAWKINS. Also, I understand, in answer to One of the questions Mr. Steiger asked, you indicated that there were many innovative ideas such as the residential skill centers and the bulk of industry Job Corps concepts, that you thought that such innovative ideas could be accomplished within the framework of the existing Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity, and that you saw no need for the development of a new agency or to spin off programs to various established agencies in order to accomplish these innovative idOas. Mrs. BENSON. Yes, that is right We would say that probably even- tually, with more experienCe and time, in order to have a better idea of how they are working it, it would probably be quite logical to spin off some of the programs. Some of them have already been spun off, or already arerun by other agencies, such as the Department of Labor, but ~ e don't see the value of moving the oper'Ltions of the OEO to another agency, or to other agencies, because we do feelthat we have a need `for a central concentrating agency. Mr. HAWKINS. Then I assume that the thrust of your statement in this regard is that there will `continue, at least `for some time, to be a need for a coordinating agency that cuts across the established agen- cies, and that if the Office of Economic Opportunity is to be disman- tled, that there still would be a need for some `council or some agency `to do what the Office of Economic Opportunity is now doing. Mrs. BENSON. Yes. Yes; that is our position. Mr. HAWKINS. Then you reject the idea of creating another agency, `whether you call it a council of advisers or any other agency under another name to do this, and that for the time being you support the concept of retaining this function in the Office of Economic Oppor- *tunity. Mrs. BENSON. Yes. That is right. We do see a need for something called the council, as it is presently in the administration bill,' or in the Opportunity Crusade, but not as a substitute for the Office of Economic Opportunity. Mr. HAWKINS. Now in your statement you also emphasize the par- ticipation of the poor, in the resolution of their own problems. Do you see `any threat of the discontinuance of this concept, if the programs are going to be spun off to other agencies? In other words, do you think that this concept can still be retained, even though the various pro- grams are fragmented among existing agencies? Mrs. BENSON. Well, I don't think I could say it would not be main- taine,d. I think it would be much more difficult to maintain this em- phasis on the participation of ,the poor, if the various programs were placed in other agencies. Now maybe in the future this would not be so, but the whole idea of the participation of the poor involving their own problems is-it PAGENO="0062" 2522 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 may not be a new idea, but it is certainly new t.o be put in practice, and we haven't had a great deal of experience with it as yet., and perhaps in the future the established agencies will be geared up to this kind of thing,. too, but at the present time I don't thmk they are, and I think it would certainly weaken the effort to increase the participation of the poor in solving their own problems. Mr. HAWKINS. Now in respect to the earmarking of the funds and what you refer to as the possibility of drying u~ the versatile funds, you have indicated that you preferred a flexibility, and you opposed at least earmarking, or you indicated support for a national emphasis program, but some flexibility. Now does this in any way mean that the League supports Federal aid without any strings attached or any direction, or is it merely a reflection of the views of the League on this particular issue? Mrs. BENSON. I am not sure I understand your question, but I think- Mr. HAwKn~s. I am merely asking whether or not this is a blanket support for Federal funds without any instruction whatsoever, whether or not you are merely saying in this regard that since the appropria- tions are inadequate, that you believe that more flexibility should be given if the appropriations were more adequate? Would you then feel that same of your opposition to earmarking and to giving greater empilasisto some programs would be reduced.? Mrs. BENSON. Yes, it is the latter. The. funds- which~ are presently being channeled to local communities, community action agencies, et cetera, are not channeled without any strings at all. They all have to go through a good deal of agony preparing a plan for the Office of Economic Opportunity or whatever, and there are guidelines set up, and certain restrictions, things they can and they can't do. Our feeling has to do with the importance of the local community or the people in the local community deciding what program, among all of those which are available, they need the..most, or what programs they need the most, and the effect has been as we have heard from our local leagues that with so much money in last year's bill earmarked for Heads~art. and for other programs, this did cut out of the total pie, as it were, avaliable, .those funds which they could use to set up base centers, or what-have-you, and for t.his reason we are opposed to earmarking. Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I regret having been at another meeting which precluded my hearing Mrs. Benson's testi- mony directly, and hearing the earlier questions, but I would like to say as a. preliminary that ever since my first session in my home State legislature, when the League of Women Voters and I worked arm in arm in an attempt to modify the Oregon constitution, I have had the highest regard for this organization with which you serve. There were some exceptionally fine members of that organization in the State of Oregon, it did a tremendous job, as we sought toget1~er to succeed in something wedidn~t quite succeed in, butwe fought a dickens of a fight., and we got. our revised const.itution through the house. We got it through the body with which I was tied, and I am sure that eventually it will come in Oregon. But we are delighted to have you here today. PAGENO="0063" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 252~ There would be just. one thing, Mrs. Benson, that I would thnd to ask, and I. had a chance to scan the bulk of your testimony as it ap~ pearsin written form. .` . . As the various le~igue groups throughout the country h'~ e made this assessment of the war on poverty, t.hey haven't, I assume, had a chance to actually examine H.J~* 10682 themselves, have they? Mrs. BENSON. Well, many of them, I am sure, have, on their own behalf, but it hasn't been in print a great deal of the time. We described it to them the best. we could before it was actually in `print, and they were greatly relieved to see that we didn't miss the mark in any ilupor- tant way. I think most of them are aware of its major provisions, but not of the details. They will be. very shortly, but they have not yet had a chance to be. Mr. DELLENBAOK. I th.ink it is important. that t.he league be aware,,, as you have undoubtedly made them aware, that H.R. 10682, ~ pro- posed, certainly doesn't make any move in the direction of disbanding the war on poverty. It is talking of making changes in it, in making in some instances, we think, significant additions thereto, and making some improvements therein, but we don't by any stretch of the imagi- nation visualize it as a disbanding of the organizations, as you realize. For example, Community Action agencies, the program would still be' continued,, as an exceptionally fine part of what has been.done,, in my opinion, and many of the individual programs are goOd ones. I read you, as you make your comments on continuing the OEO, as really saying, if I listened correctly, that you think there ought to be some coordination in the various efforts made in the attack on the war on poverty. I don't read you as necessarily approving of every- thing that the Office of Economic Opportunity has done, or is doing. Am I correct in this? Mrs. BENSON. Yes, I `think I would like to `add to tha.t, as I believe I said in my statement, we don't give a sort of blanket approval to everything the Office of Economic Opportunity has done. We don't know a.bout it. I am sure we don't know about a great many things that it has done. We `have concentrated primarily on the education and em- ployment aspects of the problems of poverty. I would like to say a little bit more, and that is that we do feel that there is a need for an agency to do this coordinating. We question the ability of a council without powers to implement, and to actually orig- inate, to carry out this coordination process: In other words, it is not just any old agency. I think we would need to be convinced that one should, for instance, abolish the `OEO and set up another coordinatino- agency. We would like to see the OEO maintained and strengthened~ to do the job it is doing, and the job the Congress wants it to do, that the Opportunity Crusade wants done, we feel, can be done better with the OEO than without it. Now it would seem not too much point, to us, to disband. I don't think that is what you mean. Mr. DELLENBACK. No, H.R. 10682 does not do that. Mrs. BENSON. I know. Mr. DELLENBACK. It sees d~awbacks in the preamble, and seeks to improve that. As you `are aware, it `seeks to bring the private sector of the economy much more deeply into thi's war on' poverty. I was very interested in reading, myself, in the newspaper, within the las't PAGENO="0064" 2524 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 few days, that one of the Senators whose name is well known in. the other body has come out in effect making a very strong pitch for exactly this concept, which was laid out months ago in the Oppor- tunity Crusade. Saying that in large part, the strength of America lies in the private sector of the economy, and if we really are going to be fighting this war on poverty the private sector should be involved in- stead of acting as if the whole war should be waged by the Govern- ment~ and by Government agencies. We are ignoring one of the most potent weapons in the arsenal, if you want to stay with that metaphor, in this war on poverty, if we don't seek in every way to bring the private sector into the battle. This is in large part what the Oppor- tunity Crusade seeks to do, to wrap this into the program, and bring private industry into the battle. I was glad that the Senator on the other side of the other political party spoke out so very strongly for this very principle, and I gather that from your testimony you have also embraced this principle and spoken approvingly. Mrs. BENSON. Yes, we have, a very strong point. Mr. DELLENBACK. Of this very idea. Mrs. BENSON. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. And as I say, this is one of the major points that is involved in the Opportunity Crusade. You are~ aware of the fact, of course, that since the concept of the Community Action program is maintained, it is not a case of disbanding whatever coordination is already existent in this area, but rather a case of saying that there should be a change in the extra layer which is above this, above even the coordinators for the Community Action program, which role the Office of Economic Opportunity in part is considered as playing, and that is the role that the principal backers of the Opportunity Crusade have felt is not the essential role. I hope that you do realize that this is not a case of either substituting another agency in the place of OEO, nor of disbanding and fragmentizing the whole operation by saying every little program, the Legal Aid program, and the Headsta.rt pro- gram, and the Upward Bound program, and the Follow-Through program, and all of these will walk their own directions uncoordinated. Mrs. BENSON. No; we do realize that. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are fully aware of that, I am sure. Mrs. BENSON. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. So that what you are speaking in favor of is maintaining close coord~ination of the various individual programs that make up the war on poverty? Mrs. BENSON. Yes, that is true. I think we should say that we should increase coordination. I think we do not think there is enough coordi- nation, that the OEO, we believe, should be strengthened so that it will have greater ability to coordinate. We don't see, as I did say in my statement, why transferring the Community Action program to HEW would improve the possibilities of coordinating. We do not see why moving it to HEW would make coordination among the various departments any easier than it already is now, and it is not easy for people to coordinate, let alone big Government agencies. Mr. DELLENBACK. Correct. And again, I don't really mean to be beating it too hard, because I think we are coming closer and closer together in what we are saying On this. That what you are saying, as I read you, is that it is the element of coordination which is essen- PAGENO="0065" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2525 tial, the element of tying together the war on the various individual steps that make up this movement, and as it now has been done, you see that the Office of Economic Opportunity has done certain things in this regard. You have indicated that certain things about what the OEO has done do not meet with your full approval. You would see those things coordinated and improved. Mrs. BENSON. Yes. But we do believe that there are other functions that belong in the Office of Economic Opportunity, in addition to coordinating. We see the functions of originating, of innovating, of establishing new programs and getting them started. We see this also, as a function of the OEO. Mr. DELLENBACK. Excuse me just a minute on that point, because I think you have made a point on this, Mrs. Benson, that again, what you are saying is to reduce it from organizational terms to program terms, what you are favoring is the capacity to innovate, and do the various creative things which need to be done, and which to date have in part been done by OEO. Mrs. BENSON. Right. Mr. DELLENBACK. You see the point that I am getting at. That in part, people approve of a principle. They see the principle to date embodied in the organizational form of the Office, of Economic Op.. portunity, and approving as they do of the principle, they then say, `~WTe approve of the Office of Economic Opportunity." And if it is possible to strip out, and I don't ask you to judge whether it would be done better or not as well, but if it is. possible to strip out the principles and carry forward this concept of coordination, and carry forward this concept of innovation, and carry forward these various `concepts, it is these concepts that I read you as approving, rather than anything magic in whether you call it the Office of Economic Opportunity or the Association of Amalgamated Hoofensnatchers. Whatever you may want to call the Office, it is not that there is any- thing magic in the Office. It is these principles that go in to make up what the Office has done, and hopefully will continue to do. Mrs. BENSON. I think there is one additional thing that is involved in this, and that is what we consider to be the need for an agency which is focusing on the problems and the needs of the poor, from all points of view. Not just from the HEW point of view or from the Depart- ment of Labor point of view, or from HTJD, or what-have-you, but an agency which seeks to bring together, to bring to bear on the problems of the poor, and somewhat,' well, I hesitate to use the example, the Veterans' Administration, but the veterans have a special administra- tion for their interests. The needs of the poor, the problems of the poor, are very complex, very difficult. No matter how much time you spend looking into them, and how to cope with them, and how to get rid of poverty, it is quite clear that even after the tremendous amount of effort, to say nothing of money, which has so far been poured into this effort to get rid of poverty, or to increase opportunities, that we have a long way to go, and we feel very strongly that there is a need for an agency, over and above the philosophical or theoretical approach, which is actually operating in behalf of the poor, its function is the poor. Its function isn't health, education, and welfare or labor, or what-have-you. Mr. DELLENBACK. I may say, somewhat parenthetically, that `it is very interesting to me that another committee on which I serve is 5O-084--67-pt. 4-5 PAGENO="0066" 2526 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the Committee on Merchant Marine, and right now, these days, in fact this morning, we were in the process of holding hearings on whether there should be an independent maritime agency, or whether the maritime agency should be taken out of the Department of Commerce and made part of the Department of Transportation. Now the administration is fighting a bitter battle to say there should be no independent agency in this regard. It should be part of one of the established departments. It should be part of the Depart- ment of Transportation, and it can far better serve its functions, and so on, if it has all the coordination which is made possible by being one of these agencies, and yet in this particular regard philosophically they turn around and they are fighting the other battle. Mrs. BENSON. But I think the nature of the problem is entirely different. Mr. DELLENBACK. Why? Mrs. BENSON. On the one hand, in the case of the poor, you are deal- ing wit.h people who have a whole series of deepseated problems. The other, it seems to me, is an organizational problem. I just don't think the problems of the maritime service or needs can be compared t.o those of the poor. But I don't know anything at all about the maritime service, so I withdraw from the comparison. Mr. MEEDS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. DELLENBACK. I will be glad to yield. Mr. MEEDS. By way of comment, I might just say that I think the administration is terribly wrong, here, too, and for the very reason the gentleman has so well brought out from the witness, purposefully or otherwise. The reason for coordination is a concerted attack on a problem. It seems to me that the maritime situation is such that it has developed into a situation that needs a. concerted, concentrated attack, and I feel a separate agency is the best way to do that; then when we get it on its feet., perhaps place it under a full committee, or a full department. But I visualize the. answers of the witnesses here to be-I mean, you can't compare them in all respects, but the need for a concentrated attack is the same in both areas, and this is precisely what she is say- ing. We have a problem here, in that we. have to place the full brunt of concerted action a.gainst a.nd I think the Der)artment, or the Office of Economic Opportunity does this, as would a. separate Maritime agency. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't seek to push the comparison beyound where in truth it ought to go, but Secret.a.ry Boyd in lengthy testimony before the committee has recognized and indicated tha.t he felt. that the goal was to push forward in this vital, important area, and his declaration is that it can be done far better in this manner than in the other man- ner. We can differ or not, and I don't mean to push the analogy too far. I appreciate very much your testimony. I think it ha.s been helpful, and the implication of my good friend from Washington to the con- trary, I think that. the purpose of these hearings is not really to take our preconceived opinions and then try to fit. a witness into them or push her out of those. preconceived opinions, and agree if she is with us, and disagree if she is against us, but rather to push for what you PAGENO="0067" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2527 are thinking, so that you can help us, in seeking to create whatever legislation can best serve the problem. Thanks again. Mrs. BENSON. Thank you. Mr. HAWKINS. Mrs. Benson, so there will be no misunderstanding as far as the record is concerned, may I again ask you whether or not both proposals, H.R. 8311, as well as I-1.R. 10682 the so-called Oppor- tunity Crusade, were put before the various leagues throughout the country, they had an opportunity to thoroughly analyze both pro- posals, and that you are appearing here today in behalf of H.R. 8311 as what you consider to be the proper approach to incorporate the ideas of the national league as well as the individual league members? Mrs. BENSON. Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is true, but I should perhaps explain that a little bit. I know that it is not true that every single league member or even every single local league has examined both of the bills in detail. They have examined an analysis of the adininistra- tion bill, and a temporary analysis, ahead of time, of the Opportunity Crusade, because at the time that we did this, the Opportunity Crusade was not in print as yet, but as I said earlier, in talking with the minor- ity, we had been able to find out the essential details, and they were aware of the essential details, but not some of the fine points in the bill. Many of them are aware of it on their own. Mr. HAWKINS. Generally speaking, this is the opportunity that the members have had, but unfortunately some of us haven't had much of an opportunity to hear witnesses in behalf of 10682, either, because we haven't had too many to appear before the committee. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would the chairman yield? Mr. HAWKINS. Yes, I will yield. Mr. DELLENBACK. To be sure of this, is my recollection accurate that the league has been doing some thinking and studying and meeting together on this for a number of months? Mrs. BENSON. Well, for quite a long while. You mean overall, on the whole problem? Since 1964? Mr. DELLENBACK. But also, within the last year, you have been- Mrs. BENSON. Concentrating on it. Oh, yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Concentrating on it. Mrs. BENSON. For the last year. Oh, yes; very much so. Mr. DELLENBACK. So that much of the study of the committees of individual leagues goes back many, many months? Mrs. BENSON. Yes, and it is going on constantly. Mr. IDELLENBACK. And it is true also that H.R. 10682 has been in existence for a very limited period of time. Mrs. BENSON. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. And it is true also that H.R. 10682 has been in existence for a very limited period of time. Mrs. BENSON. Yes. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. In this form, and so therefore as to comparison between the OEO and H.R. 10682, really, they have not had anywhere nearly the same chance to delve, try as the national office will, to get out the major features to the various component leagues, they haven't really had a chance to study H.IR. 10682 over the course of many, many months. PAGENO="0068" 2528 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs. BENSON. Well, yes and no. I don't really think that is accurate. I think they are aware of the importance-I mean, I know they are aware of, as many of the important features, with which we are con- cerned in the field of education and employment, of the Opportunity Crusade, as the administration bill, but in any effort to be completely accurate and honest, I did say that they have noted, since the opportu- nity Crusade has not been in print as long ago as the administration bill, what they got from us was not our analysis of the bill as we analyzed the administration bill, but what we were able to learn from the minority office, what was going to be in the Opportunity Crusade, and in fact, turned out to be the same thing, so that in effect they, have had the same information, a.nd the same degree of information. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you. Mr. HAWKINS. Mrs. Benson, I a.ssume that you also have Republi- cans in the league as well as Democrats. Do you not? Mr. DELLENBACK. We are pleased that that is indeed the case. Mr. HAWKINS. And that there is sufficient opportunity for the Re- pitblica.ns in the league to get the message from their Republican Con- gressmen, as w~ll as the Democrats to get their message from the Demo- cratic Congressmen, so there is free play and free expression. Mrs. BENSON. Yes, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. And that there certain'y has been. opportunity for both proposals to have been given some study, and that neither pro- posal, I suspect., is new in the sense that we have not discussed co- ordination, or involvement of the poor and these concepts before now, and that as a result of this you are appearing here today in behalf of H.R. 8311. Mrs. BENSON. That is correct. Mr. HAWKINS. Now I ask you whether or not you also believe that under the existing program, the Office of Economic Opportunity, the private sector can be. brought in, a.nd that it is not in any way dis- couraged that acti~ially there is opportunity for the private sector to be involved in the current war on poverty? Mrs. BENSON. We would say so; yes. In fact, has been. We would en- courage it. It certainly is possible, within the structure. Mr. HAWKINS. And that while you agree that the matter of coordi- nation can be improved upon, even under the current agency, that you likewise believe that it is safer to at least leave it where it is for the time being, and to improve it rather than to make any drastic changes. Mrs. BENSON. Yes, sir. Mr. HAwKINs. That is all, unless there are other questions of Mrs. Benson. Again we wish to thank you for a ve.ry excellent presentation, and to again commend the league for t.he work that it is doing in `all of our districts, both the Republican as well as the Democratic districts. Mrs. BENSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. (Letters presented by Mrs. Benson follow:) SAMPLES OF RECENT COMMENTS FROM LOCAL LEAGUES ON THE POVERTY PROGRAM From the League of Women Voters of Iowa City, Iowa Opinions about the local CAP program differ greatly. "In business" only since June 1966, CAP has already received a whole range of appraisals from its com- plete lack of purpose and ability to work with other agencies. . . to enthusiastic approval of the program. It is being judged by a wide variety of standards. PAGENO="0069" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2529 Many low-income people have entered enthusiastically into CAP activities. The 13 low-income members of the CAP board seem to be giving themselves and others who identify with them a real feeling of participation in local affairs. The low-income aides employed by CAP to identify, survey and aid other low- income families evidently are building good relationships between CAP and its "target" people. [We are] concerned over Congress's appropriations for the poverty program in its last session. They earmarked great amounts for Head Start, NYC and other socially acceptable programs, but greatly curtailed the more free-wheeling activi- ties of the Community Action Program. We feel it is much too early to stop experimenting and creatively trying to find new ways to solve problems of poverty in the U.S. From the League of Women Voters of Gainesville, Florida Alachua County's efforts to implement a community action program under the provisions of the Economic Opportunity Act date from February 1965, when the Board of County Commissioners established a Community Action Organization that was unique. Known in some quarters as "the three-headed monster," it featured an appointed Board of Directors, and a Policy Advisory Committee which was to be broadly representative of community groups concerned with poverty. Considerable responsibility for program development was delegated to these two bodies, while ultimate responsibility for projects approved and funded by OEO remained in the hands of the County Commissioners. When it became clear that the "monster" could not move ahead with clogged lines of communication, responsibility, and authority, two of its heads, the Board of Directors and the Policy Advisory Committee, voted themselves out of existence and returned full control to the Commissioners. A list of the accomplishments of this defunct creature will perhaps surprise you. In spite of the troubles it had: 1. obtained a year's grant ($23,000; 10% locally funded) to support a research director (Dr. Madelyn Kafoglis) and a staff of five to survey the county and identify "target areas;" 2. approved and supported 1966 Summer Head Start, directed by Cornelius Norton under the county school system; 3. undertaken volunteer projects, including an adult basic education program and day care centers in Newberry, northwest Gainesville, and Hawthorne; 4. brought VISTAs to the county and put them to work; 5. conducted a highly successful 8-week "Medicare Alert" campaign early in 1966; 6. prepared project proposals for submission to OEO: a. neighborhood de- velopment centers, b. legal aid machinery, and c. year round Head Start-type child development program. Action on these was suspended by OEO, however, until our local organiza- tion could put its house in order. Reorganization got under way in the fall of 1966, when the County Com- missioners called a public meeting to consider the plan they had submitted and OEO had approved during the summer. As accepted at the meeting and established, we now have a Policy Advisory Board whose membership is to be open ended, starting with a minimum of 60 representatives. Of these 1/3 are to be from the target areas, chosen by the poor; ~ from major public and private agencies concerned with poverty; 1/~ from other important elements in the community, i.e. religion, labor, business, civic interests, civil rights. (IJWV is presently represented by the chairman `of this national item committee.) No representatives are to be appointed by the County Commissioners or by the PAB itself. As of this writing, there are still `only 56 members, although more than 60 have `been invited. The number is expected to grow quickly. The Policy Advisory Board is empowered to advise the County Commis- sioners on all matters pertaining to development of anti-poverty programs. Its support is required for any such program. It will be identifying areas of unmet need in the community, acting as a forum for citizen groups wishing to propose changes, establishing program priorities, exploring proposed projects. Its corn- mi'ttees `are currently working on by-laws, organization and membership regu- lations, day care for pre-schoolers and additional recreation facilities for all. Its elected chairman is Dr. J. Anthony Humphreys (Gainesville Tutorial Asso- ciation), its secretary Dr. Madelyn Kafoglis (Human Relations Council). PAGENO="0070" 2530 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 The Board of County Commissioners continues to serve as grantee, sponsor, and administrator of all programs developed under the Act of 19M. It acts as fiscal agent for all project funds, employs all program personnel, manages and administers all phases of the program. As the new order became a reality, word was received that The Neighbor- hood Development Project had been funded for one year. until September 1961. at $95,000. 10% to be provided locally. It calls for "multi-service" neighborhood centers in target areas, their purpose "to develop an environment in which families can find inducement and initiative to break the cycle of poverty." Project Director is Mrs. Esther Lane, who describes her headquarters at 429 NW Second Street as "two cubicles in a corner of the building used by the Friends Society and known as Neighborhood House." Its central staff in- cludes Employment and Vocational Counselor Edward Jennings. Family and Home Management Counselor Mary Ellen Mardis, Coordinators of Volunteers Rosa Williams and John C. Thomas, Jr., and Secretary Evelyn Smith. Neighborhood aides are being hired to bring information to target areas and to link neighborhoods with central staff and the agencies of the community. VISTA workers provide important help for the new Centers. Already in operation are the day care centers in Newberry and Hawthorne, adult education and general recreation center at Waldo, and after-school study hail at Alachna. Several other neighborhoods have plans under discussion. Things are moving along. From the League of Women Voters of Cherry Hills Village, Colorado Locally in our Arapahoe County, after several years of organizational difficulty, a meaningful CAP program was established. However funds are not available to begin the program behind which the community has united. The Arapahoe Opportunity Foundation, the Interfaith Church Council, the Tn-County Health Department and the Welfare Department have worked earnestly to establish a Multi-purpose Center that would coordinate the functions of the various coun- ty and local organizations at one central point located in a target area whose people have shown a desire for such a center and program. it is discouraging to have strived for so long to finally organize a practical program only to realize it may not have a chance to be productive. From the League of Women Voters of Yonkers, Few York While the programs now being conducted in Yonkers are for the most part worthwhile in their intent, we feel particular emphasis should be placed on the work-training programs as embodied in the Neighborhood Youth* Corps and the Multi-occupational Training Center . . . Project Enable, under the direction of its dynamic and dedicated Director has developed a program of self-help, suc- cessfully reaching the poor in his area, and helping them to establish commu- nication with the "power structure". The multi-service centers too are reaching out and involving the poor. These programs are helping the disadvantaged they service to develop a sense of worth and a hopeful outloOk for the future. From the League of Women Voters of Champaign Covnty, Illinois It is a sad fact that in our community funds are being cut back or denied just when interest in the E.O.C. has been established and participation of the poor is beginning to be a reality. This will create bitter frustration and suspicion, and will leave the community more divided than ever. Another real stumbling block is the utter chaos in our Chicago Regional Of- fice. Personnel turnover is high, agreements made with one administrator may be annulled by his successor; decisions seem often arbitrary and irrational. From the Leagne of Women Voters of ~t. Louis, Miasonri We feel that HDC which is our local agency carrying out the Economic Opportunity Act is a distinct asset to the community, especially in its estab- lishment of neighborhood stations which are located in the midst of the poor. The programs developed in the stations are of varied importance, but they have given people in these areas hope, a voice in their own affairs, and services which formerly were too far removed from their lives. There are administrative difficulties, some duplication of services, etc., but we are beginning to make some headway in this fight against poverty. More jobs for people, especially those with few or no skills are needed. Longer range financing, largely federal in nature, with the fewest possible restrictions attached is another vital need. PAGENO="0071" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2531 From the League of Women Voters of Missoi,~la, Montana We feel that the local CAP program has done an excellent job of (1) sur- veying needs of low income families in the community and (2) setting up citizen advisory committees and with their help formulating plans to strengthen existing programs and institute new ones for the low-income families to improve their economic status. A number of programs are in progress. We feel the office has been very ably administered and that criticisms found in the news media as to graft, inefficiency, political involvement, etc. do not apply here. From the League of Women Voters of Wichita Falls, Teaas The local programs under Titles I and II of the Economic Opportunity Act have seemed to work quite successfully under the sponsorship and guidance of the Wichita Falls publlc school system. Alas, at the moment funds have run out for carrying on the Basic Adult Education classes but they may be resumed again in September if federal funds become available. It is our League's con- sidered opinion that these local programs are needed and well worth the cost, generally speaking. We deplore the loss of time from now until such time as additional federal funds become available. The time is Now. From the League of Won?en Voters of Denver, Colorado The Neighborhood Health Center has been a true "community action program" in that it was locally created. It operates on an essentially new medical con- cept of total health service to a whole family which is essentially preventive rather than a response to a crisis situation. The center was organized to handle 400 outpatient cases a month and is currently seeing 1600. Denver Opportunity has now applied for funds for a second health center. A secondary purpose of the Neighborhood Health Center has been to employ disadvantaged neighborhood residents. This is aimed at (1) providing specific training in various health disciplines to improve the aides' vocational potential; (2) providing an adequate wage to help lift the aide out of the poverty status; (3) serving as a communication bridge to other neighborhood residents; (4) helping provide the manpower necessary to operate the center. This system has worked out well so far as an "on-the-job" training program. From 6 to 10 of the clerical help have gone into private industry. Arrangements have been made with the Denver Oareer Service for the clerical help to be certified for eligibility for appointment after working for the Health Center for approximately six months. Arrangements are now being made with the Career Service to have a new "subprofessional" category in Mental Health and Social Welfare so that the trained aides can find jobs with the city. Some of these workers have been employed as "psychiatric technicians" by private institutions, but if the city had a classification for them and employed them, it would help to establish this field in the community. From the League of Women Voters of Lewiston, Idaho One portion of the Homemaker program under CAP that is a success without planned intent is the nursery school experience provided for the 30 to 45 pre- school children while mothers are participating in the Homemaker classes. The children's delight with this school more than insures attendance of the mothers to the classes. No one is typical, but I would like to cite the experience of M. B which might reflect the help that many have received from the Homemaker program. M. B is 28 years old, a drop-out from school at the seventh grade. She has three children aged five to nine. She is separated from her husband. Her income is Department of Public Assistance. Though she had an evident need for dental care, her most serious handicaps were a feeling of friendlessness and shyness. Homemaker classes changed this. She developed a warm, friendly atti- tude and a concern for other people. At the present time she is employed part time to conduct surveys for CAP. She is using the money she earns to get her needed dental care. Her own words portray her development: "I never was the first person to speak before, and now I can speak first." From the League of Women Voters of Victoria, Tewas The League has become concerned at the growing discouragement of the local members o~ the Neighborhood Councils formed by our Community Action Com- mittee: Citizens of the poverty areas of our county have spent a great deal of time since December organizing these councils and planning projects to meet the needs of the individuals living in their neighborhoods. The delay in funds for the Multi-Purpose Center which will aid them in solving some of their problems is PAGENO="0072" 2532 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 not understood in these Target Areas. One of our Councils is disintegrating because of this sense of frustration. The Councils have acted as referral sources for candidates for the Neighbor- hood Youth Corps, students and teacher aides for the Head Start program, and have recruited individuals interested in job training. In addition, they have be- come centers for the starting of local projects which can be accomplished through local resources. From the League of Women. Voters of Des Moines, Iowa The most noteworthy accomplishment of our CAP in this short time is the involvement of the poor and their effort to improve themselves. I have been astonished at the individual development of the neighborhood leaders, many of whom came to first CAP meetings dirty, shouting, and waving their fists. These same people have acquired dignity and self-respect when they realized their ideas would be listened to with respect. Many of the natural leaders have been employed by CAP, and are replaced as spokesmen by a new crop who have de- veloped the sense of community responsibility. In Des Moines CAP has proved to be the purest example of democracy, and a training ground for people who were unaware of the proper channels for voicing their opinions. It is interesting that when race riots occurred last summer, CAP staff members were the first to propose evening activities for Negro youth. VISTA workers are already planning to recruit young people to staff "Drop-In" centers for youth activities each day and evening until midnight, in the hope of prevent- ing further riots this summer. From the League of Women Voters of Phoenix, Arizona The South Phoenix Community Service Center is serving an average of 700 families or individuals per month, even though it is barely two months old. Gradually the hope is to be able to serve upwards of 2,000 each week. In an effort of necessity to keep operating expenses at a minimum, a good deal of the work will be done by volunteer workers from the community. This is an example of a CAP service which is in its infancy here, certainly will and must expand in services rendered, and will prove the concretely positive results of a program which has community approval, city sanction and federal assistance. From the League of Wom.ei~ Voters of savannah, Georgia Project Enable, federally funded as a one-year demonstration project, came to an end March 31, 1067. Under the direction of the Savannah Family Counsel- ing Center, it operated as a special detail of social workers and aides hired from the ranks of the poor to serve in EOA's War on Poverty in Chatham County. There have been cutbacks in this program. Since the 1967 appropriations for EOA were so severe, the national program of ENABLE from Washington on down was totally dissolved. In Savannah, the whole structure of ENABLE was taken and moved from the supervision of a delegate agency (Family Counseling) to a newly established division known as Human Services. Although the service that was being provided under Project ENABLE is now being provided by the Social Service Division of Human Services, it yet has to be proven whether or not the service can be provided in depth under this new format. Hopefully, it will achieve depth as well as added breadth but only time will tell. This was an ongoing program when the project was stopped because of the cut-backs in funds. It was able to be absorbed in the new division and the staff who wished came along with this project. We were able to have an orderly transi- tion period of two months so only minor interruptions of service for the people for whom this program was intended to reach. Savannah was able to absorb the program this year, but if any major cutbacks in appropriations come in 1965, serv- ices will have to be discontinued for there won't be any money to hire staff to handle this program. From the League of Women Voters of Baton Rouge, Louisiana Our local CAP agency in Baton Rouge, Community Advancement, Inc. has proved itself to be an honest and effective effort in the war on poverty. The director and the staff have shown themselves to be able and dedicated people. Altough this agency has been operating for only ten months, it already has many accomplishments, to list a few: 1. Fifteen thousand people have been contacted. 2. Six hundred fifty people have been taken off the welfare rolls. 3. Three thousand people have been referred to the proper agency. PAGENO="0073" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2533 4. Eight Neighborhood Service Centers have been set up in poverty areas. 5. Thirty-six social action organizations have emerged from these centers such as a Merchants Association, a Clean-up Campaign, parents groups, etc. 6. Last summer CAT ran a very successful Headstart course which reached twenty-five hundred children. 7. Presently several year-round Headstart classes are being conducted. 8. Currently in the planning stage, with the money already funded is a $1,500,- 000 skill center. This whole program was needed in the Baton Rouge area. In a survey CAl conducted, they found that approximately 25% of the population could be defined as living in poverty. Of this 25% 83% are Negro, and the remaining 17% are white. On the whole the Negro community has received the program enthusias- tically. Unfortunately, CAl has been able to make few inroads into the white community, but plans are presently underway to try to overcome their objections. The government cutback has affected this program in two ways. It is now more difficult to obtain qualified personnel to fill the staff positions because of the uncertaintly of career opportunities. But even more important, the cutback has discouraged long-range planning and sorely-needed expansion plans. From the League of Women Voters of Grand Tr'averse Area, Michigan Early in 1965, the County Agricultural Agent of Leelanau County called to- gether a representative group of citizens to explain the possible programs under the Economic Opportunity Act. Father Henry Dondzila, pastor of an Indian mission agreed to be chairman. Sev~eral meetings followed, exploring the county's disadvantaged population and their needs. It was early admitted that the county's most obvious pocket of poverty was the Indian settlement at Peshawbes- town. This group of Indians, both Chippewa and Ottawa, live scattered along a State highway skirting Grand Traverse Bay. The planning committee explored many ideas on what were thb chief needs of these native Americans, not living in a reservation. They are generally regarded by the "establishment" as second- class citizens, whose family life, dependency, alcoholism, work habits, make them employable only in the lowest sort of jobs. Although they have more self-pride in their race than have N1egroes, they are still the most despised and neglected group here. Most of the committee believed that a return to their native crafts was un- realistic; they needed to take their place in industry. One skilled weaver wanted to secure a SBA loan to set up a weaving center for the women. Such fabrics sell at a high price. However, lack of funds, plus a real lack of a building in which any activity could be held, heated throughout the winter, presented a stumbling block to any plans. Not only were meetings held with representative Indians, but with representatives of the Gov'ernor's Commission on Indian Affairs and the Indian Affairs regional office in Wisconsin. Because these Indians live separated from the various villages in this rural county, their need seemed primarily to be a building where any activities to be developed could be held in their neighborhood. A gift from the Roman Catholic Diocese of Grand Rapids of a community building, to be leased to the county CAP, and used by all citizens, brought into reality the project. It is modern, well-lighted, and heated with central heat. It has two bathrooms, a kitchen, a spacious recreational room on the first floor, and upstairs a study center and library. Once the building was ready for use, the CAP funds made possible the main- tenance, a director (a leading Indian in the community), an arts and crafts teacher, and teachers for evening study. During 1995 the project was bene- fitted by the assignment of two VISTA girls; during the second year, two others succeeded them. Their `leadership, and identification with the community brought to the Community Center the kind of imagination and interest which was invaluable. It is difficult to imagine to dwellers in large metropolitan areas what the geographic and social isolation, as well as economic, of such Indians as the Pesbawbestow~i group face over the years. They have high unemployment, their houses are run down, only four of the families have any running water, most have `electricity but a community well furnishes most of their water supply. They have no reliable private transportation, there is no public transportation, and what cars they own are almost always in disi~epair. The children do not have bicycles, for example. They attend a public school several miles away, to which they are transported by a school bus. PAGENO="0074" 2534 Ecur~OMIC OPPOnTIJXITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Although these Indians had a certain feeling of unity through their common race, their chief characteristic was apathy and complete hopelessness. Their isolation seemed complete. With the establishment of the Community Center, and the assignment of the VISTAs, a self-pride, a feeling of purpose and unity became possible. They elected a board of directors, 9 of whom were Indians. They held pot luck suppers. One sent in news to our county newspaper, a sort of society column. Large gifts of clothing were sent them through various news media, and they held sales in the summer to migrants. They had a booth in the Northwestern Michigan Fair, at which they sold Indian handicrafts. Of enor- mous help were the evening tutoring sessions for the school children. The great ability and devotion of the art teacher made these creative activities broaden the cultural life of the children. Adolescents were given sewing lessons by the VISTAs. and the boys used the Center for games, such as pool, skittles, record-playing, etc. The skill of the director in keeping strict control of the behavior of the children has kept the place from getting a bad reputation among the white community. The League of Women Voters from the first, giving strong citizen support to this CAP program, made possible a voter registration evening at the Center, to which the township clerk came, and some very old Indians were registered for the first time. An AA group, begun by Fr. Dondzila, faded out, but will make a fresh start later. The joy which the League of Women Voters and others have felt at t.he first two years of this CAP project is now decreased because of a down-grading of the financial support by OEO. First, the very necessary staffing by VISTAs has not been continued. For approximately four months, the Center has expected new assignments but none has arrived. Second, the funds for maintenance, rental, and program have decreased so that the art teacher has had to use her own money `to buy clay and other art supplies. Third. the support by OEO was dis- continued in August of 1966, and after applying without success for a small grant from two Michigan charitable foundations to keep the Center open until funds from OEO would be forthcoming, the day was saved by the Michigan Migrant Opportunity Agency, who granted minimum, but very necessary support. But this Agency and its funds, will be discontinued permanently May 31, 1967. What has been the effect of these deprivations on the Indians themselves? Not becoming in a short two years as responsible, self-directing, citizens, they have, without the support of the VISTAs, and with uncertainty as to their fu- ture, gone back somewhat to their usual apathy, whose symptoms are fewer community suppers, less attendance on `the part of the children, no more society news in the paper, no hoard meetings and losing what contact they had made with the outside world (the whites) and `through the League, `the VISTAs, and the school (through the ESEA). Such brave starts as were made by OEO and our county CAP for the benefit of these citizens will be just another demon- stration to them of the hopelessness of their situation, if it is decreased-a real tragedy, even for a relatively small segment of our deprived poor. This project needs to be increased in CAP funds. The art teacher, for exam- ple, has served for two years, has given both day and night service, has taken an Indian boy into her home, when he needed to be sheltered, and has kept the community in touch with needs. She earns only $2.50 an hour, for 18 hours of scheduled duties, but works actually about 40. She needs a raise. The Center should have a full-time group or community organization leader, if no VISTAs are available. CAP has been important to these people. They will need it for years to come. Mr. HAwKINs. Is Dr. Smith here? Dr. SMITH. Yes. Mr. HAWKINS. Dr. Spencer Smith, Citizens Committee ~n National Resources. Dr. Smith, would you kindly come to the witness stand. STATEMENT OP DR. SPENCER ~. SMITH, SR., SECRETARY, CITIZENS COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, WASHINt+TON, D.C. Dr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. HAwKINs. Do you have a prepared statement, Dr. Smith? Dr. SMITH. Yes, I have it distributed, I think. PAGENO="0075" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2535 Mr. HAwKINS. Dr. Smith, it is a pleasure to welcome you as a wit- ness before the committee, and I see that you have a prepared state- ment. This will be written into the record. (Dr. Smith's prepared statement follows:) STATEMENT B~ DR. SPENCER M. SMITH, JR., SECRETARY, CITIZENS COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Dr. `Spencer M. Smith Jr. Secretary of the Citizens' `Committee on Natural Resources, a national conservation organization with offices in Washington D.C. It is a dual privilege for me to rep- resent many of our country's outstanding conservationists, who comprise our Board of Directors, before this distinguished `Committee. Our concern regarding the Conservation Job Corps is the culmination of over a decade of interest. We supported strongly the very early efforts of the distin- guished Chairman of this Committee, Congressman Blatnik, and, Vice President but then Senator, Hubert Humphrey. As members of this Committee are aware, tl~e earlier proposals took a variety of forms. The first was the creation of a Youth Conservation Corps, the second was Title I in the Youth Employment Act, and finally the present Job Corps Conservation Centers. We `desire to make it clear at the outset that it is not within our full field of competence to comment on all of the extensive and varied program's, which are the responsibility of the `Office of Economic Opportunity. This is not to say that our general attit'ude is adverse but rather to suggest that our investigations, ob- servations and professional backgrounds relate primarily to the conservation centers of the Job Corps. If I may be pardoned a personal commentary to the effect that for 20 years I was involved in classroom teaching at the University level. I would not suggest that this experience qualifies me as a professional educator with knowledge of the detailed techniques of educational methods. By the same token it would be impossible for one to serve as a teacher in any capacity or level without develop- ing some sensitivity to educational procedures. Many professional conservationists, serving the large national organizations, as well as some at state and local levels, have observed the Job Corps Conserva- tion Centers from their inception. Almost all of these organizations and individ- uals supported the concept because of the outstanding record made by the Civil Conservation Corps in the 1930's. We realized that neither the conditions nor composition of youth to be served, were the same in the late 50's and GO's as existed in the 30's. There were, however, certain basic siniilarities. The conser- vation work that needed to be done in regard to our national resources was far greater than existed in the 30's. There was also a considerable number of youth without meaningful and productive activity and without educational accom- plishment. It appeared to us at the time that two important social purposes could be achieved. First the training a'nd partial employment of youth and second, the improvement of our natural resource base. It is impossible for anyone to say that all of the objectives of the program have been realized. There have been problems, many of which have been overcome and some of which have yet to be dealt with effectively. Statistical studies abound and in evaluating the program to date, are used by protagonist and critic alike. In terms of the volume of testimony taken by this Committee on the sample and statistics gleaned, it is doubtful if any additional observations I might make can be too useful. My own commentary will not deal primarily with this material, both for the reasons just mentioned and for the reason that the problems found and the solutions applied that are most crucial in evaluating such a program, are not amenable to' such quantification. The most heartening and important argument for the continuation of the Job Corps Conservation Centers and hopefully their expansion, is to me, the change of attitude of the individual volunteer. The desire to learn is the most important change of attitude. I am not going to suggest that it is possible to read such a generalized conclusion by the observation of a few cases. D'espite our efforts to spent as much time as possible with the individual enrollees in a number of dif- ferent camps, such experience by necessity had to be limited. But when one's own observation is confirmed again and again by colleagues, such experiences began to have meaning. Also, one cannot spend very much time in these Conser- vatio'n Centers without being aware of the spirit among the Job Corps volunteers. PAGENO="0076" 253$ ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 This attitude on the part of the Job Corps members has changed significantly fro~ii our observations of the first established camps. It is a change that was pr:~ictabie. Oddly enough most of the serious criticism relates to the very early experiences and is not applicable in the same sense due to the evolution of the program. It should not have been expected for the Job Corps enrollees to have had an attitude of eagerness for learning and expectancy of great accomplish- ment, when they first came to the Job Corps Center. Both of these concepts could be improved only by hard work, trial and error, and general perseverance. The improvement is perhaps greater than we have had any right to expect. When boys come to the camp 33-40% functionally illiterate and 80% in need of dental and medical care with a great number of cases requiring intensive treatment, one begins to appreciate the dimensions of the task. The record of replacements and graduates of the Job Corps has been better in its short existence than I had anticipated. The basic problem however, is not learning the skills, which would enable the graduate to be employed at a good wage level, as desirable as this is. but rather to inculcate an attitude of wanting to lenin such skills and to function as a productive member of society. In short, this is not teaching a boy to read, it is the far more complicated matter of stimulating him to want to read. To cause him to appreciate the necessity and importance of learning to read. If this problem is surmounted, then the task can be begun in earnest. Most of the first Job Corps entrants that I interviewed were hostile, highly anti-social, suspicious, and looked upon the Job Corps as an aggrandized penal institution or reform school. Even one having made his recovery from a most debilitating case of malnutrition, viewed the entire matter as being-"fattened up for the kill." Hence, for whatever the reason, these young men had little hope of being effective citizens. As a consequence, the vast turnover established in the early days should not have been a surprise. In fact the number that were retained and the length of that retention was a significant accomplishment. It is hard to arrive at a judgment that this effort should be abandoned, that all the experience should somehow be transferred to another procedure or to other programs. We are well aware that any program, which is potentially to touch so many lives must be w-eighed carefully by those responsible for it and to make sure that the public funds are being invested in an appropriate and prudent man- ner. We feel the initial agonies would be repeated, at least in part, with no real assurance that the results would be improved. Also, from the extensive testimony received by the Committee, it niay be that the real problems of this entire under- taking have not been fully appreciated and that the criteria for judgment are not realistic relative to the problems themselves. It has been the contention of many conservationists, that conservation activi- ties taking place in such natural settings is an ideal place for aiding young people in their overall rehabilitation and learning. We feel strongly that this judgment has been vindic-ated. The Job Corps volunteers are developing effective work habits and achieving a social adjustment to a degree that no-one had a right to expect. There are a variety of skills in which training has been accom- plished, carpentry, masonry, welding, culinary, mechanical as well as others. These skills have been applied in effecting conservation work the product of which has been valued at ~20-$30 million thru this last year. Those associated with conservation programs for some time are aware of the importance of this net increase to the value of our natural resources. The application of these skills have resulted in a considerable pride of accomplishments on the part of the volun- teers themselves. Young men can be far more convinced if they understand the need for their labors and are able to visualize the product therefrom. In many instances it has been through this process that resistance to the fundamental educating procedures have been broken down. A good example was one young man who expressed an interest in food preparation. He n-as encouraged to follow this interest. Shortly, it was discovered, however, that the full knowledge of such activities could not be acquired unless one was able to read and unless one had mastered rudimen- tary arithmetic. This then became the motivating force for the basic educative effort. Planting of trees, protection of water sheds and the protection of w-ild life, have generated interest and appreciation in the Job Corps enrollees. It would be our plea to the Members of this Committee not to overlook the mag- nitude and importance of the basic problems these young men face or to fail to ap- preciate the difficulties of effecting solutions by the personnel in charge of administering this program. We feel the program is making progress. We feel that its experience to date justifies not only its existence but its continuance. We PAGENO="0077" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2537 do not think alternative efforts to solve these problems are as effective as a com- bination of relatively small units in outdoor settings that constitute most con~ sers-ation centers. It is not our suggestion that all Job Corps enrollees be sent to conservation cen- ters and by the same token it is not our suggestion that all the enrollees of the con- servation center be sent elsewhere to other programs. The attack on the problems of these youiig people who terminate their education but do not qualify for a productive role in our society, is a challenge that is not going to be met by one program or one part of any program. The problem is multifaceted and solutions will have to be varied and experimental. Former President Truman said, "I hope all the mistakes of my administration will be those of conimission and not of omission". Such an admonition should serve us well in this instance and we hope sincerely that it will be the judgment of this Committee to give a strong endorsement to the Job Corps Conservation Centers. NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, Washington, D.C., July 18, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, House Committee on Education a'nl Labor, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dnan Mn. CHAIRMAN: The National Wildlife Federation welcomes the invita- tion to comment upon 11.11. 8311, "to provide an improved charter for Economic Opportunity Act programs, to authorize funds for their continued operation, to expand summer camp opportunities for disadvantaged children,, and for other purposes." The National Wildlife Federation is a private non-profit organization which seeks to attain conservation objectives through educational means. The Federa- tion has affiliates in 49 States. These affiliates, in turn, are composed of local clubs and individuals who, when combined with associate members and other supporters of the Federation, number an estimated 2,000,000 persons. Our organization long has appreciated the many values of conservation camp programs. Many of the State forests, State parks, State lakes, and other valuable properties first were established by the old Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). Like the Job Corps of today, the CCC was the butt of derision and jokes in its day. Yet, the value of these conservation efforts are becoming more and more apparent each year. Other contributions of the Corps were highlighted by the outstanding military and civilian records of its members during and after World War II. There is ample reason to believe the Job Corps conservation camps will make comparable contributions. Quite naturally, some time was necessary to get the program started. For example, the National Wildlife Federation served in a role to bring conservation educators together for the purpose of developing basic "learn-to~read" materials, something heretofore unknown for young people in the Job Corps age groups. In short, the camps just now are reaching their peaks of effectiveness, both in rehabilitating young people and in giving them basic skills and knowledge for a better future, and in performing valuable conservation functions. Our people have visited many of the camps and are enthused over their quality and effec- tiveness. Of course, the program has not been without some difficulties. However, when disadvantaged young people of varying races and backgrounds are brought to- gether under unfamiliar circumstances and surroundings, some friction and problems might be expected. On the whole, though, we think the program is off to a splendid start. We would regret it if the program is curtailed or eliminated, as apparently would be the case under the program envisioned by HR. 10682. Thank you for the opportunity of expressing these views. Sincerely, LouIs S. CLAPPER, Chief, Division of Conservation Education. Mr. }liAwIuNs. You may proceed as you see fit, either to summarize the statement or to read the statement. Dr. SMITH. I shall try and be brief. If it serves the convenience of the committee, I will be very pleased to summarize my statement, Mr. Chairman. PAGENO="0078" 2538 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I am Dr. Spencer M. Smith, Jr., secretary of the Citizens Com- mittee on Natural Resources, which is a national conservation organi- zation with offices in Washington, D.C. We are very pleased to have on our board of directors some of the country's outstanding conservationists, and the chairman of our or- ganization is Dr. Ira N. G-abrielson, a very well known conservationist. I should preface my comments, Mr. Chairman, by stating that the conservation groups have long been interested in the young conserva- tion corps concept. In fact, I think that was the name of the first bill that was introduced by the distinguished chairman of this committee, Congressman Perkins, Congressman Blat.nik, and then Senator now Vice President Humphrey. Our interest continued when it became title I of the Youth Employment Act, and later when the Job Corps was created. I do want to say one thing at the very outset. Certain comments, partly by implication, both in the press and by word of mouth have charged conservation organizations with supporting Job Corps con- servation centers because of the need for cheap or slave labor. I not only reject this charge out of hand, but I think it is unfortunate that such an observation or commentary should be made by anyone. Of course we have an interest in natural resources, both on Federal, private, State, and local. Anyone who has been involved in the policy determination of this legislation would realize that the principal rea- son for our support has been the young people who would benefit from conservation work. Whatever would result in the way of aiding and abetting our natural resource base would be a byproduct, rather than a primary emphasis. I can say, Mr. Chairman, that I have never, in all the years that I have been connected with many conservation programs seen such an attack mounted against a particular program, as has been mounted on the Job Corps conservation center. We have been involved in many controversies, such as the location of dams and the establishment of parks but none have been the equal of this. People say, "How come? How can you explain the community hos- tility to a proposed conservation center?" It is very simple. Before the act was ever implemented, before there was ever a decision to establish a particular conservation center the press and the general commentary was so hostile that the people were in a state of panic at the mere thought that some of these centers might be located near their com- munity. This situation occurred again and again. Two centers that I visited recently, Arrowood Camp in North Carolina and the Schenck Job Corps Center, both faced community opposition at the outset. Now both are supported strongly by the community. The same situation occurred in Montana, and I can cite many more instances. One newspaper editor said, "I must confess, our minds were made up about this program, before there was ever a dollar spent or a boy enrolled." About a year ago, I read a newspaper story regarding the same issue that was discussed this morning. The newspaper story said 40 percent of the Jobs Corps members at Camp Catoctin in Maryland caine directly from school, and 32 percent of them came directly from jobs. PAGENO="0079" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2539 Now I have heard this commentary time and time again; that is, that a competition exists with the school system. Hence, these people can be handled very simply in a school, or that jobs did exist for a number of Job Corps volunteers. Though we don't have a lot of funds to make surveys, I determined to try and make a personal one. I went up to Catoctin, and at that time there were 119 boys enrolled in this camp. I interviewed every one of them, and I made my own survey. One hundred and four of these boys had been out of school for more than two terms. At no time had they indicated that they were going to return to school. Seven had been out for one term, and eight could not return because of long periods of truancy, and in effect, were not to be allowed back in the school system. Had they not come to the Job Corps, they would have gone to a reformatory. Now where the newspaper accounts got 40 percent coming directly from school to the Job Corps, I don't know. I can't run down each one of these stories, but this one, I did. The allegation that 32 percent came from jobs, also was a part of my inquiry. I found that only eight of the 119 had any compensation from 6 months prior to the enlistments. Of the eight, one did work at a full-time job for which he got a return of $6.40 a week, which con- stituted the maximum earnings of the eight that had any employment at all. When a newspaper account is 100 percent wrong, you begin to wonder exactly the nature of the criticisms that have been leveled against these Job Corps conservation centers. Another instance that I think is important, and part of the burden of my prepared remarks, is the statistics seeking to explain the Job Corps. Interestingly enough, having done some of my own statistical work, which has been better than some I have paid for, I find that apparently I didn't train my students in statistics any better than some of my colleagues. Many of the statistical analyses I have seen view the achievements as not having sufficient hard facts in order to make a determination. The same statistics are used repeatedly, however, as a basis of criticism that they are a failure. The Harris study was based to a very great extent on the interview technique. I can tell you that I have been in touch with a number of these boys, it would be difficult to rely strongly upon their statements, especially when they first enter the program. Second, there is an assumption, too, that every child or person that drops out of the Job Corps Center, shows a program failure. Statistics have not explained the dropouts. In Catoctin, 25 were separated be- cause the counselors urged their return to school. No statistical study to my knowledge reflects their situation. Another problem I don't feel is fully appreciated by critic or sup- porter alike is the tragic physical and mental state of some of the en- rollees coming into Conservation Corps Centers. The complete nature of this problem is not quantifiable. In the first place, while 63 percent of all of Job Corps enrollees do not have police or criminal records of any type, over 50 percent of those that come to the Conservation Centers do have such records. Also, fourth or fifth grade educational levels represent the Corps as a whole. Those coming to the Job Corps Conservation Centers are from 35 to PAGENO="0080" 2540 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 40 percent genuinely illiterate. Relating again to the 119 boys in Mary- land, 21 could not write their name legibly. Fifteen could read a second grade reader with great difficulty. One Of the reasons, and I don't object to this, for taking some of the most disadvantaged student.s and placing them in these Conservation Corps Centers, was to try and provide a framework where rehabilitation had a good chance of success. Criticizing these centers for not providing the kinds of vocational training that would suit these students to go immediately out into the world and get high-paying jobs is like criticizing this camp for not teachng them how to swim, when they first have to try and save them from drowning. This is the real and critical problem that these Con- servation Corps Centers have had. The Conservation Corps is not a substitute for education. I am perfectly aware that society may have failed very badly both in voca- tional education and across the. board. I gave whatever was left of my youth to the whole idea of education, as a professional, as a citizen, and as a parent. I am perfectly aware of the continuing problems as far as funding properly our educational system. I have said all my life that education is the greatest return on investment that the Amer- ican people receive. Hence, because a system can't do everything, it is not right to criticize it. I would be perfectly willing if we could expand existing educational systems to go down far enough to take care of these most disadvantaged children. I would be very much for it. I don't think it is going to happen, and I don't want to sit around and wait for nirvana or the millem~ium. I would prefer to do something about it. Former President Harry S. Truman said, "I hope that all my errors and sins will be those of commission and not of omission." Well, I hope that all the errors we make in this educational process will be from commission and not from omission. I think the conservation centers have a viable program. When I saw' the first 115 kids come to Catoctin, Md., I was so distraught that I told my wife that retaining i() percent of these enrollees in camp for 2 weeks, would be a miracle. They were hostile. They were antisocial. Over 81) percent of them needed extensive medical treatment, and one young man, even after he was again on his feet from a serious malnutrition debility, hostility hadn't been exorcised at all. He said, "I wonder if they are fattening me up for the kill." This difficult group of young people, had lost hope, and couldn't care less about learning. The problem in the conservation center is not teaching somebody how to read, it is teaching them to want to learn how to read-which is a far more difficult task. If you can't motivate someone in an interest in education, you can't teach him. And therefore, I don't think that the basic problem has had a thorough delineation in order that a full appreciation of `the state of young men who come to the Conservation Job Corps. The statistics, that talk of dropouts, mask the real miracle, that is, the miracle of retention. I would have assumed far more would have dropped out, in terms of the nature of the problems. Despite such problems. however, I think the Conservation Job Corps can provide most, and I emphasize most, disadvantaged children with an oppor~ tunity. PAGENO="0081" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2541 I know that this may sound `trite, in the world in which we live,, but most of us have had a long time feeling that national forest and national park areas and environment, are good places to start this. rehabilitation. We think in terms of the problem they have been a success, a tre- mendous success. Far more *thaii one should have anticipa ted. We feel that, in many instances, these children have found some challenges. to which they can respond. if there has been one and only one accom- P1iShmefl't-wort;Il every dime that has been spent-it has been the gift of hope. Another part of the followup procedure, I am very pleased that. the Congress is investigating prudent spending and appropriations and are so concerned about costs, for which they want a better and perhaps cheaper, if possible, program. I must say as a taxpaying citizen, I wish that extended to all fields. I see our missiles blow up for $2 or $3 million, and we say, "Well, you have to expect that, that is an experimentation." If the agency downtown involved in such activity makes a mistake of a decimal point, the Congress puts forth an amiable admonition to them, and. tells them to go and sin no more, and the budgets keep growing. If we have to experiment with boys and girls, `however, we have to be right the first time, and presumably there is no margin for error. Well, there is a lot of margin for error. We are going to continue to have dropouts. We are going to continue to have problems, because these children have problems, and these problems aren't the result of one single cause. They are caused by the very multifaceted aspects of society, which is as complicated as there is in the world: a highly dynamic industrial machine, which we have going with all of `the social implications. To assume that we can solve any of these problems by one simple program or by a hundred simple programs, probably, is not going to be close to the truth. We are going to have to have some patience in solving them. These kids have to have something~ to believe in. They have got to have some hope, and they have to have an appreciation for their fellow citizen's. They have to have some idea of the society in which they live before we can even begin talking: about skills. It doesn't do anybodyany good to be a skilled bulldozer o'perator if he can't read or write, and one of `the charms, I think, of the Corps which we have seen is the way in which the motivation for' reading and writing comes about. I recall one little boy in the camp area in North Carolina who was highly resistant. He wouldn't communicate. He didn't want to. read. His father hadn't read, he saw no reason for him to. He didn't want to write. He didn't care about it. He didn't want to socialize with anybody, but he had one curiosity. He wanted to cook. He likedl the preparation of food. Within 4 months, `after showing the' boy the culin'ary arts, it was `also pointed out, that if he really wanted to go ahead with this vocation he had to learn to read, so he learned. to read. Also, if you are going to succeed in cooking you have to. have some rudimentary mathematics, so he learned rudimentary math- ematics. I think this is a notable education achievement. I pretend, no great skills in educative techniques, but I say that there are situa- tions where if the boys and girls do not adapt well to. the' books,, 80-084-67-pt. 4-6 PAGENO="0082" 2542 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 we have got to find some way to adapt the books to them. I think the Job Corps conservation centers are doing this. I think they are doing an effective job, and I call your attention to the fact that if the results may not be as dramatic, as we would all hope, I urge that these results be judged in terms of the difficulty of the problems. I don't say that Job Corps has solved all of these problems. I do say, however, that they are on the road to finding solutions but I wouldn't want to suggest to anyone here that all of the solutions are in sight. The problems are so numerous and complicated we don't even Irnow the origin of many of them. I think we have to continue to try for solutions end I think the Conservation Job Corps Centers are a significant part. of that. effort. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Let me first thank you for your appearance. You have been around here working for the Job Corps many years, and I can appreciate that fact, and the fact t.hat numerous years ago, you were representing, when I recall we met at the Congressional Hotel, long before we ever enacted, and we were moving around, try- ing to get the Youth Opportunities Act through the Congress, and we failed on several occasions, for several years. Dr. Snmi. Yes; we did. Chairman PERKINS. Until we were lucky enough to get it into one package, we were able to enact the bill. But I agree with you that if we can imbue in these youngsters motivation, that our accomplishments are worthy ones, that the funds we would spend will not be lost. Dr. SMrTI-I. A lot of them, Mr. Chairman, have not only no hope, I don't even think they know what the word means. They have never heard it any time in their life-never been exposed to it. chairman PERKINS. NOW you made mention of one factor here that I would like for you to dwell on. it has been insinuated that we are taking the youngsters out of school to place them in the Job Corps and if you recall the Youth Opportunities Act, we specifically pro- hibited the enrollees from this. Youngsters to enroll had to be drop- outs. But you touched on that here, and as I think we ought to get it over, if you have made the study, the type of youngster that is usually enrolled in the Job Corps, in many instances, the majority of them are juvenile offenders. Dr. S~rrrii. Yes; they are. Chairman PERKINS. Have been dropped out of school for many months, some for many years. Dr. SMITH. I don't say a lot of them have had records of felonies, but records of misdemeanors. Chairman PERKINS. Some of them have records of felonies. Dr. SMITH. Yes; t.hey do. Chairman PERKINS. Some of them have records of felonies. But you have made mention of the fact that we were not taking the youngsters from the school. Would you care to develop that idea a little? Dr. SMITH. Well- Chairman PERKINS. Since it has been hinted that we were taking youngsters from school. Dr. SMITH. I know there is an appeal. I don't know whether you were in the Chamber or not, when I mentioned the story that I read. Chairnman PERKINS. I was not. PAGENO="0083" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2543 Dr. SMITH. I will repeat it briefly. I read a story in the `Washington Star about a year ago, regarding the Catoctin Job Corps Camp in Maryland which stated that 40 percent of the enrollees came directly from schools, and 32 percent directly from jobs. The story's conclusion asked, "What on earth are we doing putting up all this money? Tak- ing boys away from a situation where they are already in adjustment and for the small number remaining the cost was exorbitant. This upset me since I knew that camp pretty well and was not aware of such conditions. Chairman PERKINS. Did you check that? Dr. SMITI-1. I went up there and I interviewed 119 kids, and I took four and a half days to do it. Chairman PERKINS. That is wonderful. Dr. SMITH. And out of the 119, here are some of the statistics. They are already in the record but I want you to hear them; 104 had been out of school for more than two terms, seven for one term, and eight had truancy records and couldn't return. Now that is 119. There wasn't one child of the group enrolled directly from school. Chairman PERKINS. I would hope that you picked up that propa- ganda that was put into print, because that is the type of propaganda that is taking place today, to try to do damage to a most worthy program. Dr. SMITH. Again, in the Schenck Job Corps Center in North Caro- lina, received a variety of criticisim both in the press and word of mouth. When accomplishments were evident the critics said, "Well, you have a unique group down there, of course, everything just went just fine." As a matter of fact, Schenck didn't have a unique group at all. The myth indicated that a great number of them had come directly from school so the administrators could make a real case for the Job Corps Center. This was complete tommyrot. Absolutely ridiculous. There wasn't a child, not a boy enrolled in that camp that had come direct from school. There hadn't been one in there that hadn't been out of school for 6 months to a year. Now those are the two stories, and two acounts, which I ran down. We don't, have the money to start any aggrandized survey, but I did go out in these two cases, I ran the one down in Catoctin, a great deal, boy by boy; the other one I ran down by record and not by interview. If some of the right information could be published it would be help- ful. Because we have more people willing to believe the worst of these situations rather than attempting to understand, the situation would be helped. Chairman PERKINS. Now the quality of training that is taking place in the camps oper.ated by the Department of the Interior, the Department of Agriculture, and the training aspects, how does it differ? You are old enough, I believe, to know something about the old Civilian `Conservation Corps. Dr. SMITH. Well, in the first place, Mr. Chairman, the composition of the boys of the present Job Corps conservation center are quite different from the old CCC. Chairman PERKINS. Yes, quite different. PAGENO="0084" 2544 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. SMITH. So we have to start from there. I do say, though,. that- Chairman PERKINS. We stressed work program back in those days. Dr. SMITH. That is right.. Chairman PERKINS. To a degree, but the emphasis has entirely shifted. Dr. SMITH. That is right. These boys, I can name you five by name that literally were challenged enough to get through elementary arithmetic because of some of their activities in the field. Tree plant- ing, watershed control, and the like. They have made great contribu- tions. The results of their work are valued between $20 and $30 million. More important than the work is convincing a boy that this is important work to do, and after he does it., to help him find a sense of pride in the accomplishment. Also, the Forest Service hadn't started out with the intention of using these boys as firefighters at; all. They are very willing to respond, however, and were most helpful in protecting forests from fire. Literally, the Forest Service has had. to restrain these young men for their own protection. The experiences I have had, you can't write it down, and you can't communicate the full. aspects of it. The thrill comes when some kid comes up to you and. takes you by the hand, and can hardly wait unt.il you go out and look at a particular project tha.t he has accomplished. When you have that kind of enthusiasm from some boy working in the woods, whether it is a watershed project, or the construction of habitat for wildlife, or planting trees, the real importance is what it means to the boy. Chairman PERKINS. Have you been able to follow through on it or make any study of the youngsters tha.t have been able to obtain employment when they have completed their course of training in a job in Conservation Job Corps. Dr. SMITH. Once again, we do not have hard figures. I a.m sure that. you may be aware of the fact that these Job Corps conservation centers have been utilized in some instances as starters to further vocational educat.ion. With an improved attitude and rudimentary skills to put them on their feet, quite often, they are sent to other vocational centers for more extensive training in a vocation of their choice. This has complicated our picture, to try and really find out what happens to these young men, but I can say t.hose that have graduated often have done well. The statistics are not definitive in all respects. This is a dynamic program and statistical studies reason from a particular point of time. Chairman PERKINS. This point of view is not too pertinent, inas- much as the emphasis at this day and time is on the training, and not on the work, but the value of the work alone in the conservative camps, the national parks, the national forests, would the value of that work exceed the cost of the operation of those camps? Dr. S~rrrH. Yes. Yes, I would think so. In most instances. I could, once again, I will try and detail that for you, as I go along, but I am sure that in most instances, this is true. Chairman PERKINS. And you are getting work that otherwise would not be performed. Dr. Sa~nTII. That is right. I don't think a lot of people realize how very difficult it is to obta.in appropriations for the creation of certain recreation e~nter~. PAGENO="0085" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2545 Chairman PERKINS. The quality of the work. Are the conservation people all satisfied with it? IDr. SMITH. I think that you can, without exception, receive testi- mony from the Park Service and Forest Service rangers, and the BLM managers that the quality of work is excellent. I was with a group working on watershed management, which was fairly technical, and I said, "You mean to tell me you are going to let these boys go out by themselves and do that ?" The ranger said "Yes." Usually five or six of these un~ts per day is considered average but the boys consistently put in eight a day, with excellent quality of work. We haven't had any serious complaints on the caliber of the work these boys are doing. Chairman PERKINS. If you can obtain any further data bearing on the enrollees not being selected or coming into the Job Corps from schools, other than the two instances that you personally checked out, if you could make a further study, and give me that study, and I will give a copy of your study to the minority before we insert it in the record, and if there is no objection, you can come up with some further statistics along that line, we will appreciate it. I am of the same opinion that you are, that the insinuations and the statements that were made about these youngsters, enrollees coming into the Job Corps cannot be supported by the actual fact. In fact I think that we have tightly written into the law prohibitions against this sort of thing. Dr. SMITH. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. And if it is not in the law now, we can certainly put it in the law. At least, I would be willing to support it, but I think it is there. I am not certain. Dr. SMITH. Mr. Chairman, this is one of the things that I don't feel -we are communicating properly. We don't have the devices, the procedures to do it as it should be done. Chairman PERKINS. My point is that we can't let the Job Corps-I have never known of an instance in my experience, and I think I have tried to be as close to it as anybody, where the Job Corps was the in- ~centive to pull a youngster out of high school. Dr. SMITH. Absolutely not. Chairman PERKINS. I have never seen that, and I just don't think that the record will disclose any instances of it. Dr. SMITH. One of the best ways to show the people responsible is to have them in camp and watch the new enrollees come in. Chairman PERKINS. But the type of youngster that is enrolled, that is an enrollee, that has never been successful in elementary ~nd second- :ary schools? Dr. SMITH. I don't think people realize, but we have children in the .J oh Corps that have never been inside a school. Chairman PERKINS. Is it a problem child that the schools just do not have the answers for, or have not been successful with, but it is a dif- Eerent type of youngster from the one who ordinarily goes to school and is successful? Dr. SMITh. This is true. Mr. DELLENBACK. Dr. Smith, I was interested in the comments you made on the Harris polls, which were introduced in the record some time ago by Mr. Shriver. Dr. SMITH. Yes, I know. PAGENO="0086" 2546 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. DELLENBACK. They used them to indicate certain things that are of a beneficial nature. And some of your remarks would look in the direction of discrediting some of the approaches you have mdi - cated. As I read you, as saying that you didn't like the interviewer approach. I am not quite sure that I understand what it is you are criticizing, or whether you are really feeling that the Harris polls are invalid. Dr. SMITH. No; I don't mean to suggest that the Harris polls are~ completely invalid, but what I am suggesting is that it seems to me that critic and protagonist alike are using these statistical procedures as definitive rather than an indication. The statistics show some of the mistakes made in the early days of the program but. are not as rele- vant today. The use of the statistics, also, seek to prove things which I do not think are provable from the statistics. The Harris group went too far. I think the interview technique for the boys that had just entered ~ne Corps was faulty. If you interview them, they will tell you. "Oh, yes~ I had a. job~ and I was paid so much," but if you investigate further such is not the case. The Harris survey states in their fourth volume that they had not taken this fully into account. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are you saying that the interview technique is invalid, then? Or that they did not follow through on the polls accurately? Dr. S~rn'n. No, I think that the interview technique is invalid if you stop there. If you don't do spot checking of wha.t you ge.t when you interview these kids. Most interviews were taken of the enrolees that were just coming into the camp. They hadn't been there over a. period of time. There were the so-called entra.nce class, which the Harris poll picked up. for the most part.. This was an effort to keep current, and try to find out whether they came from, such as a. job opportunity. 1 think that is very inaccurate. Mr. DELLENBACK. Well, but the thing that I don't really still quite understand as to what you are sayina is do you feel the interview technique is an improper technique? Do you feel that they did not use the teclmique properly, and didn't. ask the right questions. or didn't follow throu~h, or do you feel that. the sample that they were attempting to interview was poorly chosen? Dr. S~rrm. No: I think as I understood their sample., it seems to be as reasonable as any series of alternatives. Mr. DELLENBACK. It. isn't the iat.terç it is the sample? Dr. SMITH. I would say it is doubtful whether you should use inter- view technique on boys just coming into the camp. because in many instances the problem of communication is great. In the second in- stance., there has not been a "civilization process," and they are as apt to tell the poiltaker one t.hing as they are another. Mr. DELLENBACK. What tecimiques should you use with them? Dr. SMITH. I don't think you can get. at this kind of problem through an interview technique. Mr. DELLENBACK. What should you use? Dr. SMITH. Well, there is the assumption here that you have to use a `techninque involved. I think you have to find out at the time of the screening operation the background of these boys, and I think you PAGENO="0087" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2547 have to let this record stay. Now most of the screening operations, of course, are quite different than the previous screening operations, and I think that information that the Harris poll w~a.s seeking is now avail- able. Mr. DELLENBACK. Wasn't the technique that is used, though, also essentially an interview technique? Dr. SNITH. No. First, I looked at the records. Mr. DELLENBACK. But you also said that you interviewed. Dr. SMITH. After I looked at the records I talked to the boys. But I didn't ask the question, "Did you have a job?" and after they said yes go right on to the next question, such as, "How much did your job pay?" and so on. This was the interview technique that was used. When they told me they had a job, I said "Where? Who did you work for?" And after a series of inquiries, like an adversary proceeding, I would look at them and say, "Now did you really have a job?" They responded, "Well, no, I guess not." Mr. DELLENBACK. Well, what you are saying is that you really did discredit the polls across the line, because you feel the interviewers evidently failed to elicit accurate answers. Dr. S~irm. I have said that to the extent that the polls depend on the interview technique of the boys just coming into the camp, they are a failure, in my judgment. To the extent that the polls used the in- terview technique with boys that had been in the camp for a period of time, and therefore, were most generally far better able to com- municate with the pollster, then I think there is some creditability in the polls. The other thing that I discredit is we-well, it is not discreditation as much as it is not following up. The point was made this morning that a colloquy, "So many people drop out. What happens to the dropouts? Where do they go? What did they do?" The commentary is, "Well, we found they had one job, but then they leave. They don't stay in that job very long." This may be true, they don't sta.y on the first job very long, but therefore, are they unemployed, or on another job? How far do you follow up the experience of these kids is one thing. Another thing, what is the reason they dropped out? We assume automatically that they failed and. inst walked out of the camn and said, "We will have no more of it." This just isn't true. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you conducted any further surveys along this very line? I think this is excellent. This followup idea. Have you conducted surveys of your own? Dr. SMITH. Not only-as I say, we simply haven't the funds to do it, but wha.t we have done. is we have made some eclectric observations. One example, as I pointed out, the Catoctin Camp, in Maryland. We had 25 boys leave with 2 weeks experience. What really happened was probably a. failure of the screening operation at this point.. It was determined that with some heavy remedial work, these boys could reenter the educational system. It was the. educators at the camp that made this recommendation. Now, statistically, they show up as a drop- out. Mr. DELLENBACK. At this camp that. you know particularly well, do you have any statistics we can use to supplement the Harris results as to what has happened to the young people, how many dropped out after the first 3 months, or attend the first 3 months? PAGENO="0088" 2548 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. SMITH. I have some. I don't know whether I can. I will try very hard to see if we can relate these, and make them available, and in a sense where they are meaningful. Mr. DELLENBACK. I think we are very much interested in what the facts really are. I gather that really what you say is that you thmk most of the Harris poll results are inclined to he accurate, or you would be inclined to accept them as accurate. On this particular one, you ques- `tion its accuracy. Dr. SMITH. Yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. I therefore suppose you would question the ac- curacy of all the answers they gave in that particular interview, what- ever they were looking for in that, so we move on to the other type of questions that they asked, relative to when there were dropouts, and at what stage, and how many, and what they did. If you have some other statistics of your own that you would set up against what Harris has done, I would be very interested in seeing them. Dr. SMrrH. Well, of course, the difficulty we have, as I say, their survey was made on the complete operation, and ours is here and there. But- Mr. DELLENBACK. Are you suggesting that theirs is inclined to be more accurate, then? Dr. SMITH. No. I am simply saying that this sample is considerably larger in terms of the population than what we would have an oppor- tunity to do, so it isn't a question of whether ours could possibly be more accurate in terms of the whole. The conservation centers are only a part of the Job Corps. I would simply say that t.hey are not com- parable. All I am saying is that some of the material we have are so far at variance with what some of the other observations, that this causes us to be greatly suspicious. Not suspicious in a.ny unsavory sense, but suspicious as to accuracy. Mr. DELLENBACK. One or the other of them is certainly wrong. Dr. SMITH. Yes, that is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. But you don't have any other figures of your own? Dr. SMITH. Pardon? Mr. DELLENBACK. You don't have any figures of your own? Dr. S~ni'n. I do have some figures that I would have to look at in this sense, and reexamine to see whether they would be usable for any helpful observations. Congressman, I think the thing that disturbs me more than any- thing else is the utilization of the statistics. In reality, we are trying to quantify some of the things that just aren't quantifiable. Mr. DELLENBACK. I recognize that these are difficulties always, but if you do have figures that are at variance with the Harris polls as to results, I would be very interested because you are aware that so far as the history of the Job Corps across the board is concerned, there are statistics which have been made available to us which indicate tha.t across the board a third of the enrollees drop out within the first 3 months, a third drop out within the second 3 months, and only the remaining third have been there beyond the first 6 months. Now if you have something that contradicts this, I would be very interested in getting it. PAGENO="0089" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2549 Dr. SMITH. No; I have been shocked at those statistics, because I couldn't conceive of them being that good. Mr. DELLENBACK. Well-being that good? Dr. SMITH. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. You mean you think that to have a third stay after 6 months is better than you think it would be? Dr. SMITH. Oh, absolutely. Mr. DELLENBACK. Great. Now so far as followup on graduates are concerned, do you have any statistics here on those who have remained more than the 6 months? Do you have any statistics of your own which are either supplemental to, or contradictory of, or in accordance with, the results of the statistics that have been given to us as to where these young people have gone and whether they have used the skills they have gotten, and so on? Dr. SMITH. Now our statistics are not going to be much help here for two reasons. I don't now when the decision was to place the more dis- advantaged children in the Job Corps conservation centers. Whether it was a conscious decision or not, and I am inclined to think that it was a conscious decision, that is the way it turned out. As a result, a boy's separation has not been documented carefully. What separation pat- tern does he follow? Does he go back to school? We are now sending some of these boys who have a certain efficiency and interest, to in- dustrial or urban Job Corps that have a higher degree of skill and a better program for particular vocations. Mr. DELLENBACK. Again, this `all should be shown by the proper rec- ord and proper statistics, and certainly a youngster who goes from this. into an advanced training or back to school is in one sense a very real success. Dr. SMITH. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. And I don't care to predict what the results show,. but if you have any results of this nature, we will be very interested'. in getting them. Dr. SMITH. We will be very happy to do that. We have had some, and-I wish I could give you a definitive figure-some boys have gone' into vocations associated with natural resources. Mr. DELLENBACK. Fine. Again, it is not isolated cases I am interested in. Dr. SMITH. I `appreciate that. Mr. DELLENBACK. If you have any statistically valid, actuarial valid'. statistics, if you will, this I would be very interested in getting. Dr. SMITH. Fine. Mr. DELLENBACK. So far as regionalization is concerned, has Catoc- tin been regionalized? Dr. SMITH. I don't quite know what that means, Congressman. Mr. DELLENBACK. There have been two different procedures that have been intended to be followed in these centers. One, to take them from all over the Nation, and put them in a center. They have one run by the Forest Service in my district, and one run by the Bureau of Land Management in my district. Then there is also ostensibly a change in pattern, that they were not going to bring them from New York to put them in Oregon; they were going to bring them from som.ewhere on .the west coast, to keep them in the region. Now what about Catoctin? PAGENO="0090" 2550 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. SMITH. If memory serves me correctly, we still have a number of boys at Catoetin, at least we did in May, that were from areas dis- tributed over the country, not just from the region. Mr. DELLENBACK. How long has this particular center been in op- eration? Dr. SMITH. Oh, I should be able to give you the date. Mr. DELLENBACK. Approximately. Dr. SMITH. It was one of the first ones that were opened up after the passage of the act. I would say within 6 to 7 months after the act was passed that this camp was opened. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you know how many young people have been through the center ? Dr. SMITH. Have been through it totally since the outset? Mr. DELLENBACK. You have given us a few isolated examples, which are excellent. I am wondering- Dr. S~1rrH. My guess would be there would be somewhere between 750 and 1,000. But I am guessing. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you made any other interview analyses be- sides this one that you have testified to and the 119 boys you have talked about? Dr. SMITH. Yes, we have done that. Others in Catoctin. At Schenck and Arrowood-both of the latter two in North Carolina. Mr. DELLENEACK. Again, complete surveys of all those in the camp? Dr. S~rITH. No, I thought you meant interviews. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't iiiea.n the isolated interview. Dr. S~IITII. Not on the majority or taking the whole population into account. Mr. DELLENBACK. You see, part of the problem that we face as your servants in the Congress is this thing to which you alluded earlier. It is our function to use the dollars which come from you and your people and my people through taxes, and try not just to use them to put any person in a specially advantaged position, but to try to make them go across the board as far a.nd as effectively as we. possibly can. Anybody who has come from either a governmental background or a working with united funds, or anything of that nature, realizes that as you analyze any program, you can come up with one or two, or a half dozen or a dozen cases of great advantage, but when we face a problem, which deals literally with thousands and hundreds of thou- sands of young people, what we must be concerned about is not the isolated case or the isolated dozen cases, but across the board, what has been the result of this program, and is there a better across the board program that we can use these dollars on to create even more beneficial results. Dr. SMITH. I think that obviously is the function. I suffer from pa- rochial frustrations, as you would expect.. In our programs we get to the place where we practically hate politicians. The Democrats spend reluctantly in our areas, the Republicans don't want to spend a.t all, and we get very upset. Mr. DELLENBACK. If you didn't really find yourself so wrapped up in the program that you are working on that you would feel some of this frustration with others of us who work outside, you probably wouldn't really be doing your task well. Dr. SMITH. I hope that. is right. We get pretty frustrated. PAGENO="0091" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2551 Mr. DELLENBACK. On the other hand, if you sat in lily chair, and I sat in your chair, you would also have to be concerned about the other aspects of things, with which we must be concerned here. Dr. SMITH. I appreciate that, and I am aware of the difficulty of trying to generalize from too few cases. I do want to say one thing, however. Conservation organizations are not noted for general agreement, even among themselves. This is one and, however, that we have probably the `fewest complaints about. We have urged our people and our associates and our colleagues all over the country to get out and see these Job Corps camps. `They have. In your own State, for example, and I don't think there is a one of the number of camps that we have had reports on that recommended against them. There are 47 Forest Service centers, and 39 Interior camps, and people have visited practically all of them. We are still trying to put all of the pieces together. Maybe it is because I was a statistician for too long that I am not inclined to reject the subjective evaluation of people, who are skilled profes- sionals. Therefore, I have put a considerable amount of credence in the kind of reports that we have received from these people, who are highly reputed in their own field. I don't want to give you the im- pression that we haven't fought with Job Corps; we have. `We have had some-I guess we would say in the Halls of Congress-very spirited exchanges, in which we had very contrary points of view to the~ Job Corps. `When one reflects upon it, however, these differ- ences were born out of the agony of not knowing how to handle these problems. Employing educators was accomplished from the begin- ning. You had educators and educators looking at the problem, "What do you do ?" "Let's try this." This has been experimentation. It has been trial and error. In your task of trying to evaluate this, one of the considerations I am pleading for, is to allow tile program some greater experience. Allow the program some continuance, until we do have an opportunity. I think that we have enough fragmentary information that is hope- ful. I am not trying to come before this committee and say "This is absolutely an unqualified success'; there is no question about it going onward and upward." There are lots of questions about it, but the evi- dence to date does warrant a continuance. Mr. DELLENBACK. I gather from the chairman that right from the beginning you have been one of the backers. Dr. SMITH. Absolutely. Mr.' DELLENBACK. And you have helped-were you involved in the creation of the law that created these? Dr. SMITH. Oh, very much. Yes. We had some strong differences when the bill was debated. We didn't feel that there were sufficient opportunities in conservation areas, and one of the Republican Mem- bers of tile House of Representatives took our cause to his heart and helped us in this matter. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't think this is a partisan thing. Dr. SMITH. No, I really don't. I haven't seen it as such. Mr. DELLENBACK. Even though the administration is of one party and put forward one bill, and my colleagues Goodell and Quie are the primary backers who put forward the other, this doesn't narrow the problem down to partisanship, and it doesn't really narrow the solu- PAGENO="0092" 2552 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNTITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 tion down. `We are reaching in the same direction of how best to solver not whether to solve. Dr. SMITH. Oddly enough, we took the position that we didn't think it would be helpful to have a separate Office of Economic Opportu- nity originally. Now that we have it, however, we don't want to go through this agony again. We would rather keep it for a while, and. give it an opportunity to function. Mr. DELLENBACK. With all its imperfections. Dr. S~rrni. With all its imperfections. Mr. DELLENBAOK. And there are imperfections. Dr. S~rrrH. I am ready to accept almost anything, rather than go through the terrors of reorganization. We have just begun to under- stand what we have got. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I then interpret your remarks that the Office of Economic Opportunity is this "almost anything" that you are willing to accept rather than abandon it at this stage? Dr. SMITH. Well, I would say that that is almost a lawyer's observa- tion of a client, but I would say that we would be willing to accept the continuance of the Office of Economic Opportunity with its difficulties and imperfections known, and even yet to be established, rather than. changing the operation at this juncture. Mr. DELLENBACK. Partly because of uncertainty, really, as to what would follow. Dr. SMITH. It is not only the uncertainty; but one of certainty. I am just as sure as I am sitting here as to what will happen. Part Mr. DELLENBACK. Of course, we speculate as to what will happen.. This is a difficult one. Dr. Smith, we do have one more witness who has sat patiently with us. Dr. SMITH. He is a great friend and a colleague, and I have probably' knocked him out of a cab now, so I had better leave. Mr. DELLENBACK. Dr. Smith, we thank you very much. Dr. S~rn~H. Thank you, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. I do personally appreciate this type of cont.ri- bution. As you know, my area. is deeply involved in problems of the' outdoors, and I welcome this sort of testimony. Dr. SMITH. Congressman, I wonder, a number of conservation orga- nizations have asked me if they could submit articles that would be in- cluded in the record, close to where our discussion with Mr. Pomeroy and myself. Mr. Brandorg of the Wilderness Society, and Mr. Pool and others. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am sure if you submit these statements the chairman will have no objection to their being entered in the record. Dr. SMITH. Thank you. (The information referred to follows:) THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY, Washington, D.C.. July 20. 1967. Hon. CARL B. PERKINS, Chairman.. Committee on Education and Labor. House Office Building, Washington. D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: The Wilderness Society. a national non-profit conservation organization. is broadly interested in increasing public appreciation of the value of wilderness preservation and conservation of our natural environ- ment for the benefit of future generations. The Society is actively supporting the efforts of the Federal natural-resources management agencies to implement PAGENO="0093" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2553 the Wilderness Act of 1964 and apply its protective policies on wild lands under public ownership. These agencies-particularly the Forest Service, the National Park Service, ~and the Fish and Wildlife Service-have participated with good effect in the training of young people in Job Corps Conservation `Centers. We consider this task as having tremendous future potential in terms of influencing-for the better-attitudes of our citizens toward their natural environment. We believe that outdoor work experience in settings such as the Conservation Center camps provide is beneficial to youth, particularly to those who have grown up in urban centers without any meaningful contac't with nature. From such training and experience the nation can expect to gain a nucleus `of workers comparable to those who were educated in part by the Civilian Conservation Corps from 1933 `to 1941. Many of the former CCC trainees are found tOday in managerial posi- tioiis in the natural resources field. Conservationists within both agencies and citizen groups have observed a present need for a new group of such personnel, having practical, on-the-ground training in the wide variety of skills used in the management `of our parks, for- ests, recreation areas, and wildlife refuges. In the interest of sound wilderness management we strongly urge that the woodsman skills utilizing non-motorized equipment `and primitive materials `be taught these men as well as `the handling of bulldozers, roadbuilding machinery and the like. Recruits with such skills will be needed `by the agencies which administer units of the Wilderness System, where motorized equipment is generally not permitted. The Wilderness `Society considers' that the provisions of HR. 8311 continuing the Job Corps Conservation Centers program are desirable an'd reasonable in cost, particularly in view of the long-range public benefits to be gained both from `the improved health of body and mind in its participants and from the con- tribution they can make to the preservation of our natural-area resource. Therefore The Wilderness Society joins with other national conservation organizations in supporting the continuation of the Job Corps Conservation `Centers program in legislation pending before your Committee. We would appreciate having this letter made a part of the hearing record. Sincerely, STEWART M. BRANDBORG, E~vecutive Director. NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION, Washington D.C., July 18, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, Rayxrn house Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The National Wildlife Federation welcomes the invi- tation to comment upon HR. 8311, "to provide an improved charter for Economic Opportunity Act programs, to authorize funds for their continued operation, to expand summer camp opportunities for disadvantaged children, and for other purposes." The National Wildilfe Federation is a private non-profit organization which seeks to attain conservation objectives through educational means. The Federa- tion has affiliates in 49 States. These affiliates, in turn, are composed of local clubs and individuals who, when combined with associate members and other supporters of the Federation, number an estimated 2,000,000 persons. Our organization long has appreciated the many values of conservation camp programs. Many of the State forests, State parks, State lakes, and other valuable J)roperties first were established by the old Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC). Like the Job Corps of today, the CCC was the butt of derision and jokes in its day. Yet, the value of these conservation efforts are becoming more and more ap- parent each year. Other contributions of the Corps were highlighted by the out- standing military and civilian records of its members during and after World War II. There is ample reason to believe the Job Corps conservation camps will make comparable contributions. Quite naturally, some time was necessary to get the program started. For example, the National Wildlife Federation' served in a role to bring conservation educators together for the purpose of developing basic "learn-to-read" materials, something heretofore unknown for young people in the Job Corps age groups. PAGENO="0094" 2554 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In short, the camps just now are reaching their peaks of effectiveness, both in rehabilitating young people and in giving them basic skills and knowledge for a better future, and in performing valuable conservation functions. Our people have visited many of the camps and are enthused over their quality and effec- tiveness. Of course, the program has not been without some difficulties. However, when disadvantaged young people of varying races and backgrounds are brought to- gether under unfamiliar circumstances and surroundings, some friction and prob- lems might be expected. On the whole, though, we think the program is off to a splendid start. We would regret it if the program is curtailed or eliminated, as apparently would be the case under the program envisioned by H.R. 10082. Thank you for the opportunity of expressing these views. Sincerely, Louis S. CLAPPER, Chief, Division of Conservation Education. WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT INSTITuTE, `~Washingto~; D.C., July 18, 1067. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman. Committee on Education and Labor, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: The Institute, a national conservation organiza- tion interested in the improved management and restoration of natural re- sources. is concerned about two proposals, H.R. 8311 and H.R. 10082, pending before the committee. Both deal in part with the Job Corps Conservation Cen- ters now in operation on lands of the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Serv- ice, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife. and other natural resources agencies. H.R. 8311 would continue the constructive Job Corps Conservation Centers program; HR. 10682 would let it expire by default. Members of our staff have visited a number of the Job Corps Camps and have seen the good work that is being dolle. both in education and rehabilitation of deserving young men whose future status as productive citizens is clouded by the home and community conditions to which they are exposed, and in the actual on-the-ground conservation projects in which they are engaged. It is our sincere hope that the Job Corps Conservation Centers program will be continued in w-hatever legislation is approved. The costs of the program are modest compared to the results that are being achieved. I w-ould appreciate having this letter made a part of the hearing record. Sincerely, C. R. GUTERMUTH, Vice President. Mr. DELLEXBACK. Now we do have Mr. Pomeroy with us. Mr. Pomeroy, we are apologetic for having gone this late in the day, and you have been with US very patiently. We would like very much to have your testimony for the record, and even though the number of members of the committee who are in attendance is reduced to a bare minimum. I would welcome this chance to have you with us and to listen to your testimony so tha.t it is part of our record. You may go at it either way. If you want to go over the testimony you have put in formal information directly, and then go into it, or summarize it, whichever way you prefer. STATEMENT OF KENNETH B. POMEROY, CHIEF FORESTER, AMERICAN FORESTRY ASSOCIATION Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Chairman, you have had a long and trying day, and I will only keep you a very few moments. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I sa.y seriously at this point, Mr. Pomeroy, I don't think in any wise you ought to feel rushed because of the hour. PAGENO="0095" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2555 I think that we Members of the Congress are sometimes trespassing on the patience of those of you who are concerned enough to come and appear before us as witnesses, and I don't think you ought to feel rushed at this stage of the game. I am prepared to remain here and to listen, and be sure that there goes into the record what you feel should go in. Mr. POMEROY. That is very kind of you, but I usually get to the point in a hurry. Mr. DELLENBACK. Please lead off. Mr. POMEROY. I am Kenneth B. Pomeroy, chief forester of the American Forestry Association. It might be helpful to you to say just a work about the association. It is `the oldest national forestry organization in the United States, organized in 1875. We have, some 50,000 lay members. Our primary objective is conservation through wise use, and in this instance we are talking about human resources as well as other national forests. In May of 1967, I had an opportunity to see Job Corps enrollees at work in the Pisgah National Forest of North Carolina. A few days later Mr. James B. Craig, the editor of our official publication, Ameri- can Forests, visited the Arrowood and Schenek Job Corps Camps in the same vicinity. Mr. Craig expressed his impressions in an editorial, "How Much Is A Boy Worth" I wish now to offer this editorial for inclusion in the record of this hearing. Mr. DELLENBACK. Without objection, we will receive the editorial for inclusion in the record. (The editorial referred `to follows:) [From American Forests, July 1967] How Muon Is A Bo~ WORTH? When they report in these boys are at a major crossroads in their lives. Many of them are uneasy. A few are relieved of switchblades ~nd other "equalizers." While the forest rangers seem friendly, and the forest inviting, a few speculate on whether this isn't just another kind of cop in another kind of jungle. Soon they are issued new outfits including fatigue of forest green. The rooms in the barracks to which they are assigned are not unlike school dormitories. Many are labeled `with such signs as "The All Stars," "The Leaders" and "The Chal- lengers." One labeled "The Playboys" boasts a second sign designating it as the "Dorm of the Week." A quick inspection inside reveals that it is neat `and well- scrubbed with everything tucked out of sight, just like the Army. The pinups are first rate too. This is a Job Corps Camp as run by the Office of Economic Opportunity and the U.S. Forest Service at the Arrowood Job Corps Conservation Gamp at Frank- lin, North Carolina, hard by the Nantahala National Forest. It presently houses 112 boys. Another a few miles away in the Pisgah National Forest is the Schenck Job Corps Conservation Center with a complement of 204 boys. Both camps are in one of the most picturesque regions in the nation. All told, 8,000 Corpsmen are now being trained at 47 Forest Service centers in the United States. The Interior Department runs 39 more with an enrollment of 6,000. Purpose of the camps is to teach boys to function as useful citizens. Maximum training period is two years. While in the Corps they go to school a week and then work a week. They are paid $30 a month and on separation receive $50 for each month of service as a readjustment allowance. When they arrive, these boys are unemployable and many are Army rejects. Others arrive underweight. Dental work costing as much as $500 per boy is not uncommon for many of these boys have never been to a dentist in their lives. Other medical repairs are often required and former Marine and Army medicos in camp sick bays, and contract physicians and dentists in nearby towns, are PAGENO="0096" 2556 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 kept busy. When necessary physical corrections are made, underweight boys start to muscle up. Both their physcial and mental tone improves. But that is only part of the rehabilitation story. These boys are behind in their school work too. Twenty-one year olds tell you they went through the 11th or 12th grades but one finds them enrolled in the equivalent of third-grade classes read- ing books with pictures of Peter Rabbit on the cover. One third of the boys can neither read nor write when they arrive. That's not all, either. Many of these boys lack moral discipline and home training. Some have been in scrapes before they arrive and a few get in scrapes after they arrive. Mostly, these are boys that never had much of a chance and some never had any chance at alL I welcomed a recent invitation to visit the North Carolina camps. One of my hosts was Vern Hamre, Director, Division of Job Corps Administration, U.S. Forest Service. A career professional, he doesn't preach or theorize about his current assignment. "These kids need help," he told me. "We intend to help them as well as we know how." He and some of the other rangers and instructors helped me to obtain at least some of the answers readers of American Forests have been asking. These include "How can rangers be expected to do what the home has failed to do in the first place?," "Will society be the gainer or the loser in this program?," How many of the boys actually find jobs or go on to school ?," and "I'm told it costs in excess of $5,000 a year to send one of these boys to camp; is it w-orth it?" "At the Center, it cost a total of $6,576 per boy per year in 1966," Hamre said, "but we expect to reduce that to $5,700 this year.". Subsistence and medical-dental expenses are the biggest single items with the exception of staff salaries which average out to $2,170 per boy. School materials is a hefty item too. At the end of Anril, 1961, there were 75,410 young men and women who had left all Job Corps Centers. The Job Corps' best estimate, based on both verified reports and sample surveys, is that 40,269 found jobs,. 7,418 returned to school, 5,298 entered the military and 22,415 were either unemployed or not in the labor force through marriage or other causes. The arrest rate in 1966 was 3.18 per 100 youths whereas the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 1967 shows the national average for the same age youth to be 6.5. I welcomed the complete freedom to talk to camp personnel including the boys. I sought out Joe Medford, an instructor at Schenck Center, from Heyw-ood county, and who has taught in both elementary and high schools. At Schenck, he isteaching a course on "Life and Work." The day I was there the boys were talking about the responsibilities of marriage. What qualities should the right Wife and Mother have, was the question. Some of the answers as recorded on the blackboard included, "She should be clean," "a good sport, ""respectable" and "have a nice personality." One boy bad noted that she should be "religious." "Don't think these boys are stupid," Medford told me. "For the most part they have intelligence ratings that are average and even above in a few cases. Sure, there have been some discipline problems but the older boys often settle them for you. Sometimes new boys think they have to sound off and disrupt the class and the older boys shut them up in a hurry. Most of them want to learn." Almost too good to be true, one thinks to himself. And yet, these boys ring true n-hen you talk to them individually. "Sure, I've been in scrapes" a boy from Alabama told me. "Then I got this girl in trouble. It caused a lot of discussion. you know what I mean. But if I can keep my mind on this (with a motion toward the lathe he was working) I'll be all right." He said he planned to be a long- distance trucker. One quickly senses that the backgrounds of these boys are different from the youngsters one sees across his own dinner table every night. But if their back- ground is different from your own children their response to good stimuli is not. They watch the rangers. Some ape their walks. They like to fight forest fires, I learned, in eating lunch one day with Venton Honeycup, of Washington; Fred Murphy of Baltimore; and Clinton Wills, of Mosspoint, Mississippi. All three boys are negroes and all three are in the fire crew. In a dought year, the rangers admit they did "well." Murphy was more enthusiastic. "The last time, they asked for us, man" he told me. Willis was consigned to "mop-up" the last time and he didn't like it. "Important? I guess so." he said. "But a fireman wants to be where the action is." The fact that some of the boys have stepped into permanent Forest Service jobs has not been lost on the others. The day I was at Arrowood the Franklin Press front-paged a story: "Nathan Dean Lands Forest Service Job" and gave Nathan a two-column picture on the front page. The story mentioned that when PAGENO="0097" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1 9 6 7 2557 Nathan arrived at Arrowood from Virginia he was regarded as "flighty and un- stable." But net anymore. Bob Sloan. the editor of the Press has taken some flak for his consistent support of the Job Corps. He is one of many unsung heroes in this regard. I talked to Richard Kruger, whfte, of Garrison, North Dakota, at Standing Indian Campground where he was laying pipe. He wanted to get into the Army and was rejected. Physically he was O.K. but he couldn't read. He felt bad "They told me to go into the back room and be a man," he told me. "And here I am." He is still aiming for an Army career and intends to get it. Harold Hughes, white, of California, has been in North Carolina 19 months. "I intend to stay here," he told me. "I like the country and the people. I aim to be the best plumber in western North Carolina." He was w-orking on a camp- ground lavatory the day I talked to him. They have desire. But it has to be kindled and nourished. One boy told us he hopes to graduate to another Camp near a big city in New Jersey. Their machinist training and equipment are more sophisticated than in North Caro- lina, he said. Rangers admitted that specialized vocational, training is better at some of the big city camps than in the forest-oriented camps. They quickly add that Conservation Centers teach better work habits and better social adjustment. At the same time I couldn't help thinking our forests are serving one of their highest uses as their subtle influences help to remnold some of these boys. And as Honeycup, Murphy and Wills told us, "Xou don't get to fight forest fires in no big city, miman !" Wherever possible, effort is made to have the boys' school schedules dovetail with their work schedules. National Forests are big farms in many ways and practically all kinds of work has to be done. The boys take well to their conserva- tion assignments. All told, a total of 7,120 acres of trees have been planted. They are carrying on range improvement, fence construction, improvement of fish and game habitat, construction of fire breaks, streambammk stabilization and watershed restoration. There is more than enough to be done on the National Forests for many years to come, the rangers say. When job crews encounter old C.C.C camp construction or tree planting projects the rangers make sure the boys are told that story. Hamre told inc the Forest Service is "well pleased. with the commnunity rela- tions climate at the majority of Job Corps Centers." A visitor comes to the conclusion that people of western North Carolina deserve a lot of credit. True, they occasionally gripe about the ratio of white and negro boys at the camps. They had been told the ratio would be the same as in their own communities, or about 70 percent white and 30 percent negro. The opposite has proven true. Negro boys seem to thrive in the camps in the main. Fewer white boys from the poverty pockets in rural areas come and those who do areoften the first to leave. At the same time, the griping impresses one as. more academic than real. The truth is the North Carolina people work well with the boys and encourage them. One can't escape the conclusion they really understand negroes better than northerners. Their fairness impresses a person. "Sure, there have been sonic fusses" one Asheville citizen told me~ "But at least one of them was started by our own Asheville boys." Another Asheville citizen volunteered the informa- tion that the boys had cleaned up three decrepit cemeteries on their own time. No one would deny the Job Corps costs money. Our professionals have failed with some of the boys. They have succeeded with more. In the main, the boys look up to the rangers and they like the woods. It boils down to the question- what is a boy worth? Most members of The American Forestry Association would say he is worth a lot and deserves his chance. On a dollar and cents basis it probably costs society less to train boys in a Job Corps camp than risk having them run wild in their ghettos. While Job Corps camps cost plenty, crime costs even more. Then too, there's the other side of it. Week after week in our church pews we are all told that Christians should help the unfortunate and particularly unfortunate negroes. We are told we should tear down the Iron Curtains that separate our suburbs and the cities proper and really practice what we profess to believe. From the standpoint of society, the Job Corps approach and similar approaches are probably the most economical approaches viewed on the long term. We know it is the right approach as view-ed from the pulpit and in terms of "Am I My Brother's Keeper?" All Americans of course, reserve the right to criticize. They reserve the right to ask questions that deserve sober answers. Most Americans also like to see youth programs succeed and in their hearts they know the Job Corps is one of the best things the Administration has done. The Job Corps is succeeding, on a SO-0S4-67-pt. 4-7 PAGENO="0098" 2558 ECONOMIC OP?ORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 limited basis-perhaps imperfectly-but it is succeeding. The placements and the jobs held tell the story. Meanwhile the public owes the forest rangers, the instructors, the nearby citizens and even the forests a vote of thanks for the task they are carrying out. It is not an easy task at best. And no camp, no matter how good, can do the work of a well-adjusted home. But for these Job Corps boys, who have never known the home your children know, this is the next best thing. (J. B. C.) Mr. Po~x~noy. I would like to continue by telling you of my own. personal observations. And please note that these observations pertain only to the conservation camp. I have no background in other phases of the Job Corps. I am speaking only of the conservation camps. Mr. DELLENBAOK. Incidentally, may I break in so we will turn this into a colloquy, instead of just one-sided. Have you had a chance to visit a great many of the conservation camps? Mr. PO3IEROY. No; I have not. I have picked up many opinions as I travel around the country, but I have only been to two camps personally. Mr. DELLENBACK. Arrowood and Schenck? Mr. Po~ii~uor. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Fine. Mr. POMEROY. I was must interested in another camp at Blackwell,. Wis., because that was part of my old ranger district, but I didn't actually visit the boys in the camp and talk with them myself, so anything I know about it is hearsay, and I would rather not repeat it~ At the Cradle of Forestry I saw a dozen or so young men recon- structing the first school of forestry. Under the direction of skilled foremen they were rebuilding fireplaces, doing carpentry work,. building roads, and transplanting trees. The finished product had a workmanlike appearance. A few miles away other youths were constructing a camp ground,. complete with driveways, trailer sites and sanitary facilities. At the Schenck Camp some boys were receiving basic instruction in the three R's, reading, `riting, and `rithmetic. Other boys were learning how to repair automotive vehicles, use welding equipment and make wooden cabinets. Still others operated the mess hail and serviced the camp. And, incidentally, their work in automotive repair impressed me quite a little, because the Chrysler Corp. had given them a new Ply- mouth, and these boys had taken that thing apart completely, and then put it back together with loving care, and they were getting ready to enter a contest up in Kentucky, where two boys from each camp would go to this contest, and some way or another, the company would do something to a car, and then the group who put it back together best would win a prize. I thought this was a very worthwhile thing. Mr. DELLENBAOK. Do you know how they placed in that? Mr. POMEROY. No, I don't. This happened after I had left the camp, and I didn't follow up to see just what happened. It was the interest that the boys had in doing it that impressed me. This was the thing that attracted me. Mr. DELLENBACK. The thing you are really commenting on was the developed interest, rather than capacity. Whether the capacity was high or low, you are not certain but their interest was very definitely impressive. PAGENO="0099" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2559 Mr. POMEROY. Yes, this is the point that I am trying to make. I talked with the enrollees. A few had been in camp almost two years. Others only a few weeks. All of them took pride in their work and looked forward to the day when they would be self-sufficient. They seemed to be especially proud of their achievements as fire- fighters. It gave them a sense of being needed. I would like to stress that again. The people in the community had asked for them to help fight their fires, and this made a big impres- sion on the boys. They felt that they were doing something. Their attitude of alert confidence impressed me most. I left the camp with a firm conviction that the Nation is doing something very worthwhile. In fact several important goals are being achieved. Young men, future heads of families, are acquiring skills that will enable them to make their own way in the world. More imp-~rtantly these young men are being inbued with a desire to be self-sufficient. And in this process of "learning by doing" the forest resources of the Nation are being improved significantly. Mentally I compared the Job Corps conservation camp with the Civilian Conservation Corps that I knew 30 years ago, and I spent some 7 years in close contact with the CCC program. It was a favorable comparison. In the tests of time the CCC pro- gram has been rated a success. I think history will accord a similar rating to the Job Corps conservation camps. I recommend that the Job Corps program in conservation work be continued. Thank you. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you. Congressman Perkins, do you have any questions? Chairman PERKINS. I will ask a few questions. I want to join with my colleague here in welcoming you as a repre- sentative from our forestry association. Mr. POMEROY. Thank you, sir. `Chairman PERKINS. I was interested in your statement that you were acquainted with `the old `Civilian Conservation Corps and spent 7 years with it. Mr. POMEROY. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Were you involved as instructor in the camp? Mr. POMEROY. I was a foreman in several camps, a camp superin- tendent, a district ranger- Chairman PERKINS. Working for the Department of Agriculture? Mr. POMEROY. Forest Service, Department of Agriculture. Chairman PERKINS. How do you contrast the present operation with the old operation? Mr. POMEROY. The `basic objectives were slightly different. Chairman PERKINS. You emphasized the `Corps- Mr. POMEROY. In the `beginning part of the CCC program, it was all work. As the program went forward, there became more instruc- tion available, and of course as the program went on, the enrollees were at a younger level, too. In the first days we had boys who were 19, 20, and 21, farm `boys, boys from the mining areas, boys who knew how to work and to enjoy their work. Chairman PERKINS. Just to get a little money in those times? Mr. POMEROY. That is right. We have a little different group this time that we worked with. But what I was interested in was going to PAGENO="0100" 2560 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 this camp and seeing the boys themselves and trying to get some feel about how they felt about it. As far as the actual conservation work being accomplished, I think it is at about the same level as in th' CCC work. Chairman PERKINS. The quality is about the same level? Mr. PO~IERor. Because the same caliber of foreman and technician is being used to guide the boys and help them to meet standards, certain standards. Chairman PERKINS. But you were impressed with the attitudes of the enrollees that you visited in camps recently? Mr. PO3IEROY. I might tell you a conversation with a boy named Fred Reynolds from Fort Lauderdale, Fla. Fred was reputtying some windows. This building was originally an old log frame place put up in the 1890's, and it had the old-style handblown glass in it, the kind you can see the water ripples in and the leaden color and so on, and he was being careful with it and stressed to us that this was something of antique value, and he said, "You know the panes cost $50 apiece, too," just to make sure we were properly impressed. I know he took pride in what he was doing, and this is what I was trying to see. I think the whole purpose of the program, from our point, of view, is giving the boy the incentive to do something. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Pomeroy, just a few questions, if I may. Have you made any attempt in either the Arrowood or Schenc.k camps to make any studies in depth of how many boys there were or what their backgrounds were or how many have dropped out or how long they stayed or what happened to them afterward, any of this sort of thing? Mr. POMEROY. No orga.nized study. We did ask a lot of questions. Mr. DELLENBACK. But they were questions aimed at the isolated boy here, there, and somewhere else, rather than across the board that would yield any statistics? Mr. POMEROY. They were just random questions for our own in- formation. I might tell you how this interest started in the first. place. Our organization played a key role in the initiation of the CCC program in the beginning, the legislation in back of it, and when the proposal first came up for Job Corps conservation camp, we had one of our assistant editors make a study in depth on what it was like, what they expected to do, and published it in our magazine to see what reaction we were going to get from the members. The reaction was favorable. Well, as time wore on, we wanted to know from firsthand observation wha.t are the camps like, what are they doing, what do these boys think about it., and for this reason our editor and myself on separate occasions visited camps and interviewed boys personally, just for our own information and that of our member- ship, but we did not make an organized study. Mr. DELLENBACK. I see. So what you are giving us is your impression of these visits based on ishoated discussions that took place? Mr. POMEROY. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Is the Arrowood camp run by the Forest Service, and the Schenck camp? PAGENO="0101" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2561 Mr. POMEROY. Yes. The Arrowood camp had about 140 boys when I was there, and the Schenck camp had 114. Mr. DELLENBACK. Is it the American Forest Industry Association that Mr. Hagenstein is with? Mr. POMEROY. No. He is with the Industrial Forestry Association. Mr. DELLENBACK. Is he a member of the Society of American Foresters? Mr. SCHENOK. Yes. Our own organization is the lay group with quite similar interests, but there is no connection between organizations. Mr. DELLENBACK. I think we have in this gentleman a very able forester, and a man we are delighted to have. Mr. POMEROY. Very capable. Mr. DELLENBACK. Is the testimony you bring before us today, so we can be sure of its background, your individual testimony, or has the American Forestry Association formally taken any action with respect to Job Corps camps? Mr. POMEROY. Our board has not. Mr. DELLENBACK. Neither the board or membership has acted for or against any part of this? Mr. POMEROY. Well, this perhaps needs a little explanation, too, as to how we arrive at our policies and programs. About every decade we hold a forest congress, and the last such congress was held here in Washington in 1963, and out of that we developed a program for Amer- ican forestry which was endorsed by more than 90 percent of our members. Within the general framework of that program, I am at liberty to go ahead on whatever issue may come before the Congress. If it is some- thing I have any question about, then I bring it before our board of directors and they act formally on it. We didn't have any questions on the Job Corps. Mr. DELLENBACK. This is your thinking, your personal reaction. Mr. POMEROY. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. You indicated that you don't have any analyses or statistics on a broad scale, basically. So far as these two camps are con- cerned, or either one of these camps, is concerned, do you know what courses are taught? Again, is it a random reaction or have you had a chance to sit down and see analytically what courses are being taught there? Mr. POMEROY. Not analytically. I spent about 2 hours in the educa- tional center going from class to class and seeing exactly what type of instruction the boys were receiving and 1~ow they progressed individ- ually, what kinds of educational tools were used to do it; and I saw their progress charts and such things, but here, again, it was casual questioning on my part and not an effort to do something in depth. I was trying to gain an impression and I got a favorable impression. Mr. DELLENBACK. I understand. Mr. POMEROY. Just off the record, you might be interested in some- thing that happened. My wife was with me, and the educator thought she was the one he was supposed to show around, so she got a full treatment while I was out somewhere else. Mr. DELLENBACK. You were sort of along for the trip. Do you know for what jobs either of these camps was attempting to train these boys? PAGENO="0102" 2562 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Po~RoY. Well, at the Schenck camp, there were boys receiving instruction in welding, in the uses of tools in cabinetmaking. They were making some cabinets. Mr. DELLENBACK. Excuse my breaking in. When they took this type of course, were they just looking for a background course as fundamental knowledge, or, for example, were the boys who took the welding courses intended to be qualified to hold jobs as welders when they came out, and the boys taking courses in carpentry being prepared to- Mr. Po~r~no~. It is my understanding that they had a choice of in~ struct.ion, and being prepared to do this work when they got out. Mr. DELLENBACK. Having chosen a field, they were supposedly to be proficient in that field, but do you have any statistics, sir, as to how many of these boys were placed or not placed-again, I suspect that from your prior answer- Mr. Po~iERoY. 152 had been placed in the last year. I have a note someplace, but that is just a recollection. Mr. DELLENBAOK. But you don't know what percentage that is, or how long they kept their jobs, or whether they used the skill for which they had been trained? Mr. POMEROY. I could not give you information in the overal} context. Mr. DELLENBACK. Were any of these boys being trained for occupa- tions that had to do with the woods. Were they being trained as workers in the forests? Mr. POMEROY. I would say their training was in the phase of learn- ing by doing. Some of them might not continue afterward, but I don't think that was the specific purpose of it. Mr. DELLENBACK. These boys came from urban backgrounds, didn't they? Mr. Po~r~noy. Those I spoke with did. Mr. DELLENBACK. Again, I regret the fact we are not able to follow it through, because the question would be in my mind, did most of them go back to their urban backgrounds, or did this time in the camp lead them into forestry. This again we don't know. Mr. POMEROY. No. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you very much for being here. I appreciate this chance of talking with you. Chairman PERKINS. I likewise appreciate your being here, Mr. Pomeroy, and I would like to ask you a couple of questions, sir. First., let me ask you, have you been down in Kentucky, as a. ranger and a foreman? Mr. POMEROY. I was the assistant supervisor with headquarters at Winchester, and I worked in the forest program in the timber produc- tion. As a part of this, I visited all the sawmills and lumber camps in the States. Chairman PERKINS. That was when? Mr. POMEROY. Back in World War II. In the 40's. Drew Evans was one of the gentleman I called on. Chairman PERKINS. I was through there last weekend. I noted the conservation corps working there, the trails and the picnic areas, and the roads leading to the picnic areas, and they were making new tables and carpentry work and masonry work, and rebuilt and renovated PAGENO="0103" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2563 what had taken place in the 1930's, in the days of the old Civilian Conservation Corps. They were doing work of that type in the national `orest down there in the Pine Ridge area. Mr. Poi\n~ROy. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Did you feel that the training and the experi- ence that these youngsters are getting from a conservation corps setup is satisfactory at the present time, or do you feel it just presages a way for a youngster to go on to some Job Corps residential center when they have better equipment Mr. POMEROY. Well, I don't know that I am qualified to answer the question for you, because I don't know anything about the urban part of it. The only part of the Job Corps 1 have seen has been the conserva- tion camp, and I am favorably impressed with that part. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that the training and experience *they obtain in the conservation camp is adequate to prepare that youngster from the standpoint of job orientation, for employment? Mr. POMEROY. I think one of the most important parts of it is teach- ing the boy how to work and giving him confidence that he can do something on his own, and once he has achieved this confidence and a will to go ahead, then other things become easy for him. Chairman PERKINS. You are a conservation expert, to my mind. Do you know whether the Job Corps located in the National Forest Service and the national parks, whether any part of the training and educa- tion is being contracted to either agencies, or subcontracted to some private concern, or do the departments perform those Services them- selves? Mr. Po~iinoy. I am not aware of that. Chairman PERKINS. You are not aware of any cOntracts? Mr. POMEROY. I haven't heard of any. Chairman PERKINS. Did you observe the education and training aspects of the programs in the conservation camps? Mr. POMEROY. I visited each one of the classes in session. Chairman PERKINS. Would you describe each one of those classes, and whether that was the uniform pattern in the conservation camps you visited? Go ahead and tell us something about the education and training that the youngsters received, and the type of education and training. Mr. POMEROY. Well, in one of the classes I visited, the young man~ who I presumed to be probably about 17 or 18, was learning how to read at a very elementary level. Chairman PERKINS. 17 or 18 years of age? Mr. POMEROY. Yes. And I don't think he had any previous knowl- edge whatever of reading and in other classes in the same building, I saw boys starting in with 1 and 1 make 2, and 2 and 2 make 4-I mean right at the very beginning of learning their RRR's, and in one class the instructor had a large chart on which he showed by colors the progress of each boy, so that each boy could see where he stood in the class with respect to all of his friends, and there was a testing technique so that the boy could test himself, and if he failed some particular question, this automatically routed him around through another train- ing session until he became proficient and came up to the level of the other boy. PAGENO="0104" 2564 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It was all quite elementary, in my view, and I thought they were making good progress, and they were probably-oh, it varied from five to 10 boys in each one of the sessions that I attended. Chairman PERKINS. Under a single instructor, five to 10 boys? Mr. POMEROY. No, wait a minute. I wouldn't want to say that, be- cause some of the boys I viewed were receiving individual instruction. Chairman PERKINS. You saw some receiving individual instruc- tion? Mr. POMEROY. That is correct. I wouldn't want to say there are so many under a single instructor. I am not sure that is right. Chairman PERKINS. I just wanted you to çlescribe tile situation as best you recall it sir, as you saw it. Mr. POMEROY. The boy was learning to read, with a teacher sitting at his elbow, and with her lips she formed the vowels and he followed her, just like in tile first grade. This is about as individual as you can get. Chairman PERKINS. Ally further questions, Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. No, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your appearance here. Mr. POMEROY. It has been a pleasure. Chairman PERKINS. We will have you back sometime. Goodbye. Mr. POMEROY. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will recess until 9:30 in the morning. (Whereupon, at 5 :10 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene Fri- day, July 21, 1967, at 9:30 a.m.) PAGENO="0105" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 FRIDAY, JULY 21, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUOATION AND, LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :55 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chftirrnan of the committee), presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Meeds, Quie, Goodell, Bell, Erlenborn, and Dellenback. Also present: H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel: Robert E. McCord, senior~specialist; Louise Maxienne Dar~ans, research assistant; Ben- j amin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, in- vestigator; Marian Wyman, special `assistant.; Charles W. Radcliffe, minority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minority research assistant; and W. Phillips Rocke- feller, minority research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will be in order. A quorum is present. Let me first welcome you here this morning, Mr. Rockefeller. I am delighted that you are my neighbor. I feel that you are a neigh- bor because our chief television station in the area is `WSAZ-TV which serves your area and likewise serves the area which I am privi- leged to represent. We have many problems in common in our two States. I am glad to welcome you here today. I would appreciate your giv- ing the committee your views. Especially I am interested in your view- point as to the present operation of the local Community Action programs. I am especially interested in knowing your reaction to the proposals now before the committee, whether you feel that OEO should be retained in the Office of Economic Opportunity as presently consti- tuted or whether you feel that the Office of Economic Opportunity should be transferred as proposed in the so-called Opportunity Cru- sade as a part of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. I understand you have made a study in this area. Will you give us your views We are delighted to welcome you. Go ahead. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN ROCKEFELLER, MEMBER OF THE WEST VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE, cHARLESTON, W. VA. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Thank you, sir. If I may I would like to impose a severe limitation on myself. I have not been a statewide worker, poverty worker, and I have not been involved statewide in the poverty program. 2565 PAGENO="0106" 2566 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 My work has been absolutely limited to one small rural community. Whereas I think I can give you views on the OEO as a large part- Chairman PERKINS. You do have poverty in that community there? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir, we do. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. RooKE~r~ER. If I may, I want to give an orientation of some of the conditions in this sort of community and the way they respond to a Community Action program. Will that be all right? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, go ahead. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. You know very well, sir, that the people of our area have very severe problems. You know very well how they came about. The particular community worked in, I think, has suffered in the same way that many that you know have suffered. We have far from any sort of urban center. The people have a most remarkable degree of isolation. In fact one of the real problems in rural poverty which is what we know in parts of the Appalachia area, is that there is not a clearly visible alternative to poverty, to the people who are affected. In the cities I think you have a very clear situation, for example, in New York, 96th Street, you stand on 96th Street and look one way, you have the problems of Harlem; look the other way and you have the very clear alternative to Park Avenue. This creates a desire for change. Chairman PERKINS. From your analysis, give us your view as t~ whether you feel we have done enough in the area of rural poverty? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. No, sir; I don't. I can say that in the beginning. There are thousands of communities all across Appalachia very iso-. lated which are not rečeiving attention. I know in my own county there are probably 300 or 400 rural corn-. munities which suffer from isolation and poverty. Yet, I think, at the present time there are only about 18 or 19 of these communities serviced. Now this is Capitol County of West Virginia and where part of the brunt of the focus of the poverty work has been. Where I have worked frankly, sir, there still remains in the community a one-room school with 24 students, seven grades, and one teacher. I would say that approximately 70 percent of the people in the community where I work are on some form of welfare and there are probably only four or five houses out of the 60 that haYe plumbing of any sort. There is one newspaper each day that comes into that community. There are only 30 or 40 cars that pass by that community, and none of them stop. It is a community with really tremendous isolation, tre- mendous sadness, and with tremendous lack of job potential. I worked there for 2 years. I can say that after that 2 years most of the basic problems remain. I think this would lead me and many others to be discouraged but I do not think that this is the route that we can take. The one thing I have learned from working in the war on poverty, especially in a rural area where you do not have the instinct for change, in the rural poverty area you do not have a sense of what life could be like. PAGENO="0107" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2567 Generations of people have lived there, life has always been the same, they have not seen the alternatives, there is not necessarily satisfaction but there is not a real discontent. It is a sense of alternative, the sense of the better life, a sense of the route to better life that I thrnk is the only way that people can be motivated to `change. This is the fundamental problem, to my way of thinking, that the OEO has to `face in rural poverty in thi's country. The sufficient empha- sis is probably being made in `cities, not in terms of results but in terms of manpower and the ideas. The rural areas since they do not represent a threat, there will not be any riots where I have worked, there will not be any social action which is going to go and `threaten the State or the Nation. Chairman PERKINS. I will interupt your statement to say I feel you are stating all together the `facts. You and I both know there will not be any riots in the rural areas even though they are in much worse con- dition than the condition that presently exists in many of the cities of the Nation. I wholeheartedly agree with your statement that not only are we failing to make an adequate `contribution to the rural areas but in most of the rural areas we have not even touched with programs so far. Am I correct? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. It is true; that is right, Sir. It is more serious because of the fact that since ea'ch of these areas, as you know so well, is isolated from the next similar, area it is very difficult to develop, as is done in the cities, a community service area which reaches out and touches thousands and thousands. Each individual hollow which con- tains anywhere from 250 to 1,000 people, each of those is surrounded by hills, each is cut off from the next hollow. if it is to be affected by a community action program it must have its own. What `does this mean? It means in order to get results, then, it must have its own community action worker. Now you describe here an a'most impossible situation. In Appalachia you know very well, Mr. Chairman, there must be literally tens of thousands of hollows of this sort. Chairman PERKINS. I envisioned VISTA as being constituted to provide the technical assistance and knowhow to get programs started in many of these rural areas, but we have never found, except in a very few instances, enough highly-trained people to provide needed tech- nical assistance. I know that in my area of Kentucky we were fortunate to have one lady who came in and really performed such outstanding service every- body regretted to see that lady leave. But by and large we have not been able to get assistance for these rural areas except in a community of maybe 5 to 6 thousand or a county of 30 to 40 thousand. In a sr'mll rural county of 8 or 10 thousand we just have not touched the surface. I am delighted that you have so accurately described the situation in pointing up the need of why we have to have so many separate programs and services. Go ahead now and give us your views. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Many people I know feel that because of the difficulties of rural poverty that really in the long run nothing can be done. In your State and in mine there is a very sharp difference between the powerful and rich cities and these isolated areas. PAGENO="0108" 2568 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The people in the cities have not had the chance to see and be a~e.cted by this rural poverty which most of them have never seen. Chairman P~KIxs. We have stressed the city problems to such an extent, that we have failed to see the present urban problem results from a neglect of rural areas. Practically all the young people on the farm or in rural `communities are leaving `for the growing areas of the country. If we do not commence to do more of that at home these problems in the cities are going to get worse. Do you agree? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I agree very much. Very often the city people tell-they feel there can be no change in the rural people. Very frankly my experience has shown that. where there is a rela- tionship, where a. community action worker will go into a community and will be willing to spend time, in other words not just 1 year but 2 years or more, where he can work with those people, that the precUc- tion of the people from the Appalachia city' is that these so `called welfare people will not work or cannot be brought from welfare is not an accurate one. I have seen too many examples in our own community where atten- tion. where care and encouragement but most of all time spent, a com- munity action worker or some sort of VISTA or associate VISTA or community action worker must be there. There must be a man in the community who is willing to be there a. long enough time to reach these youth. It will take much longer, as you know very well, in a rural area to reach the youth. It. will take much longer to convince them that there is need for change. It will take much longer to teach them tile ways of change. It will take much longer then for them to `feel hope that really there can he a further life. In my own case, for example, tile community went to, 250 people, there had never been once, ever, in that community a meeting of any sort for any reason except in church. So the relationship was between a man talking to tile people but no response. So there was no history of organization. There was no history of tile democratic process. There. was 110 history of taking the responsibility. So the work of the rural community action worker has to start from the very beginning. For example, when we elected our officers after 6 months of my trying to prove that I was there to help them, not to hinder them- Chairman PERKINS. I want to ask you a question along that line. The rural people that you have observed and worked with are very similar to the rural people that I represent. You have observed these people who resent some outside worker coming in and trying to make a. Buffalo, N.Y., out of the Cabin Creek River, in there or tile Kanawaha River in West Virginia. But they will listen to any constructive ideas and will cooperate with any in- dividual who is there for a good purpose and interested in improving their standard of living and willing to work with them on ways and means to bring it about. Have you observed that and have you convinced tile workers in your area who are. there in a good faith effort, have you experienced tile utmost cooperation from those people? PAGENO="0109" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2569 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. I can answer yes to the first and in- creasingly yes to the second. Being a Community Action worker does not make you necessarily popular. Anybody who goes into a community with the idea of encouraging change which involves a very basic moral decision in the first place, whether I have that right to go into a community and suggest that things could be better. I think the answer to the moral question is a simple one, Yes, you do because then where there are children who do not brush teeth; children who are not inoculated; there has to be a better life. But you are not necessarily popular. For example, one of the prob- leins with a poor community is that there is never such a thing as a totally poor community. There is always what I would call a middle class and that are five or six individuals again in that hollow who have jobs or who come out and commute to a city. Now those people instinctively take leadership because they feel they have the education, they have the articulation. They will always take leadership which shoves your poor into a completely differential and nonleadership role. I found when I went there I had to go through a deliberate process of personal alienation of the job holding people in order that because of their dislike of me they would stay away from the community meet- ings thus giving the maximum poor who tended not to speak at all an opportunity, and even that opportunity when given took a very, very long time. But a Community Action worker cannot judge his success by either his popularity or total cooperation but all of those elements of the community which want change and are willing to seek it on the terms of the poor who are trying to `be reached will eventually cooperate. They will hestitate at first because they have never put their head on a leadership chopping block before and they are scared to do it. But with time, with the friendship that will encourage them they will give you total cooperation. As a matter of fact, I think some of the very firmest friends I have in West Virginia and anywhere in my life are from this hollow because we have been through it together, they have gone to take these risks, suffering the humiliation of standing up in front of a meeting and suddenly discovering they could not articulate, or my suggesting that is something that was wrong and my humiliation, that the bond of trying and suggesting and failing is an enormously strong on which develops a cooperation you speak of. But it does take time. Chairman PERKINS. Now, in rural areas that you are serving, will you tell the committee in your own words according to priority the greatest needs of your area~ where you feel we can do something about it in connection with this legislation I Mr. ROCKEFELLER. There are two things that are going to make a difference, primarily, from my thinking. First, I put a very heavy emphasis on Operation Headstart. You know very well, sir, the dis- advantages that a rural disadvantaged child in a consolidated school system, the child when he arrives at the urban school after having `been through a one-room school or having been through a slow early educa- tional period, has disadvantages which are sometimes so severe that he can never overcome them. PAGENO="0110" 2570 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 For example the matter of pride. There is one boy in a community I know who dropped out of school because of the sheer reason be. had only one pair of pants and the more middle class urban children teased him. That is a perfectly dreadful reason for dropping out of school, but it does not make any difference, this was the real one for that boy. If that boy through a Headstart program at a young age can be taught how to see and get along with other children, the education that he will be able to absorb I thiiik can be enormously increased. I would say that getting the children at that young age when they are so totally scared, we did not have a*n Operation Headstart program in part of our county, in one county on one side of the river in our county. In our program we started one of our own. The road com- mission blamed it on the board of education, the board of education again blamed it on the road commission. In other words we did not get an Operation Headstart program. On the self-help program the people started their own. We found, for example, a 5-year-old girl when she came to school- Chairman PERKINs. In other words, you had considerable parental involvement, in your Headstart.? Mr. Rocxr~TLLER. Tremendously. And the mothers themselves volunteered to help. We found if a 5-year-old girl came to school she often came holding the leg of her 10-year-old sister because she had never been with other children before. She might spend a first 2 weeks holding on the leg of her sister beacuse she was so scared. If we don't have a chance to break her of that early, when she goes to a consolidated, more urban school she is not going to be able to hear any of her class much less absorb because she will be so afraid. So I again say, as I guess most of the people do, an effective Opera- tion Headstart program, call it what you will, at an early age is of a priority nature as far as my experience is concerned. Chairman PrnKIxs. You, with your educational background, are quite aware that it would be impossible to have all of the parental involvement if Headstart was transferred under the so-called Op- portunity Crusade to HEW. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Sir, I am nt an expert on the bills, but I cer- tainly would question whether an Operation Headstart could have come from HEW, had it not had special emphasis. Chairman PERKINS. You feel, in other words, there has been so much come out of this demonstration on Community Action Headstart, that we should continue it the way it is now operated? Mr. RocErEI-J~~ER. Yes, sir. As a matter of fact, I strongly believe that where you have a board of education and, say, Headstart, there will be a regional conflict but that conflict will resolve itself into better programs. I personally would be very much against having Operation Headstart cut off or absorbed into another entity, because I t.hink part of its special nature and success- Chairman PERKINS. You think part of the great gains you are now receiving would be lost if it is ever transferred; we ought to at least let it get through a demonstration period and get off the ground, so that we can see some of the real conditions? PAGENO="0111" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2571 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think timing is the key there. I don't think that it is at this point ready to be `absorbed. I think it could be in some years, after this demonstration program has proved something. I would be against that now. Chairman PERKINS. Now concerning the Community Action pro- gram, Opportunity Crusade proposes to transfer that from the Office of Economic Opportunity to HEW. Do you envision that much delay and hamstringing of Community Action programs would take place if that occurred? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am hesitant to range beyond my experience, sir, in talking in a general way like that. I do know that a community action program has its force and its appeal to the sort of people it attracts on the basis of the focus that it has. I think you can make this argument-I worked for 2 years for the Peace Corps. I would wonder very definitely whether I had been attracted to the Peace Corps or whether there would have been a Peace Corps, for example, if it had been up to AID or the State Department to suggest it. Chairman PERKINS. I wonder very much if there would have been a community action program if it had been left up to various traditional departments. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I cannot answer that, but I can say the way it did evolve attracted me. Chairman PERKINS. You are quite aware of the fact that we are zeroing in on the areas that have never received consideration before? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I must say, Mr. Chairman, that I feel very strongly about the value of an entity, whether it is Community Action program, or whether it is in OEO. I am just 30, and I know that the way you attract young people who are idealistic and who want to be in public service and who are also realistic, is to set a focus, is to make the war on poverty, or whatever it should be called, some- thing which stands out very clearly. It is to this, for example, that the Vista volunteers want to go. They see it as a specific organization trying to do something specifically about a problem. They can identify with that problem and with that organization. I myself, for example, could never have wanted to join HEW because, you know, it does not work that way. The war on poverty has a specific focus, it is something which attracts the sort of people that I think will be necessary to solve this type of problem, in the numbers that are necessary to solve the problem. Chairman PERKINS. Have you observed the Job Corps in that area? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. Not closely, but I have observed it. Chairman PERKINS. What is your observation about the women's Job Corps in the area? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am impressed. The newspapers really are-. some girl will throw a small pill bottle out of the window, and sud- denly it becomes a whiskey bottle and then there is a tremendous scare. What I liked in the Job Corps that I saw, there is something I wish would take place all over West Virginia. We are taking young people with minimum education, high school dropouts, with problems, rural background, urban background. They are giving these people computer training. They are taking, for example, a 17- or 18-year-old girl with these problems and they give her 6, 7, 8 months of training. PAGENO="0112" 2572 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS. OF 1967 Within that period, at the end of that period, this girl is qualified to go out and seek work which will pay her $5,000 to $6,000 a year. What I do not like in training programs is where you take, say, a rural boy and you teach him how to be just a garage mechanic. Chairman PERKINS. In most of these that you observed, the type of young girl in this particular Job Corps has been a dropout and has very little basic education, and the training that the youngster is receiving is building them up and giving them ideas so that they can be on their own sometime in the future and get by in the world ? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. In order to do that, you have to have a job which you hold with `pride. Chairman PERKINS. Describe the type of traiiiing that the young- sters are receiving ill that Job Corps. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I know it has been suggested that girls should be mixed; in other words, advantaged girls, disadvantaged girls. I think it is very important, especially for a rural girl, that when she is going through this training program she be with girls of similar problems, not necessarily the same background, not necessarily all urban or rural, but girls with the same sorts of problems, or boys, be together. If you take a. rural girl and put. her in with a middle-class girl in a group situation, the rural girl will not open her mouth and will not respond to training, Mr. Chairman, because the rural girl and boy is peculiarly conditioned that whenever there is a more urbanized or better off person with them, they completely fold. Chairman PERKINS. At any rate, we are dealing with a problem child here. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. That is right.. A problem child becomes more of a problem child, in my experience, when she is put in close quarters with an advantaged girl that she cannot feel in communion with. Now the training that goes on in the Job Corps is a. very simple thing, like how to get along with people. Many of the people in my area, Mr. Chairman, have never used a telephone before. I have been with a. boy who had never been in an elevator before. Chairman PERKINS. How do you view the Opportunity Crusade proposal to cut. back, over a period of 3 to 4 years, to phase out the Job Corps? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am not sufficiently acquainted with the bill, Mr. Chairman, to know what is going to be substituted. Chairman PERKINS. Just assume the facts I am stating are true. Assuming that. there is a proposal pending to phase out the Job Corps in 3 or 4 years and cut. back the funds, do you feel that would be a mistake, or should we expand the Job Corps? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Of course, I feel it would be a very serious mis- take in that I do not know another way to reach these young people and give them training for jobs. To cut back-I can't understand what the substitute could be. Already we are not reaching enough with the Job Corps that we have.. There are hundreds of thousands more. In my own community, out. of, let us say, 25 boys of that age level there were only four that could get. into the Job Corps. This leaves me with 21. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you have a. backlog of kids that. cannot even get in the Job Corps down your way? PAGENO="0113" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 257~ Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. In the meantime, they stay in the hollow, without work, on welfare, with no sense of hope. Mr. ERLENBORN. Supposing there was a. proposition not to phase out the Job Corps, but to make it available to more disadvantaged youths under a different type of program that might involve the private sector as well as the public funds, how would you react to that sort of prob- lem? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think that is one of the most exciting things about the Job Corps. Our Job Corps in Charleston is run by industry, by Packard Bell of California. Wherever you get industry running a job corps, I think you have a pretty well run job corps. This is exactly what we have now in Charleston. So I thoroughly approve of Government working with industry in this type of program. What we have down there, I think, is a good example of it. Packard-Bell is training girls to do the sort of things that Packard-Bell knows it needs to get done. They can do it better than a Government or a university. Mr. ERLENBORN. I would like to inquire of the witness, I noticed your comment earlier about the mixture of the disadvantaged with the ad- vantaged, either boys or girls, with different problems and different backgrounds. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. Mr. ERLENBORN. Your reaction was that those who were disadvan- taged would sort of close up. You said you should not mix those who have different problems and different backgrounds. Did I understand you correctly? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir; that is what I said. Mr. ERLENBORN. I wondered, with this feeling about the Job Corps, how you react to the educational proposals now that you say you can't get a good education unless you put the disadvantaged in with the advantaged. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. This is correct, if you start at an age where it is going to be meaningful. What we are dealing with here is 16-, 17-, 18-, 19-year-old boys and girls who have already missed their education. With them, it is a different matter. That part has already been dropped. I am 100 percent for school consolidation, where you take `a rural child with severe disadvantage and bring him together with a middle- class child with a good deal of sophistication. But I want. to see it happen where it should be happening, and that is back from the elementary school life. The problem is that you can really see a physical change in a 1(3- or 17-year-old boy. When he gets to 18 he can legally drop out of school, he does. He tries to get a job, he can't. He tries to find something to do, he can't. Literally, a physical change will come over him. There is a depression. The clothes he begins to wear may revert suddenly to archaictype coalmining clothes to sort of seek out. new identity. The boy feels he is losing grip. Since he is losing grip, he had better not pretend he. can do something, because he knows he can't in this process. It builds on itself. Within 2 or 3 years, you literally have a different physical boy or girl before you. Past 16, if you don't get to them then, it is going to be very, very hard. I have seen this happen in my own community time and time again. I am for the mixing, but it `has to take place when it can do some good. 80-084-67-pt. 4-S PAGENO="0114" 2574 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ERLENBORN. In your opinion, even in the school system would it be good to start, let us say, at the junior or senior level in high school? If that change is to be made., should it be made gradually, starting with the lower grades? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. The sooner, the better. I am for school consolida- tion, because it forces this joining, whereas now it is on a mutually exclusive basis too much. Mr. ERLENBORN. Thank you for yielding. Chairman PERKINS. Congressman Erlenborn has witnessed some of the similar schools that we have in Kentucky. I know you have observed that the school systems cannot handle these youngsters for several reasons. Of course, we need more adequate funding and better school facilities. I hope to see that day come about. It will take millions of dollars. I think you will agree with me that in our neck of the woods and in several areas of the country that the schools are just not presently set up to handle this problem child, the type of youngster that we are talking about. From the experience that we are ha.ving in the Job Corps and the know-how that we are applying, that period lies ahead and it would not do to weaken the Job Corps at this time. Would you agree with that, sir? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. I would never make the statement that, I am sure none here would, that the Job Corps is without its problems, and it will continue to have its problems. I believe very, very funda- mentally that the boys and girls that I have been working with, there is no other way for them to receive training and to receive the sort of social orientation, unless it comes through something like the Job Corps. I im personally satisfied and highly satisfied with what the Job Corps is doing in West Virginia, in Charleston. I am not acquainted with it widely. From my experience, I think it does an excellent job. Chairman PERKINS. All those vocational schools have a long waiting list. Because of the great demand on the vocational schools, they are presently taking the cream of the crop. Only recently they commenced to take in some of the hard core adults. Is that your experience in the area? Until the Job Corps came along, these youngsters were just not being salvaged. Is that correct? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. I would not say that now the Job Corps is here the `problem is solved. As I said, there is a tremendous amount. Chairman PERKINS. The value of the know-how that they are receiving from the Job Corps operation will be fed into the school sys- tems, vocational educational school systems, and everybody is going to benefit. Industry is going to benefit. Do you agree with that? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir; I would. Let me put it this way. Indus- try in West Virginia, when it looks to teclmical skills, has to too often look outside the State. They have to hire their `technically able people from other places. Yet back through the `hills of these thousands of communities where there are able, good young people who could be trained. And it bothers me enormously, a West Virginian, to see industry having to go outside the State, when there remains this enormous pool of people who are available. The bringing together of the jobs which are available and the people who are available to be trained for tho9e jobs, to IIIG, i~ ft pftramount problem for that State. PAGENO="0115" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2575 Chairman PERKINS. You and I both know that there has been much progress and the cost of the Job Corps has come down tremendously in the last year, and the Office of Economic Opportunity has benefitted from the brief experience of two years operation. Do you see tremen- dous improvement in the operation of the Job Corps in the past years? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Sir, I cannot say that I Imow the history of the development of the Job Corps well enough to talk about its cost, its relative cost. Chairman PERKINS. If I understood you correctly, you believe that the Office of Economic Opportunity should remain as presently con- stituted, that it will be more effective in reaching the poor that we are trying to reach and should not be transferred. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. From the view of one Community Action worker in a rural community in West Virginia, yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any other suggestions that you would care to give the committee? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, I certainly do. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I want to make this point very strongly. First of all, that the rural poor of Appalachia will not, and cannot, be reached through programs which do not send workers out into those communities. My salary for 2 years was $6,400. There was not another nickel of Federal, State money or county money spent in that com- munity in 2 years. Not one nickel except $6,450. But that $6,450 which paid my salary was essential for any sort of change to take place in that community. I-lad there not been that change, we would be paying an economic price I think. Chairman PERKINS. How are we going to reach t.he rural poor that we are not now reaching? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Sir, this is a problem that I leave to wiser heads. All I know is that it takes a worker to reach people. That means a lot of people who are prepared to spend a lot of time. Rural change is enormously slow. It is at times enormously discouraging. At times you are convinced it can never happen, and yet it continues to happen. These people can be reached, they are being reached, and they can learn to solve their problems. I am convinced of that after my own experience. Mrs. GREEN (presiding). Have you completed your statement? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes. Actually, I don't think I have made a state- ment. I was just responding to questions. Mrs. GREEN. Congressman Goodell, do you have any questions? Mr. GOODELL. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you for your statement, Mr. Rockefeller. I welcome you to our committee. Let me say at the outset that the questions Mr. Perkins asked you about the Job Corps were in the hands of a master in terms of questioning. "Do you want to weaken the Job Corps ~" "Would you want to dismantle the Job Corps?" "Would you want to cut it back at this point?" Those are all very loaded questions. Nobody proposes that we weaken the concept of residential training of a specialized nature for those who cannot respond to education and training in their en- vironment. There are many of us, however, who are just a little disap- pointed with some of the aspects of the Job Corps and would like to im- prove it. When only one out of ten of the youngsters gets a job which the Job Corps helped him get, when one third drop out in the first 3 PAGENO="0116" 2576 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 months, another third in the. next 3 months, and only a~ third go over 6 months, and the evidence is that if you stay less than 6 months you are worse off than you were before in terms of the number who have jobs or are in school- when only 50 percent of those who do stay more than 6 months have jobs, all these things make us wonder if there are not ways that we can improve this operation. I say tha.t with great sincerity and with respect for your sincerity, that there are a great many needs here that must be met. I have been advocating this kind of approach since 1961. That does not mean I think that the Job Corps, as it is presently constituted, is the best answer that we can find. We are concerned about the cost.s. There is some indication by a new accounting system that we might cut costs down t.o $6,500 or $6,900 per year per enrollee. The latest studies, however, which went into this and looked into the accounting found that it now costs between $12,000 and $13,000 in most urban camps per enrollee per year. This compares to the community training centers which run any- where from a third to half of that cost. This means you can take in two or three more enrollees than the Job Corps can take for the same cost. We are in agreement on private corporations. I do not agree with your generalization t.hat. where. private corporat.ions have been involved they have done a good job. There are some examples where. they have difficulty with the private corporation. Nevertheless, they have done a better job than the others. We are all in favor of letting these people know t.ha.t we care and are trying to help them. Let me ask you a. couple of questions along these lines. I am not. going to load the questions and ask you to give a final conclusion with- out having heard all the testimony as to who should administer the Job Corps or whet.her you a.re for keeping Job Corps stagnant. and in a st.atus quo, or want to improve it a.t t.his point.. Basically let. me ask you, what is your view of the transporting of youngsters, particularly from Applachia where you have your greatest experience, to Job Corps camps some distance a.way? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think it can make a very good difference for this reason. I know of a lot of men who are good workers who have grown up in hollows of West. Virginia. They have had educational disadvantages. Maybe the don't have sufficient qualifications to get good jobs, but in any case they go to Cleveland or they go t.o Cincinnati, because to West Virginia this is a job Mecca. They get a job which pays $2.85 an hour. it is a good job. All of a sudden, three months later, there they are l)ack in West Virginia for the only reason that they were homesick. Now this is a very poor reason ~o give up a iob that pays that well. It is an even poorer reason for going back to a welfare roll. The point. is. that. it is a. peculiar nature, I am convinced, of people from the. rural areas of Appalachia that since life is so tentative, so insecure for them, that the one thing they have absolutely and can always come. back to is the hills. There is a degree of contact or loyalty between a West Virginian, I sa, audi the hills of West Virginia. which to me is com- pletely extraordinary and remarkable. It means that. wherever there is the. alternative, and let us say the boy comes from West Virginia. and he goes to a Job Corps just. 21) or 30 miles away, just acros.~ the border, he. may very well at the first sign of discouragement come back. i have several boys in my own community who started out in the PAGENO="0117" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2577 Job Corps who came back. They were near. The reason was not that they were unhappy, but in one case the boy got into a fistfight. He suddenly felt his own total social disorientation. He didn't know the urban ways. He didn't know the sophistication that you need. He felt an insecurity and the instinct, which is so deep, is to come back, come back to the hills. Therefore, I think there is something to be said- I am not sure it is the total picture, but there is something to be said for taking a youngster from that specific area and sending him rather far away. It is a lot more expensive. If he runs away, it will be a lot bigger problem because he may not. get hack. But I think there can be a case made for it. Mr. 000DELL. My biggest concern is not expense. But the evidence we have is that 85 percent. of the Job Corps youngsters go back to their original area when they finish. The evidence also is that among the highest dropouts in the Job Corps enrollees today are the Appa- lachian white youngster. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, sir. Mr. GOODELL. It would appear that somehow we are failing with them in this respect to a large degree now, to a larger degree than we are with some of the others. It is also a matter of great concern to many of us that when you send youngsters out of the community to `which they are going to return-when you send them `a large distance away-the evidence is that the problem of carrying through the continuum, after graduation to placement is infinitely greater. They graduate from a Job Corps camp in Montana to go back to Appalachia. Now who is going to help them? The way we originally did it, was totally inadequate. They were in effect dropped. They were told to go t.o the local employment office. We didn't have the capability of giving them the specialized help they needed. Many of them were frustrated and discouraged. The centers notified the regional OEO that these youngsters were going back to Appalachia, to please help them. Now they are notifying and trying to get some private volunteer groups to help place them. Now they are notifying Community Action boards to try to help them in one way or another. But there is this tremendous gap between termination or gradu- ation, `and placement which has doubtless accounted for a great deal of the failure which has been occurring in terms of getting these. young- sters jobs. It is quite conceivable that they would have to go further away than 20 or 30 miles. Perhaps there could be a happy compromise, if they went far enough away that the home community would not be readily accessible and yet would be close enough so there could be some ~tie-m and placement when they get out. You interested me very much when you talked about the. dynamics of involving people, particularly people who are isolated. If I under- stood you correctly, you were talking about. the dynamics of group meetings at which there were some assertive people who took over and those from whom you really should hear and wanted to hear from would sit back quietly and not come forward; is that correct? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. That is correct. Mr. GOODELL. You said that rather than be popular at times it was incumbent on you to alienate the assertive in order to discourage them from coming to the meeting and dominating it, and to get the others to come to the meeting and come out of their shell and speak up. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes. PAGENO="0118" 2578 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. GOODELL. Have you been active in organizing meetrngs to get the investment of these people in the rural areas of Appalachia in selecting representatives? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. When you talk about these assertive people I am talking about people in that community. Mr. GOODELL. I understand. I will give you an example. Your ob- servations are in accord with my own based on my travel in the Waynesville area of Western North Carolina and some other areas. Some of the community action workers found they could not get true representatives of those people without having at least two or three meetin°s. The ~rst meeting was completely dominated by some who were very vocal and assertive. Subsequently at the second or third meeting they could begin to induce the others to speak up. The result was, as he put it in one case, that inevitably the person who was elected the representative in the first meeting was completely set aside at the second or third meeting and they elected somebody else. That is just a parallel example of what I think you were. talking about. Would you comment further on that? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. If it can happen in two or three meetings that is extraordinary. It took me close to a year. Then you see here what happens is when I went into the community I hoped to make it very clear why I was there, to help people with particular problems. Your middle class takes over automatically. Then there is a period of alieiiation, which is usually personal. They withdraw. Then in the meantime the action is going on. In other words, the community meetings are being held, progress is being made, some of the others are speaking up. What has happened is that for the most part that middle class has come back into the community organization on the terms of the com- munity action which is then oriented towards the people you are really trying to reach. Now some will not come back in. Either their personal dislike of me is so intense that they won't but usually they will come back in on the terms that you want them to. Mr. GOODELL. I take it that you believe very much that this is per- haps, the critical element for success is involving them in their own decision-making. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I certainly do. Mr. GOODELL. In this respect, are you aware of the way the present poverty law is written, in respect to the community action phase of ear- marking funds for different types of programs? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I stressed then at the beginning of this that I am not thoroughly acquainted with the broad OEO picture or the alter- natives presented. I am speaking from a very small one community rural point of view. Generally I understand the position about the number of poor who should be represented on the board. I understand it very well. Mr. GOODELL. Actually at this stage there is very little difference in the alternatives that involve the poor. This was put in as the Quie amendment last year requiring at least one-third of the poor to be rep- resented on the board, but that would not be. changed by any of the PAGENO="0119" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2579 proposals. Actually it would be expanded somewhat, in tha.t area groups would have to be primarily represented under the proposal which Mr. Quie and I have made. I won't question you further on them except to say that there is a problem when representatives get together, have their discussions, thinking they are there to make meaningful. decisions, decide what they want to spend the money on and then find there is no money in that particular category because none has been earmarked, or that all the money earmarked for that particular category is used up. There might not be an interest in AppaJachia in a narcotics re- habilitation program or even a Legal Service program or some other phase of community action. They have perhaps great interest in the health services program or the basic education program, or something of this nature. They find the ability to set priorities taken away from them. This has happened very frequently. Let me ask YOU to comment on one phase of the overall aspect of the development in Appalachia. Recently the Associated Press did a study in which they indicated that a total of $6'/2 billion had been spent in Appalachia in 373 Appalachian coimties in the past 2 years. The head of the Council for Appalachia Development was recently quoted as saying this is not a development program at all. They want to depopulate the region. They want the people to get out so that the great absentee corps can buy in without interference. Do you have any comment on this? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Well, I am not in favor of depopulation. This has been the trend a.nd Wrest Virginia is one of the very few States that has been steadily losing population. There are a number of rea- sons for this. Our industrial basis, too, is too narrow. The number of jobs available are not readily gettabie by the people in West Virginia. I don't think that depopulation should be or as far as I have seen, an objective or necessarily a result. I maintain any boy from the community where I work if he is trained to do a job he will prefer to do it if he can get it in West Virginia and if not he will go elsewhere and will be happy. I think the jobs have to be the basis of that and that the boy will go or the man will go where the job is. So long as the jobs are elsewhere that is exactly where he will go or he will remain in default on wel- fare in his own state. I do not think that you can-for example, the Appalachia Regional Commission is trying to develop natural growth areas in West Vir- ginia. I think this is an excellent approach to this in that then it identifies what sort of areas have an economic future based on topo- graphy, resources, and other things and then sets about to try to deveiop those areas. This I think is what is going to become-to make people stay in West Virginia and help them find jobs in West Virginia. I don't know whether I have answered you clearly but I don't really see depopula- tion as a specific course here. I think it has happened but I think there are very clear reasons for it. . Mr. GOODELL. Of course I presume that nobody will ever state that their objective is to just move people out of an area. I agree with you PAGENO="0120" 2580 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNIT~ ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 that. in some areas of Appalachia, at least. this has been the net. effect. There are other reasons for that. We have a general trend of migra- tion from the rural areas to urban areas and obviously those factors apply to the Appalachia area as well as to other areas of the country. I am interested in your comment about. the so-called separation of individuals who have different problems. You pointed out that in rural Appalachia a youngster 17 or 18 years old-I think you used the~ ex- ample of girls-should not. be mixed t.oo quickly with those who have different backgrounds and more advanced backgrounds, is that right? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. It depends on how you define backgrounds. What I am saying is in a. particular case of rural disadvantaged in the area where I am, which is the only qualified contribution I can make, if you take a rural disadvantaged, advanced teenage. boy or girl and in the expectation of having social sophistication a.nd abilities rub off on them *t.hrough contact with girls who have already acquired that sophistica- tion and orientation, I do not think that the effect on the disadvan- aged girl will be what we again want.. I think rather it will be to drive her further in a corner through a sense of-a constantly reinforced sense of her own ina.dequacy. It is a very special problem I think to have rural disadvantaged children. They are constantly awaiting for their sense of inadequacy again to be fulfilled. Anything which hints in that direct.ion drives them further back. I think in principle any time you can mix different orientations that is much better if the result will be good. Mr. GOODELL. What you are arguing for, in effect, is certainly a. inodi- fled track system in the Job Corps. The evidence thus far would confirm your comment that we are having particular difficulty in keeping the female Appalachian Job Corps enrollees in the Job Corps. This is apparently aggravated by the fact that in a Job Corps camp, you tend to get establishment, of what t.he sociologists call the sub- culture. This in itself alienates the rural Job Corps enrollee. This is why many of us feel that at the earliest opportunity we must move away from centers and camps t.hat are collections of only those people classified by society as "rejects." There should be a. com- munity approach to this, using comiaiuiiity facilities, enlisting all corn- mi.rnity agencies-business, labor, charitable-in this effort, and there should be facilities that combine technical institutes for fairly high skills and training, with specialized training for the Job Corps type of youngster. I say this only to t.ry to clear the picture a bit on what may have been conveyed to you by our chairman with his description of the alternatives that are available. This is the direction that many of us on this comn'ntt*ee want to take and we are not satisfied t.o stand still with the Job Corps concept. as it is at the moment. If you have any further commeiTit on anything I have said, or ex- l)ansion on what you have said earlier, I will be glad to have you do it now. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. No, sir. Mr. GOODELL. Thank you. Mrs. GREEN. Congressman Meeds. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you, Madam Chairman. First of all let. me express my gratitude and I am sure the gratitude of all members of the committee for your appearance here and corn- municate to you my agreement and good feeling that. a person of your PAGENO="0121" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2581 stature has come here, and to compliment you on your obvious com- munication and articulate presentation on the problem of the world poor. It is a real privilege to get someone like you to come here and artic- ulate as you have on the `problems. I think this is one of the bigger problems we in Congress have to get witnesses who have really been on the firing lines as obviously you have. So my congratulations to you on your dedication and secondly on your testimony. I would like to just go into very briefly the type of programs that you are operating, the type of community action you are doing. What are some of the projects you are carrying out under your program? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. From the OEO point of view, the only program is me, so to speak. In other words, that represents a person in this particular locale, this hollow. They sat down about 6 months ago and figured out everything they had done to help their community the last 2 years. They came up with a list of 71 things. The first thing they started off with was obviously recreation because recreation is one where you can get parents who are not accustomed to dealing together `to deal together. So they have something like three baseball teams. They have their own library now. They have their own operation headstart which is their own and nobody elses', according to their own interpretation of their needs. There was a chance to have Federal help in this program and they turned it down because they felt under their own ideas, their own work, they could do it better. They have a music program, they have a very extensive community center area where `there are all kinds of activities. They built the building themselves. They made a recreation area, for example, with their swings. They had not been able to afford to buy a swing or a seesaw. So they will go out and get individual pieces of pipe and wait until there is a suffi- cient accumulation in order to solder them together and then they will get a board or a piece of rubber to put over the board to sit on and gradually get their chains. I think our swings took four or five months to accumulate, much less build. But it is all their own work. Nothing given. Mrs. GREEN. How does this impetus to do these things which they obviously have not been doing come about? Do you go into these meetings which you described earlier and stir people up? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Let me give an example of one boy. Let us call him Henry, who, when this work started, was from a welfare family with very severe problems. He was a school dropout and one reason he was a school dropout was that at that time there was not a bus to take him to school and the school was 30 miles away. In any case he was a dropout and depressed and had more or less given up. He was 17, which is in that swing stage. We began to work with this boy. In the first place before I even talked personally about change or program I spent 6 months there every day, all day, just being there, becoming an object which they became accustomed to, who was not only there before elections but after elections, and who ob- viously did not take anything away from them and who, in fact, was PAGENO="0122" 12582 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 interestech playing football, talking, walking, eating with them, everything. I came to this boy first of all as a friend, not a case. Nobody out there has ever been a case, a. problem to me. They have first of all been individuals and friends. Gradually through knowing this boy, through asking him questions about what he had done in school, I began to awaken a sense in him a little bit. He needed help in tutoring. It is fairly easy to get. You get friends from Charleston who will come out and help. Other older boys there will help. He~ began to have a sense he could do something. The short part of the story is that he want back to school and he is now in college in West Virginia. Now the boy is the same, the parents are the same, poverty is the same, the clothes are the same but he ha.d motivation. There was nothing other than self concept. Mrs. GREEN. This is precisely what I am trying to get at, the struc- turing of programs that ought to go on within these communities. From what you have said this morning, it appears to me that this is primarily a people structuring and a dedicated people structuring from the initial stages where the first basic thing that has to he established is rather important, a~ communication and an understanding of those specific problems. Now my question is, ca~n this best be done in this type of operatioi~ with the community a.ction program or are VISTA volunteers the answer to this? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think they both are. They are both in some ways the same thing. The community action work-I thought I could do the job in a year when I first went there. At the end of a year we only had had two or three meetings. Two years has not even done the job. This community still is an impoverished community. There are still men, the majority of the men, who need jobs. It is nice to have a community center and have a prettier com- munity but t.he point is, what are the jobs available. You cannot change, in my interpretation, you caimot get motivation in these young people in this rural condition unless you make the personal contact. You can talk about centers and programs all you want but unless somebody is there to gain the confidence of that boy, not because that boy was a case or because his parents were on welfare but somebody who is there to help that boy because he believed in the boy, you are not going to get a change. A program will not change the person uiiless the person has reason to believe in the person describing the program to him or offering the program. These people are in a position to reject what is coming from the outside. it is a very long and very deep condition. Mrs. GREEN. That leads me to another point. I don't think there is any responsible disagreement. on this that the rural programs, pro- grams serving the rural poor, have been slower in getting off the ground and actually accomplishing things than some of the urban programs. I also think there are some very good reasons for this, and it seems to me that one of them is that the rural poor, because of the lack of structuring, are slower in responding to these programs, in other words, slower in carrying out programs that are available. PAGENO="0123" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2583 Could this perhaps be attacked better from the standpoint which you have taken, of personalities going in and beginning this foment that ultimately will, I hope, call for programing and structuring. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. To my way of thinking the person has to begin but the boy will not be satisfied by a person, there does have to be a program that follows up the person. Mrs. GREEN. There has to be something that is offered. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes. I can offer the boy a reason to be motivated but there is only really a job or specific opportunity to really get him going. I am just temporary. Mrs. GREEN. Would this indicate to you, and I am just asking you, that perhaps this is a. two-stage procedure, at least a two-stage proce- dure. People go in and strike up the community and again begin the motivation, and then programs that con'ie in following this, more corn- rnunity action type programs after the VISTA volunteer type pro- gram, would ta.ke advantage of the rapport which has been established. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Or provide continuity. Yes. A VISTA volunteer will stay a year. Somebody may supplant him but he will stay a year. There has to be more time than that. There has to be a con- tinuity as you suggest. Mrs. GREEN. One of the things we have noticed and perhaps insisted on throughout all of these hearings, in our consideration of this bill for a number of years, has been some place to go. When I speak of some place to go I mean offering some jobs. If you get a person working it certainly carries out the concept of belief in himself and of getting some self prestige. What kind of pro- gram do you have for following up with jobs? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. This is where your community, in my case Charleston, the capital, has `to become a part of this. We have a job training program as part of our community action program, but this is where involvement of the community becomes essential. To me, what I would like to see, since I have a tremendous amount of respect in the way industry trains people, knowing exactly what it wa.nts from them, I would love to see, and this has not yet come about sufficiently, industry in West Virginia take on the job through incen- tive, one `way or another, of training people. One of them has. The MFC Corp. has taken all people that have a ninth-grade education, which is not ordinarily enough to get a job. It will train them and help them become adjusted. If you talk about people with n~t a ninth-grade education you are eliminating ahnost .90 percent of the people in my community. This is a step in the right direction. It has to be a lot more. I like the idea of having industry to train these people. They live near. They love the hills. They all-they will always be there. It is a very ideal relationship, but it has not come about yet. This can only come about through industrial participation and corn- munity participation. The private sector. Mrs. GREEN. So you would be in favor of more involvement in the on-the-j ob training type of program which would result in some part- nership between these programs and industry? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes; very much so. PAGENO="0124" 2584 ECONO~nC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs. GREEN. I was interested in your comment that there were not many riots. I agree with you; I believe that is correct. Isn't there, however, a quiet change going on? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. There is a quiet change and a very good one. What I am saying is that. it does not, rural poverty and its problems do not present the threat to, so to speak, that gaili s the attention that I think it deserves. Mrs. GREEN. Does this necessarily mean that things are not chang- lug? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Things are changing. Mrs. GREEN. How would you describe this change as opposed to riots and other overt revolutions? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. In our community there are no more school drop- outs. I think there may be one. That is a tremendous change. It is quiet one but it is tile kind that counts. Mrs. GREEN. I think that is all. Thank you very much. I note that you said you felt tile most exciting thing was the entry of private industry into the Job Corps program. Did I understand you correctly to say Packard-Bell runs the center at Charleston? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. ~1'es. ma am. Mrs. GREEN. Have you ever had a chance to study it closely? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. No. I have not. Mrs. GREEN. But you do think think that this is a very good program? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. At the time I have been there I have been irn- pressed with what they are doing; yes. Mrs. GREEN. I have a little concern. I have a great deal of concern about statements that are made that those who would question the present ~Job Corps want to do away with it. It seems to me that. we are insisting that the people must love God, mother, and country, and on the same basis they must love every program that is designed for the poor without examining what is in the program. The legislation says the people who will go to the Job Corps will participate in an intensive program of education, vocational training, work experience, counseling, and other activities. Then later it says that the purpose is in order to secure and hold meaningful employment and to assist them in school work and to qualify for other training programs. I have before me tile actual class schedules of girls in a center that. is also run by Packard-Bell. I s~y to you that I have not examined the schedules, but I am interested in a meaningful program. May I have your judgment. as to whether or not Packard-Bell is doing one of the most. exciting things, and whether or not those of us who examine the Job Corps a little more critically are doing harm to it? I have the class schedules before me. One girl during the. entire week has a total of 6 houis of classes. One of those 6 hours is physical education. These are taken at random. I can provide a couple hundredi more. Another girl, and I am told she has the heaviest load of any, has, during the week, a total of 121/2 hours of classes and training. r'~cl flis includes ~he li~horatory a~ well as the actual school work and the other things they are required to do. Another girl has 11 hours during t.he week and 2 hours in P.E. Another girl has 6 hours of classwork. However. she does work as an aide in child care, so her class schedule would beyond 6 hours. PAGENO="0125" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2585 Another girl has 2 hours total during the week. She works as an aide. Her classes are 2 hours, but she has 20 hours during the week as an aide. Another girl has 6 hours total for the week. This includes, I believe, driver education. Another girl has 12 hours. Another girl has 9 hours during the entire week. Another girl has 6 hours during the entire week. Another has 61/4 hours. Another one has 123/4 hours if we include the P.E. Now we have paid at this center approximately $9,000 per enrollee per year for this intensified training program that will help the indi- vidual to get a job. I say to the credit of the Job Corps, that when I called some of these things to their attention, they did move in and try to correct the-however, before I called it to their attention, they had a study team who went out for 3 days and reported it as one of the best, if not the best Job Corps Center, of the entire county. With this in mind, do ou think it would be wise for the committee to follow your advice, if I understood it-and I did not hear all of it- that the Job Corps is a tremendous program, that private enterprise is the most exciting thing that has happened and that really we should not, this committee should not, examine alternative, ways in which we might be able to provide better training for more youngsters at no larger cost and perhaps at a reduced cost. Mr. R.ocIiEFI~r~LE.R. Was this Job Corps you described the one in Charleston? Mrs. GREEN. No. I said it was not. the one in Charleston. No, I want to make it clear it is not Charleston, but it is one run by Packard Bell. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. As I said at the beginning, I feel it is wise only for me to comment on what has been my actual experience.. I have no. idea what the perspective of the figures you have given are, what lies behind them. I think it would be unwise for me to draw conclusions from that. I am very much for experimentation. One of the things that. I felt worked most for me in my work in my community was my lack of preconceive.d ideas. I walked in there really open. My whole existence there was one experiment after another. I learned much more than I ever taught or suggested. I am very much for experimentation in the contribut.ion of any ideas in job training. I would never take the position that what is must continue always to be. Wha..t I do think is possibly-there may be a good deal of experi- mentation going on, but I cannot draw conclusions from what. you have told me. Mrs. GREEN. By the same token, neither could the conclusion be drawn that the Job Corps is the best way and that we must not in any way criticize it or take a good look a.t it and perhaps suggest alternative proposals at the same time that we do a better job? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think all and every alternative suggestion is good. I think the question is not. whether the Job Corps is a solid status thing, whether it never changes. The question is whether the changes take place in the framework of the Job Corps or whether there is quite an other framework. There again I suggest strongly I am not qualified to give testimony ~be~ause my experience has only been briefly with one Job Corps. PAGENO="0126" 2586 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs~ GREEN. I am glad to have that clarification. I came in at the time the chairman was questioning you. I had thought that you were saying that this must not be changed and that it must go on. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think the idea behind the Job Corps and that is training is essentiaL I am satisfield by the vehicle of the Charleston Job Corps. That is the only one i know. I did say that I felt. that one is doing a good job. But that is the entire range of my statement. Mrs. GREEN. Thank you. Mr. GOODELL. Will the gentlelady yield? Mrs. GREEN. Yes. Mr. GOODELL. In that comiection, you have indicated you have a. backlog of applicants for the Job Corps? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. My reading says that there a~e thousands and thousands all across the country. Mr. GOODELL. Yes, that is wonderful reading, but the testimony and the facts that we have are that they have been sending out special recruitment teams to get enough to come, to the Job Corps. I am inter- ested in your personal experience. You said something to the effect that only two of 23 or 24 in a group were able to get into the Job Corps; is that correct? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. We have some tha1~ went. to the Job Corps who had to return because there was this problem of insecurity. Mr. GOODELL. When did that happen? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. That was about a year and a half ago. Mr. GOODELL. I am not referring to the ones who ftropped out. be- cause of problems of insecurity. Do you have a group there which has been making application to the Job Corps and has not been able to get in? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. No, because the route we have been taking there, I have been trying to work with some of the boys to get them into jobs in the Charleston area. In other words, rather than working through the Job Corps, because I knew the pressure there. I thought I knew the pressure. I have been working more directly with industry. We have been able to get some of them jobs, but not all of them by a long shot. Mr. GOODELL. I was not speaking about the on-going program. I was speaking about those who were interested in getting into the Job Corps. Am I correct in my understanding, that of the group that you were referring to, only two of 20 were able to get into the Job Corps? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. That's right. That was a condition a year and a half ago. As far as I know, there are no more applicants from that area to the Job Corps, but there are a lot of unemployed people. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Erlenborn? Mr. ERLENBORN. I am interested in your comment about the involve- ment of private enterprise. Some of us feel that the present structure in the Neighborhood Youth Corps which allows Youth Corps en- rollees to work only in public works projects is somewhat restrictive. What would you think about expanding this to ntake it possible for' those in the Neighborhood Youth Corps to be employed by private enterprise, profit-making companies, and get their training this way ? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Again, our experience-the only way I am will- ing to comment is on the basis `of my own experience. Our experience PAGENO="0127" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2587 with the Neighborhood Youth Corps has been fairly limited in our community. We have had up to three or four boys who have had their income supplemented in a very good way by it. It has not been a con- sistent experience and it has not been a deep experience with the Neighborhood Youth Corps. Again, I don't have the total picture of the Neighborhood Youth Corps involvement across the nation, so I would hesitate to comment. Mr. ERLENBORN. If however we are going to train these youths to. have skills that are needed by industry, don't you think we need to involve industry as the employing agent at the end of the line so that the skills that are needed are taught? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes. I am strongly in favor of involving industry in any phase of this program. Mr. ERLENBORN. If we limit job training of either the Job Corps or Neighborhood Youth Corps, to the expenditure of public funds: and employment by public agencies, public works projects, aren't we leaving out of this total picture a great resource__private industry? Now I have reference, for instance, to the so-called Human Invest- ment Act. We gave tax incentives to industry to invest in capital goods, to get new plant and facilities. Some of us feel that the same principle is valid in the area of getting industry to invest in people, in training people, so that they can be useful for that industry through what we call the Human Investment Act tax credit to encourage industry to do this. I have reference to your statement about what your experience has. been with one industry doing `this sort of thing that you think should be expanded. Are you familiar with the Human Investment Act or~ -~ if you are not, what do you think of the principle of giving tax incen-~ tives to industry to get into this training project? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I have already said I am for the industry getting into the business of dealing with job training. What that form is to be and what its range shall be is another matter. But the principle of industry being involved in this, I think, is desirable. Mr. ERLENBORN. As long as we don~t have industry involved, wouldn't you agree with the statement that we are leaving out one of the greatest resources that we have available to us? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. That is one of those questions one hesitates to. answer clearly and directly, but again I would say where industry has not been used and where it could effectively be used in partnership. or more than that, I think that would be. to the good. Mr. ERLENBORN. Thank you. Mrs. GREEN. Congressman Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Madam Chairman. It is nice to see you, Mr. Rockefeller, again. We were together very~ briefly at the time of a recent visit with Mr. Shriver to Charleston and Huntington. The involvement was too brief then.. I welcome the chance to take a few more minutes now to speak to you. There are too many things, really, that I would like to talk about, but let me be sure that we do read you correctly as to what you are testifying to before. us today. I say this against the background of the chairman's questions earlier. I wish that he were here so that we could be sure that we are para-. phrasing him correctly. PAGENO="0128" 2588 ECONO~'IIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I think you have made an excellent self-limitation, Mr. Rockefeller, wheii you have said several times that you don't mean to be strayrng beyond your own experience and knowledge in the comments you make against this backgro~md. I am sure that experience and knowledge are very material and very substantial, but you are pinning them down to that particular area and the experiences that you have had there. Am I correct in that? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. As much as I am able to; yes, sir. Mr. IDELLENBACK. I read you really as favoring certain concepts that you see come alive through your own experience rather than as favoring certain administrative bodies. For example, I heard you say that you favor active participation in the program planning and imple- mentation by the poor. Is that correct? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes. I am sa.ying that again it is a question to what limit you want to put that. Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes. I am not talking about degree. I am not talk- ing about form. What I am saying is that it is this policy, this concept of participation of which you speak strongly in favor. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. It is the concept or policy of involvement of private industry. I am not saying the form it ought to take or degree, but it is this concept you have seen come alive and you think this is an excellent concept. Am I correct? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. ~1es, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. But you have limited yourself. For example, you haven't read 10682 versus 8311, the two bills that we are studying formally. You are not balancing one bill off against the other? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am doing my very best not to comment on the structure and form. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are not talking about saying that it is neces- sary to have OEO to make the program come alive? You are talking of concepts and ideas that you have seen produce results and you are staying clear of endorsing OEO as it has been, or endorsing any structure? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. What I am saying is that I am doing my best to stay out of the particular issue that you are trying to decide, that is, which is the better form? What I am saying is that I am reporting from my point of view, which has not been structurally oriented about what I see. I am not saying what you say there. Mr. DELLENBACK. This is exactly what I want. to have clear, because I don't seek to lead you into favoring one form of organization aga.inst another, one bill against, another. But I was afraid that some of the questions tha.t Mr. Perkins had asked earlier were susceptible to the interpretation that. you were saying you favor OEO as it exists, that you favor certain structures as they exist.ed, that. you favor Job Corps in its present form. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I very much do favor the continuation of the Job Corps. I have said that and I would say t.hat constantly. Mr. DELLENBACK. Let me push this a. little bit further. Are you favoring the Job Corps as an administrative group, as a structure, or are you `favoring the concept of taking young people who badly need training, who badly need the bringing out. of their economic capacities, the bringing out of their social capacities, and giving them the sort of training andd experience they need? Which of these do you favor? PAGENO="0129" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2589 Mr. ROCKEFELLER. It is impossible to pick one or the other. Mr. DELLENBACK. But it is, you see. if it were possible not through Job Corps but through another organization, name it anything you want, to achieve these goals, would you then say you favor the Job Corps against the other organization? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. What I am saying is that I am highly in favor of the concept which you state, and that I am in the case of Charleston, W. Va., Job Corps satisfied to the extent that I know it by what they are doing, period. And from that I favor the Job Corps on the basis of my experience. Mr. DELLENBACK. Let me push a little bit here what your experience has been with Charleston. Now you visited it at least once, I know, because I was there when you were there. How many young people have gone through the Charleston center? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am not aware of the statistics involved, nor the costs. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are you aware how many dropouts there have been? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Not in number, no. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are you aware of how many have dropped out at any stage of the program? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. No. I am very well aware of the dropouts that have come about as a result of myown work. Mr. DELLENBACK. I do not mean to push this unduly. I was going t.o leave this line completely alone, except now I read you as saying a little bit about the Job Corps as opposed to the concept of what is sought to be achieved through the Job Corps. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am not sure that it is useful to try to make that distinction. I think you know very well what I am saying. I am trying to limit my comments to the basis of my experience. I am satisfied to the extent that I know what Job Corps is doing. The extent I know the best is in Charleston, W. Va. I refuse to range beyond that. Mr. DELLENBACK. I hope this does not prove to be the case, you see, but what I am a little bit afraid of is, in view of the Chairman's earlier questioning, that at some stage of the game we are going to hear some- where that there appeared before our committee Mr. Jay Rockefeller, who went on record as saying so. and s(.; he favors the Job Corps; he feels that the Job Corps in Charleston has done an exceptionally good job and he feels that this is the administrative organization through which we ought to push ahead. All I want to be sure is that.is not what you are saying. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am saying exactly what I now will repeat for the third time to you, if you wish me to. Mr. DELLENBACK. I apologize for being so slow. Please do. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am saying that on the basis of my experience in Charleston, W. Va., with the Job Corps, that I am impressed by what they are doing and would continue to be impressed and would hope that their work is continued and strongly emphasized m the bill I am also saying that within that organization in Charleston, I am sure there has been much experimentation, and I. am sure there will be much more and that they will modify and improve and build upon what they have been doing as the years go by. 80-084-----67-pt. 4-9 PAGENO="0130" 2590 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I am indeed satisfied by what they are doing. Mr. DELLENBACK. Sinceyou have used, if you will, as a qualification for all that followed thereafter the basis of your experience, let me just- be a little bit clearer in my own mind as to what that is in depth so far as Charleston is concerned. You have indicated to me that~ you do not have any statistics on enrollees, on dropouts, the placements afterward and this type of thing. So that what you are saying, and please contradict me if I am in error at any stage of this, so what you are saying that on the basis of your Observation -in Charleston, which is not really a statistical analysis, which is nOt really a study in depth of that program, but on the basis of certain isolated cases that you have seen, on the basis of certain visits that you have- made, that this is what you are using as the basis for your statements. - - Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I acknowledge that has been the fundamental of my entire testimony, everything rests-on the basis of my experience. Mr. DELLENBACK. This is the limitation of your experience as - far as Charleston -is concerned? - Mr. ROCKEFELLER. That is therefore why I am not sure that your interests are served by trying to draw general conclusions about the Job Corps and its administration from me. - Mr. DELLENBACK. Exactly. - I appreciate your putting it this way. I am really preparing under the circumstances the rebuttal that may be necessary at some time in the future in the event that you are quoted, I think, out of context. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Let me say one thing more, too, and that is that everybody makes his assumptions and judgments on the basis -of what he knows. - If you are trying to limit me to say that therefore any other Job Corps outside Charle-ston, W. Va., -is something that I can have no feelings on, then I am not willing to say that either. - Mr. DELLENBACK. I do not seek to have you say that. Please under- stand, nor am I seeking in any wise to discredit. I have extreme ad- miration for you. - - - As I told you in Charleston, there is only one aspect of your career - about what I have any regret. - Mr. ROOKEFELLER. I think I a-rn aware of that aspect. - Mr. DELLENBACK. We need - not go further with that. So far as the involvement of private industry is concerned, which I think is one of the concepts you favor, and - an excellent concept, I think one of the great weaknesses of program after program in the present ad-. ministration has been the evident underlying concept that Govern- ment can pretty well do it alone. The present administration ha-s taken this tremendous tool of the private sector of the economy which is here and which has had such a vital part in making America what it is a-nd largely ignored it or left it aside instead of somehow channeling it into the middle of the program. You are even more, intimately familiar than I am with the proposal which has been made in the other body for channeling the private sec- tor of the economy into the housing field, which I think is a tremendOus idea. We are here talking nOw about taking the private sect-or of the economy and channeling it into the war on poverty. You have gone on record as favoring this concept to the degree it can be implemented. PAGENO="0131" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 2591 In the situation where Packard-Bell is involved, I would urge that we all understand at least one level of distinction between the type of involvement by private enterprise, which is their effort and another type of involvement by private enterprise. Now I think the private sector belongs in doing what it is doing in Charleston, but I think we. both realize that this is a way station on the road that it ought to be walking. The way station, you see it in Charleston, the private enterprise economy, and this is but one example of a series throughout the: country, has taken as a profitmaking task the running of a J oh Corps,. not to train its own workers but to train people for work for somebody else. There is another level of involvement by private enterprise which ought to be developed in the future where private enterprise takes young people, or older people that it can use, itself, and somehow cooperates with Government to train these people to work . in private enterprise. Private enterprise will do its own training, with assistance, with tax incentive, to train these people to work. So when Company A says, "I have a job that needs somebody to do it" and here is a young person who is not quite ready to do it, but I can get some cooperation. in the way of tax incentive, in the way of a little subsidy, to bring this person into my company and there I train him so that at the end of 1 or 6 or 12 months he will be a fully participating and self-sustaining employee, this is another level of involvement by private enterprise that goes a step beyond what is happening in Charleston, Huntington, and a series of places throughout the country. Are you with me on this line of distinction? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am not aware that this is not happening to some degree in those places and I am sure it could be a development. that came from that. Mr. DELLENBACK. I have checked with some of the people who have run some of these Job Corps Centers, representatives of private indus- try, and find that only in very few cases do the young people who come out of those centers go to work for the company that is t.raining them. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. But it is at least happening in some cases. Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I think it is a very possible development from that situation there. This is something that could evolve from the content of the Packard-Bell relationship right there. Mr. DELLENBACK. Certainly the level of involvement is not exclusive. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. One easily develops from the first. . This i~ a matter of refinement. This is something which can evolve in that situation. Mr. DELLENBACK. Does Packard-Bell have any industrial plants in West Virginia? . Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Not that I am aware of. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you feel that the people who come from West Virginia essentially will be happiest if tley are trained to carry out employment that will keep them close to their own area? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Yes, but I have also said that I think there is a good deal of merit in taking peOple . and training them~ anI se.ndjno~ them to `tn entnely nen orient'ttion, entirely new `~rea I think the~ could often be happier in West Virginia because that is what the~~. PAGENO="0132" 2592 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 know. But these same people working in California could be extremely happy, too. I think it depends on the job situation, particularly the job situa- tion. Certainly a West Virginian can be very happy in California and he can be happy in West Virginia. Mr. DELLENBACK. Some of us have some real concern about the whole Appalachian situation so far as the efforts which have been devoted to date. A recent A.P. story dealt essentially in terms of $6.5 billion so far having been used in the Appalachian area in the war on poverty. Our concern is that the tangible measurable results of that expendi- ture are not related in proper degree to the measure of the expenditure. By your own testimony you have indicated you don't feel the war is won after 2 years there. Nor, I suppose, would we be able to say that it will be won in another 1 or 2 or x years. Am I correct in that? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. The work that is being done in education in the community where I have worked will take its effect as late as 10 or 15 years off, so the war on poverty is a long and very slow affair, especially in the rural area. Mr. DELLENBACK. The comment that my friend from Washington made earlier, I am convinced, is present in all of life. He used the term "people orientation." I just wish there were a way at the expenditure of $3,225 a year to get 10,000 Jay Rockefellers to go to work in their own respective communities throughout the Nation. I think this would be priceless money that, unfortunately, we are not going to be able to spend for this particular purpose. Let me ask you one more question, if I may. Viewed against the background of what you have seen and what you have experienced in the area in which you have worked, what would you say to us who are on this side of the problem, charged with the responsibility of creating tools that will help achieve results? What would you say to us that we ought to do that we are not doing? What are you saying we should pass in the way of legislation? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I would hesitate to say exactly what should be increased and in what amount. I do feel very strongly, however, as I have said repeatedly this morning, that the rural problem of poverty is a very, very' slow one and that it is going to take, I think, more of concentration in funds and people and ideas on that problem. I am, therefore,' hopeful in my small way that I can convince you to strengthen the effort being made in rural poverty. Mr. DELLENBACK. Primarily dollar-wise? Mr. RoCKEFELLER. No. The dollars are a part of it, but is also a matter of freeing people, making people available. Dollars ought to create people. You ought to get more VISTA volunteers. VISTA has been an enormous success so far, I understand, and the volunteers I have seen. Mr. DELLENBACK. So you suggest we expand the VISTA program? Mr. ROCKEFELLER. I am not going to range beyond that. I am say- ing that I think rural poverty is a serious and slow problem which ~is not sufficiently recognized in this country because of the more immedi- ate threat of urban poverty. PAGENO="0133" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2593 I would hope that the efforts in that direction would be made even stronger. Mr. DELLENBACK. You recognize, as do we, the difficulty under which we labor dollar-wise. This is a part of what is involved in the discussion of 8311 which is, in effect, an expansion and slight modifica- tion of the present situation, versus 10682, which has some departures and attempts to wrap certain changes into the program. However large the number of dollars the Federal Government is involved with may look to be from the outside, when you get close to the inside and see the dollars measured against the great crying needs in this field and a lot of other fields, we find we don't have enough dollars. So, it is a case of where those dollars can best be used. We can apply them in this situation and yield so much in the way of result. There is a lot more there that needs to be done. If we use some of those dollars in this field or in other fields, we may be able to get two or three; or a~ times results that we would achieve in the first place. This is the struggle we have. Any time you have specific suggestions that arise from your ex- perience or knowledge, I think we would be delighted to hear from you at a later time. Thank you. Mrs. GREEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Rockefeller. If I had my way, I would change parts of this program; but I am in complete agreement with you, if we are going to be successful in the war on poverty, we are going to have to bring to it more money, more people, and more ideas. I thank you for your appearance here~ The aspect that brings pain to the heart of my colleague from Oregon and greatest joy to my heart, and it confirms what I have read about you, is that you are a man of extremely good judgment. Thank you. Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Thank you. Mr. GREEN. I turn to my colleague from New York to introduce our next witness. Mr. GooDr~rJ4. I am very proud to present to the committee Sister Marie Baptista who is director of the Boorady Reading Center in Dunkirk, N.Y., which is in my district. She is here to give us a descrip- tion of her program, a description of the problems which she sees in dealing with educational deficiencies of children. She speaks from a vast reservoir of experience and wisdom in this area. Being a very strong advocate of the program, I am particularly pleased to see the dramatic results that have been produced under the direction of Sister Baptista. We welcome you to our committee, Sister. STATEMENT OP SISTER MARIE BAPTISTA, DIRECTOR, BOORADY READING CENTER, DUNXIRK~ N.Y. Sister BAPTISTA. Thank you, Congressman Goodell. Madam Chair- man, members of the committee, I certainly thank you very much for inviting me here and giving me the opportunity to express some ideas that I have on the importance of education for all children. I could not be in more agreement, let me say at the outset here, than PAGENO="0134" 2594 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I am with Mr. Rockefeller. I was talking to myself back there in the second or third row. First, education is of paramount importance, we cannot start it early enough. My contention is that we don't continue this compensatory type of education which we shěould continue beyond Headstart. Speaking of Headstart, before I go into my paper here which I have just pulled together, so that I won't go off on a tangent, may I tell you that I taught at Fordham for eight summers, and I taught child de- velopment and also the problems of the individual youngster. The first year that Hea.dstart Opened was in the summer of-if you recall. I took my class down to the 138th Street Headstart pro- gram. I sat down with a little child. I said to the youngster, what do you wantmeto make? I had some clay and he had some clay. He said make me a chicken. It was in very broken English. I made him a little chicken. it went over to another little child. He said make me a police car. Again the teacher had to interpret for me. I did not know what he was trying to say. This is the first week of Headstart. These are all 4- and 5-year-old children. I went to another youngster. He said make me some alka seltzer. By this time I did not know just what to think. I finally weną to the teacher a little later and I said, "why would these children all say the same thing ~" "Sister, look out the window" I looked out into the narrow street. Here were police cars, five or six of them. She said, "The only food these children have pretty much of is chicken which is a favorite meat of theirs. Sometimes their parents overindulge so they have the alka seltzer." The interesting thing was, after 6 or 8 weeks, toward the end of summer school I returned to that same Headstart program. I am tell- ing you this only because you all have read of the astounding results of Headstart. There is no doubt about it. I have not been fortunate enough to carry on a Headstart program, but at the end of that summer I returned with the same group of teachers. Unless I would have known it was the same children in the same setup I would never have believed it. It w'is a little short of mlrQculous These same childien were using the telephone, dialing perfectly, placing orders in a restaurant, of course pretending, telling stories to each other, playing games in perfect accord with everything that we hear about In psychological adjustment with others. They knew the five boroughs in New York. They could tell you they had been around the island. I think something like this, when you have personally visited a project like this, might give you some idea of how I feel about many of these~programs I have seen. Now I have not seen too many, that is true. But this is just one * isolated instance I want to bring in because we all are in love with this very young child, but I am very much concerned about the growing developing youngster as he goes, particularly,. goes through the ele- mentary school. In 1964, Edgar May wrote a clear-thinking study of a key American problem entitled "The Wasted Americans."* In the near future are we going to call them the "used Americans"? This concerns me very much. The scramble for funds and for power in PAGENO="0135" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2595 the name of helping the poor could cause such a thing. If funds are going to be used to help the poor of America, if power is going to be exerted to break down causes and produce working, then the overall go'tl has to be defined and never lost sight of Defined achievable goals. must be permitted to have a functioning vehicle free to~ do the job~ I would like~ to make this practically my theme throughout this whole paper. I really feel very strongly about the independence of these programs. so that the, structures that are using so much pressure on them, something. can be done either legis- latively or somehow to prevent this interference with a program that is really good and accomplishing its purpose. The Federal `Government.does and should have the national interest of all its citizens as its concern. The concerned should cross party lines, economic lines, racial lines, and religious lines. The Economic Opportunity Act emphasizes the Government con cern for the national welfare and specific national problem, of course, which is poverty This may not-this national problem of the poor American is getting bigger rapidly and producing newer and even more vicious related prthlems. Here I mean the crime that we are hearing about constantly, rising crime throughout the country. As the population and wealth of the Nation increases so do the problems. Giving money to the poor is not the answer. Established institutions and bureaus have failed or we would'not'be concerned today. Here is where education and freedom enter. In improving the economic status of a large segment of the country is heavily dependent on education. I think we all will .agree ,that illiteracy begets poverty. Education of the poor `family and the `children, education of the community. in whi'ch the middle class live, education of the industries dependent upon them for labor and above all education in the various local, State, and Federal agencies to achieve the goal in helping the wasted Americans of today and in the future to become independen't and productive Americans that they can and should be. The vehicle devised to combat any aspect of this problem must be free of outside political and self-interest pressures to `work success- fully. Otherwise the po'or and the weak for whom the programs are .setup lose out to the interests of the strong. `The poor of our country experience constant failures, failures breed further failures. This pattern can be reversed because we are dealing with individuals. If a power failure happens of course we are com- pletely paralyzed, we don't know what to `do. If power fails with a child we can do something. If power. within the person is cut off or stymied or interfered with we can do something. He is a growing, developing person. `He can `be taught to make choices. He can be taught to think clearly. This is `why I hope I am here this morning. When we are talking about-let me deviate for one second-Job Corps and,the importance of some big `organizations an'd `labor, I don't know anything about labor, you put me in the corner on this, or legislate a'bout this, but with-when you say-when I hear of some big organization taking over anything its makes me wonder, are we putting these people in little pigeon holes and saying we will train you for this job and ~ ou must go out into this job and fulfill it PAGENO="0136" 2596 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 This youngster might try the job and not like it. What is wrong `with that? We are training him to make choices. This is a mark of maturity. You know a number `of people today who began and did not like it and turned to something else. One of the greatest reasons for our adults today going to psycholo- gists is because they are unhappy in their work. If we can find this out when a youngster is in his late teens or early twenties this is fine. We know today, they tell us, a man makes his choice and changes * jobs at least three times. I don't believe in preparing a person for one job. As an educator I am interested in success and I am particularly interested in success now and for the child now. Of course in this * NatiOn the average ADO child is accumulating the same characteristics `that shaped the dependency of his parents. School drop outs among ADO children between the ages of 14 and 17 are more than twice as, high as for other children in this age group. Inability to read is the largest single cause of failure during the ele- mentary school years. A low level of reading ability has been ac- curately defined as one of the basic causes of chronic unemployment and underemployment. Many of you fi~ie people here know how hard we had to work to give reading a high priority. It really seems almost ridiculous to say but a few years ago when I talked about starting a reading center b,ecause I knew from testing many of these children psychologically that they were being put in class for the retarded so called or the socially maladjusted or the, I think various names of the special classes and so on, these were the children who could not read in many cases. They were children with high IQ's anywhere from 115 to 140. It does not necessarily mean if he has a high IQ he will learn to read faster and he will become a seriously maladjusted younster if he does not have the opportunity to learn. These are the youngsters `we are particularly interested in. Now I am saying I had a difficult time convincing people that read- ing is a higher priority. They said it was a lOwer priority. Can you imagine that? Don't ask me who. There were several people when we were trying to set up a reading class. Now the young child, the headstart youngster, we `will say, the pre- school child, is learning concepts. He is learning to express himself, `he is learning to talk. ,Finally when he gets into primary grades, and here I am very much concerned, `here is where he needs the compensatory type of education that he can not get in a large school set up, and I am talking pri- marily of course of the disadvantaged child. Teachers will tell you this far better than I can, the bright child, the average child, the youngster will learn in spite of the teacher. The ,teacher will say they have done everything at the same time we know the youngster will be best helped by a good home. These disadvantaged children, children who cannot speak English `well for instance, are completely lost in a situation. I have documents to prove that this can happen not only where I come from `but this happens all over the country. I `have been in teacher training a long time. I have heard individual teachers tell me from both the parochial schools, and the public schools PAGENO="0137" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2597 and the large private schools, that this does happen, unless there is some independent group that will take enough interest in these young- sters to help them. . *. I am not skipping over the primary grades but if any of you have youngsters between the ages of 9 and 12 I think you will know what I am trying toget at. To me this is the youngster that ~~~~half way up the stairs. He is a youngster who has: learned to read and now he learns to contradict to add to, to try to learn more about what he has just learned to read. He wants to know everything about everything, he can possibly learn about. He wants to reach out to the whole world. If this young- ster in the fourth, fifth and sixth grades as .they are set up now. is frustrated in his learning ability-all reading is learning-he is going to be a dropout in the seventh grade. We can put our fingers on him. We know. This is why it can be predicted so clearly. You can predict a dropout in the second or third grade but very accurately in the fourth or fifth. If any of you have been reading anything about the reading clinic set up throughout our country you know that the greatest number of children who are being tutored in our clinics today are from the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades. This 9- to 12-year-old youngster, this is a crucial age when poor reading ability can spell success or failure in his life. Wouldn't an extra class in reading take care of this problem? Ab- solutely not. Home environment, attitudes, hope, nutrition, medical problems and abnormalities, these are some of the aspects of the whole problem. This child is a complex thing, not just a body and mind relationship. This youngster for instance at this time and he is starting to learn something about social studies, something about how his country was built, something about how a bill becomes a law, something about the United Nations. Believe me when I tell you that the disadvantaged homes of these children turn their radios off just as soon as the news comes on. They want. to be entertained. They don't realize the importance of it because they feel completely cut off from anything that has happened. They blame everyone else, it is true in many instances. These chil- dren are becoming completely frustrated in the fact that they have been learning one thing at school and it does not mean too much to them because they cannot conceive of it. A little Puerto Rican boy came in one day. He had some homework assigned. It was to draw the three Pacific. States and tell something about them. We told him "Do you know what the three Pacific States are." .. . . . He said "Washmgton, Oregon, and Califorma" I said "Where are the Pacific States." He found them. "Why are they called Pacific States." "I don't know." I said "Did you know there was an ocean out there." "Oh, no, there is only one ocean." So we took a 5-minute trip from the Atlantic seaboard to the Pacific seaboard. He found out that there is a Pacific Ocean. ` " . Now we are not criticizing any school system here. We realize only too well that a teacher teaching 30 or 35 children cannot positively PAGENO="0138" 2598 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 give all of the experiences, all of the knowleciges, all of the attitudes about life and about curriculum that he would like to give this young child, particularly if this youngster is someone who cannot read well and consequently then cannot think. Now, what are the handicaps of a large school system in attacking the problem of education? And believe me, I don't think .1 have to sell this to any of you. One, the school is geared particularly for cur- riculum, not for the total environment. It is amazing when someone takes an interest in a youngster and sits down and explains the mis- takes to him or explains what is going on in our country. It is amazing the change in attitude of this youngster. As someone said so well-I think it was Mr. Rockefeller pointed out here-that a youngster when he becomes a young man even changes in his personal experience. You know how true this is of children. Teachers of necessity have to have a timed curriculum. In the first 6 weeks they must cover thus and so. In the next 12 weeks what happens to the youngster who cannot read this material, who cannot think it through, who has no idea of a cause and effect relationship? In other words, he has only learned to memorize material. This is sad. It is dreadfully sad because later on anyOne can sell this young. adult a bill of goods. If he has not been taught to think clearly, to decide for himself whether this concept is correct or not, to do a little bit of investigation, we call it research, it is a sad state of affairs be- cause I think.you can readily make the adjustments yourself, the rela- tionship here to a life outside, when this youngster will only learn to memorize an answer. All our school systems are forced to deal in numbers.. They teach.. many children, not the individual child. Of course this is wha.t we are constantly saying to our teachers, you do not teach children, you teach a child. Very often in opening up a new avenue, whether it is. social studies~ or science or whatever happens to be in the subject matter area, you have opened up a whole new world for this youngster. We used to .say in school you learn to read in the first three grades and then you read to learn. That is not correct of course. You do learn to read and then to learn how to learn because in this changing society of ours which is changing so rapidly our youngsters must constantly be forging, ahead. Every new idea, every new concept that comes up, every new inven- tion brings a whole new vocabulary. So that, the curriculum cannot be the paramount interest of a teacher. It must be this individual youngster who is struggling along. I ~ealize we talk about trackplans, we talk about team teaching and program learning. We discussed homogeneou.s grouping. There is only, one homogene- ous type of grouping. That is the individual child. As every thumb- print is different certainly every youngster is different. This is where we must do our best work. Three, the pressures that exist and t~h~y are present. I have taught principals, I have been discussing various jobs of superintendents in various parts of the country. . . . . I know how harrassed they are by' outside pressures. They cannot be flexible and independent in `their approach to the problems that PAGENO="0139" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2599 exist in the schools. We kncw this. They are pressured by parents, by school boards, by civic leaders in the community. There are many, many things they would like to do and they will never be able to do them. We all know this. Now, to get into our little tiny reading center. The Bôorady Reading Center was set up with the idea of attacking the failure pattern from every aspect possible. It does not mean we don't have failures. We most certainly do. It must provide an atmosphere we feel of achievement. Could I say just one word about this. It is a basic need for all of us, isn't it? If you have children in your family I am sure you have heard them say "I did it all myself. Let me do it myself. Look what I did." What they are doing is spelling out "I can achieve." Achievement, success, and hope. This could only be done by providing a facility with complete freedom from outside pressures and money to operate such a facility. It must not be dictated to by the public schools, the parochial schools, civic government, or any other group. At the same time close cooperation with the local school is necessary since compensatory education should bolster the existing curriculum In other words, we work as an auxiliary of all of the large school systems, not as something opposed to them. I think I should make clear here that all the times I have set up reading centers, and this is my third one, I have found that these are the places where most teachers will want to come because they are having maybe a little difficulty with this youngster or that child. They say how do you do it in a small group set-up, a sort of demonstration type of thing. At the same time you are not only helping the teacher but you are helping the youngster. Compensatory education or any education of a special service should be outside the institution where the child has experienced academic and social failure. I will refer later to the report that was made by the National Education Association to President Johnson last year and the fact that they had gone to various school systems throughout the country and they had found many of the pro- grams, so-called compensatory programs, were not successful for three reasons. - First, these children were being taught in the same place where they had met failure. Second, they were taught by teachers many times who had no faith in them. Third, the teachers themselves in some instances did not know the material, that is the best material, for the youngster who needed the most help. This, I think, is very interesting. So it is very simple, I should think, to set up a compensatory type of program where you would have multi- ethnic types of books, you would hire the best teachers you could find and you would change their environment to that of a warm, attractive home. The teacher could provide a sort of father or mother figure with each child to identify himself with. He should here encounter acceptance, trust and confidence. He should be provided with new experience, and attention here then can be given to his medical, nutrition, and psychological need PAGENO="0140" 260Q ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Above all, his education should be individual, of the highest quality, and geared to his ability, so that he might progress at his own speed. This spells the beginning of success and independence. Now the econOmic opportunity act provided the opportunity for the Boorady center to expand and operate in this unique manner. I invite questions here. It has been even more, successful than we had hoped. Our original idea was to prevent future dropouts. We are encOuraged to see yesterday's dropout beginning to volun- tarily ring our doorbell and ask for the opportunity to try again. Now, this is very interesting. Just the other evening a young boy stood around the house. He looked in the front window, saw the kids working. He finally rang the bell. He said, as many young kids will say, "May I join up?" "Where are yOur friends?" "They are all in there reading." Needless to say, he "joined up." We are encouraged to see yesterday's dropouts now begin to volun- tarily ring and ask for the opportunity to try. These boys are the hard core unemployables. We call them the dropins. No one ever uses the tenii dropout around our house. I have to be very personal about this because we are like one huge family. We all say so and so dropped in. That is a sort of key word around the house. Everyone knows he is a potential dropout or he has just dropped out of school. This summer, of 1967, we had six Indian children from the nearby Cattaraugus reservation, 12 dropins, five mothers in addition to the 28 elementary and junior high school students. May I add here not one youngster has ever been forced to come. It is voluntary. The teachers recommend it very often that they come. Parents urge them to come sometimes. But the ~child himself only comes because he wants to. We hold a little interview with each child before he is registered. We ask him why he wants to come. I wish I could have made a tape of what some of the answers have been. Some of them have said something like. "I want to learn to read so that I will know the answer for a change." "I would like to be able to hold my hand up when the teacher asks a question." "I would like to be a.ble to write a letter to my friend when he goes away." "I would like to be able to write a letter to my grandmother who can't write." These are all various reasons they give. I would say for young chil- dren in the elementary school these are very sound reasons for asking for help. An important point I think is the followup we do when a student is absent and I expect you are going to ask a lot of questions here. One of the things we have found particularly about our Puerto Rican and colored children is their lack of sense of scheduling or of time. Now we live in `a world of time, don't -we. We know how impor- tant it is to keep an appointment; if we have an appointment for 3 o'clock, it does not mean 3 :30~ We try to get these youngsters to come at the time assigned In September we will say to the youngster, "Your appointment is for Monday and Wednesday at 3:30 p.m. We' give them the little card, as you would any clinic, Monday and Thursday at 3:30. What happens? In various instances he lost it, the dog chewed it up, dozens of things happen. Instead of coming `Monday and Wednesday, he came Tuesday. We would say, "Your appointment is for Monday and Wednesday." Finally we came to the point where the youngsters are definitely com- ing, keeping their appointment. PAGENO="0141" ECONOMIC. OPPORTUNITY. ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2601 When they can't come they are calling up and saying, "I have a sore throat" or "I have to stay home and watch the baby." It may be a very little thing .to you but to those of us who know that they have a very poor concept of time it is an extremely important step. In the beginning the family is called upon as soon as the child misses a class. The parents learn we care. Prompt attendance and family re- sponsibility on the part of the parent arid child letting us know when a child cannot attend are all part of our program. Now, under the OEO we have completed one summer program and one school year program. You will find the results of these programs on pages 7, 8, and 9. Can I take just a moment now or would you like to ask some questions before I go into the evaluation, the little evaluation we made of the results of the test. Mrs. GREEN. Thank you very much. I have a 12:30 appointment. I have to leave in just a minute. Let me ask you about the Headstart program. Have you had any experience with it? Sister BAPTISTA. In our own city, no; I have not because I am in- volved with this program. The only experience I have had with it arc assignment I have given teachers when I am teaching in an area where there are several Headstart programs going on. Mrs. GREEN. You personally have not been involved in it? Sister BAPTISTA. I have not. Mrs. GREEN. As an educator, may I ask you, without the experience in the program itself, from the standpoint of the child and a good edu- cation, do you think that it makes better sense to have two different agencies directing the education, one directing it with different rules and regulations and salaries and everything else when thechild is 4 and then another agency directing it when the child is 5, the education of the child again with different arrangements, different salaries, differ- ent teachers, different rules and regulations? Do you have any judgment? Sister BAPTISTA. Thatis something I have thought about very often. I don't think as far as the salary is concerned it would make a lot of difference. I would not be affected by it if that is what you mean? Mrs. GREEN. I will use a case' I have used before as an example. In a city school system where a teacher is employed and paid with funds from the Office of Economic Opportunity, which would be 90 percent Federal funds, and has 20 youngsters in' Headstart and has two aides helping her; und another teacher in the same building with youngsters from the same families, the same social economic level, is a kinder- garten teacher and is paid by the school district fund. Because of the ceiling put on by the voters her s'tlary is less than the Headstart teacher who has 20 youngsters during the entire period, whatever hours in the day she is there, plus two aides. The kindergarten teacher has 30 youngsters in the morning and 30 youngsters in the afternoon with no teacher aides. This is a specific example of two agencies, one an agency directing the education pro- gram when the child is four and another agency directing the program when the child is five. From an educators standpoint does this make good sense? Sister BAPTISTA. Let me tell you this, please. I happen to be a great advocate of young children's education and how important it is. I really feel very strongly about this particular matter. PAGENO="0142" 2602 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I think the younger the child the more the teacher should be paid. I would tell you why I feel this way. I think the responsibility of a teacher to a very young growing developing child is extremely im- portant. She is not just a teacher to this 4-year-old. Mrs. GREEN. Yes. I completely agree with you. I would certainly not differentiate between what, the teacher of the 4-year-olds shothd be paid and what the teacher of the 5-year-olds should be paid. I understand what you are saying. We, for a number of years in this country, have been under the false assumption that if they teach the youngsters we pay them the least. I disagree with that entirely too. I am talking about `a program that makes sense from an educational standpoint. The question here, one of the main questions, that this conmuttee has to decide on Headstart is not at all whether we should (10 away with Headstart. I don't know anybody who suggests this. The question is whether we would have a better program if it were under the same supervision and direction and agency that the kinder- .garten program is, and that the Followthrough program is, and that the first grade program is. Would it make better sense from an educational standpoint? Sister BAPTISTA. I really don't know. I am not sure about that. I am sure about one point here though. I think again that the individual choice of a teacher has to be so important. You might have a poor Headstart teacher, this is perfectly possible, who is playing with children and not teaching them and you may have an excellent kindergarten teacher. You may have an excellent Head- start teacher and poor kindergarten teacher. I don't know about the salary level. Mrs. GREEN. Have you been the principal or administrator of a school? Sister BAPTISTA. No, I am not. Mrs. GREEN. If you were the principal of a school, and let us say that two teachers were equal, would you assign one teacher 20 young- sters and two aides~ Suppose she has equal ability. Then would you assign another teacher 60 youngsters during the day? Sister BAPTISTA. Of course not. This would not make sense to me. Mrs. GREEN. With Headstart under two different agencies, this is what is happening. Sister BAFTISTA. May I ask you this? Aren't the Headstart children from the poverty group, the group which is disadvantaged, and the kindergarten youngsters are all of mixed economic groups. Don't they have to have a line there? Mrs. GREEN. No. The youngsters could come from, the same socio- economic group. They might have $200 more income in the family, but they are of the same level a~id supposedly of the same means. Some of those youngsters may well have been kids in the He.adsta.it proeram the year before~ Tam sorry, Sister, I appreciate your being here but I am going to have to leave. I will turn it over to my two colleagues to my right. Mr. Qr~i~. Let me make a few comments, myself. I appreciate the `testimony you have given us this morning, Sister, especially with re- gard to the ar&a in which you are working. I have been appalled at the ~,ac.k of research on reading, research into what makes a youngster Tead. PAGENO="0143" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2603 I became involved in the work of the young people in my own dis- trict and their inability to read We have estimates that suggest that 10 percent of the children are experiencing a severe hardship in that they are not able to read adequately. As you mentioned in your testimony, when individuals have a high IQ, higher than average, and still are unable to read, then there isn't a sufficient interest given them in the schools to afford them additional training. It surely is deplorable. I also appreciate the point you have raised .that it is not only a matter of an `additional remedial teacher being placed in the classroom. We recognize fully that many schools are doing an inadequate job. If this were not the case it would be un- necessary for you to operate a separate school. I am glad that you have this facility in operation and are given a chance to some children. Sister BAPTISTA. We feel very strongly about this. We could use a reading center on every corner in America. I don't think any of us are in opposition tO this program at all. I think there are many chil- dren who need to be better understood. If a youngster has a serious reading problem and he is a normal child, possessing normal intelligence, he has several psychological prOblems involved. He has to have. Talking moneywise, the cost to the taxpayers of putting a child through a school for the retarded and when he is not retarded, putting him in a class for disturbed young- sters, mostly disturbed because that it what happens in these young- sters, is $2,000 to $3,000 a year. Yet sometimes we hesitate to spend money for books and teachers and for all the necessary things. I was going to proceed here with the results of the tests. Mr. Quri~. I think you should. I think they ought to be placed in the record. If you want to summarize and place them in the record it probably would be helpful. I think we need it. Sister BAPTISTA. I think this would be interesting. I took it from 1 year's work, 6 months of last year. The number of children tested were 326. You will find this on page 7. The number of the below `grade level of these youngsters was 75 percent of 249 children. The number who were reading only at grade level, and this is only statistics again but these represent individual people, individual children, was 26 children. The number who were above grade level but were classified as reme- * dial readers, strange as it may seem, were 51 youngsters. At the end of the 6 month's period with excellent teaching, individual one to one approach, we had 184 or 56 percent of the children now were below grade level as compared to 75 percent 6 months previous. There were now 8 percent of the children at grade level. It is inter- esting because you go back over the 26 children, they were not the same children. The 26 who were at grade level in September had to be above grade level. They were in the 115 children you see in March. This is the March results we were testing. Now `the number, above grade level is 115 children' compared with September of 51 children. I read through statistics very quickly here because I have little respect for just number~ but we do~ have these * tests available to anyonewho would like to see them. We have `the children's' writing for anyone to see the way they an- swered the questions in September and the way they answered them 6 months later. PAGENO="0144" 2604 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJI'~ITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I1iav~ihcludëd pur~posely the di~afts so you could see the youngsters who w~re more than 2 years below grnde level in reading. It is a sad thing to see a seventh or eighth grade youngster coming in reading on a second or third grade level. He is embarrassed. It is a shame. You have to dO a good job psycho- logically before you can even attempt to teach this child to read be- cause he feels he is a failure. The quick facts on 10 and 11 you may like to go over yourselves. In January 1967 we had 45 percent of our children Puerto Ricans, 10 percent were Negro and 45 percent other. You see we had a mixed group here. I will summarize very quickly here. We had the under- achiever whom many of you probably have had in your own families. He is getting into a lot of families today. Personally, I don't like the word underachiever. We knOw we can identify these youngsters today. He is a new serious hazard to effective teaching and composes a badly neglected educa- tional problem and as a consequence we have a wasted human resource. I don't know. As teachers we all think the youngster is the most important human resource we have in the world today. A study just made in the New Jersey school system shows that about two-thirds of all the children have average or better than avera.ge intelligence who are being classified as reading retardates if you want to call them that. This is sad. Would you look over to page 14. We had a pediatrician on our staff to whom we sent many of these children. Naturally we have blocked out the names of these children. If you will read through here I think it will sound like something you would probably pick up in India. It is not. These children are in Dunkirk, N.Y. When we see some of these very serious physical handicaps in the children it is no wonder they cannot learn. It is no wonder they are indifferent to learning or listless in school. Many of these children had pneumonia two or three times this year. Page 15 pretty well sums up what I feel we should think about when we are discussing or thinking about compensatory programs for de- prived children. This was taken from an address by Alan Cohen, now director of the reading center at Yshiva University. Dr. Cohen has done much of the research in the whole field of compensatory education. No doubt about it he is one of the best in the country. He goes on to talk about the culturally deprived children and saying that the ISEA title I projects attack quantity rather than quality. More service, longer hours, more basal readers, more of the same will not change the youngster. One particular approach to teaching reading to a culturally deprived child is not the answer tO their reading retardation. Culturally de- prived children are human beings. They are the members of a species made up of individuals with different learning styles. That means they must be taught as individuals and only through a thorough continuous quality instruction will culturally deprived chil- dren ever learn to read. I think it is most important here that down on No. 6, Dr. Cohen says "Most Puerto Rican, Negro, Mexican-American and Appalachian white children are retarded in reading. Not many, but most." PAGENO="0145" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2605 I could not agree with him more thoroughly. I think if we want to just sum up here we might turn to the "Report Bleak on Aiding Disadvantaged Children" on page 18 President Johnson received a generally gloomy report on the first efforts to reach poor children through Federal Education funds. This is why we feel we must set up something that is separate but certainly cooperating with. The "crucial ingredient" in improving education of the disadvantaged, the report says, is changing "the attitude of teachers". Yet in most communities studies of the special projects for the poor were alarmingly deficient in facing up to this need. The report was made to the President by the National Ad- visory Council on the Education of Disadvantaged Children. The Council report concentrated on a $2~5O million, one quarter of the total, spent this year on special summer education projects for disadvantaged children. Let us go over and find out the reason. It found "most disappointing" the failure of schools "to identify and attract the most seriously disadvantaged children" to the special program. It also con- cluded "frequently heavy purchases of educational equipment are made without examining the educational practices that underlie their use". Now I am going to ask you to read that and ask me any questions you want to about it because this is the one thing we feel we are accom- plishing in almost all of the small compensatory education programs. This is not just true of my area. I have taught teachers from various States and they all ask the same question. Why aren't we having more programs that will help the individual youngster who cannot be helped in a large school system. If you have children and you have the money, you can afford to have tutors, can't you? A youngster having trouble in Spanish and geometry and you have college in mind you will spend money on tutoring the' youngster. I know because I taught in a demonstration school for years and I taught in a college prep school. I know `that parents have spent `a great deal of money on private tutoring for these youngsters. Cer- tainly the poor deserve the same attention. Mr. QUIE. I would ask unanimous consent and I know my colleagues will not object that all the material you have given us be placed in the record. I will yield to my colleague from New York for further questions. (The information follows:) THE AMEBICAN POTENTIAL-REPORT FROM Booa~&rx RE&DING CENTER, DUNKIRK. N.Y. In 1964, Edgar May wrote a clear-thinking study of a key American problem and entitled it "The Wasted American's". In the near future are we going to call them the "Used" Americans? The scramble for funds and power in the name of helping the poor could cause `such a thing. If funds are going to `be used to help the poor of America, if power is going to be exerted tobreak down causes and pro- duce working answers, then the overall goal has to be clearly defined and never lost sight of; defined, achieveable goals must be permitted to have a functioning vehicle free to do the job. The federal government does, and should have, the~ national interest of all' citizens as its concern. Its concern should cross party lines, economic lines, racial lines and religious lines. The Economic Opportunity Act emphasizes the govern~ ment's concern for the national welfare and a specific national problem. This national problem of the poor American is getting bigger rapidly and producing newer and ever more vicious related problems as the population and wealth of 80-084-67-pt. 4-10 PAGENO="0146" 2606 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the natiOn increases. Giving money to the poor is not the answer. Established institutions and bureaus have failed or we wouldn't be concerned today. Here is where education and freedom enter. Improving the economic status of a large segment of the country is heavily dependent upon education-education of the poor families and their children; education of the community in which they live; education of the industries dependent upon them for their labor; and above all, education of the various local, state and federal agencies to achieve the goal of helping the Wasted Americans of today and the future become the independent, productive Americans they can and should be. And freedom? The vehicle devised to combat any aspect of this problem must be free of outside political and self-interest pressures to~ work successfully. Otherwise the poor, the weak for whom* the programs are set up, lose out to the interests of the strong. The poor of our country experience constant failures. Failure breeds further failure. This pattern can be reversed. As an educator, I am interested in succes8 and I am particularly interested in success now, for the child now. Across the nation, the average ADO child is accumulating the same characteristics that shaped the dependency of his parents. School dropouts among AIJO children between the ages of 14 and 17 are more than twice as high as for other children in this age group. Inability to read is the largest single cause of failure during the elementary school years. A low level of reading ability has been accurately identified as one of the basic causes of chronic unemployment and under-employ- ment. The 9- to 12-year old child has an eager, open mind. This is a crucial age when poor reading ability can spell success or failure in life. Then wouldn't an extra class in reading in school take care of this problem? Absolutely not. Home environment, attitudes, hope, nutrition, medical problems and abnormalities- these are some of the aspects of the problem. What are the handicaps of the public school in attacking this problem? 1. The school is geared particularly for curriculum, not the total environ- ment. 2. Size-they are forced to deal in numbers. They teach many children, not the individual child. 3. Pressures exist-a principal or superintendent is constantly harassed by outside pressures-cannot be flexible and independent in his approach to the problems that exist in his area. The Boorady Reading Center was set up with the idea of attacking the failure pattern from every aspect possible. It must provide an atmosphere of achievement, success, hope. This could only be done by providing a facility with complete freedom from outside pressures and the money to operate such a facility. It must not be dictated to by the public schools, parochial schools, civic government or any other group. At the same time, close cooperation with the local school is necessary since compensatory education should bolster the existing curriculum. This corn- pensatory education or special service should be outside of the institution where ~he had experienced academic and social failure. The physical plant should approx- imate a warm, attractive home; his teachers should provide a mother or father figure with whom each child can identify; he should encounter acceptance, trust and confidence; he should be provided with new experiences; attention should be given to his medical, nutritional and psychological needs; above all, his educa- tion should be individual, of the highest quality, and geared to his ability so that 1ie might progre~s at his own speed. This spells the beginning of success and independence. The Economic Opportunity Act provided the opportunity for the Boorady pro- -gram to expand and operate in this manner. It has been even more successful than we dared hope. Our original idea was to prevent future dropouts. We are encouraged to see yesterday's dropouts beginning to voluntarily ring our doorbell and ask for the opportunity to try again. These boys are the hard-core unemploy- ables now. We call them our "Drop-Ins." This summer, 1967, we have 6 Indian children from the Cattaraugus Reserva- tion. 12 "Drop-Ins", 5 mothers in addition to 289 elementary and junior high students. An important point I think is the follow-up we do when a student is absent. The family is called upon as soon as a child misses a class. The parents learn that we care, prompt attendance and family responsibility on the part of the parent and child in letting us know when a child cannot attend are all a part of the program. PAGENO="0147" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2607 Under the OEO, we have completed one summer program and one full year program. You will find the results of those programs on pages 7 and 8 and 9. Also, on pages 10 to 12 you will find "Quick Facts" drawn up last January in response to question's. We would refer you further to page 13 with an excerpt from an article in the National Observer on the Bright Underachiever. This is the child who has a normal or above normal IQ but is scoring low on the standard achievements tests administered in the local school. These tests are almost always geared to a middle-class culture, and the results are most unrealistic. Subsequently, the child is taught as though he has a low intelligence level, and thus falls further behind "normal" students. Page 14 is a copy of a doctor's report. The thédk~al ills described are typical of the children of our area. Among our students we have an occasional `brain- damaged child as well. An important inclusion is page 15, an excerpt from a paper presented by Alan Cohen, Director of the Reading Center at Yeshiva University, to a New York State English Teachers Council in 1966. To sum up, what is the Boorady Program under OEO? It is: Total Education.-It provid~s a variety of services aimed at attacking the causes of failure. Excellence.-a. Teachers must be well qualified in their education, person- ality, `and psychological orientation to the disadvantaged child. b. High quality materials including multi-ethnic texts related to the lives of these children. c. Chartered under the NYS Bd. of Regents knowing that they would de- mand maintainance of quality. Fle~vible.-Programs can be devised for the needs of the area. Geared to the individual.-Not stereotyped, but adjusted to the needs and capabilities of each child. This is only possible with' small groups. We re- ject the acceptance of the position "that most of these children have limited capabilities and that not much can be done as a result". Neighborhood Youth Uorps.-Our six young people have had a marvelous impact on the Center. They have served us and we have served them. Two Vista `Volunteers last year made tremendous contributions to our program. Four Vistas this year give promise for greater community involvement. Handicap.-Lack of funds for expansion and future planning. READING TESTS ADMINISTERED TO 326 CHILDREN September 1966, Results: Number Below Grade Level: 75.0% ; 249 Children. Number at Grade Level: 7.9% ; \26 Children. Number Above Grade Level: 17i%; 51 Children. March 1967, Results: ` ` Number Below Grade Level: 56.0%; 184 Children. Number at Grade Level: 8.3%; 27 Children. Number Above Grade Level; 35.7% ; 115 Children. PAGENO="0148" 2608 `ECONOMIC OPPORTTJ~ITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 L"~ ?~i~ PAGENO="0149" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, ACT. AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2609 c .-~-----~- -~ ~ ~ . N ~4) PAGENO="0150" 2610 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 QUICK FACTS ABOUT THE Boon.~ny Mu~.1oEIAL R&&nING CENTER In Chautauqua County there are approximately 2,040 economically and ed- ucationally deprived children who qualify for remedial reading assistance, since it is the only center of its kind in Chautauqua County. As of January, 1967, there are 260 Durkirk children at the Center under the OEO program: 45% are Puerto Rican. 10% are Negro. 45% are others. All students are in classes that purposely mix all economic and ethnic groups. Teachers are not advised which children belong to which economic group. All are given the very best of individual attention. The most remarkable thing about the program so far is the continued en- thusiasm of teachers and students. To date there have been no dropouts of stu- dents. Rather, the waiting list of students doesn't wait quietly in the files; little brothers and sisters of enrolled students come again and again saying, "Please, may I join up?" Why does the center insist on having students of all economic levels? Because more than just reading is taught here-attitudes, love, initiative, intellectual curiosity, pride and confidence in self. The combination of the planned program, skilled and dedicated teachers, bright and attractive physical plant is only part. Without realizing it, the less fortunate children are learning from the more fortunate. Prejudice simply does not exist. They all take great pride in themselves, their work and the facilities at the Center. With 350 children attending classes twice a week, there is no defacement of the building or educational materials. The need in Dunkirk is great. This program is designed to prevent dropouts at the Junior High and High School level by giving the younger children a good foundation and enthusiasm for learning. If we had the facilities, we could double the enrollment. A child's needs cannot wait three years to be met. When they reach high school age a failure pattern is difficult to reverse. Hence, the large numbers. of dropouts of Junior High and High School age in the city now. Ideally, an additional program designed to the needs of these boys and girls should be considered now. Again and again we hear pleas from distressed par- ents of Puerto Rican and Negro origin for help with these dropouts. It is wrong to dismiss these young people with the attitude that their parents don't care and are to blame. They do care. They don't know how to go about it. The hope of the future is in the young people of today. Children cannot be kept waiting. Bi-Lingual Chiidren.-A particular program is set up for the children who do not yet read and speak English. It is meeting with great success. Improvement after summer session of 196G.-lOU predominantly Negro and Puerto Rican children enrolled. Improvement: 50% improved a 3-4 month grade leveL 25% improved a 6-8 month grade level. 15% improved a 10 month grade level. 10% practically no change. Teamwork and love of children have been the key to success here. The staff~ consists of Director, Social Worker, Master teacher, 2 speech therapists, 4 Vista workers, 6 qualified teachers, a bookkeeper, and an office clerk. All work at less than standard salaries. In addition, there are 8 teachers' aides, 6 of whom are Neighborhood Youth Corps. Community volunteers help as needed. Contractors (construction, electrical, architect) reduced their fees. There are more and more offers of personal time and effort by citizens. Local Union #266 is preparing a benefit day with a goal of furnishing a bus for the Center. Center is chartered by the New York State Board of Regents. It is non-profit and operated by a Board of Trustees. Services: Developmental Reading. Parent Education. Remedial Reading. In-Service Courses for Teachers and Study Skills. Aides. Psychological Services. Experience Room. PAGENO="0151" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 26fl `Emphasis is on quality of teaching, love of the child, and, involvement of parents and community. The reniedial reading course aims to help those with reading disabilities of various kinds: language, psychological, emotional, and/or social deprivation. The end result of this program is diagnosis of problems, concentrated individual tutor- ing, team evaluation by experts, and most important, rapid improvement in reading, confidence and initiative in the pupil. Value received from ta~v dollar.-Comparing the quality and cost of this pro- gram with others, quality is superior and per pupil cost less. The purpose of much anti-poverty legislation is to change an ecoisting condition of failure and depend- ence in one segment of society. `Such a program as this strikes a strong blow at some of the causes~ [Excerpt from the National Observer, June 5, 19671 Tun Bniauv UNDERACHIEVER 1. Most school authorities argue that such students are a new, serious hazard to effective teaching and compose a badly neglected educational problem and a wasted human resource. 2. A stu'd~r made of the New Jersey ~Schoo1 system between 1960 and 1964 showed almost two-thirds has average or better than average intelligence. The bright underachiever has intelligence, guile and sophistication. This is what we have found in our* "dropin's". DUNKIRK, N.Y., January 18, 1967W Sister MARY BAPTISTA, Boorady Menwnai Uenter Dunicirk N Y DEAR SISTER BAPTISTA: This is a report on the first six children that have come in for their physical exa'minatiois: They all had complete physical examinations which included blood pressure,. rectal examination, audionietry, vision testing, complete, blood count, complete urinalysis and a tuberculin test. The families have been instructed to notify us on the results of the `skin testing. ,. Individually, the findings were: Mild anemia; round worm infestation, mild hearing loss: Vision :-right 20:30, left 20:40; mild hypoglycemia and a possible urinary tract infection~ She was given treatment for the worms andsbould have a further. workup by her own physician if she continues to have a poor appetite or other complaints. At the `time we saw him he had a high fever, pharyngitis, and bronchitis. He was treated for this and laboratory testing was deferred until he was well. Chronic sinusitis: enuresis and chronic urinary tract infection and pin worms. Tuberculin test was negative even though she had had previous findings on chest x-ray at Mayville. Moderate hearing loss; epilepsy; possible mental retardation; flat feet and pin worms. All findings within normal limits. Hypertension;' Obesity.; general ichthyosis (severe); probable intestinal para~ SitoSis. Further workup is indicated by hi's own physician for diet, immunization, skin care an'd the `strong possibility of parasites. ` Yours Very Truly, ARNOLD B. VICTOR, M.D., F.A.A.P. EXCERPT FROM ADDRESS OF ALAN COHEN, DIRECTOR, READING CENTER AT YESHIVA UNIVERSITY, TO THE NEW YOBK STATE ENGLISH TEACHERS COUNCIL, 1966 1. Compensatory programs for culturally deprived children are usually more of the same. Most ES~EA~Title I projects attack quantity rather than quality. More services, longer hours devoted to reading instruction, more basal readers, more time with the teacher will not solve the problem of reading retardation in socially disadvantaged children. New programs `utilizing new methods and ma- terials geared to changing quality rather than quantity are needed. 2. One particular approach to teaching reading to all culturally deprived chil- dren is not the answer to their reading retardation. Culturally deprived chidren PAGENO="0152" 2612 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 are human beings. They are members of a species made up of individuals with different learning styles. That means they must be taught as individuals. 3. Thorough, continuous, qu ityinstruction wIll teach culturally deprived chil- dren to read. A high intensity learning program in which content, level, and rate are adjusted to' individual needs has worked every time this author has tried it with socially disadvantaged children youth.' . . 4. Most teachers do not know what materials and methods are available for teaching socially disadvantaged children. In addition, they do not read journals and are unaware of research and programs conducted in many sections of the ~country. Like lawyers and physicians, teachers blame (with good reason) their poor professional training for~ their deficiencies. But unlike most lawyers and physicians, teachers often do not make up these deficiencies. once they enter the field. 5. The culturally deprived child depends more upon the school for language development and general verbal intelligence than does the `middle class child. In fact, the latter learns most of his verbal behavior, including reading, informally `through his home environment. Thus the school has never really had to teach reading and language development. A sort of quick and dirty glossing over has been enough to get middle class children `on grade level'. Now the culturally de- prived child has been discovered and we educators are on the spot. 6. Most Puerto Rican, Negro, Mexican-American and Appalachian white chil- `dren are retarded in reading. Not many, but most. Many educational administra- tors that I have talked with are not just kidding visitors to their~schools; this is understandable if not defensible. More seriously they are kidding themselves by not recognizing and `accepting the magnitude of the problem. When they kid themselves, there is little chance of effecting significant change in reading in- struction for these unfortunate children. For example, one superintendent of a city slum school system conceded that four or five children at the end of grade One in a particular school might be below grade level in reading in Fune. When we administered the entire Durrell analysis of Reading Difficulty battery individually to all first graders `in this school, we' found' oniy two or three children per classroom reading on grade level. Every other child was already retarded in reading. I hope we can deliver. Right now I have my doubts. If we `do not deliver, we `will be replaced, and by "we" I mean the public schools. Perhaps that gradual re- placement has already started under the aegi's `of the War on Poverty. Look closely and you will see what I mean. [From the Evening Observer, Dunkirk-Freclonia, N.Y., Wednesday, Fan. 25, 1967] EDITORIALS-READING CENTER NERDs HELP After proving to be one of the best investments ever made by the Office of Economic Opportunity to provide needed `help to underprivileged ehildren, Dun- kirk's Boorady Reading Center now faces a financial crisis. A change in the dis- tribution pattern of federal aid funds for next year will result in a severe cut- back to the local reading center. At this point, the fate of the institution is uncertain. The Center, under the dynamic direction of Sister Marie Baptistia, started its program in September funded for 100 students. Within a short time, 200 `young people of all nationalities and faiths were enrolled, swamping the facilities and the staff. Brothers returned with sisters, non-readers with their friends. No one who needed help was refused. Offices and libraries became classrooms. The basement was refurbished `by the local Rotary club for still another classroom. Each child progressed as fast as he was able. Many ea'periences the first real sense of accomplishment in their lives. Each became a person instead of a "nothing." These results are particularly significant in children of second and third generation welfare families. ` . ` ` Here is really the heart of what our aid programs should be designed to do. If a sense of pride can be instilled where there was only despair, a spirit of accomplishment where there was only defea~t, a feeling' ofbelonging where there was only resentment, then that individual Is well on his way to take a respon- sible place in sOciety. The Oenter is doing' this every day where it counts the most for the future in the children of today PAGENO="0153" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2613 Now it needs the help of the community to see that funds Sre provided to assure its continued services. Officers of the Center have suggested a letter writing campaign to public officials. We might also suggest that the local public school officials be approached to put in for a federal grant since the Center is now a licensed educational institution. There are many ways to help. See what YOU can do! [From the Buffalo News, Dec. 5, 1966] STATE 0110 AIDES INSPECT DUNKIRK READING CENTER DTJNKIRK, December 5.-Present and future programs of the Boorady Memo- rial Reading Center were reviewed by state and regional personnel of the Office of Economic Opportunity Saturday. After a four-hour conference with Sister Marie Baptista, SSJ, director of the center, Miss Astrid Gray, executive assistant to the New York State director of 0110, and Albert J. Petrella, field consultant, and Gene Seymour, task force con- * sultant of Buffalo, said the center is "one of the best in the state, if not the nation." The center is giving 356 youngsters individual attention in both remedial and developmental reading and has a waiting list of more than 200, Sister Marie Baptista said. 0110 staff members learned that the social and cultural needs of the students are considered, as well as the lack of reading skills. They were also told Of the community endorsement of the program-volunteer workers, renovation of the basement into additional classrooms by the Dunkirk Rotary Club and several special events underwritten by local citizens. After the conference, Miss Gray observed that "Boorady appears to be achiev- ing all of the aims of 0110-education, integration and motivation." [Prom the Evening Observer, Dunklrk-Fredonla, N.Y., Monday, Dec. 5, 1966] 0110 OrriclALs VISIT Boonanx READING CENTER Three officials of the New York Siate Office of Economic Opportunity (0110) made a brief visit to the Boorady Reading center Saturday afternoon to obtain information for the annual 0110 report to Gov. Rockefeller. Albert J. Petrella, 0110 field consultant, praised Sister Marie Bapti'sta for the work that she and her staff are doing in the field of reading programs with chil- dren of the area. Accompanying Mr. Petrella was Miss Astrid Gray, executive assistant to Mrs. Ersa H. Poston, state 0110 director, and Gene Seymour, rural consultant for the 0110. Also taking part in the afternoon conference was Russell Profitt; recently appointed executive director of the Chautauqua Opportunities Inc., and Mrs. C. B. Mosher, president of the board of directors of the center. The visit to Dunkirk was part of a three-day tour of western New York to view projects financed in part by funds from the 0110. Sister Marie Baptista outlined her past as an educator and explained the goals and hopes of the reading center. She further explained how 0110 aid was ob- tained to help partially finance the program and outlined the reading program * available. Mr. Petrella commented that he was happy to see a community where a need was recognized and then definite action taken locally to solve the problem. He said that 0110 wants the community to help itself and start with a good pro- gram and then ask for federal aid in further financing it. The future plans of the eenter were discussed along with various recommen- dations whteh could be made to other Sreas wishing to start a center Such as the one in Dunkirk. It was pointed out that the Boorady Reading Center was started through the efforts of Sister Baptista and other interested citizens of the area and expanded to such a point as to have a waiting list. 0110 funds were then obtained to help finance the reading program and make possible the further expansion, and con- tinuation of the work. Mr. Petreila said that the state 0110 will help officials of the center continue their work and that the staff will offer all possible assistance. PAGENO="0154" 2614 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY~ AcT..~MEND~ENTS OF 1967 [From the Buffalo Courier Express, T~uiu~y, Mar. 30, 1967] READING CENTER'S DIRECTOR UPSET BY FUND CUTBACK (By Lucian C. Warren) The plight of the Boorady Memorial Reading Center in Dunkirk was described here a few weeks ago. This is the project which has had outstanding success in training underprivileged children in northern Chautauqua County to become good English readers. The results have been dramatic, with some of the children rising rapidly from the bottom to the top of their classes as the result of the improved reading facility. Sister Marie Baptista Pollard, director of the center, informs us that she has just been told by Chautauqua Opportunities Inc., that~ the program must be sharply cut back. A directive from the New York City regional office of the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) that after today funds will be supplied from the federal antipoverty program to provide classes for only 100 out of 250 children now enrolled at the Dunkirk center. Sister Baptista outlines the nature of the problem with great clarity as follows: "Here we are in the United States of America, fighting the drop-out problem by setting up job corps, neighborhood youth corps and various other `stay-in- school' projects. "At the same time officials are telling me to `drop out' children who could, be taught to speak, read and write English and become some of the best citizens this country has ever known. - "In the field of medicine and mental health,.emphasis is on prevention, while in education of the disadvantaged, we wait until a crisis, occurs and then rally our forces at an astronomical cost in time, effort and money.", Representative Charles E. Goodell and Sen. Robert F. Kennedy have `gone to bat for the program. . . . . . Congressman Goodell only two weeks ago had OEO director Sargent Shriver in his office for a conference on the matter. Shriver promised be would see what he could.do to obtain sufficient funds for the Dunkirk project to keep it going at full strength. Apparently he has either done nothing or not succeeded in finding funds for 150 of the students. It is difficult to believe the latter premise. Sist~r Baptista says she has been reading about `conditions in New York City public schools, where the number. of youngsters who can't learn their school lessons because of a poor cOmmand' of English is astronomically high. "This could soon become' nation-wide," says the nun, "if nothing is done to help `these youngsters. "The cities can hire all the police force available, preach, `yak' at the children, but until they offer help when help is most needed and appreciated, there will be no'cessation in acts of delinquenCy which usually begin with defiance. "Several educational studies point out that when `children ,are tutored in the same building `where `they already met failure, with the same textbooks they failed with, taught by the same teachers who have no faith in them, the result is that the program-any program-'falls on its face.' "It has been my experience that a separate educational center is in great part "the answer to many questions' concerning compensatory education. "I honestly do not know how we can continue to operate after today. We have `teachers, children willing to learn, but no money." Though the hour is late, it is earnestly hoped that somehow the prayers of Sister Baptista and the hopes of her students and the families can be answered. [From the Buffalo Express, Dec. 1, 1966] - REPORT BLEAK ON -AIDING DISADVANTAGED PUPILS AusTIN, Tex.-PreSideflt Johnson received Wednesday a generally gloomy report on the first efforts to reach poor children through federal education funds. The "crucial `ingredient" in improving education of the disadvantaged, the report said, is `changing "the attitude of teachers." Yet in most communities studied the special projects for the poor "were alarmingly deficient in facing up to this need," it said. ` PAGENO="0155" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2615 * The report Was made to. the President by the National Advisory Council on the Ed~ication of Disadvantaged Children, created in 1965 by the legislation providing the first federal aid for elementary and secondary education. The council report concentrated on the $250-million, one quarter of the total, spent this year on special summer education projects for disadvantaged children. It found much to commend in some of the 86 school districts studied, but con- cluded: "For the most part, projects are piecemeal, fragmented efforts at re- mediation or vaguely directed enrichment. It is extremely rare to find strate- gically planned, comprehensive programs for change." PURCHASING. PRACTICES HIT It found "most disappointing" the failure of schools "to identify and attract the most seriously disadvantaged children" to the special programs. It also concluded that frequently, heavy purchases of educational equipment are made without examining the educational practices that underlie their use." The report was based on the personal observations of 27 consultants. They found that most of the summer programs "took place in ordinary, schoolhouse classrooms and were at best, mild variations on ordinary classroom work." One consultant reported: "The program was as uncreative and unimaginative `as I have ever seen. Pupils dropped out in large numbers. Several teachers mdi- *catcd they felt that any kind of help which might be offered would not signifi- cantly change most of these kids. The head of guidance and counseling told me that he was reasonably certain that most of the cause of people being in the deprived category was biological, a result of poor genetic endowment." 17 PROJECTS DUNKIRIC, NEW YORK Take a 10-room, small-town mansion, once elegant with gables and ginger- bread, lately faded to peeling paint and flaking plaster, add youngsters from a small manufacturing town, the. children of once-migrant grape pickers and semi- skilled factory workers-and what do you get? Nothing more than an empty house filled with kids who read poorly or not at all. When you add to these the unobstrusive talents of two dedicated nuns, one of whom just happens to be an author, a Doctor of Philosophy, and a child psychologist; .the other a trained social worker, whose professional competence is exceeded only by her love for children, possibilities begin to emerge. When the talented nuns convince a public-spirited businessman that he should make the once elegant residence available to them so that they can convert it into a reading center for needy children, gOod things begin to happen. And, when the United States Office of Economic Opportunity learns about the quiet nuns and the businessman, and observes the initiative that they have already taken to help children with their speaking, their reading,, and perhaps far deeper problems, you have the potential for a project to be supported by Federal funding under the Community Action section of the Economic Oppor- tunity Act. * * ` The faded mansion is in Dunkirk, New York, where, during the past 40 years, population has slipped from a 1920 all-time high of 19,336 to a declining 18,000. The children come to the Center from all economic levels in a community where median family income is less than $6,000. The nuns are Sister Marie Baptista and `Sister Theresa of the Teaching Order of St. Joseph. The public spirited business- `man is Mr. Norman Boorady, who made the residence available as a memorial to his mother and who cooperated in its initial modernization. Prior to their hearing rumors that assistance from Federal sources might be available, the two Sisters operated the Reading Center alone and without outside help. The Center was open to any child who needed help in reading. The fee was $1.00 per lesson. Parents who could pay did. The children of those who could not pay were welcome. In either case, no questions were asked and no child knew who paid for what. " Under OEO funding, the same policy applies. Thus, the Boorady Center has * now achieved an integrated mix which represents a cross-section of all children in the community. The basic qualification for attendance is under-achievement in reading. PAGENO="0156" 2616 ECON(YMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Plans to request OEO assistance for the Center were drawn up by Sister Baptista, Sister Theresa, and the Board of Directors of the Boorady Memorial Reading Center, which is chartered as a non-profit corporation under the laws of the State of New York. The first draft of the project proposal was begun in September 1965. Five months later the application for funds went forward to Chautauqua Opportunities Agency, the OEO agency responsible for Community Action Programs in Chautauqua County, New York. Endorsements for the project came from several responsible persons in the Chautauqua County area. The Department of Public Welfare commented that "the Center is providing a most helpful service, one which is not available through public and private schools." A public school official testified to the "inval- uable educational service which the Center has afforded to many of our children who experience reading difficulty." A local school administrator reported that he did not have within his system "reading specialists who can provide the program in reading to correct reading deficiencies." In the face of such documented evidence of need, the application of the Boorady Memorial Reading Center was approved as part of the Chautauqua County Community Action Program. The Office of Economic Opportunity share, under Grant No. CG-1088, is $54,548. The money is authorized to staff, equip, and operate a Tutorial Reading Center in Dunkirk, New York, between June 1, 1966 and April 30, 1967. Staff, equip, and operate-truly formidable sounding words. First-staffing. Sister Baptista's competence as a child psychologist was well recognized. Superior teachers of the public schools in the Dunkirk-Fredonia area were most anxious to make' their services available for the 1966 Summer Sessions. Mrs. Kathryn Bullock, who had recently resigned as bookkeeper at the Brooks County Hospital, agreed to maintain the financial records. A member of the Fredonia Presby- terian Church, a certified speech therapist, welcomed the opportunity to lend her talents. Two VISTA volunteers, mature, dedicated, and competent, were added. One of these, Mrs. Muriel McCutchen, brings to the Puerto Rican children of Dunkirk her years of experience with Mexican-American children on the West Coast, plus her fascinating competence in designing life-like puppets and marionettes. English or Spanish, it makes little difference when a child pours his heart out to a rag doll that bobs, nods, and dances at the end of a set of strings. Today, the Boorady Reading Center faces no staffing problem. In addition to Mrs. McCutchen and the second VISTA volunteer, Mrs. Elsie Keller, who main- tains all student records, there are seven specially trained reading teachers, two speech therapists, a secretary, a bookkeeper, two volunteer librarians, and four Youth Corps teacher aides. All are of different denominations, and all work together, as a large and happy family, helping the two nuns to provide the read- ing training, speech therapy, and tender, loving care which these children so desperately require when they come to the door of the Reading Center. Eleven other teachers, each with an advanced degree, stand in line waiting for a vacancy on the teaching staff. "Equip." This was a real challenge. The Center could not be like a school. It must be like a fine home. Many of the children who might come wouldn't know about fine homes with book shelves, books they could take away and read, and quiet carpets. It must be an exciting place with machines that would let the children hear how their voices sound, and instruments that would flash words on the wall. The Center staff knew about these things, but they knew that wonderful as OEO help was, it wouldn't stretch quite far enough. So Sister Baptista decided she bad to get a job. She made commitments for what she needed. She stretched each OEO dime until it loked like a pre-war dollar. She persuaded carpenters, carpeters, and educational suppliers to give her credit. Then she delegated administration of the Reading Center to Sister Theresa, and with the permission of her superiors, she taught, for a salary, at the State University College at Fredonia. She took the salary with one hand. With the other, she turned it over to the carpenters, the carpeters, and the educational suppliers. When July 1966 rolled around, the Reading Center was ready and the staff was ready. As to the children, some were recommended by the Welfare Agency; others were sent in by their public school teachers. Still others were solicited by such volunteers as Mrs. AdeLfa Perez, who knocked on sagging doors and per- suaded reluctant parents to enroll their children. By opening day 197 were regis- tered. Of these, 102 were sustained under OEO funding. Others, whose parents could pay the $1.00 per hour fee, were tuition students. The rest were "on the house." PAGENO="0157" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2617 For each child who enrolled, Sister Baptista selected from her inventory of reading measures those individual test instruments which her experience told her would best diagnose the reading disabilities of that child. In addition, she administered and interpreted psychological tests for some of the children whose behavior indicated a need to go beyond the diagnosis of reading difficulties. After the performance of each child had been interpreted and after his score had been recorded as a pre-test, each child was assigned to his teacher and his instruction was started, one level below his performance score. Each teacher worked with six children. Thus, for five days a week, five hours a day, from July 5, tO August 15, the 197 children-little ones, pre-adolescents, and early teen-agers-were given "Thera- peutic Tutoring" in reading and study skills, in listening, thinking, speaking, and learning that they could learn. At the end of the summer session, the pre-test was administered as a post-test and compared with earlier performance. Sister Baptista and Sister Theresa are far too professional to tub thump the differences between a July pre-test and an August post4est as a statistically significant measure of a child's reading gains over a brief six-week period. The results are available and the Sisters are pleased to share them with anyone who cares to look. However, they prefer to seat their visitors at their kitchen table over a cup o coffee and a sweet roll and let them read the uninhibited answers that the children gave when they were asked to write down what they really thought of their summer school experience. At first, the visitor will be amused; then he will stop, think, and understand what too many of the children are really saying. Each says it differently, but the same theme appears, again and again. "They gave me love here. I want to come back." The summer of 1966 is history in Dunkirk, on the shores of Lake Erie, in Chautauqua County, New York. The grapes have been picked. The twisted arm- thick vines, which once bore the purple fruit, stand brown and naked, impaled on their props of wood and stranded barbed wire, like skeletons stapled to crosses in the No Man's Land of another country. But the children have come alive. The word is out for Puerto Rican, white, and Negro alike. The first elementary school children tumble in at 8:30 in the morning; the last high school boys now leave at 9 in the evening. At the beginning of the September session, 352 had applied for admission. Although OEO funding only made provision for 100 children, 251 of the applicants were from economically disadvantaged families and had been referred by Welfare services. Somehow, the burden is being carried. Not a single child has been turned away. A new teacher has been hired, the Rotary Club has installed a ceiling, painted walls and a basement floor, put up a partition, and donated materials and labor. A private donor has given $500 for new eaves and new drains to assure a dry basement. Six classroom lighting fixtures were donated and installed by a local electrical contractor. The Fredonia Presbyterian Women's Group has supplied arts and crafts material. The Fredonia Presbyterian Youth Group has worked at cleaning, clearing, and painting. To take care of increased enrollment, the basement has now been converted into a classroom. As they review the progress that has been made in a few short months, Sister Baptista and Sister Theresa are thankful. They are also troubled. They know that chautauqua-type training has no place in the 20th Century. They also know that their OEO authorization will expire in April. But they are not idle. They have drawn up an application for re-funding. They are working 16 hours a day to prove their entitlement to each frugally administered OEO dollar. It is also rumored that they find the time to speak their needs silently to a higher power. To one who might understand, they privately admit that it is much wiser to get on with the most urgent needs of today and let that higher power decide what is best for tomorrow. Perhaps it was this philosophy which prompted one hesitant little boy to tell the Director of the Center when she asked him if he knew her, "Oh, yes, Sister, I know you. I saw you in the `Sound of Music.'" Mr. GOODELL. Sister, I am very proud to have you here as a spokes- man from our district, as well as a very articulate spokesman for the concept you are advancing and the program in which you have done so well. PAGENO="0158" 2618 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Will you just give us the various age groups which your program covers? Sister BAPTISTA. We made a sort of regulation that we would not take children from the first and second grade. I felt if these youngsters were immature and they were not learning well they should probably repeat the grade. We do not have an ungraded system in our part of the country. However we found that this was happening. A little second or third grader would come in and say, "I flunked last year and I flunked the year before." This is almost getting to be a pattern of talk for these youngsters. So that now we have gone to take the second grade children if they ha~e repeated a grade. This year we had about 15 little first graders come to the center~ Now these youngsters had had Headstart 2 years ago. But again there was not the followup because they had not been-well, language was. poor, all of the rest of it was first grade. These youngsters came in and we did not have room for them. We turned our library over into a classroom and an office over into a class- room. We said "You have to come back after Christmas." I really hope.d~ they would forget and not come back because we didn't ha~e room. The week following Christmas vacation there were nine Puerto Rican and colored youngsters sitting in the library. "You said after Christ- mas and us is here." So of course we hired a teacher and got some books and started in. We still have them. Our grades usually run from about the third grade right through the junior high. In the evenings we do give classes for our high school youngsters. We have had to cut that repeatedly. I don't dare think of the number of high school youngsters who have asked to have help. This is interesting. Many disadva.ntaged children go to a high school, and this is true throughout the country, and they are put into business education, we will say, which is all very fine but there are many youngsters who don't want business, they would like to go to college or they would like to continue their education. They are completely stymied because they do not have the required subjects to get into the colleges. These youngsters are coming now and asking, "Will you help me with biology," "Will you help me with chemistry so that I can go into that program in my senior or junior year." They are readers and they would like to be helped guidancewise and every other way. I really feel strong about the guidance program that should parallel a reading program, particuIa~rly for our junior high and our high school youngsters. Mr. G-OODELL. Basically your program is aimed primarily at the fourth grade up through the secondary level? Sister BAPTISTA. That is correct. Mr. GOODELL. Would you tell us just briefly how the program was started at the Boorady reading center? Sister BAPTISTA. Yes. I started a private reading center on wheels. I went around in a broken dOwn car from school to school to help these children. I was of course just going to the parochial schools at that time because I had been asked to come into the area. In a very short while many of the teachers from the public schools were asking me if I would take some of the youngsters from their grades. PAGENO="0159" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 26195. So we expanded a bit. Finally I was able to get a house in the mid- dle of the city. We started with 30 youngsters. After one semester we had 94. The following,year we had 115. We now have 307 in the last 3' years. . . ` Mr. GOODELL. The house you refer to is the Boorady house from which the names comes? Sister BAPTISTA. That is right. Mr. GOODELL. This was donated, was it, at that time? Sister BAPTISTA. The use of it wa~s donated for the youngsters, in other words, set up a reading center there. This is again nonsectarian in every respect and most people I think realize that now. We have more youngsters from the public school right now simply because- I have been in the parochial schools previously to this, you see, and have taken many of those children-and there are more children in the public schools in our area than in the private schools. Mr. GOODELL. I have been through a rather torturous maze with you in reference to our attempts to get this funding program started as a private program which was run without any Federal funding what- soever. Will you tell us when the decision was made to try `to obtain some of the poverty money for an expanding program? Sister BAPTISTA. I was down at New York at the time. I was look- ing at various grants knowing that many of the children who were coming never could afford private tutoring. I went from place to place. Everywhere I would go they said, "You ha~e to have matching funds." Since I didn't have funds we had to start somewhere else. This is at the time of the birth of the Office of Economic Opportunity. They were just moving in their desks up there. I knew nothing about it. I went to a young lawyer and said "Can you do a little research for me and find out what this is all about." He came back and said "If I were you I would go up and get an appli- cation." I went up. They laughed at me, "An application", they said, "you have to go back and work through your county." I went back and contacted Chautauqua County. They had just applied for `funds through the Office of Economic Opportunity. We were one of the first groups that were funded there. This was a year ago June 13. Mr. GOODELL. Now, you have received initial grants. How much was involved? Sister BAPTISTA. We received $54,000 for 100 children and 250 chil- dren showed up. So we kept spending the money until it was almost gone. We asked for additional funds of $10,000 to take care of two teachers and more material that we needed. We were granted this $10,000 extra. This year we asked for $91,000 to run,our program and received a promise of $75,000 to run our program for a `full 12-month year, all through summer up to next May. Mr. GOODELL. The problems we went through were rather difficult in `terms of the delay in getting the funds allocated. They largely resulted from the fact that the funds of the Chautauqua County corn- munity action agency were `cut `back due primarily to the earmarking of funds last year. There was a supplemental grant approved attempting to bring this up to a level at which you could operate reasonably close to what you `had projected. Is that not correct? PAGENO="0160" 2620 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Sister BAPTISTA. That is correct, Mr. Goodell. Mr. GOODELL. Can you give us an estimate of the number of young- sters that you could effectively serve in this area with this type of program if there were adequate funding available? Sister BAPTISTA. Yes. I have asked the board of occupational serv- ices in the county about the number of economically deprived and educationally deprived `children who need remedial reading. It is somewhere around 2,000 or 3,000 children. They say it is much greater than this~ But they have earmarked that number of children at least. Mr. GOODELL. That `is in the county? Sister BAPTISTA. That is right. I think myself it is much greater than this. This is about the number they have come up with at this time and it is growing constantly. Mr. GOODELL. This is a county of approximately 150,000 people? Sister BAPTISTA. Yes. Mr. GOODELL. Would you give us your observation, and I under- stand you don~t want to be critical of others, but would you tell us your problems concerning the lack of coordination of various programs and funding of programs in the area? Sister BAPTISTA. First of all, may I say we are very grateful to Con- gressman Goodell for all the help he gave us. Chautauqua Opportu- nities, a group of men who represented them, went down to Washing- ton several times to help to get more funds. These funds were earmarked for various objects as Congressman Goodell so well told you. I believe he himself went to the Office of Economic Opportunity to plead for us to get more funds. There was a delay, there is no doubt about it. However, we were finally funded. Because I was quite sure that Congressman Goodell would do something we proceeded as if we had been funded. Mr. GOODELL. It is a good thing you had faith. Sister BAPTISTA. We hired `teachers. We ordered books. `We didn't pay for anything for a long time. I would have had to leave the county if we had not been funded-probably leave the country. Mr. Qtm~. You and Congressman Goodell both. Mr. GOODELL. Sister, the lack of coordination of the different pro- grams that have gone on there, and I was referring to such things as the problem of getting State funds and poverty funds and elementary and secondary funds working here in a coordinated way; could you make a little comment on that? Sister BAPTISTA. I would like to comment but I am on very thin ice when it comes to organization. When I came into Dunkirk, I was so stupid I did not know that Dunkirk has a school system and all the others have central school systems. You can imagine how all super- intendents felt about me for awhile because I `was calling it the general school system and they said this is a city school system. The board of cooperative educational services that worked through- out the county and handled all of the curriculum and hiring of teachers and so on for the whole county certainly is tremendous. There are 17 school districts in that area. I am under contract to them. I give work- shops for the board of occupational services. I gave it to Jamestown in November. I have gone up to Mayville and various places for workshops and worked very closely with these teachers. I have given workshops to PAGENO="0161" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2621 the public school teachers of Dunkirk, in reading, remedial reading and developmental psychology to these teachers. I have gone to all the public schools and talked to the parents and teachers. I feel that the coordination and cooperation has been good. Did you have anything else in mind? Mr. G-0ODELL. I think both these programs are relatively new in getting underway and we have some interesting projections on how we are going to move into this area. Any lack of coordination at the moment is probably a problem of getting started. I have one other question that I think is relative as far as this com- mittee is concerned. The youngsters that you come in contact with are largely youngsters whom the existing school system has failed in one way or another. I am not blaming the school system alone. It is society that has failed. You have made it dramatically clear that you cannot bring them back simply with additional teachers or the remedial school approach. Their problems are broader in scope; family, nutrition, health, at- titude, all of this. Can you give us just a brief description of how you go about attack- ing the more subtle problem of these youngsters? You do not have a large amount of money to give them nutritional help, you don't have a large amount of money to meet their family problems or do things meaningful that can begin to change their attitude. How do you go about this? Sister BAPTISTA. I think you have an important point that concerns the motivation of these youngsters later on. First of all we do have four wonderful VISTA volunteers this year. We had two last year who did a tremendous job in our area, they developed what they call an experience room. The Rotary built the room, equipped the room. These VISTA volunteers came in. This is something that is not connected with read- ing. It definitely is connected with all learning. It takes care of the subtle things that underlie a child being happy or unhappy in a learn- ing situation. They built a marionette stage, a puppet stage. Here were little young- sters who had never spoken English before, learning to work these little puppets where they did not have to be concerned how they sounded because they were behind the stage. These puppets were being worked on. They were putting on the shows for them. Thus, young- sters whoP had never before been selected to be in a show other than opening or closing the doors or pulling down the shades, as one young- ster told me. This youngster was permitted to have a vital part in the community. He went around to the various church organizations and he put on a show with the VISTA volunteers. This was a tremendous thing for the youngsters. Secondly, with these particular children we did do, I feel, a great deal of writing. This is where it really wears you out. I think any teacher will tell you. this. We saw these children two and three and four times outside their reading classes to ask them what they were having trouble with. Sometimes they would come in and they would not have any reading at all. We would just talk with them. It was a type of therapy with these youngsters that they needed far more than the "Textbook open 80-084-67-pt. 4-11 PAGENO="0162" 2622 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 at page 17." They needed somebody to sit down and talk with them. We also installed a one-way vision mirror which we questioned at great length because it cost $400 or $500. It has paid for itself a million times. The child is nOt aware it is there. A good teacher can carry on a testing program and tutoring program, the mother sits back and hears how the teacher comes to the child. She does not say "Stop, don't you know better." But the teacher says "I think you can do the job. That is not too difficult. Remember we did this yesterday. This is just a little harder. That is all." She hears this conversational tone with which the teacher handles this child. She observes it all. She can ask questions about it. We hope to install some kind of recording system where the parents will hear everything that is said but up to this point we haven't. `We never use the one-way vision mirror with the teenager without telling them because they would never trust us. We usually say, `We have visitors, would you mind if they observed." They say, "If they are not going to be in here looking at me, OK." But we never use it without telling the children. V I think children cannot learn anything unless they are content and comfortable. This is again where not only our volunteers V but our fine neighborhood youth corps come in. V We have six neighborhood youth corps girls. Four are colored girls, two are Puerto Rican youngsters who have done a tremendous job with our youngsters. They help to interpret many of the problems for us because they are the big sisters of these children or they live in the same block with them. I think we very often overlook the good that another youngster from that same area can do. In fact ~I brought a tape with me. All we did was ask a VISTA volunteer to go up and talk with them. V We taped it. "How do you feel about the school system? How do you feel about your work here at Boorady?" We did not mean for them to talk about the school system. It was interesting to hear these young- sters say, "We like to watch good teachers teach. `We like to know that these youngsters are having their questions answered." V V V You might be interested in this, talking about the little subtle things that haVppen. Last year we asked for evaluation from: the children. V The Vquestions, maybe were loaded, I don't know, because I really wanted to know how the kids felt about it. We said, "How is this V school different from any other school you l1ave ever been to ? ~V1~Te had 189 reports. Not one single child misspelled the word teacher. They misspelled a lot of other words. They liked it because V some- body does not yell at them or something. You know if you talk cross, they think it is yelling. Not one child misspelled that word. To me this is very significant You won't misspell or mispronounce a name of someone that you have confidence in. Here were third grade children spelling the name teacher correctly when they could not spell "can" correctly. Mr. GOODELL I wish we could go on all day with this. Your testi- mony is extremely helpful and impressive. Let me congratulate you on your presentation and the work you are doing. V For the record I will ask you how much we are going to commit our- selves beyond what we have this year. Are you and I in danger of being V run Out again? PAGENO="0163" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2623 Sister BAPTISTA. What are we going to do? Our children have learned to write letters to their Congressman, believe me. They know where Washington is. One of the youngsters came in with a little let- ter from some Congressman. You know children, there is no gray, just black and white. He came in, "I have a letter from the Government, you are going to get your money. It is all settled." "Who wrote the letter?" "His name was written so badly I could not tell but the Secretary typed it underneath." Mr. 000DELL. Thank you, Sister. I hope that was not my signature. Sister BAPTISTA. I am sure it wasn't. Mr. GOODELL. Thank you very, very much. I don't know what we are going to do next year. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Sister. We appreciate your testi- mony. Mr. Bell, do you have any questions? Mr. BELL. No questions, but it is a pleasure to welcome you here. I am sorry I was not able to hear your complete testimony. Sister BAPTISTA. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Holmes, If you will take a chair and bring anybody up to the table that you would like to have with you to testify. Mr. Holmes, will you identify yourself and introduce the other members of the panel and move right ahead with your testimony. STATEMENT OP K. DAVID HOLMES, PRESIDENT OP THE CONNECTI- CUT POVERTY COUNCIL, WATERBURY, CONN.; ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAl\~ HARRIS, WATERBURY, CONN.; SAMUEL RUSSELL, HARTFORD, CONN.; AND MRS. JACKIE SHAPPER, HARTFORD, CONN. Mr. HOLME5. I am David Holmes from Waterbury, Conn. On my right is Anthony Carter from Waterbury, Mr. William Harris from Waterbury, Conn. They represent various councils which are inactive of the target area. Chairman PERKINS. They are on the community action board? Mr. HOLMES. Yes, councils of neighborhood organizations. On my left, Samuel Russell from Hartford, Conn., also from the target areas of Hartford, Conn. Chairman PERKINS. Wouid you like to introduce the young lady, too? Mr. HOLMES. In the rear is Mrs. Jackie Shaffer, also from Hartford, Conn., also from one of the target areas in Hartford. My name is K. David Holmes and I live at 17 Newall Place, Water- bury, Conn. I am the elected president of Action Council, one of five neighbor- hood organizations representing sections of Waterbury designated as poverty areas. I also represent my neighborhood on the board of directors of the local antipoverty agency, New Opportunities for Waterbury, Inc. Last year the neighborhood councils of Waterbury joined with similar neighborhood groups in other Connecticut cities to form the Connecticut Poverty Council. It is this group I speak for today; an organization of the once invisible poor of one of the most affluent States of this most affluent country. PAGENO="0164" 2624 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 Three years ago it would probably have been impossible for a dele- gation representing the poor of any State to come to Washington at the invitation of such a distinguished committee. The fact that we are here today is significant testimony to an initial area of success of anti- poverty efforts in Connecticut. After decades of well-intentioned, but in too many cases largely ineffective, social welfare efforts, Congress, with the Economic Op- portunity Act of 1964, at last promised the poor a voice in the decisions which would hopefully lead them out of the ghettos and their poverty. But what has happened since 1964? Just as the impact of the war on poverty was beginning to be felt, Congress cut 1967 appropriations to less than half of the $3.39 billion which the Office of Economic Opportunity felt was necessary to con- tinue the momentum of the program. Congress then compounded the damage by earmarking large shares of the fiscal 1967 appropriations, thus limiting the voice of the poor in determining their own local needs. This earmarking was in direct conflict with the intent of the original legislation. As one result of this congressional action, Waterbury had to cut back its antipoverty program by about 30 percent, and a pending application for a day care facility, the top priority item sought by the poor of Waterbury, was never funded. Agencies in other Connecticut cities suffered similar experiences. This year the House is considering a bill which would authorize $2.06 billion for economic opportunity amendments, still $11/3 billion less than the amount OEO said was needed 2 years ago to continue the momentum of the program. There are those who will try to reduce the $2.06 billion authoriza- tion and to them we of the Connecticut Poverty Council say there is need in our State to spend three, four, and five times present alloca- tions to fight a winning fight against poverty There are those who will say that the financial demands of the war in Vietnam, the space program and other Federal responsibilities limit the resources we can devote to the war on poverty. To them we say that if the Federal Government does not have the resources, the State and city governments and the poor themselves certainly don't have them and the only alternative is to leave for our children as a harder task that part of the job which we do not face today. There are those who edvocate the elimination of the OEO and splitting up of its programs among other old line agencies as an economy and efficiency measure. To them we say that we are convinced that the innovations of OEO have been the stimuli which are beginning to make old line agencies produce. Without OEO and its built-in resi- dent participation, programs run by old line agencies do not and will not reach the poor. This past June, with the strong support of the Connecticut Poverty Council, the Connecticut General Assembly passed a Community De- velopment Act which will provide State financial assistance to com- munities for a wide variety of community development programs including those of Community Action agencies. The cities of Con- necticut themselves are devoting new energy and financing to solving the problems of urban blight and poverty. The city of Waterbury, for example, recently created the new position of development co- PAGENO="0165" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2625 ordinator and private citizens contributed $427,000 toward the crea- tion of a private nonprofit development corporation to provide the city with the resources which would enable it to wisely utilize federally assisted programs of community development, including those aimed at elimination of slums and poverty. Much of the stimulus for this type of self-help activity can be traced directly to the exist- ence of the various antipoverty agencies throughout the State and. the new voice they have given to the poor. In conclusion, we of the Connecticut Poverty Council feel that the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 was sound and needed legisla- tion and that its intent is being met in Connecticut. We feel that the OEO should be retained with maximum flexibility in its funding pow- ers so individual communities can determine the priorities of their own needs. And finally, we strongly urge that the authorization figures listed in H.IR. 8311 be considered as minimums and be increased sub- stantially wherever possible. Thank you. Mr. QUIE. Thank you, Mr. Holmes. Do any of the people with you now wish to make a statement before we begin to ask questions? Mr. HAunTs. I do have one statement to make that I think is not getting across to the neighborhood. We, as the poverty people in the community, do not have enough representation on the poverty board of directors. So far, I think we only have one who has been selected from our entire poverty area. Most of the representatives on the board come from maybe the city, itself, city hall, appointed by the mayor. The controlling interest of the poverty programs is not in behalf of the poor people. I don't think it is fair to the people. I think that the poor people should have the controlling board members to represent them from their own poverty area. Mr. QUIE. Along that line, may I ask a question? How big is the Community Action board? Mr. HOLMES. Locally, helping my colleague, we have an 18-member board. As presently constituted, one-third comes from the poverty area. Mr. QUIE. You have six from the poverty area. Does that mean six neighborhood centers from which they drew? Mr. HOLMES. Technically, that is true. Mr. QUIE. Is it far from reality? It would be interesting to have a comment on that point. Mr. CARTER. Actually we have our large councils. The committee will have one representative. We feel that in order to get the most out of these programs that we should have the representation from the people of the area. I think you have to live in the area to know the people. You can't come from management living out in the aristocrat neighborhood and come and tell the poor people how to run the program. You don't know anything about the poor people, how to contact them, what are their problems. You can read newspapers, but that is not the `hard core. In order to get the hard `core people out and interested in these various pro- grams you have to be able to mingle and socialize with them. Let PAGENO="0166" 2626 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967 them understand what. we have to present to them. We felt that~ if we had more representation from the poverty area, say two delegates from each council, that would give us nice representation on the board. I am almost sure that we would get all the mileage out of each program. Mr. QrIE. You have four councils and six members on four. Does that mean that two of them have two members on the board? Mr. HOLMES. I think we take one from each other agency like the united council fund. We have one representative from each council. Mr. Quiz. You have one representative from each council. That accounts for four. Where are the other representatives? Mr. HOLMES. We have one from a committee, from committees like small different areas combined into one. The rest come from like united council. Mr. QUTE. They pick the representative for you? Mr. HOLMES. They pick them. We don't. Mr. Quin. The representatives of the mayor, of those agencies? Mr. HOLMES. Yes. They are from management, labor and what-have- you, and they rule. They have the power. We feel in the council we should protest and fight, the only way we can get across our point. We have talked to people in t.he programs and we have told them, like in manpower a.nd different other programs, it is not getting to the people. We felt that if we had the representation we would see that the program would be fully used. Mr. ~ As you know, the law provides that you must have one- third from the poor. From your definition, I don't believe that you have more than five who are truly representative of the poor. Mr. HOLMES. That is right. Mr. Qum. I don't know whether Mr. Holmes agrees with that or not. Mr. HOLMES. We have discussed this with the regional office. We have been assured that our agency does come within the lines of what is currently on the books. ~Ir. QmE. You are not one of the eight who does not qualify? Mr. HOLMES. We have looked into this. We feel that the manner in which the board was selected should have been more profoundly dis- cussed. You have fragmented areas of poverty, as Mr. Carter has said. It is our feeling perhaps that they should have two along with the concentrated areas of poverty which would more or less put the pro- grams in a position, since we are dealing with the board of directors of a policymaking body. Mr. QmE. Your suggestion is that it would work best if the two members of the board came from each council which would make eight and then one from at large, making nine, having half of the members of the board. Mr. CAIrn~n. Yes. Mr. QuiE. I know that there is great objection to permitting the poor to have a majority voice on the board. I personally feel very strongly that we must reach that point in community agencies where we accept that 50 or 51 percent of the boards be representative of the poor, I mean truly representative of the poor, and not somebody that the mayor appoints and someone who is selected and changed when he wants to. PAGENO="0167" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2627 I tried to offer an amendment requiring 51 percent of the board be representative of the poor with no chance at all. The best I could do was the amendment adopted last year requiring one-third of the poor on the board. I appreciate your comments. I will venture that this is the key to the typical war on poverty. The people who are going to get out of the ghettos and poverty must be involved in their improvement. Now, from your statement, I gather the people with the middle class concept, people like myself, have no way to truly understand the problems of poverty because I don't live there. I can visit there but the fact I know a week later I can leave means I don't understand it. As I read it, the only way you understand it is if you know you can't get out. As much as I try to read about it, I do not fully understand it. Yet, we need to involve people with the middle-class concept, the busi- nessmen, because it is by working with them, also, that you will come out of poverty. Once you are out of poverty, then you will start thinking like them. They have to be included, don't you agree, but yet the majority voice eventually needs to be with the poor people. Mr. HOLMES. Changing the attitudes along this line. We have felt that with any program, particularly in the area of employment, it was almost essential that you have representatives of labor and management. I state again when you are dealing with a board of directors, when you vote you have to have the strength to say, well, let us move this program. If you are in a minority some programs become stagnated and one has to have a little muscle if the true intent of the act is there. How we resolve this on a democratic basis I don't know but on any board there has to be a majority. Mr. HARRIS. We have this consumers' ed program. I don't know that it has served a useful purpose in our particular part of the the program. It has not served any purpose. Mr. Quii~. In other words, the people from your council did not ask for a consumers' education program? Who asked for it? Mr. HAmus. It was not asked for. It was put on us. It has not produced anything as far as poverty is concerned. I don't see it. Mr. HOLMES. We strongly documented day care and these are some of the problems you run up against. We realize you are dealing with money and you never have enough. You go out and get community participation, say find out what you want. This is fairly well documented. I think Mrs. Shaffer can testify not only about Waterbury but most of the cities in the State of Connecticut, it would mean on ADCH skills that were off the labor market and jobs that were advertised, if they had some where they could leave their children they could be gainfully employed and off the welfare rolls. Mr. QmE. Mrs. Shaffer, do you wish to make any comment about the make-up of the Company Action Agency in Hartford or about the representation of the poor? Mrs. SUAFFER. We don't have the same problems they have inWater- bury. We have eight councils and I am chairman of one. We have two representatives from each council on our board of directors. PAGENO="0168" 2628 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. Making 16. Mrs. SHArnn. Sixteen. Mr. Quu~. How big aboard? Mrs. SHAFFER. Thirty-two. So it is half and half. Mr. Quii~. You have made it? Mrs. SHArPER. We really fought for it too. As Mr. Holmes said, the problems that we really need to reach we are not reaching because day care is* a main problem in Connecticut. We have one day care center in Hartford sponsored by the women's league. We have one by the city. They are not even tapping the resources of the people that they could because they don't have the facilities. As he spoke, the welfare women would like to get off welfare if we could have day care but nobody has the money to fund the day care program. Mr. HOLMES. We have a $2 million program. Mrs. SnAPPER. That is true, but we don't get that much out of it for day care. I don't know exactly what was allocated for day care out of $2 million, some of it was, but we are not going to be able to do any- thing with it. Day care is a big problem in Connecticut. I know this because I have been fighting for it for over a year. I have gotten nowhere. We have in Hartford a church that was offered to us. We had to fight the code inspectors, the fire inspectors and everybody else. It was used as a church but it could not be used as day care. We finally got that passed. Then we had to have money for the director. Mr. Vanderbilt who runs the league day care offered to train a director, to get one. ~obody has the money for day care. But every- thing else you get. Mr. QmE. Would you like to make a comment about Hartford? Mr. RUSSELL. My name is Samuel Russell. I am from Hartford. We have two problems. One is houses. The other is day care. Speaking about day care, I have been living in this one particular area for a period of 10 years. We have, I would say, about 600 kids in this area. We have a lot of mothers who like to work, they ask to work, they are willing to work. They are getting assistance from welfare. But they don't have any place to put the kids, no one to keep the kids. They have been writing letters to Congress, one thing or another and they still don't seem to get any place. They have a small day care center in the area where I live but it does not help the situation too much. Now we could have, as I say, a day care center in Hartford. If we could get one in South Arsenal it would actually cut down on some of your tax funds. You would have more people that could work and it would cut down on the tax problem. Mr. QUIE. There is more and more a realization in Congress of the need of day care centers. Now, Mr. Holmes said in his testimony that there was a damage to the poverty program by earmarking a large share of the fiscal 1967 appropriation. I thought there would be. I thought it would be unwise last year. I didn't make as big a fuss last year as I will this year, be- cause I think it is proven now that the best way we can distribute the money is through versatile programs-through decisions that can be made, so that the programs that you need at Hartford are the ones you utilize, the ones you need in Waterbury are the ones you utilize. PAGENO="0169" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2629 Again, there is nobody in Congress or in OEO who knows exactly what you need or how to standardize the regulations along these lines, But my question to you is do you want an earmarked day care pro- gram to make sure it goes to day care or should we provide additional money for community action? Would you prefer that that be expanded and therefore you could utilize versatile community action money for day care if you felt that was the greatest need? Mr. HOLMES. In order to give each city its choice upon documenta- tion I don't think I can come out and take it off the top of my head and say I want this. I think there has been some demonstrated evi- dence to prove this is the area where the city wants to gear itself. I think there should be ability in flexibility with the local cap agen- cies for the board to resolve and say, "Well, this is where it goes." Mr. QmE. I gather what you are saying is that if we expand the versatile program you would use it for day care because this is needed more than anything else. Mr. HOLMES. Some other city might say legal services or community action. Mr. QiIrE. If the Congress were unwilling to increase community action versatile money but was willing to give day care money ear- marked, would you prefer to have earmarked day care money rather than none at all? Mr. HOLMES. Definitely. Mr. CARTER. I would like to still dwell on the board of directors. I know you understand but still I felt- Mr. Qun~. I might say that OEO is going to hear from us on that. Mr. CARTER. I talked to Mrs. Goldstein, the OEO director in the New England area. We were trying to get her to go along with us to get us representation. Also we are having problems as far as pre- primary, especially in my council area, because we have preprimary in all different areas of the city except what I call the need council which we have discussed with the board of health and even with the director of preprimary. There seems to be some conflict as far as the building. In order to have preprimary you have to have so much space. We also talked to Mrs. Goldstein from OEO. She said if you don't have certain facilities as long as the fire martial-we have to make allowance but in our city we don't get preprimary unless the whole city is qualified to have preprimary. The only point that the council and the mothers in the petition-I would like to read what I have-it is very short. It says, "Operation of Pre-Primary." They say, "What preprimary," "when, now". "Our children have been neglected in this area because of the inability of preprimary and health department to find a building suitable for preschool. The money is available. It has been for at least 2 years. Our children deserve an opportunity to become acquainted with the things that will give them a headstart in school." I have a few signatures of people who have signed. We have met with the health department. We have a meeting next week with the mayor. In certain areas, in all the areas none of the preprimary schools come up to the qualification of what .OEO designates. PAGENO="0170" 2630 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Yet still they seem to neglect us. They have money enough for two preprimaries in the area because there are so many children. Yet. the directOr of the health department here seems to obj e.ct.. As I talked to Mrs. Goldstein, the parents felt in that area if we cannot have preprimary we think nobody in tile city should have it. That is a little outrageous but this is the: kind of threats we have to make in order to get. the things that we actually need. That. is why I asked that the board of directors should actually be two from each council. As far as jobs, like rnan~ower, we have labor liaison, lie is supposed to get the manpower director to meet with management and try to set up programs. Then we. have three people on the manpower that were presidents of unions. What do you need a liaison for~ That. money could be used fOr something else. Here is a liaison getting $9,000 or $10,000 a yea.r. It does not make se.nse. We feel that t.he people who are training are training in small factories. We have one of the three largest bra.ss industry in the world, American Brass and Chains. They have programs for training skilled jobs, youngsters who drop out but the manpower has not hit them. That is why we expressed these senti- ments to Mrs. Goldstein. We will make sure that we check to broaden the training programs in the large industries so that dropouts and what-have-you will get an opportunity to train. Mr. HARRIS. I would just like to say about these neighborhood council presidents. We are elected from the neighborhood, from the poor areas by the poor people. We don't get a salary of any kind. Ours is strictly charit.y. We are not asking for anything. As ~-ou can see, we are not out trying to make a buck for ourselves. We weren't interested in the thing from the beginning of it. We all want to see that the thing is done right. Se.nding the money into the city as I said awhile ago for day care, unless we get representatives on the board from these poverty areas actually the board can use the money for what they want it for unless we have representatives there, unless it is des- ignat.ed for day care. Mr. QtnE. Mr. Holmes, you serve on the. Connecticut Poverty (Joun- cii. As I underst.and you. this is made up of the councils, not the um- brella community action boards, but councils. Is that right? Mr. HOLMES. Let me explain CPC to you. Last December when the alarm came out there was a possibility of a cutback, we were cut back 30 percent. TJsing community . action involvement of the people we called a statewide conference of all these councils. This is the culmina- tion of our efforts by my being here to testify. We filed a brief. We thought that the 1964 act was well intentioned. As I said in my testimony, I think in large measure the act of 1964 was one of the reasons why Connecticut responded with this human development commission. We represent eight cities in the State of Connecticut. Mr. Quii~. One of t.he purposes in coming to Washington and in testi- fying before the committee is trying to scare money from the State? Mr. HOLMES. We did. We were instrumental. We were instrumental in getting the State to set up this human development commission. Mr. QUrE. Are you getting money from them? PAGENO="0171" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2631 Mr. HOLMES. To assist in this war on poverty. We were instru- mental. We lobbied in Hartford and joined forces with other groups who were interested in getting the State of Connecticut to commit itself to the eradication of poverty. Mr. QUIE. Has it had any effect on improving some community action boards to involve more people from the council? Have you done any work on this? Mr. HoL~rns. The fact that we are here, the agencies are not scat- tered around. We hope to continue our effort as an organization. Mr. Quri~. Let me point out a comment on the reduction in money, that $3.39 billion evidently was what the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity felt was needed but the Bureau of the Budget or Executive Branch scaled that down ito $1,750 million. This is what the Congress was requested to appropriate. Then Congress scaled that down by another $130 million to $1,062 million. So the Bureau of the Budget knocked out $1,640 million while the Congress knocked out $130 mil- lion. So I would say that the greatest blame is on the Bureau of the Budget and not on the Congress for the reduction. I yield to my colleague from California. Mr. BELL. I have just a couple of questions. Mr. Holmes, I note that on page 3 of your statement you refer to the fact t.hat you believe the OEO should be retained. Then you go on to discuss the maximum flexibility in funding and so forth. But you do believe OEO should be retained; is `that correct? Mr. HOLMES. That is correct. Mr. BELL. On page 2 you state that there are those who will try to reduce the $2.06 billion authorization. My question is really twofold. I assume by your statement that you think that amount should be re- tained and that you have feeling there are some who want to get rid of OEO; is that right? Mr. HOLMES. That is correct. Mr. BELL. Do you feel that those are the same people who you men- tioned will try to reduce the amount to OEO? Mr. HOLMES. No, that is not the intention. Mr. BELL. It has no connection? Mr. HOLMES. No. Mr. BELL. The reason I brought that question up, Mr. Holmes, is that I am sure you have heard of the Opportunity Crusade, whose authors are Mr. Quie, and Mr. G-oodell. I want to make it clear that there is no dollar reduction in that substitute amendment. As a matter of fact, if anything it would increase the amount. If the OEO should be abolished by an amendment, it would be for the purpose of making the poverty program more efficient. I wanted to clarify that because I feel some people think that this amendment is an attempt to kill or hurt the poverty program. It is not at all. I note that there has been some publicity about your com- mittee, the political activities of your staff and the fact that some of you became worried about it and passed a ruling as to the political rights of poverty program staff members. Was there any particular experience you might have had that caused you to take that action? Mr. HOLMES. No personal experience. I have, a strong feeling from the personal standpoint, a true `fight on poverty should be strictly on PAGENO="0172" 2632 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 a nonpartisan basis. Where you have a change in the administration that would not be helpful to the program, itself. Of course, in community action there are political needs and there are community needs. I think you have to make the evaluation and distinction, yourself. Mr. BELL. Yes. I can see from reading the article a certain amount of dynamite in staff members getting active in one way or another in a political matter. Mr. QmE. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. BELL. Yes. Mr. QUJE. Would it not be true that as a community gains in eco- nomic strength, economic muscle, and pride itself, it then gains a political voice that it never would have gained if it had engaged in partisan politics initially? Mr. HOLMES. That is true. I state again there are political needs and there are community needs. Mr. QuIE. If you resolve your community needs it gives you political muscles to develop- Mr. HOLMES. Political means are used to solve political needs. Mr. BELL. From your statement I assume you generally agree that earmarking is in direct conflict with the intent of the legislation. I would be inclined to agree with that. I assume that you agree with Mr. Quie that earmarking is not in the best interest of the poverty program. It would inhibit the flexibility to innovate. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Mr. QUIE. I have one other area I would like to pursue. Your comment on page 3 about OEO being the stimuli of old-line agencies. As we talked earlier the real genesis of the war on poverty and the people coming out of poverty eventually is their becoming involved in this program. Don't you feel that the other programs where the largest amount of Federal help comes from, something like $30 billion, comes from a genesis other than OEO, something less than $2 billion from OEO, that that same principle needs to eventually be a part of their program through community action, through involvement of the poor, with the poor having a voice in the operation of the programs? Mr. Hor~rEs. That is true. I would go along with that. Mr. Qu~. I will refer specifically to housing. We have spent some time now with urban renewal and public housing. Don't you feel that all of these programs would have been much more effective if the people in the neighborhood and the ghetto which was to be torn down and improved, if the people who left there would have had a dominant voice in deciding their future? Mr. HOLMES. Yes. I strongly believe in that. Mr. QuIB. And the same thing would be true of manpower pro- grams, training skills. It would also be a* significant factor in improv- ing the effectiveness of these programs. Mr. HOLMES. Manpower also? Mr. Qurn. Yes. Mr. HOLMES. Manpower, you have to have a combination of in- gredients. You have to have a partnership here. In a ghetto you don't employ. And you have labor unions and you have the right of co- operation. I go along with the idea on the board you have to have a PAGENO="0173" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 2633 good cross-section, particularly with some programs, in order to have the necessary ingredients to effectuate particularly a manpower program. You must have management, corporations, labor and you must have the one who wants a job. Mr. QtrIE. You notice so often that the manpower board is made up of the employer and labor, organized labor, but usually the people who are to be helped are not represented on those boards. Mr. HOLMES. This is where the muscle from the board will give direction. You have to make reports. If you don't have the power on the board, so to speak, nothing will be done. Mr. QUTE. Also, the same would be true in the health field and the welfare field-the same kind of strength in improving the effec- tiveness of the program-Community Action operation could be af- fected there, would that not be true? Mr. HOLMES. Yes. Mr. Qun~. I want you to know as this is written up in the paper our proposal would eliminate OEO. The intent is not to remove the stimuli but to find a means of increasing it, of extending it to the other $30 billion of Federal, not just the $2 billion. This is the suggestion we have made to `be considered during the hearings. Whether that is the approach we will take in the final legislation is hard to tell but we are looking for a way. It may be a different way than has been `brought about. I agree with you that some `way must be found to stimulate the involvement of the poor. Before yielding to my colleague from California, I would like at this point to insert a statement from Dr. Arthur B. Shostak, associate pro- fessor, Department of Social Sciences, Drexel Institute of Science and Tecimology, Philadelphia, Pa., relative to his observations and recom- mendations concerning the Community Action Program and related matters, which I believe will be of interest to the committee. I now yield to Mr. Bell. (The statement of Dr. Arthur B. Shostak follows:) STATEMENT OF DR. ARTHUR B. SHOSTAK. ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, DREXEL INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, PHILADEL- PHIA, PA. Gentlemen, I appreciate `this opportunity to have my observations and re- form recommendations entered into the Record. As a professional researcher and writer, I have spent the last three years examining the anti-poverty prob- 1cm and the various reform efforts addressed to this problem. I have done field research in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Pittsburgh, Boston, Wilmington, Tren- ton, New York and, most especially, Philadelphia. I have published on the subject in American Guild, Social Work, Social Forces, and The Annals; I have co-edited the first paperback anthology on poverty, New Perspectives on Poverty (Spectrum, 1964) and have edited a rare anthology of first-person accounts of efforts to use sociology to alleviate human suffering (Sociology in Action- Dorsey, 1966). In the Fall, and again in the Winter of 1967, two new anthol- ogies will appear containing lengthy essays of mine evaluating the progress thus far made-or missed-in the War on Poverty. I propose in this brief statement to focus on recommendations, and only the key among these, inseveral vital areas: I. INVOLVEMENT OF THE POOR Experience makes plain the need for OEO-sponsored and joint OEO-local CAP rule over compulsory staff training for all non-professional elected rep- resentatives of the poor. Philadelphia, to cite just one of several possible ex- amples, has failed thusfar to secure OEO approval for a Training Institute- and this has cost dearly in the skills of the 144 elected spokesmen for the poor. PAGENO="0174" 2634 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Second, I urge OEO to requir~ all GAP Boards to include tha manpower specialists of the city-and two or three professors representing the major local institutions of higher-learning. This is not true in Philadelphia, but is true of New Haven, where it has long established its worth. Third, I urge OEO to use its power to fund 20 per cent of CAP funds out- side the Umbrella Agency's approval in such a way as to keep local CAP atten- tive to grass-roots ideas and needs. That is, OEO should not hesitate to fund a proposal sent directly to it by a CAP or public group angered by a local CAP rejection-if the proposal has real merit, and its passage u-ill force the local CAP to evaluate its position anew. IL 000EDINATION OEO should urge all mayors to establish a special cabinet meeting on a bi- weekly schedule to focus on the city's anti-poverty effort and insure communica- tion and coordination among all the various relevant branches of city government. By pre-arrangement state and federal officials might be invited to participate. OBO should also undertake the publication and circulation of a. newsletter propo~1 sent directly to it by a CAP or public group angered. by a local CAP people now operate in isolation, and would profit much from national news of the new. III. MISCELLANEOUS OEO should insist that a non-voting ex-offieio member of its organization be seated on all local CAP Boards-so as to reduce confusion over OEO positions and provide instant answers to questions Board members raise about OEO. Academicians in every city with a CAP program should be employed by OEO to undertake long-term evaluations of the local CAP program. OEO should lobby in Congress for the inclusion of a provision guaranteeing the development of non-professional careers as part of all new social welfare legislation (e.g., education, medical, etc.). OEO-or some other national body-should publicize the activities of Phil- adelphia's Maximum Participation Movement, and urge its replication else- there in the nation. Maximum Participation Movement is a citizen group dedi- cated to helping the poor help themselves out of poverty. Maximum Participa- tion Movement evaluates all CAP programs in Philadelphia, compares them to the needs of the poor and the achievements of other cities, and reports twice a month to over 400 Philadelphians on local anti-poverty scene. Should these recommendations merit further clarification and possibly even enactment, I stand ready to assist the Committee in any possible way. Again, please accept my appreciation for this opportunity and my compliments for your earnest concern with helping America soon win its War against Poverty. Mr. B~L. Mrs. Shaffer, go ahead. Mrs. SHAFFER. You may have read last week about the unrest in Hartford. Out of this unrest we have talked communitywise, neigh- borhoodwise, everything. This seems to be the biggest problem. The neighborhood people are not represented on boards and commissions other than OEO projects. They do not have a voice. Communications between these boards and cOmmissionS seem to be the biggest problem. This is .one of the biggest problems that came out of that unrest up there. Mr. QUIE. You read in the paper about Minneapolis? Mrs. SHArPER. Yes. Mr. Quin. That is my State, although I cTon't represent Minne- apolis. I noted earlier that welfare recipients had been to the welfare offices indicating that they had no voice and even though they are on welfare they were human beings and therefore ought to be respected and should have a voice. Mrs. SHAFFER. The same thing in Hartford. Mr. BELL. I would like to clarify what I think the gentleman from Minne~otft has been talking about. If, for example, some of the ftmc- tions of OEO were transferred to the Department of Health, Educa- PAGENO="0175" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2635 tion, and Welfare, there would not be any change insofar as represen- tation of the poor is concerned in any particular operation. The rep- resentation would be the same. Amlright? Mr. QULE. There would be no reduction. There would be improve-. ment by way of requiring a neighborhood council, which is not in the law now, a neighborhood council that would have to be all representa- tive of the poor. Mrs. SHAWER. If OEO money was transferred to Health and Wel- fare we wouldn't have represei~tation because we don't have any rep- resentation in Health and Welfare. Mr. QUIE. Under our proposal you would. We pick up~ community action as it is now, bodily, and place it over there. The only difference would be that John Gardner would be the boss of Ted Berry instead of Sargent Shriver. From all he says he is totally committed to Sargent Shriver. If he. appoints Sargent Shriver as his Under Secretary, you would operate exactly the same. But the transfer would then give this person the overall responsibility that Wilbur Cohen has now in HEW, with the muscle that the poor would have a voice in the program, in health, welfare, and education. This is not completely satisfactory to me because there arc some other areas too. That is in the manpower training and housing areas. I wouldn't be satisfied until the poor have a voice in the programs all the way down the line at the Federal level. Mr. BELL. If I may continue to elaborate further on some of the advantage to this. Mrs. Shaffer, you probably have in your organization a Headstart program, do you not? Mrs. Si-IAFFER. Yes, we have. Mr. BELL. Sometimes in some places you may have a Headstart pro- gram to get the children started and then they go into a school which is not a very good school. The children lose what they have gained by Headstart. If Headstart, for example, were under Health, Education, and Welfare where the school system was all closely allied and connected, something could be done to be sure the carrythrough would be accomplished. There is an example of a greater efficiency. Mrs. SHAFFER. You have a followup? Mr. BELL. Opportunity Crusade is a more efficient method of doing the same thing. OEO has done a good job in getting things started, but the breakdown in efficiency has been rampant throughout the country. My district is somewhat close to the Watts area of Los Angeles. It is not a part of it but it is close to it. I know that just about 4 days before the Watts riot we had been testifying there in Will Rogers Park auditorium The place was filled with people, all complaining about the promises that had been m'tde through the OEO on which there had' been no delivery. .`` This was a partial cause of the unrest Mrs. SHAFFER. This is true. We found out in `Haitford ~when they had the cutback that a lot of these programs they had'started ~ working effectively on, they had to drop'when thecutback canTle'. This is when all this unrest started It did not just start last week They PAGENO="0176" 2636 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 didn't have the money to do as they were promising the people they were going to try to do. This is one of the main causes of that unrest. We got some money for the summer program. To give you an illus- tration. We had about 700 teenagers from the ages of 16 to 19 apply for these jobs. We only had 400 jobs to give these kids. Now we have 300 kids who are trying to find something to do for the rest of the summer. Even with all the money we had here earmarked for summer pro- grams it is not going to help. Mr. BELL. Those are all the questions I have. Chairman PERKINS. We want to thank you for coming. Mr. Qum. You have been most helpful. I had intended to do this rather quickly since I talked to Mr. Holmes, but your testimony was so~ interesting that I have gone beyond the time that I have to be at another meeting. Mr. BELL. I would like to second Mr. Quie's statement. Your testi- mony has been excellent. Mr. HOLMES. Thank you for listening to us. (Mr. Goldberg's prepared statement follows:) STATEMENT OF Mn. NED GOLDBERG, CONSULTANT, ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAMS, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF SETTLEMENTS AND NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS We welcome this opportunity to present the views of the National Federation of Settlements and Neighborhood Centers, Inc., on H.R. 8311, the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967. In the past, our agency has supported before this Committee a wide range of anti-poverty measures and, in 1964, President Johnson's proposal for an Economic Opportunity Act. We support the major proposals and intent of HR. 8311, but are opposed spe- cifically to some of the amendments proposed as we shall indicate below. Further, we are opposed to any Bill which would, at this time, eliminate the Office of Economic Opportunity and distribute its programs to other Federal agencies. The National Federation of Settlements has 246 member agencies and serv- ices 16 more, operating 399 neighborhood centers in 94 cities, 30 states and the District of Columbia. 22 metropolitan or regional federations of neighborhood centers are affiliates, too. In addition, NFS operates a National Training Center, based in Chicago. NFS works nationally for neighborhood conditions favorable to family life and helps its member centers to serve their neighborhoods effec- tively through a wide range of direct and advisory services. Most of our member centers are engaged in anti-poverty programs and have been over many years. Currently, in addition to their voluntarily funded efforts, they administer sonie~ $40 million in OEO funds. The National Federation of Settlements reaffirms its continuing support of an effective Economic Opportunity Act, in the full context of the Declaration of Purpose of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. It ad- vanced as the goal of our nation the elimination of "the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty-by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the opportunity to work, and the opportunity to live in decency arni dignity." We submit that the bill now before you, while incorporating some excellent amendments, falls too far short of this ideal. It seems to us to be more oriented toward quieting some of the critics of this essential federal program than toward improving the charter for the programs it will help fund. We endorse the evident intent of the bill that there be no dismantlement of the Office of Economic Opportunity and no further delegations of programs, at this time, to other federal departments for administration. We support the concept of OEO as an arm of the Executive Office of the President. We shall limit our testimony, in the main, to those titles and sections of the bill which, we believe, need revision. Authorization of Appropriation We endorse an increase in OEO funding, but believe the amount proposed, $2.06 billion, still falls far short of adequate funding. The field investigations of this Senate Subcommittee on Employment, Man- power and Poverty have served to underscore the crisis confronting poor people PAGENO="0177" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2637 in Mississippi. But there ar~ crises resulting from poverty in all parts of our country, North, South, East and West, rural, urban and suburban. The Administration request for federal FY 1967 does not measure up to these critical needs, nor does it measure up to the conservative projections of expansion originally outlined by `the Office of Economic Opportunity. OEO said, in 1964, that overall expenditures in its third year of operation would be at least $3.5 billion. And this was said before the adoption, in subsequent years, of such worthwhile provisions as the Nelson, Scheuer, Kennedy and Javits amendments. Further, the 1967 amendments provide for a justifiable expansion of attacks on rural poverty. To fund these adequately within the limits of a $2.06 billion authorization, and with earmarking of a significant proportion of Title II funds, would most likely result in a freeze or further cuts in versatile urban CAP funding beyond those occasioned by inadequate funding in FY 1966. NFS therefore urges a doubling of OEO authorization and appropriation from $2.06 billion to $4 billion for federal FY 1967. Job Corps T.H. IA, Section 105, Screening and Selection (of applioants)-Special Limita- tions, tampers With, if it does not completely destroy the original intent of the Job Corps, a service for youth handicapped in their own community by reason of previous behavior or "label." These are youth who are most in need of a properly conducted residential setting if they are `to have any chance of "making it." Further, this Section is well nigh impossible to administer. It asks that the screening agent make projections as to future behavior of all individual appli- cants as well as ruling out `all youth with a record of "behavioral aberrations." Those of us who have worked with delinquent youth know that motivation for change in behavior comes at different periods for each youth. We have found many a "late bloomer," who despite a record of repetitive delinquent acts is indeed ready for rehabilitative help. Section 105 would deny such youth the Job Corps as a new opportunity for breaking away from the delinquent behavior pattern. Criteria for screening out so-called undesirable Job Corps applicants can only result in "creaming" the hest of the youth and refusing service to many who are most in need of a residential service outside their own neighborhood. We there- fore recommend that $ection 105, Title I, be deleted. Governor's Veto Title I-Section 115 (c) provides for the governor of any state the power of absolute veto over the establishment of a Job Corps center or similar facility within it. We would recommend that the provisions of this part and that of similar sections under other titles `of the bill (e.g. Vista, Title VIII, Section 810(b)) be made consistent with that of Title II, Section 242, which authorizes reconsideration by the Director of OEO and the overriding by him of any such veto. In the interest of effective programming, the resources of the Federal government and its anti-poverty programs should be made equally availajńe to all citizens and in all states as a matter of right. Political Activity Title I, Section 118(b), Title II, Section 214(a) and (b), and Title VIII, Section 810~b) seek to extend the application of the Hatch Act and other limita- tion's on citizen action to enrollees and to employees of agencies, institutions and organizations engaged in the War on Poverty. Much of the direction of the bill under these Sections seems to be toward precluding the participation of individual enrollees, CAP organizations, grantee and delegate agencies in continuing efforts for community and institutional change. Indications of this intent are found in the language proscribing picketing and protest and, under Title II, authorizing the Director of OEO to promulgate rules or regulations "which shall be binding on all agencies carrying on com- munity action activities with financial assistance (from OEO) . . . governing conflicts of interest, use of position of authority for partisan political purposes or participation in direct action, regardless of customary practices or rules among agencies in the community." NFS is strongly opposed to these Sections of the bill as an invasion of the rights of individuals and autonomous organizations, and asks that they be deleted. 80-084-67-pt. 4-12 PAGENO="0178" 2638 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967~ Personnel Standards The bill authorizes each community CAP (Title II, Section 214(a)) to adopt for itself and other agencies using funds or exercising authority for which it is responsible, rules designed to establish specific standards governing salary, salary increases, travel and per diem allowances and other employee benefits. While NFS supports the efforts of OEO to establish decent standards for per- sonnel employed under Title II, CAP grants, it is opposed to this section in the bill. NFS believes that any code promulgated nationally by the Director of OEO or by a local CAP should serve as a floor and not as a ceiling. Many agencies serving as local CAP delegate agencies already have extant local civil service or other merit systems, union contracts or voluntary agency board-approved personnel practices codes. All these Sections subvert the principle of local autonomy and can but have the affect of destroying the enthusiastic participation of many agencies, includ- ing our 399 affiliates, in the Waron Poverty. Financial Assistance The language of the bill, in a number of Sections dealing with financing pro- grams, has been changed significantly. Under the current law, the Director of OEO is authorized to make grants, or to contract with appropriate Grantee and Delegate agencies. The new language states that the Director may provide financial assistance for programs and projects. Title VI, Section 609(2), defines "financial assistance" as "assistance advanced by grant, agreement or contract. Inherent in this language change, despite the definition cited above, we be~ lieve, is a further assault on the autonomy of agencies willing and equipped to participate effectively in the War on Poverty, but as independent contractors or grantees, prepared to have the quality of their wurk in carrying out their contracts fairly and equitably assessed by the granting agency. NFS is therefore opposed both to this language change and to the inherent change in status of delegate and grantee agencies. We ask for a return to the original language. Further clarification is needed to assure the autonomy of the agency which sells its services and skills to the OEO. It is neighborhood residents who are in need of assistance from the federal government, and not the helping agency. Limitations on Salary The bill places an overall limitation of $15,000 on salaries to be paid to persons in community action programs out of federal funds and precludes inclusion of any additional salary from local sources as a part of local matching contributions. NE'S is opposed both to the salary limitation and the exclusion of sums above the $15,000 ceiling from matching funding, if such a ceiling is legislated. The question of high salaries paid to agencies receiving funds under the Act is a false issue. It is necessary to pay a "market price" for persons with the talents needed in local community action programs. Imaginative and creative persons with administrative abilities will not be attracted by modest salaries;* and since the programs are new, these abilities are essential to their success. There is no logical reason for paying lower salaries to people in the human serv- ice field than to those in the business world. The coordination of resources, the complicated nature of financial arrangements, and the exploratory nature of the programs, all require a high level of professional competence. Necessarily, the salary levels will vary from locality to locality and should be left to the market and local discretion. In the event, however, that the Congress insists on maintaining the salary ceiling, we would strongly urge that any additional salary paid such employees be included in matching funding. This is particularly important in light of the requirement for an increase in local matching contributions proposed in these amendments. Increase in Local Matching Funding Title II, Section 223C, requires as of July 1, 1967, an increase in local match- ing funding from 10% to 20% of the cost of these CAP programs. Local voluntary organizations, and particularly neighborhood groups, already experience great difficulty in raising the currently required local contribution, particularly as the costs of their non-OEO funded programs and services continue to mount. Passage of this amendment would cause an added hardship to existing programs, PAGENO="0179" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 2639 particularly those privately operated. It would tend to discourage the initiation of new programs, increase dependence on local public agencies, and generally delay the expansion of the War on Poverty. NFS believes that public agencies must carry certain basic responsibilities, but that in serving the total needs of our society, the concerted and collaborative efforts of *both public and voluntary sources are needed. This is particularly true in the War on Poverty. Basic Conditions NFS believes, further, that the following basic conditions are essential to assure maximum effectiveness of voluntary agencies in a free society: (a) The acceptance of federal funds should in no way inhibit the freedom of the voluntary agency to engage in social education and action programs, with and on the behalf of its neighbors. (b) The voluntary agency must receive adequate federal funds to provide administrative, supervisory, and other supportive services necessary to the conduct and administration of these projects. Revisions of Poverty Criteria NUS recommends that the definition of poverty under the Economic Oppor- tunity Act of 1964 be increased from the present figure of $3130 for an urban family of four persons to $4000 for such a family. The $4000 figure would also apply to definitions of target areas in the Anti-Poverty program. Any variations in the minimum poverty level should be in line with costs of living in different areas. Further, we support the new definition of eligibility for enrollees, under Title Ib, Section 125(a). Grievance and Appeals NFS subscribes to the concept that the local CAP, as the broadly representative body of governmental institutions, voluntary agencies, and the anti-poverty target population, should be the principal instrument for review and approval of anti- poverty programs to be funded through the Office of Economic Opportunity. Implicit in this, however, is the possibility that proposals submitted for review may be rejected by the local Poverty Board. Such rejection may not be justified. NFS, therefore, endorses an effective grievance and appeals machinery which permits and encourages the applicant to submit its rejected proposal directly to the rugional and finally to the National OEO for review. Projects so approved by regional or national OEO should not be subject to local veto. Role of the Local CAP NFS believes that the local CAP should receive and assess applications from delegate agencies. It should make sure that such plans include: (a) Effective organization of the residents of the target neighborhood. (b) On-site availability in that neighborhood of the wide range of educa- tion, employment, legal aid, health and welfare services. Both of these are interrelated and each is essential to the success of the other. A key instrument for establishing these functions is the neighborhood service center, a replication of the relevant, vibrant settlement house and neighborhood center. However, NFS believes that the local CAP should not, itself, ordinarily under- take to administer and operate anti-poverty services. Its most effective role is in negotiating and facilitating the development of community instruments involving the residents of the target areas and existing agencies. For the long haul, it destroys its own effectiveness in this role if it becomes a competitor for the new resources available through federal funding. It should, instead, serve as a "th~ird force." There exist in many local communities voluntary agencies, including settle- ments and neighborhood centers, which are equipped to serve as the appropriate delegate agency for the conduct of neighborhood service centers. Such agencies are often already established in target neighborhoods and have skill in establishing outpost and satellite operations. They are equipped to help residents achieve maximum feasible participation. Such voluntary agencies also have a better chance of achieving the kind of agency cooperation and inter- program coordination needed for multi-discipline, multi-agency, neighborhood operations. There exist many examples of effective use of existing voluntary agencies by the local CAP. In Cincinnati, the Greater Cincinnati Federation of Settlements PAGENO="0180" 2640 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 and Neighborhood Centers develops and operates, through its existing member houses and through newly established neighborhood councils in heretofore un- served neighborhoods, a network of multi-service neighborhood centers in three counties in two states. These programs are under constant review and assessment by the local CAP staff. Voluntary agencies have long since demonstrated a high capacity to perform these functions well. Further, they have assured meaningful participation by residents of the target neighborhoods, consumers of these anti- poverty services, both as employees and volunteers as well as in policy-making bodies such as Boards of Directors and committees. This experience of successful delegation to our member houses and other voluntary agencies is replicated in New Orleans, Houston, Detroit, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, Chicago, New York City, Los Angeles and many another. Such continued involvement of local voluntary agencies, as autonomous con- tractors responsible to CAP and OEO for executing their contracts in good faith would help to assure the effective utilization of all local resources in the War on Poverty. The reasonableness of this approach has been demonstrated by OEO itself, in its contracts with the YWCA for Job Corps centers for girls, with universities and our NFS Training Center for research and for the training of VISTA enrollees. It may be necessary for the CAP to undertake responsibility for direct opera- tions in certain areas where voluntary and public agencies are not available, such as in some rural counties. But even here, we suggest, past experience dictates the creation by it of new corporate bodies, independent from the CAP, for the administration and operation of programs and services. This would preserve for the CAP its principal roles as described above. OEO in Perspective During its relatively short life, and despite its handicaps of inadequate finan- cial resources and constant harassment, the OEO has made a tremendous impact on our communities, its institutions and the life chances of the poor citizen. The history of our country since pre-revolutionary days, is in real part, a history of the struggles and conflicts in which we have been engaged as we have striven to translate the American creed, "All men are born free and equal," into American reality. The forms which these strivings have taken have changed from time to time, but the goals are constant. In the first half of this century, the great domestic issue was the establish- ment of decent and dignified standards for working men. Here at home, as in some other countries, the result was the emergence of a trade-union movement and a revolution in our thinking on the relations between management and labor. The great issues of these latter years of the century, other than the over- riding issue of survival under the threat of nuclear holocaust, are (1) the waging of a successful war on poverty and, (2) the peaceful resolution of the revolution for civil rights. Just as with nuclear war, these are not merely domestic problems, but confront every nation and the total world society. All human strivings for freedom, decency, personal dignity and justice depend now on our desire and ability to resolve these issues. In the North, both require for their success the extending and translation into reality of a whole series of guarantees of equality in education, employment, housing and the command of sufficient goods and services for participation in the main stream of American life. Targets are school desegregation and en- riched educational opportunity, not only for reasons of racial pride but also, in the long run, economic survival; an increase in job opportunities not only at the entry level in low pay-low status jobs, but in management and the executive suite, and a drastic change in the image of the black ghetto. In the South, in addition to all these and perhaps of prime importance is the dismantling of a complete sys- tem of color castes which has too long enslaved Negro and Caucasian poor alike. In the South, the Negro wants and needs his "courtesy" title-(Mr., Mrs., etc.). At the heart of this is the problem of stigma, or as Richard M. Titmuss put it at the recent NCSW Forum, (Social Policy and Economic Progress-R.M.T.- Professor Social Administration, London School of Economics, May 30 1906), "of felt and experienced discrimination and disapproval on grounds of moral behavior, ethnic group, class, age, measured intelligence, mental fitness and other criteria of selection rejections. The problem then," says Mr. Titmuss, "is PAGENO="0181" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2641 not whether to differentiate in access, treatment, giving and outcome, but how to differentiate . . . We cannot now disengage ourselves from the challenge of 4listributing social rights without stigma; too many `unj'ulflfled eapectations have been created, and we can no longer fall back on the rationale that our economics are too poor to avoid hurting people." Towards the end of his brilliant analysis of significant factors for social policy which we have too long neglected, Mr. Titmuss listed these: 1. "We overestimated the potentialities of economic growth by itself alone to solve the problems of poverty-economic, educational and social. 2. "We exaggerated the trend towards equality during the Second World War in respect to income, employment and other factors. 3. "We overestimated the potentialities of the poor without help, to under- stand and manipulate an increasingly complex ad hoc society, and we failed to understand the indignities of expecting the poor to identify themselves as poor people and to declare, in effect, `I am an unequal person.' 4. "Lastly, and perhaps most significant of all, we have sought too diligently to find the causes of poverty among the poor and not in ourselves. Poverty, we seem to have been saying, has its origins in either social pathology and a lack of `self-determination or in agency delinquency and a failure in coordina- tion or in the shortage of social workers and psychiatrists. Now, in the poverty program, the United States appears to be discovering a new set of casual explanations: the lack of political power among the poor themselves. 5. "The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings," he concluded. The Declaration of Purpose of the Economic Opportunity Act is most revolu- tionary. For the first time in the history of man, a government has declared that it is its policy and intent to eliminate poverty-"to open to everyone the op- portunity for education and training, the opportunity to work, and the op. portunity to live in decency and dignity." These revolutionary concepts are directed at submerged classes who con- stitute about 20% of our nation, over 30 million souls. Numerically, under our democratic system, they ought to be able to exert enormous power. In truth, despite the revolution in their expectations, their influence has been negligible. The many causes of his impotence are rooted sometimes in diverse and con- flicting aims; in our heritage of deep suspicion of strong central government as against States' rights; or our preference for individual as against common effort; or the imbalance in our state and federal legislative bodies in favor of rural as against urban areas. As a result, the poor are caught up and held to their lot by a complacent, prosperous overwhelming majority enjoying the goods and services of the most affluent society of all times. This leads us, then, to revolutionary evolution in response to rising expecta- tions, both in the War on Poverty and in race relations. Inevitably, one small part of this is uncoordinated violence in scattered communities. To some Negro teenagers, even the Black Muslims seem conservative. To many of them the Economic Opportunity Act and the Civil Rights bill are meaningless. Some would move toward partition rather than equal rights. But for the largest number neither violence nor partition are the means and goals. Instead, they choose the following: 1. $ooial mobility.-moving up and out of lower class life. The physical movement away from the port of entry slum is one measure of social mobility. The availability of jobs and of training opportunities to qualify for them is essential. A major concern for us, then, is a rational approach to the develop- ment of entry-level jobs, for sub and non-professionals, in all the service occupations in industry and commerce and, finally, through a major com- ponent of public works. 2. Political and ~S'ocial Action-participation of citizens, including the dis~ advantaged, in efforts to change the society and its institutions. Perhaps the largest thrust of the War on Poverty is in these areas. It is a means for people to enter the mainstream of society. It is a tool for reducing detachment and alienation of poor people. Psychologically, it is a part of their attaining a new sense of self worth as a part of a healthy, democratic community. It is expressed in a variety of forms in the War on Poverty, and this goes back 80 years for those of us in Settlements. It includes organizing local residents for self-help, through Kitchen Olubs, Block Clubs and Councils of Organizations. PAGENO="0182" 2642 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967 It includes training of local residents for positions of leadership and respon- sibility as volunteers, in direct service and on policy-making bodies. It includes the development of ad hoc organizations to identify and then attack local social problems-alone and with allies. It includes the establishment of new coalitions for pressure for institutional change. If this revolutionary evolution is to succeed, we must lend our full help. In doing this, of course, we cannot afford to be apologetic about our own vaine arid services. In Conclusion We reaffirm our continuing support for an effective Economic Opportunity Act and, with the revisions suggested above, urge the early approval by this Congress of the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will recess until Monday morn- ing at 9:45 a.m. (WhereupOn, at 1 :55 p.m. the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9:45 a.m., Monday, July 24, 1967.) PAGENO="0183" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 MONDAY, JULY 24, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITFEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9 :50 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon Carl D Perkins (chairm'ui of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Hawkins, Q.uie, Erlenborn, Dellënback, and Steiger. Also present: H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; Louise Maxienne Dargans, research assistant; Ben- jamin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, investigator; Marian Wyman, special assistant; Charles W. Radcliffe, minority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minoiity reseaich assistant, and \Y Phillips Rocke feller, minority rese'irch specialist Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. I am delighted to welcome one of my colleagues this morning, the gentle- man from Florida, Mr. Rogers. Will you come around, Mr. Rogers and make any statement you wish to make? STATEMENT OP HON. PAUL C. ROGERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS PROM TIlE STATE OP FLORIDA Mr. ROGERS. Thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman. I will make a short statement and then file a statement for the record if I may. Thank you for this opportunity to appear to express some reflec- tions on the poverty program as it has existed in the Ninth District of Florida. I have a report made at my request by th~ General Accounting Office which I would like to submit to the committee, along with my own report prepared after personally looking into the administration of some of the programs in my area. * These two reports speak for themselves but I would like to add some additional thoughts There is no question about the' existence of serious poverty in. the ninth district. It exists throughQut the area, in or close to places of great prosperity It is a serious problem in the migrant f'irmworker areas. ` , Some good has resulted from the various programs, especially in education Of particular note have been Headstart and day care pro grams; and self-help housing. ` The Adult and Family Education program administered by Mary- mount College, and the new adult program to be run by the St'ite department of education offer signs of encouragement The Foster Grandparent project with retarded children `at the Sunland Training Center at Fort Myei s is particulaily outstanding 2643 PAGENO="0184" 2644 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Far too much effort, however, has been wasted. This not only angers taxpayers who see their money being spent for questionable projects and salaries, but deprives the poor themselves of the very limited resources which are supposedly being provided for their betterment. The real needs of the poor are in housing, education, and health. All three are within the established competency of local and State governmental units which too often have been bypassed by OEO in my district. These points of concern are outlined in more detail in my report given to the committee today. We have been given assurances by OEO that many of the past mistakes have been corrected, and the proce- dures and administrative shortcomings have been identified. A better spirit of cooperation now seems to exist. I am concerned, however, that these mistakes could have occurred under a watchful OEO administration. The committee may wish to discuss these matters with OIEO. Not only did a few individuals re- ceive millions of dollars in grants, but they were apparently success- ful in. avoiding a day of reckoning in spite of expressions of concern by all members of the Florida congressional delegation whose dis- tricts were affected. OEO has been cooperative this year in seeing to needed reorganiza- tions of various projects in my area. Now we are hopeful that the errors of the past will not be repeated. Only time, and continued close atten- tion will prove out the assurances received. This committee can help. Now if I may proceed off the record for an additional minute. The General Accounting Office and OEO have provided me with addi- tional information regarding one of the Florida operations which should be brought to the attention of the committee. OEO has requested that this information not be generally released at this time and I want to cooperate. Members of the committee, how- ever, should be aware of this in consideration of this legislation. I have made a few copies to leave with you. OEO and GAO can no doubt provide additional copies or further information should the committee find it necessary. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. I would appreciate your leaving a copy with me. Let me compliment you, Mr. Rogers, on bringing this to the atten- tion of the committee and deciding to come before the committee to make your observations. Not only does it show that you are a great Congressman but one conscious of trying to improve the so-called poverty program in your area. There is no doubt in my mind that your appearance here today will work toward that end. If we do not point up these discrepancies and short comings and let the responsible authorities know about them there is no way to make the corrections. I personally appreciate your appearance this morning. It shows that you want to see the program move in a more constructive way than it has moved in the past. Now do you feel that we are moving in that direction at the present time and has it been your observation that the Director has taken steps to correct these mistakes? Mr. ROGERS. Let me say this, Mr. Chairman, as I have said in my re- port, I do think that we have the experience now when we have been PAGENO="0185" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2645 bringing what we feel are improper action and errors in the adminis- tration of the program to the attention of OEO. We have had good cooperation to date. I think a number of pro- grams have been improved. There are still some areas that certainly need a great deal of improvement. I do think where we have been able to bring these problems to OE'O that they have been responding quite well in trying to correct them. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, the director of OEO has co- operated with you to make these corrections? Mr. ROGERS. Yes, I think he has. He has tried very hard. We still have a number to go but they have been doing very well. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Rogers. (The documents referred to follow:) REPORT ON INVESTIGATION OF ALLEGED POLITICAL AND UNION ACTIVITIES BY CERTAIN GRANTEES UNDER GRANTS BY OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, BY THE COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY 1967 COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES, Washington, D.C., ]iay 1.9, 1967. Hon. PAUL ROGERS, House of Representatives, DEAR Mn. ROGERS: Pursuant to your telegram of December 23, 1966, and later meetings with you, we have made an investigation of alleged participation in polit- ical and union aetlities by employees of the Community Action Fund, Inc., and the American Friends Serice Committee-organizations conducting programs for migrant workers in Florida with grant funds provided by the Office of Economic Opportunity. The accompanying report presents the results of our investigation. Our review includes information on references indicated in your letter dated' February 8, 1967, addressed to Mr. Alfred C. Krumlauf, an investigator for the Office of Economic Opportunity, regarding the alleged attendance of American Friends Service Committee employees at certain meetings held in Belle Glade, Florida. A copy of your letter was furnished to us on February 9, 1967. On the basis of our review of available records and discussions with officials and individuals connected with the above grantees and other individuals involved in the allegations, it appears that certain employees of these grantees engaged in what may be considered political and union activities and that Federal funds were used to reimburse some of those employees for certain travel expenses incurred' while carrying out such activities. Because all but two employees who engaged in these activities were employees of the Community Action Fund, we confined our' review to that grantee's records. It was not feasible, however, for us to determine the costs incurred for these' purposes because time records of the Fund generally did not show specific day- to-day activities of employees, travel vouchers did not always contain information on the purposes of employees `travel, and records concerning rented automobiles' did not show the purposes for which the automobiles were used. As to the legality of using Federal grant funds for union organizing activities,, a responsible official of the Office of Econ~mic Opportunity has taken the position' that such use of grant funds by the Community Action Fund was not permitted under the `terms of the grant. It appears that, under the terms of the grants to the American Friends Service Committee, the same position would be applicable. We therefore believe that the Office of Economic Opportunity should take action to identify, and `obtain refunds from both grantees for, any expenditures made under `their respective grants for those activities described in this report which, in our opinion, represented union organizing activities. Regarding political activities, on the basis of the grant proposal submitted by the Community Action Fund. `the lack of restrictions in the grant on such activi- ties, and the position taken by the Agency's Office of General Counsel, we would' not ~question the use of `Federal gran't funds for nonpartisan political activities of the type described in this report, However, any further transportation of indi- viduals to the polls on election day by a grantee would be in violation of the' agency s Community Action Memo No. 50-A issued December 1966 in implemen- tation of the provisions of section 603 of the Economic Opportunity Act as: amended by the Public Law 89-794, approved November 8, 1966. PAGENO="0186" 2646 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Your attention is invited to the fact that officials of the Office of Economic Opportunity and the grantees, and other individuals mentioned in this report, have not been given the opportunity to formally examine and comment on its contents. Also, as will be noted in the body of the report, there are certain incon- sistencies in the information obtained. You may wish to consider these facts, therefore, in whatever use you decide to make of the results of our investigation. We plan to make no further distribution of the information presented herein unless copies are specifically requested, and then copies will be distributed only after your approval has been obtained or public anouncement of this informa- tion has been made by you. V Sincerely yours, FRANK H. WEITZEL, Jssistant Corn ptroller General or the United states. BACKGROUND By telegram dated December 23, 1966, and in a meeting with our representative on December 27, 1966, Congressman Paul G. Rogers requested us to investigate certain allegations concerning participation in political and union activities by employees of the Community Action Fund, Inc. (CAF), and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC), which were conducting programs under grants by the Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO) for assistance to migrants. Mr. Rogers furnished the names of a number of individuals to whom he thought we should speak in order to obtain information relating to the allegations. In addition, Mr. Rogers furnished us a copy of his letter dated February 8, 1967, to Mr. Alfred C. Krumlauf, an employee of the Office of Economic Opportu- nity, which alleged that employees of the American Friends Service Committee, participated in certain meetings held in Belle Glade. Florida. During a meeting with Mr. Rogers on March 6, 1967, he expressed concern over the effectiveness Of the migrant program as conducted by the OAF. We agreed to review available information at OEO headquarters in Washington relating to the administration and evaluation by OEO of this program: Our investigation consisted of discussions with various individuals associated with the Community Service Foundation: the community Action Fund, mc.; the American Friends Service Committee; FlOrida State and county officials; news- papermen: and other individuals associated with the VallegeVd actfvities or believed to have had information pertaining to the allegations and of an examination of pertinent financial and other records of the Community Service Foundation and the Community Action Fund and related documents: of the Office of Economic Opportunity. The results of our investigation are summarized herein under the following main captions. Allegations of political activities. V V V V Allegations of union organizing activities. Legal status of political and union activities Administration and evaluation of the Florida OAF migrant program by OEO. The grants and contracts made by OEO through February 28, 1967~ to the CAP and its associated organizations are listed below: Estimated Date Grant or contract number Grantee or contractor organization amount Dec. 31, 1964 Apr. 28, 1965 June 7, 1965 Nov. 2.1965 Dee. 7, 1965 May 28, 1966 June 13, 1966 Contract OEO-23 (expired Mar. 20, 1965). Grant FLA-771 (Ill-B) (expired Apr. 30, 1966). Contract OEO-404 (expired Oct. 11, 1965). Contract OEO-709 (expired Sept. 8 1966). Contract OEO-777 (expired Dec. 12, 1966). Grant C G-0771 B/O (expires Apr. 30, 1967) (includes Project Upstream). Grant C G_66~9676 Community Service Foundation ~ do 2 do do Community Action Fund, Inc. do Migrant Legal Services, Inc.3 $6, 083 626,410 102, 560 293, 300 5,039 V 610, 708 V V 806, 099 V Total esthnated amount 2,450, 199 1 Community Service Foundation served as a subcontractor to the Florida Institute of Continuing Uni- versity Studies which held a prime contract with OEO in the amount of $32,394. 2 Grant was made to the Community Service Foundation, but the Community Action Fund, Inc., as- sumed responsibility for this project in October 1965, when it was founded. 2 As of February 1967, no Federal funds had been made available to Migrant Legal Services, Inc. PAGENO="0187" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2647 The Community Service Foundation was founded in 1940 by Mr. Willis T. Spivey as a philanthropic organization devoted to helping underprivileged people. The Community Action Fund and the Migrant Legal Services were established with OEO concurrence, apparently for the purpose of engaging in the antipoverty program. The American Friends Service Committee received two grants from OEO-one in Octo~er 1965 for $98,685 and the other in November 1966 for $133,985. Both grants were for 1 year and were for assistance to migrants in 10 east coast States including Florida. ALLEGATIONS OF POLITICAL ACTIVITIES The allegations of political activities are to the effect that OAF, using Federal funds, conducted voter registration drives in the spring and fall of 1966, and two OAF employees acted as deputy voting registrars in Palm Beach County; that the number of Democratic voters registered by these OAF employees was out of proportion to the number of Republican voters registered; and that OAF employees transported voters to the polls. The allegations, in general, are contained in three articles in the Fort Lauder- dale News (December 21, 22, 23, 1966) by Howard Van Smith, whom Mr. Rogers suggested that we interview to obtain information in support of the allegations. We interviewed Mr. Smith on January 6 and 9, 1967. In support of his state- ment concerning political activities by OAF employees, Mr. Smith gave us copies of the three articles which he had written, but he had no further documentary evidence. He furnshed us the names of persons, as indicated below, who were said to have personal knowledge of political activities of OAF employees. Specific allegations made by Mr. Smith and the results of our investigation of these allegations are sumarized below. OAF employees acted as deputy voting registrars Mr Smith sud th'it t~\o OAF emplo~ ees-Mr Leonard Smith and Miss Man garet Taylor-w-ere appointed as deputy voting registrars in Palm Beach County and thus were able to go into the fields, clinics, and camps and regfster migrant workers "on the spot" and that no other Florida county had appointed OAF employees as deputy voting registrars. Horace Beasley, Supervisor of Elections for Palm Beach County, confirmed that tw-o OAF employees were appointed as deputy voting registrars, but he identified them as Leonard Smith appointed in September 1966 and Mrs. Myrtle Walker appointed in Fe~ruary 1966 (rather than Margaret Taylor). Mr. Beasley said that the only specific requirement that a person must meet to serve as a deputy is to be a resident of the county and that he determines by interview whether a person is qualified to serve in this capacity. Fumber of Democratic voters registered by OAF employees was out of propor- tion to number of Republican voters registered One of the newspaper articles written by Howard Van Smith stated that Leonard Smith of OAF registered 1,700 voters with a ratio of 44 Democrats to 1 Republican. During our interview, Mr. Van Smith said that he had been told by Mr. "Red" Simon, an employee of the Florida State Employment Service, that Leonard Smith of OAF had explained his disproportionate registration of Demo- crats to Republicans by saying that the OAF employees explained to the regis- trants what the Democrats had done for them and what the Republicans had done. Mr. Van Smith also said that Mrs. Frances Harper, a nurse employed by the Palm Beach County Welfare Department, and another nurse who preferred net to be identified had heard Leonard Smith of OAF discussing politics with migrant workers to an excessive degree. In an interview on January 31, 1967, "Red" Simon corroborated the statement attributed to him by Mr. Smith, but said that he had not heard OAF employees advise farm workers to register as Democrats. Mrs. Frances Harper told us that she had worked in the same room at Belle Glade in which Leonard Smith of OAF had registered voters but that she had not heard Leonard Smith or anyone else attempting to influence the party selec- tioń of registrants. Mrs. Harper told us also that she had been called by Howard Van Smlth but that she had declined to talk to him. Both Dr. Thomas P. Hardeman and Richard F. Wiggins, then president (since resigned) anu piogr'mm director respectii ely of C &F stated that they had no *knowledge that OAF employees attempted to influence migrant workers to regis- ter as Democrats. PAGENO="0188" 2648 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Leonard Smith, who held the position of Citizenship Educator, at the CAP Regional Office, Delray Beach, categorically denied that he had attempted to influence the party affiliation of persons whom he registered. Mr. Smith said that, when the migrants asked a question about the differences in the parties, he told them "Johnson is a Democrat, Kennedy was a Democrat, Goldwater is a Republican, and Eisenhower is a Republican." He noted that by his reference to Goldwater as a Republican "the deck may be stacked" in favor of the Demo- crats, but that in his opinion his explanation of the differences in the parties was not contrary to the law. Mrs. Walker, employed by OAF as a Community Development Aide, told us that she had been appointed as a deputy voting registrar and that she had registered voters in the Belle Glade area, but denied that she bad attempted to influence the party choice of those whom she registered. She said further that most of the registrants knew the party with which they wished to register, but when she was asked to explain the differences in the parties she did so by stating that Johnson is a Democrat and Goldwater is a Republican. Horace Beasely expressed the opinion that it was proper for a voting registrar to use the names of individuals such as President Johnson and Mr. Goldwater for party identification, so long as the registrar did not attempt to tell the eppli- cant how to register or how to vote. Mr. Beasley remarked that he cautioned all deputy registrars not to direct registrants to either party and that he had no knowledge that Leonard Smith had attempted to do so. Miss Margaret Taylor, CAF Regional Director, Delray Beach, said that she had assisted Leonard Smith in registering voters in the Deiray Beach area and that she had no knowledge that any member of her staff had attempted to in- fluence the party affiliation of registrants. She said that she thought the news- paper allegations of improper influence of registrants came about as the result of comments made in jest in a conversation she and Leonard Smith had had with "Red" Simon and Tom Easterling of the Florida State Employment Service. Concerning the number of voters registered by Leonard Smith and Myrtle Walker, our examination of records maintained by Mr. Beasley showed that Mr. Smith bad registered 491 voters and that Mrs. Walker had registered 195 voters. Mr. Beasley explained the difference between the numbers and the 1,700 registrations attributed in the newspapers to Leonard Smith by saying that dis- trict registration offices are prone to exaggeration and that many of the reported registrations represented persons who were already registered. Concerning the ratio of Democrats to Republicans among the persons regis- tered by Leonard Smith, Mr. Beasley said that the registration in Palm Beach County is predominantly Democrat. Leonard Smith gave us two reports issued by Mr. Beasley which showed the following information concerning tht~ party affiliation of registered Negro voters in the county. Registration as of- Number of registered- Democrats Republicans Ratio Apr. 2, 1966 15,583 1,225 17, 332 1,227 12.7 to 1. 14.1 to 1. Oct. 8, 1966 Mr. Smith expressed the opinion that these figures show that OAF's voter registration activities did not result in any significant change in the proportion of Democrat to Republican registration in the Negro population of the county. Our examination of registration records in Palm Beach County showed that~ of the 686 voters registered by Leonard Smith and Myrtle Walker, I registered Independent, 5 registered Republican, and 680 registered Democrat. CAP employees transported voters to the polls Mr. Van Smith stated to us that he had been told by Leonard Smith of CAP that on November 8, 1966, he and other OAF employees and Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) bad driven between 700 and 800 migrants to the polls. According to Howard Van Smith this transportation was accomplished through use of both Government-owned automobiles and privately owned vehicles, the owners of which were reimbursed from Federal funds. Mr. Van Smith suggested that we contact Mr. Tom Easterling of the Florida State Employment Service in Deiray Beach for information concerning OAF's use of Government automo- biles for political purposes. PAGENO="0189" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2649 Mr. Easterling told us that he had seen one to three Government-owned auto- mobiles at the Palm Beach County Welfare Department Clinic located west of Deiray Beach-where Leonard Smith of OAF had registered voters-but that he could not say that these vehicles were being used for political purposes, inasmuch as they could have been there on official OAF business. Dr. Hardeman gave us a copy of a leter dated May 12, 1966, that he had received from the Assistant General Counsel of OEO which stated, in effect, tha (1) privately owned vehicles could be used to transport workers to register and to vote, provided transportation was furnished on a nonpartisan basis and the cost could be reimbursed from Federal grant funds if it was reasonable and (2) Government-owned vehicles assigned to VISTA volunteers could be used to transport workers to register, provided transportation was furnished on a nonpartisan basis, but that these cars could not be used to transport workers to the polls. The OEO Assistant General Counsel informed us on March 29, 1907, that he believed that the use of vehicles for transporting workers to register or to vote, as stated in his letter in May 1966 to Dr. Hardeman, was not in violation of CAP's grant. He stated also that OEO was still working on the problem but he believed that any community action agency, including grantees under title III B, which would now transport workers to the polls to vote would be in vio- lation of Community Action Memo No. 50-A, dated December 1, 1966, which states in pertinent part: "~ * * an employee of a public agency or a OAA [Community Action Agency~ may not:-solicit votes, or help to get out votes on election day. * * *" We reviewed CAP's proposal for which OEO grant CG-0771 B/O was approved on May 28, 1966, and noted the following statements indicating CAP's concern with political action by migrant workers. "The Citizenship Educators shall give primary concern to enabling the migrant to participate fully as a citizen within the society. He will encourage the adults in the families to become fully aware of the rights and duties of citizenship, both national and state, and help the migrants to see their own needs and problems and the ways in which they themselves can work effectively to bring about a resolution to these problems. He will give special attention to the areas of Social Security, wage and work conditions, voter registration, health welfare, rights and opportunities, educational rights, residency and other appropriate areas of concern. * * * * * * * "Participation in democratic processes involves more than registering and voting in elections of public officials. This is certainly important. Our staff has been responsible for over a thousand Mig-Migrants [sic] registering to vote. The formation of neighborhood councils, clubs and other types of indigenous groups has been and will continue to be a significant part of the program. Organizations composed of farm workers have sprung up in each of the six regions and have taken action appropriate to their purposes. The Free Will Neighborhood Council in Belle Glade, for example, has worked on a project to secure a tract of land to be the site for homes financed through the Farmers Home Administration. They also conducted a voter registration drive, a cleanup campaign, and have promoted participation in home management and literacy classes by holding neighborhood meetings on these subjects featuring speakers with professional expertise. Speakers have come from the Social Security Office, Welfare Departments and local private agencies to this and other such groups and will continue to do so. The Carver Homes Improvement Association, established with the help of the Migrant Program staff and VISTA Volunteers, in the Pompano area has invited gubernatorial candidates to its meetings to hear presentations of their platforms and to discuss them with the candidates. "One of the most significant instances of establishing indigenous groups was the formation of the United Agricultural Workers of America for purposes of collective bargaining and other protections to the workers. This group has had the advice and counsel of our staff, but is now proceeding under its own power. "Programs aimed at community involvement in such democratic processes currently in evidence in scores of locations will be intensified and multiplied throughout the southern half of the state. "Each Regional Director and Citizenship Educator will devise a program for training migrants as Aides in citizenship education. This will include presentations on voter registrations, social security, organizational techniques, parliamentary procedure, and various facets of community leadership. * * * [Italic supplied.] PAGENO="0190" 2650 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY. ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Leonard Smith, OAF, said . that Government-owned vehicles were used. to transport farm workers to registration places but that OAF was not authorized to use Government-owned~ vehicles to transport voters to the polls. He `said that a bus. borrowed from Marymount College, and personal vehicles of OAF. staff members were used for this purpose. Our examination of OAF financial records showed that OAF employees were extensively engaged in transporting farm workers to voter registration places over a period of several months and in transporting voters to the polls on Novem- ber 8, 1960, and that grant funds were used for these purposes. It was not feasible for us to determine the costs incurred for these purposes because OAF's time records generally did `not show specific day-to-day activities of employees; and, as a result, salary costs could not be allocated to specific activities, travel vouchers did not always contain information on the purposes of employee travel or show a breakdown of the cost applicable to each of several travel purposes, and records on rented automobiles did not show the purposes for which the automobiles were used. We were able, however, to identify travel costs of 8899.418 incurred to transport farm workers to voter registration places and $28.90 to transport voters to the polls. In addition, we noted travel costs of $327.62 which involved voter registration along with~ other activities, but we could not determine the amount of these costs applicable specifically to voter registration.. ALLEGATIONS OF UNION ORGANIZING ACTIVITIES. The allegations regarding union organizing activities on the part of employees of OEO, OAF, and AFSO were that the Coordinating Committee for Farm Workers (COFW)-a group in which OAF and AF'SC were active-had spon- sored a rally of migrant farm workers in Belle Glade on December 11, 1960; that at this rally the president of OAF and representatives of A1l'SC had ex- horted the workers to express their dissatisfaction with their economic and social status and with their local, State, and national governments; that follow- ing the rally there was an organizational meeting of the United Agricultural Workers of America to which all the workers were invited; and that the union meeting was presided over by the Regional Director of OEO until the taking of a vote on whether to join the union, at which time a representative of AFSC assumed the chair. Mr. Rogers gave us the names of a number of persons who, he said, would be able to give us specific information concerning these allegations. In. our investigation of these allegations, we found fairly extensive evidence that OAF and AFSC employees participated in efforts to unionize farm workers in Florida. The information developed on this subject was obtained from many and diverse sources, and its development was quite time consuming. For that reason, we did not attempt to establish the full extent of participation by OAF and .AFSC employees in unionization activities, `but limited our examination to the extent that we believed necessary to demonstrate the nature of these activi- ties and to learn whether Federal grant funds awarded to OAF bad been ex- pended in connection with these activities. Ear1~j organi:at'ional activities The earliest indication that w-e found of unionization activities on tile nart of OAF and AFSC employees involved efforts, in the March to May 1066 period, to organize migrant crew leaders. We interviewed three persons who said that they had attended meetings of crew leaders in March or April 1966 at which OAF and AFSC employees and representatives of AFL-CIO were attempting to organize a union of crew leaders and migrant workers. The three persons interviewed were Calvin Clay and Wal- ter Kates, employees of the Florida State Employment Service in Belle Glade. md Loren Meredith. crew leader and farmer, of Boyntoa. The OAF and AFSC employees identified as taking part in unionization efforts were William H. Johnson. OAF Regional Director for Broward County; Roscoe Webb, OAF Re- gional Director for Dade County; Leonard Smith, OAF Citizenship Educator, Delray Beach; and Hank Mayer, AFSC. Messrs. Clay, Kates, `and Meredith generally agreed (although Meredith said that he attended only one meeting) that, at these meetings, Johnson, Webb. and Mayer encouraged the crew leaders to form a union by pointing out to them the advances that the union had brought to agricultural workers in California: the advantages, such as insurance and bulk buying, which they could obtain by or- ganizing; and that, if they were organized, they could "make the farmers come to them." Mr. Meredith said that a representative of AFL-CIO offered the crew leaders union financing, lawyers, and labor to help them organize. PAGENO="0191" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2651 Messrs. Clay and Kates said that, at the second meeting of the group, which also included representatives of AFL-CIO, they selected a name for their or- ganization. They said that the crew leaders wanted a name such as "United Crew-Leaders" but Johnson objected to that name because it was desired to bring in the workers as well as the crew leaders, that to satisfy Johnson's objection the name "United Farm Workers" was suggested but Webb objected because he said the union should be national in character and should obtain a na- tional charter, and that the name finally chosen was "United Agricultural Work- ers of America" (UAWA). We were informed by Mr. Allison T. French of the Management Research Institute, West Palm Beach, that [JAWA voted to affiliate with the Industrial Union Department (IUD), AFL-CIO, on May 10, 1066, and that on May 24, 1960, UAWA was granted a charter as local 1131 of the Laborers International Union of North America, AFL-CIO. We discussed these early organizational meetings with Messrs. Johnson and Webb of CAF and with Messrs. Mayer and William Channel of AFSC. Johnson and Webb acknowledged that they had attended several meetings of UAWA, al- ways at the invitation of the crew leaders, but denied that they had directed any of these meetings or that they had ever encouraged the crew leaders to join any particular union. Mr. Mayer also ackiiowledged that he had attended the organizational meet- ings of UAWA, but denied that he had directed these meetings. He said that he had advised the crew leaders on the advantages of organization in their deal- ings with the farmers and on the advantages and disadvantages of affiliating with the laborers union but that he had emphasized that the crew leaders would have to decide for themselves the course of action to be taken. Mr. Channel, who is director of the APSO migrant program operating under an OEO grant, stated that UAWA had been chartered under Florida law as an agricultural cooperative, under the same provision of law as the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association-an association of growers-and nOt under the Florida labor laws. - CAF and AF~8U participation in preparation of T]AWA newsletter A UAWA newsletter dated April 25, 1966, listed Bill Johnson, OAF, and Hank Mayer, AFSC, as Editors, and Roscoe Wbb, CAF, as Special Consultant to UAWA. This newsletter also contained the following statement, which is quoted herein in its entirety: "ATTENTION ALL CREW LEADERS ! ! ! ! Keep this phone number-it's a MUST LAKE WORTH 965-6991. Call STOOP "STOOP will be a code name for any emergency you have while you are away from Florida up North. Put in a person-to-person call for STOOP when you have an emergency problem and he will help solve it, whatever it is. After 5 P.M. call STOOP at West Palm. Beach 585-5152. "This `service will be available only `to crew leaders who are mem- bers of UAWA." The telephone numbers shown are those of the AFSO office in Lake Worth and the home. of William Channel, Program Director for AFSO in Lake Worth. Mr. Channel advised us that it was "unfortunate" that the newsletter stated that `the services referred to would be available only to crew leaders who were members of IJAWA, that it should -have shown that these services were available to all cr'ew leaders and farm workers. Mr. Ohannel also said that the -newslet- ter was put out by Johnson and Mayer over a weekend on their own thne and that the cost of the newsletter had been borne by the crew leaders. Mr. Johnson denied that he was ever Editor of the UAWA newsletter, but he did acknowledge that he bad helped to prepare one issue. Mr. Webb said that, when he was listed as -Special Consultant in the PAWA newsletter, the UAWA was not union affiliated. Mr. Mayer -acknowledged that he and Johnson had put out -one issue of the UAWA newsletter, `but he asserted -that this was `before UAWA was affiliated with the union. `Mr. Mayer said that he and Johnson were responsible for list- ing `the APSO telephone number in the news-letter and for the statement that PAGENO="0192" 2652 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTrS OF 1967 the sbrvices available to those calling that number would be limited to crew leaders who were members of UAWA but that this restricting of service was for the purpose of getting more crew leaders to join UAWA. Dr. Hardeman and Richard Wiggins, of OAF, stated that in their opinion Johnson and Webb had used poor judgment in acting as Editor and Special Consultant for the UAWA newsletter and that Johnson and Webb had been told to disassociate themselves from UAWA in these capacities. Meeting between officials of OAF and AFL-CIO Mr. Walter Neiger, formerly employed by OAF as an accountant, advised us that on June 18, 1966, he attended a dinner meeting in the conference room of a Tampa hotel between officials of OAF and AFL-CIO at which there was a dis- cussion of AFL-CIO plans to organize the farm workers and of the role that CAP was to play in these organizing activities. Mr. Neiger said that the AFL-CIO plan was to sign up 10.000 migrant workers by July 4, 1966, and that CAF's role was to furnish information to union organizers as to where migrant workers could be located. We ascertained that the hotel conference room in which the meeting was held was rented for dinner on the night of June 18, 1966, by IUD, AFL-CIO, and that the bill for the hotel's service was paid by ITJD, AFL-CIO, Charlotte, North Carolina. We questioned William H. Johnson, CAF Regional Director for Broward Coun- ty, about the meeting, and he acknowledged being there. He said that the meeting had been called for the specific purpose of acquainting the CAF regional directors and staff about plans to organize migrant workers during their trip "upstream" and to obtain OAF assistance in these organizing efforts. Mr. Johnson identified the following persons as being in attendance at the June meeting: Thomas P. Hardeman, then President of OAF, and Mrs. Harde- man: Jack Mansfield, Vice President, OAF; Richard Wiggins, Program Director, OAF: William Blakely. Deputy Program Director, OAF; Walter Neiger, ac- countant, OAF: all OAF regional directors except Roscoe Webb; Peter Kramer, CAF; Father Martin Walsh, Human Relations Board of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Miami; Nicholas Zonarich, IUD, AFL-OIO; James Pierce, IUD, AFL- 010. Pat Burke, Regional Director, United Steel Workers; Estes Rife, United Steel Workers; and Willie Payne, Newlin Lloyd, Oarrol Lewis, and Chuck Todd. organizers for IUD, AFL-CIO. Mr. Johnson said that the union officials present outlined plans for their ~`Project Upstream" (see p. 21) in which they proposed to employ college students and professional organizers under the supervision of IUD to contact crew leaders during their trip "upstream." According to Mr. Johnson. Jack Mansfield stated at this meeting that the union was the answer to the farm workers' problems, that OAF personnel could tell the union organizers where the crew leaders could be located "upstream," and that OAF employees~ should cooperate with union officials and help get the farm workers organized; also, according to Mr. Johnson, Dr. Hardeman stated that OAF regional directors should assist the union organizers in any way they could to get farm workers to sign union cards. Mr. Johnson said that after the June 18 meeting he had furnished information related to "upstream" crew leaders to Eleanor Constable, VISTA Support Officer, hilt that he had not furnished such information directly to union representatives. Mr. Johnson also said that the OAF regional directors were supposed to get some money from the union to defray the extra cost incurred in these union activities but that he had not received any such funds. Mr. Johnson's Oomments concerning the June 18 meeting were substantially corroborated by Margaret Taylor, OAF Regional Director for Palm Beach County, except that she remembered no discussion of the union's financing any OAF efforts to assist in organizing the farm workers. Richard Wiggins, Program Director, OAF, confirnied that information fur- nished by Mr. Johnson, in general, except that (1) he was sure that either Dr. Harcleman or Mr. Mansfield had made the point that OAF would cooperate with the union but that there were limitations in the OEO grant and (2) he did not recall that there was any discussion of the Union's paying OAF for any assistance which OAF might give in the organizing campaign. Mr. Wiggins said that he assumed that some or all of the regional directors supplied the requested infor- mation to the union. A memorandum dated June 21, 1966, from Mr. Wiggins to the OAF staff con- cerning "Role in Unionization of Farm Workers" seems somewhat inconsistent with the spirit of cooperation apparently expressed at the June 18 meeting. This memorandum is quoted in its entirety as follows: PAGENO="0193" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2653 * "There have been questions raised as to the role of Staff Personnel, including Volunteers, in the recruiting of farm workers for unions. We must emphasize to each one of you that there are provisions within our O.E.O. grant that prohibit active participation on the part of O.A.F. Migrant staff, including Volunteers, in such recruitment. There may well be persons, including college students, in your area this summer involved in the signing up of farm workers for unions, but, we must refrain from this activity." We note that this memorandum does not define either "active participation" or `the acceptable role, if any, which OAF employees might assume in the union- ization of farm workers. We were unable to identify any costh `incurred by OAF in assisting the union as agreed at the June 18 meeting except those related to attendance at the meeting itself. Travel costs related to attendance at the June 18 meeting and at a regional directors' meeting held on June 19 at the same location totaled $255.04. "Project Upstrecom"-sumnier 1966 The stated purpose of OAF's "project Upstream" was to assist migrant workers during their northern migration and to further the work begun in the migrant program in Florida. To accomplish this work, OAF was to have a supervisor and 14 VISTA volunteers accoi~npany the crews "upstream" and work with the same migrant children and adults with whom they had worked in Florida. Our examination of OAF records disclosed that during the period June 19 to 21, 1966, Messrs. Jack Mansfield and William Blakely, Vice President and Deputy Program Director, respectively, of OAF, traveled to Philadelphia, Penn- sylvania; Trenton, New Jersey; and Bridgeton, New Jersey, to prepare for the arrival of the "Project Upstream" staff later that month. William H. Anderson, Jr., Assistant General Manager, Labor Division, Florida Fruit `and Vegetable Association, furnished us with a copy of a document which he said was a report from an official of the State of New Jersey to an official of the State of Florida, which stated in part: "Early in July the IUD, Washington, D.C. notified the Business Agent of the Amalgamated Food and Allied Workers Union, AFL-CIO, Seabrook Farms, that the men listed below would spend some time in the Bridgeton, New Jersey area to explore the possibilities of organizing farm workers in South Jersey. * * * * * * "Nick Zonarich-Organizational Director, IUD, Washington, D.C. "Bill Layman-Riverdale, Md. IUD. "Russell Galloway-Oonshohoken, Pa., AFL-CIO. "James Pierce-Charlotte, NC. "Jack Mansfield-Florida * * The report also stated that Mr. Mansfield denied any direct connection with the union. Our examination of OAF records showed that, immediately after arrival of the "Project Upstream" VISTA volunteers in New Jersey, OAF begin to receive criticism from growers and processors in the area, the main complaint being that the VISTA volunteers were helping the IUD, AFL-CIO, to organize the farm workers. The correspondence also indicated that meetings were held between the OAF staff and representatives of IUD, AFL-CIO. OAF participation in UAWA meeting Our examination of travel vouchers and other documents of OAF disclosed that William Johnson, OAF Regional Director for Broward County, traveled from Pompano Beach to Belle Glade on November 16, 1906, "to attend meeting of U.A.W. as per request of Pat Hardeman." Mr. Johnson advised us that the "1IJ.A.W." shown on his travel authorization should have been "UAWA." Mr. Johnson told us he was not sure of `the purpose of this meeting but that this could have been the meeting at which the UAWA returned its charter to the laborers' union. In discussing the meeting at which the charter was returned, Mr. Johnson said that 75 to 100 crew leaders had returned from "upstream" and were trying to reorganize and that they had found their union office in Belle Glade closed, the telephone disconnected, and all utilities discontinued. Accord- ing to Mr. Johnson, "the boys were peeved" and called in Jerome Loberg of the laborers' union and James Pierce, IUD, AFL-CIO, for an explanation as to why their union office had been closed. He said that, after explanations by Messrs. Loberg and Pierce, he (Johnson) advised the crew leaders to get out of the laborers' union. * 80-0S4--67-pt. 4-13 PAGENO="0194" 2654 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Rally and union meetings at Belie Glade We obtained information from several sources concerning activities in Belle Glade on December 11, 1966. In general, the information obtained from these various sources is in agreement as to the nature of the activities, although there is some inconsistency in details. The essence of the pertinent information obtained and the inconsistencies are summarized below. Permit for rally Mr. Howard Gorham, a staff writer for the Tampa Tribune stated to us that he had been told by James Pierce, IITD, AFL-CIO, that (1) he (Pierce) had applied for a permit to hold a union rally in Belle Glade but was rejected because he did not have a local office, (2) at that time Father Martin Walsh, President of the Coordinating Committee of Farm Workers (CCFW), "went down the line" of CCFW affiliates until he found one (OAF) who had a local office, and (3) OAF applied for and obtained the permit. We examined a copy of the application for the permit for the rally and found that it was signed by Margaret Taylor, OAF Regional Director for Palm Beach County, and that the purpose of the rally was stated to be "to provide farm workers the opportunity of discussing mutual social and economic problems." The application showed that Ed King, a crew leader and President of IJAWA, and Father Walsh, President of CCFW, would be in charge of the rally. We were advised by Dr. Hardernan that the December 11, 1966. rally was not a union rally but, rather, a farm workers' rally, sponsored by CCFW, to provide farm workers an opportunity to discuss mutual social and economic Iwoblems. Richard Wiggins. OAF Program Director, said that CAF obtained the permit for the rally after CCFW's application for a permit was rejected because CCFW did not have a local office. Nature of rally Don Hoffman, Executive Director of the Management Research Institute, West Palm Beach, said that he was present at the rally; that there were a number of speakers, including Dr. Hardeman and Mr. Nicholas Zonarich, AFL-CIO; that all of the speeches had the same theme-organization; and that the prin- cipal speaker was Mr. Zonarich. Mr. Hoffman said that the speeches generally were to the effect that, if there was unity, there would be hope for the farm workers-better pay, better housing, better education, better sanitation, and better health facilities. Mr. Hoffman also said that in his speech Dr. Hardeman told the workers that the people on the platform, including Zonarich, could "do the job for you." Mr. Charles Schiele, a field representative of the Management Research In- stitute, told us that he was present at the rally and that it was his conclusion that its sole purpose was to unite the farm workers through the union. Another observation by Mr. Schiele, with which Mr. Hoffman concurred. was that the general feeling among farm workers was that the whole attempt at union or- ganizing had the approval and backing of Washington-meaning the Government poverty program. Mr. Schiele also said that the farm workers refer to OAF and AFSC employees and to VISTA volunteers as "people from Washington." Howard Gorham said that he was present at the rally and that it was not entirely pitched to union organizing. He referred us to the following statement from an article which he wrote for the Tampa Tribune of December 12, 1966, and which he said was his recollection of the statement made at the rally by the President of OAF. "Dr. Thomas P. Hardeman, director of the Community Action Fund and a member of the CCFW told the group it must seek its goals and, `if there be farm work, you have got to have these things before the farm w-ork is done. If your voice is not laud enough, it still won't be done-w-e have eight groups here (in the CCFW) and if all work together, we'll get it.'" Mr. Gorham said that Dr. Hardeman's talk followed a talk by Father Walsh in which Father Walsh spoke of inadequate living conditions, lack of schooling for children, filth and lack of sanitation in the camps, and the unavailability of workmen's compensation. Mr. Gorham said that Dr. Hardeman's reference to eight groups in OCFW included ITJD, AFL-CIO. Mr. Calvin Clay, an employee of the Florida State Employment Service, Belle Glade, told us that he was present at the rally, that he had heard Dr. Hardeman tell the assemblage that the people on the platform could get them better housing and so forth, and that Father Walsh made this same statement several times during his talk. PAGENO="0195" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF io~r 2655 Dr. Rardeman told us that his speech at the rally was directed toward telling the farm workers that there is strength in unity and that they should seek legis- lation to better themselves; *that he told the workers that America expects certain things of them and they should expect certain things in America and that they would have to be the ones to seek such goals as better pay and better housing; but he said that he did not mention any union, although there were union representatives at the rally who did. Mr. Channel, AFSO, told us that lie had sent Hank Mayer to the December 11,. 1966, rally to observe the activities but not to participate. Mr. Mayer confirmed to us that he had attended the December 11 rally as an observer and that lie did not participate in it. Union meetings before and after the rally Mr. Howard Gorbam told us that he was present at a meeting of crew leader's which was held in the union hail in Belle Glade before the rally on December 11, 1966. Mr. Gorham said that those in attendance at this meeting included about 25 crew leaders; James Pierce, IUD, AFL-CIO; and Roscoe Webb and William Johnson, CAP, and that at this meeting the crew leaders voted unanimously to affiliate with the United Farm Workers Organizing C'ommittee-~a unit formed by AFL-CIO by coin'biningtwo California unions. Mr. Gorh'am said that this meeting was presided `over by Roscoe Webb up to the point of taking the vote, but that Webb had not conducted the vote; also, that after the vote both Webb and Johnson spoke to the crew leaders in support of the union. Mr. Gorhaiu referred us to the following statements from his article in the Tampa Tribune of December 12, 1966: "Oiie crew leader spoke of threats against him for attending the union meet- ing and Webb told him, `I work for Uncle Sam. We're here to see your interests are taken care of.'" "Johnson said, `The growers are `organized and they are `organized to the teeth. You men in cirtus know this.'" "Johnson also told `the group, `It has to start with you. If one of you gets pressured by a farmer, then don't `go to his place. Let `him suffer. Don't go in and help the man. If you don't go, `he will come back to you on his `hands and knees.'" We interviewed W.H. Anderson, Jr., Assistant General Manager, Labor Di- vision, Florida Fruit and Vegetable Associ'ation, concerning the activities in Belle Glade on December 11, 1966. He said that he was not present at these activities but that he had a representative who was. Mr. Anderson gave us a copy of a letter which he wrote to the President of the Florida Fruit and Vegetable Association, which he said summarized the activities surrounding the rally. This letter `contained the following `statement concerning the union meeting before the rally "The actual rally by CCFW was preceded `by a meeting of crew leaders, union officials, poverty program people-including Roscoe Webb, Director of the Community Action Fund in Da'de `County and his assistant, Bill Johiison, and the Reverend Winton Ward. The union meeting was chaired by Roscoe Webb and the vote was conducted `by Reverend Ward, a'ssisted by James Pearce [sic], organizer for the AFL-CIO." Mr. Anderson declined to identi'fy his representative. The basic allegation by Congressman Rogers included a statement that the rally on December 11, 1966, was followed by a union meeting to which those attending the rally were invited. Dr. Hardeman stated that a note was passed to the platform during the rally by Ed King, President of UAWA, requesting that an announcement be made that there would be a meeting of crew leaders after the rally and that Father Walsh made the announcement as requested. Dr. Hardeman said that no one on the platform knew of this meeting until the announcement was made. Dr. Hardeman objected to reference to this meeting as a "union meeting"; he said that it was a crew leaders' meeting held to consider seeking affiliation with Chavez's union-- the United Farm Workers Organizing Committee (UFWOC). Messrs. Roscoe Webb and William Johnson, CAP, and Hank Mayer, AFSC, said that they attended the crew leaders' meeting after the rally. According to Mr. Johnson the purpose of this meeting was to vote on whether to seek affiliation with Chavez's group and that the crew leaders voted to seek such affiliation. Webb and Johnson denied that they supported the union in either of the meetings which preceded and followed the rally or that Webb had presided PAGENO="0196" 2656 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY AU~ AMENDMENTS OF 1967 over either of these meetings. Mr. Webb said that he did not attend the meeting before the rally-that he was in the meeting hall at the time but was being inter- viewed by a Columbia Broadcasting System news reporter; that, at the meeting which followed the rally, he was asked to read the minutes of a prior meeting and some letters related to TJAWTA's seeking affiliation with UFWOC; and that he did read these documents. Dr. Hardeman and Mr. Wiggins said that in their opinion attendance by Webb and Johnson at the LTAWA meeting before the rally was poor judgment on their part because the CAF staff had been authorized and encouraged to attend the rally and to bring farm workers with them and the action by Webb and Johnson might put OAF in a bad light. Dr. Hademan asserted, how-ever, the that Webb and Johnson had come to the rally early and had attended the meeting before the rally on their own time and that, in his opinion, activities of OAF employees on their own time could not constitute a violation of the OEO grant. Our examination of OAF records showed that neither Roscoe Webb nor Wil- liam Johnson claimed mileage or per diem for December 11, 1966, but that 12 other OAF employees were paid travel cost totaling $152.64 for attendance at the rally. In addition, an undeterminable amount of travel costs were incurred by a number of OAF employees in notifying farm workers of the rally and in urging attendance at the rally. We noted that 19 OAF employees claimed a total of 140 hours of work on December 11, for which they may be granted compensatory time, but the records do not show- the nature of the duty performed. In a memorandum dated December 20, 1966, addressed to all OAF regional directors and the OAF State office, Dr. Hardeman stated regarding the charge by Congressman Rogers that the OAF staff had used Federal funds for union organization: `~If our staff has done this it is contrary to the policy of OAF, Inc. As you know, the policy of this organization is that staff members, paid by OEO funds, are not to do the work of union organizers. This specifically forbids (1) inducing workers to sign union cards; (2) collecting dues from workers for any union; (3) recruit- ing workers for membership in a particular union. This does not mean that union organizers are our enemies or that because some reactionary Congressman does not like them ; that we must treat them as pariahs in the land. And, of course, it does not mean that you are to stop your very valuable ~s-ork of organizing farm workers into neighborhood groups, improvement association, or any kind of honorable group effort enabling them to assert their own aspira- tions and desires for protection of their own interest* It is important that the farm w-orkers make their own decisions and express their own interests, and that we do not manipulate them into joining a particular political party or labor union. "However, it is a part of our citizenship education program to inform the workers of the rights and responsibilities of American citizenship, to assist them in registering to vote and to inform them of all the resources that communi- ties-local, state and national-have to offer for their benefit. This can include instruction in the possible benefits from Social Security, various welfare pio- grams, and also from unionization as long as we do not recruit for a particular union or in any way w-ork to get them to join one." Frank R. Sloan, Regional Director, OEO, Atlanta, Georgia, told us that he did not attend the rally or meetings in Belle Glade on December 11, 1966. We exam- ined travel vouchers and authorizations for members of the OEO regional office staff and did not find any claims for expenses for, or authorizations to attend, the rally or meetings in Belle Glad on that date. Ot1~er information possibly related to union organizing activities of CA? and AFSC Employment of Mrs. Thomas P. Hardemait by APL-UIO Mr. Wiggins, OAF Program Director, and Mr. Johnson and Miss Taylor, OAF Regional Directors, each informed us that during the summer of 1956 Mrs. Thomas P. Hardeman, wife of the then President of OAF, had been employed by IUD, AFL-CIO, under her maiden name-Sara Cunningham. Mr. Johnson said that during the summer of 1966 he received calls from work- ers in the field concerning Mrs. Hardeman's activities on behalf of the union. Miss Taylor said that on one occasion Mrs. Hardeman had come to her office to obtain names and locations of certain people and that Mrs. Hardeman used her maiden name at that time. Miss Taylor also said that Mrs. Hardeman had intro- duced herself as a union representative at a meeting held by Father Walsh at Miami in the summer of 1966. PAGENO="0197" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDME~S OF 1 967 2657 Mr. Wiggins said that Mrs. Hardeman's employment by IUD, AFL-CIO, caused confusion among C'AF field people and could have led them to believe that Messrs. Hardeman and Mansfield were behind the union. Mr. Wiggins expressed the opinion that knowledge that Mrs. Hardeman worked for the union could have been a form of pressure on OAF employees to work with the union and could have clouded the issue of union involvement for field workers. We asked Dr. and Mrs. Hardeman to discuss whether Mrs. Hardeman had been employed by AFL-CIO; if so, the nature of her duties in such employment; and if Mrs. Hardeman did work for AFL-CIO, why she worked under her maiden name. Dr. and Mrs. Haredman declined to answer these questions on the ground that we could not show any connection between Mrs. Hardeman's employment and the expenditure of Federal funds and that our asking these questions was an unwarranted invasion of Mrs. Hardeman's privacy. Union connection of CAP and APSU employees We were told by Mr. Johnson that he had been contacted at his home on March 2, 1967, by James Pierce, IUD, AFL-CIO; Hank Mayer, AFSC; and a representative of a packing house workers' union and that at that time he (Mr. Johnson) was offered $15,000 a year plus expenses to work for the union. Mr. Johnson also told us that Hank Mayer was leaving AFSC as of March 17, 1067, to work for the union. According to information furnished to us by Dan Hoffman, Executive Director of the Management Research Institute, West Palm Beach, Hank Mayer was a labor organizer for the United Furniture Workers of America in Sumter, South Carolina, from 1961 to 1965, and before that he was business agent for Local 17 of the International Hod Carriers in Newburgh, New York. Distribution of "flyer" linking support of CUEW witk support of IUD, AFL-CIO A "flyer" which was distributed at one or more CCFW rallies contained bold marginal headlines which read "SUPPORT CCFW-JOIN IUD." Both CAP and AFSC are members of COFW. Both William Channel, Program Director for AFSC, and Dr. Hardeman told us that this "flyer" was printed Jy IUD, AFL-CIO, and was distributed by union employees at OCFW rallies. Mr. Qhannnel told us that he had written in November 1966 to Father Walsh, President, CCFW, objecting to the distri- bution of this "flyer" at CCFW rallies because he (Channel) did not see it to be a function of the COFW to organize or recruit for the IUD and that he was prohibited from such actions specifically )3y the terms of the OEO grant under which the AFSO program was operating. Mr. Channel's letter to Father Walsh further stated that he "* * * had attended the meetings of the Coordinating Committee as a single staff member of the American Friends Service Committee and my organization has not authorized nor been requested to authorize such action." Meeting in Belle Blade-.January 1967 Congressman Rogers, in a letter dated February 8, 1967, to Alfred C. Krumlauf, OEO Inspector, Atlanta, Georgia, a copy of which was furnished to the Comp- troller General, alleged that (1) Mr. Hank Mayer, an employee of AFSC, was a speaker at a meeting of crew leaders which was held in Belle Glade on Jan- uary 18, 1967, for the purpose of promoting a farm workers' union and (2) Mr. Mayer and Mr. William Channel, also of AFSC, were at another meeting in the Belle Glade union hail and were accompanied at both meetings by rep- resentatives of the AFL-CIO. Mr. Rogers expressed his understanding that the Palm Beach County Sheriffs' Department had full details on the two meetings. On March 1, 1967, we met with Sheriff Martin Keilenberger and members of his staff and were informed that they had no first-hand information concerning a meeting on January 18. Information furnished to us by the Sheriff's office, which we imderstand had been obtained from Al French of the Management Re- search Institute, contained broad statements concerning alleged union organiza- tion activities of CAF and AFSC employees. We were shown two motion picture films taken in Belle Glade at the union hail on January 19 and 20, 1967. How- ever, neither we nor employees of the Sheriff's office were able to identify CAP or AFSC employees in the January 19, 1967, film. In the January 20, 1967, film we were able to identify Hank Mayer entering the union hall and Hank Mayer, William Channel and a man identified by Sheriff's office employees as Tommy Martin, AFL-CIO, leaving the hail and PAGENO="0198" 2658 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 having a short conversation outside the union hail. We were told that these individuals were in the union hail for about 55 minutes but that the Sheriff's office personnel did not know what went on at the meeting. LEGAL STATUS OF POLITICAL AND UNION ACTIVITIES The Economic Opportunity Act does not specifically refer to the use of grant funds for nonpartisan political or union organizing activities, nor does OEO grant CG-0771 B/O, which was awarded to CAP and approved on May 28, 1966. However, in a memorandum to Congressman Rogers dated April 28, 1967, the Director, Office of Special Field Programs, Community Action Program, OEO, has advised that the grantee agrees to carry out a program that follows both the grantee's proposal and OEO's revisions of that proposal. The Director stated that, under the terms of the grant, the grantee agreed to carry out a program in the areas of migrant education, housing, sanitation, and day care, but that no- where in the grantee's proposal or in OEO's revision was there any mention made of union organizing activities. The Director further stated in the memoran- dum that: "Since the proposal did not contain provisions in the work program to carry on labor union organizing activities the grantee could not perform these activ- ities without express written approval from OEO. This approval was neither requested nor given. The conclusion must therefore be that labor union organiz- lag activities were not permitted wader this grant." [Emphasis added.] In light of the foregoing information, the use of grant funds for union organiz- ing activities by OAF under OEO grant CG-0771 B/O would not be authorized. OEO should therefore take action to identify, and obtain refunds from OAF for, expenditures made under the grant for those activities described in this report which, in our opinion, represented union organizing activities. As to nonpartisan political activities, the OAF proposal, which served as a basis for the award of the 1966 grant, contained information (see pp. 10 and 11) which could be considered as an indication that the OAF would carry out non- partisan political activities, and the OAF grant approved in May 1966 contained no restrictions on such activities. Further, an Assistant General Counsel, OEO, Ia a letter dated May 12, 1966, indicated, in effect, that strictly nonpartisan political activities of the type described in this report may be said to be within the general community organization and advancement objectives of CAFs grant program. Therefore, we would not question the use of the grant funds by OAF for nonpartisan political activities. Regarding AFSC activities, the grantee's proposals which served as a basis for the awards of the grants in 1965 and 1966 contamned no information that would indicate intended involvement in political or union organizing activities. The AFSC grant aw-ard approved in October 1966, how-ever, contained a special provision w-hich stated: "It shall be a condition of this grant that all funds are to be used exclusively for the work program and no personnel, material. or facilities may be used for any other purpose, including involvement in political, fraternal, or labor organizations." The AFSO grant awarded in October 1965 did not contain the above special provision. In light of the position taken by OEO with respect to union organizing ac- tivities by OAF and the special condition in the grant awarded to AFSC in October 1966, it appears that the union organizing activities by AFSC em- ployees, as described above, were similarly unauthorized and that OEO should take action to identify and i~ecover from AFSO any expenditures made under the grants for such activities. In regard to future political activity, section 603 of the act, as amended by Public Law 89-794. approved November 8, 1966, states: "(a) For purposes of chapter 15 of title 5 of the United States Code [formerly called the Hatch Act] any overall community action agency which assumes responsibmlity for planning. developing, and coordinating community-wide anti- poverty programs and receives assistance under this Act shall be deemed to be a State or local agency; and for purposes of clauses (1) and (2) of section 1502(a) of such title any agency receiving assistance under this Act (other than part C of title I) shall be deemed to be a State or local agency. `(b) The Director. after consultation with the Civil Service Commission, is authorized to issue such regulations or impose such requirements as may be necessary or appropriate to supplement the provisions of subsection (a) of this PAGENO="0199" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2659 section or otherwise to insure that programs assisted under this Act are not carried on in a manner involving the use of program funds, the provision of services, or the employment or assignment of personnel in a manner supporting, or resulting in the identification of such program with, any partisan political activity or any activity designed to further the election or defeat of any candidate for public office." In implementing this amendment, the agency issued Community Action Memo No. 50-A, dated December 1, 1966, which superseded Community Action Memo No. 50 and which states in part: "u * an employee of a public agency or a CAA may not:-solicit votes, or help to get out votes on election day. These restrictions are applicable to grantees funded under titles lI-A and Ill-B of the act. In addition, an Assistant General Council, OEO, has informed us that any community action program grantee, including grantees funded under title 111-B, which now transports individuals to the polls to vote will be in violation of Community Action Memo No. 50-A. OEO ADMINISTRATION AND EVALUATION OF THE FLORIDA CAF MIGRANT PROGRAM As a result of our March 3, 1967, meeting with Mr. Rogers, we agreed to examine into the extent of surveillance exercised by the Office of Economic Opportunity over the grants awarded to the Community Action Fund and the Community Service Foundation (CSF). Our review of available records and discussions with OE'O officials elicited the following information: The Director, Office of Special Field Programs, Community Action Program, OEO, is responsible for administering migrant grants which are funded under title Ill-B of the Economic Opportunity Act as well as for monitoring and evaluating the programs conducted by grant recipients. We were informed that the proposal for the first grant, awarded in April 1965, was actually prepared with the personal assistance of the Director, Office of Special Field Programs. In March 1966 a program analyst from the Office of Special Field Programs visited Florida to evaluate the operations of the Community Action Fund. This evaluation, in general, identified several weaknesses in the administration of the grant; and, as a result, the OEO Audit Division was requested to make an audit of the program. The Audit Division subsequently issued audit reports in January, July, and August 1966 and in January 1967 pertaining to `OAF's programs. The first three OEO audit reports were critical of the adequacy of the ac- counting system and listed many transactions as being indicative of inadequate control of and accounting for funds, questionable billings, and unauthorized deviations from the approved: budgets. A summary of these audit reports was prepared by us at the request of Congressman William C. Cramer and was sub- mitted to huin on October 10, 1966. The fourth report, issued in January 1967, contained in part the results of a review of actions taken by `CAF and CSF to comply with recommendations, made in the August 1966 audit report. The report reflected those deficiencies and re- lated questionable expenditures that had not been resolved. While the four audit reports were critical of certain transactions and ques- tioned areas indicating inadequate control over funds, the reports made no mention of the effectiveness of the programs being carried out under the OEO grants and contracts. We reviewed a report, dated April 15, 1966, prepared by International Re- search Associataes, New York City, a research firm under contract to OEO to evaluate about 50 of the programs for migrants funded in fiscal year 1965. The report stated that the reviewer was impressed with the advantages of private sponsorship of the program for migrants, independent of the local power structure and county or State community action programs. The report indicated that the program being conducted by CAF was accomplishing a great deal by assisting migrants in the areas of housing, edui~tttion, sanitation, and day care and that the high caliber staff in its employ was a major factor in the success of the program. An analyst of the Office of Special Field Programs conducted an evaluation of program activities of OAF in November 1966. The resulting report, dated Novem- ber 10, 1966, pointed out that, at the centers visited and reviewed, (1) cOmplete records were not being maintained on program participants but records on num~ bers of participants `served were being maintained, (2) program attendance was as outlined in the approved grant, (3) employees appeared to be performing PAGENO="0200" 2660 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 duties outlined in their job descriptions, and (4) the program was being operated efficiently and purposefully. The report also noted that at the program level the number of participants and minority group members who were supposed to be served were being served and that a daily average of about 1,000 migrants were participating in program activities. The report also stated that the program was accomplishing its task of remov- jug the migrants from poverty and was, in fact, more than a welfare program. The voter registration program was especially commended in this evaluation report as a most effective weapon for bringing about social change. In May 1966, OAF was awarded a second grant which provided, in general, for carrying out the same objectives as those proposed in the first grant. Educa- tional Projects, Inc., as part of a title 111-B technical assistance grant awarded by OEO, reviewed operations of the grantee at the program site in the early part of 1967, but the report on this review has not yet been submitted to OEO. In addition, we were informed that representatives of the Office of Special Field Programs had been in communication by telephone with officials of OAF or CSF on an average of at least once a week since April 1965 when the CSF was first funded by the OEO and that they bad been aware of the activities and pro- grams conducted by the grantee. Further, we were informed that the analysts assigned to assist this grantee had made several supervisory visits to Florida to discuss problems and advise remedies regarding problems encountered in carrying out the program. In addition, it appears that officials of the grantee have visited Washington a number of times to discuss matters regarding the activities being conducted with grant funds. Also, four progress reports have been submitted by the Board of Directors of OAF since the second grant was awarded. These reports, although not submitted at regular intervals, described program activities and relayed sta- tistics on the number of people served by the program. The most recent progress report, covering the period May 1, 1966, to January 31, 1967, indicated that 33,389 persons had been served by the Community Action Fund program. In May 1966, when the current grant was approved, it was estimated that about 35,000 people would benefit from the grant. According to the Director, Office of Special Field Programs, the actual participation figures have not been reviewed or tested on a systematic basis in any of the evaluations performed to date and have not been questioned `by OEO officials. The Director referred us to several letters of commendation that various public and private organizations and participating migrants had written to OAF in the early part of calendar year 1967. These letters were included in CAF's proposal for another grant to begin on May 1, 1967. Among the organizations commending the Fund were the Florida Industrial Commission; the Social Security Adminis- tration of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare; the American National Red Cross; the Tampa Economic Opportunity Council, Inc.; the Sara- sota County Health Department; and the Housing Authority, City of Pompano Beach. Generally the letters indicated that OAF was effective in assisting the migrants of Florida in the areas of housing, sanitation, education, and day care. INews release, May 31, 1967] REPORT ON OFFICE OF EcoNo~rIC OPPORTUNITY PROGRAMS WITHIN THE NINTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF FLORIDA The Federal Government, through the Office of Economic Opportunity, has committed over $57 million to the State of Florida in the "War on Poverty." and of this, over $61/a million directly affects the 10 counties making up the 9th District. The figures which follow are from O.E.O. reports for Fiscal years 1965 and 1966, and the first half of FY 1967, but do not include calendar year 1967 grants which had not been made at the time of the field tour of projects in Florida. The main categories for funding within dLstrict counties are as follows: Rural loans $475. 870 Small business loans 208, 650 Summer Headstart education 2. 049.483 Migrant children education 1. 124,425 Adult basic education 376, 132 Sominole tribal council 151, 290 Neighborhood Youth Corps ~.- 109. 156 Community action programs 887, 128 PAGENO="0201" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2661 Individual county totals are as follows: Charlotte $106, 077 Collier 1, 191, 175 Glades 14, 000 Henciry ~ 820 Indian River ~ 164 Lee 380, 783 Martin 81, 302 Okeechobee 9,380 Palm Beach 1, 020,254 St. Lucie 1, 046,908 The major programs ($50,000 or more) in each county are as follows: Charlotte: Board of public instruction $100, i37 Collier: Board of public instruction 1, 088, 131 Lee: Board of public instruction 131,272 Rural farm loans 128, 630 Sunland training center 92, 651 Martin: Rural farm loan 80,000 Board of public instruction 66, 087 Palm Beach: Board of public instruction 537, 167 State board of education 122, 505 Marymount college 197, 427 Rural farm loans 98, 750 Community action council 64, 405 St. Lucie: Community action organization 964, 733 In addition to programs which operate under local sponsorship within the individual counties of the District, there are a group of migrant farm worker programs which are multi-county in scope. In most cases, counties of this district constitute at least half of the counties included in each of the following programs: Migrant worker grants $1,292,255 Migrant legal aid 806,099 Migrant project administration 117, 528 Neighborhood Youth Corps 30,480 Vista volunteers 147, 400 Approximately $21/2 million has been granted to multi-county migrant pro- grams administered by non-public groups. Of the funds granted to local counties, over $3 million has been administered by local units of government, mainly the county school systems. An additional half million has been funded through a Federal agency and its local commit- tees, the Farmers Home Administration, in the form of rural farm family loans. Only one non-public local agency has received large grants, the St. Lucie County Community Action Organization, Inc. The largest school program has been the migrant education project of the Collier County School Board. The first and most apparent shortcoming of the "War on Poverty" in this District is its uncoordinated, disorganized, overlapping profusion of public and private agencies. In Palm Beach County alone, poverty funds have been received by the Palm Beach Community Action Council, Inc., the Farmers Home Administration, the Florida State Department of Education, the Palm Beach County Board of Public Instruction, Marymount College, the Community Action Fund, Inc. and the Amer- ican Friends Service Committee. And of course these projects are in addition to the regular health and welfare and education programs going on in the county through the state and local governments and private groups, and a special migrant health program administered by Federal, State and county health officials. St. Lucie County, on the other hand, has seen the development of a strong com- munity action agency which coordinates a wide variety of programs. Those who formulated programs early and worked closely with O.E.O. were funded-those areas which did not were not funded, regardless of need. PAGENO="0202" 2662 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967 The result has been the complete lack of programs in some areas of poverty, while other areas have multiple services available. No single agency at the state or local level has jurisdiction over funding, and even within O.E.O. some pro- grams are required to have the approval of an Atlanta regional office, while others are funded directly from Washington. Most of the problems w-hich have come to light in the various programs result from this lack of coordination and control. The Federal-aid-to-hospitals program is an example of administrative proce- dure which might have been followed. The Federal funds are apportioned among the states and a state government office receives requests for funds and allocates them to the various hospitals on the basis of need and priority. There is no simi- lar plan in operation for the "War on poverty"-any group, anywhere, can apply for funds. No state or local governmental agency reviews the need in relation to the ne&ls of the state as a whole. Private groups, such as the Community Action Fund and American Friends Service Committee, have received Federal grants under these programs and have caused difficulty. They have not been responsive or representative of the areas or people to be served. Cooperation with local government u-as in many cases non- existant. While many operated w-ith good intent and had the services of dedicated employees, they failed to establish the necessary community cooperation which is required of successful programs. These two programs in particular require special critical review. On the basis of complaints received and personal investigation, it appeared necessary to se- cure an outside professional audit of activities of the Community Action Fund, Inc. and the American Friends Service Committee. At my request, the United States General Accounting Office conducted that investigation, and their report has now been made public. The use of Federal tax funds for political or union activity is objectionable to all citizens. But the shortsighted use of time, energy and money for these pur- poses also deprives the poor of these resources for legitimate efforts to help them better their own living conditions, the taxpayer is not the only loser, then, but the poor themselves suffer perhaps the greater loss, since these funds were supposedly being provided to assist them in solving the very real and serious problems they must face in life. Unions have the facilities, manpow-er and funds to do this or- ganizing job. The General Accounting Office specifically notes the involvement of the Corn- muiaity Action Fund, Inc. and the American Friends Service Committee in a num- ber of union organizing activities. The report speaks for itself, but it must be noted here that all this activity took place while supervision was supposedly being furnished by the Office of Economic Opportunity, and in spite of the fact that the situation was called to the attention of O.E.O. on several occasions, only to be denied. The Congress must require more professional management from Federal gov- ernment agencies, and copies of these reports are being furnished members of the appropriate Congressional Committees. O.E.O. should proceed immediately, as requested by the General Accounting Office, to identify funds misspent by the Community Action Fund, Inc., and the American Friends Service Committee, on union organizing activities indicated in the G.A.O. report. O.E.O. should immediately review their own audit pro- cedures to insure that similar mis-use of funds cannot occur in the future, and that grant recipients are most fully aware of the limitations of their use of Federal funds. Existing channels of communication and cooperation between Federal, state and local governments should be further developed to meet the special needs of the poor, and especially the migrant farm worker and his family. At present, migrant programs are administered directly from Washington. The state and local governments should become more involved in these programs, have more responsibility for them and supervision over them. Housing, education and health are three areas u-here concrete results can be achieved through increased effort without the necessity of a bureaucracy of over- lapping and disorganized and uncoordinated public and private agencies. All these areas are within the scope of existing public agencies, which could more properly administer special migrant problems. In education, lines of communication already exist between county school sys- tems and the state education department, and in turn between the state and the U.S. Office of Education. The Florida State Department of Education should PAGENO="0203" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2663 coordinate all of the educational programs within the state, including headstart and migrant projects, and adult education. The state university system should be utilized for teacher training for these special fields. We have already been suc- cessful in working out a program between O.E.O. and the State Superintendent, and it should be strengthened and broadened in the months ahead. One common problem in each county in the 9th District has been the estab- lishment by O.E.O. of programs and agencies which are not local in their interest or support, and the granting of funds to some local committees which have been torn with strife. With the benefit of two years' experience, O.E.O. would be well advised to restructure the entire concept of community action back to the com- munities themselves and to require results before considering refunding. Community action boards should consist of county and city officials, united funds, religious councils, business, professional and labor groups and the poor themselves. Boards not representative of the prime movers of a community cannot call on the cooperation and resources of the community. Since calling these problems to the attention of the various groups concerned and the Office of Economic Opportunity, several changes have been made. The Community Action Fund, Inc., has been partially reorganized. The former president has resigned and the new president is a resident of the area being served. The board itself has been restructured to give more representation to the counties in which it operates. Efforts are now being made to re-direct the program away from the activities cited as illegal by the General Accounting Office, and to those programs which will more properly assist the migrant popula- tion in improving educational, health and housing programs. The AFL-CIO or any other union has the right to encourage workers to join together for mutual benefit. Such Associations should not, however, be brought about by Federally paid employees. I have no doubt that the labor movement is both willing and able to finance organizational efforts from its own funds. The Community Action Agency, Inc., of Palm Beach County has also under- gone a reorganization of its officials and board. Migrant Legal Services, Inc., which was started under the sponsorship of the CAP was: transferred to a 6 county board of directors which includes representa- tion from the 6 county bar associations and 6 county organizations interested in migrant problems. We are currently working with local housing authorities to improve housing conditions. In addition, self-help housing groups have been formed to encourage home ownership by the migrants, which will bring them into year round resi- dence and employment in the area, which will help stabilize the availability of farm workers while improving their living conditions. The State Department of Education has taken over the management of the migrant education program, and ~vill now supervise it in the various counties with migrant populations. The State Board of Regents will assist, through the university system of the state, in the training of teachers to work with the migrant poor. Marymount College will continue its worthwhile program of family education and the development of migrant teaching. One of the most important programs outside the Office of Economic Opportunity has been in the field of health. The Palm Beach Health Department and others have worked on Federal grants with local supporting funds from public and private sources to improve *health conditions, especially in housing camps. Mobile units have been par- ticularly helpful in taking needed health services directly to the migrants in the camp areas. This program, while outside OEO, is mentioned as a successful program which we were able to have written into law during the 89th Congress. Previously, we had written into the Housing Act special construction loans for farm labor hous- ing, along with the provisions of the Farmers Home Administration housing program, and OEO's self help plan. These housing programs are all designed to improve the living conditions of the migrant farm family, which is basic to meeting the other problems of this group of people. Experience has indicated that the expenditure of time and money does not guarantee results. And there is much to be done. In Palm Beach County alone, there are reported to be almost 10,000 welfare cases active each month the year round. The welfare costs alone, not to assess the cost in terms of economic waste and human suffering, warrant our continued con- cern and determination to meet the needs of the community. PAGENO="0204" 2664 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It would be easy to criticize the "war on poverty" by simply ignoring the ex- istence of poverty in the first place. This cannot be done. There are children living within a few miles of Palm Beach, or Naples, or Vero Beach, or Boca Raton, who have never had the experience of sitting at a table for a meal, and who do not have a bed to sleep on. Some have never seen meat and potatoes on a plate together. There are hundreds of children who re- ceived their first pair of shoes, their first dental exam and first medical checkup when they started attending a day care or head start program. Many people living along the prosperous east and west coastal areas would be amazed at the extent of the problem. In one day care program, we were shown evidence that over % of the children enrolled had suffered from anemia and malnutrition. These children are not few in number or isolated in location. They can be found throughout this district. Many are migrants, but many are also year-round resi- dents. These children will soon be adults. They will not be wage earners or tax- payers-they will be welfare cases. Now is the time to reach these people, before it is too late for them and for us. Education, health and housing are the greatest needs, and they are within our capability to provide through existing programs and existing local agencies. Coordination and planning are needed, and cooperation between all those in posi- tions of responsibility, if welfare rolls are to be reduced in the future. Bernard F. Hillenbrand, editor of American County Government, wrote in the February, 1967 edition of that publication of the association of counties, that, in effect, "the Office of Economic Opportunity has established its ow-n system of local government." This is largely competitive rather than supplementative of local effort. "Why, for example, should OEO establish its own administrative structure at the local level when we already have an existing and workable system supported by the majority of local citizens? The support and involvement of these same citizens is also a prerequisite to any kind of successful program on a sustainable basis." Mr. Hillenbrand's comments could be applied directly to the problems we have seen in our own district. With so much to be done, and limited resources available, it becomes increas- ingly important that all efforts be directed toward proper achievable goals. Programs must be adequately supervised and evaluated at the local level on the basis of accomplishment. Wasteful spending of tax funds for improper purposes must be stopped. Accomplishments to date simply do not equal expenditures. If the "w-ar on poverty" is to meet any degree of lasting success, it must be re-oriented and brought under sound management control. Chairman PERKINS. We have with us this morning Mrs. Grace Olivarez, secretary-treasurer, board of directors of the National As- sociation for Community Development. Come around Mrs. Olivarez. Identify yourself for the record and proceed in any manner you wish. STATEMENT OF MRS. GRACE OLIVAREZ, CONSULTANT, ON BEHALF OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPS KENT, ACCOMPANIED BY ALLAN ~ALEY, IR., MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, NACD, AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE DALLAS COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE, DALLAS, TEX. Mrs. OLIVAREZ. I am Mrs. Grace Oliva.rez. My home is in Phoenix, Ariz., and I am a consultant in Community development work. I ap- pear here today as a representative of the National Association for Community Development of which I am secretary-treasurer. I am accompanied by Allan Maley, Jr., a member of the board of directors of NACD and also executive director `of the Dallas County Community Action Committee, Inc., Dallas, Tex. NACD is a private, nonprofit organization with offices in Wash- ington, D.C. It was incorporated in March 1965 for the purpose of PAGENO="0205" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2665 stimulating and assisting the national effort to provide all citizens with the opportunities necessary for them to realize their full human and economic potential through education, job training, neighbor- hood organization, `agricultural and business development, and pro- grams of special social services. NACD also aims to: (a) Promote professional competence and growth in the adminis- tration of state and local community development projects; (b) Stimulate interest and research in the development of human resources among charitable and educational institutions in the com- munity and among the widest possible segment of the American population; (c) Enhance the relationships among National, State and local agencies whose purposes are to promote and assist the development of human resources. We do not appear here today in support of any bill now before the Congress amending or repealing the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 that is now before the Congress. We do appear to ask you to provide the local communities of the Nation with `the necessary tools for them to effectively combat poverty. Our organization recently held seven regional meetings across the country attended by over 1,000 representatives of local communities who are active in community action work. One of the results of these meetings is a broad consensus on the legislation needed to more effectively implement antipoverty pro- grams at the local level. We are pleased to note that there seems to be a general consensus in Congress and in our Nation that the war on poverty must be continued. Our organization and our members maintain very strongly that the war on poverty must and will be won at the community level. One of the major points of disagreement seems to be the issue of whether the Office of Economic Opportunity should be continued and strengthened or whether antipoverty programs should be conducted through the diffused efforts of a number of agencies with no strong coordination at the Federal level. We strongly urge the continuation of the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity as the agency to effectively conduct the Federal programs to eliminate poverty. To date we don't feel that anyone has provided convincing evidence that any other agency or combination of agencies. could successfully assume the responsibilities and duties of OEO. Just as we need OEO at the Federal level we also need an agency at the local community level to plan, coordinate, and implement pro- grams. The Community Action Agency fills this role. The Community Action Agency has many unique attributes and. one of them is the involvement of program participants in the devel- opment and operation of programs. We believe this involvement to be a necessary ingredient in helping our disadvantaged citizens to solve their own problems. Another strength of the Community Action Agency is its capacity . to involve and mobilize all of the resources of our communities. We believe that the poor working in unison with the total community, including all of the public and private elements, is the ideal system for action at the local level. PAGENO="0206" 2666 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJINITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 If our local communities are to have the proper tools to solve their own problems we must not restrict their flexibility. In this light we believe that neither Congress nor the Office of Economic Opportunity should set all of the priorities for the programs which communities may operate at their level. If we really believe in local community actionand in a broad, flexi- ble, innovative approach to combat poverty, earmarking of funds at the national or regional level should be held to a minimum. Equitable distribution of funds among urban and rural, large and small cities, and among geographic areas must be achieved. We must return to a 90/10 funding ratio with a provision for the pooling of non-Federal share among the several titles of the legisla- tion. Any increase in local share places the greatest burden on our poorest communities who have the least local resources but need the programs the most. Permanent jobs with salaries about above the poverty level must be provided also. All levels of government must cooperate in this effort. It is the role of governrn~nt to stimulate, educate, and provide incentives for people to prepare themselves for jobs in private industry and public agencies both. In this context the legislation should provide for unified compre- liensive training for work programs. The most logical means of marshalling public and private resources at the local level and providing for the involvement of program par- ticipants is through community action agencies. Therefore legislation should make clear the intention of Congress for the CAA's to coordi- nate training for work programs at the local level. While there have been recent efforts to develop comprehensive coor- dinated training for work programs, especially for urban areas, much more needs to be done in the field of research and demonstration pro- grams, training and technical assistance. Since we have not scratched the surface in rural training for work programs, it is especially necessary to have new resources available to our rural communities. If we are to protect our investment in all antipoverty programs and allow our communities to develop more than stopgap projects it is imperative that Congress provide an authorization period of more than 1 year's duration. If Congress is really serious about conducting a war on poverty it must reassess the financial resources that are being made available. The Council of Economic Advisers has estimated that it will take $17 to $20 billion per year over the next 10 years to reach our goal of elimi- nating poverty. `We feel it our obligation to call on this Nation to face up to this deed. `We invite you to join us in our commitment to reach solutions to the problems of poverty in the midst of our affluent Nation. Chairman PERKINs. Let me compliment you on your statement and say that I agree that we should have a longer authorization to give the program some stability, certainly more than 1 year. I hope we will be able to achieve that goal. I certainly agree with you that we have only scratched the surface in the rural training for work programs. Would you care to elaborate on that just a little, why you made that statement? PAGENO="0207" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2667 Mrs. OLIVAREZ. May I turn this over to Mr. Maley since he is the one conducting the program right now? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. MALEY. A great deal of emphasis has been placed on job train- ing in urban areas such as our concentrated employment program. Frankly it is much more difficult in the rural areas because I do not think anyone has really coped with this problem of what do you train people to do. What jobs are available there or if they are trained for other jobs where are they going then and so on. Mrs. OLIvAREZ. May I add something to that, sir? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mrs. OLIvAImz. As you know there are two different schools of thought on what to do with our rural population. Those who say let us get them out of rural areas and into major communities and those who say we have to keep them where they are because they are clutter- ing up our urban centers. Personally I think they must stay where they are. We have to try to make their lives as comfortable as possible where they are. In this context I do not think we have done any really gutsy feasibility tests and studies on what kind of industry can be brought into the rural area to keep those who want to stay there. This business of imposing our philosophy on them is utterly ridicu- lous. As a Mexican-American I know some people whose culture is very definitely rural. For me to come in and tell them "You have to get out and move to the city" would create problems on top of problems. For those who want to stay there we must have some meaningful and realistic work training programs. Chairman PERKINS. In the first place, we have been bypassed all through the years by all the government spending such as defense contracts, we don't have the universities in our areas and those that are getting any of the research contracts, defense contracts, and all the defense spending has bypassed these areas. The principal rural areas are in Appalachia. That has been caus- ing us to run a little farther behind all the way along instead of keep- ing up. Then to be bypassed with programs of this type is just putting us so far behind sometimes I just wonder if we will ever catch up. That is the reason I want to see an effective rural program. But we have to do something about rural housing. I am confident that we will make progress. We are making progress with some of the programs in the present legislation, some of the programs have meant so much to the rural areas. I am hopeful that we can improve them and make more progress. Mr. Hawkins. Do you have any questions? Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I would like to also join in welcoming Mrs. Olivarez before the committee. I have known her for a long time and I know of the very, excellent work which she has been doing in the southwest com- munity and in California as well. Certainly it is a pleasure to have her before this committee. I have just several questions, Mrs. Olivarez. I note that you indicate or make a disclaimer before the committee that the organization is in support of or in opposition to any particular bill. PAGENO="0208" 2668 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Does this indicate a lack of support for the present efforts to amend the programs and as contained in H.R. 8311 or does it also indicate perhaps an indifference or a lack of knowledge of H.R. 10682, the so-called opportunity crusade that several members of this commit- tee have introduced? Has the organization, in other words, had the opportimity to spe- cifically direct its attention to any of the pending bills? Mrs. OLIvAu~z. Yes, we have. Mr. Maley is on our legislative com- mittee of NACD. Perha.ps he can elaborate on this. I think we are here testifying, our testimony reflects the opinions of our membership throughout the coimtry. Mr. HAWKINS. You have in the statement indicated support of certain concepts. My question goes to the heart of the matter: that is, whether or not one of the other bills actually incorporates these con- cepts and which one does the best to this extent? Mr. MALEY. Congressman, as we in the legislative committee have reviewed the proposed legislation, No. 1, we are very pleased to. see that both parties propose to continue the war on poverty. There are some features of each that might appear to be desirable. So we felt that it was best to address ourselves simply to matters that we thought should be enbodied in the legislation that is finally adopted, whoever's bill is adopted, rather than to try to tell you that you ought to adopt this bill or that bill. Mr. HAWKINS. There is a distinction, however, and I hope you will not be misled by this particular bill, that it indicates a great support and continuation of the war on poverty in the Congress. Nor do I hope that you will be misled by the title of some of these. bills. Directing ourselves then to the concepts, do I understand that you strongly support the coordinated approach and oppose any further effort to return the various programs to existing agencies in sections? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Very definitely we do. We are very much in favor of the coordinated approach as we have seen it in the last 2 or 3 years. Mr. HAWKINS. Have you had any opportunity to actually review the bill H.R. 1068 as to whether or not this bill retains that coordina- tion or whether it would under any other name achieve that coordina- tion which is now recognized and indorsed in the current program? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. I frankly state I can't see how we can have any kind of coordination by spinning off or dismantling OEO a.nd placing these programs in other agencies. If I may be very blunt, even with the Department of Labor, BES won't talk to BAT. They can't get together on the time of the day, how can they possibly coordinate any programs at the Federal or regional level? That is just one of the departments. Have you questioned the cabinet members as to their ability to be able to absorb some of the additional administrative duties? Three, has anybody studied the cost of dis- mantling OEO? Then I would ask the very basic question, what happens to our investment? What happens to all the money we have poured into establishing OEO? Don't forget that it is still under the executive office. So if they don't have the club what makes you think that a diffused program is going to have a.ny club and who is going to do the coordination? PAGENO="0209" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2669 Everybody will want a piece of the action and they will want to run away with it. Mr. HAWKINS. I see you advocate the concept of involvement at the community level of persons who are directly affected by the programs dealing with the poor. With that in mind do you feel that to spin off the programs to estab- lished agencies would jeopardize that concept of involvement of people at the community level? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Yes; I feel that it would jeopardize it because the concept of the involvement of the poor was more or less brought rnto effect by OEO. If the established agencies were really concerned about the poor there is nothing that says they could not have mvolvement of the poor all along. No. 2, it would eliminate that healthy competition which comes from having somebody else doing the involvement of the poor. As it is now I think you will note that more and more agencies are beginning to look at their boards and the composition of their boards and trying to bring in poor people. If nothing else it is a tokenism but it is a beginning I don't believe the old-established agencies can deal with the poor on the board level because in that instance their arguments are very basic. Mr. HAWKINS. You have also indicated support-great support for umtiecl comprehensive training for work programs. Would you say that this possibility might be diminished if programs were to be disunited and we spin off various programs to established agencies? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. If we don't have a community action agency at the local level, as if I may use the term, advisedly, as a threat or a watch- dog to see that the poor are being served adequately, and we give the training programs to the established agencies, I really don't see how the poor will be involved in any meaningful way unless the Community Action agency is on top either as the coordinator or as a funnel for the money where they can really watch the program to see that the people for whom the program is intended are being served. I really don't see the old-established agencies changing their tactics. Mr. HAWKINS. I assume from your answer that you believe strongly in the community action concept and believe that this should be strengthened and also I get the impression that you believe that it might be jeopardized if we were to spin off the various programs to other agencies. Mrs. OLIVAREZ. I don't think that the programs are old enough so that they can spin them off. We have not really been able to prove that this program is more successful than the other. To spin them off now, they will get lost in a maze. I believe eventually spin off 8 years from now is possible but I don't believe we are ready to spin off any pro- grams right now because they are not old enough to find out if they are successful or not. Mr. HAWKINS. I also assume from your statement that you believe the present funding of the programs is inadequate and that eventually a larger amount should be appropriated for the program. Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Yes. I go back to the recommendations of the Presi- dent's Council of Economic Advisers has repeatedly made that accord- ing to their estimate we need something like $17 to $20 billion per year for the next 10 years. When we talk about piddly sums I don't blame the poor for questioning the sincerity of the programs. 80-084-67--pt. 4-i4 PAGENO="0210" 2670 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Mr. HAWKINS. Do you believe this money should come from both private as well as public sources and, if so, should the amount that you are talking about include a much larger appropriation from the Fed- eral Government as well as what private industry or other sources might contribute? Mrs. OLIvAR1~z. You know, the door has always been open for private industry to get involved. I think Mr. Shriver has consistently invited private industry to be involved. So far we have seen them involved in the Job Corps program. On the other hand I would like to see private industry stay as a profitmaking organization. I think this is what it was intended to be. At that point I think the Federal Government is going to have to come up with some incentive so that private industry can get involved without really jeopardizing what they were established to do. Let me elaborat.e a bit on that. Private industry has a social con- science to a degree but to ask a private enterprise to take a hundred hard-core unemployed simply for the sake of having a social conscience I think is a. little bit ridiculous. However, the Government could easily come out with some inter- esting incentive too, so that private industry could afford to have a. social conscience and place people in a training program that they will eventually put these people on the payroll. As far as money from private industry, I think we could definitely use more. My question would be where is private industry in the poverty program? Mr. HAWKINS. I assume what you say is that we should encourage private industry to participate and should even offer incentives for them to do so, but that we should not rely on private industry neces- sarily to solve the problem. Mrs. OLIvAREz. No, sir, because the Federal Government is the largest employer in this Nation and they have the worst record of hiring the poor. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the chance to hear your testimony. I appreciate your being here today, Mrs. Olivarez, and also Mr. Maley. Mr. MALEY. Thank you. Mr. DELLENBACK. I realize that involved in Mr. Hawkins' questions is the risk that you will be of the opinion that we are primarily in- volved in tugging between H.R. 8311 and H.R. 10682. So far as I am concerned this is not the case. I am interested in the concepts that are involved in these two bills. But I am interested pri- marily in what it is that your experience has given you as background, and as comment to make to us, as to what we can best do to push this poverty war forward. If I read your statement correctly and if I listened to you correctly, Mrs. Olivarez, there are certain principles that you have indicated you favor. You favor the continuation of CAP and CAA and you favor a reduced earmarking of funds on the Federal level and you favor what PAGENO="0211" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2671 you deem a more equitable distribution of funds as between urban and rural programs. Mrs. OLIVAREZ. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. By that I assume you indicate that your feeling is that the distribution so far has been slanted heavily in. favor of the urban as opposed to the rural? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. And that we need additional funds for rural? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Not only that, in favor of turning from the East in favor of the West. Mr. DELLENBACK. As a Westerner I join you in sympathetic reaction to this comment. You also favor return `to the 90/10 funding. These are principles that you have gone on record as favoring. You also talk in terms of favoring the coordinated approach. Will you tell us ,a bit more what you mean by that in your own experi- ence? What does' coordinated approach mean to you and what `should. we be doing in this area? Mr. MALEY. There is' `a big differeiice between coordination and monopoly. There is one thing that the CAP agency' has been able to coordinate without monopolizing working with the poor. I am in coordination at the local level, for example, where anyone who wants to have any information or perform any ` services for the poor can go to the CAP agency because the CAP agency is run aecordin~ to the Economic `Opportunity Act; has on its board, either on the board or its advisory council, all the agencies, that are directly or indirectly con- cerned with the poor. So that if there is a person who needs birth control information and comes to a CAP agency, we have somebody on planned parenthood: on that board that we can rely on. Mr. DELLENBACK. So the coordination of which you~ speak is the coordination on the local level? Mr. MALEY. And at the Federal level, too. Mr. DELLENBAOK. I was taking one step at a time because I think this is an important distinction. So far `as the coordination on the local level is concerned you think this is highly desirable? Mr. MALEY. Coordination, not operation of the program. Coordina- tion of the program. Mr. DELLENBACK. With a lot of local control? Mr. MALEY. Very definitely. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you approve of `the involvement of the poor themselves in this decisionmaking process? Mr. MALEY. By all means. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are of course aware that this is an amend- ment that was proposed by my colleague from Minnesota that was not part of the original program but was pushed ahead in the last session, I think one of the most successful parts, one of the most important parts of the program. So this coordination which involves maximum flexibility on the local level, which involves the poor being involved in the decision- making process and which embraces a great many of the local agencies PAGENO="0212" 2672 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 this is what you favor on the local level so far as coordination is concerned? Mr. M.ALEY. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you read H.R. 8311 and H.R. 10682? Mr. MALEY. I don't know that I have read H.R. 8311 as carefully as I have read the other one. Mr. DELLENBACK. You have read H.R.. 10682? Mr. MALEY. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are of course aware that all this type of co- ordination would be continued under the H.R. 10682 concept? None of this is destroyed at all? Mr. MALEY. In what way? Maybe I did not read it right. Mr. DELLENBACK. The community action program concept of the coordination of the type you are talking about is not interfered with at all in the programs as advanced under H.R. 10682. The community action program, community action agencies, these are if anything strengthened. They go forward in at least as good condition as they are at the present time under H.R. 10682's proposals. Mr. MALEY. May I comment on this? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes, please. Mr. M~&LEr. It is one thing to say that a community action agency will continue within the Department of Health, Education, and Wel- f are but speaking from my experience at the local level it is quite an- other thing I think to make it work if you do that. Mr. DELLENBACK. At the moment we are not talking about coor- dination at the Federal level. I am talking about coordination at the local level. Mr. MALEY. So am I. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are indicating whether OEO or whether HEW is involved at the Federal level somehow this would interfere with the coordination at the local level? Mr. MAr~. If I understand the bill-and I have read it-it says that the community action agencies would become a part of the De- partment of Health, Education, and Welfare. Now we are in one position of being under the administrative branch and an independent group answering directly to the board of direc- tors at the local level now. I think it would be quite another thing if we were a member of or employees of a Federal agency trying to get other Federal agencies to coordinate with us. Mr. DELLENBACK. I think that this is a misconception of H.R.. 10682 on which we all ought to be disabused. This does not embrace the change that I think you fear that would involve people on the local level be- coming Federal employees if, in fact, they are not Federal employees at the present time. There are other people who are obviously Federal employees. There are people like Mrs. Olivarez who are involved in the national council and have been acting as State directors and who have been OEO people. But so far as a change in employment of people on the local level, this is not contemplated under 11.11. 10682 if it is not already the situa- tion under 11.11. 8311. PAGENO="0213" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2673 This would be a difference in the coordination. There would be a difference in the Federal agency or agencies involved and I was striv- ing initially to keep our reference to the local agencies. Mr. MALEY. My point is that the difference at the Federal level I think would have a direct bearing on our ability to be able to coor- dinate at the local level. That is my point. Mr. DELLENBACK. Will you please amplify that because I think this would be an important th'ing and I would be interested in your opinion on pinning it down for me. Mr. MALEY. Congress established the OEO as an agency to develop and coordinate programs. That is its purpose. Within that framework, I think we have been able to do a fairly good job of coordination at the local level. If you do away with the agency that was devised to fulfill a co- ordinating role, you weaken the ability to coordinate at the local level. Why would Labor be anxious to let their folks, regardless of what our relationship is-so far as we are concerned we are HEW people- coordinate their programs any more than HEW folks would like to have Labor people coordinating their programs. Mr. DELLENBAOK. Under H.1R. 10682 which programs are you of the opinion would be under Labor which are not already tied to Labor? Since you have read this, Mr. Maley, tell me which of the programs that are now under community action would suddenly become part of the Department of Labor? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. May I just inject there are some programs which have been spun off to the Department of Labor but the coordination is still being done by the community action agency at the local level. They have not been spun off by another statute. Mr. DELLENBACK. Tell us which programs under H.R. 10682 you think would go over to the Department of Labor. Mr. MALEY. Primarily the same ones that have now been delegated to the Department of La.bor by OEO. Mr. DELLENBACK. That consists of what? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. The work programs. Mr. DELLENBACK. Out of school, NYC? Mr. OLIVAREZ. Out of school, in school, new careers. Mr. DELLENBACK. You see here again there is a misconception_and if you look at the programs for out of school Neighboorhood Youth Corps, I think you will find that you are still talking about a single agency. There are all sorts of misconceptions that are involved in what people say or think about H.R. 10682. I don't seek to gloss over anything that is there but I think it is important that you not set up strawmen and attempt to knock them down. The out-of-school Neighborhood Youth Corps program would go to the Department of Labor under provisions of H.R. 10682. This is essential a work training program. We feel this soundly is a program that the Labor Department can best handle. It is a training for job on the job, out of school. The rural loan program which is at present being administered by the Department of Agriculture would be part of the province of the Department of Agriculture. PAGENO="0214" 2674 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMEI~S OP 19 67 Except for these changes, the programs at present involved in CAP would remain in a single agency grouping, but they would be trans- ferred to HEW. We are switching from the local coordination alone to a combination of Federal and local coordination. I think it is important to move on to the question of the Federal involvement because this is then at the heart of the question. Again I would not confuse local coordination with coordination between local and Federal. So I am again at a loss from what you have told me so far to see where the coordination in your opinion would be less. Thinking of H.R. 10682, one pushes to really lmderstand what is fact and what is fancy in your concern. Mr. MALEY. Nor was our purpose too in coming here to attack H.R. 10682 as we tried to make clear in Mrs. Olivarez' original statement. Mr. DELLENBACK. I read at the top of page 2 she did not do that, but at the bottom of the statement she was speaking in favor of 11.11. 10682. Mr. MALEY. We don't care what the number of the bill is. We are for the concepts. Mr. DELLENBACK. Nor do von care what Federal agencies are involved? Mr. MALEY. Yes, we do. Mr. DELLENBACK. Tell me why? Mr. MALEY. I do not want in effect to argue with you about what it would do at the local level but what established agency now delivers programs through a local board of directors at the community level other than OEO? Mr. DELLENBACK. Community action programs? Mr. MALEY. I say what other agencies other than OEO? Not coni- munity action. Any kind of programs. What established agency has boards at the local level that involve the total community including the people to be served? Mr. DELLENBACK. I think, unfortunately, if you will, some of the other Federal bureaus, such as HTJD and the like, are talking about setting up what may eventually be duplicating agencies of this nature. I think this has drawbacks too. I think by the time we get a prolif era- tion of local agencies such as those concerned with housing, welfare and the like, each setting up its local board, I think we may have the typical Federal overlapping. But essentially the key issue in this bill is this particular one. Chairman PERKINS. We will operate under the 10-minute rule today. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I just ask one more question because I want to be sure if my understanding so far as Mrs. Olivarez is correct? Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. DELLENBACK. Is it correct, Mrs. Olivarez that you have been the State coordinator for OEO in your State? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. I was last year. Mr. DELLENBACK. You were-vou are the acting State director for OEO? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. I was last yea.r. I was a full-fledged State director. Mr. DELLENBACK. Those are two different positions to a degree. You have been both of those. So you have been deeply involved m OEO? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Yes. PAGENO="0215" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2675 Mr. DELLENBACK. Also that you were or are on the National Advis- ory Council for OEO? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. I was until the Prouty amendment. Mr. DELLENBACK. So your background, and this has strengths and weaknesses to it, but your background is deeply involved with OEO Mrs. OLIVAREZ. My background has been deep involvement with th~ poor forthelast 18 years. Mr. DELLENBACK. So far as the Office of Economic Opportunity is concerned you have also been closely working with it? Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Yes. I have not always but I have worked with it. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. QUIE. I have no questions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger, do you have any questions? Mr. STEIGER. No questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your appearance this morning. We appreciate your coming. Mrs. OLIVAREZ. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Our next witness is Mr. D. M. McElroy, presi- dent, Board of Director, Lubbock Community Action Committee, Lubbock, Tex. I notice, Mr. McElroy that you have several other people here. I think Congressman Mahon, the distinguished chairman of the Com- mittee on Appropriations, would have liked to be here but he is at this time at a meeting so it is impossible for him to be here. So we are delighted to welcome you here. I will act in his stead in welcoming you here. Likewise on this panel we have Mr. Donald Flanders, secretary-treasurer of the Economic Opportunity Commis- sion of Fond du Lac, Wis. Ben Day, president of the Board of Direc- tors of Jackson County Community Action Council, Inc., Medford, Oreg.; Mrs. Annie Lee Small, director, Action, Inc., Athens, Ga., and from my home State, home district, Mr. Jim Templeton, director, Northeast Community Action Committee, Olive Hill, Ky. I understand this is a panel of perhaps experts on rural poverty. I am delighted to welcome all of you here. Come around and get your seats at the table. I think for the convenience of the committee and in order to conserve time today that Mr. Day is going to serve as the chairman of the panel. All of you may make your prepared statement before we interrogate each of you. Then we can address questions to any of you we prefer. We will hear from you first, Mr. McElroy, since I introduced you first and then Mr. Day may take charge of the panel. When we come to Mr. Day the speaker- Mr. HAWKINS. I think Mr. Quie and Mr. Goodell have reserved witnesses. May I ask when are these reserved witnesses going to appear or whether or not they intend to take advantage of these hearmgs to present their witnesses? Mr. QtJIE. We have six already. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. McElroy. PAGENO="0216" 2676 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 STATEMENTS OF A PANEL COMPOSED OF D. M. McELROY, PRESI- DENT, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, LUBBOCK COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE, LUBBOCK, TEX.; DONALD FLANDERS, SECRETARY- TREASURER, FOND DU LAC AREA ECONOMIC OPPORTU1~ITY COM- MISSION, INC., FOND DU LAC, WIS.; BEN DAY, ESQ., PRESIDENT, BOARD OP DIRECTORS, JACKSON COUNTY COMMUNITY COUNCIL, INC., MEBPORD, OREc+.; MRS. ANNIE LEE SMALL, DIRECTOR, ACTION, INC., ATHENS, GA.; AND JIM TEMPLETON, DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE, OLIVE HILL, KY. Mr. MCELROY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for those kind words from Mr. Mahon. I have a little alliance in that I am married to a Kentucky girl. I am director of the vocational technical college and president of the Community Action Board of Lubbock County, Tex. You already have volumes of statistics and analysis that are evidence of the effectiveness of the various programs operated under the aegis of the Office of Economic Opportunity. I do not know whether Lubbock, Tex., has been part of those statistics or not. If not I would like to say that we also are evidenced of the effectiveness of these programs. The implementation of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 has been termed "the war on poverty." It was never intended from the outset that this would be of short duration. We all know that it will take a long time. It is a strange type of war in that the enemy is elusive. Our weapons, which are dollars and qualified personnel, are limited. We do not have academies such as the Naval Academy, Air Force Academy, West Point, or war colleges that we can send our people to to find the experience and techniques of war or conflicts such as we are engaged in in the war on poverty. Our school has been trial and error, and experience, and from this school there has emerged irnowledgeable leadership that is now fur- nishing expertise in treating these problems. There has been criticism of this program hut I believe I will submit that this criticism has been actually of programs that are not related to the war on poverty. The enterprising American is opposed to professional beneficiary of wealth in programs. Yet the fellow who rides the employment rolls is charged to the war on poverty, in the provision of the Economic Opportunity Act. This is something that we and our own communities have to combat and inform the people. Nevertheless this criticism has existed. True, there has been criticism that has been active. But as the distinguished gentleman from Florida, Congressman Rogers, spoke a few minutes ago, corrective actions have been taken in these cases. The very things for which the OEO has been criticized represent circumstances that the war on poverty and the program through the community action agencies would eliminate or greatly reduce by moti- vating our people to improve themselves to where they will not be perpetual beneficiaries of variOus welfare programs. I would be disappointed to see any phase of the OEO programs reduced, curtailed, or channeled off to another existing agency. OEO PAGENO="0217" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2677 has been through the trials. It has become pretty rich in experience and actually we are all striving for the same thing regardless of what piece of legislation we support or what method we choose to approach the problem. That is the elimination of poverty. But an agency with 3 years' experience and the benefit of its trials and errors that it has already had seems to me should be more efficient in this area than another agency given a new assignment. One thing, I believe, important particularly in this, is the continu- ation of the OEO because it has become a symbol to the poor of a hope for the future. I think the elimination of OEO would be demoralizing to the per- sonnel that we have employed in our CAP agencies; having the lines of communication already established, new ones would have to be developed with other agencies. I would like to see the OEO continued as it is and I would like to see the Congress be a little more expedient in the appropriation for this program. Too frequently the appropriations are passed so that late in the year that the program should have been started 3 or 4 months beforehand. This has been particularly true in Headstart programs. Sometimes the year is half over before we know what funds are available. Now there might be some circumstances where a change from OEO might be palatable t~o some but I think it will be disappointing to those whom the original OEO Act of 1964 was designed to benefit. Mr. Chairman, that is the extent of the remarks that I have to make. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. McElroy. I am going to call on Mr. Dellenback at this time to introduce Mr. Day. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am delighted to say for the record that Mr. Ben Day `is from my home State, the city of Medford, Oreg. I-fe is a man whom I have had contact with for a great many years a.s we practiced law together and against each other on occasion. We look upon Mr. Day as one of the leading citizens of this com- munity. He is a former State senator from the county in which we both live. He is a very respected member of the bar. He has done a great deal in connection with community action work in our area. I feel that the community owes him a great deal for what he has done in this regard. He is a very competent man and we are delighted to have him with us today. Ben, welcome. Mr. DAY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Did I hear you correctly you want me to introduce the other members of the panel to give their statement? Chair~nan PERKINS. Except Mr. Steiger will introduce Mr. Donald Flanders. I will introduce Mr. Jim Templeton, myself.. Mr. DELLENBACK. We have pretty well cut your role down. Mr. DAY. Would you like me to give my presentation? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. DAY. Mr. Chairman and members of the House Committee on Education and Labor, my name is Ben Day. I practice law in Med- ford, Oreg.- Chairman PERKINS. What I intended awhile ago would be to ad- dress questions to you as chairman of the panel and then if any other members wanted to answer you could so indicate. PAGENO="0218" 2678 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. DAY. My address, business address, is 1005 East Main Street, Medford, Oreg. I am going to lay aside some of my prepared state- ment because I think some of the-some of it has been said. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection your prepared statement will be inserted in the record. (The statement referred to follows :~ STATEMENT OF Mn. BEN Dxy, LAWYER, MEDFORD, OREG. Mr. Chairman, members of the House Education and Labor Committee, my name is Len Day, I practice law in Medford, Oregon, my business address is Day and Courtright, 1005 East Main Street, Medford, Oregon. Because of what I will say and attitudes which I will express, i think it will be helpful if I first tell you something of myself and my background. I am a Republican, I spent three sessions in the Oregon Legislature as a Representative and a Senator, undoubtedly I was on tile conservative side of the line. My back- ground is agriculture, w-hich u-as my full time occupation for many years. What understanding I had w-ith poverty came from contact with people who worked for me on the ranch and who were a bit poorer than I was, and from the general concepts gained through newspapers and talk around the Legislature. In any event, I u-as quite satisfied with my knowledge and understanding of poverty. In the summer of 1965 I became involved in our Jackson County citizen's efforts to participate in the War on Poverty. My first reaction was a feeling of insult to my community, because I really didn't think that we had a poverty problem. This was follow-ed by curiosity and then by realization of the extent of our poverty problem. For more than a year now I have been Chairman of the Jackson County Community Action Council. For the past two years I have worked a great deal on local poverty problems and with local low--income people. From working with these people and watching the successes or failures of various efforts, I have almost completely revised all of my earlier ideas. I had to revise them, because the true realities w-ere entirely different than I had always thought. The problems which this committee faces cannot be properly answered w-ithout a much better understanding of the problem than that which has been prevalent in this country in the past. Last Thursday I spent tw-o hours at the meeting of our Study and Review Committee. This Committee is composed entirely of low-- income people. Each low-income member of our hoard is a member. At this meeting, there were also some of our aides, probably about tw-enty people in all. I asked them to give me their ideas of our programs so that I could present them to you. Here are some of the results: 1. We should be funded for longer periods of time. It is inefficient and wasteful for us to dash into a program for a short period. 2. The established state and federal agencies have not beeii able to reach people. We do. We reach their minds and gain their cooperation. 3. The local CAP Agency should have more authority. 4. There should be more flexibility w-ithin OEO guidelines in order to fit local conditions and needs. 5. Congress and the public are expecting results too quick1y. Give us enough time to do a job. Sometimes it would be better not to start, than to start and not finish. It is too disappointing to have it stopped before good results are achieved as promised. 6. People fear that what has been started will revert to established agencies. 7. People say this is the first time they have been asked what their own thoughts and wishes are. 8. We make people want to get off Welfare and to improve their position. 9. We are making the community, as a whole, aware of low-income problems. 10. If only some of these changes are accomplished within my life time, I will feel that my work has been worthw-hule. 11. We build peoples confidence in themselves. This is through education, GED, job training and providing opportunities. 12. Women who aren't trained or educated can't pay a baby-sitter and make ends meet, so they give up. 13. Despite our present high unemployment rate of eight per cent we have a shortage of skilled and semi-skilled workers, such as w-elders and so on. We should make job training available locally. PAGENO="0219" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2679 14. We should develop a program encouraging industry to provide job training programs. 15. Local building trade contractors will agree to hire trained people from a local vocational or training school. 16. We have made the mental outlook on life better for many people. We have more people voting and more people participating in community and local problems. 17. Once we get people started, it is surprising what they can do for them- selves. An ADC Mother with a ninth grade education was able to be the acting head teacher for eight weeks in the Ashland Day Care Center and did an excellent job. She replaced a person with a Masters Degree. 18. By example and encouragement we make people realize "if she can do it, I can". 10. I worked with a Mother who was not physically able to work. She was w-ithdrawn and sat within the four n-ails of her home and never went out. Sometimes she wouldn't even dress all day. She is now a vital active Mother, taking good care of her family and interested in the community. It took three months to just get her out of the house, and the program was only a four months program. 20. I am a good example. I was fat and forty plus, rejected by my husband and rapidly withdrawing from life. I was encouraged to participate, I now have my GED Certificate, a job at the public library, have been elected a member of this board, have filed my own divorce action and feel that I'm really going places. In speaking of how people who have given up are restarting, this comment was made and enthusiastically approved by everybody: 21. You have to get the person into a group involvement before the miracle starts. 22. There are many we haven't reached, many who are still not committed. We are beginning to reach more and more. 23. Senior citizens need to get away from their homes and mix with other people. Many haven't been able to do this because. of lack of transportation. We have arranged car pools to get the aged people out to events. 24. The established agencies are beginning to change their attitudes towards the poor. Some are doing well, but some are strongly resisting change. 25. We need a good deal more cooperation frOm agencies and between agencies. 26. We are the catalyst that makes it all jell. 27. We need time. A person won't respond without hope. You have to instill belief and hope, create an involvement of the person in affairs outside of the home, provide an opportunity for training or work, and this whole process takes time. The people who made these remarks were all low-income people. Many of them were on welfare. Some of them still are, but see their way to becoming free. M'my of them freely said use me as an example Ihey themselves ha\e been helped, they see and understand how they can hOip others and they are doing it. Our local program at the present time is placing strong emphasis on com~ munity organizations and community centers. From these, many other organi- zations are being formed and are active. The ADO Mothers Group is `a good example. They understand the things that are necessary to get people moving again. One of the groups require that ea'ch member belong to another organiza- tion `and attend its meetings and report back on those meetings. An'other group sends its members in teams to attend PTA Meetings', School Board Meetings, `City Council Meetings, County Court Meetings `and other functions of a public or semi-public nature. They are teaching themselves, and others, that it is possible for them to have an influence in their own community, to be an active participant in local affairs, to gain `confidence in themselves, `to believe they can successfully train for and hold jobs. I know the time is limited but I want `you t'o know that our Community Action Program in Jackson County, Oregon, is a success. `We are making noticeable progress in a very difficult task. We are changing people's habits and attitudes, `and giving them confidence and hope. We are changing the age old concepts held by the public generally regarding poverty `and the people caught in it. We are seeing some change and improvement in the long established `attitudes and ,practices of government agencies. I have some recommendations to make, which I will do categorically and I will be very glad to enlarge upon it, if you wish. 1. You `should provide for participation by l'ow-in'come people in `the planning, development and operation of projects being conducted by existing old line agen- cies. This will accomplish three purposes. First, it will provide encouragement, PAGENO="0220" 2680 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 willingness to participate and the necessary self-confidence in the low-income people, second, it is an opportunity for administrators and other people to listen and begin to understand the real nature of the problems that they are trying to help solve. Third, if we listen carefully to such people, w-e will avoid the waste of much government money and fruitless efforts. 2. I w-ould recommend that somehow- you provide for longer range financing of Community Action Programs. The nature of the problem is such that we will not get the results that we want by short programs. For the most success, we must be assured of a continuity of action and adequate follow through. This is not a short range, hit-or-miss program and it should be financed for what it is, a long range effort to change a situation which has developed over many years. 3. I oppose the suggestion that OEO Authorities be spun off and given to other governmental agencies. We are designed to work with OEO and it is designed to work with us. The willingness of other long established government agencies to work closely with a CAP group is quite uncertain. Some will and some won't. And believe me when some won't, it is close to impossible to make any head- way. Our inovations and new approaches many times run counter to the long established concepts of existing agencies. The old established agencies try to w-ork on the problems on a piecemeal basis. One is concerned with health, one is concerned with education, one is concerned with job training, one is concerned with employment. In contrast, we are in a position to, and do, try to work on an individual's entire environment as well as a particular problem. I recommend that you give Community Action Agencies more power to compel cooperation from other agencies in the development of their program. 4. I would like to see more flexibility in the OEO guidelines. By this I mean priority as to types of programs should not be established for an entire region and programs should be judged on their individual productive merits. In conclusion, should any of you become discouraged or doubtful about the ultimate value of rural CAP Programs, I invite you to visit us in Southern Oregon and talk to our many people who have been so helped. Please always remember that these people, 20% of our population, who we are trying to help, represent one of the greatest potential resources that our Nation has. Thank you. Mr. DAY. Because of what I will say and attitudes which I will express, I think it will be helpful if I first tell you something of myself and my background. I am a Republican, I spent three sessions in the Oregon Legislature and as a representative and a senator, undoubtedly I was on the conservative side of the line. My background is agriculture which was my full-time occupation for many years. What understanding I had with poverty came from contact with people who worked for me on the ranch and who were a bit poorer than I was, and from the general concepts gained through newspapers and talk around the legislature. In any event I was quite satisfied with my knowledge and under- standing of poverty. My first reaction was a feeling of insult to my community. Because I really did not think that we had a poverty problem. This was followed by curiosity and then the realization of the extent of our poverty problem. For more than a year now I have been chairman of the Jackson County Community Action Council. For the past 2 years I have worked a great deal on local poverty programs and problems and with local low-income people. From working with these people and watching the successes or failures of various efforts, I have almost completely revised all of my earlier ideas. I had to revise them because the true realities were entirely different than I had always thought The problem which this committee faces cannot be properly an- swered without a much better understanding of the problem than that PAGENO="0221" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2681 which has been prevalent in this country in the past. Last Thursday I spent 2 hours at the meeting of our study and review committee and this committee is composed entirely of low-income people. Each low-income member of our board is a member. At this meeting there were also some of our aides, probably about 20 people in all. I asked them to give me their ideas of our programs so that I could present them to you. Here are some of the results. 1. We should be funded for longer periods of time. It is in- efficient and wasteful for us to dash into a program for a short period. 2. The established State and Federal agencies have not been able to reach people. We do. We reach their minds and gain their cooperation. 3. Congress and the public are expecting results to quickly. Give us enough time to do a job. Sometimes it would be better not to start, then to start and not finish. it is too disappointing to have it stopped before good results are achieved as promised. 4. People fear that what has been started will revert to estab- lished agencies. 5. People say this is the first time they have been asked what their own thoughts and wishes were. 6. We make people want to get off welfare and to improve their position. 7. We are making the community as a whole aware of low income problems. 8. We build people's confidence in themselves. This is through education, GED, job training, and providing opportunities. 9. Women who are not trained or educated can't pay a baby sitter and make ends meet, so they give up. 10. Despite our present high unemployment rate of 8 percent we have a shortage of skilled and semiskilled workers such as welders and so on. We should make job training available locally. 11. We should develop a program encouraging industry to provide job training programs. 12. We have made the mental outlook on life better for many people. We have more people voting and more people participat- ing in community and local problems. 13. Once we get people started it is surprising what they can do for themselves. An ADO mother with a ninth grade education was able to be the acting head teacher for 8 weeks in the Ashland Day Care Center and did an excellent job. She replaced a person with a master's degree. 14. By example and encouragement we make people realize if she can do it, I can. 15. I worked with a mother who was not physically able to work. She was withdrawn and sat within the four walls of her home and never went out. Sometimes she wouldn't even dress all day. She is now a vital active mother, taking good care of her family and interested in the community. It took 3 months to just get her out of the house, and the program was only a 4-month program. 16. I am a good example. I was fat and 40-plus, rejected by my hu~band and rapidly withdrawing from life. I was encour- PAGENO="0222" 2682 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 aged to participate, I now have my GED certificate, a job at the public library, have been elected a member of this board, have ified my own divorce action, and feel that I am really going places. 17. In speaking of how people who have given up are restart- ing, this comment was made and enthusiastically approved by everybody: You have to get the person into a group involvement before the miracle starts. 18. There are many we have not reached, many who are still not committed. We are beginning to reach more and more. 19. Senior citizens need to get away from their homes and mix with other people. Many have not been able to do this because of lack of transportation. We have arranged car poois to get the aged people out to events. 20. The established agencies are beginning to change their at- titudes toward the poor. Some are doing well, but some are strongly resisting change. 21. We need a good deal more cooperation from agencies and between agencies. 22. We are the catalyst that makes it all jell. 23. We need time. A person won't respond without hope. You have to instill belief and hope, create an involment of the pe~on in affairs outside of the home, provide an opportunity for train- ing or work. and this whole process takes time. The people who made these remarks are all low-income people. Many of them are on welfare. Some of them are still, but see their way to becoming free. Many of them freely said use me as an example. They themselves have been helped, they see and understand how they can help others and they are doing it. Our local program at the present time is placing strong emphasis on community organizations and community centers. From these many other organizations are being formed and are active. The ADC mothers group is a good example. They understand the things that are necessary to get people moving again. One of the groups require that each member belong to another organization and attend its meetings and report back on those meetings. Another group sends its members in teams to those PTA meetings, school board meetings, city council meetings, county court meetings and other functions of a public and semipublic nature. They are teaching themselves, and others, that it is possible for them to have an influence on their community to be an active participant in local affairs~ to gain confidence in themselves~ to believe they can successfully tra.in for and hold jobs. I know the time is limited but I want you to know that our corn- munity action program in Jackson County, Oreg. is a success. We are making noticeable progress in a very difficult task. We are changing people's habits and attitudes and giving them con- fidence and hope. We are changing the age old concepts held by the public generally regarding poverty and the people caught by it. We are seeing some change and improvement in the long established atti- tudes and practices of government agencies. I have some recommenda- tions to make which I will do categorically and I will be very glad to enlarge upon it, if you wish. PAGENO="0223" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2683 1. You should provide for participation by low-income people in the planning, development and operation of projects being conducted by existing old line agencies. This will accomplish three purposes. First it will provide encouragement, willingnes to par- ticipate and the necessary self-confidence in the low income people, second it is an opportunity for administrators and other people to listen and begin to understand the real nature of the problems that they are trying to help solve. Third if we listen carefully to such people, we will avoid the waste of much government money and fruitless efforts. 2. I would recommend that somehow you provide for longer range financing of community action programs. The nature of the problem is such that we will not get the results that we want by short programs. For the most success, we must be assured of a continuity of action and adequate followthrough. This short range hit or miss program and it should be financed for what it is, a long-range effort to change a situation which has developed over many years. 3. I oppose the suggestion that OEO authorities be spun off and given to other governmental agencies. We are designed to work with OEO and it is designed to work with us. The willing- ness of other long-established Government agencies to work closely with a CAP group is quite uncertain. Some will and some won't. And believe me when some won't it is close to impossible to make any headway. Our innovations and approaches many times run counter to the long-established concepts of e.xisting agencies. One is concerned with health, one is concerned with education, one is concerned with job training, one is concerned with employment. The old established agencies try to work on the problems on a piecemeal basia In contrast, we are in a position to, and do, try to work on an individual's entire environment as well as a particular problem. I recommend that you give community action agencies more power to compel cooperation from other agencies in the develop- ment of their program. 4. I would like to see more flexibility in the OEO Guidelines. By this I mean priority as to types of programs should not be established for an entire region and programs should be judged on their individual productive merits. I mean that we should have more leeway in which to develop programs for our own local needs and ideas. In conclusion, should any of you become discouraged or doubt- ful about the ultimate value of rural CAP programs I invite you to visit us in southern Oregon and talk to our many people who have been so helped. Please always remember that these people, 20 percent of our popu- lation, who we are trying to help, represent one of the greatest po- tential resources that our Nation has. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Mr. Day. Mr. Steiger, do you have any questions? Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. PAGENO="0224" 2684 ECONOMIC OPPORTT~TXITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It is a pleasure and a very great privilege to have Donald Flan- ders of Fond du Lac County, secretary-treasurer of Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee, Inc. before this committee. Hav- ing worked with Don in a number of capacities, in his role as an officer of the board for the Fond du Lac Committee and in his role as executive secretary for the Fond du Lac County Board, I know that he comes well prepared and well versed to discuss the operations and goals of t.he Fond du Lac Economic Opportunity Committee. This is a group with which I have worked very closely in order to better assess how well we are doing. I can say with some pride that the Committee in Fond du Lac County has done an outstanding job. I think this is due to many factors not the least of which is the terrific job done by Mrs. Rosalie Tryon who is the executive director for the committee, and the board that works closely with her. They are dedi- cated, hardworking, honest, and extremely willing to give up their own time in an effort to motivate and assess the resources of the com- munity to find out what can be done and what is not being done. Don Flanders is one of those who has worked the longest and hardest at this as a member of the board. I think the committee can benefit. from the whole panel because they are talking about the operation of OEO at the local level and I think we can learn more from that than we can from almost any other single group of witnesses. Don Flanders' testimony I know will be both pertinent and relevant in explaining the role the committee plays in Fond du Lac and his ideas and views of his board as to what should and should not be clone as we look ahead. It is a pleasure to have you here, Don. STATEMENT OF DONALD FLANDERS, SECRETARY~TREASURER, FOND DU LAO AREA ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, INC., POND DU LAO, WIS. Mr. FLANDERS. I appreciate the great confidence you have in me, Congressman. I wish to express my appreciation to you, Chairman Perkins and the House Education and Labor Committee for the op- portunity to take part in this panel. Your interest in the activities of the community action program is heartening to say the least. I would like to make a matter of record that our agency under the able and thorough leadership of Mrs. Rosalie Tryon has been afire with enthusiasm in being innovative and not yet duplicative. Mrs. Tryon has been called on by the leadership of the Chicago regional office and the State of Wisconsin Office of Economic Opportunity to assist new directors being organized for the best economic uplift of the people to be served. Our agency has gained the confidence of those needing our services and the services of other old-line agencies to the point where the rap- port is constantly upgrading our services as a result of the elimination of the conimunication barrier which exists elsewhere. I would like to tell a little bit about our birthday party which we had for our Community Action Agency in June. We were funded on May 29, 1966, and celebrated our birthday, I think it was on June 13, 1967. At our meeting there were representatives of the "Day Care Mothers," of the "Headsta.rt Mothers," of the "Senior Citizens," who PAGENO="0225" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2685 have now a senior citizens center system throughout Fond. du Lao County, also those who have been helped through our office in claiming homestead tax relief. It was quite impressive to have our mothers from our day care center get up before an assembly of 50 or 60 people and express their deep appreciation for our activities. The older people served by the senior citizens center expressed their renewed enthusiasm for living as a result of our activities. Others came to extend their appreciation for our personal assistance though our opportunity center, our homestead tax relief activities and many others. I would also like to extend the appreciation of our board of directors, our committee and staff, and the many people in our day care and senior citizens centers for the personal interest our Congressman William Steiger has shown and the help he has given. Mr. Steiger has partici- pated in the opening of our senior citizens center and has taken time from his busy schedule to make personal inspections of our agency, office, and the day care and Headstart centers and has tried to keep us informed as to the applications that we have filed for funding of various activities. I would like to file with your committee an outline of our evaluation, the goals, the strong points and the weak points of the CAP program for your consideration. I feel that the need for extended funding is definite, there is no question about that. We have operated on a 6-month CAP program to start out with. It was very inadequate. We had to go back in .and get refinanced and refunded. The time lost in the processing of con- tinual applications has diminished from the activities that our staff can do. I think this is a' serious consideratiOn that has to be given. I am upset hearing the rest of the panel members talk about the lack of cooperation in the communities between Federal agencies. We have had stunning success in getting the communication between agencies of the various Federal agencies and State agencies, our local groups. I can talk about the Lions and the Jaycees and the other clubs, the Optimists who have volunteered their services, their time and their money to make this program a coordinating point for the entire community upgrading of the poverty people in our area. We were instrumental in the organization of the senior citizen cen- ters in Fond du Lao County. We have at present three centers operating and a fourth one funded. We have already spun off the responsibility of the daily operation of the senior citizens centers to the municipali- ties who came in and through their foresight took hold of these projects and made them a local community effort through the coopera- tion of the commission agent. We have been rather innovative in that we have worked closely with anybody's money that we could get in that we do not just say that everything has to come from the OEO funds. We have worked with the manpower training, the vocational schools in our area trying to place these mothers and people who need the help in a program whereby they can be assisted to the best of our ability. I can recite to you several instances of individual growth. We have a deputy director at this point who has graduated from the ADO program. She worked as a nonprofessional aid until `her graduation 80-084-67-pt. 4-15 PAGENO="0226" 2686 ECONO~M1C OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 19 67 from Marion College in Fond du Lac and is now a valuable member of the staff and has coordinated the activities in our Headstart and day care activities. She has done an outstanding job. Others I can refer to, nonprofessional aids who have now taken on the enthusiasm of our very enthusiastic director and has aimed for furthering her education. She has six children, wants to become a social worker at this point, and is enrolled presently for the fall term at Marion College to initiate her college education, continue on as a nonprofessional aid part time, to enable her to get enough to pay the babysitters and continue her education toward the point where she wants to contribute to society what this program has done for her~ My concern is that we do not look at the overall focus of the pro- gram. Being a person who wears two hats,. working for the county level of government, this economic opportunity is a second load, I feel that there has to be some coordination point and whether it is focused in this office as a liaison under the county framework of gov- ernment should be given some consideration. I think it is a good area. I still think we can have the poor people involved as a policy background. My concern is that we do not go off fighting each other as some of these other areas and agencies staJte they are having trouble in. We have not had this problem. Maybe we are lucky and maybe it is due to the dynamic director that we have. I will be glad to answer any questions that I can. I have a file of information for you. Chairman PERKINS. I, at this time, will introduce Mrs. Small. Go ahead, Mrs. Small. I am delighted to welcome you here this morning. STATEMENT OP ANNIE LEE SMALL, DIRECTOR, ACTION, INC., ATHENS, GA. Mrs. SMALL. Mr. Chairman, members of the House Committee on Education and Labor, I am Mrs. Annie Lee Small from Athens, Ga., coowner of radio station WYTH, a member of the Morgan County Community Action Committee, a member of the Board of Directors and Executive Committee for Action, Inc., chartered in 1965, in No- vember, which serves as an umbrella organization under which six county Community Action committees operate and work. The six counties served by Action, Inc., are located in what is popu- larly and correctly termed the Bible Belt of Georgia. This area repre- sents a total population of something over 70,000 people, rural in nature principally. The percentage of Negro population per county ranges from 13 to 53 percent. The percentage of all families wit.h incomes less than $3,000 ranges from 42 toSS percent per county. Paradoxically, the potential work force now unemployed is quite small. It has been estimated that from 48 to 60 percent of the total number of housing units in the six county area are substandard and that from 50 to 34 percent of the persons per county who are 23 years of age and older have less than 8 years of education. While the area I represent is certainly right for the type of oppor- tunities offered through the antipoverty program I would not like t.o give the impression that ours is a totally depressed or apathetic PAGENO="0227" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2687. area by any means. It does, on the other hand, give one the impression of being a section that is awakening from a long social awareness sleep, revitalized and refreshed and ready to move. My own Morgan County Community Action Committee was in existence for a number of months before Action was incorporated. Of course, our committee was organized in accordance with OEO guidelines. They comprise of two representative groups of our popu- lation including, of course, the one-third membership of those peoples to be served by the antipoverty programs. I think the work of our own Morgan County Community Action Committee and the board of organization can be expected to speak for the five counties involved in Action, Inc. Of course, like all others, early in our work we made every attempt to determine the most pressing needs of our economically depressed through investigation, survey, and personal contact. We have evolved over these past months the usual antipoverty programs. Year `round Headstart, summer Headstart; additionally Operation Future, which is an interesting program which we find is a multiservice family cen- tered program. It is designed to raise the level of family living and community awareness through homemaking and home planning. Be- cause women must take pride in the home before pride in the com- munity comes. Health education, child development, recreation, this: program is 13 weeks old. It is operating in four of our six counties. It is serving over 900 families and there are well over 900 more families yet to be brought actively into this program. Of course, we have been able to organize the Neighborhood Youth Corps. This summer we have an operation of summer urban orienta- tion projects which has been very interesting in which some of the rural NYC participants have I been given the opportunity to work and live in an urban situation and atmosphere, to acquaint them under close supervision with the problems that urban living must ultimately bring. We have, of course, as I say, summer Headstart. Our Action, Inc., has also cooperated with several special services groups either in an advisory supportive capacity, the Community Council on Aging, Com- munity Adult, High School Education, Women in Community Serv- ice. We have worked very cooperatively with VISTA, with the social services department of two colleges, by giving experience to their trainees. We have worked with them with some success I think. We have additionally worked with partial success with the other agencies in our county, the department of family children services, health depart- ment, et cetera. We have received some invaluable advisory services' from the University of Georgia. There are projects in development. Legal services, comprehensive manpower center, day care cooperative, self-help housing. Is the antipoverty program, within the scope of my own knowledge,. working? Well, I think the answer is a qualified yes. We are reaching a great many people with a great deal of. success~ Others with only mOderate success. The sea~ of need seems wide amid deep. PAGENO="0228" 2688 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Have we ha.d problems? Indeed we have. I think the problems that one haS as you conceive and build a program from scratch. Partially, our problem stems from the racial makeup of our area. Partially, be- cause we have found in some cases that the regulations under which we have to operate are incompatible and sometimes because there has been some confusion and lack of cooperation between agencies. This, then, is a comprehensive and condensed view of the anti- poverty program in my own area at this time. Thank you for the opportunity of making this statement. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mrs. Small. We are all going to be questioning the panel in a few minutes as to how we can improve the programs, essentially in the rural areas. It is a pleasure for me at this time to introduce Jim Templeton, director of the Northeast Community Action Committee, Olive Hill, Ky. I have made the statement on numerous occasions and I have no hesitancy in making it again. He is the most outstanding director that we have in Kentucky. He has displayed much administrative ability and has taken great advantage of the programs for his section. I am delighted to welcome you here, Jim. STATEMENT OF JIM TEMPLETOI~ DIRECTOR, NORTHEAST COMMU. NITY ACTION COMMITTEE, OLIVE HILL, KY. Mr. TEMPLETON. Thank you, Congressman Perkins. I would like to say this is a pleasure, of course, to have the privilege to appear before this committee. In behalf of Congresman Perkins may I say that it also is a pleasure for me to have 15 months ago returned after being absent from the area about 30 years to become the executive director for the Northeast Kentucky Area Development Council and, of course, it is a pleasure and I am very happy, of course, that my area is in Congressman Perkins' district, which I might say makes the work a little easier, Congressman. Thank you, sir. I would like to describe just a little about the area. This is six coimties. I would call it a rural area because we have 1,800 square miles to cover with a population of approximately 93,000. So, you can see that we are very scattered. The job is very difficult to get to. I think, as I have heard others speaking of the cooperation and co- ordination of other agencies, that surely in this area of ours I can see where there has been a disadvantage possibly to other agencies in giv- ing services back in the remote areas in what we call down there the hollows. This is understandable to me. I think this is why this so-called community action lends very much to pal'ticuiarly the rural America in providing personnel to go into the remote parts to contact and involve the people. Now, we have been very fortunate, of course, and I feel, too, in the cooperation of many of the Federal agencies and State agencies. But as a director, an executive director, of an OEO funded area, let me say that we have had the cooperation and we have spent a lot of time in talking to and meeting with the various agencies of not only State government but Federal agencies, too. PAGENO="0229" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 268~ I feel that we are having tremendous cooperation. We are fortunate also in having a very fine university, one of the State universities in one of the counties that we serve. That is Morgan State University. The cooperation we find from this university, of course, is very grati- fying. We are very grateful for the cooperation. Although we have not been able to move too much into educational programs, I think that we are behind particularly in basic education, that we are now with the help of the university, of course, in the process of developing programs which can conceivably be, of course, funded through the Department of Education. I would like to point out also as on several occasions that men on the local level representing the Federal agencies have said to me-and then I will explain what I mean-"Jirn, how fortunate that you are not an employee of a particular Federal agency or State agency. Therefore you can knock on many doors and possibly open them whereas we have only one door to go to and we would not dare go beyond that point, be- cause someone higher up would have to carry this on for us." So, with t.his freedom of working for a nonprofit agency that is neither Federal nor local government, it has given us the freedom to move in many circles. The results are that we have been very fortunate in getting several programs from other agencies of the Federal Gov- ernment. Of course, we are hoping that we will be able to develop many more. I surely feel that if this is not the case that we might be tied to dependence on someone higher up to make those contacts for us and to carry the message for us. Now, this is not taking anything away from our OEO people on the regional and the Federal level. Surely they also do this. But again I see them on the top level as also another agency of Federal Gov- eminent. They surely are paid by such. So, they too are handicapped to a degree because of this situation that they are in-their employment. I just had the privilege last week of visiting another CAP agency in the State of Kentucky-Washington Park. Not only was it a privilege for me to be out there in the lowlands but also to see and to spend 2 days with an agency that is just. more or less trying to get off the ground. I find a board that was made up as our board at Northeast, of people representing not only the many agencies in the area but also civic clubs, businesses, and representatives from the target group which the com- munity action, of course, will be working with. But I found also a new board that to my amazement was very dedi- cated from the beginning apparently which, as I remember when the Economic Act first came in, in fact in the latter part of 1964 and 1965 this was not the case, and I might say that I had the privilege-and I was not employed by OEO-of being called in the first week of De- cember 1964 as a rural consultant to the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity. So, therefore, I have followed it very closely since then. I have seen a lot of changes, particularly on the local level, in the attitude of people, people who before, even though in our part of the country they maybe small towns of 1,600 or up to 5,000 population, that within a half mile of the town they just did not realize or at least they were not recognizing that their people were having problems, problems of the poor, which now they are doing; they are recognizing it. PAGENO="0230" 2690 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I feel that they are surely acimowledging the fact. that there are many poor in the area. and they are doing or attempting to do some- thing about it. Again, without community action and the makeup of the board and the makeup of the committees that are developed on the local, I doubt very much if this would have come about as I see it today. I think the chairman had the privilege of attending our area meet- ing oil July 8, on a Saturday afternoon. This is unusual. This which we had was just an informative meeting. We had nothing to present to the people or give to the people or give away other than for them to learn something about community action. And possibly what Congress will do this year in the way of the Economic Act. There were in ex- cess of 900 people who came in from these rural six counties of ours. The school superintendents within the counties furnished schoolbuses to transport the men. Private individuals furnished their own cars to bring them in. The president of the university, Dr. Adrian Dorn, said to me that this is the first time-and he has been there since 1954-that he has seen men come onto their campus with overalls on. Surely I do not think this would have happened if it had not been an Economic Act of 1964. We are fortunate in having several pro- grams; in fact, I would like to just brief some of them. As an example, as of about 3 months ago we activated a legal aid program for the six counties. I think that this is probably the first multirural county agency, county agency with a legal aid program. We have three attorneys. We have six offices that are open 5 days a week, one in each county. We had the endorsement of at least 90 per- cent of the practicing attorneys of the six counties. We have four counties that have a bar association. We had an endorsement from each of those bar associations. So, we are very proud that we do have legal aid and we do think that the attorneys are going to do a good job. The State bar association has offered its assistance in addition to the law school at the Univer- sity of Kentucky. Summer Headstart up until last year, of course, all of the counties had not had Headstart. We encouraged them to have it last summer. Of course, this is no problem other than our problem of late funding. We have a full year }ieadstart at the university. This is the second year for it. It is used more or less as a training demonstration, experi- mental project in which the Headstart teachers, the teachers who are going to teach in the Headstart program in the summer, come to the campus of the university for training. \TS,Te have one of the rural communities of Elliot County; this is one of the counties of the six, a little community called Stark. It is a nursery program. These are children involved from 3 years through 5. This is a so rural community that they had no facilities in which to do this. This community is made up of approximately 80 families. There- fore, we were able to, through the assistance here in Washington of the Office of Economic Opportunity, to bring in four surplus house- trailers from South Carolina. The people themselves did all the work at no cost to the Government in renovating the four housetrailers, putting them together, putting them on the foundation. The program was water. So they dug a cistern. Now those four house- trailers are so modern as a house would be inside the corporation. PAGENO="0231" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2691 There are 18 of those children involved in the program. We are very proud and sorry that we cannot do this more because of the lack of money. We have a program in the same county, countywide, called the socio- economic program. It has been in operation for 1 year and we can prove that it has affected approximately 80 percent of the total popula- tion of the county. In another county we have what is called the commodity food distribution program, which the fiscal court turned over to us to op- erate. We included in this program a home management part of this program. We are feeding in this program in excess of 2,000 people, men, women, and children. We are finding a lot of things coming out of this where we have been able to bring a lot of people who were poor. When the program first started our people could not even get inside the house. Now they are teaching them how to prepare the food properly. They are teaching them home management. They are seeing that they get to the health departments if there is something physically wrong. They are helping the children to get back in schooL *We are trying, through the assistance of public assistance, to get clothing for the children who do not have adequate clothing to go to school. Also we have been able through this to start bringing them in group sessions. Now we are even bringing them in on a countywide program for further training by the home demonstration agency and many others. I think that one of the best programs-surely all of them are good but they have their weaknesses as well as their good points-one of the best programs we are operating is what we call the home repair for the senior citizens. I would like to point this out that where other agencies have cooperated to make this program a success, and we could mention other things too, other programs where additional agen- cies are cooperating, but to make this home repair program as success- ful as it is it has taken the cooperation of the public assistance which operates title V of the Economic Act. This is the work experience and training unemployed fathers. They do the labor, we supply the work supervisors, the know-hows, to teach them while they are doing the work. This program was in operation three months during which we were able to take nine with a crew of 25 working fathers and develop jobs with lethtimate contractors in the area. So this is not only to assist and repair senior citizens home who cannot afford it, but it also is a training program for the unemployed fathers under title V. With this the senior citizens of those two counties, with their senior citizens clubs and the county organization of senior citizens, they assist in the selection of the personnel who are working in the program such as the work supervisors and also they are the ones that have priority on the homes to be repaired. I am very sorry to say that in our six counties we do not have enough going for senior citizens because we have far too heavy a population of senior citizens in that area. We are hoping we can get more things going for senior citizens. We surely need it. There are many other programs we have. I will stop with that, Mr. Chairman. PAGENO="0232" 2692 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. I will call on Mrs. Green, first, for questions. Mrs. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I join my colleague from Oregon in welcoming Mr. Ben Day espe- cially and members of the panel. Remembering our association of 20, 15, and 10 years ago, your testimony is most interesting. Mr. Day, you are involved primarily in the CAP program? Mr. DAY. Yes, I am. Mrs. GREEN. What do you do in Headstart? Mr. DAY. We nm it, ourselves. We have a combination Headstart- day care center program, which begins at 7 in the morning and ends at 6 in the evening. We have developed what was originally our ad- visory committee, it is now incorporated, and we intend to make them the contacting agency for us. Mrs. GREEN. I did not hear you. I am sorry. `Who is the contacting agent? Mr. DAY. We have a new organization which was our advisory committee. They will be our contacting agent. Right now we run it ourselves. Mrs. GREEN. How do you run it? Mr. DAY. We had trouble to begin with getting proper head per- sonnel, but we now have a very capable person. We have had two who work for us and direct it for us. Mrs. GREEN. `Where did these two personnel come from? Mr. DAY. The first one who went in on a temporary basis, because our first person was not able to do it, was the wife of a teacher in Southern Oregon College. She had gone to Oregon State College and taken a summer course on Headstart. For family reasons she did not not want to continue the job, although she did an excellent job. Then we found another professional person with a master's degree, who is our director. Mrs. GREEN. Did she come from Education? Was she in the Medford schools? Mr. DAY. No, she did not have any teacher's certificate or anything like that at all. She was not a teacher. Mrs. GREEN. How many are employed in the Headstart program? Mr. DAY. 26. We have two centers, one in Ashland and one in Med- ford. We have 26 employees. Mrs. G~nnN. Su~umer or full year? Mr. DAY. Full year. I am going to go from memory. There are 26 total employees and this takes in cooks, aides and teachers, and the director. We have one social worker, one nurse, one director. We have two head teachers. Incidentally, as of now both of these head teachers are ex-high school dropouts, ex-welf are people and both are doing a very remark- able job. Mr. Dellenback went through one of our centers. He was taken through by the then acting head teacher, who is now an acting head teacher. She was a welfare person. I don't~ think you knew that. We didn't tell you. But she is doing a very, very commendable job. Mrs. GREEN. The two head teachers are both former high school dropouts? Mr. DAY. Yes. PAGENO="0233" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2693 Mrs. GREEN. Did they ever go back for any training? Mr. DAY. They have both received a GED certificate. Mrs. GREEN. From where? Mr. DAY. One of them in California and one of them in Oregon. Mrs. GREEN. What is GED? Mr. DAY. This is a sort of high school education equivalency exam- ination that is given. They run special courses for this, to bring up their education and then if they pass the test, they get a GED certifi- cate. This enables them, when they apply for a job, to say that they do haYe a high school education. Mrs. GREEN. With high school education, now they teach in the Headstart program? Mr. DAY. In addition to that, we have given both of them 2 months' training at San Jose State College. Mrs. GREEN. Two months? Mr. DAY. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. What is their salary? Mr. DAY. The head teachers are getting $500 or maybe $525 a month. Mrs. GRE1~N. How many students do they have in their classrooms? Mr. DAY. We have 40 in each center. We do not really run classes as such. Remember, we are both a day care and a Headstart program. We have several other teachers besides that and then the aides. It is a very small group instruction. Mrs. GREEN. You have 40 youngsters in each of the two centers? Mr. DAY. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. Ashland and Medford? Mr. DAY. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. You have 26 employees for them ~ So, it is a ratio of one adult to three children. Mr. DAY. Yes. I should point out that we do much more than teach children. We have a large parental. involvement program. Of course, they are fed and then there are janitors and all these things. Mrs. GREEN. Where are the classes held? Mr. DAY. In both centers, the two new ones which we are ~going to start, they are all in church-donated facilities. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have any cooperative effort with the Medford public schools? Mr. DAY. Our system in Medford has not been going along long enough to develop that. We have fine cooperation with the Ashland public schools. I am sure we will have in Medford. Mrs. GREEN. Is there any coordination of effort between the Head- start program and the school program in Ashland or are they entirely separate? Mr. DAY. Pardon me, between what? . Mrs. GREEN. The Ashland public schools and you people, CAP, that run it. . . .. . . Mr. DAY. Our cooperation there has been good. They have advised us and we have exchanged information. They have come to us, and urged that we take the children from such and such families because they know from their own past experience that these children from a certain family are going to have trouble. We have had that type of cooperation. . PAGENO="0234" 2694 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Mrs. GREEN. What is your total program cost for Bleadstart in Medford and Ashland for a year? Mr. DAY. May I answer it in this way. That our annualized rate for four Headstart centers will be $246,000 for all four. Mrs. GREEN. What do you mean by four? You have two in Med- ford? Mr. DAY. We have two established now and we are establishing two more, one in Ashland and one in Medford. There will be one at Cen- tral Point and one in Rogue River. Mrs. GREEN. Do you have the cost for last year when you had just Ashland? Mr. DAY. Yes, I will be glad to furnish it to you. We have never had any program which has been funded on a full-year basis. To. give you meaningful figures becomes a little difficult. Mrs. GREEN. If I remember, Ben, you sat on the school board for some time? Mr. DAY. Yes, I was a school board chairman. Mrs. GREEN. Right. What is the average salary for elementary teachers in Medford? Mr. DAY. I don't know. It has been too long since I have been con- nected with it, but I would imagine very close to $6,000. Mrs. GREEN. Do you think it is above or below that? Mr. DAY. I think the starting figure would be very close to $6,000. From there on it goes up with experience. Mrs. GREEN. What kind of training is required in Oregon for teachers? Mr. DAY. Four years of college for temporary and then 1 more year, I believe, before they get a permanent certificate. Mrs. GREEN. A minimum of 4 years of college and preferably a year of graduate work? Mr. DAY. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. Was the last tax levy in Medford defeated? Mr. DAY. No. Finally it was passed. It was defeated the first time and passed the second time. There are two other districts in our area where they were defeated twice and passed the third time. Mrs. GREEN. Close to the end of your statement, if I remember, you said that you would like to see CAP get more power to compel other agencies to work with them. Mr. DAY. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. What do you mean by this? Mr. DAY. We have several examples. If my remarks were taken to indicate that we had lack of coordination, this is not so. I would like to correct that. We have had very, very fine cooperation with our community. Mrs. GI~N. I was particularly asking what kind of power do you want? Mr. DAY. We see the Neighborhood Youth Corps, for instance, being improperly handled and doing far, far less than it should simply be- cause it is being run by an agency which doesn't really understand the problems involved. Mrs. GREEN. What agency runs it? Mr. DAY. The schools are running the in-school program and some outfit with the Labor Department is running the out-of-school pro- gram. PAGENO="0235" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2695 I might say, so far as the schools are concerned, we have had with one district, that is the TED district, very, very poor cooperation. With the Medford district we have had very fine cooperation. Both ques- tions rev9lved around parental participation. Mrs. GREEN. Let us go back again to this power-what kind of power would you like to have to compel, for instance, the schools to work on NYC more closely with you ~ Mr. DAY. I would like to see CAP's have the first shot at funding any type of program and let them delegate it to a school, for instance. I would like to see the CAP board have a real meaningful writeoff au- thority or veto authority on this type of program in our own area, so that we would be insured that these programs would be developed with our cooperation instead of having them come in and say we have to have this in, next day we want your approval. Mrs. GREEN. Now the schools handle the NYC program and what other ones in the poverty program? Mr. DAY. They have had a very, very excellent program there called child resources development, which was a selection of 30-some very capable and especially trained teachers to work with students who were for some reason or another slowed down in various schools. This has worked very well. Mrs. GREEN. You want CAP to have veto power over these education programs? Mr. DAY. We had a knock-down, drag-out with TED on these vari- ous programs, because we wanted to have the parents brought into it, because we feel that the problem was not an isolated thing within the individual but it was part of his entire environment. Mrs. GREEN. Let me ask you this. The school board members are elected at large, aren't they? Mr. DAY. Yes, they are. Mrs. GREEN. How are the CAP people chosen? Mr. DAY. We are very undemocratic in this way. We choose our- selves initially. We went to the county court and we said, will you approve this. This was for the first board. Mrs. GREEN. A school board that is elected by the people supposedly has the best judgment to run the educational programs. You would like an agency that is self-selected and approved by the judges, or who- ever it is, to have superior authority over the duly-elected representa- tives? Mr. DAY. This bothers me. We sit there not responsible to anybody and we are handling something like $400,000 a year of taxpayers' money. Not a one of us is elected by the public generally and I realize that it is a tremendous responsibility, but it is not the school boards that we have difficulties with. It is the administration establishment. I would say this. The top administrative people work out all right. As you get down to the lower echelons where real contact is made, that is where you get the resistance. Chairman PraiKINs. Mr. Quie? Mr. Qmr~. Some of you have mentioned late funding. I believe Mr. Templeton did. When were some of your programs funded? Mr. TEMPLETON. I don't think I understand what you mean, Con- gressman. PAGENO="0236" 2696 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. You mentioned that you had difficulty with your com- munity action agency because of late funding of programs. Mr. TEMPLETON. I think an example, of course, is the surmner Head- start as to which so far some of the programs we will finish this week for the summer. We have only been able to get 25 percent of the cost of the initial funding of the program. Also, to go back to last year when at the end of the program year for the Northeast, because of the Congress' late appropriation, this meant that my own agency operated somewhere around 3 months by borrowing by our board, borrowing money to operate. So it is a combination, I think, of late funding. Mr. Qum. So this summer's program where you are funded now has nothing to do with the funding? Mr. TEMPLETON. No. Mr. QulE. Of course, we did delay the funding. However, there were arrangements made with a continuing resolution. How about any year- round projects that were developed by your community action board? Were they quickly funded or was there delay by the regional office to release funds for your operation ~ Mr. TEMPLETON. I think surely this was one of the big complaints, of course, sometime ago. Now as far as the regional office is concerned, they are expediting it and we are getting it much faster. For example, before we did not know when to expect it. Now within 2 or 3 months; in other words, around 90 days. Mr. Qum. When did this occur? Mr. TEMPLETON. That is pretty difficult to say. I would say within the last 6 months. Mr. Quiu. So none of the year-round programs proposed last fall have been funded with the speed of 90 days, nor anything you have planned this year has been fimded? Mr. TEMPLETON. You are talking about last fall now? Mr. QUJE. Yes. Or anything that you propose this year, which is a minority of your programs. were actually planned, developed, and requested in this calendar year; is that correct? Mr. TEMPLETON. That's right. Mr. QuJE. What about the rest of you? What have your expendi- tures been? What about Athens, Ga. Mrs. SMALL. I was thinking here sometimes late funding worked in a positive fashion. We wanted a day care program for our Morgan County very badly and wrote the project up and waited and waited and waited. Finally, the families and the children who were involved- the families of the children who were involved got so impatient they just started their own on a voluntary basis. Sosometimesit has worked in a positive way. However- Mr. QtTIE. You want more of them to start that way? Mrs. SMALL. Of course, the entire program, as I understand, is to help one to help himself. This is encouraging self-determination. It is fine. But certainly we didn't have the professional help we needed because there were not the funds. It does make it difficult. We have been slow in getting started in many areas because of the lack of funds either late funding or no funds~ period. PAGENO="0237" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2697 Mr. Quu~. Where is the regional office for Oregon? Mr. DAY. San Francisco. May I comment on this question? Mr. QULE. What do you do out there? Mr. DAY. One of the very worst examples that I know of, and it hit us very hard, was this 3-year program, designed to be a 3-year child-development program which the school system is running and which is doing a wonderful job. There is no money available this year to hire teachers. They had chosen their very best teachers for this project. After 1 year's operation, although it was designed for 3 years, the whole thing has gone down the chute, because there was no appropria- tion made. These teachers had to be placed back in regular jobs and the proj ect has been entirely dismantled. We have the framework. When we get the money again, we are going to try to bring it back. It will be very difficult. We had a tough time getting these people all together, to begin with. Now, we had to disperse them and we will have to start all over again. This is very, very inefficient. Mrs. GREEN. Is this under the CAP program? Mr. DAY. No, this is an TED program. Mrs. GREEN. TED is what? Mr. DAY. Intermediate education department, which we now have replacing t:he old county school supervisors. Mrs. GREEN. Why wasn't it `funded? Mr. DAY. Because you haven't passed the appropriation. You see, they had 1 year's money. Mrs. GREEN. You mean the taxpayers of the county? Mr. DAY. I beg your pardon. This was an OEO-funded program, yes. Mr. QuiE. Direct OEO funding and not through community ac- tion, is that right? Mr. DAY. It was direct through some other title, ESA or whatever it is called. Mrs. GREEN. The programs under CAP you felt had tremendous support in Medford? Mr. DAY. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. How would you feel, then, if we went to a 50-50 matching? Mr. DAY. On an overall `basis it might be a little rough right now. Mrs. GREEN. Why? Mr. DAY. Because the voters are turning down school budgets and things like that. Mrs. GREEN. You feel this would have much higher priority than other programs. If it has wide public support, surely the taxpayers would approve of it, would they not, and vote the 50 percent of the money to rim it? Mr. DAY. Just don't mistake what I mean when I say "wide public support." We are getting very good response from the public. This is a big job because essentially the public has to change its preconceived concept of `welfare and poverty and so on. They are doing this. `There are still a lot of doubting Thomases. If we were to go out `and ask the taxpayers of Jackson County to approve a very sizable budget for this, I would `have my doubts. Now at the present time we PAGENO="0238" 2698 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 are doing some project entirely on our own, because we do not irnow whether there is going to be Federal funding and we don't want to wait. I am speaking of the GED. Mrs. GREEN. Also the public has to change its ideas about the sup- port of education. Mr. DAY. Pardon me? Mrs. GREEN. Doesn't the public also have to kind of change its ideas about the importance of financing adequate education? Mr. DAY. Yes. Actually in Jackson County we have done quite well. We have a good school system. Up until this year the voters have been very understanding. Mrs. GREEN. If I understand you, what you are saying is that the Federal Government should finance this group of people who -would be able to operate, as you suggest, without any controls and determine their own destiny and spend the money that they want to without any democratic limitation. Mr. DAY. For a while- Mrs. GREEN. And they are charged with the responsibility of chang- ing the viewpoint of the conimunity. Is that what you think? Mr. DAY. Yes; and the Federal Government should continue to finance it for a while to give us a chance to prove these new type ap- proaches and to get the public acceptance. Mrs. GREEN. Suppose Congress were made up of a group of Nazis and Congress decided that we wanted society changed to the Nazi way of thinking; if your logic is right, the Federal Government will finance your people to change society the way they think society should be changed. Is that what you are saying? Mr. DAY. No; you are misreading me. I believe we have been developing a subculture of this country of the poor. In fact, I know this is so and it is so in Jackson County. What we are trying to do is to bring this culture in line with the main culture- Mrs. GREEN. I am with you on this part of it. I am just saying that it concerns me, if I understand what you have been saying that the Federal Government is to finance a group in CAP that has decided what is good for society in Medford and they are not to he subjected to any vote of the people. They are to operate as they determine is best, and you have determined that society really doesn't understand the problems and, therefore, you are going to change and educate society and fund those programs that you think society wouldn't quite understand unless the Federal Government funded them fully. is that what. you are saying, without arguing? Mr. DAY. Yes. There are two justifications for this. One is that we are essentially experimenting. The other is that I have never seen any public body operate as close to the people of the country as we are. This is really so. We really have our community well represented and well involved in our program. Mrs. GREEN~ Isn't the school board that is elected by the people very close to the peonle? Mr. DAY. We have school people on our board. We have as many agencies as possible either directly on the board- PAGENO="0239" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 2699 Mrs. GREEN. I thought you said your agency worked closer with the people than any other agency? Mr. DAY. Definitely so. Mrs. GREEN. I don't understand. When a school board is elected by the people, why that is not working very closely with people. Mr. DAY. You can demonstrate this by the comparison of the num- ber of people `who come to the school `board meetings as against the number of people who come to our meetings. Mrs. GREEN. We can compare it to the number of people who come out and vote for you compared to the number of people who come out and vote for the school board, too? Mr. DAY. Yes, and nobody votes for us except within the com- munities, the poverty people are elected to be on our `board. Mrs. GREEN. I thank the gentleman. Mr. QmE. Let me clear up one thing. This program you are talking about, was t'hat an Office of Educa- tion program or an OEO program? Mr. DAY. That was part of our local government, the intermediate education. Mr. QUIE. Federal funding of intermediate education? Mr. DAY. No, except that they have taken on s'ome of the experi- mental type educational work wit'h money furnished by the Federal Government. 1~fr. Qtrrn. Which Federal agency gave the money? Mr. DAY. I am not sure where they get their money. Some of it they get from OEO and some of it they get it from the Office of Education. I think it is split. Mr. Qrni~. Talking about late funding, let me find out from Mr. Flanders if Wisconsin were in Chicago, would they get any faster ac- tion than we are able to in Minnesota? Have you had trouble with late funding `because of OEO in Wisconsin? Mr. FLANDERS. I was looking through our schedule here of funded programs. We have had more funded in this calendar year than we did last year. Mrs. Tryon says that the cooperation and the expedi- tious handling has increased greatly in the last 6 months of this year. Mr. Qun~. That does not mean that they are very speedy. We have a program with Indians that finally got funded here the other day. The request was made in August 1966 for a year-round school program for transportation of Indian children. It was finally funded, I believe, `the 20th of July 1967. I had nothing to do with t'he congressional appropriation. It seems OEO is quite negligent in reaching a decision on the projects. Mr. FLANDERS. I think this is partly due to Congressional control of how much goes into what categories. Mr. QmE. It is possible. We must admit there was late funding last year. In my estimation, the Congress made a mistake and ear- marked `the program instead of providing a versatile program. I was doubtful of it last year and I am convinced now it was a mistake. So, you also make a point there. I also maintain that OEO itself has a'bout the lousiest administra- tion of any agency in the Federal Government. PAGENO="0240" 2700 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. FLANDERS. I am not too familiar with other Federal agencies, but I will say that we filed our- Mr. QmE. I would like to find out also, since Mr. Day said nobody votes for them, how your community action boards are selected. Could we go down the line, tell the number in your community action board, the number that are representative of the poor and how they were selected. Could we begin with Mr. Templeton? Mr. TEMPLETON. I am sorry, Congressman. Would you repeat that question ? I was wanting to answer you on something else in defense of OEO and its administration as well as this, if I may do that. Mr. QuiE. I will repeat the question. No. 1, how many people serve on the community action board, how many are representative of the poor and how are the representatives of the poor selected? Mr. TEMPLETON. We have 36 on our governing board for the six counties. We have one-third who represent the poverty people on the board. I would say there are others on that board who fall under at least the OEO guidelines of poor, even though they were not elected representing the poor on the board, some other category. We hold prior to the annual meeting what we call a primary in each county. We go to tile little radio stations and weekly newspa.per through our community clubs within the county and we promote a certain night and we have people to haul down the target group. Usually this is held in the courthouse. This iS tile largest facility we have in the county. We get up ailci we tell tile people, now you are to elect your representatives which will be two from each county to represent you for the next year on the Northeast Kentucky Area De- velopment Council Board, Community Action Board. After we have explained and they have asked questions, we move out and ask someone to take over from their group. Then they pro- ceed with the selection to represent them on the board. We usually stand in the back and we list down every word that is said, so some- times you don't wind up with really a target disadvantaged person representing them. Mr. QrnE. You accept the two people that they elect at the meeting? Mr. TEMPLETON. Absolutely. Mr. QuIE. Go ahead, Mrs. Small. Mrs. SMAIL. We have active county community action committees that are set up by bylaws, Action, Inc., in Athens, in each of the six counties. Our membership in the community action committees are chosen five from each of the eight existing agencies, such as five from the county commissioners, five from the department of health, five from the board of education. Then those to be served by the program in each of the outlying communities in our county elect their own. This complies with the one-third according to the OEO guidelines. Then each county action committee elects nine members to serve on the board. The executive committee of that board is composed of 13, the officers which the board elects, plus one-third of the total board from the poverty group, economically depressed group. So it is truly a representative group. PAGENO="0241" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2701 There are five members on each of the county committees who are from the business interests at large, the citizens at large. Then the others come from agencies. Mr. Qmi~. Your election is at neighborhood meetings? Mrs. SMALL. At a county meeting. We hold monthly meetings iii our county. All programs have been determined at these meetings by the need as expressed at these meetings. All of our subcommittees are active in the counties in which we are operating. Mr. QUIE. Mr. McElroy? Mr. MCELROY. We have 30 on our board. One-third of them are from the maj or agencies concerned with welfare, such as our city government and our county government. Our school board, the United Fund, community planning council, city and county welfare committee. These are elected. Representatives to the board are elected by these bodies. One-third of our membership is comprised of civic and other organizations such as the Lubbock Ministers Association, the non-Protestant ministers, each precinct. This is the most difficult one. The precinct is pretty difficult to establish as an entity, but the county-municipal court, as a rule-well, they do elect the precinct representative to the board-I have forgotten th~ exact name of it, the Labor Forum, that we elect the representative to. But these are civic organizations. There is one representative from the PTA. One-third of our mem- bership is from the poor themselves. These are elected. We select census tracts that represent the lower economic, lower income brackets. We send circulars out through the school kids that elections will be held at a given time. This will either be in a community center or in the school. We have turned out-I believe we have six census tracts represented out of about 25 census tracts within the city. Six of these have large poverty areas. Flyers are sent out. As I say, they met in schools, com- munity centers, and they elect. We have from 50 to 300. Some areas respond better than others, but at least there will be 50 to 300 people. One census tract has two representives because of the large number of poor in that particular area. Two-fifths of our board represent minority ethnic groups. There are more Latin Americans on the board than there are Negroes. I just toss that in as a matter of interest, perhaps. Mr. QrnE. Now you have 12 representatives of the poor on the board? Mr. MCELROY. No, sir. There are 10, but we have 12. Two of our representatives from civic organizations are Latin Americans. I say 12 of our board, two-fifths of them. There are 10 representatives of the poor. Twelve, though, are of minority ethnic groups. Mr. QUJE. You have six census tracts that elected two members of the board? Mr. MCELROY. We have six who elected 10. Two of these-or three, elected two because of the number of people living in that. We tried to put it on a population basis. Mr. QUIE. Thank you, Mr. Day? Mr. DAY. Our board is flexible at the present time. It is about 30. At the present time we are out of balance because we have too heavy a representation from the poor. Fourteen of the thirty are either 80-084-67-pt. 4-16 PAGENO="0242" 2702 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 poverty people themselves or we have two who are nonpoverty people representing the poor people. In both cases they live right in the community. The rest of it is divided eight of local citizens and eight represent- ing Government agencies of various kinds. Our board was initially established after almost a year's work by people in the community; when we finally decided to organize, we asked the county court to sponsor us. We gave them the list of names that we would like to have for the initial board. They kicked off one and that was all. Since then we our- selves reappoint or we have a limitation how long a person can stay on the board, which applies to the general public and to the heads of agencies. We reappoint ourselves an agency head or another citizen and, of course, we take the elected representatives of the poor. Mr. Qrm~. How are they elected? Mr. DAY. This was a difficult problem for us initially, because they were not organized. We now have community organizations going in certain parts of the county and we have groups such as ADO mothers, and so on. These are the people who are elected, geograph- ically, so far as the coiurnunity organizations are concerned and in- terestwise so far as ADO mothers. Mr. QDIE. You mean you invite all the ADO mothers to contact and elect a representative? Mr. DAY. They are well organized. In fact, they even have- Mr. QUTE. Do you have a meeting of ADO mothers to do this? Mr. DAY. Yes. In fact, they are organized in clubs throughout and have been active and doing a tremendous job. Mr. Quip. What voice do the poor men have? Mr. DAY. The mothers have not but in the neighborhood areas they have quite often elected men. Mr. Q.UTE. You mean the. women elected men? Mr. DAY. No, the neighborhood organization elects men. The ADO mothers always elect women. Mr. Qmn. Why do you say 14 too many? Mr. DAY. It is beyond the one-third that is set up. Mr. QUIE. There is nothing that says there should not be more than one-third. Mr. DAY. It says there should be one-third agency heads and one- third general public. So we are sort of shortchanging them. Mr. Qiun. It may be that somebody in the regional office decided that because the law only specifies not less than one-third shall represent the poor. Some community action agencies run up to one-half repre- sentatives of the poor and they have worked very well. Mr. DAY. I would like to say now that we have had tremendous help and participation by our poverty people. This wasn't so initially, hut we established what we call a study and review committee and the only people allowed on that are the poverty people. We further provided that no major measure would come before our board until it had been taken before the study and review committee and the study and review committee could then report to us. This is wherein we ran into some trouble with some of the agencies who didn't quite think this was dignified or something. But it really works. PAGENO="0243" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 2703 Mr. QUIB. Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. Originally our community action committee was formulated by the chairman of the county board. The county board fathered the community action program and gave it 32 members, who I believe were originally appointed, $5,000 to organize and get an administration program going. At that time there was great stress put on by the State office of OEO to include in the original group a percentage approximating one-third poverty people or their representatives. We have at the present time 31 members on the committee, 11 of which are poverty people plus agency heads and subagency heads of welfare and related functions which also serve as the voice for these people. Mr. QUIE. How are those 11 selected? Mr. FLANDERS. We have had to amend our bylaws several times to conform to OEO requirements. The last one that I have here at the open amTlual meeting, new members of the corporation shall be elected by ballot. Nominees shall be all those persons who have attended two or more meetings of the corporation and have requested membership. At that time, at the annual meeting then, those who request mem- bership are placed on a ballot and others can be nominated from the floor for any vacancies existing and then they are selected by ballot of the committee. Mr. QIJIE. What committee? Your committee? Mr. FLANDERS. Yes. Mr. QUI[E. You elected the board? Mr. FLANDERS. Well, from those who are interested, yes. Mr. QmE. Is this accepted by OEO? Mr. FLANDERS. They have not stopped funding us. They might after today. Mr. QmE. Are you one of the eight that they have told are not in compliance? Mr. FLANDERS. I don't know. We have filed our articles of incor- poration, our bylaws and also our amendments to the bylaws. I can't say that I have heard anything to the contrary, that we are not operating. Mr. QUIE. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am not sure which time rule we are under, 25-minute time, Mr. Chairman, or 15 minutes, but let me watch for it and see where we go. I would like to ask a series of questions of the individual members of the panel in an attempt to get some balancing off. May I lead off by asking this: How many of you in your respective group involve- ments are following through on a Headstart program, Mr. Templeton? I am trying to make these short questions so I get a full picture of the panel. Mr. TEMPLETON. We only have summer Headstart other than the one that is the year around at the university. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mrs. Small? Mrs. SMALL. We have had summer Headstart. Beginning in September we will have year-round Headstart in four of our counties. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. McElroy? Mr. MCELEOY. We coordinate five Headstart programs in five in- dependent school districts in the county, summer programs only. PAGENO="0244" 2704 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. DELLENBAOK. Mr. Day? Mr. DAY. We have two year-round Headstart and day-care centers. We will have two more. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. We have two day care Headst.art centers in Fond du Lao. We have a full-year IHeadstart fi.mded for September at Ripon, and we have three summer Headstart programs rmming right now. Mr. DELLENBACK. Who sets the curriculums as to what is being done or will be done in }{eadstart? Mr. TEMPLETON. Let me correct myself, Congressman. We do not administer. We pass this on to the delegate agencies which are the school system within the county. So they set the curriculums. Mr. DELLENBACK. Your Headstart are being run by the school system'? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. They set up their curriculums? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mrs. Small? Mrs. SMALL. Our summer Headstart program, we were the funding agency. The year-round Hea.dstart this is quite a different story. I don't know that I am qualified to answer authoritatively. I believe the curriculums and program will be set by our child director, who is a professional and Action, Inc., man. Mr. DELLENBACK. The curriculums will not. be. set by either OEO or by your local school system? Mrs. SMALL. That is correct. Mr. DELLENBACK. It will be set by your own agency administering the program? Mrs. SMALL.. That is correct, I believe. Mr. DELLENBACK. But it will be a professional man? Mrs. SMALL. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. McElroy? Mr.MCELROY. Our programs are delegated to t.he schools, and they set up the curricula. Mr. DAY. We established our own. We did it with considerable help from OEO specialists who helped us. We did it with the help of our advisory `committee which included Dr. Buckler from Southern Oregon College. the man who was in charge of this child resource program for' the TED education, several kindergarten teac.hers, and other people who were on this advisory committee who initially set up the standards' for the program. Mr. DELLENBACK. So, in effect, it is being set by the local organiza- tion with some assistance from OEO? Mr. DAY. Yes. I want particularly to have it noted that we had the most capable professional people establish our standards and our program. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. Our full-year Headstart at Ripon is in coordination and in cooperation wit.h the Ripon school system, county and State' welfare departments. The summer Headstart program is presently being carried on through the cooperation of the school superintendents and personnel for those programs. It is through the cooperation of the welfare children's board and county nurses who is to be' placed.. PAGENO="0245" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2705 The full-year Headstart day care center is in coordination with the county welfare department, guidance clinic, county health department, city health department, State board of health, and is being controlled through our office. Mr. DELLENBACK. Rather than through the school system? Mr. FLANDERS. That is correct. Mr. DELLENBACK. Fine. Now how do you feel in your respective areas as to whether there should be increased flexibility on the local level relative to priority of programs versus we on the Federal level, either through legislation or through the administering department, establishing the allocation of projects? Do you feel there should be more local control over priority of programs in your respective areas or a continuation of designation on the Federal level? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, I do think there should be more local flexi- bility in all the programs. i~fr. DELLENBAOK. Mrs. Small? Mrs. SMALL. Yes. If this program is to truly serve the poverty groups, then I think they must have some voice because they know their needs better than others. Mr. DELLENBAOK. Mr. McElroy. Mr. MCELROY. I agree with this. 1 think the application should document the justification of this program and be subject to scrutiny by the OEO, but I believe the flexibility for defining the program should be with this CAP agency. Mr. DELLENBACK. You would see the Federal agency, whichever agency it might be, not exercising an arbitrary control but rather being sure that certain standards are met in whatever program you select on the local level? Mr. MCELROY. That is right. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Day. Mr. DAY. I agree with what has been said. I do think we would do a better job with more local control and less restriction from OEO, especially as to priorities. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. I agree 100 percent. Mr. DELLENBACK. Now, if this is to be the case, and without going off into a long discussion, are you able to answer it in a word or two, if we should end up increasing the control on the local level for selec- tion of programs and determination of priorities, do you think it would make a very significant difference whether the Federal agency with which you are dealing and which is making sure your program met certain standards was OEO or was HEW or maybe some other Federal agency? Mr. Templeton? Mr. TEMPLETON. I suppose I would be partial because of working in the last 15 months with OEO and being familiar' with it starting in 1964 and going from an infant to at least walking now. So I would be partial in saying that. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you ever had a chance to deal with HEW at any department? , Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, sir, several of the bureaus of HEW I have. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you say on the basis of these dealings do you feel that OEO would do a superior job to HEW in working with you? PAGENO="0246" 2706 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. TEMPLETON. I think the concept of the Economic Act, itself, yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would your experience with HEW leave you with this feeling that they could not administer `this effectively? Mr. TEMPLETON. No, I am not saying that at all. I think it would take years for it to `come about. I think they would have to gain the experience that OEO has over the last 3 years. Mr. DELLENBACK. Unless the people who `have been doing the coordi- nation m part were to become part of the HEW staff? Mr. TEMPLETON. I cannot see where any part of HEW has had. enough experience in this so-called community action, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mrs. Small. Mrs. SMALL. I don't know where my prejudice stands, but I feel it has been easy to work with OEO. Mr. DELLENBACK. What you do is something of a prejudice? Mrs. SMALL. I don't know. I have no ax to grind. Mr. DELLENBACK. You have had extensive dealings with HEW,. Mrs. Small? Mrs. SMALL. No, I can't say I have, only insofar as school guide- lines. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. McElroy. Mr. MCELROY. I have had very pleasant experiences with HEW.. We have just completed an expansion program of an educational t.ele- vision station under the provisions of the Educational Facilities Act under HEW. Our relations have been most cordial; they have been. most cooperative. However, I feel that we a.re in a unique program in the war on poverty, and as I have said in my opening remarks, I believe we have. people who have gained knowledge in their 3 years' experience, and I feel that the letters OEO mean a lot to the poor themselves and these are the people we are trying to motivate to help themselves. Mr. DELLENBACK. I recall from your opening remarks, you made this point, and I was struck by it. You feel th.at there would be some psychological loss to the participants whether or not a. substantive' difference, if they were to hear that the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity had been discontinued even `though the programs were going on? Mr. MCELROY. This is a provincial view, I must admit, but. I believe this would be true in our community. They don't talk about the Com- munity Action board's office. They talk about going down to OEO office and down to OEO cente.r. Mr. DELLENBACK. Even though it is your board they deal with? Mr. McELROY. Yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Day? Mr. DAY. I don't think that it is possible for the old line agencies to do this job. We are dealing in change, in a change concept., changed procedure, change in approach. A long-established governmental agency, whether it be State or Federal, has established so many procedures, they have so many personnel who are used to doing things in a certain way, that. it is very, very difficult for them to change over. In .Jackson County we had what I considered one of the very best conceived programs. We delegated it to the Extension Service. Many years, as a. farmer, I have, worked ~ve1l with the Extension Semee. I PAGENO="0247" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2707 have a great admiration for them, and I know them personally. In fact, the head of the Extension Service was on our board and very, very active in it. Yet they had great difficulty operating this program. It just didn't take. They were beginning to overcome it. They realized they were in trouble. They sent a sociologist down to work with people trying to do this. Essentially in this case it came about from the fact that there is a difference between doing things to people, and doing things for people, and doing things with people. Mr. DELLENBACK. You feel this deep apprehension that the Federal agency which was set up to deal with problems of health, education, and welfare has become so rigid, so ossified that it is unable to do the task for which it was established? Mr. DAY. I know that this is so with the Labor Department, the Employment Service, the Extension Service. Mr. DELLENBACK. Which is essentially State. Mr. DAY. They have great difficulties. I am not too well acquainted with HEW. I do recognize this. That no matter how understanding the head of the agency may be, by the time they get all the way down to where it is on the working level, you have many, many minds tp change. Mr. DELLENBAOK. So your feeling in connection with HEW is based less on dealings with HEW than on carrying over the analogy in dealing with other old line agencies? Mr. DAY. We are working with a new concept. People don't change their minds quickly, and people in established agencies are people. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. I would like to preface my remarks by saying that these are personal feelings and not necessarily the feelings of the Board of Directors or the director of the agency. I think if this is true, that they have become so ossified, that they can no longer become an ag- gressive and full partner in the raising of the levels of economic op- portunity for all people, perhaps we should give them a spur under the saddle and make it become a vibrant, going organizatiton. I think this Office of Economic Opportunity, if it were to lose the initial enthusiasm of the local people and also the enthusiasm of the staff by becoming ossified, we are going to defeat the whole program. But I don't feel in my own mind justified in saying that we have to forever be in a separate state where we cannot work together and harmoniously, and, after all, our goal is to eliminate poverty and every one of these agencies had better have the same activities in mind or else you are going to- Mr. DELLENBACK. I think what you say is very sound. Mr. DAY. May I add something, Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes. Mr. DAY. I hope that we work ourselves out of a job in this, that eventually the time will come when OEO and our local agencies and so on can disappear and the old line agencies should take over what remnants of this should be continued. But I fear that if you put it into the establishment of old line agencies, that it will becOme such an integral part of their operation that we will never get rid of it. Mr. DELLENBACK. I wish there were time to go on further with this. I personally have an apprehension that the march of Government is PAGENO="0248" 2708 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 nigh on to irreversible, and having once moved in, to get it to back out is very difficult. I am sure that you can really expect an Office of Economic Opportu- nity, if it has its chance to dig in for 3, 4, 5, or 10 years, that you wifi do nothing but have created another agency that will continue ad in- ftmtum. This is not a 1-year battle. We had a very sound statement and a well-phrased one when Mrs. Small said the sea is wide and deep. The problem is not going to be solved in a year or two. Our question is how to create the framework not for a short period of time, but for a long period of time, that will really be best calculated to fill the sea to plumb the sea, or to drain the sea or what you will. Let me go on briefly, if I may. Do you have any comments, again across the board briefly, on involving in the war on poverty more of the private sector of the economy? Do you think this is desirable or undesirable? Mr. TEMPLETON. Of course I think a person's own philosophy becomes involved in this question. Surely my philosophy is that the whole segment of the population should become involved and that as you upgrade, whether they be the poorest of the poor, but even upgrade the middle class, that surely is what I think we must be about. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am not talking about individuals, Mr. Temple- ton. I am talking about bringing industry and the whole private sector of the economy as a vibrant creative force into such things as job-maiming programs. Do you feel strongly on this endeavor? Mr. TEMPLETON. I feel strongly it should be done. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mrs. Small'? Mrs. SMALL. I agree it should. Mr. MCELROY. I agree. Mr. DAY. I agree, and that is one of the things we are moving into now to do this very thing on our own local area. Mr. FLANDERS. It is my understanding nuder the new careers pro- gram that this is a part of the idea: to promote private industry and get them in. Mr. DELLENBACK. What concerns me is that the private sector of the economy is one of the great creative forces which has helped make America what it is. I am not by any means endorsing it a.cross the board in everything that it does, but I am concerned that really, in the war on poverty, it has been to a large degree set aside. We have gone through new governmental tools and agencies to attempt to fight this battle, not folding into the battle at all, to the degree that we should have done and we should be doing, this whole creative private sector of the economy. You indicate there is private philosophy involved in this. That is something I feel strongly about. Mrs. SMALL. I believe industry must have an incentive to do this. I don't believe we can expect them to do it from their largess. Mr. DELLENBAOX. Have you all read H.R. 8311 and H.R. 10682, either or both of these bills? Mr. TEMPLETON. I have read H.R. 8311. Mr. DELLENBACK. But. not 11.11. 10682? Mr. TEMPLETON. No, sir. I have not.. I have not been able to get hold of one. PAGENO="0249" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2709 Mrs. SMALL. Will you see I get both, please? Mr. DELLENBACK. I assume you have not had a chance to study either? Mr. MCELROY. I gave a cursory reading to both of these last night. Mr. DAY. I have read them both. Mr. FLANDERS. I have read H.R. 8311, and I have given a cursory inspection to H.R. 10682. Mr. DELLENBACK. Let me say, then, for the benefit of any of you. who haven't read I-LR. 10682, and let me enter my private disclaimer that I do not endorse everything in it, that it moves directly in the taking of the private sector of the economy and saying this must play and should play a very real active part in the battle of the war on poverty. Let me ask one more and then I will quit. I wish there were time to go on indefinitely. Do you feel that since you are all involved in rural poverty programs that there has been sufficient priority given to rural. program funding as opposed to urban program funding? Mr. TEMPLETON. No. Mrs. SMALL. No. Mr. MCELROY. I think we have had inadequate funding in both areas, but I realize the problems in the urban areas are greater and can be more tragic than in the rural areas. Now the individual suffer- ing may be as great, but the group suffering in the urban areas, I can't help but believe bears greater attention right now. Mr. DELLENBACK. Because the numbers are greater? Mr. MCELROY. Conditions are great. In our particular area if one of our migrant workers does not like, his shelter is not adequate, he can find another farmer that will find him a better place to live. In our large cities, many times this is not possible. Mr. DELLENBACK. So your answer really, in part, is opposed to Mr. Templeton's and Mrs. Small's? Mr. MCELROY. We only have to read the newspapers e~ery day to see what we are dealing with in urban areas. This is what concerns me, when we are losing lives and we are destroying property, then I think this deserves quicker attention than where we are-we are not starving to death in these areas; we are living in poverty. Mr. DAY. I am sorry, I can't answer that question. We have been so busy trying to do a good job locally that we have not-at least I have not-made any examination as to whether or not we are getting our share of the pie. I don't know. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you feel that the rural programs with which you are familiar have been adequately funded? Mr. DAY. No; I am sure definitely we have not been funded on some programs which we feel would do a lot of good. I am sure this must exist everywhere. Your question was is the rural getting short-changed in favor of the urban, and I don't know. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. Certainly I am not a strategist in this field either. I feel that we would like a fair share based on the actual needs of the area and the priority should be determined at the local level. Mr. DELLENBACK. Really because of the nature of those answers, let me ask a supplemental followup question. PAGENO="0250" 2710 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Do you think it would be desirable to have the funds which are available for poverty programs, in effect, in part at least separated for urban CAP funding and rural CAP funding? Would it be helpful if there were a certain number of Federal dollars which were set aside to be used for rural CAP funding and you were not finding that the rural programs were constantly in competition for funds with the urban programs? Would you feel this is desirable to have a certain number of dollars available for rural CAP programs? Mr. TEMPLETON. I have given this a lot of consideration. No; I don't think so. I would rather see-and I would hope that there be a rural branch of the Office of Economic Opportunity established on the national level. Then the money which the rural would need would be working through this branch of OEO. The reason I say no, I do not believe that earmarking for rural as opposed to urban, because there are situations, emergencies that might arise and this conceivably could become a handicap. Mr. DELLENBACK. Of course, this does not necessarily mean that there would not be emergency funds or that there would not be a larger portion, if you will, set aside for urban poverty programs. Mr. TEMPLETON. This is true. I think as of about February there was something like 17 percent of the allocation in rural development. Mr. DELLENBACK. I think statistics will bear out that based on a population basis the urban programs have gotten a higher percentage of funds than have the rural programs which goes along to back up part of Mr. Templeton's and what Mrs. Small sa.id. Do you feel, Mrs. Small, it would be desirable to have a certain number of dollars allocated to rural programs so that you, in pushing rural programs, you were not in competition with urban demands? Mrs. SMALL. I don't feel qualified to speak to this. It seems to me we should have paid more attention to what we were supposed to be doing if we were not in competition, I would hope we would get our fair share because it iS just as important to prevent tragedy as to stop it after it has happened. Mr. MCELROY. I believe Mrs. Small has expressed by opinion on this. I do not feel qualified to pass on the merits. Mr. DAY. Somehow or other somebody somewhere has to make a distribution and division between rural and urban. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you see this made in effect in the appro- priation process? Mr. DAY. I would not object to its being a minimum amount for that purpose. Within the legislation if you could provide for not less than a certain percent going to rural, not less than a certain percent going to urban, with an amount in between which could be used for discretion. Mr. FLANDERS. I agree with this principle. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger. Mr. SmIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The panel has been very very patient. Let me just respond to Mr. Templeton, if I may. In fiscal year 1967 the amount allocated to rural CAP programs was 32 percent. It is estimated that it will increase to 36 percent in PAGENO="0251" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2711 ~scal year 1968 which will provide for the funding of only 50 new Tural CAP agencies throughout the country. In Wisconsin alone we have nine that are awaiting funding. I `would doubt that all nine in Wisconsin out of the 50 in the country will be able to secure funding. Let me follow up because there are a number of things that can be touched on based on what all of you have said. No. 1, can I get just a simple yes or no in order to conserve your time and the committee's time on the question of whether you all agree that we should have to the greatest extent possible versatile funding? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, I think we should have versatile funding. Mrs. SMALL. Yes, sir. Mr. MCELROY. Yes. Mr. DAY. And I agree. Mr. FLANDERS. I, also. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you. :Second, it is proposed in H.R. 10682, which is the opportunity crusade which some of you have seen and some of YOU have not seen, that there be an urban-rural CAP split. I would hope that all of you might take a look at this because I think this does tend to make it possible for a rural CAP agency to stand on its own in determining its own priorities without the degree of competition which I fear presently exists. Mr. McElroy is quite correct, a part of it I am afraid is based on the ~fa.ct that there may be more noise in the urban areas than in the rural areas. I don't think that is a sound, valid basis for providing the funds because the needs can be equally as great in a rural area as they can be in an urban area. So I would hope that all of yOU might go back and review that portion of the opportunity crusade, and, frankly, I would hope YOU would agree to support it because I think it would do the kind of job that I think all of you think should be done in assuring there is equity in attempting to carry on an effective war against poverty. Would all of you be willing to comment about what is the role of the State technical assistance, agency In Your State? Is it strong? Is it weak? How well has it done in working with Your agency aild what ideas would each of you have, if any, on how to improve it? Mr. TEMPLETON. I think as the OEO has come along they too have ~come along in improving in such a short period of time. Of course, I see them strictly as technical assistants, not in supervisory capacities whatsoever. I see them in assisting new agencies, the formation of new agencies, the agencies that have been organized, assisting them in pre- paring programs, or coordinating `between the State agency and the local community action agency. `This is a very `vital, important role. I can see them `becoming specialists in the field of manpower and educa- tion and so forth. Mrs. `SMALL. Since I am simply a volunteer lay worker I really don't have any experience to answer this question. Mr. STEIGER. Has your director made any commen't to the Board about it? Mrs. `SMALL. Not that I am aware of, not enough to establish a tren'd. Mr. MCELROY. We have' had a very good experience with the State agency. We think they were largely responsible for our getting our PAGENO="0252" 2712 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 program underway. This is further evidenced by the State agency whose now regional director for the OEO, Mr. Walter Ricker, re- placed Dr. Crook who is now in Washington in charge of VISTA.. I have no particular suggestions as to how we might strengthen that organization's function. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Day. Mr. DAY. We had a great deal of assistance from the State office initially in getting ourselves organized and in assistance in getting our first programs written. I believe that the State agency should, its proper role should be to give us technical assistance, advice, evalua- tion, and especially assistance in the location of resources and explana- tion of how these resources can be made available to the locality. I would very very strongly oppose priorities being distributed from a State office. I would also oppose having to get approval from a State' office on projects. In other words, I do not want to have any more authority over us that we have to save for any particular project than we have now. It is a tough enough job to get all of this through OEO' without having to duplicate that and put it all through the State office. That would be horrible. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Flanders. Mr. FLANDERS. We had assistance from the State technical staff in our original funding. I felt that they were as ill informed as we were as to the procedures involved in our original funding. This may have been perhaps because of inexperience.. I, on the contrary, feel that the Federal-State local partnership could and should play a vital role in this field. I think it is of vital concern to the State as well as to the local people that the areas are developed properly and fully and the funds are used to the best advantage. Mr. STEIGER. Another feature of H.R. 10682 is the concept of a bonus over and above the funding made available for community action agencies and Headstart. It proposed that $100 million for both com- munity action a.nd Headstart. be made available on a matching 50-50 basis. If a State wishes to expand its program by putting up some money the Federal Government will match it on a 50-50 basis in order to expand the money available. We have all talked about the degree and importance of the involve- ment. of all units of Government. My question is, Would you think that there is some value to the concept of attempting to involve the other units of Government in the actual funding operation through this kind of bonus feature? Mr. FLANDERS. Yes: I do. I sincerely feel that the partnership has to be all the way down the line in order to give the ultimate benefit to the people. I think if you are cutting out every local unit of government, every State unit of government between the Federa.l and servicing which is done through a community action program you are cutting out the whole middle area which must accept some responsibility as well. Mr. STErnER. Mr. Day. Mr. DAY. I would hope that as we go along on these programs and we prove them or disprove them and those that are proven would be- come accepted by the communities, that the communities and the States' would take over. Maybe on a permanent plan of Federal assistance.. The Federal Government is now moving more and more into educa-~ PAGENO="0253" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2713 tional assistance and so on. But to face the States with the necessity of providing 50 percent of the cost of these projects at this time- Mr. STEIGER. Only if they wanted to. This is a voluntary feature. Only if the State desired to do so. Mr. DAY. If the State did not what would happen? Mr. STEIGER. The money would not go to the State. Mr. DAY. Now you realize that the States, at least our States' tax resources are pretty much overtaxed at the present time. We have difficulty raising enough money to handle our present State functions. I would suspect that the States would be rather reluctant to put up the amount of money that would be necessary to be 50 percent of the present money put in this type of program. Mr. STEIGER. It is not 50 percent of the present money. This is a completely new feature. This would be a bonus feature. If the State wanted to come in and expand what the local community is doing on a matching basis. Mr. DAY. We have done that locally, not on the State basis. We can't get funding for something, and if we can justify it, either local institu- tions or the county government has stepped in and given us money. We have not had this experience with the State. We have not tried it. I think at the present time that if the State could appropriate money for this purpose I would hope they would. Mr. MCELROY. The feature of it as being a bonus has appeal. How- ever, I agree with Mr. Day that I don't believe that the States are in a position at this time. I know that we just do not have the fundraising abilities to match those that our Federal Government has. If this pro~ gram is successful I think we would look forward to the time when the sheer economics of the thing justifies the local contińuance~of it without Federal support because if it is successful we will increase `the economy of our communities to where the additional funds from Federal sources will not be necessary. I think it is very important that ~the 90-percent feature be continued for sometime. Mr. STEIGER. Mrs. Small. Mrs. SMALL. This may not be a realistic view but I would wish that `the entire antipoverty program were State supported and locally sup- ported, if you will. However, this is not possible with the funds avail- able, taxable funds available in the States. Until such a time as Mr. McElroy said, when we are able to raise our economic standard to meet the requirements economically statewide, I think 90-10 will have to stand to have the programing. Mr. STEIGER. What about the bonus feature? Mrs. SMALL. Well, I am speaking in respect to that, too. I think ideally it is wonderful. Practically, I think we will find it `difficult to get the States to go `along because they cannot. Mr. STEIGER. Mr. Templeton. Mr. TEMPLETON. Not knowing the details, the financial structure of `the State of Kentucky, it would `be my opinion that they could not fi- `nancially come up with their share. If they could, surely we would have kindergarten in the State today. We do not understand the public `school system. I wonder also within H.R. 10682, as is proposed, who would establish the guidelines in the conduct of the program at the local level. Would this be a Federal guideline, or would it be State, or would it be on the local level? Now, this within itself, I think, has a real PAGENO="0254" 2714 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 bearing on whether I could say I would agree with }J.R 10682 or not because I think those questions will have to be answered first. Mr. STErnER. Just to comment on the last question as to what is the proposed method of operation. It is an attempt to provide addi- tional funds for those programs which a local community action agency will develop under the system of CAP, under the Opportunity Cru- sade, HEW, and OEO. The guidelines would be as they are now. This would be an attempt to provide additional funds for ongoing program. Mr. TEMPLETON. Congressman, may I ask you, in H.R. 10682, if this were going to HEW, then would it be the prevailing guidelines? Mr. STEIGDR. If you put them under HEW I am not sure, to be very truthful, that you can really tell whether they would remain under existing guidelines or not. There is, of course, a transition period when the guidelines would remain the same. You are raising fears that I have about OEO. Their guidelines change constantly as their personnel change, which to me is the wrong way to run the program. The guide- lines should not change when you get a new person in and should not be dependent on the regional director or the analyst for the group of States he may be working with. I am sure you can raise the same fear under the present structure. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Flanders indicated that he had a two-page out- line of the Fond du Lac County community action programs. I would ask unanimous consent that this be inserted in the record. Mr. STEIGER. There is what I consider to be a very good discussion of the Fond du Lac program. Which touches, for example, on some of the questions Mrs. Green raised about the actual operation in Fond du Lac County of the economic opportunity committee. Would it be possi- ble to have those inserted in the record? Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The information follows:) Su~f MARY OF COMMUNITY ACTION PRoaz~Ms Fiscal 1966: Program Development: Locate poverty, assess resources, plan programs. Fiscal 1967: Conduct and Administration: Plan, implement, administer programs. Coordinate community services. Senior Citizen Centers. Homestead Tax Relief. Services in Action. Day Care Centers: Fond du Lac. Summer Headstart: Ripon, Calumet, North Fond du Lac. Opportunity Center: Fond du Lac County. Fiscal 1968: Continue: Conduct and Administration. Day Care Center. Opportunity Center. Start Additional Senior Citizen Centers. Preliminary Planning for New Programs: Youth Employment Service. Neighborhood Youth Corp. New Careers Program. Legal Services Program. PAGENO="0255" Corn- ponent No. Program Dates Months Funds approved Federal funds received Total Non-Federal Federal Date Amount Percent FISCAL YEAR 1966 6-i Program development FISCAL YEAR 1967 June 1966-November 1967 6 $11,032.54 -__$1,694.54 $9,338 Aug. 30,1966 $9,338.00 100 7-1 Conduct and administration December 1966-November 1967 - ~ 12 38, 651. 00 5,030. 00 33, 621 Jan. 16, 1967 Mar. 6, 1967 June 5, 1967 13,448. 00 6, 724. 20 6, 724. 20 40 20 20 Total 28,896.80 80 7A-3 Day care center - March-November 1967 9 40,267. 00 4,808. 00 35, 459 Mar. 30, 1967 June 5, 1067 14, 183. 60 14, 183. 60 - 40 40 706 Total Summer 1967, Headstart June-August 1967 2 14,307. 00 2,894. 00 11,413 June 14, 1967 28,367.20 2,853. 25 80 25 7-2 7A-3 7 Opportunity center Day care center, transportation supplement Ripon School, Headstart Summary: March-November 1967 do September1967 6 9 9 7,409.00 1,848.00 23,233.00 699.00 0 8,449.00 6,710 1,848 14,784 June 29,1967 do 6,710.00 1,848.00 100 100 -- Fiscal year 1966 Fiscalyearl967 Total . 11,032.54 125,715.00 1,694.54 21,880.00 9,338 103,835 9,338.00 68,675.25 78,013.25 136,747.54 23,574.54 113,173 0 0 0 C L~J 112 C Note-Non-Federal contribution for all programs provided by: Funds in cash, Fond du eral, 90 percent, non-Federal, 10 nercent; actual ratio of contribution, Federal, 82.8 per- Lac County Board of Supervisors, $2,414.54; in-kind contribution of community (space, cent, non-Federal, 17.2 percent, plus items not accounted. equipment, services, volunteers, materials) $21,880; required ratio of contribution, Fed- Uomponeivt program stato~s report PAGENO="0256" 2716 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 CONDuCT AND ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM Funded-From 12/1/66 To 11/30/67. No. Months Completed 71/2. No. Months Approved 12. No. Months Planned 12-1967, 12-1968. Cost of Program-Total $38,651.00; Federal $33,621.00; NON-FED. $5,030. Location-Fond du T~ac, 82 North Main Street. Area Served-Fond du Lac County. Groups Served.-Low income families throughout County, all citizens. Num ber Participants-See separate components. Scope and Content of Program.-Locate poverty, assess resources, provide stimulation and incentive for Fond du Lac County to mobilize its resources to combat poverty; plan and implement needed programs to effect permanent in- crease in the capacity of individuals, groups and communities afflicted by poverty to deal effectively with their own problems so they eventually need no further assistance. Staff Number Job title Professional Low income nonprofes- sional 5 1 executive director ideputydirector lsecretary 2 nonprofessional aides (halftime) 1 1 1 2 Coordination With Other Resources.-Close working arrangements with FDL County Welfare, State Welfare; FDL Children's Board; Senior Citizen Centers; Wisconsin State Employment Service; Vocational Rehabilitation; FDL Voca- tional & Technical Institute; City, County, State Health Depts.; Marian College; FDL County Guidance Clinic; All School Districts; Churches, religious groups; Service-oriented groups; COUNTY, City and village government units; Univer- sity of Wisconsin Extension Service. Objeetives.-Increase capacity of individuals, groups, communities to per- manently step out of poverty cycle; coordinate community resources for greatest effectiveness; communicate services available to reach people who need them; involve the poor in planning, policy making and operation of programs; involve the TOTAL community in community betterment; locate local sponsoring groups for non-Federal share of cost. Work Program.-Conduct and Administration plans, operates and administers the component programs (Day Care, Head Start, Opportunity Centers) ; provides initial stimulation and catalystic action for Senior Citizen Centers; runs spe- cial emphasis programs (Homestead Tax Relief, Assistance, Services in Action- Resource Fair); coordination of Community services; acts as liason between services and people; serves as advocate for the poor-assistance in using resources. Evaluation-Component Programs are regularly reviewed and assessed by: FDL-EOC Board of Directors; FDL-EOC General Committee; Advisory Boards of Professionals and low-income participants; Open meetings, news articles, radio programs keep the general public advised of programs-comments by the citizenship are frequent, pertinent and welcomed. Future Planning.-Continue Present Component: Conduct & Administration: Same. Day Care : Increase by 2 rooms, eventually sliding scale. Opportunity Center: Continue individuals guidance, explore Neighborhood Youth Corps, New Careers Program and Manpower training and develop- ment areas. Increase coordination and communication role. Expand Senior Citizen programs to Western half of County. HEADSTART, DAY CARE CENTER PROGRAM (2 classes of 15 children each) Funded-From 3/1/67 to 11/30/67. No. Months Completed 4~. No. Months Approved 9. No. Months Planned 9-1967,12-1968. PAGENO="0257" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2717 Cost of Program-Total $42,115.00; Federal $37,307.00; Noń-Fčd $4,808.00. Loeation.-Fond du Lac, Church of Peace, 150 S. Military ROad. Area Served.-City of Fond du Lac plus approximately 15-mile radius sur- rounding towns. Children from Eden, North Fond du Lac, Town of FOnd du Lac and Mount Calvary area. Groups $erved.-3 to 5 year old children of low income families. Number Partieipants.-Direct: 30 pre-school children. Indirect: 36 parents, 102 brothers and sisters. Scoper and Content o~ Program-A year-round, full day program combining good physical care, supervision and pre-school education for the child; educa- tion, training and encouragement for families to break the cycle of poverty. Staff Low income Number Job title Professional ~ nonprofes- sional 1 3 1 staff administrator-teacher 1 24 ~ 1 1 teacher (4) 1 4 4~mother-aides 1 cook 1 1 janitor (5) )~ 1 Full time. 2 Halftime. 4th time. 5 hr. daily. 2 hr. daily. NovE.-Staff is augmented by approximately 40 hr. per week of volunteer time. Originally volunteers frOm Marian College students. Presently 60 percent of volunteer time is by mothers of children in day care; balance, community citizens at large. Coordination With Other Resources.- FDL County Welfare-Admissions, referral, in-services, parent sessions, close, regular work with caseworkers, supervisors. FDL County Guidance Clinic-Admissions, referral, in-service for staff, parent sessions, counseling of children and parents, evaluation of needs of children. FDL County Health-Advisory Board, referrals, in-service for staff, follow-up on medical needs of children. FDL City Health-Admissions, referrals, child and family health services. State Board of Health-Admissions, advisory, in-service, parent sessions, child evaluations, expert cosultation in fields of nutrition, Dental health, child development. Joint School District No. 1 FDL-Admissions, referrals to Center, fol- low-ups to schools, provide equipment, materials, conferences on needs of children and families. Marian College-Advisory Board, volunteers, educational consultation. Recreation Dept-Coordinated use of all child programs. Medical and Dental Assoc.-Advisory Board, consultation, education. FDL Children's Board-Advisory, Admissions, referrals, follow-ups. PROGRAM Objectives.-Provide good care for children; increase child's self-cOnfidence and self-image; promote good health thru nutrition, rest, medical and dental examinations and follow ups where needed; increase readiness for school and school-type activities; encourage positive group activities, play, socialization; teach parents improved ways to meet the needs of children; assist families to use existing resources; enable parents to up-grade through education and job- training by providing child care while they work or go to school. Work Progs-am.-Good care, year-round 5 days a week from 7:30 AM to 5 :00 PM; good health habits-hot lunch, 2 snacks, nap, exercise; social serv- ices-Medical and Dental exams and follow-ups; psychological and social services to meet child's needs; pre-school education including music, art, language arts, readiness for school; introduction to group play, group activities; parent program involves the families in meetings, discussions, child care education. Parents assist in all phases of Center operation. 80-084-67-pt. 4-17 PAGENO="0258" 2718 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Evaluation.-Children showing really great gains in confidence, verbal skills and readiness for school; health improvement very apparent-increased nutri- tion, regularity of meals, adequate rest and exercise; referrals to appropriate resources have resulted in glasses, tonsillectomies, treatment for emotional dis- turbance and malnutrition; parents are successfully running their own very active Parents Club featuring Child care education, recognition of child needs, increased responsibility by parents. Future Planning.-Plan to continue the present 2-room Day Care Center, Propose to add a supplementary 2-room Head Start Center. Eventually hope to establish a series of sliding-scale Day Care Centers throughout the County open to low-income families without charge, and to working mothers with higher income on a propostionate fee basis. FULL YEAh HEAD START PROGRAM, RIP0N Funded.-From 9/5/67 to 6/3/68. Cost of program.-Total: $23,233.00; Federal: $14,784.00; Non-Fed: $8,449.00. Location.-Roosevelt School, Ripon. Area Served.-Ripon. Groups Served.-Children of low income families and their families. Number Participants.-15 children and parents. Scope and Content of Program.-A nine month pre-school program to aid the child and family. To prepare the child for a more successful start in school and make the parent aware of the physical, mental and emotional needs of the child. Etaff Low-income Number Job title Professional nonprofes- sional 1 1 Teacher Teacher-aide 1 I Inkind Contribution.-Volunteer, Nurse, Psycometrist, Social Worker, Cook, Janitor. Coordination With Other Resources.-Oordination and cooperation of Ripon School System and County and State Welfare Department. Objectives.-1. To better prepare the child for schooL 2. To break the cycle of poverty for families by working closely with all members of the family. 3. To give the children and families a positive image of themselves. Work Prograrn.-A half day of pre-school activities with emphasis on language development, large muscle skills, coordination, good health practices, etc.; parent participation, up-grading with emphasis on parent involvement and leadership. Evaluation.-A careful study wili be made of each child and the development attained in a year of Head Start; family evaluations will be made to determine the impact of a longer program; parents will be asked to evaluate the program from their own view-point. Future Planning.-If the evaluation proves that Full Year Head Start has improved the chances of the child and family the Advisory Board would offer other School Superintendents the opportunity of developing a full year Head Start in their areas. SUMMER HEADSTART PROGRAM Funded.-From 6/19/61 to 8/18/61. Cost of Prograrn.-Total $14,307.00; Federal $11,413.00; Non-Fed. $2,894.00. Location.-Calumet School, Calumetville; Washington School, North Fond du Lac; Ceresco School, Ripon (Fond dii Lac County). Area Served.-Fond du Lac County. Groups Served.-Children of low income families and their families. ~ Participants.-34 children, 35 parents. Scope and Content of Program.-A nine week pre-school program to aid the child and family. To prepare the child for a more successful start in school and make the parent aware of the physical, mental and emotional needs of the child. PAGENO="0259" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2719 Staff Number Job title Professional Low-income Nonprofes- sional 3 3 3 1 1 11 Teachers Teachers aides Cooks Social worker Aide Total 1 3 ~ 1 1 Half time. Coordination With Other Resources.-Use of Resource people on boards and for parent meetings; cooperation with school superintendents and personnel for programs; cooperation and coordination with Welfare (County and State) Chil- dren's Board and County Nurses for intake process. Objectives.-l. To give the child experiences that will broaden his growth and aid his readiness for school. 2. Work with the families to help break the cycle of poverty. 3. To give the children and families a positive image of themselves. Work Progranl.-This includes a half-day of activities including: Art, music, language development, rest, play and nutritious meals and snacks; the parent program consists of sharing talents, round-table discussions on health, growth and development, mental health and various field trips. Evaluation-The program is about half over and there have been many im- provements in the children. A shy child has become more talkative, an over-active child has channeled his activity into more meaningful projects, some wetters and thumb suckers have stopped. The parents are becoming much more positive in their outlook and have assumed responsibility for their own meetings. The parent advisory board will be given an evaluation of the program and also asked to evaluate its impact on their own areas. They will then decide if Summer Head Start should be renewed in their area, extended or dropped completely. OPPORTUNITY CENTER PROGRAM Operated without special funding from 1/1/67 to 5/30/67 thru C. & A. Funded.-From 6/1/67 to 11/30/67. No. Months Completed 1~. No. Months Approved 6. No. Months Planned 12. Cost of Prograni.-Total $7,409; Federal: $6,710.00; Non-Federal $699.00. Location.-Fond du Lac, 82 North Main Street. Area Served.-Fond du Lac County. G-roups Served.-Adults in need of employment up-grading. Number Participants.-Approximately 50. Scope and Content of Program.-Guidance, counseling, encouragement, assist- ance to help low income people up-grade their skills to increase earning potential; responsible for the planning, implementing and administration of various pro- grams: Youth Employment Service, Neighborhood Youth Corps, New Careers Program. Staff Number Job title Professional Low incom Nonpro- fessional e 1'/2 - 1 opportunity director 1 secretary (half time). 1 1 Coordination Witli~ Other Resources.-Referrals to and from Opportunity Cen- ter, consultation and close working cooperation with: Wisconsin State Employ- ment Service; MDTA Training courses; Vocational and Technical Institute; Marian College; State and County Welfare Departments; FDL Guidance Clinic; Vocational Rehabilitation; Service oriented groups, churches, clubs, organiza- tions. PAGENO="0260" 2720 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Objectives.-Counseling, guidance, testing to determine individual potential; training, education, vocational upgrading; supportive services through training to insure success; assistance with job placement at completion of training; initiating new programs for non-professionals leading to self-supporting employ- ment: NYC, YES, New Careers. Work Prograrns.-Opportunity Center operates on a individual basis with clients in up-grading programs, acting as liason between client and all needed community resources. Opportunity Center will be administering agency for new programs aimed at manpower training and development. At present these are in the earliest planning stage, but will include: Youth Employment Service (jobs for 14-48 year olds), Neighborhood Youth Corps (in-school jobs for teens), New Careers-non-professional training programs for adults 22 and over. Evaluation.-NA. Future Planning.-Continue individual counseling of Opportunity Center; pre- pare application for new programs. YOUTH EMPLOYMm~T SEnVIOE PRo~AM Funded.-From 6/14/61 to 8/15/67. No. Months Completed 1. No. Months Ap- proved 2. No. Months Planned Perm. Cost of Prograam.-Total-; Federal-; Non-Federal-. No separate funds- thru Opportunity Center. Location.-Fond du Lac. Area Served.-F and du Lac Countyand surrounding areas. Groups Servecl.-Teenages, 14 thru 1. yrs. old. Scope and Content of Program.-YES functions as a regular employment serv- ice operation, but on a much smaller scale. Each applicant fills out an applica- tion card; it interviewed by the community aide; applicant is referred to the most suitable opening; foUow-up is done and recorded. Staff . Low income Number Job title Professional nonpro- fessional 2 Half-time community aides 2 Coordinatica With Other Resou*rees.-Excellent community support in many areas. Existing agencies use YES rather than running their own private employ- ment service on the side. Radio and news media have provided many services, excellent coverage regarding advertisement. Private business organizations have donated time, services and "know how" without charge. Employment Service has provided mailing, printing of posters and fliers. The Youth Council donated many hours of volunteer time for distributing 10,000 fliers, putting posters up. (They held a dance and raised $60.00 to help the program.) NoTE-YES was thought of, planned and made operational within one week! Objectives-YES was initiated to fill an existing need for youth seeking employment in the Fond du Lac area. YES acts as a clearing house for all jobs which young people can qualif.v. It affords teenagers an opportunity to enter into the world of work by providing all necessary services to achieve meaningful work experience. Work Progranz.-YES has a staff of 2 teenagers, each on a part time basis: 1 in AM.; 1 in P.M.; 5 days per wk. They have been provided: use of office space. desk. telephone and office supplies by WSES. YES community aides are hired by and are responsible to CAP. Evaluation.-Yery favorable to date. 65 teenagers placed on jobs. Excellent compared to some surrounding communities. Recommended for year-round operation. Future Planning.-Not known if CAP can fund YES in future. Neighborhood Youth Corps, if funded, is designed to fill such a need. Long range goal: have YES completely sponsored by some local organization i.e. Jaycees, Lions, etc. PAGENO="0261" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2721 SPECIAL SERVICES TO THE AGED Initiated by: FDL-]~IOO Conduct and Administration. Multi-purpose Senior Citizen Centers to. serve the many needs of the aged were initiated through research, leadership and coordination of the FOnd du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee, Inc. Since this is an area that can be well handled by the local communities, the committee arranged f~r all funding of Centers to be arranged directly by local governmental units and the Commission on Aging. The role of FIDL-EOC was primarily catalytic organiz'itional and coordinating It does not retain any direct control and finds that the Centers are very well attended, serving multiple needs regularly and will unquestionably be continued indefinitely in our communities. S'enior centers, Fond dn Lac County-Projects funded Number Total F~dera1 (months) . funds Non- Federal North Fond du Lac 36 $11,498. 00 $7, 626. 40 Fond du Lac 36 22, 677. 00 17, 008. 74 Rosendale 36 3, 000. 00 1,850. 00 Campbellsport 36 11,842. 28 7, 389. 91 Total 49, 017. 28 33, 875.05 $3, 871. 60 5, 668. 26 1, 150. 00 4, 452. 37 15, 142. 25 Employees: Fond du Lac: 1 full time Center Director-Volunteers. North Fond du Lac: 1 part time Center Hostess-Volunteer Center Mgr. Rosendale: 1 part time Center Hostess. Campbellsport: 1 part time Center manager 2 part time Center Hostesses. The Senior Centers Function as Follows: A drop-in Center available without charge to all older people. A place to drop in, have a cup of coffee, read the paper or magazine, visit and talk with friends, rest, leave parcels, participate in games, pool, television. A social Center with regular programs offered: parties, pot luck suppers, movies, lectures, community singing, games, trips. An information center with printed materials on Medicare, Social Secu- rity, Tax Rebate, health needs, retirement, etc. Speakers, specialists and resource people will be invited at times to personally aid in these areas. A referral Center to refer people to the services they need in Welfare, nursing, health and finance. An employment clearing house to help older people find part time jobs that they are able to handle. An educational center bringing courses to the elderly. Driver's re-trainfng, retirement planning, budgeting, family living, arts and crafts, etc. Volunteer service coordination center . . . helping older people use their time and talents, skills, abilities and experience to serve others in the community. The funding for Senior Centers is done thru the State Commission on Aging on a three year basis; divided as follows: Year 1: Federal Funds 75%, Local 25%. Year 2: Federal Funds 60%, Local 40%. Year 3: Federal Funds 50%, Local 50%. Year 4 and after: Local 100%. This is achieved by arranging for the local governing bodies to contract with the State Commission on Aging. THROUGH CONDUCT AND ADMINISTRATION: SPECIAL PROJECT No special Funding. HOMESTEAD TAX RELIEF What It Is Homestead Tax Relief Act provides for a rebate of real estate taxes or rent paid by Senior Citizens with low incomes. Few eligible people have applied be- cause they either had not heard of it or did not understand how to use it. PAGENO="0262" 2722 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 PdL-EOO promoted wide knowledge of Homestead Act through newspaper articles; radio spots and party line presentation; letters to groups, clubs, orga- nizations; through churches (church bulletins and church announcements) senior citizen meetings. A workshop to assist applicants in filing was set at the main office on Jan- uary 12, 1967. Over 400 people applied the first day and another 400 applied between that date and April 15th, last filing date. Complete records are not available but partial records indicate 96 persons received refunds amounting to $8,199.70. We estimate that this is approximately one-half of the actual figure. Precise records were not available because: The more complex tax problems were not handled by us, but referred to State Tax Department for completion. The first day's crowd so overwhelmed the staff that emergency help from the State Tax Department and Commission on Aging were called in and did not record applications handled. A total of 4 special Workshops were held at Fond du Lac, Campbellsport, North Fond du Lac and Rosendale. We plan to sponsor llome~tead Tax Workshops each year from January 1st to April 15th as a part of the Conduct & Administration activities. SznvlcEs ix ACTION, A RESOURCE FAIR What Is It "Services in Action" is a one day Resource Fair to display visually, with printed materials, and with a program, the many facets of service available to the community. When May 23, 1967. Free Fair-open to the public. 10 AM to 8:30 PM. Program-"Services for Children and Youth"-7 :00 PM. Where Fond du Lac Recreation Center and the Cow Palace at the Fond du Lac County Fairgrounds. Use of both buildings has been made available by the County Board of Supervisors. Who Cam Participate With a Booth Any group that provides service to citizens. Participants will include govern- mental agencies, public and private welfare groups, service oriented organiza- tions, special services of educaton, labor, industry, professions, etc. Free materials can be distributed. No items will be sold at the Fair. Who Will Be Welcome To Attenct All citizens, the community at large. Public will be invited through news stories, radio publicity. Problems That Led To Planning the Fair 1. Service organizations do not always know about each other. 2. Services are fragmented, each attacks problems from one facet. 3. The community at large doesn't know about all services, specifically people who need services don't know what is available to them. 4. Service-providing agencies share a common problem of "getting the message" out to eligible people. Goals of "Services in Action" Day 1. To gather and share information. 2. To establish communication lines. 3. To make information available, in one place, of all resources of the com- munity. 4. To deliver resources to those who need them. 5. To attempt to coordinate programs to respond most effectively to needs. 6. To modify and enrich programs to respond most effectively to needs. 7. To discover gaps in service that need future attention. PAGENO="0263" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2723 How Can Your ~Staff or Members Be~eflt 1. Collect materials explaining widest range of services. 2. Meet with staff and members of other services. 3. Establish working relationships for future coordination. 4. Broaden outlook regarding spectrum of services. Is There Any Cost There is no admission charge. There is no charge to participants. Each group will be expected to provide for itself: Visual display for wall, Card table with materials, Pass out information sheets, Referral cards (if desired), Any printed materials it wishes to distribute, No sales will be permitted except that coffee, light refeshments will be sold by WORKSHOPS, INC. ~`The Community Services Committee for the Handicapped" has assisted in planning and is cooperating fully with the "Services in Action" Day. 61 groups participated in Services in Action Day. 32 Government agencies or paid staff 29 Service groups COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS Purpose To effect a permanent increase in the capacity of individuals, groups, and communities afflicted with poverty to deal effectively with their own problems so that they ultimately need no further assistance. GoaZs Program development stage: 1. Locate and identify poverty. 2. Assess and evaluate existing services. 3. Involve TOTAL community. 4. Coordinate existing services. 5. Communicate resources to the poor. 6. Plan needed programs to fill gaps. 7. Locate local sponsoring support. 8. Establish priorities on basis of greatest need. Administration of programs: 1. Initiate and administer programs. 2. Coordinate new programs with existing resources. 3. Outreach to the poor. 4. Public education, both poor and total community. 5. Evaluate constantly for maximum real effect on poverty. 6. Act as advocate of the poor. 7. Follow-up so apparent gains become permanent improvements. 8. Lay groundwork for increased community sponsorship so that ultimately programs become an integral part of community services. Comment Both phases continue simultaneously. While we are now administering Day Care, Headstart, Opportunity Centers, we are Program Developing Neighborhood Youth Corp, New Careers Program, Possibly Legal Services Program. We have already "spun-off" Senior Citizens Centers. Long range CAP goals should be to: Turn smooth running programs over to the community when they are ready, administer programs as long as needed, de- velop new programs to meet unmet gaps in service, continuosly evaluate to see which programs are at which stage. Greatest Strengths of' Community Actio~n Programs 1. The REAL participation of the poor in shaping their destiny. 2. Utilization of low-income people as non-professional aides, Day Care as- sistants, community aides, outreach people. Benefit to them: Job training, upgrading, raised sights, increased potentiaL Benefit to CAP: Understanding, rapport, realistic view of poverty. PAGENO="0264" 2724 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Benefit to recipients: People working for them who understand, think, feel, and know life from the same point of view. 3. Flexibility to innovate, experiment and try new approaches to old problems. 4. Coordination role made possible by being "outside" old-line agencies. 5. Having a full time professional and non-professional staff available to act as "advocates of the poor". 6. Funds available to support dynamic services that are too expensive for a local community to initiate (Example: Comprehensive Day Care for the poor). Weakest Spots in Community Action Programs 1. Necessity to make all plans short range. 2. Reliance on annual appropriations, letting one-half a fiscal year go by before fund approval is made on programs. 3. Inability to establish long range master plans leading to eventual write off of Federal funding. 4. Arbitrary, inflexible definition of "poverty" Guideline of $3,000 annual income for a family of four means a totally different way of life in Appalachia, Indian reservations, Chicago inner core and Fond du Lac County. We work with many people who are definitely hampered by poverty who have incomes slightly above established guidelines. Would suggest some sliding scale flexibility depending upon llving costs in area and individual cir- cumstances. 4. "Earmarked" funds with earmarking varying each year. We are planning now for 1968, 1969, 1970 and later. CAP should 1e able to plan locally, use com- munity needs, not earmarked funding of programs, to determine course of action. IN PLANNING STAGE-NEIGHBORHOOD YOUTH CoRPs, INSOHOOL AND SUMMER PROGRAMS Funded.-From-To--. No. Months Completed.-No. Months Approved.-No. months planned 12. Location.-Fond du Lac County. Area Served..-Fond du Lac County. Groups Served.-Youth attending 9th thru 12th grades and other criteria. Number Participants.-100 planned. Scope and Content of Program.-Inschool program is designed to help youth from low-income families to stay in school. It provides part-time work coupled with counseling, remedial education and vocational training. Summer program provides disadvantaged youth with full time jobs for summer months. Financial assistance, gaining valuable work experience encourage them to continue their education. Staff.-Number: Too early. Job Title: Being Planned. Coordination With Other Resources-By the very nature of this program all community resources, both urban and rural, will play a vital role. WSES: Recruitment, selection and referral, supportive services: counsel- ing, testing, etc. FDL Welfare: Verification of income and recruitment. 8 High School Districts: Focal points for local areas of operation. 1~Tarious agencies, municipalities, county and city departments will provide work sites and other necessary services. Objectives.-To provide wide range of work experience along with necessary supportive services. Work training will come mainly from 5 major fields: 1) Health, 2) Education, 3) Welfare, 4) Recreation, 5) Conservation. NYC will be planned, implemented and administered by Opportunity Center component. Work Program.-NYO will be conducted on a county-wide basis with the 8 school districts or focal points for their surrounding communities. Examples of work opportunities: library aides, nursery school attendants, landscape assistants, nurse's Aides and hospital orderlies, conservation workers. There examples may be used for the inschool programs (15 brs. per wk.) or Summer program (40 hrs. per wk.). Evaluation.-NA. Future Planning.-NA. PAGENO="0265" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 2725 NEW CAREERS PROGRAM, TITLE II, SECTION 205(e) EOA Funded-From-To-. No. Months Completed-. No. Months Approved-. No. Months Planned 12. Location.-Fond du Lac County. Area Served.-Fond du Lac County. Groups Served.-22 years or older and meet other criteria. Jl,TU~7j~~ Participants.-100 Planned. Scope and Content of Program-This program will contribute to and facili- tate the process of designing and creating new careers jobs in public service areas for sub-professional personnel. Staff-Unknown, too early to tell. Coordination With Other Resources-Involvement within the total County will require cooperation in the widest sense. WSES: Recruitment; selection and referral and supportive services. FDL Welfare: Verification of income criteria, etc. Agencies who represent potential employers as listed on attached sheet will of necessity become an integral part of this program. Objectives.-Basically has 3: (1) Assist in developing entry level employ- ment opportunities, (2) Provide maximum prospects for advancement and con- tinued employment without federal assistance, (3) Combine vocational training with necessary supportive services, i.e. educational training, counseling, etc. New Careers will be planned, implemented and administered by Opportunity Center component. Work Program.-Enrollees will be assigned to work areas, see examples `on attached sheet. Evaluation-NA. Future Planning.-"New Careers" would seem to hold for our community the greatest potential for offering services and assistance to those who are in the greatest need of training and up-grading. Ea,amplës of subprofessiona~ or "New Career" positions which might be developed in coitnection with projects under sec. 285(e) of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended Agency Task categories Possible job titles Schools Assist truant officer, visit family, develop re- Attendance developer. sources, agency referral. Under school nurse, visit homes to teach hy- Health educator. giene and health improvement. Assist librarian and teachers in working with Reading developer. slow readers. Conduct reading and language laboratories. Tutorial and remedial, home visitation, per- Education assistants. sonal assistance, clerical and machine opera- tions, facility coordination. Supervise recess, physical training activities, Physical developers. free time supervision, physical therapy, and other therapies prescribed by professionals, particularly with physically handicapped children. Supervise and conduct examinations and tests. Test monitors. Score tests, keep records. School libraries Process books, file, stack books, keep records, Library assistants. clerical work, supervise craft and club activi- ties. Optrate substations, bookmobiles, recruit Outreach librarlad. readers. Delegate agencies of Information giving and taking-Advice, edu- Neighborhood worker. CAA's. cate, transportation, communication, etc. Direct contact with individuals organizing Community developer. community groups, liaison with professional staff, community organization. Intake, interview, clerical, filing, etô., commu- Intake clerk. nications. Employment service Recruit, inform, advise, Interpret, provide Employment worker. and programs. liaison, assist clients in seeking services, pro- vide intake and data-gathering service, clerical and filing. PAGENO="0266" 2726 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Eilainples of subprofessiona.l or "New Career" pUs ition.s which might be deveiope~ in connectionS with projects under ~sec. 205(e) of the Economic Opportunity- Act, as amended-Continued Agency Task categories Possible job titles Public or private social Temporary emergency service, child and older Homemaker service workers. agencies, person care, budget, hygiene, health nutrition, etc., instruction and demonstration, family maintenance. Caseworker assistance, transportation, informa- Caseworker aide. tion gathering and dissemination. Inform, demonstrate, instruction and assistance Commodity utilization in procurement and utilization of surplus developer. commodities. Personal and group programs designed to inform Information assistant. poor of services available and method of ob- taining them. Planned parenthood and other service agency assistance. Child care centers Non-Headstart care and training of children; Child care instructors. supervise group activities, feeding, reading, bathing. etc. Health Work with health professionals in hospitals, Community health service health clinics, and homes to link services and worker. people; provide referrals, treatment, and followup service and/or health education. Inspection code enforcement, health education Sanitation assistant. instruction and guidance. Trainee position, bath patients, take and record Nursing assistant. temperature, pulse, respiration, apply simple dressings, give uncomplicated treatment, assist in treatment and examination. Perform simple laboratory tests, such as urin- Laboratory assistant. alysis, blood tests, biological skin tests; take responsibility for the care of the laboratory animals; take responsibility for the mainte- nance of the laboratory equipment; type blood for transfusion. Prepare patients for X-ray; affix protective lead X-ray technician assistanL plates; assist in keeping of X-ray room records; develop plates; manipulate switches. Prepare patients for examinations, treatment, Dental aide~ and dental surgery, and assist dentist; develop X-ray plates, maintain instruments and equipment. Mental hospitals, clinica. Assist with therapy, group conferences, listen- Service workers. ing, supportive assistance, liaison with profes- sional staff. Court-Juvenile and Maintain direct contact with family of persons Casework aide. adult probation and to be sentenced; gather information, establish parole officers, assistance, probationed parolee contact- counsel, assist and maintain contact; counsel, advise and provide service assistance to fami- lies of and prison inmates. Legal services Receive information, gather evidence, continue Legal aide. contact with clients and/or family; provide communication between attorney and client. Police Operate intake and service program, receive Communications worker.. calls, interpret, etc. Monitor parking areas, assist in traffic and safety Reinforcement aide. work, aid in accident data gathering, record- keeping, and research; education programs with schools, safety patrols. Recreation and social Supervise and coordinate activity programs in Recreation aide. agency. playgrounds, clubs, centers, etc. Housing authority Operate center activity, relate professional to Service worker code en.- residents; intake and interview-, keep records forcement worker. on housing code enforcement. Urban renewal Communicate, organize, inform, provide service Relocation assistant. to relocatees, assist in finding housing, moving, settlement. General private and Index, file, maintain records, receive and route Clerical. public, Federal, State, mail, operate simple machines, data develop. local. ~ ment. Government agencies_ Lookout, inspect public grounds for compliance, Fire control aide. put out fires, clean burned area, fell snags, brush, etc. Collect soil samples, assemble information, ex- Soil conservation aides plain conservation methods; prepare records. Measure and mark, record tree species and size, Forestry aide. thin, plant, prune, enforce rules, keel) records, answer questions. PAGENO="0267" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2727 COMMUNITY ACTION MEANS You WORKING To HELP YOUR COMMUNITY BECOME A BETTER PLACE FOR Ain ITS CrrIzENs Volunteers are now: 1. Working in the Senior Centers as Hosts and Hostesses. 2. Painting and building at the Senior Center. 3. Being Foster Grandmas and Grandpas to families. 4. Offering help with the Day Care Center. 5. Redecorating and helping furnish the Day Care Center. 6. Acting as volunteer `aides at the Day Care Center. There are many other projects and programs which need You. If you need our help or if you want to give help, Please contact us at FDL EOC Office, 82 N. Main, 922-7760. What is the Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee? It is a private non-profit corporation established to do something about the economic condition of low income people in Fond du Lac. Do we have poor in FDL County? According to `the 1960 census there are 3,337 families in the county with annual incomes under $3,000. Of these 806 families have an annual income under $1,000. How does the Community Action Program work? CAP develops programs de- signed to help low income people help themselves. CAP helps the poor take advantage of all existing services and opportunities available in the com- munity. CAP works with the local community finding solutions to problems of poverty via local community action. CAP seeks out gaps in service and gaps in communication and assists the community in setting programs to meet the needs. Who pays for the programs? The FDL Economic Opportunity Committee was formed by resolution of the Fond du Lac County Board of Supervisors who pro- vided the initial local funding. The CAP programs are supported by funds through the Office of Economic Opportunity `and funds, services, and in-kind contirbutions by the local community. The matching formula is now 80% fed- eral funds and 20% local contributions. The Senior Citizens Centers are funded through the "Older Americans Act" administered by the State Commission on Aging, and by funds from the sponsoring cities, villages and towns. How can you `apply for service? Contact Fond du Lac Area Economic Op- portunity Committee, Inc., 82 N. Main St., Fond du Lac, or phone 922-7760. Office hours: 8:15 A.M.-4 :45 P.M. Monday through Friday. COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS Senior Citizen Centers: Fond du Lac, 86 South Macy St. Rosendale, Grange Hall. Campbellsport, Municipal Bldg. North FDL, Amer. Legion Hall. Opportunity Center: FDL EOC Office, 82 N. Main St. Guidance, assistance, and encouragement for low income people to upgrade their skills to increase their earning potential. Day Care Center: 150 `S. Military Rd. FDL. Preschool learning, good care,- well balanced meals from 7 AM to 5 PM for 3 to 5 year old children of low Income families. Special Services: Homestead Tax Relief workshops and assistance in filing. "Services in Action" Resource Day. Information Center on services available to citizens. Future plans include Summer Headstart at upon, Calumetville, and North Fond du Lac; Headstart-(School year) Ripon. (Fond du Lac Commonwealth Reporter) EcoNoMIc COMMITTEE PLANS ANNUAL MEETING The Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee Inc. will hold its annual meeting at the supervisors' room of the courthouse at 8 p.m. Jan. 19 The public is invited, according to directors of the committee. PAGENO="0268" 2728 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 AREA GROUP WILL ELECT Committee members and board of director replacements will be elected Thurs- day night at the annual meeting of the Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee Inc. slated for 8 p.m. in the supervisors' room at the courthouse. The public is invited to attend the session, according to Harold Zitlow, com- mittee president. In addition to the elections, Mrs. Rosalie Tryon, economic opportunity project director, is expected to report on activities conducted during the last seven months of her office. The committee will discuss finances, projected plans for the coming year and will hear a report on senior citizen activity. INCLUDE POOR, POVERTY UNITS TOLD By U.S. Community action agencies have been ordered by the federal antipoverty agency to reorganize their governing bodies by March 1 to give low income rep- resentatives at least one-third of the seats on their boards. "We have had this all along," Mrs. Rosalie Tryon, director of the Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee, Inc., said today in answer to the order. PLAN CHANGE "One-third of our board representation is by low income persons," she said. "Our general committee, whose number varies, is not, however," Mrs. Tryon continued, "but we will correct this at our annual meeting Thursday night." The annual meeting of the economic opportunity committee is slated for 8 p.m. Thursday in the Supervisors' Room at the courthouse. Mrs. Tryon urged that low income persons wishing a seat on the committee either call her to put their names in nomination or do so at the meeting. The order by the Office of Economic Opportunity to give representation to low income persons was included in new guidelines to community action agencies dated Jan. 11 and made public thday. MAY LOSE FUNDS Local agencies always have been required by law to provide "maximum feasi- ble participation." It was not until Congress amended the law last year, however, that this was spelled out mathematically. The OEO said local agencies which do not comply with the new regulations will be cut off from community action funds. It also said no new programs will be approved unless the new requirements are met. 806 FA~ru~IEs LIST INcoME LESS THAN $1,000 Yx~xr,y Three officers were re-elected, directors and general membership chosen and the first annual report of the Fond clu Lac Area Economic Opportunity Inc. given during a meeting in the supervisors' room of the courthouse Thursday night attended by 55 persons. harold A. Zitlow of 1864 Beehaud Beach was re-elected president; Lawrence E. McEnroe of Eden, vice president, and Donald Flanders, city, secretary- treasurer. Named to the board of directors for three-year terms were Mrs. Mary Sturtz of 226 W. Cotton St., Zitlow and Flanders. Holdover members of the board are Henry Guell of Campbellsport, R. 2; Alvin Bellmer, Lee Berndt, Mrs. Darleene Schlicher and William J. Harmer, all of Fond du Lac. General membership of the corporation includes the following: Wayne Arihood, Bernard Bergen, G. Franklin Brown, Mrs. Elgene Disterhaft, Merlin Hodorif, Joseph Juknialis, David M. Kuter, Ray Leith, Irvin Lerch, Mrs. Sarah Manis Locke, Mrs. Susan Meyer, Richard Mills, H. J. Van Valkenburg, Mrs. Jean Blackhall, Victor T. Broome, Mrs. Peggy Haase, Mrs. Bonnie Ludjack, Mrs. Marian Schott, Mrs. Luella Warren, Fred Kenas, Howard Bly and Mrs. Barbara Timm. PAGENO="0269" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2729 `NO GREAT SLUMS' Mrs. Rosalie Tryon, program director for the community action program (CAP) with offices at 82 N. Main St., said the organization now consists of 31 committee members-20 persons representing a general cross section of the county and 11 representing groups to be served by the program. Mrs. Tryon in presenting her annual report noted that "we do have poor people" in the county, revealing that 806 families have an annual income under $1,000 and that 3,337 families have an income under $3,000 per year. "Since poverty in Fond du Lac is not obviously apparent (we have no great slums or large minority groups) ," she stated, "we needed to determine who the poor are and where they live. Roughly one-third of all low income families live in the City of Fond du Lac, another third live in the other cities and villages throughout the county and one-third are living on farms or in distinctly rural areas." POVERTY OF AGED She indicated that elderly citizens are located in similar proportion with the greatest prevalence of poverty appearing in the aged groups. Between 11 per cent and 12 per cent of the county's total population was over 65 in 1960 and the number is increasing. "These elderly people are caught between rising costs and fixed incomes that cannot stretch to meet their needs," she said. "Women heading households form another critical group of the poor who are destined to continuous poverty unless they `break out' through vocational up- grading, education and guidance," she continued. Mrs. Tryon expressed appreciation for the publicity received during the year and said OAP has "established a good working pattern with all phases of com- munity leadership." She said more than 30 planning meetings on senior citizen programs have been held in Fond du Lac, Campbellsport and Rosendale. "An idea for a `multi-purpose senior center' evolved and each town will have a fully functioning center in February," she reported. OPEN 60 HOURS She said the Fond du Lac senior center on South Macy Street near West First Street "will be the most comprehensive" of the centers and will be open 60 hours each week. The largest portion of work in all centers will be furnished by volunteer senior citizens with a salaried director in Fond du Lac who will also plan major programming for all three. "I'm proudest of the fact that senior citizen activities are here to stay," she commented. "I think these centers will never go away-they'll continue and con- tinue . . . I think the time will come when there will be a senior citizen center within 12 miles of every senior citizen in the county." Mrs. Tryon said that within two weeks "we may expect funds for a day care center at the Church of Peace" for children of underpriviledged families. Total ~estimated cost of the program is $52,044 under a requested federal grant of $43,276 and a nonfederal share of $8,768. "Federal money is not a bag of money to use just because it's there," she stated. "Federal money is a boost to get you started." Two amendments to the bylaws were adopted at the meeting. The officers and staff were given an applauding vote of thanks "for achievements during 1906." `HEAD START' PLAN OKAYED Members of the Fond du Lac Area Economic Opportunity Committee Inc. dur- ing their first annual meeting in the supervisors' room of the Fond cm Lac Court- house Thursday night adopted a $15,800 "head start" program for children of low income families. The proposal was recommended during a board of directors meeting last month when Mrs. Margaret Salick, head start specialist from Madison, explained the program. "Summer head start is for children who are starting kindergarten in the fall, show a need for preschool training and are from low income families," said Mrs. Patricia Kremer, deputy director serving under Mrs. Rosalie Tryon, director. "It is intended to help the child start kindergarten at the same level as the more advantaged child." PAGENO="0270" 2730 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 SPACE DONATED The program is designed to train 15 children in each class staffed by a teacher, a teacher's aide and one volunteer. Schools in the county have donated space to help run the program. A federal grant of $12,402.95 is requested with the remaining $3,410.25 of the total program to be "in kind" contributions acceptable toward the cost of the component project. Personnel services will cost approximately $7,570 with total travel costs estimated at $3,536. SUMMER PROJtCT The head start project will be conducted in Calumetville, North Fond du Lac and Ripon for nine weeks-from June 19 to Aug. 18, Mrs. Kremer explained. Each session will run four hours per day, five days a week with specific hours to be set by the participating schools. Children will be transported by school bus. Mrs. Kremer of the Community Action Program (CAP) will run and coordinate the summer program from the local office at 82 N. Main St. and she will act as general director of summer head start. The educational program is designed to broaden experience through field trips to areas of interest in the community, creative art work, story time, records, musical play and singing, free play periods, outdoor play, language art periods in which the child has an opportunity to express himself in a group situation, and individual attention from the staff for a personal child-adult relationship. MEDICAL PROGRAM A medical program in connection will provide that each child have a complete physical examination and that parent-education classes be held. A dental pro- gram will provide that each child have a dental exam and is instructed in proper dental hygiene. Included will be a social services program to aid parents, teachers and chil- dren in the adjustment to daily living. "This will also work closely with other agencies who may be involved with families participating in the program so there will not be duplication of services," Mrs. Kremer explained. She said a "nutritional morning snack and a carefully planned balanced hot noon meal" will be served, and "teachers will eat with the children to aid them in manners and proper eating habits." chairman PERXINs. First, Mr. Templeton, you made mention of home repairs for the senior citizens. I am primarily interested in how we can improve this program for the rural areas of America and just what suggestions do you have to offer the committee and what pro- grams that we are not taking advantage of which we perhaps can take advantage of in the future and whether or not we need to come up witk further legislation? I particularly have in mind ~rural homes, the home repair issues you speak of. If that project works out successfully in your area, and in the areas that I represent it is just as badly need- ed, I am hoping that somewhere along the line it will catch on fire be- cause to my way of thinking poor housing conditions that are so prevalent in eastern Kentucky, and the poor people do not have the. means to finance home improvements. The Government should make a much greater effort in rural housing. The Government has been derelict from the standpoint of rural housing. They have not done the job. I would like to have the views of you people who work in rural areas as to how we can improve these programs. Go ahead. Mr. TEMPLETON. Mr. chairman, the home repair program, of course, eventually has handicaps because there is no legislation which we can find which will permit us to buy material. So this is a three-way effort in behalf of three different agencies, public assistance in the State of PAGENO="0271" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2731 Kentucky and the Farmers Home Administration. We would find that elderly persons that fell within the guideline, who need their home re- paired, we would take them to the Farmers Home Administration and they might loan them two or three hundred dollars to buy the material. Then public assistance in the state. Let me give you as an example an elderly family that was on public assistance for, say, $85 a month to live on. The borrowing from Farmers Home Administration meant that they would have to repay this loan at $5 a month, public assistance increased their check from $85 to $90 so that this would not take any part of the $85 away from them. This was again where different agencies came together on this given problem. As I say, I think if there were legislation in which there could be material purchased that it would surely simplify an awful lot because we found, of course, in due time that the Farmers Home Administra- tion. the economic part of the loan, their loan program, the money was depleted. So, the only one that would continue on with it was the local bank. If they knew the elderly people well enough they probably would make a two or three hundred dollar loan. Chairman PERKINS. The present loan porgram has worked only on a limited scale, is that correct? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Assuming that the Congress sul sidized either the interest rate or guaranteed repayment of the loan or guaranteed a portion, do you feel that would stimulate the commercial banks to make loans on an adequate basis to a point to improve the rural housing? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, I surely do. I think that the local banks would be very receptive to this thing and cooperate. I would hope to see this come about. Chairman PERKINS. I know that we had a program 2 years ago that worked very successful. It was a grant program. I think there were several grants made in the area that I represented, in other rural areas in different parts of the Nation. Maybe some of them as large as $500 that would enable the recipient, the people that were on public assist- ance, enable them to get a roof over their heads or a bathroom, or winterize their homes. We must not continue to be derelict in meeting this problem. I think if we can come up with a solid foundation for the rural areas in the way of a rural program, a more comprehensive rural poverty program, then we woud be meeting the urban crisis at its root source. I have been in Congress long enough to know that in governmental agencies most of our people are city oriented. We have been placed at a disadvantage in the rural areas because we do not have the tech- nicians that they have in the cities and metropolitan areas. I am pleased by the fact that the rural people are responding though in many areas too slowly. If for any reason we dismantel OEO as presently constituted, then we would be rendering a great disservice to the poor people of this country. Does this panal agree with me that we should not dismantle OEO as it is presently constituted but keep all of this under one tent just like we have at the present time. Do you agree with that? Mr. TEMPLETON. Yes, sir, very much so. Chairman PERKINS. You, Mrs. Small. Mrs. SMALL. Yes; I presume I do. PAGENO="0272" 2732 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Why do you say this? Mrs. SMALL. Because the rose by any other name-you luiow, how- ever, I do agree with Mr. McElroy that OEO carries a very fine con- notation for our poor people. I personally do not care what it is called as long as it does the job and as long as it is constitued in a like manner to OEO, but I do feel our economically depressed care. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel, Mr. McElroy, that we are still in this period of demonstration or experimentation in gaining useful knowledge and experience that would be lost and thrown away if we undertook to transfer OEO to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Mr. MCELROY. Definitely I think we would lose momentum if we made that change. Chairman PERKINS. What is your feeling, Mr. Day? Mr. DAY. I would like to see eventually OEO dismantled but not now. Further than that I would like to see a process reversed which I believe took place last year where some of the OEO functions were put into the Labor Department. I think those ought to be returned. Chairman PERKINS. What is your view, Mr. Flanders? Mr. FLANDERS. I have great trepidations about the length of career of an agency once it is firmly rooted. I think the Office of Economic Opportunity has served a great function in creating the will of the community and the people to go about correcting the problems within the community. I think the goal of all of us should be to continue to upgrade the individual to the point where they can become a worth- while citizen and contributing citizen to the community. To say that I feel that the dismemberment of the Office of Economic Opportunity by removing its head would ruin this program, I don't feel it would. I really don't. I feel there is enough expertise that has been gained by the people involved on the local level as well as on the Federal level to carry on, no matter where it is. I think our goals are firmly fixed and the method by which we get there is not necessarily of import. Chairman PERKINS. In selecting this panel I tried to go to different parts of the country-realizing in my own section that we have prob- lems, perhaps other areas of the country had similar problems and different problems-to get you in here to offer your suggestions. This question is general but how can we better improve this program. I will start with you, Mr. Templeton. From the standpoint of the rural areas of America. Mr. TEMPLETON. As I stated, first, of course, I think the appropria- tion must be increased. Also, I would recommend that there be part of the Office of Economic Opportlmity Branch exclusive for rural America. I think that there are two things that we will move along. I would like to say no doubt rural America is behind. I don't think it is negligence or anything like this. I think it is because Urban did help, they had a city manager form of Government. They had staff that got busy on preparing proposals. Rural America had no one other than volunteers on the local level in which to do the legwork and to do this type of research and so forth that was needed. So, I can fully understand why rural America is a little behind. I would think with an additional appropriations and the establishment within the Office of Economic Opportunity a rural body which would be there to assist us would be advisable. PAGENO="0273" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2733 Chairman PERKINS. Mr. McElroy, do you care to comment on how we can improve the rural programs, assuming you had the same amount of money. As to priorities what would be your recommenda- tion to this committee? Mr. MCELROY. I think the first funding would be beneficial. I be- lieve the programs are available within the provisions of the act. The main thing we need is a sense of security that this is going to be per- petuated and we can implement the programs that are provided. I think we can improve them. Chairman PERKINS. Do you agree with that, Mrs. Small? Do you have any further suggestions, yourself? Mrs. SMALL. I think the principal suggestion would be concerning the fact it is very difficult to vie for professional help, you know, and, therefore, we need to be funded over a longer period of time, not just on short term. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with that, we should give the program some stability which it has been lacking. Now, I would like to run all the way across the panel but I will ask two or three questions. There has been suggestion perhaps that the local governments fund in excess of 10 percent. Again, to my way of thinking, if we made that mandatory we would really do a great disservice to the rural areas in America. I agree with Mrs. Small, I would like to see the local people do it all but you and 1 know they just do not have the resources. If we raise the local con- tribution requirement on the part of the local people, rural areas are going to be the hardest hit and the poor communities that have the greatest need are going to obtain the least from this program. So, I would like to ask the panel whether you agree with that that we should maintain local matching at 1Q percent. On another question, as to the Job Corps, work study, Neighborhood Youth Corps, do you feel these programs have worked well? Do you feel that the Job Corps could be replaced at this stage of the game by residential skill centers? I would like to hear this panel briefly discuss those points. Mr. Templeton, if you can follow the question. Mr. TEMPLETON. Mr. Chairman, you put me on the spot about the Job Corps because as you are aware, we do not have one in our six counties, I am not too familiar with it. From all indications I would say that there has been much improvement in the program. We are just this week working on a halfway house on the way out. We have heard of Job Corps houses on the way in. We are going to work on one on the way out by which we can assist the returnees after the satisfactory completion of the courses to be able to get jobs. As I say, we are starting to work on that this week. As to the local con- tribution I think the chairman probably knows more than I do about this and that is the six counties in which we attempt to serve, one of the counties has not paid even their county officials for 6 months. They have not had the money. They have not been able to pay the electricity on the courthouse for over a year. They have not had the money. I could take all the counties and say they are in a similar situation. Then to imagine now contributing anything to any program in the 80-084-67-pt. 4-18 PAGENO="0274" 2734 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 way of economies is just out of the question. I am sure and I am cer- tain of this. We have had a. difficult time in finding in kind, buildings and volunteer services, and so forth in the past. We think now that the people in the area have become so concerned with the work of the Office of Economic Opportunity locally that we are having no trouble finding in kind at this time but as far as finding cash it just is not there. That is a certainty. And as far as assistance `from the State government, I don't think that the State of Kentucky at this point is' ready to assist on the local level as far as contribution is concerned. I would hope that thi's would come about someday. As far as the programs of the W.E. & T., which is title 5, we have two of our counties and even though they too have had rough sledding ~t the beginning and we are involved in these programs we do not direct the total program of the W.E. & T. but we are involved with 95 people working on the home repair program in one county, 15 people in another county working on our program of home repair. So we think that the W.E. & T. is coming along fine. The NYC we activated three slots just a few months ago. It is amazing what is coming out of NYC. Illiterates that never had an education, in 3 months we are proud he can write his name. Mrs. SMALL. Mr. Chairman, I hate to disappoint you on the Job Corps, too. However, may I say that our NYC has worked beautifully. We have 600 placements now at this present time. I would like to say here, because I think it is relevant that we have found difficulties, we seek the guidelines, they are not always the same among all the agen- cies. We find it is difficult particularly in the case of our neighborhood Youth Corps to work in `compliance with our school board that has funded funds. We have been informed that 48 people in our own county will not have jobs. There are many at the local level who are wondering whether we are more interested in complying with guide- lines or more interested in helping these young people. The jobs are not that prevalent to put them into. As to funds I agree. While we pay the light bill, et cetera, we have had to pay our share of services in kind and not in cash. I don't think we could do that for long. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. McElroy. Mr. MCELROY. I really am not familiar enough with the Job Corps to evaluate it. I don't know of any youngster who has in our community attended it, returned to us from there and I have not visited one center for t.hem. Chairman PERKINS. Any other comments you care to make Mr. McElroy? Mr. McELROY. I believe I have said enough, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Day. Mr. DAY. We have a Job Corps `center close to us in a neighboring county. I would be doing you a disservice if I were to intimate that I felt I could evaluate it. I can't. But I can say this. One of the most impressive things to me about this whole program has been the great ability o'f people to improve themselves to do things that you could not imagine they could do once they are given the opportunity to get an education or to try their skills and things of that nature. I have watched so many of these people coming from welfare and then doing extremely well for themselves in the neighborhood because of help PAGENO="0275" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2735 through work-study, vocational rehabilitation, various things of that nature or GED courses and so on that I am very impressed about the potential of an individual for great improvement. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Flanders. Mr. FLANDERS. I think I had better refrain from saying anything about Job Corps because I am completely unrelated. We have one in Sparta which is quite removed from Fond du Lao. This residential center sounds like it might have some intriguing aspects to it. We have recently created in the State of Wisconsin a district vocation school system. We have four counties that will eventually be serviced in a center. The idea of bringing them in to be serviced at a vocational center sounds like a good idea if we could get some Federal money in that we would appreciate it. Chairman PERKINS. I personally favor putting Federal money into residential centers but not at the expense of Job Corps. I think we can't utilize both of them. Mr. FLANDERS. I cannot say anything about the Job Corps. I think this is a good idea as well. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment the panel for your appear- ance here today. You have been very helpful. I hope to invite you back again sometime. The committee will recess until 5 minutes after 2. (Whereupon, at 1 :45 p.m. the committee recessed, to reconvene at 2:05 p.m. the same day.) AFTERNOON SESSION Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. We are pleased to have a statement from a distinguished Member of Congress here, Congresswoman Frances Bolton. It is addressed to me as chairman: It is my understanding that you will bold hearings this afternoon on H.R. 7642, and that testimony will be given concerning the results of various job training programs in some of our cities. May I present some information regarding Oleveland? We did have an exceedingly bad `situation in regard to the Women's Job Corps Center and reports that you had some time hack were not good. Since that time, however, Dr. Zelma George was appointed Director of the Women's Job Corps Center in Cleveland. Dr. George is one of the finest women I have ever worked with. Her under- standing of young people and her capacity to influence them has brought excellent results. Instead of many drop-outs, instead of many failures, the Cleveland Center has very few-and ever those are usually able to get remunerative job's. This is `so contrary to what happened in the past that it ha's changed the whole character of the Cleveland program. I do hope that your Committee will give Dr. George a real hearing this afternoon. I regret most sincerely that I have a commitment myself at the time of your hearing which makes it impossible for me to attend your meeting. I shall deeply appreciate any courtesies extended to her. I have also, a letter from Senator Wayne Morse highly recommend- ing you, Dr. George, to the committee, in which he states: This is on behalf of `Dr. Zelma George who is testifying before your Com- mittee today on the Job `Corps. Dr. George and I served as Delegates to the United Nations `Generally Assembly in the fall of 1960, and `I am well aware of her outstanding contributions. Job Corps is most fortunate to `have Dr. George as a `Director of the Cleveland Job Corps Center for `Women, and I commend you for wanting to obtain her views about this `most outstanding program. PAGENO="0276" 2736 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In my own state of Oregon, the Tongue Point Job Corps Center for Women is quite successfully training young women who will be making their con- tributions to society, so I hope your Committee will give strong backing to the program of the Job Corps. Dr. George, come around and take your seat. We have also with us our distinguished colleague from New York, Dan Button. Come around and make your statement, Congressman. STATEMENT OP HON. DANIEL E. BUTTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OP NEW YORK Mr. BUTr0N. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is my sincere pleasure this afternoon to be able to introduce to you and the committee, Dean 0. Williams Perlmutter, who is the dean of the College of Arts and Sciences of the State University of New York at Albany. As a resident of Albany, he is one of my most distinguished con- stitutents in the 29th District of New York. I would like to emphasize that he is here today as a professional educator, a man who has devoted his life to education at all levels, and improving its quality and application to the needs of our society. I feel Dean Perlmutter is expertly qualified to discuss education. His background represents the broadest possible educational experi- ence. It includes instructional and administrative duties in church- related schools and in State universities, both in this country and abroad. He attended New York public schools and attended both Yeshiva University and Wyoming University for his undergraduate work. He received his MA at the University of Chicago, and continued there for his Ph. D. in political science. After graduate school, he was associated with Dean Searle of Chicago in adult education training programs. At St. Xavier College in Chicago, he worked with some 60 high schools. He has been the academic director of the Institute of European Studies at the Univer- sity of Vienna, Freibourg, and Paris. Just before coming to the State University of New York at Albany, he was dean of the College of Fine and Professional Arts at Kent State University in Ohio, where he was the project director of the Peace Corps training program and also initiated an informal Upward Bound program. When the poverty program started, Dean Pcrlmutter volunteered his services to the Job Corps. I know he will want to address himself in particular to this aspect of the Job Corps program with you this afternoon. Dean Perlmutter serves on a continuing basis as a consultant to the U.S. Office of Education, Division of Adult Education, and with these credentials, I believe valuable insight into the Job Corps can be gained. I thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Dr. ZEL3IA GEORGE. Do you want me to sit here? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Do we have anybody else in this panel? PAGENO="0277" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2737 Do you want to sit up here, Congressman Button, with the witnesses? If you do, come on around. Dr. George, I am going to start off with you today. You have been highly recommended to the committee. Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. I would be remiss, personally, if I did not also say, in line with the recommendations and testimonials to Dr. George, that Dr. George was formerly a constituent of mine in Los Angeles, where she contributed greatly to the development of our community, and she is highly recommended, I am confident, by those who worked with her in Los Angeles, including myself. Certainly, it is a personal privilege to me to join in the welcome of Dr. George, and I wanted her to know I am not going let these other people say such nice things about her without expressing my appreciation for what she is doing in Cleve- land. It certainly is in line with what she did in Los Angeles. Chairman PERKINS. That is another compliment, Dr. George. We are interested to know about this Women's Job Corps, what condition it was in when you took over, and how it looks today. STATEMENT OP DR. ZELMA GEORGE, DIRECTOR, WOMEN'S JOB CORPS CENTER, CLEVELAND, OHIO Dr. GEORGE. Thank you very much for this privilege of speaking to this group. I have been reading some of your minutes of the last meet- ings, and there doesn't seem to be much left to say. But I am happy for the privilege of being here. I can hardly wait to hear myself speak after all these introductions. I am here, really, in the interest of the Alpha Kappa Alpha Soror- ity, which is the prime contractor for the Cleveland Job Corps Center. Contemporary society is awakening to the danger which lurks in the insulation which is being constructed by adults and youths between themselves. The imagined enemy in both cases is the other one. This is an irony. Each knows, at least below the conscious level, that his very future is in the other. Twentieth-century youth has developed right in our midst, a new creation-the world of youth, a youth culture with identifiable, dis- tinctive characteristics we cannot ignore. This world of youth is the home of the emerging adult who is sud- denly an imposing figure, not yet mature, not yet wise, but often most serious and quite dissatisfied with things as they are. His new world is not just an unhappy accident, it didn't just happen to a certain segment of our population. It is a global phenomenon, which is self-conscious and very powerful. In South Korea it toppled a government. In the United States this world of youth initiated, almost single-handedly, the Negroes' revolu- tion for human dignity. In other words, it is capable of unbelievable violence and antisocial behavior as well as of positive, constructive action. Whatever its origin, whatever its future, we have in our midst a youth culture, worldwide in scope, cutting across ethnic and geo- graphic lines and social and economic. classes. And it commands our attention. PAGENO="0278" 2738 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Trying to explain this phenomenon, adults call it "delinquency," they call it "the dropout" or "teenage problem," or "just the new gen- eration," and, to dismiss it they look for personality defects in the youth himself or particular problems in the home environment of the family. When we attempt to relate our definitions of these youths to reality, we discover that adolescents are no longer where we put them. They have forged a culture of their own which is practically impenetrable to an outsider who is unaquainted with the particular signals by which these adolescents share with one another an understanding of their situation and their aspirations for the future. But nothing is more important today, however, than that society come to grips with themselves as adults and their relationship to this culture of youth. It is born out of the general moral crisis of our time and its fundamental lack is adequate images of significant humanness. This challenge of youth to civilization is directed toward every seg- ment of our society-the family, the state, the academic structures, the welfare services, the religious organizations, and the economic order. Assuming these statements to be valid, the imperatives upon society begin to come into focus. They are subsumed under four major cate- gories: First and foremost, the world of youth must be recognized, acknowl- edged, nourished, and wisely counseled and directed. Secondly, youth must be seen. in the light of urbanization and ministered into the broader context of knowledge of the city and its problems, whether or not he lives there. Thirdly, it is essential to the young that society apprehend, refine, and boldly communicate a. new definition of men. relevant to our times. Here is a generation which desires to be dedicated, which asks to be used for the sake of a more human adventure. The Peace Corps is one model of such corporate youth action. Society must legislate channels and structure which will harness the passion of youth and direct it toward social mission. Fourthly, education can no longer be understood as a desirable for tomorrow, or even a preparation for t.oinorrow, it is an urgent neces- sity of today and it must be. functional to the felt needs of youth. Its design must guide these youth to facts about and adequate contact with life out of which new moral machinery must be forged with which to construct a. more just a.nd human society. These imperatives constitute the challenge of youth to civilization. To continue .to pret.end tha.t it is not here, that youth today are like youth of other days, is to deny our times and thereby t.o expose our- selves to the future accusation of a lack of courage to take into our- selves this confrontation. Such a course of serious recognition will require a difflcul.t act. of humility on the part of the older generation. We must now carefully listen to these strange fledglings who are sending out signals about. the sha.pe of the future, and are. evidencing unsuspected wisdom, courage, and dedication in their upending of past patterns, attitudes, a.nd symbols which have become empty hulls before them. We must become willing to learn deep lessons of life from our own "children." .. We of the older generation must initiate a sincere effort to coin- municate t.o the young our desire to work out a partnership with him PAGENO="0279" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2739~ that can provide him with a sense of his worth, significance, and power.. He must be helped to know that the future is not mechanistically con- trolled by the past, but is created out of the decisions of men to sift out, choose, and act upon the wisdom of the past in relation to the' fantastic possibilities of the future. We must demand that and provide the conditions in which it is possible for the individual to make such decisions and pick up h~s life' and live it. To move toward such a partnership both young and adult must not be deprived of the face-to-face contact with suffering humanity which educates one to the realities of life, and, in our time, provides a nec- essary milieu for meaningful vocation. Society must build its vocational structure to this end. In the war on poverty, one section of the Economic Opportunity Act creating Job Corps, provided the structure for such a meaningful, unique partnership. Private contractors, in partnership with the Government, had made contacts with the people of the United States, promising to provide the academic, vocational, human relations, and managerial skills needed to attack the problems of a large, powerful segment of the world of youth in the U.S. community. These youth are casualties of our school system and have been all but cast out of society-youth who are undereducated, underemploy- able, undermotivated, and often hostile. The girl who comes to the Job Corps centers comes because she is not unmotivated. She is not unmotivated because the first move toward the Job Corps centers must be because she wants help. It is not com- pulsory education and she can leave when she and her parents or guar- dians request that she do so. `When the young woman comes to us for help she expresses her felt need in terms of vocation that will make her self-supporting. We will do what we can to help her help herself, knowing that a job skill alone will not be enough. We will have to help her develop the personal, social, academic, citizenship, as well as vocational skills that will make her employable. Helping young women transform themselves from tax consumers to taxpayers is a very complicated, involved, multidisciplinary process. The entire job cannot be done or undone in the time in which we are privileged to work with these young women. Nevertheless, they can be helped to see themselves as society also must be helped to see them-not in terms of their deficiences and dis- advantages, lacks, and low personal esteem, but as young women with untapped resources, with unknown and unused potential. It is true that they come to us from culturally deprived communities and in order to make them move over into the positive column of soci- ety, they must be helped to a new definition of themselves as persons. They must be inspired to dream, but most of them have to be given the "stuff" out of which to make those dreams. They must be exposed over and over again to new ideas, new. personalities, new events, new ways of living, new kinds of people and a feeling that they, as persons~ are important, and what they think and do has relevance in our society, and will make a' difference. Right now all of this adds up to' far more than observable profit. But, so did color television. PAGENO="0280" 2740 ECONOMIC OPPORflJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The Cleveland Job Corps Center for Women provides 345 girls a total change in environment-an entirely new living experience in a residentia.1 center where we have 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 12 months a year responsibility, and opportunity to work with them. They come from 46 States and represent many ethnic groups, in- cluding Indians right off a reservation, Hawaiia.ns, a fairly large group of young women with Spanish-speaking backgrounds, Negroes, and whites. \~\Te call them "underprivileged," "disadvantaged, culturally cle- prived," "dropouts." We label them as "poverty victims," "slum dwellers," "hard core," "welfare cases," "deviates," ~"specials"-a1l negatives, all deficits, all lacks. We refer to these young women as part of the "them" we think of when we talk about "us". `We-they, us-them." We talk about going down "there" to help "them." Our Nation is really now for the first time admitting and placing squarely the existence of conditions within its borders which so in- capacitate great numbers of its citizens that their life circumstances are nearly hopeless. The realization of this condition in our country today has come as a severe moral shock to many who, because of Job Corps, have been privileged to face-to-face contact with reality often for the first time. The family, the church, civil society have all isolated these middle class adults and youth from the harshness, pain, ugliness, and rawness of life by means of abstract intellectual sophistication. This has created a pride in many which further has shut off real touch with the human issues of our time. But Job Corps, especially through the one-to-one contacts of MTICS, has provided a way to shatter the false attitudes of do-goodism and uninvolved charity and open the way to a realistic recognition of interdependence and mutuality. It could lead to a recognition of the fact that distinct ghettos exist on both sides of the city broadly, neither of which is more human than the other. Job Corps provides not only a second chance for many young women, it provides society also a second chance, and in many cases, a last chance. Who can estimate the value of Job Corps to society if for no other reason than to provide the school not only for the Job Corpswomen but for middle and upper class adults who are a part of this new unique partnership? Here they find it necessary to forge a new understanding of one another as persons. Who can estimate the consequences for society as a result of what will come to many who find it necessary to forge a new understanding of one another as persons? Who can estimate the consequences for society as a result of what will come to many who find it necessary to redefine their own rel. evance to "others" as they face the facts of life m their new relation- ships with them? Social causes, a few years agO, were the domain of college profes- sors, labor unions, and student demonstrations. Today they are be- coming the new business of business. Who can dare guess what the PAGENO="0281" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2741 implications are for society as a result of this new philos9phy, and this new activity, with Job Corps. Mr. Sol M. Linowitz, chairman of the board of Xerox Corp., in a speech before the Public Affairs Conference of the National Indus- trial Conference Board in New York, on April 21, 1966, addressed himself to the fact that "a far lesser number of young men are plan- ning business careers these days"-14 percent iii Harvard in 1966 versus 39 percent in 1959-only nine more into business that year went into the Peace Corps-says: I think what the youth are seeking from American business and industry is a sure indication that it, too, feels their sense of responsibility and commitment- that it, too, recognizes it has a stake in the conquest of war, disease, hun- ger, and poverty. I am by no means proposing that American industry take upon itself a solitary crusade for the conquest of the world's burdens. What I am suggesting is that a systematic and intimate understanding of the domonant social problems of our day, combined with a firm dedication to public service, will lead to the discovery by businessmen of inovations that will satisfy their direct corporate goals and simultaneously make a contribution to the most pressing human needs. And witness the testimony of Wolham L. Batt, Jr., Administrator, Area Redevelopment Administration, U.S Department of Commerce- at the 36th Annual Boston Conference on Distribution, October 19, 1964-re "The Invisible Market." To make jobs available for the longterm unemployed or the underemployed- who lack either a job or a job opportunity, or both-is to add to our markets in just as positive way as by enlarging export markets in South America or in Asia. Furthermore, this new domestic market is a more convenient market to service. We have acres of diamonds in our own backyard. A combination of investment, initiative, and imagination can change this problem into an opportunity, can transform public charges into private consumers. Who can predict what great things can come to society when we help one another to examine their own unrecognized subjective con- cepts and attitudes that give meaning and power to our words. Such as, I object to the word "dropout," because it puts too much responsi- bility on the young person to say that he all of a sudden one day dropped out of school, when really what has happened that his needs have not been met and what is the amazing thing is that he or she has stayed as long as they have. Society has literally been pushing them out by failing to meet their needs. We talk about immorality and poverty, as if they were synonyms. What I would like to say on this point now in regard to this is that one of the first jobs we have to perform with every youngster who comes to Job Corps is help them to get rid of these labels put on them by society, and I am hoping the day will come when we can find some of the terms we can use instead of these negative ones. We become so clustered with labels that we can hardly find the youngsters themselves. How can Job Corps make this partnership even more meaningful to the "power structure," the "policy and decision makers" as well as to the Job Corpswomen? The primary purpose of Job Corps is to put itself out of business- to help public education define and eliminate the conditions which created the need for Job Corps to begin with. PAGENO="0282" 2742 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It would be foolish to dump these youth back into the system which created them and which has pushed them `out. These youth have al- ready rejected its content and method and a prime challenge to Job Corps is to find another way to meet their needs. And I think without a doubt the 2 years or more that the Cleveland Job Corps has been in operation, and it is the oldest of the women's Job Corps, we have been able to influence the school system of Cleveland with the success that has~ been reached with their casualties, with the casualties of the school system. I could name some of the ways now in which we have shown such evidence there, and I think we have only scratched the surface. We have only got to the point where we can begin to make the kind of study that can be helpful to the public school system then so that they will not continue to produce the young people. who need a Job Corps, and as I said before, one of the prhnary objectives of the Job Corps is to put itself out of business. How do you go about devising a way to reach a youth with whom everybody has already failed: the home, the school, the church, temple, or synagogue, the community organizations? `With no compulsory education, how do you make that learning experience so attractive and meaningful that she wants to stay? There is no other way to keep her there. How do you help her establish a new value system and accept the controls, the rules and regulations without which you cannot hold the center together? In many cases she has not had anybody to tell her when she can come and go for some several years. How do you select and schedule staff so that trained, skilled per- soimel is available at the hours and on all the days that she has real need for guidance and help to new, rewarding experiences? Remember, the Job Corps is a 24-hour day, 7-days a week, 12-months a year responsibility and opportunity. How do you translate that "responsibility" to "opportunity" with your staff? If this youth is culturally deprived and she is-how do you help her -take advantage of meaningful cultural experiences? What are they? }Iow do you tailor-make the program so that she will not leave also culturally deprived, and those are these things, this is the challenge that Job Corps has been facing and has been doing extremely well with, but is now ready to do the real job in partnership with govern- ment, business, with private, nonprofitsharmg organization, and with The rest of the community. Nobody is an expert in Job Corps and we certainly do not know all the answers, but I am happy to say that we at Cleveland say that we are ready to continue to work with all the available sources that you can make available to us and that the community provided for us in this program. I am happy to be a part of the Cleveland Job Corps Center for ~Women for several reasons: First, its prime contractor the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., is an international organization with a 59-year-old history of social -service, education, community `projects and health activities. It has :a merubership of 49,000 college trained women. Its supreme basileus Is Dr. Larzette Hale and its national headquarters is located in `Chicago, Ill. PAGENO="0283" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2743 The Cleveland Job Corps Center for Women is the oldest women's center and the only one that is sponsored by a predominantly Negro organization. This partnership of middle class Negro women who are concerned and active in the program of Job Corps for all women adds to its uniqueness and gives strength to the Job Corps idea. These women, even though they are predominantly in upper middle class, know what poverty is, what slums are and what deprivation and discrimination are and can do to human beings. They bring to the program an empathy and ability to communicate which are essential ingredients in a Job Corps program. We do not yet have all the answers. There are no experts in Job Corps, but there are many of us who are working very hard on the problems involved. There is much learning taking place on both sides of the desks and it is clear that we are part of what may be becoming a vast new edu- cational institution with many implications for the traditional school system. Most of the questions with which we are laboring are not new but I believe it is somewhat new to find them important to busi- nessmen and to the other kind of organizations I have listed. The abundant economy of the United States compels us to move from mere expressions of compassion toward our fellow man to action that could not even be dreamed of in a society bound by an economy of scarcity. Our unique team of government, private organization and business in the coordination of its talents and concerns, is making an important contribution toward providing a chance for self-realization and ful- fillment for each person in the United States. I am prepared to answer questions about any successes we have had in the Job Corps center and am prepared to discuss any aspects of the program you have any question about, but it did seem important to see all the women's Job Corps centers in this country, not only as a function in the lives of the girls themselves, but also as a function in the lives of the adults in the community who are a part of this very unique concept. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you. The next witness is Dean 0. ~\Tilliam Perimutter. Go ahead, Dr. Perimutter. STATEMENT OP DEAN 0. WILLIAM PERLMUTTER, STATE UNIVERSITY, NEW YORK Mr. PERLMtTTTER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is a great privilege to be here, and I especially want to express myself on Congressman Green. I know of the Congressman's magni- ficent work in behalf of education, and I don't know how many educators you have on your committee, but I certainly know of Con- gressman Green, and I come here not to read a statement, which I have already submitted for the record, but I would like to make some comments about the Job Corps, not in the specific way Dr. George has, since I am not engaged in the operation of any of the centers. I took these last 3 days to prepare myself as thoroughly as I can about the Job Corps. For the past 3 years, I have been a very close observer of the Job Corps. PAGENO="0284" 2744 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I volunteered my efforts in the late autunm of 1964, when the task force was just ending, and there was a group of educators at that time who came in mainly at their own expense from various parts of the country, NEA people, public school educators like myself, some from private education. We did this for a series of months, and to me it was one of the most exciting periods in my own career and education to see this kind of dedication. Finally, as the OEO was established and became a little more bureau- cratic, someone said, "`We have to put you into some official capacity," so for 6 months or a year I was there as a consultant coming in now and again 1 or2 days at a time. I come here to speak as an educator, not as a. citizen, or as a rep- resentative of the State University of New York where I occupy the position of the dean of arts and sciences. I think many people are confused about what the Job Corps is and what it means, and if I can be of any value to this committee today, my prime reason for coming here is to speak as someone who not only has experience in education, but has made it his business to study and analyze what is happening in American education, and I relate Job Corps, not to the economic question, primarily-it is related to that; that is obvious in its name and what most people say about it-but what is not obvious is that Job Corps is a real outgrowth, and logical development in our educationa.l patterns in this country. In my prepared statement, I compared it for a metaphor, so it can be seen a little more easily, to a new building that is just going up. When you look at a new building, and heavens knows I am looking at a lot of buildings up in Albany, you see debris and people running around, a.nd it looks like madness. You come back in 3 years and there is a structure. I think we are looking as sidewalk engineers at Job Corps, and we see something misplaced, or as it should not be. I wa.nt to talk about the philosophica.l aspects of this. I think Job Corps if it is going to make any sense to us in the educational com- munity has to be related to what education is all about, and it is in this nrima.ry sense that I look at it with you today. In education, we have inherited, if you go back to the 18th century, an ancient ~rejudice, and that is that education is for the few. Every- thing we have clone in American higher education, which I think is our greatest distinction, is that we have always tried to expand the educa- tional horizon. When Harvard College was founded by the Puritans, this was intended not as just for an elite, but a much larger elite. It was a revolutionary thing in its time. And there has been a national progression, an ever widening area in education. I would take five big landmarks just to have a sort of noble view of this, starting with the independent and often church-related liberal arts college. We went from that to the State university, where we took the same concept and said, "Let's apply it to the agricultural. n'iechanical, engineering arts, let us see if we can't get the farming community, the rural community, a large segment of American youth," and we succeeded in that. The liberal arts colleges a.nd the State universities led into one of our most distinquished accomplishments, the graduate school. PAGENO="0285" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2745 One of the things distinguishing graduate school in this country with France, Germany, or the Soviet Union, is that we have opened up the learned professions, to very large groups in our society. Our largest achievement has been the public school systems, and I stress the plural here, because we have a vast diversity of public school systems and our stated goal here was that we would have uni- versal education, culminating in the elementary school, in the gen- eration represented in this room in the secondary school. What we are seeing now is the universal education moving up to the community college and the State college. Yes, there are certain failures that come to the fore; we have ex- tended education at all levels to many people, more than any other society, but it has ended up that we have large groups, primarily the poor, the colored, the disenfranchised, the Spanish-American~ in'uni- grant, the American Indian. These are people who have been dis- carded from the school system, who have been thrown out, and we are recognizing now that something has to be done, `and this is not merely a question of finding jobs for these people. We are talking about young people who are our young people. They are our children. And what we wanted to do is raise these youngsters to positions of dignity in the society and self-esteem and self-respect. I don't think anybody is really quarreling about `the goals of the Job Corps. What we are asking is how these goals should be met. What does it mean, is the second question. You have to forgive a pro- fessional approach to this. I want to know what I am doing. I am a great enemy of thoughtless action. I want to think about what I do, and I have to act all the time. What it means to me is that the Job Corps represents for the educa- tional community a kind of `a Mayo `Clinic. We have on `the one hand here a clinic where we treat people who are in need, and people who are not getting treatment in other places in the educatiOnal system. We do not treat these youngsters in the schools of Harlem ade- quately. We can't. We don't do it in the restricted suburbs of our affluent cities. These are youngsters in great need, and on the one hand it is a clinic, but the Mayo Clinic is more than a clinic where you treat the sick. You do research. You study diseases that come before you. You study analytically and in depth the problems that these patients bring to you, and it is perhaps this laboratory aspect to the Job Corps which is so fascinating to me and many of my colleagues which are among some of the most innovative educators in the country, in all fields we are watching the Job Corps. We want a feedback from the Job Corps. I. have faulted the Job Corps in the past very plainly to some of the people there by telling them they had not done enough in relating to the educational community. I have a specific recommendation `that I wish to make on that `score, but nonetheless, the Job Corps represents a very profound and new approach in American higher education. It wasn't invented `there. I would place a great deal of credit for what is going on in Job Corps in the efforts that arose, already in the 19th cen'tury in our university extension, agricultural extension and what today we refer `to as adult and continuing education. PAGENO="0286" 2746 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Now, the revolution in adult and continuing education which you see in the Job Corps, in the Peace Corps, and the Headstart-you see it in a number of different programs-marks a radical departure from what conventional educators throughout the world have thought, which was "You are a good student or a bad student." When I open my school year in September, 1 am sure someone is going to get up from the admissions office and say, "Ladies and gentle- men of the faculty, we Eave the best entering freshmen class that we have ever had in history." I think you will hear this in a thousand colleges. The moment those words leave the lips, I think what he means is that the cutoff point this year is a little bit higher than it was last year. If it was hard for a Negro or Puerto Rican to get in last year, well, he certainly had a job getting in this year, and if we got any of them, they are very, very good. This is a traditional attitude. Professors always talk about "good students," or "bad students." "College material" is what the high school educator says. "Not college material" is written off. Adult education has patterned itself on this kind of approach to educational methodology. If you go into the Mayo Clinic and you are treated and you break out into a violent rash because of the antibiotic, you don't say, "This is a bad patient, let's drop him out." You say, "Let's find out what we did wrong." We look at the human being as being infinitely elastic with respect to education. There is no giving up. If he doesn't learn in this way, let's try another method, or another technique. If this situation isn't the proper situation, let's change the teachers. I think in this new kind of education which is crystallizing in many different sectors today in the United States, and it is one of the most beautiful things in the American dream, where we are saying that education is no longer a matter, as I think it was when we began education, just for the teacher. We are asking whether the man in private industry knows something about education. We are asking whether people in Government know something about education. We are no longer shocked by the fact that a large company has a training program. We are no longer shocked that the Department of Defense runs the largest enterprise in the teaching of foreign language in the world. We take some of their techniques, their books and if they are good, we use them. It is very easy to lecture in a university hall these days. You don't have to have the Ph. D.-you have to have commitment. I myself when I first confronted this in 1964, I was horrified. I came to a meeting there, and they said, "We are going to set up Job Corps centers." I said, "Fine, this segment of youth need it." They were going to have contractors, and the academic hackles of the professor went up-contractor, what is that, no academic tit.le? 1~\Tho will be the contractor-business firms, State govermnents,. anybody? PAGENO="0287" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2747 I said, "That is nonsense. This is the sense of Congress, Congress has legislated this." I am completely converted on this. I found that we had outstanding successes among business firms: we had some failures; we had successes among universities, and some failures; but the lesson I took from this was that all of these agencies in the society have something to con- tribute to the operation of the Job Corps. I use that lesson in the university. If there is something that relates to some section of the society where I think someone is more able to talk about it than a professor, that person can profess on the campus as far as I am concerned. Peace Corps has done this in a very beautiful way. About the Job Corps, it seems we are partially inhibited by some of the guilt feelings we have. It strikes me that when we talk about Head- start, everybody is for the children, and when we talk about Job Corps, we begin to pick on some of the isolated instances where an adolescent gets into trouble. We don't ever think of holding a 6-year-old responsible for his con- dition, if a 6-year-old comes out of dire poverty; but if a 16-year-old comes out of the same condition, we hold him responsible, we call him a delinquent, we put all sorts of bad epithets on this youngster. He deserves more of a chance, if anything, because he started be- hind the finish line. I think the real problem before this committee is, shall we do this in an independent agency, in an old line agency, shall we do it at home or away from home. Let me say a few words about that, and I hope you will cross-ques- tion me as closely as you like to in this matter. First of all, about the agency question. I remember when I was a beginning professor, I wrote a series of articles and published them on World War II diplomacy and post- World War II diplomacy. I took the Roosevelt administration severely to task for not setting up independent new agencies. Take lend-lease, for example. Lend-lease. Can you imagine the Department of State carrying on lend-lease during World War II? I can't. First I said, "Why didn't they put those functions in the Depart- ment of State?" I can answer those questions in a developing university. I am able to do things in the University of New York which would take several generations to do in older universities in some States, which I will not mention. There is a new dynamism, and people who have this kind of spirit, they are apt to run off at the deep end. I notice with the best of my professors, they are the most difficult people to manage, but the most creative and the most imaginative people are that way, always. And a new agency recruits talent. Talent is not created in the old line agencies. I don't want to single them out, but the old line agencies have far too many encrusted traditions here. Thirdly, I would say perhaps more profoundly than the other two objections, I would not want to see this program become operational at the Federal level. PAGENO="0288" 2748 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I know that therefore when a-when you take a Federal program and lodge it into a bureau, in a traditional department, it achieves what most of us would like to achieve, and that is a kind of condition of immortality. We are still dealing with Indian affairs in the Bureau of Indian Affairs. They are trying hard there, but we have never gotten terribly far in Indian affairs, and I would hate to see the Job Corps become an analogous bureau, whether it be in HEW, or Agriculture, or wherever von put it. I think Dr. George has put it very well. The Job Corps must one da.y be liquidated, but not until we have the teclrniques for liquiclatmg the problem, and we ought to keep the Job Corps out in the open where we can see it. ~\Then it is in OEO, we can see it, and I don't know the last time when I have seen a headline about the Bureau of Indian Affairs. I don't mean to pick on that bureau. There are some able people working there. Fourthly, I think the U.S. Office of Education is handling about as much as they can handle at this time. I think it would be bad adminis- tration to transfer this agency, this function, to another agency at this time. This is a tremendous momentum in Job Corps personnel. We have some terrific people here. I was recently talking to Sister Trancetta, Dean Lippiet, the Uni- versity of Maryland. I have met some of the finest educators who are deeply committed, public and private educators, religious and secular. They are committed. They don't want to go into another agency. It is hard enough to get good educators into OEO without giving them the handicap of an old guard, old line agency. Will the committee indulge me a little while longer? If you want to stop me, Mr. Chairman, please feel free to do so. Chairman PERKINS. Go a.head. Mr. PERLI~mTTER. With respect to keeping these youngsters at home. or sending them away, I have one son who is in school in Albany, another son who is several thousand miles away. We face this problem all the time, "WThere do you send the youngster to school ?" The youngsters who go into the Job Corps in a great majority of cases actually require they be taken out of their environment, just as it was necessary when they took Bill Perimutter and made a soldier out of him, they weren't going to do it in the vicinity of New York City, but it would work in Fort Riley, Kans., which is where I was sent.. You have to leave home. Many of these youngsters aren't leaving home. Robert Frost said, "Home is the place where if you have to go there, they have to take you in." Many of these youngsters have no place where they have to be taken in. There is no home to leave. In many cases they have to be prepared to make lives in new environments. I think there are youngsters who have a psychological need to be at home. I think the directors of the centers should have that option, when they would be kept in the area, but to make that judgment on economic grounds or a priori, is-I would like to make several specific recommendations: PAGENO="0289" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2749 I would like to see the act amended. I don't have the technical expertise to give you. The principle is that Job Corps must be related directly and intimately to the educational community of this country, and not, in honorific fashion, but where we can get some of the top minds in education, at all levels, working closely with Job Corps and monitoring it at the level of research and staff training. I would like to see upward of 10 percent, as much as a10,percent of the budget, of Job Corps, hopefully that it may be at least given the full amOunt devoted to research, development, and particularly to staff training at highest level. I have various ideas as to how this might be accomplished, Mr. Chairman, which I can't make up now, but this is a sine qua non for the success of the Job Corps. It must have the support of the educational community. We look to this experience-I said the Mayo Clinic-we look to this experience in the schOols. What do we want to learn? I think there are four types of patterfls we want to extrapolate from the Job Corps experience. The first is patterns for educating and inducting all American youth We know' perfectly' well how to induct middle-class youth, into the society; upper-class youth know the society. When it comes to the bottom of the social scale, we simply are at a loss, we do not have the educational technologies and insights to do this We look for these patterns in the Job Corps We look for new patterns of vocational and technical education in the Job Corps. We look for new patterns of continuing adult educa-' tion in the Job Corps, and we look for new patterns in training teachers, educational administrators `md counselors These are the four things we look for from the Job Corps in its labo- ratory side, and `on the' side as a clinic, we hope that the Job Corps' will do more' than simply provide jobs. We `hope that the Job Corps will take as its real goal the renewal of humanhope in a large sector of our youth, and the production of knowledgeable useful citizens who can in time occupy not just jobs, but positions of dignity in our society. I thank you. Chairman' PERKINS. Let me ask you, both `of you: You have made such outstanding statements, and I am very grateful to our colleague. for helping to get you here today, Dr. Perimutter, and I am likewise thankful to D'r. Zelma `George for her appearance here, and there. will be many questions. But if you are in no rush, I would like for you to stand aside for the convenience of `another witness who has transportation problems, and then come back on the stand a little later. Does that meet your approval, Dr. George? Dr. GEORGE. Yes. Mr. PERLMUTTER. It is quite all `right with me. Chairman PERKINS. The record will be arranged so that their testi- mony will be continued as though uninterrupted. `Chairman PERKINS. `Come around, " Mr. Leo McDermott, Commis- sioner of the County of Chester, Pennsylvania, speaking for the National Association of Counties. 80-084-67-pt. 4-i9 PAGENO="0290" 2750 ONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF.~ 1967 STATEMENT OP ~EON. LEO McDERMOTT, COMMISSIONER, COUNTY OP CHESTER, PA., ACCOMPANIF1D BY C. D. WARD, GENERAL COUNSEL, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OP COUNTIES Mr. MODERMOrT. I have with me, Mr. Chairman, Dr. Ward, who is general counsel for the National Association of Counties. I want to thank the chairman of the committee and previous wit- nesses for making this concession to me so that we may keep our commitments. * I would like to read the statement into the record. I am Leo McDermott, county commissioner of Chester County, Pa. I am also a member of the Office of Economic Opportunity's Public Officials Advisory Council. My appearance here today is on behalf of the National Association of Counties, and organization representing the Nation's 3,000 urban, suburban, and rural counties. Unquestionably, one of the major domestic questions confronting us today is the fate of the war on poverty. It is of the utmost concern to county government. Today, county governments' largest single budgetary expenditure is that of direct and indirect assistance to the poor. As recently as December 1966 our national association enacted the following basic philosophy with respect to our views on county governments' respon- sibility in this area: The National Association of Counties believes the responsibility of alleviating and eliminating poverty is a principal function of county government, and there- fore urges the respective states to provide counties with broad legal powers to accomplish such objectives. Additionally, we urge the respective states and the federal government to participate financially In these programs, however, that any accompanying state and federal regulation be such as to maintain the maximum degree of initiative and responsibility at the local leveL County government is very much a part of the war on poverty, and just as the Office of Economic Opportunity has received criticism for their efforts, so have we. We are here today to offer our suggestions on how, based upon our experience and observation, the Office of Economic Opportunity can be improved; however, at the outset, it should be stressed that we support the continuation of the Office of Economic Opportunity. We do recommend that several basic changes to the program be considered. First and most basic we feel OEO programs often suffer to a great extent from lack of commitment on the part of a large segment of local government. This is not because of what `OEO has attempted but how they are `doing it. We appreciate the fact that the OEO is intended to be the spokes- man of the poor and serve as a focal point for the Federal Govern- ment's efforts in the war on poverty. Our suggestions are based upon the assumption that the OEO's purpose in the field of planning and programing is to be one of innova- tion and evaluation, that once OEO's programs have `been tested and proven they should be assimilated into the fabric of our local govern- ment where they can receive the coordinative support of the com- munities' full resources and be integrated with the communities' efforts in the war on poverty. PAGENO="0291" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2751 We feel OEO shares our opinion that: it is not desirable for them to retain indefinitely jurisdiction over specific programs that have been successfully tried and proven. if a given OEO program has proven to be beneficial in its limited application, it should provide the incentive for `a much broader acceptance. When this becomes the case, there `will be ,the need for a ~different type of `coordinated Federal, State, and local administrative structure. If the OE'O were required to serve in such an arrangement, it would sap from the OEO its ability to be an innovative, `imaginative, "free wheeling" agent. `Equally important is the fact that, as presently constituted, a majority of the OAA's are entities separate and distinct from any public agency and, therefore, separate and distinct from local government. If the OEO fail's to move their successful programs into the main- stream of State and local governments, we will see it becoming a giant respository of a multitude of Federal programs. We will additionally see the development of `two forms of `local government, the first being our traditional local governments responsi- ble to the body politic, and~ supported by our developing creative federalism's financial structure; the second being a Federal "OEO local government," supported by Federal funds. Mr. MCDERMOTT. We suggest that the law be amended to require that 3,083 community action agencies must demonstrate that they are making meaningful efforts to bring about the absorption of their pro- grams by local governments. This could logically be required as an integral part of the community action agency's annual request for funds. DEMONSTRATION PROJEGTS In the past, Congress has f~lt that the requirement of one-third representation by the poor on the governing boards is so vital it must be mandatory. Many local officials do not agree with this concept. In fact, it is this very requirement. which contributes as much as any other reason for many local officials' lack of enthusiasm for OEO programs. Most local officials feel they are not elected by their constituents to share their final dec.isionmaking authority with anyone. The final decision on the allocation of tax funds has been entrusted to them and it is highly unlikely'they would or even should partially relinquish this authority. They are willing to do so, reluctantly, however, when virtually all of the funds to be spent are Federal. Notwithstanding some local offi- cials are satisfied with the present requirements regarding the poor involvement, some are not. Others say that by emphasizing the poor's participation at both the policy and implementation level, as OEO does, the result is the poor are ineffective at both levels. Consequently, we urge that `the law provide for demonstration projects with respect to the participation of the poor. It may well be that the bringing of the poor into the poverty program as officials or members of boards of directors, does not result in the maximum benefit to the program's success. PAGENO="0292" ~2752 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 At the very least, some programs might be improved if the poor's participation, was at the implementation level and not at the policy level. Many of our `members f~e1 that `it would be worthwhile to gather additional evidence and information regarding this very controversial position. We can see no harm in allowing several programs to be carried out with the poor's participation being limited to implementa- tion. This will mean they are serving as caseworkers, liaison and gen- eral staff, personnel, and so forth. Under such arrangement the policy- making would be under the purview of the local elected official. We feel that we should be innovative and experimental with all aspects of the OEO programs including this very critical issue. Dem- onstration programs could provide us with the opportunity of evaluat- ing and comparing which type of involvement brings the maximum benefit to the poor. Another type of demonstration we would suggest would be the op- portunity of experimenting with what is halfway between that which is currently required and that which we have suggested. In this `case, the Office of Economic Opportunity could recognize the elected county board as the umbrella agency which is ultimately responsible for coordination and funding all CAP activities. All OEO grant funds would go to the county treasurer and be subject to periodic audits. In order to qualify for any project OEO grants, the county board would be required to develop a comprehensive plan for community action against poverty. This action plan would be able, where appro- priate, to integrate all of the county programs with those financed by OEO funds. In addition, it would facilitate the assimilation of OEO programs into the regular county operation where the OEO programs were proven effective and worth while. The county would hire and appoint additional staff to that of its normal planning operation. Such addi- tional staff would be specifically charged to plan antipoverty projerts. On the other hand, the county would be required to establish a citi- zen advisory council, the majority of which would be composed of representatives of the poor. This council would also be staffed by those persons hired by the county to plan poverty projects. Ideas for poverty projects could originate with either the county board or the citizen advisory council, but final approval would require independent approval of both. The advisory council should or could provide for neighborhood councils where antipoverty projects would be in ac~ual operation. These neighborhood councils could also have the majority representa- tion of the poor. In addition, the chairman also-of the neighborhood council- should also be a member of the countywide advisory council which would, in effect, have the veto power over all the proposed projects as would the county board. The war on poverty is going to be a very long and frustrating effort. We feel it will be unfortunate if we assume doctrinaire positions regarding issues which are still subject to such different opinions by persons who have a genuine and sincere desire and are working toward ending the misery, hunger, and ignorance which plague so many of our fellow citizens. PAGENO="0293" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2753 We should not allow ourselves to get locked in on what just might not be the best and the only way to involve the poor. We have some trepidation that some people will interpret our remarks as trying to pull an end run around this requirement. Not at all. We are merely trying to assure, through actual experience, that what we now have is the best or perhaps some other method may be better. We should not be afraid to determine that question through experi- mentation and demonstrations. We ask your support of that. I have appreciated being here today and I will attempt to answer any question you might have. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. I have only one, Mr. Chairman. I think you indicated that the OEO should remain as an innovative agency and should retain jurisdiction of programs only until they have been proved, and in a sense they should be then spun off. With that concept, are you willing at this time to indicate any pro- grams you think have been proved and should no longer be retained by OEO, or have you any program to suggest that has been proved sufficiently and should not be retained by OEO at this time? Mr. MCDERMOTT. We think that operations such as Headstart, Neighborhood Youth Corps, are programs which have been well es- tablished and have been proven to be successful; yes, sir. Mr. HAwKINs. Are you saying that NYC and Headstart should not be retained by OEO? Mr. MCDERMOTT. My reply would be my own personal judgment, since this is not a position which has been formulated by the National Association of Counties. Mr. HAWKINS. I was asking for the position of the association. Mr. MCDERMOTT. They have not formulated a position. Mr. HAWKINS. Then the reference you made to the NYC and Head- start was a personal opinion and not that of the association? Mr. MCDERMOTT. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. Let me ask a followup question of the witness along the lines Mr. Hawkins has opened. As one who has watched this carefully, even though it is not the official position of the National Association of Counties, Mr. McDermott, do you feel that in these areas such as Headstart there ought to be a change from the present situation? Mr. MCDERMOTT. In the Headstart program? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes, sir. Mr~ MCDERMOTT. I don't believe it is quite as simple as that, and again I am giving you my personal reactions. I am also not on the directorate, but I do speak from 2 years' experience in the local corn munity action program in my home county. It is my feeling that the value of Headstart has been well estab- lished. I think it has been recognized, at least in my part of the coun- try, that this represents a great departure from educational systems as we have known them there, and that it, however, in the field of education, and best administered by the educational system, but un- less there is some watchdog agency, shall we say, or some continuing PAGENO="0294" 2754 ECONOMIC 0PPORTT~ITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 ~concern, that the program be implemented as it was designed, I think that there would be a danger of going right back to the educational patterns as we have known them. Mr. DEr~Eiu~AcK. What do you think should happen with Head- start? I am not quite sure I understand what you are saying about this program. Do you feel it ought to continue just as it is, or should there be some modification in its supervision? Mr. MoDERMorr. No. In our particular county, the community action agency is the applicant agency. The delegate agency is the public school system of Chester County, and I think that this kind of arrangement is an effective one. A comparable arrangement on the Federal level might be that the OEO continues to be involved to see that the program is implemented as it was designed, but the actual administration might be by the ed- ucational system of our country. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you had occasion to work closely with OEO on a national level in any of these capacities? You indicated that you were involved in community action, I believe, yourself. Have you ha.d occasion to work closely with the national office of the OEO? Mr. MCDERMOTT. Well, by "closely," I, at the beginning of my re- marks, mdicat.ed that I have been for a year and a half a member of the public officials advisory council. We have met some half dozen times, I believe. I maintain communication with the national office. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you had occasion to deal closely also with the Office of Health, Education, and `Welfare? Mr. MCDERMOTT. Very little. Mr. DELLENBACK. So you are not really in a sound personal posi- tion to compare the efficiency of one department versus the other, as far as administration is concerned? `You see, what is involved in the' committee's deliberations at the moment is ~whether the `Office of Economic Opportunity, on the basis of its record and the projects for the country, should be, as a national office, disbanded, as you realize, and that such concepts as community action programs be preserved and go forward' with aggressiveness, `but under the general supervision of HEW, `rather than OEO. It is this. type of of comparison about which I am asking.' Have you worked closely enough with both of these agencies to make `any `comparative evaluatiOn of `whether you think the program of the war on poverty would move forward or backward if'it were changed?. Mr. MCDERMOTT. My response would be that I have had little ex- perience working with the National Office of HEW. Perhaps, `if I may, Mr~ "Ward, who is counsel for' NATO, and closely' invOlved ~with theL~~~~ `Mr. DELLENBAOK. Mr.Ward, yes. , Mr WAIm First, the Nation'il Association of Counties has worked clOsely with `the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, wel- fare b'eing our `No.' .1 budgetary item involvement with the Federal Gpvernment, and also in the field of' health, and other programs that HEW has. ` ` " ` ` "AlthOugh our national Organization has no ,specific position on the pOint' that you are making, I think that `based upon our very extensive PAGENO="0295" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2755 discussion over the last few years with OEO, it would be the feelin that wewould not want the Office of Economic Opportunity abandone at this time, and the CAP or CAA agencies moved to the Department of: HEW, notwithstanding, we feel HEW does a very good job in administering many of the programs we are involved in. I think that we do feel, as Mr. McDermott has pointed out, that as these programs are tested, evaluated, and accepted on a limited basis in which they are now being implemented throughout the country, it will serve as an incentive for other counties and cities to pick up these same programs and make them part of their governmental, fabric within their own communities. At that time, it would appear that it would be desirable for those programs to be put in HEW which is-which have the structure of the traditional, if It may, Federal-State-local arrangement, rather than the innovative OEO program, which is somewhat a part from the local government~and local body politic. `Mr. DELLENBACK. I am not, again, quite sure that I understand the "why." You indicate this extensive experience with HEW and with OEO. You do not feel this change should be accomplished at this time even though you ultimately subscribe to the concept of such spinoff or such movement over. Why not at this particular time? Mr. WARD. I don't think that we would say ever we would want OEO itself to be spun off into HEW, and it would be our observation at this time. Mr. DELLENBACK: Why not? * Mr. WARD. Because we feel HEW would not be in a position to act in this coordinated mechanism in spite of the fact that we do have these joint convenor~ memorandums. that the President has issued to try to coordinate ~various programs and functions which are admin- istered by different `tgencies Mr. DELLENBACK. Which programs could not be so coordinated? Mr. WARD. It would, seem the neighborhood centers which have been ~eve1oped-I think there are 14 of them this year-I believe that HTJD is involved, I believe HEW is involved-I am not sure of the other Federal agencies. It seems that OEO has been `able to act as a spark- plug, as a type of-I hate to use the word again-innovating group, which can britig them together. At least they have been designated that by Congress and by Executive orders, .and it would appear this would be the time to give them more time and see how effective they are going to be in bringing this kind of program together. Mr. DELLENBAOK. You are' talking now in terms of keeping OEO as a permanent agency, then ? Mr.'WAIm. At this time; yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBAOK. You think it should be indefinite ~ duration. You are not talking about the Office, the Office of Economic Opportu- rnty ever terminating its, operations but continuing indefinitely in the Government? `.` Mr. WARD. As long as poverty is facing us to the extent it is. Mr. DELLENBACK. Assuming we have this as a smaller and smaller problem, but a permanent'problem, you would recommend OEO be continued :indefinitely,?~ . , ` .;.: .. . PAGENO="0296" 2756 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF'. 1967 You see, we have had some witnesses say, "We should continue this until a certain period goes by and then do away with it, butthi~ ~s'not the time to do away with it." I read you sir, as saying something different. I read you as saying that OEO should remain as a permanent part of the Federal Govern- ment with certain programs being moved out from time to time. Is that correct? Mr. WAiu~. As of this time. Because one of the problems confronting local government, sir, is that we have 400-some-odd grant-in-aid programs, many of which are not related to the poor, Federal-aid to highways, and so on. We have all these programs with their various requirements, various means of implementation, and as is pointed out in the editorial that was mentioned, it makes it difficult at the local level to get these programs together into some type of meaningful, coordinated approach. We feel, of course, the best place to do this is to provide the local officials with the mechanism themselves to bring it together, but at the national level there has to be some type of agency or group of agencies which are entrusted with this responsibility. Senator Scott; of Pennsylvania, has introduced legislation which has been joined in by members of both parties on this side, which would establish this physical planning in the Executive Office of the Presi- dent, what we envision OEO is doing nOw. If that would become a reality and evolution would come about. Perhaps OEO would no longer need to be in existence as this coordinat- ing mechanism that we think is desirable at this time. Mr. DELLENBACK. You would see the department which was estab- lished to `deal essentially with problems of health and problems of education and problems of welfare, doing that coordinating work. Is it your answer that you do not see HEW doing that coordinating'? Mr. W~tiw. You see, there are other aspects to it besides health,, education, and welfare. There are the problems which HUD have, and so forth. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PEIUUNS. Thank you, Mr. McDermott, and Mr. Ward. We appreciate your appearing. Mr. McD~oTr. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. In order to accommodate Cynthia Parsons, we will still let the Job Corps witnesses remain on the side for a few moments. I know everybody wants to question some witnesses. We are glad to welcome you here, Miss Parsons. STATEMENT OF MISS CYNTHIA PARSONS EDUCATOR EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR Miss PARSONS. Thank you, sir. ` ` Mr. Qum. Mr. Chairman, may I make a comment, that Miss Cyn- thia Parsons has been the education editor of the Christian Science Monitor for 5 years. As a journalist she has been `following, very closely what has been going on, `and she recently toured 13 vocational educational schools in theUnitëd States and Canada. As the chairman knows, because we had some conversation earlier about what vocational schools are do- PAGENO="0297" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2757 ing now, and because the chairman is probably the most knowledgeable person on this committee, and perhaps in the Congress on this topic, I know that you will be talking about something that is very dear to his heart. All of us will be interested to find out from you what is happen- ing now with the legislation that has enabled the vocational schools to move forward as well as to explore the potential that these schools possess. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have a prepared statement, Miss Parsons? Miss PARSONS. During this time, I have made it briefer and briefer, and I am going to be extemporaneous. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, proceed with your state- ment. Thank you for coming here today. We, as always, `are delighted to have a witness who `has made a study of vocational schools. Miss PARSONS. I do have a series of articles which are appearing in the paper, and I will `be glad to have them in the record, if you would like them. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, they will be inserted in the record. (Series of articles by Miss Parsons follows:) [From the Christian Science Monitor, June 13, 1967] PITTING EDUCATION TO THE CHILD `Schooling for skills is in trouble. Most vocational education programs and equipment are outdated and obsolete. Thousands of youngsters have been misdirected into purely academic programs when at least half of them should have been guided into direct preparation for employment. The very words "vocational education" conjure up an image of inferior pro- grams for inferior students. At last, a freshly awakened interest in schooling for skills is stirring across the United States and in many other countries. Nowhere is there a greater educa- tional need. In Canada, industrial physics and industrial chemistry programs are turning out rnuch~need~d,la:boratory technicians. In ~France, `boys are given free lunches and work clothes-and their parents receive subsidies-to help enable the youths to learn a skilled trade such as cabinetmaking, masonry, or welding. The new comprehensive schools being built in England contain metal and wood- working shops w'here boys can do more than "muddle about." Aided by this training, they can `learn a trade and bypass some of the long years of apprentice- ship. In the United States a revitalized Office of Education has poured millions of dollars into vocational education since 1963. This school year 6.5 million students received vocational and technical training with the aid of $265.4 million from the federal government. Vocational and technical education is 50 years old in the United States. But it has only `been in the last two or three years that some public school administra- tors have been giving schooling for skills as much attention as schooling for college. The greatest need for skilled workers is, of course, in the large urban areas. Yet it is in these very areas that thousands of students have been forced through academic precollege programs totally unrelated to their immediate futures based on their interests and abilities. The statistics for the state `of Ohio tell part of the story. STATISTICS STARTLING The 1960 Ohio census disclosed that only 7.6 percent of `the employment oppor- tunities in the state required `a college degree. At that time, 81 percent of all the PAGENO="0298" 2758 ECONOMIC OPPORTLTNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 young people enrolled in public secondary schools in Ohio were taking a college- preparatory program. The statistics further showed that 3.1 percent were enrolled in trade and industrial courses, 2.1 percent in vocational agriculture, 12.5 percent in office occupations, and only 1.3 percent in retail sales training. But Ohio's needs were then and now quite different from what its educationists were providing. The requirements: Craftsmen and technicians-42.2 percent. Farm agriculturists-3.7 percent. Off-farm agriculturists-5.3 percent. Clerical workers-14.4 percent. Retail sales personnel-14.7 percent. PARENTS, STUDENTS SURVEYED A 1964 survey of students and parents throughout this Midwestern state dis- closed that 75 percent wanted vocational-technical training at. the high-school level, 21 percent desired a totally academic or pre-college prOgram, and 4 percent were undecided. Yet in Ohio, as in the rest of the United States, the schools have been concen- trating excessively on academics. The federal Office of Education estimates that less than 20 percent of all the teachers, texts, and equipment in American schools is vocationally oriented. Estimates also place most of the vocational equipment and course offerings in the outmoded or obsolete category. While the employment need is for skilled craftsmen and technicians, the high schools have been counseling more than 80 percent of all students to take pre- college programs, although they have been able to place only one out of every six graduates in college. The other five? They enter the world of work with no marketable skill, a poor estimate of the grandeur and nobility of manual labor, and an even poorer estimate of themselves. QUESTION PUT BLUNTLY A New Mexico vocational educator of Spanish descent put it this way: "What kind of a job can a boy. get here in northern New Mexico with a high. school major in history?" A check of the "help wanted" section of any city newspaper today discloses a persistent need for automobile mechanics, plumbers, electricians, pipe fitters, ia~oratory technicians, toolmakers, maintenance men, appliance repairmen, clerk typists, secretaries, hairdressers, and key punch Operators: The United States has approximately 74 million working people. More than half of these should be skilled craftsmen, but the Bureau of Laboi~ estimates that only 13 percent can be so classified. PROGRESS SHOWING Fortunately, things are stirring today in vocational education. A recent trip across the United States and into Canada provided encouraging evidence of progress. As I visited vocational and technical schools, witnessed programs in action, talked with educators, and read reports, I became increasingly impressed with the innovations now taking place. Much remains to be done. But more and more school officials and systems have been responding realistically to the need to do it. In this sense, the state of vocational education has never been healthier. Federal money has been a boon. So have better. relationships among labor unions, management, and vocational educators. Advisers from business and industry have spent countless hours helping schools upgrade their programs. Thousands of dollars in equipment have been donated to schools. Men and women from industry have given up high-paying jobs to teach high-school students a trade. In Las Vegas, Nev., the new vocational-technical center has wall-to-wall carpeting, the latest in equipment, and a very fine esprit de corps. In Allentown, Pa., every shop has a typewriter and all the boys learn to type out their reports. In Ohio's Penta-County area vocational school, one-way mirrors permit viewing of the nursery school prior to actual work with the children. . In Northern New Mexico State Vocational School, the boys learning carpentry build complete houses and learn to be the Jacks-of-all-trades they will need to be in that rural area. PAGENO="0299" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2759 In Milwaukee's vocational-technLcal school, the boys in the print shop learn some computer technology, the setting of "hot" type, and the mysteries of the. offset press. AIRPLANE OVERHAULED In Portland, Ore., a complete airplane is overhauled each year and then test-flown by the instructor; in Helena, Mont., prospective airplane mechanics. also work toward a pilot's license. Vocational educators are standing a little taller these days. They like to tell you how qualified they are academically-if they are-and how little academics really means if they aren't college graduates. They are still defensive. And they are ashamed of those industrial arts programs which still limit girls to sewing up aprons and boys to making hook ends. Vocational educators argue among themselves about the relative merits of including vocational subjects under the same roof with precollege programs, of having the students do production work, of separate schools for boys and girls, of requiring teachers to have "X" number of years in a trade, of the type of academic program which should complement the shop work. WORKING TOGETHER, NOW But by and large vocational educators are working together in this new climate of interest to bring schooling for skills into the 20th century. The next nine articles in the series, which will appear weekly on this first page of the second section, will pinpoint exciting new programs, and report on some of the new spirit of interest in education for immediate employment. That makes schooling for skills schooling for jojs. [From the Christian Science Monitor, June 20,1967] BENSON POLYTECHNIC TURNS NO-NONSENSE LEARNERS INTO CAP~LE DoERs PORTLAND, OREG.-TO Portlanders, Benson Polytechnic High School means vo- cational education plus. Benson teaches learning for doing. But its community and regional significance extends far beyond instruction in mechanical skills~ Benson means: . A 100 percent record over many years for placing its graduates in college or a job-prior to graduation. . ... . ,.. . `..,.. A sensitive alertness to the needs of local industry. . . . . Lifetime job placement service for Benson graduates. . . . .. .~ These are some of the reasons why-at a time of accelerating change in the job market for skilled and semiskilled workers-Benson is more than prepared to cope The Benson image also is firmly founded on high entrance standards, a rigorous course of study, a fine reputation in the cOmmunity, highly skilled teaëhers, and the latest vocational and technical equipment EXAMPLE FOR OTHERS Benson is, without doubt, one of the most outstanding technical high schools in the United States. What Portland ha~ in Benson is, possibly, what every city should have. If vocational schools are thought of as the dumping ground for the academically weak and socially unacceptable, then they can't begin to perform a needed service to students or community. Benson overcomes this problem by combining in one school the most outstanding boys in the City of Portland who score high in math and science, with other boys who are headed for immediate employment in a trade. Boys who enter Benson's four-year preengineering course must complete the eighth grade with achievement scores at least two: years above average. They must have earned the commendation of their teachers, and must show exceptional aptitude in the sciences. These boys make up approximately half the student body of about 2,000. PAGENO="0300" 2760 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The other half is composed of boys who want to terminate their education after completing grade 12, and who want to move immediately into a semiskilled job or an apprentice program with one of Portland's many unions. These boys may even be a little below average in their reading scores but must show some aptitude, too, in both math and science. DISCIPLINE PAYS OFF Contrary to much public opinion, a boy does not need to have a college degree to get a good job in business. Industry is looking hard for the boys who have learned to discipline themselves, who can follow orders, are eager to learn new skills, and want to lead satisfactory work lives. Thousands of boys across the United States, quite uninspired by academic pur- suits, are not given a vocational education relevent to their desires and present abilities. This puts them on the streets of large cities and causes sociologists to label them "social dynamite." Portland's vocational-school program is designed to avert this problem. Young Oregonians consider it an honor, then, and not a disgrace, to graduate from Benson. I witnessed this sense of pride when I registered at my downtown hotel. The young desk clerk asked: "What's The Christian Science i~Ionitor doing way out here in Portland?" "1,Tisiting the Benson Polytechnic High School," I answered. He looked startled for just a moment then recovered himself saying, "Well, I graduated from Benson and I'm mighty proud of it." MORE THAN 100 BOYS TURNED DOWN Last September more than 100 boys were refused admission because there was no more room in this free, selective, public high school for grades 9 to 12. Almost half of the boys have part-time work during weekends and vacations related to the vocational and technical work they are doing in school. And many of the college-bound enter universities, institutes of technology, and four-year colleges with advanced standing due to the superior work they have done in math and science at Benson. Benson is a no-nonsense school. As Aki Nishimura, vice-principal explained: "I guess you might call us old-fashioned here. We don't allow the boys to wear outlandish hair or clothes, and we keep a pretty tight rein on the activities." The prescribed courses of study reflect this attitude, too. Every freshmen must spend two of the eight periods each day in shop work. For 12 weeks these ninth graders learn practical machine technology, for 12 weeks they concentrate on industrial and communication electronics, and the internal-combustion engine takes up 12 more weeks. TEACHERS AiD SELECTION Essentially the freshman work is orientation. But it is also an opportunity for the shop men to get to know the boys. For these shop teachers, in conjunction with the guidance counselors, will help these freshmen when they become sopho- mores decide just what their major course of study will be. A student may flunk out of Benson, at which point he is reassigned to another one of Portland's high schools. For those who make it to the sophomore year, the difference between the courses for the vocation and college bound begins to widen. For example, all sophomores take a course in drawing. The technical students devote only 43 minutes a day to this essential skill; the vocational students 86 minutes. The precollege students, even though their later work is not going to call on them to use shop tools, nevertheless are taught the basics in such skills as pattern- making, plumbing, carpentry, and welding. The same shop teachers who guide the college bound, also work closely with the job bound to make employable crafts- men of them upon graduation from Benson. MARKET NEEDS KNOWN The shop teachers are expected to know the local employment market so well that boys will be sure of placement prior to graduation. Benson's record, for many years, has been 100 percent. All the boys are either in college, in the armed serv- ices, or employed full time. For vocational students, placement in a job is as important as placement in a college to a technical student. Since Benson's shop teachers also are guidance counselors for their students, job placement is on a person-to-person basis. PAGENO="0301" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2761 In fact, many Benson graduates return to their old shops and to their former teachers for part of their apprentice training with one of the labor unions. This close relationship between teacher and market place can only be envied by the shop teachers' academic counterparts. This because college guidance coun- selors must deal with more than a thousand market places. One of the major criticisms of most city vocational schools is that they are too shop oriented. That is, that the students spend too much time in the shop; too much time using their hands and not enough using their heads. STRONG ACADEMIC DIET Benson does not overemphasize shop work. The juniors and seniors headed for college spend no more than one-fourth of their time in shop, and the prevoca- tional boys no more than one-half. All the young men are given a strong academic diet with the most up-to-date curriculums available. One of the most popular electives at Benson is art. The day I visited the school, hooked rugs Were hanging in the art room and displayed prominently in the main front hall. The boys first work out an original design with water color, crayon, or colored chalk, and then transfer the pattern to the hooked rug backing. The designs were exciting and the workmanship outstanding. Benson also has managed to keep abreast of the needs of local industry by using teams of advisers representing labor and management to assist the school. The 12 major skills offered at Benson each have their own advisory committee made up of Portland business and labor leaders, and these committees advise on curriculum, teacher training, and securing of equipment to keep the shops abreast of the times. INDU5TRY COOPERATES One of the advisory committees, for example, suggested that Benson's new foundry teacher might well spend considerable time this summer working in industry. Accordingly, a few of the companies have cooperated to give him short- term employment-at full pay-for the summer montho. One school officer has the sole job of giving lifetime job-placement service to Benson graduates. Advisory committees assist him in this work. Prior to gradua- tion each boy is helped to find a place in college, in the armed services, or' in the world of work. After graduation he i,s free to return to Benson for further counseling about changing his job, getting further training, or returning to in- dustry after a stint in the armed services. I asked Mr. Nishimura about the academic program. "It is second to none," he proudly stated. "Weoffer the SMSG [School Mathematics Study Group] math `throughout, as well as PSSC Physical [Physical science Study Commission] physics, BSC'S [Biological Sciences Cńrriculurn Stttdy] `biology, and two sophisticated courses in `new chemistry.'" INNOVATION5 IN MATH Benson also has math and science courses, related to the shop work, which it devised right there. For example, the SMSG geometry program, while quite suitable for a college~bound student,' would not fit the needs of a student major- ing in prevocational patternmaking and metal fabrication. There wasn't any course in geometry related to' this basic skill, ~o Benson wrote its own, combining the talents of the mathematics department with those of the shop teachers. This is innovative education coupled with quality control. (From the Christian Science Monitor, June 27, 1967] OPPORTUNITY KEEPS ON KNoCKING DENVER, CoLo.-Biii Thompson is a dishwasher at an all-night diner. He's on from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. He sleeps in the morning, but at 1 p.m. he's at the Emily Griffith Opportunity S'chool in downtown Denver studying to be a jet aircraft repairman. He has put in 1,000 hours of training, w'ith 800 more to go. Helen Lowe works for a large Denver firm. She is a secretary, but she has never been trained in taking dictation from a machine. Every morning she spends an hour at the Opportunity School in a course in dictation. When she has completed the course she cs ill be upgraded on the company pay scale PAGENO="0302" 2762 ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs. Mary Kimball has two children in school and a four-year-old at home. Once a week she watches a TV program which is teaching her bow to sew. The TV teacher also instructs sewing classes at the Opportunity School, and Mrs. Kimball is on the waiting list for one of the advanced sewing classes. LANGUAGE LEARNED Juan Ramero arrived in Denver on a Saturday. On Monday his cousin had him registered in an English class. Juan quickly learned enough English to enroll in the Opportunity School's high-school program and he is following an individualized course through English, math, and social studies. His math teacher has assured Juan that he can take a basic electronics course next year in the evenings and continue his job as a polisher in a car-wash establishment. In 1916, the year that the Denver Opportunity School opened its doors, 2,398 Juans, Marys, Helens, and Bills came to take advantage of its unique personalized educational service. Last year, more than 32,000 young and older adults took at least one course at this public school. The youngest students at the Opportunity School are 16. These pupils are enrolled in other Denver public high schools and take only one special course at the Opportunity School. The next youngest pupils .are over 21 and quite possibly are school dropouts who want either to finish high school or take a course, such as shoe repair, which will give them an immediate. marketable skill. The oldest student at this year-round S a.m.-to-10 p.m. school is 95. He is enrolled in a daytime oil-painting class and was at work on a flower still life the day I kibitized over his shoulder. The City of Denver operates 130 schools with an annual budget of $78 million. The Opportunity School spends. $2 million of that each year. Enrollees who live and work outside the school district must pay a modest tuition, but for all Denver residents the courses are free. SPECIAL COURSES SLATED The Opportunity School will set up any course any time if there is sufficient interest and need. A rubber company, for example, which was opening a subsidiary company in Belgium, asked for and got a crash program in technical French. A group of men from several large advertising firms offered to conduct clinics for small-business operators. The clinics were set up at convenient locations around Denver and proved a tremendous boon to the small-business men who must handle their own advertising. Another short clinic was held for store detectives. A certain type of skilled machinist was needed by one large Denver company. The business took $85,000 worth of machinery over to the school, freed a foreman to teach a course, took the machinery back to the plant, and hired the students from the course who began production work on the same equipment on which they had trained. The Opportunity School also tries to get ahead of job needs by feeling the business pulse of the community. For example, the school had trained TV repairmen before the first set was sold in Denver. The school also introduced jet-engine repair, and graduated certified repairmen before there was a jet at Stapleton Airport. In the context of the nation's growth, Denver is still an American melting pot. Hundreds of immigrants first learn English and apply for citizenship in this mile-high city. The school's citizenship teacher, Miss Esther Heller, is herself an immigrant from Poland who first learned English as a foreign language at the Opportunity School. Then she took the course in citizenship, following this by taking enough basic education courses to get a high-school diploma. She is now a college grad- uate. and a teacher at the university level as well as at the Opportunity School. WAITING LIST GROWS Along with several others, the citizenship class has a waiting list. On March 20, the waiting list for the more popular courses stood at 3,732. At the same time, there are always some vacancies in classes because each student in each class moves along at his own pace. As soon as a student completes a course, the first one on the waiting list is notified. He may enter the class immediately-there is no waiting period. PAGENO="0303" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2763 Students enrolled in barbering or cosmetology normally put in an eight-hour day five days a week until they have studied the required hours and are ready to pass the state examinations. The many students who cannot come for more than one hour a day are also accommodated. This has been the school's policy since its beginning. That beginning goes back to 1907, when Miss Emily Griffith, a Denver public- school teacher, visited the homes of her children to find out why their homework wasn't done and why their clothes were tattered and torn. She found that their fathers were often out of work, unskilled, and uneducated. She also discovered that mothers were inept at budgeting what little money they had and didn't recognize the potential of good schooling. To break the cycle of poverty, sickness, and deprivation, Miss Griffith reasoned, a school was needed. Such a school should allow adults to do high-school work, should teach trade skills such as carpentry, sewing, auto mechanics, and welding. Miss Griffith also determined that such a school need require no previous edu- cational background, should be open and free to residents of Denver, should have teachers willing to double as counselors, should give no grades, and require no homework. For 50 years the Emily Griffith Opportunity School in downtown Denver has pursued its original policy. The school also has reached outside its own buildings and conducts classes over TV and in more than 100 locations around the city. COMPUTER USED Most of the courses taught at the Opportunity School are devised right there. The teachers write their own curriculums, set up their own workbooks, and the school shop prints out the desired number of copies. The Opportunity School owns its own IBM 1440 computer. The computer teacher heard that a 1440 had been damaged in a recent flood and asked for the machine. He got it for what it cost to transport it to the school, taught computer repair and maintenance to a class while cleaning it, and now is able to use the computer in several special computer-technology classes. Sewing is the most popular activity at the school. For a few of the women it is a hobby. But for most it is a way of making a living or of augmenting the family income. The Opportunity School offers training to apprentices in such trades as bar- bering, `boilerinaking, carpentry, electrical construction, printing, plumbing, and sign painting. In some instances Opportunity School teachers go to the industrial plants to give instruction. Inothers, the students come to the school. Women and girls living at homes and hospitals in the area are also included in the Opportunity School program. Teachers come to them with courses in bookkeeping, business education, business English. This year, employees of the Colorado State Highway Department can take a čourse in letter writing. This work is given to those who already have typing skills, but who have not had a recent course in business writing. Students interested in becoming salesmen, merchandisers, or sales managers take one of the more than 50 courses in distributive education. Art is taught for those who want to work on layout and designs of ads and sales displays. A career training course includes instruction in retail buying, advertising, credit insur- ance, real estate, traffic, transportation as it affects business sales, small-business management, and other related topics. EXPERIENCE OBTAINED Denver's high-school seniors who elect distributive education spend the morn- ings in class and the afternoons on the job-to the tune of 15 hours a week. The arts-and-crafts division is always full to overflowing. There are courses in basic drawing, ceramics, enamel on metal, jewelrymaking, lapidary, silversmith- ing, `sculpturing, woodworking, and painting. For many of the pupils in these courses the school is their social center. A wisbing'wel'l is kept at the front office for those who say, "I wish you taught XXX." If it's not taught, then the wish is put in the well which is frequently emptied. A sufficient number of Denver citizens all desiring the same program will have their wish granted. The Opportunity, School `is just that-an opportunity,. For those who are just lonely it is a place of companionship For those who are illiterates it is a way out of darkness. `For those beset by poverty `it is the road to a jOb, dignity, and personal success. PAGENO="0304" 2764 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 [FrOm the Christian Science Monitor, July 3, 1967] VOCATIONAL CENTER WITH "EVERYTHING" LAS VEGAS, Nnv.-The administrator of schools fOr technical, vocational, and adult education in Nevada's Clark .County, Raymond L. Sturm, is a man with a dream. Part of this dream has been realized in the form of a 3.2 million voca- tional-technical school located high on a mesa overlooking the Sunrise Moun- tains and the Nevada desert.' Las Vegas, long known for its wide~open gambling and lavish hotels and casinos, now boasts one of the most advanced vocational schools in the world. The Southern Nevada Vocational-Technical Center is every inch modern. Wall-to-wall carpeting is laid throughout, with the exception of a few shop areas. Gourmet cooking classes use a $2,000 grant from the federal government to buy, prepare, and serve such seafood delicacies as scallops, lobster, crab, and even frogs' legs. A complete motel unit is a teaching laboratory for the hotel-management classes. Service-station attendants are trained in an up-to-date automobile service station. Movable partitions rather than interior wails, designate work and class areas. Electronically controlled work stations serve those studying office practices. Students, using electric office equipment, can tune in on headsets to get dictation lessons given at their own speed level from a central controL A central library specializes in technological books and magazines. Study and listening carrels are spotted throughout the school. The latest electronic equipment is used for diagnosing and correcting mechani- cal automobile deficiencies. The beauty shop boasts special equipment for hair dyeing, facials, manicuring, wigmaking and care, hair cutting, shampooing, and setting. Of the 86 schools in Clark County, the vocational school is the most. expensive, most lavish, most elegant, most functional. For years vocational education in Las Vegas as well as in the rest of the United States has taken second place to academics. Learning for doing has been relegated to basements, barns, prefabricated structures, condemned buildings, and the like. Vocational students, by and large, have been given little or no counseling, no praise from the school district for their school or work achievements, and have been forced to make do using old outmoded equipment. SHORTAGE FOUND A few secretarial and home economics courses and some work in industrial arts were all that Las Vegas offered its noncollege-bound boys and girls up to 1966. Yet there are relatively few jobs available in Nevada which demand a college degree. Most require some hand skill, and the schools had, until most recently, failed to provide this. The other part of Mr. Sturm's dream has been a full education for every boy and girl. In his cinder-block office located on a patch of desert, this sensitive educator recently made an `eloquent plea for truth-telling on the part of school people. It is his dream that all school personnel unite to give `every child a relevant education, one which combines professional academic skills with professional work skills. A special study of the employment needs in Clark County turned up a serious shortage of trained service-station attendants. Every day thousands of tourists flock to Las Vegas. Many come by automobile, and Las Vegas is a main truck stop for hundreds of cross-state and cross-country truckers. There are more than 500 service stations in Clark County; a questionnaire returned . by some 200 of them helped determine the curriculum for an. unusual course. An 11th grade boy, who elects the service-station course, takes two hours of auto mechanics a day on top of his regular academic schedule. SALESMANSHIP TAUGHT His shop training is not professional or expected to turn out a skilled me- chanic, but rather to familiarize him with how automobile and truck engines PAGENO="0305" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2765 function. Other instruction includes the servicing of different engines, both gasoline and diesel. During his final year in high school, the prospective service-station attendant learns proper salesmanship techniques and how to deal with the public. Here his training is taken, in part, in the distributive education division. He goes to the office skills personnel for help in simple and double-entry bookkeeping, and back to the auto mechanics shop for detailed information about the products sold in most service stations. For example, he is taught the difference in composition between a standard and a premium tire. He is shown how different batteries operate, how they are made, and what constitutes "life" for a battery. His chemistry instruction goes Into paints and polishes, fuel viscosity, and a breakdown of lubricants. All the boys in the course `can elect a work-study program which allows them some on-the-job training after school and `during vacations. So far, Mr. Sturni reports, all graduating students have b'een placed in service stations, an'd all employers report satisfaction. OPPORTUNITY OFFERED It is expected that some of the boys will return to the vocational school to study auto mechanics ~nore deeply, that others will want to major in auto body work, and that a few others will `want to get further help in the operation of a small business in the hope of owning and operating their own service stations. The girls w'ho come to the center to learn office practices already `have taken typing and possibly `shorthand in their home high schools. But the center offers them the opportunity to become specialists and to pa'ss rigid examinations in specific office skills. In accordance with standard business practice, the girls work at desks similar to the "stations" they can expect to encounter w'hen they become wage earners. They use electric typewriters. Each desk has its own telephone. And each girl moves through assigned tasks at her own pace monitored by a teacher. At some time during a morning of work, a downtown lawyer may ~aH and ask for a girl to take a letter. The switchboard operator, a student in training, flips to the phone of a girl training to be a legal secretary and to `the instructor. The lawyer interrupts the girl's morning routine, dictates the letter, and then hangs up. NOTICE ATTRACTED The student is expected to carry out the instructions to the teacher's sat- isfaction and the letter will be sent downtown for the lawyer's approval and signature. The same girl will learn to take dictation from a variety of machines containing several different types of voices, all dictating at different rates of speed. Every program at this exceptional vocation school is worked out with the same creativeness and sense of purpose. Not yet a' year old, the center is already attracting countrywide notice for both its design and its innovative curriculum. One of the counselors, a woman who was in on the year of program plan- ning before the school even opened, told me that she had never had a more rewarding time. Another Clark County school official said that a top notch English teacher from one of the academic high schools was moving to the vocational center. He `said that she was so thrilled by the philosophy of combining academics with vocational experience that she doesn't want to be left out. Certainly this multimillion dollar school pulses with Mr. Sturin's philosophy. Not only is the building magnificent and architecturally exciting, but the teachers are exciting. The classes are stimulated, the teaching dedicated. Mr. Sturm denies vehemently that this type of education is any less re- spectable than a strictly academic diet. In fact, he maintains that the prac- tical applications of chemistry, mathematics, English, and physics required for a boy to learn the ins and outs of properly servicing and overhauling automo- biles and other machinery is just what academia needs. "We act like tin gods when we tell the nation that we are serving the boys and girls when we give them a purely theoretical education," says Mr. Sturm. "But we aren't serving them. We aren't even exciting them about learning. "Vocational and academic education must work together. It isn't one or the other. It is both." 80-084-67-pt. 4-20 PAGENO="0306" 2766 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 [From the Christian Science MonItor, July 11, 1967] UNDER ONE ROOF IN CANADA ETOBICOKE, CANADA.-Canadian educators call it a "composite school," by which they mean the combining of vocational and academic training under one roof. On either side of the border, the concept can start an argument whenever two or more vocational-technical educators get together. In 1966, the New York City Board of Education ruled that separate voca- tional and technical schools were "out" and that comprehensive schools, com- bining academic with vocational and technical courses, were "in." This spring the board reversed its position, and the old controversy flared anew. The New York superintendent of schools and the Board of Education, while committed to comprehensive schools in theory, have declared that the closing of separate vocational and technical schools is just not economically feasible. Critics of the "separate-schools" policy charge that discrimination is at the heart of the New York decision. The city's trade schools enroll a majority of ethnic-group children. Opponents argue that this doesn't give such children a proper chance at a richer academic diet. Separate vocational schools are too often thought of as second rate and have long been known informally as the dumping ground for "difficult" students. It is quite true that the boy or girl who is academically deficient, socially inept, rebellious, or fractious is frequently counseled out of an academic pro- gram into a vocational one. SUITABILITY ARGUED But vocational educators insist that such students are even less suited to learning a skill-combining scholarship with manual dexterity-than they are to following a less-demanding program stressing academics. While New York argues, the Borough of Etobicoke, just west of Toronto, has taken composite schools in its stride. Two special vocational schools continue in operation. But these are for boys and girls of limited ability who need to learn basic care of themselves as well as how to hold down an imskilled or semiskilled job. Almost all the Etobicoke Borough high schools combine an arts and science program with either business, or commerce and technology, or both. Not all of the high schools teach all the various skills and subjects, and only five carry a strong technical program. The policy, though, is to house teaching of the separate academic disciplines and manual skills under one roof, and to give each student the same options, electives, pride in scholarship and school, and opportunity for free choice of program. Etobicoke is in an area of exciting growth. In 1928, the township had one. high school. Today the borough has 17-most of which are helping to provide the skilled workers needed by area industries. Laboratory technicians are needed, as are men in the construction trades. Girls with secretarial and office skills can be employed by the scores of businesses moving into this Toronto suburb. Recently I visited Martingrove Collegiate Institute, for grades .9-13. Martin- grove opened its doors in December, 1966. and is already building an addition. When completed, the school will have cost more than $5 mifflon. Martingrove conducts two curriculums: arts and science, and science and technology. About 60 percent of the students are enrolled in the technical pro- gram; the others are enrolled in the more academic arts and science curriculum. FOLLOw-TIP SOUGHT Martingrove's prin~ipal, James M. Day is very much in favor of composite schools. "The academic work which is common to both programs is not divided up," he explained. "If we were to split them into different classes, we must make differing standards, and this is unfair." Students who elect arts and science are university bound and must complete a five-year program to qualify. Boys and girls who major in science and tech- nology may opt for a four-year terminal program or a five-year university-bound curriculum. And students may change their courses if they decide either to complete high school at Grade 12 instead of Grade 13 or vice versa. When Mr. Day and I visited the microbiology laboratory we got into conver- sation with a 10th grader. PAGENO="0307" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2767 "I was in arts and science, but now I've switched to technology," be said. "I am specializing in microbiology now and looking for a university course to follow it up. After that, I want to teach in a setup just like this one." The youngster was working on a project of his own devising. He was handling research tools with enthusiasm and considerable skill. Beside him was a boy pre- paring and studying slides. At the front of the room the teacher was demon- strating a heating-for-testing technique. SHOPWORK PURSUED The microbiology room was designed by the instructor. It was added to the sëience axid technology program at the suggestion of the school's advisers on tech- nical subjects. The lab is complete, with three incubator rooms: one for 37 de- grees centrigrade. one for 25 degrees centigrade, and one for 2 degrees centigrade. Martin~rove Collegiate Institute also offers a course in industrial physics com- plete with functioning laboratory-testing equipment. This special course includes study of fluid power, mechanics of materials,, instrumentation, as well as elec- tricity and electronics. Students perform electric and electronic shop work in the electronics labora- tory after learning related theory in the industrial physics room. Each student works at his own pace, sometimes in twos or threes, on individual problems and projects. Classroom equipment includes a power supply of fluid connected by snap-on hoses to certain instruments; the teacher controls the supply. Students are given problems whose solution requires connecting the right hoses to the right instru- meats. Thus they can see and experience for themselves the combining of theory with practice. Industrial physics also is offered in a four-year or five-year program. The five- year students are headed for university and already preparing for the engineer- ii~g profession. The boys in the four-year program become skilled workers with sufficient academic background for further education at a community or techni- cal college. Ninth and 10th graders enrolled in science and technology at Martingrove C. I. have a completely prescribed program of studies. Each student spends 2~/2 months in each of the shops. This ensures, Mr. Day explained, a better choice of career. SHOULDER RUBBING Each student is able to find out for himself where his talents and interests lie~ He gets a fuller appreciation of the type of discipline involved in each of the sub- ject areas. Martingrove offers auto mechanics. architectural and mechanical drafting, electricity, electronics, machine technology, industrial physics, and microbiology. The boy or girl who might want to study industrial chemistry would apply to Thistletown Collegiate Institute or Brunhamt'horpe Collegiate Institute, two other schools in the Borough of Etobicoke. Girls interested in becoming dental assistants would need to apply to Etobicoke C. I. Mr. Day is equally interested in all his students. As he sees it, the boy or girl completing Martingrove C. I. at the end of the 12th grade is no different from the one continuing through Grade 13 and then entering university. Martingrove's motto is: "Lumen in vobis est"-"The light comes from within." Mr. Day elaborated on this theme by adding. "The boys and girls all have the spark of intelligence in them. it's our task to bring it out and put it to the best use for them." Asked to explain in .a word why he was so in favor of the composite-school idea, Mr. Day thought for a moment and then said, "Rubbing shoulders, that's what's important." [From the Christian Science Monitor, July 18, 19671 EDUCATION FOR TOMORROW'S JOBS FORT LAUDERDALE, FLA.-When should vocational education begin? A few educators argue that all skill training, all occupational education, should come after a student has completed 12 years of high school. Many insist that students should be tested between the ages of 11 and 14; all those not rated academically superior should be given three or four years of vocational training toward immediate employment in manual labor. PAGENO="0308" 2768. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 A very few-an articulate few-are beginning to talk seriously about voca~ tional training from kindergarten through adulthood. Those who talk about combining vocational, technical, and academic educa- tion all though the entire school program have a name for this-the organic cur- riculum. These innovators want no part of fragmented learning. They don't want divisions between manual and literary skills. In the wOrds of Robert M. Morgan and David S. Bushnell of the United States Office of Education: "Unfortunately, much of what is now taught in our public schools fails to recognize that technology is generating profound changes in the nature of work. The tendency in the past to separate general and vocational education has penal- ized both those who are college-bound and those who plan to terminate their formal education at the end of high school or junior college. "The academically oriented students are directed to those college-preparatory programs which will enhance their performance on the college-entrance exams. They have little opportunity to acquire a knowledge of the functioning of the business and industrial community. "At the same time, vocational students receive too little opportunity to develop competence in the basic learning skills which they must have if they are to cope adequately with present-day society." CURRICULUM MODIFIED At the Nova Schools, Fort Lauderdale's world-famous innovative public schools for Grades 1-12, a modified organic curriculum is already in effect with con- siderably more to come. For example, the Nova Elementary School contains a practical arts room which was designed by Warren Smith, Nova's supervisor of technical education. The practical-arts room is manned by a vocational educator-a teacher skilled in the use of power equipment, simple tools, arts and crafts techniques. Equip-~ ment includes jig saws, lathes, carpentry tools, a small printing press, washer, dryer, refrigerator, child-height electric stoves, work benches, vises, simple- electronic testing equipment, clay, wood, plaster of Paris, metal, water. Even the youngest children come to the room for work on projects. They come in small and large groups, singly, with and without a homeroom teacher, and grow remarkably familiar with basic manual skills. While I was there, the youngest pupils were constructing models of famous dams. They had cut out the plywood boards they were using, painted the surface, designed a landscape from available materials, used reference books in the library to see the differences in the constructions of dams, and built their own out of soft wood. WIDE VAR~TY OFFERED Mr. Smith also has the elementary-school library stocked with vocationally oriented books. The children not only read about the friendly policeman but the contented carpenter, happy mason, clever architect, careful electrician, and so forth. Reading assignments in the lower grades include, basic blueprint reading, and arithmetic lessons often require practical applications through model build- ing or planning. With the coming school year, Nova's 7th to 12th graders will be required to elecl at least one technical-science course each year of high school in addition to a full program of science, social studies, English, mathematics, and foreign language~ This wide variety of courses is possible not only because Nova High School has modular scheduling but because more than half the students at any given time are working on individual projects. The flexible scheduling, with each student responsible for his own program, combined with extensive use Of programed texts, direct teaching by TV, and computer-assisted instruction makes it possible for Nova students to combine academic and vocational education at their own literary and manual-skill levels. Achievement in the `technical and vocational skills, Mr. Smith explained, will be measured by competency and not by time spent in class. All 7th-year Nova students will be required to take a course called visual com- munications. Occupational skills to be learned in that program include: perspec- tive drawing, isometric drawing, orthographic projections, and scale drawings. The 8th-year students must all learn to type; to operate keyboard equipment, drafting equipment, and electronic testing equipment. PAGENO="0309" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2769 BREAKING THE IMAGE Mr. Smith explains that Nova's vocational program is not designed to serve just the employment needs of Fort Lauderdale. Instead, he sees Nova as a pilot study and showcase for the entire United States, demonstrating an integrated or organic curriculum to fit the needs of all students. Nova, therefore, will not teach barbering, or cosmetology, or restaurant cooking, or auto mechanics. The six areas to be covered in technical science are: graphic arts, drafting, mechanical technology, home science, electronics, and business education. Nova is trying valiantly to break the image of girls only taking typing and shorthand, sewing and cooking. The world of work is wide open to women, and Nova is asking all its students, not just the boys, to take a thorough program of technical education. Each year business and industry demand skilled workers at the technical- assistant level. Research laboratories, test laboratories, drafting studios-none can find enough trained workers. These are areas in which girls could make a significant contribution, but vocational-education critics charge that most high- school counselors fail to point this out to the noncoilege-bound girls in the student body. Statistics available from the State of Wyoming tell that, of 35,895 students in Grades 7-12 in the public schools this year, 13,158 were enrolled in typing, book- keeping, and secretarial courses. No Wyoming girls were offered cosmetology, graphic arts, printing occupations, or laboratory-technician programs. Even where a broad range of vocational training is available to girls, few ever take advantage of it. A study of nine school systems by a team of vocational- education researchers at Pennsylvania State University revealed that the schools themselves have compounded the problem by giving girls a bad image of voca- tional education in general and of themselves as part of the labor force in particular. MORE ELBOW ROOM The conventional notions hold that: there are few occupations appropriate for girls; girls should only plan on working until they get married; girls should not prepare themselves for important jobs because they will marry and waste their training. Nova High School is taking the leadership in destroying these notions, and the Pennsylvania State University study team urges the rest of the academic community to follow suit. According to the study, intertwining vocational with academic schooling would solve the problem of vocational training for girls. Nova is not only pioneering a vocational-technical program which includes girls in the technical areas, and boys in the business-education currictilum, but in a broader concept of occupational training which will allow graduates more elbow room in the working world. A recent government study predicts that adults liv- ing in the latter half of the 20th century will change occupations at least three times. Already automation of skilled and semi-skilled jobs is dramatically showing up the shortcomings of too specific training in job skills. The worker of tomorrow needs to have a broad enough background in vocational-technical education to move from one skill area to another without requiring massive retraining. This is what the organic curriculum seeks to achieve. This is the sort of voca- tional training Nova is-proud to offer its students. EFrom the Christian Science Monitor, July 25, 19671 DEMAND FOR SKILLED WORKERS ESCALATING Contrary to what most United States citizens may believe, there will be more, not less, need for skilled workers in the near future. Government economists predict that by 1975 the total number of jobs will increase by 18 percent. Here is -how these economists forecast the needs: Professional-technical workers, up 54 percent; clerical workers, up 37 percent; service workers (gas-station, attendants, etc.), up 35 percent. To meet these demands, public schools are having to reverse themselves on vocational training Schooling for skills is experiencing a renaissance. PAGENO="0310" 2770 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 United States public-school authorites have gone under the false assumption that every student capable of doing college-level work should go to college, and that other normally intelligent youngsters should have a strictly academic high- school program. This has meant that training for blue-collar jobs has too often been given only to the academically weak, emotionally immature, and socially inferior. National statistics emphasize this imbalance. Of the children born in 1944, 19 percent left school before the 11th grade; 30 percent didn't finish high school. Thirty-five percent entered college, but only 20 percent was graduated with a bachelor's degree. This means that 8 of every 10 boys and girls were available to fill jobs which did not need a college degree. Only one out of the eight received any occupational. training in the public schools. VOGATIO~AL SKILL IN DEMAND To put it another way, 70 percent of today's 23-year-olds had no job training in school and have not completed a college education. Yet nearly 80 percent of all: the jobs available in the United States require some vocational or technical skill.. Only now are public schools acknowledging that they were wrong to overem- phasize academics at the expense of vocational education. To make up for past neglect, schools across the United States are today putting in equipment, upgrad- ing vocational faculty, giving more vocational guidance to good students, and beginning to work closely with advisory teams from labor, business, and in-~ dustry. Two schools, one which specializes in vocational education and the other which is a comprehensive high school, have been in the business of schooling for skills for many years. They point the way for other school districts. The Allentown high schools have been offering vocational education alongside academic education to young Pennsylvanians since 1916. George W. Elison, the present director of vocational education in Allentown, feels very strongly about the need to keep schooling for skills as well as college in one comprehensive high school. The vocational students spend half their time in the shops, and the other half in academic courses mixed into classes with the nonvocational students~. The choice of courses taught in Allentown reflects the job needs of the corn- inunity. In 1966-67 Allentown's two high schools offered: auto-body repair~ auto mechanics, brick masonry, cabinetmaking, carpentry, ch~rnical technology, archi- tectural drafting, mechanical drafting, general electricity, electronics tech- nology, radio and TV servicing, machine-shop practice, plumbing-heating-cool- ing, printing, welding and fabrication, distributive education (salesmanship).. The Allentown school di.strict also operates an adult vocational-education pro- gram. Formal courses are available there in chemical technology, data process- ing, computer programing, doctor's assistant, practical nursing, and a very spe- cial six-week course in tractor-trailer driving. The day I visited the truck-driving course, student drivers were out on the range going through prescribed maneuvers. Mornings are spent in the classroom going over driving techniques, simple truck repair. and rules of the road. So thorough is the program that drivers who successfully pass the course get credit for two years of driving experience. The truck-driving course, like the doctor's assistant program, was set up to meet an immediate employment need in the area. The chemistry laboratory is used both for students* taking advanced-place- ment chemistry and those in chemical technology. The chemistry students are preparing to enter four-year colleges with advanced standing in chemistry. The chemical-technology students are preparing either for technical college or im- mediate employment as laboratory technicians. Whichever the goal, the facilities far exceed what would be available in a strictly academic high-school chemistry lab. Nearly 200 business and labor leaders in Allentow-n make up the advisory staff for the vocational and technical courses. These community leaders help to keep the programs updated. replace equipment, train the shop teachers, aud help in the placement of the graduates. Just as Allentown's academic program reflects the thinking of college professors, so the vocational program is influenced by labor and business leaders. PAGENO="0311" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2771 SOUND PREPARATION ACCENTED And there is no excuse in Allentown for any student to graduate without sound preparation either for college or for a job which will use the skills he has learned. The comprehensive high school provides communities across the United States with a way to rise to challenge of giving a relevant education to the neglected 7 out of every 10 students. The area vocational school is another workable scheme. The 5.' M. Wright Technical School, set in a public park in Stamford, Oonn., also has a long history of successful vocational and technical education. Wright Tech (as itis called by the students) started out in 1921 as a vocational school without high-school, diploma-granting status. Since 1945, it `has been graduating skilled workers as wellas some college bound. Wright Tech is one of 14 area vocational-technical schools in Connecticut. Vocational educators ac- knowledge that this Southern New England state is doing one of the best jobs in the nation offering schooling for skills to a significant number of its school children. Wright Tech takes boys and girls in the 10th grade on recommendation of their previous school and the results of aptitude tests. John Kerpchar, Wright director, says that the school will not take just any boy or girl. Instead, he maintains, he wants only those with the aptitude, interest, stamina, patience, and self-discipline to handle both a high-school academic program and a full shop program., YEARBOOK WINS AND WINS Mr. Kerpchar runs a highly disciplined school. Dress and grooming codes are strictly maintained. The building is spotless, the pupils polite, and the student body displays considerable sense of pride. This one vocational-technical school offers a full program of physical education with varsity sports teams, gives dances, schedules a colorful graduation ceremony each June, sponsors a yearly trip to Washington for the seniors, and manages to squeeze in a very active club program. The Wright yearbook repeatedly wins awards for both style and content. As in many of the better technical schools in the United States, the curriculum is written to order by the faculty. All the shops do production work. Students spend one full week in a shop and one full week in related classroom instruction. A few girls are studying to be nursery-school attendants. They not only work at nearby nursery schools but take care of the small children brought by mothers who come to the school beauty shop as customers. ` Girls studying practical nursing spend eight months in a hospital learning on the job. Girls in the beauty-culture program must put in 2,000 hours working on "live" customers. The dental assistants work closely with area' dentists not only at the school but in on-the-job training in their offices. Boys and girls in the food- preparation class not only serve lunch each day to a portion of the faculty and staff but do some catering for call-in customers. The tool-and-die students in the machine shop made an instrument for the' Stamford Museum telescope and were, the day I visited, forming rods to be used in the reconstruction of an old mill. A former student in electronics did a senior project which hooked the school's clock system'into the Bureau of Standards in Washington. Another boy worked out a complete weather-prediction system in one electronic unit. The magazine rack in the `library gives a `clear profile of Wright Tech and how it is meeting the needs of the students. A few of the titles are Popular Science, Motor, Scientific American, Time, Life, Sports Illustrated, Better Homes, House and Garden, Harper's, Atlas, Popular Electronics, United States News and World Report, National Geographic, Saturday Review, Parents, MeCalls, and Vogue. Miss PARSONS Two years ago I traveled around foi a series of ar tides for the Monitor entitled, "What's Right in American SchoOls," looking for the strengths. I asked the educators what they thought their soft spots were, and in city after city it was i~ ocational education So I made a little mental PAGENO="0312" 2772 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 note, that I would come back to this area when I had a chance-and in the meantime Federal legislation in 1963 began to be funded in 1965, and at this point there is considerable stirring in vocational education. There are facilities up-just in-but there is a tremendous kind of spirit m the area that hasn't been there before. In my office, I get mail from all over the world and from all sorts of educational things, and it began to get heavier and heavier and heavier on skills and jobs, and I began to get a feeling of some controversy, which is always good. And so in the winter I wrote to the directors of vocational educa- tion in the 50 States and asked them for help in determining where some vocational schools were, and I was directed in Kentucky to Somerset, Ky., and I visited the vocational school there. Chairman PERKINS. You mean there was one already there, Miss Parsons? Miss PARSONS. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. MiSS PARSONS. I spent a day visiting the school and talking. I was on the phone with them just the other day. They have been able to get a much larger facility and are very delighted about it and so on. Anyway, I then traveled in the last 3 months all over the United States visiting various kinds of vocational schools, and I would like to describe at this point what is existing in vocational schools. There is the comprehensive high school with a vocational arm per- sonified, perhaps, by the Allentown, Pa., school I visited. Allentown High is about 100 years old. It has ha.d vocational educa- tion in it for about a hundred years. The program is a good, strong program in vocational education. About 30 percent of the students are in vocational education, 30 to 40, which is considerably more than the national average, which is something under 5 percent. The comprehensive high school that has a vocational program has traditionally, over the last, oh, 40 years, begun to phase it out, and it wasn~t until the Federal funding in 1963, which didn't start t.o get started really until about 1965, that there was a new impetus. What had happened was that the traditional skill training became sort of calcified, over the last, oh, 40 years, begun to phase it out, and it retool equipment, and teachers and programs, and so fewer and fewer students wanted to go into a program that didn't look like it was going to end them up in a good job, and fewer and fewer even entered it. Even the most `popular at all across the country, neglecting agricul- tural education, was auto mechanics, and even auto mechanics fell off as students were made to do assignments on what they called "dead engines." The equipment wasn't able to keep up. Those schools are now beginning to retool, beginning to act as though the vocational educator is as fine a man as the academic administrator, and they are beginning once again to work hand-in-hand. The other kind of vocational training possible is the city which has separate schools. One is a purely academic school, it might have some secretarial training in it, and the separate school is then strictly a vocational school. It has its own band, its own graduation ceremonies, and so on, and these two were mostly in cities, the large cities were the only sort of areas that could afford to have two really distinct schools, and so they often had several of them, and these, too, began to get, over PAGENO="0313" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2773 the last, traditionally 30 years, fewer and fewer students of the right kind, and bit by bit they became a dumping ground. These are not being retooled as are the vocational programs in the comprehensive schools to any of the great degree that other programs are, and part of the reason is a strong argument on the part of edu- cators as to whether or not there should be separate facilities. The claim is that they are separate but not equal. Many of the spokesmen for Negro groups say they are dumping grounds for the Negroes, and say they are deliberately maintained for this purpose. This is an argu- ment of the NAACP in wanting to close New York City's separate school facilities, separate-strictly vocational. Another argument is that a school must have a strong academic pro- gram to have a good school, and by that time you have gone back to making it a comprehensive school. There is the old blue collar-white collar argument that holds up the funding of these facilities within the confines of the city. But there is a great interest in an entirely new type of facility, and that is called the Area Vocational School, and Somerset, Ky., is an area vocational school. It serves counties-I think it is three-and sometimes like 11 school districts. The longest distance any student comes is something like 60 miles, and the director of the school has found approved lodging in town so in a sense it is almost residential for some of the students who come a long distance. Pinta County, Ohio, has gone into vocational education-Pinta County High School; there is no county named Pinta-Pinta means 5-it serves five counties south of Toledo. It serves many high schools. The students in those high schools continue to have their identity in that school. There is a Fulton County High School student who rides the bus every day over to the Pinta County Vocational School, and returns in the afternoon to Fulton County High School where he joins in the athletic program, extra curricular, or whatever, and when he gets his high school degree, he gets it from his own school, not from the area vocational school. The Somerset area vocational school is one of a different variety,~ slightly different in that it does grant a degree. It is a high school; it has a high school program of its own. Both kinds of these vocational schools operate on a 6 or 7 days a week, 17 to 21 hours a day basis every day out of the year. The Pinta County School and the Somerset School have closed school for high school at about 3:30, and sometimes the technical col- lege is maybe 3:30 to maybe 8:00 in the evening, and leads to a 2-year associate technical degree, and then at 7:30 or 8 :30 in the evening it turns into an adult school for dropout returns, further specialized skill training, basic educ'ttion and veterans and so on Another variety of this kind of area vocational school is the one in Las Vegas, Nev. I hardly believed that Las Vegas, Nev., could provide a good voca- tional high school, and the young man who fixes my automobile at the Sunoco station where I live asked me where I had been a short time ago. And I said I had been in Las Vegas looking at the vocational school. PAGENO="0314" 2774 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS `OF 1967 And he said, "Yes?" And I brought him back the article I wrote on the Las Vegas vocational school. It is the most beautiful vocational school in the country. It has wall-to-wall carpeting. I was treated to frogs legs provencal, and asked where the school got the funds, and was told the school had gotten a grant to get rare fish delicacies in order to teach the foods they would be cooking if they got jobs at the fine casinos, and hotels in .Las.Vegas.. The school has unbelievable equipment, and for 2 years in the plan- ning stage, it is a completely comprehensive school. It has closed circuit television, it is in the wall no less-it is a mag- nificent place, really. Its programs are very exciting. One very kind of interesting thing in its secretarial training is that girls generally-boys are supposed to have the aptitude for auto mechanics, do live production work to make the work interesting and to make it realistic, instead of working on. mounted engines. Girls have had traditionally dead work to do. They copied letters that weren't going anywhere, and wrote finger exercises on the type- writer that also weren't going anywhere. Each girl in this school, sits at a station and there is a switchboard, and someone in town who may wa.nt a letter, a lawyer or doctor or businessman, can call and ask to dictate a `letter, the phone hookup goes to one of the instructors and the students. She then writes the letter, it is corrected by the supervisor and is then sent downtown to the doctor, lawyer, or whoever, for his signature, et cetera. I went deliberately to schools that were doing what they felt was a very good jOb, and at all of them that offered this provision, they were all very, very complimentary about it, and that was to allow into the classes with high school students, older students, who had dropped out of school. They all were very complimentary about the effect this .had if they could control the numbers, if they had six or eight young adults who were particularly interested in, getting a certain training, and' they put them in thO classes with the, high school students, that this worked out very well. ` . I don't want to give a rosy picture of' the vocational educa.tion pic- ture, because it really is very, .very'poor. The statistics are ~ll pretty frightening about all of what is going On in `occupational education,' and I just wanted to give a couple.'' . I am not going to give all the sou'rces' and all the background, but I um going to explain that' every~ 10 children who ~me'out of school, there are three of them who: have honestly had college preparatory tra.ining. Two. of them have had job training, and five of them are neither prepared to go to college nor take a job. ,~ These'five are heavily `weighted:~in the male or bOy, because.. more. of the girls are the 2 percent ready for a job because of the very strong business and secretarial offerings throughout, the country. The State of Wyoming~ for instance, just. to pick on it for a moment, and I ha.ven't heard anybody'. sa.~ he was from' there, has 27 percent of its offerings in office education,' and about `10 percent in college education, and nO percent in any of the traditional voc~tiona1 pro- grams, especially for girls. . ` There is no technical training; t.here is no printing; no beautifica-. tion courses; no industrial chemistry; no industrial physics. I don't believe there is a welding course. or airplane mechanics course. PAGENO="0315" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF* 1967 2775 There is auto mechanics, there is auto body work, but really very slim pickings. This five out of every 10 students, then, in the United States, are the ones you are concerned with, in some ways, if he finishes school, because he turns out to be poor very quickly, because he can't go to college and he doesn't have any job training, and the unskilled jobs have been taken by those who dropped off before he did. The dropout drops into a job, an unskilled job, but what he has decided is that money is more important to him than continuing the mile race at school, discounting all the other problems that makes him drop out. So, often, the unskilled jobs are taken by the dropouts, and as 1 say, 50 percent of the youngsters who graduate from school run into immediate difficulties. The area that probably needs the greatest attention, and which in my quick perusal of the bill before you for conversation there isn't much being done about, is the colleges and universities. Except for agriculture, there aren't programs in the colleges and universities which will turn out a vocationally trained vocational teacher, and as far as the statistics that I have been able to get inthis 50-State study, is that almost three-fourths to 90 percent of all vocational teachers or noncollege graduates, and that almost none of the State colleges and very few of the universities :offer such a program. It isn't possible to get out of a college or a university with a degree with any expertise in plumbing, whereas it is possible, if a high school wants to offer animal husbandry, it can find a young man who has had on-the-job training, work, he has done summer work on farms, he has worked in laboratories in the college or university, and has a col- lege degree, has had to take a relatively broad, although Ag students, of which my own brother is one, seem pretty close to the earth when they get through. But there is some broadness. There is a tremendous need, and until there are college-educated plumbers, and. collegereducated electricians :and college-educated welders and draftsmen. and beauticians and tech- nicians, I think that the vocational educational educators will continue to have to struggle for a place in the sun alongside the academic people who put so much weight behind the degree. Vocational educators are as guilty of doing that ~as the others are. It would distress me at many of the vocational schools, in asking them about the success of the school, one of the things they do is tell me about some rather rare case that went on and got a Ph. D. from MIT, instead of the local brick mason who has done such a beautiful job of building~30 houses on East North Street,. or something. It wasn't until I expressed my interest in the boys who took `masonry that I could convey to the vocational educator that I was interested in the pride he showed in the boy who went on to be a mason and a strong member of the community. But the early press was for this rare individual who finished school, vocational school, and then got a college degree. In the best vocational schools I saw, with the' exception of `the Poly- technic School in Portland, Oreg., and the J. M. Wright in `Stamford, Conn., and the other 11 that' I know about, the great lack in them all is a strong program in the cultural arts, music, drama, dance, and physical education. PAGENO="0316" 2776 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In the magnificent Las Vegas facilitie,s, sort of a hundred miles of desert on all four sides, there is one, no, two, basketball standards ouside, which offer physical education facilities for such a school. There are no teams, no tennis courts, no swimming pooi, no volley ball courts, no provision for these young people, and no music, nc~ orchestra rooms, no theatre, no drama production areas, no drama teachers, no provision for any of this kind of thing, and while I under- stand that many people, and hearing it from the vocational educa- tional teachers, that first they become a plumber and then they learm to sing and dance and enjoy music, I pointed out that oftentimes it. doesn't come unless you get started early. I guess the only other thing that I would sort of like to point out. is that the school boards across the United States were recently polled. and gave as the area they felt was of the greatest concern to them as vocational education, but I do feel that schoolboards have been very lax not to press stronger for the school systems to do a better job on it.. One of the important needs that these schoolboards and committees need to do is to build up these advisory teams. It is absolutely no good having a vocational program if there is no liaison between the vocational school and the employment opportu- nities in the community, so if you have a printing department such as the Milwaukee vocational does, and you have an area like Milwaukee with so many printing plants and printing needs, that unless the Mil- waukee vocational technical school is using the equipment and proce- dures that they would be using in industry, they can't get jobs, and that school does have advisory committees for all of its area and work very closely with the labor unions, with the people in industry,. and so on. I guess that concludes my formal remarks. If there are any ques- tions, I will be glad to entertain them. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins? `Mr. HAWKINS. I have no questions. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you for your statement. I will have some questions a little later. Mr. Quie? Mr. Qtru~. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your statement, Miss Parsons, and I would like to ask you a few questions, if I may. 1 gathered from what you said that there are two programs that are effective, namely the comprehensive high . school and the area. vocational school, and not a high school that is limited to some subjects on vocational education, since that is not too effective for the young people. isthat correct? Miss PARSONS. The ones in existence now are not being t'~rrib1y ef- fective, and the interest' by `the Federal Government isnot in them, so the money is not going there, and the local communities don't seem to be doing much about them. For the most part, they are not really sure, because for so long they were used as dumping ground for poor students, and it was not really possible to make good electricians out of poor students, or good elec- tronics workers and so on, and so they were not turning out goodi products. PAGENO="0317" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2777 It is, of course, perfectly possible-New York City has some special- ty schools which only teach a specific trade, for instance, the School of Printing-but it is rather like an academic school, academic high `school. It pitches everything, toward an elite, few, and. so there are upward of 60 percent students `spending 4 years at this School of Print- ing in New York, and then getting machine-cut paper, sweeping a floor in a print shop or something. Mr. QmE. We were concerned mainly with dropouts and this subject now, the poverty area. Do you think that better job training then, would enable us to hold the students in the high schools better? Miss PARSONS. Yes, `there seems to be very clear evidence that the `stronger the vocational offering and the wider the vocational offering, `the more students will stay in school. The Pennsylvania State study showed that quite clearly, and I didn't talk to anyone who didn't believe it., who did not say if they had a good, strong program-the Las Vegas school, which has only been operating a year now, the area vocational school already has earmarked over 150 students who were classified ready to be dropouts who said in order~ to go to the area `vocational school, and, interestingly enough, they must get themselves `there, and it is up on a mesa. Mr. QUIR. In other words, the job training has to be meaningful, `and that actually motivates them. Would it actually draw out their interests in basic education as well, Miss Parsons? Miss PARSONS. Yes, of course it'would. There needs to be a little more ~creative way that `the vocational is merged with the academic.' It is coming a little bit. There are some people working on it. There are `pie-in-the-sky people talking about the organic curriculum. When they read this, I am going to be shocked, but there are really `only two or three who could possibly do the kind of thing they are `talking about, and each of `us thinks we are one of them, but we are not `teaching, and it is to take what we have in art, literature, social `science, `and plumbing by studying the waterworks of early Rome or some- thing. [Laughter.] Mr. QUTE. That sounds like quite a course. Miss PARSONS. I would hate to tell you who is funding them. It is a little. OEO.grant there. [Laughter.] Miss `PARSONS. I'm sorry I `walked into that. Mr. QUIR. There is also `a group besides the dropouts, those who finish high school but don't have any intention of going on to college. `They don't have any job skills and'they find themselves out in the cold ~s much as a dropout'does. Have you looked into what type of training can be provided for these groups? Miss PARSONS. Half of the students in the country-at this point it is half of them in the country-the statistics for all of use are of ~ mill-working Americans, and less than `one-fourth have had any job training. ` At this `point, only 10 percent of all the students graduating from high school have had specific job training, and as I said, 30 percent go to college. So it makes `fifty percent who really don't. There are some provi'sions for these people, but not a great many, and industry, of course, has been shirking its duty in this way by not really running its own good training programs. PAGENO="0318" 2778 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Qum. In your visits to the vocational education programs in the country, did you visit both day schools and residential schools? MiSS PARSONS. Yes. Mr. QUTE. What are some of the residential schools you visited? Miss PARSONS. Los Vegas, that is residential; Boulder, Cob, has a residential facility; the one in Somerset, Ky.,. has a sort of housing means to do things with the student. Pinta County, in Toledo, Ohio, has probably the biggest residential group. They are not high-school age, they are possible-high-school age. There are some problems that they are all having with making a resi- dential facility for young people under the age of 18, or under age 21, depending on the State, and the demands this places on the school and on the facilities and on the arrangement for supervision, et cetera. Mr. QmE. Did you visit Mahoning Valley in Ohio? Miss P~soNs. No. Mr. Q.uIE. There are a couple of other day schools that seem to have great potential. One of them I talked of at length is the one in Milwaukee. Miss PARSONS. Yes. Mr. Qtm~. And the other is Vincent de Paul School in Portland. Miss PARSONS. I visited both of those. The Portland school is special in that it combines in one facility some of the most outstanding stu- dents in the city determined by their intelligence quotient as well as their achievement level in math and science. They are not allowed to go to visit Polytech in the eighth grade unless they are 2 or 3 years ahead and-on standard achievement scores. They have technical programs that have sent them on to be, presum- ably, engineers, and go to Cal Tech and MIT and Purdue and t.he other fine technical institutions. The other half of the student body at Vincent Polytechnic are those below the average in achievement. When they finish the eighth grade, and who are thought could benefit from a technical vocational program. These boys are sent to Vincent Polytechnic. The onus of being a dumping ground is thus avoided. The school has an extremely fine training program, and I was es- pecially impressed with the fact the geometry, for instance, which is taught, the finest and the newest geometry and the best new math geo- metry is taught to the summer students, but at the same time the stu- dents who are going to be the tool and die makers, are taught a special geometry whereby they have to solve geometric problems on their lathes and in their patternrnaking, and the school designed this course themselves. Mr. Qtn~. I would like to have her finish with Milwaukee, and then I will be glad to yield. Miss PARSONS. In the Milwaukee facility is probably the finest voca- tional technical school in the world. It has 1,800 courses, and that wouldn't be good unless the courses were good, and they have-they are pretty good. I spent, oh, most of my time, in the printing department, not feeling that I knew more about printing than anything else, but they have decided to combine-they no longer can teach a boy or girl to run a Linotype, or if he chooses just to be in graphic arts, or if he chooses PAGENO="0319" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2779 to be in photography-4hey have hooked up a Linotype to a computer, and have insisted that the boys learn that. They are taught in the printshops by their own; people. They learn to run offset :presse~s as well as hot type. They learn to work, not only with old photoengraving equipment, but with the new- est, which does almost all the work for you, where you have to be more skilled in the design of what you put on the plate, and the acid man dipping the plate. I won't go into the process, but photoengraving has moved from the 18th century to the 21st century with no spaces in between, and most schools haven't gotten to the 21st. The presses, there are new presses that run off a computer-run Lino- type. That is, you can even go one step further. If my newspaper were that modern, and it is not, I could call on the telephone a story. The telephone would translate it into a magnetic tape, which would be fed into the Linotype, which would set the type, it would be corrected by a computer and go directly into a special press and come out in the paper without having had to be handled at any of those points in between, and suddenly the printer no longer has to be able to work a Linotype, but he has to be able to keep the tape running through the machine and understands whether it is working properly. He becomes a mechanic. Mr. STEIGER. I want to say how proud I am to have you here and have you make those statements on behalf of the Milwaukee Technical Institute, and we are particularly pleased when we have a woman in your position sharing the view that so many of us in Wisconsin have. Miss PARSONS. Now can I be nasty to Wisconsin? I then went back after I was snowed by the Milwaukee director of the vocational school, who, by the way, is a very, very fine man and a very good agent for his own work. I just loved him. There are few-by the way, I was the first person-no newspaper had interviewed any of these vocational people before. Mr. QUIE. You mean any of these schools? Miss PARSONS. That is right. Mr. STEIGER. You mean nobody had interviewed any of these people? Miss PARSONS. No. That means you have to see the entire school. I know the powerplant of every vocational school I visited. I talked with the Superintendent of Schools in Milwaukee, and I said, "Is your nose not out of joint?" He said, "It is not only our nose but our pocketbook," and told me about the rest of the vocational training in Wisconsin, which does need a shot in the arm, andespecially in the Milwaukee public schools. While the vocational technical has this tremendous program, much of Milwaukee is still back on the old bookends for boys and aprons for girls vocational program, which it is tooling up too slowly. They really have to jump from one to the other. Mr. QUIE. Tooling up from bookends? MisS PARSONS. They are going from bookends to larger bookends. Mr. STEIGER. May I say, if my colleague will yield further, the point you make is a valid one. I think that Wisconsin recognizes its weak- ness, and what we did in 1965, in the area technical school legislation and some of the other steps we have taken I hope will work to speed up the tooling and retooling operation that is so necessary. PAGENO="0320" 2780 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QIJIE. Let me ask you then, Miss Parsons: I know Milwaukee is contemplating, or requesting residential facilities as well. Are there other day programs that you have visited which have indicated that they want to utilize residential training as well? What do you think of such a proposal connecting with the area school. This is in line with the Opportunity Crusade, in which we recommend the concept of residence in vocational schools. Miss PARSON. Almost all the area vocational people are interested in this, and especially those who are willing to take out on the dropout, the young man or woman who dropped out of school. Personally, I am strongly in favor of the residential facility, espe- cially for the ghetto, even the city child. I can't think of anything better for a child from the Roxbury area of Boston to be able to put into a dormitory situation with some sort of counselor-type arrangement in connection with the strong vocational and academic program. I didn't talk with a vocational educator who wasn't interested in doing this, who wasn't nmning a vocational school. The man in Boulder, Cob., is especially keen to do so, and he sees this as solving a distance problem, and Dr. Stirmer of Las Vegas is the same way. What they really want is to be able to-well, I have to use the edu- cator's terminology and make it "environmental control," but what they are talking about, if you are really going to retool someone who has dropped out, he has dropped out of a lot of things. He hasn't just dropped out of the welding, or auto mechanics, or beauty school, he ~has dropped out of a belief in adults and out of a belief in the strength in the American way and so forth. So if you create for him a place where there is human dignity as well as in which hand skills can be developed, then you have a really strong authority. Mr. QULE. You don't think a person from Boston flown to a resi- dential school in another part of the country is- Miss PARSONS. Not if we are talking about the limited student whom you are trying to fit into a job. Not that I would want to ship a Boston- ian to Portland but Portland has its own problems and Boston has its own. While I certainly think there would be an opportunity for a student to ask to go to another State, it would seem for them to make peace where they are. Especially if we are talking about the student who is limited in every possible way. If he is limited by his home environment, limited by his income, limited by his friends, limited by his school experience, in one sense it might be good to plunk him way out of that and have him trained in Milwaukee. But then what next? Mr. Qum. Mr. Chairman, I have taken quite a bit of time. I will ask some more questions later. I yield to my colleagues. Chairman PERKINS. Why don't you finish now since you have taken your 30 minutes. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am glad we are operatrng on the half-hour schedule. First of all, may I say it is good to see you again. There is one person who I would just as soon volunteer to be sent from Boston to Portland. I was glad I was here to hear your testimony. PAGENO="0321" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2781 Miss PARSONS. What I said is in the record. The statement, because I had to wait all day, was pared down. In deference to the committee, if they had to listen to everything I had written out it would be too bad. Mrs. GREEN. Could you make available the unpared down version? Miss PARSONS. I will be glad to. Mrs. GREEN. At one point when you were discussing the Milwaukee school you said their pocketbook was out of joint. What is the cost per pupil in running the Milwaukee Technical School? Miss PARSONS. May I guess? I don't know exactly. He told me and it is something between $50 and $100 per pupil more. Most of that is not in salary but in equipment. Mrs. GREEN. Per pupil per year? Miss PARSONS. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. I was thinking that the average cost for a good voca- tional school with the equipment was about $2,000 compared to about $500 for academic. Miss PARSONS. Yes. Of course, you see, there is the cumulative effect of the thing like Milwaukee. The per year is based each year per year. So it becomes safe. They don't usually keep statistics well enough to interpolate over the number of years. I believe this is what he said. I may be wrong. It may have been 75 to a hundred. When you go into the cost of equipment, of course, the cost soars. Mrs. GREEN. You may have given `the answer to some of these ques- tions when I was out of the room so I apologize. What percent of the high schools in the country have vocational education? You said 10 percent of the high school graduates have-what percent of high schools throughout the country have technical vocational schools? Did you write a series of articles? Miss PARSONS. Yes. I don't know for the whole country because no one knows. Baltimore County, Md., the `statistic is 3 percent. I think Chicago, which is one of the highest, claims `something like 25 percent. Then you go in between. My estimate for the country is between 5 and 10 percent are offering. My statistic is two out of every 10 students in the school are getting some job training, if you say how many are getting excellent, up-to-date, really strong programs, it really gets to be very `small. Mrs. GREEN. In comparison with the study of a few years ago that 9 percent of the high schools across the `country were offering any real vocational training. MiSS PARSONS. For instance, in Ohio only 3.7 percent in the whole State of Ohio were getting any vocational training and 3.4 percent of that-I mean 95 percent of that was in agriculture, which is no longer needed. They have more farmers than they need in agriculture. Mrs. GREEN. Agricultural and home economics in the home, but not for remunerative employment. Miss PARSONS. And of farm occupations, which they need more than they do farmers. Mrs. GREEN. What would you say would be the average amount that was spent-Let me ask you first, why do you think that this is true that this very, very `small percentage of the high schools offer technical or vocational training? Miss PARSONS. I am glad you asked that question. I blame it on the school supei intendents or school administr~tors `tci oss the counti y I SO-084-07-pt. 4-21 PAGENO="0322" 2782 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 am very hard on them. In the New York State study that Commis- sioner Allen had Conducted on his chief school officers, which is a name for superintendent, i't'showed that more than 80 percent of their fathers had never completed high school. So that these were all first-generation college students. It also disclosed that more than 85 percent of them had excelled in some sport in school. It also disclosed that zero persons read the Christian Science Monitor, a crime for which I will never forgive them. That a very small percent read any what might be known as literary magazines or better magazines. And that zero percent had any vocational training. It has been, in many ways, a misguided feeling by these people that the best thing they can do for a child in the `20th century was to give him a college prepatory education or a general education. It must only come from their personal rejection of the blue collar life and I `do think the newspapers have been a little bit at fault. The front page of news- paper after newspaper says you have to have a college education to get a job and the last 10 pages of the newspaper lists help wanted, and I recently was trying to find a job for a beatnik who still doesn't have one and still shouldn't be hired and there were over 500 opportunitIes for man to be a keypuncl~ operator. The need for just a slight amount `of skill on the part of these people is tremendously great. Mrs. GREEN. You give two definitions, and I think both are accurate; one, that society places such a high premium on a college degree and, two, administrators who have no appreciation of the importance of vocational training. But isn't it true that society has been unwilling to finance vocational education because it~ is more expensive? Miss PARsoNs. Yes, in the last 25 years we got going on spending more and more money for education. ~What happened was that we had to start paying teachers more and so programs went down. Part of that problem is the same teacher is now asking for two to three times as much as she got before and society does not think she is two or three times better. Mrs. GREEN. In studying of these vocational schools, did you make any detailed studies of the kinds of classes and numbers of classes that students were attending? Miss PARsoNS. Yes, somewhat. Mrs. GREEN. Could you tell me how many hours a~ week the young- sters were in classes? Do you have any idea? Miss PARSONS. Well, the kids worked out different arrangements and there are different requirement's. For the most part they are in class 2 to 3 hours longer than their academic counterparts. Mrs. GREEN. That would be how many hours a day? Miss PARSONS. About 8. Five is about-if we talk about classes being academic classes-there are about 8. Mrs. GREEN. That would be 5 `days a week. Miss PARSONS. Yes. Some of the programs require x number of hours. Mrs. GREEN. As somebody who has been studying the educational scene and who `has a tremendous background and competence in this area would you make a value judgment on what the Government is getting for its money when we have Job Corps centers which are designed for what the bill says intensive education training and the students are in classes and in labs combined 6 hours or 8 hours or 12 PAGENO="0323" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2783 hours-I have never seen one yet that is there 25 hours a week. The ones I have studied, spend 6, 8, 12 hours a week `for their total academic basic education and vocational training. And the report now is that we are spending $6,900 a year and it has been up to $1,500 per pupil per year. Compare the value of the two with a vocational school run by a public school system that will, as you suggest, have 40 hours of training a week and maybe a $2,000 cost. That is a loaded question. Mi'ss PARSONS. Part of the problem in my answering it is that I have not `studied any Job Corps programs as a repOrter. So I have not gone in and made any significant studies. I didii't know they were spending so few hours in training. Now I know why New Bedford had all the trouble. Mrs. GREEN. Let. me make available to you 200 or 300 schedules that I have where we have 6 hours of classes and 8 hours `a week in driver education for a $10,000 `cost. Mr. QUIE. Will you yield? Mrs. GREEN. Yes. `` Mr. QUJE. The `25 hours a week in the Job Corps centers was before the absenteeism was figured in, too. They figured 20-percent absentee- ism from what I saw. Miss PARSONS. Most vocational schools do a quite nice thing. A stu- dent who is absent very much is dropped, but he can `come back any time he i's ready to be a real student, which is much more flexible than the academic programs are. I would react, of course, just as you do to that small amount of train- ing. The only point of the Job Corps program would be to do, in a vocational way, what our very best private schools do in a college preparatory way. I have always wondered why it was that the no-good private `school educator did not throw up his Exeter or Andover hands and take over the Job Corps. They could do a marvelous job with a staff committed to vocational training as they do to college prep work. And they `do it on a `24-hour basis, which is the only way it can happen. Mrs. GREEN. Have you made a study of the dropout rate in voca- tional schools? Miss PARSONS. I only believe what I am told. I am told that the dropout rate in the area vocational schools is extremely heavy, as much as 50 percent in some of them-not because they say of the program but because of the poor counseling on the part of people who are send- ing them over, that they are not sending to the area vocational schools the motivated capable student. They are trying to send troublemakers and so. The area vocational schools are being tough about not keeping them. So the dropout rate is very heavy. Once the student is in a pro- gram they claim that the dropout rate is very small, something under 5 percent. Mrs. GREEN. Is 50 percent the national average? Miss PARSONS. I am not suggesting that; but I am suggesting that it certainly is more than 25 percent, but they drop back into their ac- ademic high school. They just don't drop out of school altogether. So it becomes a vocation school dropout. He goes back into academic. Mrs. GREEN. If you `had "your druthers" when would you start vocational training, `at what level? PAGENO="0324" 2784 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Miss PARSONS. Kindergarten. It is done pretty well. In Kinder- garten we do have vocational training. We do get the children to de- velop hand skills. We drop that from grade 1 to grade 9 and pick them up to grade 10 when most people have gotten pretty awkward. The only place I have seen it done very well is at the Nova Elementary School at Fort Lauderdale, Fla., where there is a thing called the practical arts room in the primary school. It is maintained by a vo- cational teacher and the room is filled with awfully good equipment, child size, and the children actually do go and learn to do. When they go on up into the high school no student leaves Nova High School who hasn't done some drafting and some key punch operating. Every student, boy or girl, learns to type. I really would have, I would also begin to insist on the development of some mechanical achievement tests and have lots of those and have them spotted along the way and be a.s interested in the mechanical level and circuitry level and hand skill level, and kind of technical relevance level as I am in the reading and spelling level of the same child. Mrs. GREEN. In vocational education and technical training the youngsters when they are 12, 13, 14, if they are not physically dropped out of school, they are at least mentally and emotionally dropouts and the instructions in technical training ought to begin at a junior high level. Miss PARSONS. Don't you agree with me that the cutoff point is between third and fourth grade? Mrs. GREEN. On dropouts? Miss PARSONS. On: a child who has made up his mind whether he likes this thing or not. I am an ex-elementary school teacher. The chips begin to fall between third and fourth grade. All over the country the statistics are pretty strong on children from low income deprived situation homes who are allowed to be in mixed classes or they sep- arate them in ability, they start sort of third and fourth grade, if the home is not supporting this child he begins to drop back a little bit. It is when homework requires a bigger vocabulary, a growing vocabu- lary that. you run into difficulty. You are quite right, unless the op- portunity for a student to begin to relate what `he is learning in the academic side to a specific skill opportunity it doesn't come in junior high then it comes too late. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I won't even take the full 20 minutes. I wish there were time to ask more, of course. Let me ask at least a few questions. Have you had a chance to look at H.R. 10682 at all? Miss PARSONS. Just briefly today. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are familiar with some of its proposal for an Industry Youth Corps in the Opportunity Crusade? Miss PARSONS. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Can you tell us what you think of that proposal? Miss PARSONS. I think it is an excellent proposal. Mr. DELLENBACK. You think this idea of doing some of the training in this close coordination with industry would be a good idea ?- Miss PARSONS. Yes, I don't think it should be industry dominated ~or industry initiated. There is some danger in having industry decide ~what it wants and then the public schools ignore the "whole child" PAGENO="0325" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2785 and tooling up somebody to fit industry's needs. At the moment Navy has reactivated a shipyard in Quincy, Mass. The word is out for 500 machinists. I feel very badly if all the schools were to tool out and de- termined that x number of its students would suddenly become ma- chinists just because the Quincy Boat Yards need 500 machinists. At the same time, I would want every boy who would want to be a machinists to be working very closely with the Quincy operation that need the machinists. Mr. DELLENBACK. Recognizing how difficult it is to follow any one single road and achieve the result, including this 20 percent you talk about, of people really trained for jobs, do you feel it is desirable that some of the training which isn't done in schools should be done on the job with education tied in closely to industry? Miss PARSONS. Yes; it is absolutely necessary at this point. Industry has to have it at this point. There is no reason, really, for it not to happen. Mr. DELLENBACK. On this concept that you have touched on, of vocational education dealing with potential dropouts, I believe you cited a statistic in connection with the Las Vegas school where they included some 50 potential dropouts who were staying. Do you find that, by and large, across the country in addition to this Las Vegas operation there is much tendency in good vocational schools to hold dropouts in school or potential droputs? Miss PARSONS. Yes. But vocational schools are getting tougher so their reputation is changing. They used not to fire anyone from the school. They used to just sort of muddle around with them. When they graduated they really would not recommend them for a job. Now they are being much more realistic about it and are really recoin- mending students back to an academic program because the~y say they are not going to make it in a vocational program. So, the dropout rate is going up at the time that the training is better for the dropout. You see what I mean? Mr. DELLENBACK. What does this say to us? If the academic pro- gram is dropping out the youngster who isn't meeting the standards and if the vocational education program is dropping out the youngster who is not meeting the standards and each kind of foists the dropouts from that program off on the other one, what does this say about the future? Miss PARSONS. It says that we need a great deal of material geared to the average student. We need to learn how to teach them. We need to want to teach them as bady as we want to teach those either highly motivated in the skill or the highly academic. There are a few school systems which are really beginning to care about it and doing some- thing about it, but only a few. Mrs. GREEN. Will you yield? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes, I will yield, Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. Isn't it true if you made a curve in terms of native ability and various skills that are desired that this curve for dropouts follows the curve of ability, that the dropouts are not necessarily uneducatable at all, they are very brilliant on the average and the very poor follow that? MISS PARSONS. There is growing evidence that humans, given some physical differences, are really quite the same. When we talk about PAGENO="0326" 2786 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 native ability, we all have reasonably the same amount of that native ability. There are certain other factors. The student who is hard to teach for x number of reasons is the one who needed the academic schools or the vocational schools and he is the one that we need to worry about, not that he is the dumber one because there are really pretty good programs for the student who is selected out for being limited in ability. Mrs. GREEN. it seems to me it is more than working on the average student. Miss PARsoNs. Yes, I am sorry. I generalized and I shouhcln~t have clone so. Mr. DELLENBACK. The committee is wrestling of course, as you realize, Miss Parsons, and some of us are desperately concerned that the youngster who comes from a poverty background or is the dropout is a problem-in one sense I hate the use of that word-but offers a challenge that we must meet because somehow this youngster must be given what he or she needs to put him back in productive society. I think that through this road of vocational education we have part of the answer. The selection of the schools that you particularly have studied in depth are the atypical, not the typical. Yet it is through the atypical that we sometimes see the gleam of light that leads us to what we must do for the rest of them across the board. I was challenged by that statistic you touched on in Las Vegas, by the number of po- tential dropouts who caught fire or at least were being held by this potential program. I am wondering, is there any reason why if we in- crease the quality of vocational education in the average public school we are not going to find that same holding of some of these potential dropouts so in effect we catch them before they become the serious problem and catch them while they are still eclucatable or redeemable or whatever value words you want to use Miss PARSONS. Yes. Let me briefly explain a program that Las Vegas has which is very good. Las Vegas made. a study of its com- munity needs. One of the things they turned up was that there were 200 gasoline service stations in the Las Vegas area and the people manning those service stations felt that they have badly needed boys who had some training in salesmanship, in a little bit of auto mechanics, knowing the differences of the compositions of various tires and things. In other words, were trained, not only to be good handlers of the money and that area of the gas station but really when somebody came in and wanted a new tire, to be able to describe to them the differences in the kinds of tires. So they have built a course of study around service station attendants. The students are taught their chemistry, their physics, what they need, their English, bookkeeping, various things, and then do a work study at a. service station until they have coin- pleted their high school so that they are actually at a service station, they get paid for some of their work, they are at school all day long learning to be a good service station attendant. At the same time the door is not closed for them when they finish to decide (a) that they want to become the owner of a gasoline station, would like to come back to this vocational school and get the kind of business training that you need to run a small business, or if they decide they really would like to specialize in body work, that they may come back to the school and take a course in body work or auto mechanics. PAGENO="0327" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2787 Mr. DELLENBACK. You are still talking about that special vocational school rather than. the public schools in Las Vegas at the moment? Miss PARSONS. But that is a public school in Las Vegas. Mr. DELLENBACK. You are not talking about the average public school? Miss PARSONS. But they are going to move this program out of the vocational school out into all the Las Vegas high schools. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are they on the verge of doing this? MISS PARSONS. Yes, they are. Mr. DELLENBACK. They are not dreaming of this sometime in the future? Miss PARSONS. No, it is real. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you found any public school systems in the Nation as you have gone around where they have gone past the con- templation stage on this type point and have really taken the step? You make the point to my good friend from Wisconsin where there is an excellent school but it is not infectious, it has not moved out in the public school system. You have touched in my St.ate on Benson. It is not in my district, it is in Mrs. Green's district. But has it also moved into the public school system support or is it still just in Benson, this extraordinarily good program? Miss PARSONS. Benson is a different program. Mr. DELLENBACK. I recognize that. Miss PARSONS. I did not go to any of the other Benson schools but the director of the vocational program at Benson said that they had a fairly strong trade and industry program in Portland. He gave it a fairly strong endorsement. I don't know a.bout the Oregon program in vocational education. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I add this one flash of light.. I don't know that it will do much but it so happens that the former principal of Benson is now the State Superintendent of Public Instruction in the State of Oregon So theie is ability in interest in this which is now present at the State level and which should permeate, hopefully, the. rest of the system. Are you familiar with the proposal in 10682 for coordinators To- cat.ed in the public schools to find jobs for the graduates of the public schools with local private employers ~ Miss PARSONS Yes Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you have any comment to make on that program? Miss PARSONS. I am totally in agreement with it. The American Institute of Research did a study, a quite exhaustive study of thou- sands of vocational students and asked them questions about how they got their first job and who helped them get the jobs and the lowest point on the scale was the school. Two percent of the school principals were ever any help. Something like 8 percent of the school guida.nce counselors were of any help. The students' own friends came up to something like 40 percent. Family, much heavier. Yet all the good schools I went to they have completely retooled much of that. One of the things they have done which I think is very good, the coun- selor is a needed over-all person and this is what I found these schools lacked. Even when they had good job entry for their students it was PAGENO="0328" 2788 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the welding man who was in charge of the welding shop getting a boy a job in a welding plant that he knew about in the city. I haven't touched on the elemental in New Mexico. New Mexico has had zero vocational education in its life. El Rito, which is in the hills of north- ern New Mexico, there is a vocational school which is now in its third year. It is the first time they ever offered barbering in the State, most exciting things happening with wonderful boys learning to be barbers with a Spanish-American accent. Their finding a job is the job of the man who has the boy in his shop, but the assistant. to the director coordinat.es all of that. It is his job to keep his pulse on what the conmnmity needs, what is happening, what is changing in it. and to make sure that they are not sending them to one place and not to another. Mr. DELLENBACK. There are a number of us I think who are deeply concerned that there needs to be strong two-way communication be- tween the school on the one hand and the place of economic oppor- tunity, the job on the other hand, and it must be two way. They must be certain that the needs of industry are communicated to the schools so that the schools start training for those skills and don't train them for dead skills and then after the individuals start. coming out of the. schools this two wa.y street must serve to funnel these young people in where they belong. I will close by saying that I think the Monitor is one of the Na- tion's truly fine papers. I think some of the articles that appear, the type that you have writ.ten and other specialty write.rs, are truly valuable to those of us who read it and we appreciate your being here today. Miss PARSONS. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The testimony has been both enlightening and interesting. I share my colleague from Oregon's view about the Monitor, incidentally. Can you tell us why the Milwaukee vocational school is as good as you say it is? What is there that gives it that kind of excellence? Miss PARSONS. The director. It sounds too easy to say that but the rule of thumb on a school is its principal. To make a what may sound facetious statement, but isn't, 1 can tell from the time I get to the parking lot to the principal's office of any school in the country what the principal is going to be like. I may not know whether he is male or female but I will know what kind of individual I am meeting when I get in there. Milwaukee Vocational Technical has only had three directors in its lifetime and it is 60-some years old. This is also a strength. The first two kinds of men were just right for the job needs in Milwaukee at that point and the raw material they had to work with. The present director is a. very colorful and dedicated person who just ca.n't think that t.here isn't. a program for anyone. So, the school has in it absolutely everybody. It has dropouts, dropins~ out of jail, in jail, derelicts, people 85 years old who haven't finished high school, it has literacy courses, it has supert.ec.hnical training. There isn't anyone he doesn't want to program for and at the same time that. he is not really willing to think things out. He is one of the few people in education I have talked to who is basically sort of very sound and sound enough in his own feeling that he can be really honest.. PAGENO="0329" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2789 One of the statements he made to me was that you could be wrong in his school as a member of the faculty, but you could not be lazy. That is a very interesting point. That means these are the kind of people he has teaching. When I walked around and went through the class they not only said, you may talk to any of the students but it was the kind of atmosphere where I could talk to any of the students and did talk to the students. Whereas lots of times you go in a vocational school, they say you can ask any student anything you want to and no student would dare look up, you know. Mr. STEIGER. Can you assess at all the degree to which the Mil- waukee institution works with the hard core disadvantaged? Miss PARSONS. Yes. One of the strengths certainly is their strong advisory committee program, so that every one of their skill areas has a strong advisory committee. So the extremely disadvantaged may need a job at the same time. He may be just. sweeping the floor of the foundry or scraping lead into a bucket at the foundry while at the same time receiving the vocational tecimical learning to move along in his skill. By having the advisory committee in on the thing, and the people of the town running industries it makes it possible for the very dis- advantaged to be working in the area where they eventually are hopmg to get them tooled up. This is important. Mr. STEIGER. Is it possible in your judgment for us to look ahead and see the time, hopefully, in the not too distant future when voca- tional education in this country can do more of the kind of things that they are doing in Milwaukee so that we are serving, for example, the kind of individuals that the Job Corps was created to serve? Miss PARSONS. Yes, I think the momentum is well up, the system is up. I think if the money keeps coming out-I do feel, though, I do want to make the point that unless-you see what happens, education is quite a roundelay and if you are not careful and you are funding three-fourths of it and you have not plugged the last fourth it seems good while the money is going but it does not hold up. The colleges and universities must be made to play their part in this. They must be as interested in training a teacher of plumbing as they are a teacher of French. Unless they are included in the vocational school is always going to be thought of as the vocational school down around the corner, isn't that fine? Mr. STErnER. I could not agree more with you. Mrs. Green touched on the emphasis that we place in our society upon gOing to college as the goal. It is obviously not the goal to which all should aspire. Until we can change that we are going to continue to have the same kind of problems that we have today. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Miss Parsons, I agree with your testimony that we need to stress and strengthen vocational education in this country today. I take it from your observations in going around the country that you observed a high dropout rate in vocational educa- tion, approximately 50 percent. I recall back when we wrote the Voca- tional Education Act a few years ago that we were only spending $48 million at the Federal level, $90 million at the State level, less than $120 million at the local level and less than two-thirds of our high schools in the country gave any type of vocational education at PAGENO="0330" 2790 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 all. But you have pointed up the fact here that you found in your tour that very few of the high schools had a comprehensive vocational education program. Is that correct, in your tours around the country? Miss PARSONS. No. All the schools I went to were comprehensive in the sense that they offered both academic and vocational. I deliber- ately went to different kinds. I only went to two schools that were what we term comprehensive, one in Canada and one in Pennsylvania. Chairman PERKINS. I mean a high school that is provided Federal reimbursement funds for instance, for the training for office occupa- tions and they had preemployment training for descriptive occupa- tions, vocational, agriculture, marketing, experimental at all levels of agriculture. You did not see that type of training in high schools? Miss PARSONS. I just went to two like that. Chairman PERKINS. My point is that since we wrote the Vocational Education Act in 1963 the expenditures at the local and State level have multiplied many times. You can see from your touring the coun- try that these vocational education schools are continuously expanding. Is that correct? Miss PARSONS. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. In spite of all that, I think you observed when you visited the area schools that there was considerable overcrowded conditions and that the administrators, did they not tell you they had many people on their waiting list that they were unable to take in in Milwaukee or other places around the country? That they were un- able to train because of lack of facilities? Miss PARSoNS. I ran into two opposite problems. I ran into what you say, the school with not enough room or facilities and I ran into one which can't get enough good students to fill its classrooms because the feeder schools don't understand the programs well enough-that is their complaint, at least-and they can't get enough. For instance, in Stamford, Conn., which serves an area on the coast there from Greenwich up to Norwalk, I think it is, and in Norwalk there is another vocational school, and so on, the director of the ~J. M. Wright Technical School complains that lie doesn't have enough wanting to come to the school for the kinds of training they have to offer. Chairman PERKINS. That is as far as specialized training, elec- tronics and in that field or category. But in ordinary classes of weld- ing and carpentry, things of that nature, you never ran into a situa- tion where the classes were not filled, am I correct? Miss PARSONS. That is correct, sir. Chairman PERKINS. But it was in the specialized training that you found some practically empty classrooms and did you find the prob- lem likewise in the most specialized areas of vocational education where they lacked the technical instructors? Miss PARSONS. No, because any place I went had a technical in- structor. If it offered industrial physics, it had an industrial physics teacher. But the problem is the same all through. They can't get enough carpenters much less industrial physicists. Chairman PERKINS. You did not visit many so-called residential vocational schools? MiSS PARSONS. The ones I visited that were residential had only been residentia.l, you see, for a year or two and ~o have no 1ei~gth of time to- PAGENO="0331" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 -279-1 Chairman PERKINS. If I -recall, we have had very littlO experience in the. operating of residential vocational centers in the United States up to this hour, am I correct? Miss PARSONS. That is right, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you feel through the operation of the Job Corps centers that we are going to get feed-back information that is going to be very beneficial to the residential centers that we are operating today, that we hope will be operating in a few years? Miss PARSONS. I certainly hope that they are studying that area. I must plead ignorance at having not studied the Jo-b Corps situation. Chairman PERKINS. You have not made any study of the Job Corps? Miss PARSONS. No, sir. Chairman PERKINS. You don't know the type of youngster that they are dealing with in the Job Corps and you have made no study of that? Miss PARSONS. I made no study. Chairman PERKINS. Have you made a study of the youngsters who entered vocational school by and large, their educational qualifica- tions, whether the majority of them had some high school education, the great majority of them? Miss PARSONS. No. The four studies which I have- read and the five doctoral theses that I was able to get hold of, none of them dealt with this aspect. Chairman PERKINS. None of them touched on that point? Miss PARSONS. That is right. It is my fault for not finding the right one. Chairman PERKINS. I think you have observed that the great ma- jority of the youngsters of vocational education a-nd the adults that had dropped out and were back there for training were people with the highest school training? Miss PARSONS. No. For instance, in Sommerset in Kentucky the majority of the adult students were nonhigh school graduates. The majority of the academi-c training they were being given was equiva- lency degrees. Though the Milwaukee Vocational Technical has a very high percent that are in this. The one I haven't mentioned this afternoon is the Denver Opportunity School which provides-every town should have a Denver Opportunity School-it is called the Emily Griffith but it has in every class about half -of its students are nonhigh school graduates who have come back and want skill training and can work simultaneously. The problem is whether or not the school offers this opportunity to take both a basic e-ducation and skill training in Sommerset, Ky., the Empire Appliance Re- pair Course is especially for those who have never finished high school. Chairman PERKINS. My point is that we have such a broad are-a where we have hardly touched the surface. We need both the resi- dential schools and we need the Jo-b Corps. To my way of t-hinking there is certainly no overlapping at this time and there will not be for several years because we have such a tremendous dropout problem and -we are gaining such invaluable information at the present time from the operation of the Job Corps that it is going to be most helpful in the operation of residential centers in the future. PAGENO="0332" 2792 ECONOMIC OPPORT~UNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 As I recall the situation in Sommerset, Ely., you have an area voca- tional school there that has several satellite schools but they have been overcrowded to the extent that they can't take care of the high school youngsters that really want to come there for vocational train- ing. WTith a situation of that kind, where regular vocational schools, comprehensive, area technical and a few residential can't take care of the high school youngsters alone, to my way of thinking we have to do something and give special consideration to a youngster that has reached the doorway to adulthood without a basic academic edu- cation. We have no assurance that he is going to go back to school when he has dropped out. There is no conflict here at all. It is just a question of being able or not being able to salvage thousands of the hard core youngsters to whom the Job Corps means a real chance. As I see it, we need really a great expansion of the Job Corps and we need a great expansion in the vocational education area. We are not spending enough money, we have to do a better job. We are making tremendous progress in the area of vocational education but that should be multiplied many times. I certainly would like to see the Federal Government add on to the $225 million that we are pres- ently spending. I think the figure is grossly inadequate. But at the same time. I think it would be grave mistake for us to cut back one penny on the Job Corps or undertake to phase out within the next few years or undertake to let the Office of Education at this time operate it. I think we have some of the best talent. personally, in the world involved. I think the experience we are going to gain is going to be of a tremendous value to the education system. Do you agree with that? Miss PARSONS. Have I just lost my bus ticket? No. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Miss PARSONS. No, I don't; and I could leave it there and you don't know which part of that I don't agree with. Chairman PERKINS. I will confess that I gave my own views. There are so many of those views that you may disagree with but you do not disagree with all of them? Miss PARSONS. No. It turns out, sir, that I have been in the news- paier business too long and I saw the gardenpath early. Chairman PERKINS. I will ask you whether or not you are in favor of the Job Corps being transferred as proposed in the so-called Oppor- tunity Crusade to the Office of Education. Do you feel that it would be helpful to do that, since you have not made a study in this area? Miss PARSONS. You took the words right out of my mouth. I cer- tainly have never felt that I have never studied one area more than I have not studied the Job Corps. It is possible when I get back to Boston and need a job that I can study the Job Corps for this committee. Chairman PERKINS. You are just giving us your findings on voca- tional education. Miss PARSONS. Yes. sir. Whenever I do study the Job Corps and you would like to know what I have found out, I will be glad to come back. Chairman PERKINS. Then we will invite you back. Mrs. GREEN. Will the Chairman yield? I can't understand why the Opportunity Crusaders have not asked you if you have ever studied the Job Corps under any circumstances. PAGENO="0333" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2793 You can say that you are unequivocally opposed to the transfer to the Office of Education, aren't you? Miss PARSONS. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any recommendations to give us about the high dropout rate which you have observed in the vocational schools, how you think that could be cured? Miss PARSONS. I think a great deal better counseling needs to hap- pen. You not only need a coordinator at the vocational level to work with industry, but earlier on in these student lives they need more people who know more of the variety of things that young people can get into and more about the schools' proposed programs. We have guidance counselors throughout our school systems that have never even visited vocational school that don't really understand what it could be like. You know it is "full life" to be a plumber. The student who drops out, the student who is not kicked out but the student who drops out has had to make a choice. That is a decision on his part and he has been poorly guided to have to make that decision himself. That is an active decision. The guy I want you to worry about as well is the guy that doesn't make a decision to drop out but goes on through and ends up with nothing. The dropout has made a better decision than the boy or girl who stays in and does not get prepared later for college or for a job. The dropout is the most visible but he doesn't begin to see the 50 percent who finish school without any training. 1 would prefer either for the schooling or for the job. He is not nearly so visible, not nearly so colorful. The dropout has got to make a strong position and he obviously somewhere along the way has not found among the alternatives what he wants to choose. So I think good counseling is one way. I think another way is to have a greater variety of programs available to him. I think that the school arrangement of the Carnegie unit should be shot and you should break into smaller units of studies so that the student can take within the space of a day as many as 10 different things and not be stuck with four. There is no reason for not wanting to know your U.S. history but no reason why it can't go into various periods and various studies, and there is no reason why certain pieces of vocational education, especially the basics of electricity and basics of drafting, the basics in some of the more technical areas, should not come in a small enough package so that a student could elect this and decide whether or not he wants to have anything to do with it. We do the very same thing in our foreign languages. You must make a commitment based on the foreign language you want to study without showing evidence to yourself of either learning it or anything of that~ kind. If we should break those things up, people would have a better sense of it. Also, if the school today were broken into small pieces and a~ more cafeteria arrangement of things to take, some of the students who might not be able to stand three of the courses might find three others that would be somewhat viable. But the other real problem is the high school student who is waiting to be 16 to drop out. We need for him the sort of home school counselor type of thing. Chairman PERKINS. One final question: From your travel and ex- perience I take it from that last statement-I am not putting words in PAGENO="0334" 2794 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS ~OF. 1967 your mouth, I am using my terminology of what you have stated- that one of the principal problems of our vocational educators in the. country today is to find better ways and means to eliminate the dropout problem and to deal with the problem child. Is that your observation? Miss PARSONS. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Miss Parsons. Mr. QUIB. Did you say that 50 percent of the young people who enter area vocational schools drop out? Is that what you said? Miss PARSONS. In some of them. The percent was as high as 50 per- cent, and that was their determination that they didn't drop out of school; they went back to the academics because they had no aptitude or interest or patience of whatever to do the kind of thing they come to the area vocational school to do. Mr. QUIE. Is that the number who dropped out who spent 1 day in area vocational school? MiSS PARSONS. Yes, 2 days and a week, 2 weeks. * Mr. QmE. What percent after they had been there a month? Miss PARSONS. Then it is very strong, 90, 95 percent stayed. Once the school wants the student-it is a two-way at the area vocational school. Because they are in an area vocational school they may pick and choose as against the city vocational school which sort of has to take what it gets, you know that is assigned to the school. It is a two- way arrangenient. The school gets to decide whether or not it wants to keep the student. So part of the dropout rate is push out, push back into the academics. The other is whether the student really wants to continue with the program. Mr. QUIE. I think you ought to realize when we ask questions about the Job Corps which you have not studied, that the Job Corps count the dropout only after he has been there a month. If they drop out any time before a month then they are not called a dropout. So you should know what terminology they are using in the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman fron'i Minnesota knows that the witnesses have stated it both ways. Miss PARSONS. The dropout that we were talking about here was the dropout out of school when I talked about the area vocational school losing its entrance. It was not out of school. Chairman PERIUN5. Thank you very much, Miss Parsons. We ap- preciate your statement. You have been very helpful. We are glad you made that trip. We hope you will make one on Job Corps. Miss PARSONS. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Come around, both of you, please. STATEMENTS OP DEAN 0. WILLIAM PERLMUTTER, STATE UNIVER- SITY OP NEW YORK, AND DR. ZELMA GEORGE, DIRECTOR, WOMEN'S iOB CORPS CENTER, CLEVELAI~D, OHIO-Resumed Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Chairman, I have a. few questions of these witnesses. Dr. George, in your statement you have indicated that there are some elements of training and development of the women who come to the Job Corps that are certainly in addition to the. obtaining of skills. In order words. you have inclicatect that yours is a full-time responsibility of both day and night. the year around, and that is to PAGENO="0335" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2795 assist the woman in the development of personal,. social, academic, citizenship factors, as well as a vocational skill. . You seem to make some distinction between what is offered in the Job Corps and wh'tt might be offered in the convention'tl vocation'tl schools Am I correct in that `issumption, or ~ ould you like to comment on it? Dr. GEORGE. Yes. Thank you very much., I feel that skill alone certainly is not enough. These women who have come to us, although we don't like the term deprived, there are some communities where they have been deprived of so many things that they will need in order to be employable. In other words, a girl could leave there `~ ith the ability to type 78 words a minute, `is w e did have'i girl graduate Fist month And ability to write shorthand s'itisf'ictorily and do all of the real chores, have all the skills for the job and still not he employable because she still doesn't know how to be on time or how to be dependable. She doesn't know the proper dress to wear. She may still have a few words in her vocabulary that need to be taken out and supplied with new ones. She still has to know how to eat with other people. That sounds like a simple `thing but it is an important thing with many of the young people who have never `had a family meal experi- ence, who have eaten come and go as quickly as they can and do some- thing else. She still may not even know how to take `a bath, to keep a bath clean. One of the things we do for every girl is to have the first engage- ment with a hair dresser, not to dress the hair but to teach her about washing it and keeping it clean. Some of these girls have never had this done. They really do not know how to do it. We may have to delouse her in order to make her ready for this job. So that there are many, many things involved in training her and making her employable besides the skill itself I think probably the strongest thing about Job Corps, as I see it, is its residential program where we not only have the responsibility for her, which is the w'iy we feel about it, sometimes it gets to feel like a responsibility, but the opportunity to b~ effective and be available around the clock for her, learning how to live with people, They come there never having met a Negro before in :their lives, never having seen a Negro before. And not from the South, may I say, mostly from northern Michigan and northern Wisconsin, who have never seen a Negro in their lives, and I find problems in learning to adjust to one another. I am extremely concerned about keeping these yoimgsters from coming mostly from the region close by because you get such a homo- geneous grouping. I `think you have Indians from reservations and Hawaiians and Spanish-speaking youngsters, Spanish background young people as well as Negroes and whites. It is a tremendous expe- rience for all of them. I can't find any Indian reservations near Cleve- land, Ohio. I would like to be able to still furnish to these youngsters a variety of ethnic experiences, too. So I have strongly felt that we must find ways to keep what the residential program gives and to meet the special needs of these young people in giving them- Mr. HAwI~INs. If the Job Corps were `to be discontinued, let us say in Cleveland~ do you know any other place in Cleveland `that these women could obtain such experience, such extra services? PAGENO="0336" 2796 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. GEORGE. There is no place in Cleveland, Ohio, except the Cleve- land school. Mr. HAWKINS. Do you know any other city- Dr. GEORGE. No, I do not. Mr. HAwKINS. Where the service could be obtained at the present time? Dr. GEORGE. I don't know of any such places where the hard core- maybe there would be a few among them who might qualify for the vocational school, but the mass of them wouldn't. Mr. HAWKINS. You discount the possibility that the vocational school as currently constituted, without condenming it, but realizing that it plays a specific role which it not perhaps the role that the voca- tional school as it is now organized and operated would not offer a substitute for this program? Dean PERLMUTTER. I've been holding back during the previous testi- mony because there are numerous points of contact, things that are the most recent that are happening in education in this area were not really brought to the surface level. The Nova Schools were mentioned, how- ever, and my ears perked up because in the region where Dr. George is I was formerly dean of fine and professional arts at the State uni- versity of that area, Pennsylvania State LTniversity, where we not only had one of the most outstanding faculties in iiidustrial arts and technology but we indeed were the consultants in this area for the Nova Schools. So that one of the things that were were interested in there as a faculty, and this is one of the professional reasons I had for volunteer- ing in the Job Corps because I saw this as a laboratory and my indus- trial arts faculty which was fascinated by it. I said supposing we had some of these centers like the Job Corps could you really-and this is exactly what they want to do. The con~ cept of vocational educat.ion by the wa.y, that we are talking about is a very outmoded one. For one thing, we are talking really about training youngsters not just in the deprived area but in the regular academic schools in a variety of technical schools which are a necessary part of the general education in the modern world. Second, very few people really, a smaller fract.ion, actually work in the jobs for which they were trained. I don't think there is any one on this side of the table who took a course which trained them to become a Congressman. I did not expect to be a professor for a long time, or a dean. But if you go into the blue-collar trades or the marginal trades, the things that we are talking about today as trades, that you are talk- ing about as jobs or vocations, they weren't in the dictionary 20 years ago. When did electronics come into the field? When did computers come into our terminology? You are talking about training a man for a service station and a tire-that is going to be antiquated in 5 or 10 years. So the concept that the best. industrial arts, the best industrial technology professors and there is an enormous movement. in the universities and you know that in Minnesota. where I have taught. I know it in Pennsylvania. State. I know it. in Purdue. I have been at. the leading State universities in the country. ~\Te have as many as 20 applications for placement for any industrial tech graduate at the bachelor's level. At. the. master's and Ph. D. level we can't produce them quickly enough. What we are trying to do in industrial arts is to work out new patterns. PAGENO="0337" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2797 For example, you work out a course where you give a youngster a variety of skills and certain general principles in the techniques with the implicit assumption that these things are going to change, and what sort of adaptability do you feed into him, and the change is going to be a railway fireman or one of the Christian Science Monitor printers who, when he sees the new technology come along, runs to a union, or is he going to get retrained? If we can have our faculties and universities, especially the more alert and aggressive ones, working hand in hand with the Job Corps centers, and I am not praising what the Job Corps centers are doing educationally-frankly very conventional-that this is no reason for kicking them in the pants. Then you get some help from the universities. I tried very hard to bring my faculty 30 miles from this center, it is a coincidence that we are here together, to see if that faculty could relate to that center. You know, the machinery did not exist. The good will was there on both sides. Dr. Chambers is here who is director of that. I visited her center several times in the very early days. If we could bring these things together we could do a lot in the universities in the develop- ment of industrial arts and industrial technology and various other technology, not just industrial. Dr. GEORGE. We must say also that you find a more specialized faculty in the Job Corps than you would find in vocational. The very fact that they are on call for 24 hours more or less, or that they cer- tainly are not expected to keep conventional hours; they cannot look up at that clock and expect to go home at 3 :30 or leave on Friday and come back on Monday. This just is not part of it, you cannot even think about it. We would sift through and sift out those teachers who don't have that extra ingredient of dedication. I know dedication without a lot of other things can be just as dangerous as skill without dedication but who can bring that extra measure of something that Job Corps student needs that I don't think on the whole you will find anywhere else than in the Job Corps. Mr. HAWKINS. Are you saying, in effect, that there are two distinct programs at the present time, vocational education on the one hand, and Job Corps on the other, and you can assume we cannot do one without the exclusion of the other, the mixing is not necessarily the proper thing to do? Are you saying we should not discontinue the Job Corps program on the basis that those who are served by the Job Corps are going to be taken care of in the conventional vocational education as it exists today. Dean PERLMUTTER. It goes a step further than that. By continuing the Job Corps in the most enlightened educational fashion we can greatly improve such provisional education as exists outside the Job Corps. We need the Job Corps very badly in the vocational schools. Mr. HAWKINS. When you say you need the Job Corps- Dean PERLMTJTTER. We need it as a laboratory. Mr. HAWKINS. You need it to continue its operation basically the way it is now constituted, with improvements of course, but you are not suggesting bringing the Job Corps into the vocational education setup as such? 80-084-67-pt. 4-22 PAGENO="0338" 2798 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1.9 67 Dean PERLMUTI'ER. No. I mean bringing the experience of the Job Corps, the bast experience, into the vocational education setup. Dr. GEORGE. I think there is a lot of learning to be done in both directions. They can learn, of course, from what we are learning about their mistakes but we can certainly learn a lot from them. We are in the process now of organizing a board of education which we made up of consultants to help us think through the problem and frnd a way in which we can be mutually helpful. I think you are quite right in this. Dean PERLMUTTER. I am only $40 away. Mr. HAWKINs. I have just one question, and that is with respect to the Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority. I assume that the members of this sorority are coi~tributing substantially of their own time and service, as well a.s some of the financial support to this and other programs. Dr. GEORGE. The policy for the organization rests in the hands of a comn-iittee, a national committee chaired by the national president who is here, by the way. They are responsible for the administration of it the same as any other prime contractor of any of the other projects. We have local chapters as you know. They live all over the TJnited States but there are chapters in Cleveland and in the vicinity that do share their personal lives and talents in various ways with the girls. Mr. HAWKINS. The question really goes to this: Whether or not there is a voluntary service which is being rendered by the sorority in a program of this nature, and collateral with that question is the point of whether or not. such service would be available if these women were not sponsored by such an organization such a program as this but were, let us say, returned to the conventional type of school setup. Would we lose the service of such groups as a.re now being involved in the program? Dr. GEORGE. I think probably the biggest service aside from policy- making in the administration is in the follow-up of our graduates when they leave, when the girls terminate for one reason or another and go home, we are attempting to do more and more in the follow-up in the homes back where. they go. and the cont~numg interest in them, helping them to get a job and following through on the training they get at the center. It is a national center. Most of the members who are not at Cleve- lan cl can be involved in the nrogram. Mrs. GREEN. As a. member of Delta Sigma, I am pleased to wel- come to this committee. a member of Ainha Kappa Alpha. The mem- bers of Delta Sigma. only look to the Office of Economic Opportunity. I am advised, and wonder why the Office of Economic Opportunity wasn't wise in ~iving contracts and awnrcline one to the Delta Sigmas as they did when they offered one to the Alpha Kappas. Dr. GEORGE. They thousrht it was the best. place to put it.. Mrs. GREEN. To my colleague from California. may I say that I think it is fair to soy that the ~-\lpha Kapuas and Delta Sigmas are two of the aTeot. service sororities in this country. end that. pypii thoi~gh the Delta Sigmas did not receive the contract from OEO that hun- drecls of them are actively involved in working very hard, very hard, even without benefit of contract. PAGENO="0339" ECONOMIC* OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS~ OF 1 9.6 ~ 2799 Mr. HAWKINS. May I say to the young lady from Oregon, I hope th'~t ~ e loin the others in continuing this progr~trn so th'~t Delta Sigma c'~n continue to render that gre~t service which it is now rendering I would like to commend both Delta Sigma sorority and the Alpha Kappa sorority. I h'ink you, Mr Ch'urm'ui Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. QUIE. Did you say that the vocational instructors of the %\romen~s JOb Corps center spen't'24 hours a day? Dr Groroi~ No, I didn't I would be-let me s'~y we do occ'tsion ally if there is something that comes up and we felt the need to be there, not 24 hours, no If they do, it is `t voluntary thing it is more th'tn 8 hours. And on call. Since I' have been sitting here there may be some activity in Cleveland tonight, like there is in Detroit. If there is it will be 24 hours, sir. Mr. QUIE. What relationship will anybody in the centers have with the activities? Dr. GEORGE. We will be keeping the girls in the building and keep- ing them under supervised structured program activities to see that they are comfortable and feel secure and are provided for and we know where they are every moment. Their parents will be continually informed what the situation is. It willtake the total staff around the clock to handle the situation, if it happens, because we are right in the Hough area. Mr. QIJIE. You are located in the area that might be- Dr. GEORGE. Yes. But, we went through it once without any scars. Mr. QUIE. So both the instructors and the aids-I imagine some of the aides who would normally have t.ime off, would .be required to re- main, too. Dr. GEORGE. They would not be required. They would be interested enough to st~ wh'ttever time was needed We would schedule people, of course, with as reasonable hours a.s we could but I have no doubt'that I would have all the help I needed in volunteers from `the st.aff to cover whatever wasneeded. We have a very fine emergency procedure already worked out, all ready to be activated as soon as I get the telephone if we still feel the need for it. This is done without the full staff in on it and very well spelled out and everybody knows what his job is. Mr. QUIE. How many hours a, da.y would a vocational instructor be required to work? Dr. GEORGE. Eight hours a day, 40 hours a week is what they are required to do. I am merely saying that a program of this sort involves activities after 4 o'clock and our aids or resident advisers or counselors on duty ca.n not do the full job-there are enough of them there to man it, yes, but the interest of these teachers in them, the fact that they will come back past their `hour of expected work and just be present or participate in the program or to involve themselves with them in it, or to take them, we took a~ hundred girls to the opera when the Metro- politan Opera. was there. We spent weeks getting them ready for it in every single way. Teachers took small groups. We didn't take them in a bus. Teachers and friends in the community. Alpha Kappa women come, small groups of them, to the opera. That is a program as much as sitting up in a class in vocation. The teacher will be in better posi- tion to do something for the girl the next day after any kind of such activity, It will help to enrich this person's life. PAGENO="0340" 2800 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. We visited public schools in New York who were doing the same thing with the instructors. Only they ran into union difficulty. So they had to make certain that there was free will on the part of the instructors. Dr. GEORGE. This is only free will. I can only schedule them 40 hours a week. I wouJd look twice at rehiring a teacher for the second year who only spent 40 hours a week. Mr. QUIE. Dr. Perimutter, you mentioned the Mayo Clinic a num- ber of times, a Mayo type of operation. I don't find any similarity between what Mayo is doing and the Job Corps. Dean PERLMUrrER. It is a conceptual similarity. Mr. QUIIE. Tlriless you meant research. Mayo is involved in research. Dean PEELMUTTER. It was a conceptual comparison. Mayo treats patients. Mayo does research. I would like to see the Job Corps deal with students and this is the sense of treatment through what needs to be done right away. I would expect us together with the Job Corps and the educational community to do research in what they are doing. I do not think you ca.n underestimate our ingnorance in the world today in dealing with this population group. I have very little patience with people, especially those who are not on the front line of education, who are smug and derisive about efforts of this type because what we have been doing not only in this country but throughout the world is that we have been educating an upper strata as broad as 10 percent and here it tends to be closer to 30 or 40 but the vast majority are down below and we talk in rather pejorative terms about them. One of the reasons we do this is that we know very little about educating that group. I would be the first to profess my ignorance here. But I think we can learn. I think the good will exists now to conduct that inquiry and to learn. But we can't be too impatient with this. We can't expect to know in 3 years what we have not learned in several thousand. This is a large job. Congress can not legislate our knowledge on this. We are going to have to work by hard experience. This is a very valuable kind of laboratory that we have. It is not an either/or question that if we study here we can not study comprehensive high school in Milwaukee or a vocational school. We don't have enough of those vocational schools, either. But we need this laboratory. And we need it for these human reasons to get at these kids right away even when we don't always know what we are doing, even when we get them a bed to sleep in and teach them to wash their hair. Mr. Qu~. Are you claiming that there should be more research projects in the Job Corps Centers or the mere fact that there is money going into the Job Corps Centers that ends up to be a research project? Dr. GEORGE. No. I made a very specific suggestion here. I would like to see about 10 percent of our funds in the Job Corps effort clearly channeled not just for research but the program development is an extremely important aspect of this. I can illustrate this very quickly-staff training. WTe don't know enough to do adequate staff training, but I think we can find that out prett~r quickly if we were to designate three or four major university centers in different parts of the country to conduct this. Let me take this on the question of program development. This Christian Science Monitor correspondent, Cynthia Parsons, made the point about an organic curriculum. We discover, for example, in dealing with a Job PAGENO="0341" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2801 Corps youngster that one of the reasons he may have difficulty in vocational education is that his very fundamental difficulty is in basic education. You talk about circuitry and electronic and all the terms that are used in what seem to be simple trades there are some very big words that have to be read. When a package comes from a manufac- turer today it just does not come with pictures, it comes in prose. It is pretty horrible prose which I never find myself able to read and decipher. It is pretty hard for a youngster to come in and read this. We say all right, let us teach him to read. You take the same youngster to the reading teacher. The reading teacher has a different background altogether. She may be "Jack see May run". If you give that to a Harlem boy he will hoot at you. You give him some other prepared material that will reach him. What will reach him? We `are discovering what will reach this youngster is something related to his vocational goals and aspirations. He has to have a reading program and history program. It was not quite so absurd to talk about the plumbing and the Romans. The principle was a good one. Maybe if we can relate some reading material to what goes on in plumbing and it still makes sense, we can not only teach the boy to read but we can also get him to move ahead in his vocation, calling this an organic curriculum. We know very little about this. Vocational teachers don't have much sympathy for reading. The idea is that a vocatioal teacher when he gets a problem he says, "All right, boys, let me show you `how to attack this word." He may be a non-reader himself. The reading level of some vocational teachers is not at the very highest. If I may speak for a moment off the record, Mr. Chairman. (Discussion off the record.) Dean PERLMUTI'ER. This dropout language is nonsense. We simply do not have the necessary skill, scientific knowledge, data, information at present to do the job. I want a little patience from the Congress and a little money and a little support to improve what they are doing because in many ways the curriculum is at the level of the Christian Science Monitor report, speaking out of our guts and out of memories drawn 20 years ago. There are some advances being made. Dr. GEORGE. I would like to say something. I thoroughly agreed with him. I don't know who put us on the same beam but I would say that we have been experimenting with this business of teaching read- ing. Certainly there are a lot of common denominators in poverty. We use that `term as if we now know what we are talking about when we talk poverty. There are many distinctions in poverty as you have in the middle class. You have upper middle, lower middle and that sort of thing. You have the same thing in poverty, urban ghetto poverty, rural poverty, migrant poverty, you have little town poverty, you have poverty of ethnic ghettos and you have all kinds of poverty. About the only common denominator I have been able to find has `been that none of them knows how to read well enough. `They just don't know how to read. This is the one thing you can bet your bottom dollar on when they come back and need help. How do you teach them? We have had to just plain experiment. We try this, if it does not work we try something else. IRight now we are working on using their vocation, which is business English, which is medical English if they are in the medical field. Learn the `medical PAGENO="0342" 2802 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 names of the parts of the body. Learn the terms you are going to use as a nursing aide. If you do it you make a sentence. You begin to teach remedial reading with the thing that is tied up with the voca- tion, the thing they think they want without knowing all the other things they have to have to go along with it. So we are experimenting. V\Te do need some help in evaluating. We need people to help us with ideas on the way to do it. I think the success we have had in the light of the fact that we are experimenting with people other folks have failed with, the casualties of all the other people are the ones we are dealing with right here. Let me say this: I have stacks of success stories over here. I wish I had as much time as she had and I would read you some of them. I would tell you about a little Mexican girl who caine from Washington who wouldn't eat but two meals a day because she couldn't swallow that third meal because her people did not have enough to eat, who left there typing 78 words a minute. I don't know what her rate was in shorthand. I would like to read the letter to you that came from the people with whom she did her on-the-job training in Cleveland, the University Hospital of Cleveland: ~ow completed her job of affiliation training with us. We are pleased to report she was placed for the affiliation in our Department of Radiology which offers a broad range of clerical job opportunities. Experience includes typing, transcribing, filing, telephone processing, X-rays, experience with the auto- matic typew-riter. Our supervisor, Mr. Paul, states that Miss Magda is a very competent worker, responds well to teaching and explanation, follows instruc- tions very well. She is a good typist and her work is accurate and neat. Miss Magda's appearance is always neat, she is well mannered and works well with other members of the team. She is self-motivated to the point of seeking out the supervisor to request further work each time she has completed a project. Miss Magda would have been hired for permanent employment if she had remained available. She wanted to go home and go in the field and work. When we said to her, Let us sit down and takepencil and paper, you take one and I will take one. How much would you make if you went back, how much would you make a. week, how many weeks let us add this up for the 2 months before graduation. Now give me what you would make if you finish. We convinced her to stay. She wanted to go home and get in the field and work. Now we have got her a job with the Imperial Valley Irrigation Co. They wanted to hire her for a .top job. We said let her work up to that. Start her lower. She'll make it but let her do it on her own. She was made secretary of the head of a division. She is making a good salary. She is 21 miles from the nearest town where she lives. I can tell you about a girl who came in with third grade reading level who came from Brooklyn. Third grade reading level. She has finished the seventh grade. She had been training as a dental assistant. She wanted to read more than anything else. Everything that caine her way she wanted it. She had never seen a piece of clay. She had never seen a bust. Never had one in her hand. She paints, sculptures. She made a dental plate and then made an abstract painting of the dental plates, a tremendous improvement that has taken place in the girl's life. She is president of the student council. When I saw her reading her notes, a charge to her successor as president from little 3 by 5 PAGENO="0343" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2803 cards in her hand, something happened inside her. Now this is the thing you have to come and see. The Members of Congress can not judge this program until you have been to a center and been all the way through it and spent some time with us and looked at what we are doing. There is no way for you to imagine what is happening to these youngsters. Sure we fail with them. Every time we do, I weep because I don't think it is their failure, it is our failure. We have not learned yet enough about what t.o do for them. We talk about it. We give them, 1 would rather give them one too many chances than one too few. Sometimes it is difficult to make a decision because I don't feel it is not girl's `fault. It is our fault because we have not yet found out all the answers. I wish it were possible to just share with you letters of recommendation just like the one I read to you, stories of girls who come to us really out of correctional institutions, a girl who took care of herself since the age of nine. Chairman PERKINS. Will you put some of those success stories in the record? Dr. GEORGE. Now? You want me to write them up or tell them? You won't ever read it. You won't have time `to read it. Dean PERLMUTTER. Dr. George has a very important point about firsthand experience with the centers. I have been in seven or eight. It is a very gratifying thing to see these youngsters. Mrs. GREEN. You `say you have been in seven or eight. How long did you stay and in which ones were you? Dean PERLMUTD~R. I have been in Gary and Kiliner and Parks that I remember offhand. I `have been in the Cleveland center several times. Mrs. GREEN. Gary, Kilmer, Parks, and Cleveland. Dean PERLMUTTER. Yes. `Mrs. GREEN. How long' did you stay in each one? How long were you in Gary when you were there? Dean PERLMUTTER. I would have to check to see if I have any records of when I was there but I usually was there 24- to 48-hour periods. Mrs. GREEN. Were you ever in any center for more than 48 hours? Dean PERLMUTTER. I never stayed overnight in a center, which I would have liked to have d'one. Mrs. GREEN. Were you in any center for more than 2 days? Dean PERLMUVPER. No, I have been, however, with center personnel for as long as about a week, with just center persomleL Mrs. GREEN. There were studies that have been made by people taken on a Cook's tour where a center has been given a wonderful rating. Then when the real detail study was made it was far from what was on the surface. Did you ever personally make a study of the training courses that were given to the enrollees? Dean PERLMUTTER. Of some I have. Mrs. GREEN. Where? Dean PEELMUTTER. At Parks. Mrs. GREEN. Of the training courses that were given at Parks? Dean PERLMUTTER. I have looked at many of the curriculums and the programs. I am not a strong defender of the program academi- cally. I think they have a long way to go. PAGENO="0344" 2804 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs. GREEN. When you made the detailed study at Parks, how many hours were the youngsters in training? Dean PrnI~ru'rrER. I did that when Parks was maybe 6 or 7 months old. Mrs. GREEN.. Did you ever write up or give anybody a memo on your study of the training that was taking place there? Dean PERLMUTTER. I may have.. I have had long conversations, I may have written some memos. Mrs. GREEN. You don't have any recollection of the kind of train- ing and effectiveness of it? Dean PERLM UTTER. I have some recollection of some of the training I have seen at. Parks. For example, I saw one of the best training pro- grams there and it may have been a short visit but then I am not an amateur walking into a school. In the culinary arts, for example- Mrs. GREEN. I wanted to know about individual youngst.ers. What I am trying to make a judgment on is the kind of program that we are getting for the dollar spent. I think there is a great deal of misinfor- mation and also assu1nptions that those people who question the kind of training program in the Job Corps are per se opposed t.o it. Dean PERLMUTTER. I would not say that at all. I think we are agreed that. this is something that needs to be clone. Mrs. GREEN. By my questions I am not one of those who would do a.wa.y with all Job Corps centers. Far from it. I think, if I understand you, that some of these perhaps do serve as a good laboratory from which we can learn. From that conclusion, I do not jump to the con- clusion that the Job Corps is to be defended as t.he only wa.y to reach these hard core youngsters. I think the job of the committee is to really probe in depth and not just to deal in platitudes and say the Job Corps, like motherhood and country, is wonderful. You come here today defending the Job Corps. I want. to know what kind of training programs you have studied and how effective they have been and what your conclusions are in terms of the number of youngsters that grad- uat.ed and held jobs. Dean PERLMrTrrER. I stated at the outset, I don't know whether you heard the introductory remarks, the very first remarks I have made, I am not here to defend the Job Corps. I would have to be operationally involved to do that. Mrs. GREEN. I thought. your paper was defending it. Dean PERLMUTTER. I am defending the concept. I am defending the concept not from the point of view of the Job Corps. I am defending the concept from the poin.t of view of education that this is something to be done. Whether it is being done badly or well is for you to deter- mine, for it- Mrs. GREEN. You sa.y it is to be determined whether it is educa- tionally sound. Dean PERLMITTTER. Whether the concept is sound. Let me outline the concept. The concept is that we will take young- sters and put. them in residential centers; t.ha.t they will get medical treatment, complete health care, psychological care in terms of coun- selling, vocational education, and basic education; perhaps education in the art.s and a number of related things and this will be done in residential centers. It will be done by teams of faculty and experts who a.re drawn from industry, from government, from colleges, from PAGENO="0345" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2805 schools. This is the concept. This is all I am defending. I would have to be very well versed to speak about the detail. Mrs. GREEN. You would defend the concept but you will also admit that it might be well to try several different kinds of residential centers and see which ones would work the best? Dean PERLMUTTER. Indeed, but I would want to know the concept; not that residential makes it good. Dr. GEORGE. May I ask you, Mrs. Green, why would you be inter- ested in trying somewhere else until we really had a chance to do an adequate job of trying here? Two years is really not enough to find out what has happened to human beings. You get. a lot of examples of success but you really won't know what happens to some of these hu- man beings for a long time. Some of them you will never know what happens to them. If you are going to have to look for evidence of success with human beings, in 2 years they don't even ask for that kind of return from stocks or from investment in business when you have things that you can handle. Human beings, to expect us to be able to prove to you that it worked, when we have all of this evidence of indi- viduals who are successes. I am just wondering why you would want to try somewhere else. Mrs. GREEN. May I say, Mrs. George, that I have heard about your work at Cleveland center and from what I understand you are doing a good job. I have visited Job Corps centers, and I have made in-depth studies of some of them. So I think I have some information on which to base a judgment, although I do not pretend to know the answers. I do not see any volume of evidence at this point after 2 or 3 years which assures me that the Job Corps is the way and the only way. I do think we certainly ought to continue a few Job Corps centers as laboratories and see what we can learn from them. I also am convinced that. there are other ways that we also ought to study and see if we can do a better job and a more effective job. This is my concern. With the amount of money that we are expecting per enrollee per year it seems to me that this committee is obligated to find out if there is a better way to reach this tremendous nunTher of youngsters. We are only reaching 40,000 youngsters. There are 8,000 dropouts a year. We are not beginning to scratch the surface. School districts don't have money for disturbed children. We don't have money for a great many things. If there were unlimited funds and we could do everything we wanted for all youngsters, we could have a thousand Job Corps centers but we don't. So we have to say how do we get the best return for the dollars we are spending. As I say, from the studies I have made, I am not convinced that that volume of evidence is there `to say that the Job Corps is the only way that we should do it. May I turn to some direct questions. Is there a study of Cleveland in terms of the number of girls enrolled, how many have graduated and the dropout rate in the jobs? I don't mean in individual cases. In any school in the country we can pick out individual cases tha.t can be grea.t success stories and individual cases that can be failures. I am not interested in individuals although the individual is terribly important but in terms of evaluating the total Job Corps program do we have studies? PAGENO="0346" 2806 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT A~NDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. GEORGE. I can give you some very authentic facts but may I say that the whole Job Corps idea is based on the individual. Education for all we have about achieved and now we are working on education for each. If it is not individual I don't know what it is. Mrs. GREEN. You either misunderstand me or you are putting words in my mouth. Evaluate the Job Corps program in terms of millions of dollars you are spending and in terms of results. Dr. GEORGE. I don't know how to put a price on a successful girl. I feel if we make a fair percentage of success it might be much cheaper than it would have cost society if we had not done it. I don't imow how to get those figures but I think it is an important thing to keep in mind. I can give you the answer to your question. We have had 1,143 girls since we were activated. At present we have 346. We are supposed to have 345. So we are at capacity, one over. We have had 797 terminations; 247 of them are graduates. Mrs. GREEN. How do you define a "graduate"? Dr. GEORGE. Someone who has satisfactorily completed the course, as prescribed, for whatever vocational choice she has been training for, whether it be secretary or data processor or nursing assistant or phys- ical therapist. Mrs. GREEN. Do you include as undergraduates the girls who have not finished the course, but transferred to another school or took a job? Dr. GEORGE. No, I have here a. list that I would break down the termination from. `We have had 93 transfers out, 73 of them were OEO holding units which means they were transferred because of pregnancy. Fifty-seven of that were pregnant on arrival. We have transferred 20 of them to other centers. We have had 66 disciplinary discharges. We have had 77 that were discharged for 30-day AWOL, being AWOL 30 days. `~\Te have five that were on administrative leave and this is a. sort. of nebulous term because it was one inherited and we no longer use it. We have had 19 medical discharges which had to do with emotional disturbances. `We have had 281 resignations. Then we have had nine other terminations which we call improper screening. Two hundred and forty-seven are graduates. Of that number 138 as of this moment have confirmed employment. We know where they are working and how much they are making. We know there are. others working. We have a record here of exactly where they are working, who they are working for, what they are doing and how much they are making. This is minimum. . We have 11 previously employed but not now working, according to our records, eight who have married, 18 who transferred to colleges or high school, and we had five this past year who went to college and scholarships from Alpha Kappa Alpha sorority. One in the armed. services and we have 71 unemployed. Now that 71 unemployed, almost all of them are Negro girls in the South and who have been trained beyond- Mrs. GREEN. Have you made a study of the girls who have had jobs and how long they stayed on the job? Dr. GEORGE. I thought we were doing pretty good to get this. We are going to work on that next. I have one of our teachers in voca- tion this summer, who is taking 1 week of this time to interview girls in the Los Angeles area where he is spending his vacation. `We PAGENO="0347" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2807 have quite a group from there. He is going to do some indepth inter- viewing of them so as to give us an idea of the kind of things we would like to know. Mrs. GREEN. Ilow many hours a week would the girls be in class, both in vocational training and academic work? Dr. GEORGE. Eight a day. They go to class 8 hours a day, 40 hours a week. Mrs. GREEN. This is for all the girls? Dr. GEORGE. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. What kind of vocational training? Dr. GEORGE. We have three clusters. One is around the Hough area where we have nurse's aides, psychiatric aides, physical therapist aides and assistants, LPN, the nursing field primarily, dental aides. We have receptionists, sort of a hybrid. They have to know some- thing about medical things. Then we have the clerical field, and we call it a cluster, and they start from the five clerical way up to the secretary, and at a point they break off; they may have two or three employable skills before they get to where they really have the capac- ity to go. If for some reason they drop out they still have employable skills in the clerical area. In the clerical area we do data `card processing, IBM keypunch, and a. number of the related fields, duplicating machines, and verityping. I have right in front of me here a girl who is working for Standard Oil. Mrs. GREEN. How long have you been in Cleveland? Dr. GEORGE. I have been there since August last year. Mrs. GREEN. Have the girls been in a training period of 40 hours a week all the time since you came there, or were they when you came? Dr. GEORGE. Pretty near it. They have been in it ever since about the third week I was there. Mrs. GREEN. I must say this is a better record than some of the other centers I have taken a look at. What is your ratio of adult em- ployees to girls? Dr. GEORGE. Just a moment and I will find it. We have a permanent staff of 1341/2. This is 2.1 to 1. . Mrs. GREEN. What is the average, loss there in Cleveland; do you know? .. ., . Dr. GEORGE. That is one figure I meai~it to get. I will, see that you get it. It is less than it is supposed to be and I am not ,proud of it. I just couldn't get it. Mrs. GREEN. In one of the studies that has been made there is talk of the very high absentee rate, and the recommendation was made that the adjustment allowance not be paid to youngsters who went to Job Corps centers and just never reported to classes. Do you think this would be a good procedure? Dr. GEORGE. I stated that the first month I was there. We deduct 20 cents for every class they miss because they are being paid a salary to go to school and we talk about it in meetings and we say, "If you don't go to class it is important to you to learn that you don't get paid because the Government is paying you to go to school. You are pay- ing income tax out of that $15," 13 something they get, and so we take 20 cents out. PAGENO="0348" 2808 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 We averaged what it should be with 40 hours a week and we came up with 20 cents some kind of way or other. Anyway, it works and we take it out of their pay and we put it in the welfare fund and we do cultural enrichment programs with it.. What we don't get from that I get from lecturing. Mrs. G~EN. In terms of the care of the center, do the girls wait on themselves and so on? Dr. GEORGE. They do all of the cleaning of the public rooms on their floors, like the bath, and the toilet, and the hall, and the ironing room, and the laundry room, and the television room, and their own rooms. They do not take care of the first-floor lobby. We employ mainte- nance man for that. I have here in front of me, a schedule of the house- keeping per each floor for a month at a time, and this is on my desk the last day of the month for the next month. Mrs. GREEN. Earlier you made the statement that you thought it was well not to have the girls close to home., if I understood you correctly. Dr. GEORGE. I very strongly feel that way. Mrs. GREEN. I believe, one of the studies showed that 94 percent of the youngsters returned to their own homes after they had been in the Job Corps, whether it was a week or 6 months. There is, in fact, a.n amendment. to the law last year that they would be sent to a center that was close. I agree with you that some youngsters ought to be away from their home, but would you change this new law? Dr. GEORGE. Oh, yes, I would change it. Yes, I would very much like to see it changed, and I will tell you why. A girl who comes to a center, the first thing you have to do is establish discipline. She has to make a 7 o'clock breakfast. She has an 8 o'clock class. She has to clean her room. It has to be inspected before that class. Now, we want a better life because she didn't buy that, but you have to establish this the day she gets in, not next week. All right, she gets homesick right quick. That home she couldn't wait to get away from is the most beautiful place she ever saw. She wants to get home right away. She will, if she has enough money in her pocket to get bus fare home. She is gone before I even know she has a problem. But if she has to come to . her counselor or to me to ask for money to go home, I have a chance to persuade her. I can't keep her against her will, but I can say, "Why do you want to go home?" "I don't like it." "You don't know whether you like it. You haven't been here long enough." You know what you would say to many. That is what I say. Usually they end up staying there. If I can keep them 30 days I can keep them 90. I think we ought to require them to stay 90 days when they sign up and come. I think there ought to be some penalty when they don't, but I feel very strongly that these girls who have not had discipline, and you can't operate without it, are going to want to go home and they are going to go home. They are going to call their parents and are going to tell them anything in the world. They will tell them the biggest story, just the biggest you ever heard of. They call the WICS and they tell them, and if it doesn't work then they tell them, you know, "I am leaving Hough." And then they will get them home because that is a dirty word like Watts, and the parents will send and get them right away. He knows. Watts is a dirty word like Hough. PAGENO="0349" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2809 Mrs. GREEN. May I say to you, Dr. George, that at least as one member of the committee it would be helpful to me if you would make specific recommendations as far as legislative requirements or ad- ministrative changes. Now, I studied some of the Job Corps centers, and I visited some of them where there is no discipline and where absenteeism doesn't make any difference and the full adjustment allowance is paid and where the enrollees are waited upon for the full time. Some of us look with a jaundiced eye at spending $8,000 to $10,000 for `a training `program that we don't think is much of a training program. So I think specific suggestions from you on changes would be more helpful than just the concept that the Job Corps is great. Dr. GEORGE. We even define what we call a successfully completed month so that they don't get their $50 if they don't successfully com- plete the month. This is a lot of work and if you don't `have enough help because Congress doesn't give you enough money to get th'at help-this really takes money. It takes money to pay people in com- petition with public school systems, with no fringe benefits, just the love of humanity. Mrs. GREEN. Let me say, Dr. George, that if I had my druthers, I would increase the total amount that we spend on education, includ- ing the Job Corps and various efforts of the war on poverty to a much larger extent than `the administration is requesting this year. My quarrel is not with the total amount of money that we are spend- ing on education or the war on poverty. My questions are the way that we are spending it and `the tremendous job ahead of us and the hundreds of thousands of kids in every community that need help and how can we best do it. This is my question and we have lots of problems. Dr. GEORGE. Some of us working awfully hard, if we just got a little pat on the back from Congress maybe some of the others would work harder. It is really very disgusting. They don"t make any dis- tinctions. They hear about a conservation corps somewhere that did something and all `the Job Corps is wrong `and this just isn't fair to the girls. The tremendous things that are coming ou't of some of these centers really just need to be isolated from the criticism that come to all of us. Mrs. GREEN. I think this committee hears both the bad parts and good parts and as a result of the balance then we try to make a judg- ment on what might be done. Dean PERLMUTTER. I would like to have one more attempt at a meet- ing of minds here, Congresswoman, because I have been very articulate in my criticism of certain Job Corps practices, particularly in the area of staff training and some of the internal discipline problems and the scheduling problems, but these are not simple matters and 2 years is very little time in which to start up 123 residential institutions and get `them built and get them staffed. Mrs. GREEN. I can't agree more. I think we should have started much fewer and gone much slower. That is one of my criticisms. * Dean PEELMUTTER. There were some pressures coming from the Hill as I recall in 1965 to get some people into Job Corps centers very quickly. Wherever that `pressure came from, it did not come through the Job Corps, and within a period of six months about 10,000 people were brought in and this I remember very clearly. PAGENO="0350" 2810 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I am with a large state university where in a period of 10 years of our starting up we finally, starting with 22,000, reached 42,000. 1 brought a table with me here which indicates our 1959 enrollment of 42,000 students which we take as our base. We have built up very rapidly since 1959, but we don~t calculate costs the way we seem to be calculating costs for the Job Corps and I am speaking as an outside observer of this. This is over $100 million worth of construction on my campus that appears in public print. That doesn't include other kinds of buildings that come out of some other sort of funds. I don't divide the number of students by that consti~uction and come out with a total year figure. Mrs. GREEN. You misunderstand. The figures I was talking about were entirely operating, not a cent for capital construction. Dean PERLMUTTER. There isn't any capital construction, but there is rehabilitation and acquisition of facilities. Mrs. GREEN. The figures I was talking aboutincluded not a dime in renovation of centers, not a. dime in construction, not a dime in equip- ment. I am talking about operating expenses entirely. Dean PERLMuTTER. Even with that, even with that, relative to what it costs to operate a private residentjal school this ~s a nmc.h more diffi- cult task. It is a much more complicated task. I expect it to be expen- sive. The question is whether we can afford not to spend that kind of money. Dr GEORGE. I would like you to see some of the kinds of things we are trvin~ to do to give cultural enrichment to some of these Young- sters. Here, for instance, is a program of a gentleman who is the first violist in the Cleveland Symphony who did pen-and-ink drawings when he went with the orchestra to the Soviet LTnion on a good will tour and he has had these on exhibition all over the country. I was literally scared to death when he offered to bring his paintings and give us a 1-hour lecture on it because he speaks with a Hungarian accent and I can't understand him myself and thinking of him lectur- ing for an hour I just lost my mind but lie came and we had these paintings hanging, 77 of them for a week. We had a. string quartet from the Cleveland Symphony. 1-Ic spoke for an hour and the hail was packed and they enjoyed it, every minute of it, and I just think to get the spirit of it you could just look at on' of those pictures. Mrs. GREEN. I am not quarreling with individual efforts. We can take individuals. Dr. GEORGE. This is not individual. That is not individuals. Those are not individuals. There are a lot of people there. There are not any individuals there. Will you come to Cleveland and just visit us in October? Mrs. GREEN. I will come to the Cleveland Job Corps center and I do want to hear more about the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. I have several questions to ask you, Doctor. I really feel that you and Dr. George have come before this committee today with my concept of the value of the Job Corps and I noted that you mention that the figures that have been quoted were unrealistic insofar as comparing the cost of general education with the Job Corps. Dean PERLMUTTER. Not unrealistic. I meant that when you consider what -is being purchased and what the task is and then try to relate PAGENO="0351" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2811 it to comparable tasks this is not a very expensive figure. If you are to send a youngster to a good residential school, and I remember this kind of debate a couple of years ago, or send them to a fine university, those figures are very high too when we analyze them. They don't come down to any low numbers. I am not a financial man so that I have these things at my finger- tips, but I know that as a parent it will' cOst me say about $3,000 to keep a yońngster in college. It costs the college much more than that $3,000. Chairman' PERKINS. Assuming that when the `Job Corps was first activatčdthat the average cost was'$lO,OOO and today the average cost is down to $5,900, do you feel that- Dean PERLMUTTER. What was the first figure, sir? "Chairman PERKINS. $10,000 and per enrollee today the average cost is down to $5,900. Let's just assume for a moment that' we authorized the Federal Government to construct some residential centers in the country, a certain number of them eight or 10 to start out with, maybe more, and turned them over to the State vocational agencies in the various States to operate. Dean PERLMUTTER. On a residential basis. Chairman PERKINS. On a residential basis, yes, and the Federal Government paying all the' cost. Could you visualize the cost of those residential centers being any less than the cost of the present Job Corps? Dean PERLMUTTER. I visualize it being much higher, a lot higher. Chairman PERKINS. I would like you to tell us why. Dean PERLMUTTER. This is a very uneconomical solution apart from the- Chairman PERKINS. Go into this phase of it. That is what the Op- portunity Crusade provides, to phase it out presently, to turn the Job Corps overnight to the Office of Education to operate and within 3 years phase it out in favor of residential centers. How long would it take us to construct these residential centers and what is the cost? Give us your observation on that. Dean PERLMUTTER. I am a very conservative person as an educator and I don't like to encourage the Federal Government to get into this kind of operation. I am kind of amazed at the whole concept. I can see the Federal Government providing some support as indeed it is doing in a variety of ways, but I don't want `to encourage the Fed- eral Government to go into this kind of an operation. I think one of the saving things about the present operation is that we clearly see it as a transitory device. We have used rather crude facilities. Camp Kilmer is no elegant place, or take the converted hotels and so on. It has been done quickly without great emphasis on building and furthermore this kind of building operation would be a great tax on the building that we already need to do in higher education and can't keep up with. Dr. GEORGE. Let me get back to the population. Who are you going to put in these places? You mean people from the States? If it is going to be run by the States you think they are going to let my people go to Alabama. Chairman PERKINS. On your line of thought that I was going to try to develop it in an orderly manner and I will let you comment on PAGENO="0352" 2812 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 it, Dr. George, as we go along, but even though you are not an econo- mist, you cannot visualize the cost being any less than it would be in the Job Corps centers? Dean PERLMUTTER. No; I visualize that it is probably being in excess. Chairman PERKINS. What do you base that statement on? Dean PERLMUTTER. I base that on a very simple thing that you experience all the time when you are running a school that you can make certain economies if you stay within one existing framework that already is there. If you add on to what you have rather than start a brandnew campus and start a new operation, starting up costs are greater. The studies are greater. In each one of these places you don't just build a building. You have to make a number of very expensive pre- liminary studies to determine who, where, and how this is going to be done and there is a lot of repetition of facilities if we add more build- ings to where we are where the same heating plant can be expanded or can be added on to, rather than getting all the basic equipment in a new place. I have a good example on my own university campus because we have an old campus. We took an old library now and rehabilitated it for a TV and instructional resources center. We did that at a fraction of the cost it would have cost us to put this up as a. brandnew con- * strnction. This is plainly evident to anyone whether he is an expert or not, that if you work with existing facilities and brandnew ones, the brandnew ones are a factor of several times the existing ones. Chairman PERKINS. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota. Mr. Q.UIE. Have you compared the cost of Job centers with resi- dential vocational schools which give the same kind of training to the young people as the Job Corps does? Dean PERLMUTTER. I have no preparation for this committee today and I came primarily to talk about the curriculum, program, and staff, but I have made comparisons of that kind in the past and I made them about 2 or 3 years ago when we were just starting up Job Corps. Mr. QUIE. But the estimate for what the Job Corps would cost was way less than it turned out t.o be. Dean PERLMUTTER. That may very well be. Mr. QUIE. But the residential vocational schools run by vocational education cost less than the Job Corps. Dean PERLMUTTER. Not with this kind of population. Their costs would go up, anybody trying to do this. Mr. QUIE. We took a particular interest in Mahoning Valley, Ohio, because the Job Corps dropouts went there and fared better. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to t.he gentleman that Mahoning Valley is a trade school, but they do not deal strictly with the so-called disadvantaged youngster. The majority of the enrollees are high school graduates, or have had high school. Mr. QUIE. Some of the Job Corps do too. Dean PERLMUTTER. Very few. Mr. Quir. Very few had, but the chairman changed it to "Ha.d some high school." Dean PERLMUTTER. I would say to you, Congressman Quie, that if there were students like that in the Job Corps then that is not the PAGENO="0353" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2813 place for them. Those students could be handled in other' schools. The Job Corps is designated as I see it for the very hard-core group. Now, I can see some compromise with that because if you go to the extreme there that may be a very difficult way to learn and I can appreciate some director saying, "Well, don't give us the toughest. Let's start with `some that are somewhere in the middle," but they certainly should not start with those that have been inside the high school. Chairman PERKINS. Pursuing the point a little further, the schools that we have in operation at the present time, the vocational schools in the country, by and large, are not set up to deal with the bottom of the ladder, the last rung where we have the youngster that has never had high school, never had a job, and comes from a torn up home in a majority of cases. Are the presently operated vocational schools equipped to serve that type of youngster? Dean PERLMUTTER. Some way, but in `the main t.hey are not. Chairman PERKINS. it is for that reason that you feel that it is uecessary that we continue the operation of these Job Corps camps for many years and to feed back I believe you stated today the knowl- edge that we gain through vocational schools and other schools?. Dean PERLMUTTER. I would hope that in the long run we would drastically revise our whole conception of vocational education as a result of this experience. ` ~Chairman PERKINS~ I think you would agree withme that you have~ stated that we need,both the residential schools. for. more' residential centers and Job Corps centers and they more or less complement each other, that the information that we gain, the know-how that we gain from the operation of' the Job Corps certainly will be beneficial .to the residential centers? Dean PERLMUTTER. Yes, I would even want to provide systemically for rotation of staff, both ways. It would be a very useful thing. I would want both kinds of schools to be very closely linked to the lead- ing university in its area which maintains the faculties that could study what ,is going on `and I would like to see some network Of this on a national level. Chairman PERKINs. You gave some illustrations today, not illustra- tions, but items from your own experience I will put it that way, that the Job Corps is creating hope and giving and imbuing these young- sters with the idea that they can earn a living and have the capacity to make money where the vocational schools by and large have never touched this real hard-core youngster. Is that a fair statement? Dean PERLMUTTER. Yes. You can't say that you know with complete finality 100 percent. Certainly some hard-core `youngsters will be t.ouched and I hav~' seen enough in the slums' of New York City, but then there are variqus factors involved. But by and large' when' you have a real hard-core youngster-mind you, we are talking about a youngster who may get in' trouble with the police, who may get in trouble over narcotics, who may be violent, who may carry weapons, who may `be very antisocial in his behavior-the reaction of the average teacher is couldn't we get him out of the school, get him out of my class, and when he comes to the principal what he wishes for is to get him out of his school. 80-084-67-pt. 4-23 PAGENO="0354" 2814 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 This is a healthy normal reaëtion, I would agree, but it is a. normal reaction. Chairman PERKINS. I have listened carefully to your statement and to my way of thinking you are qualified as an expert in the field of industrial arts. Just why are the ordinary vocational schools failing in any efforts that are being made to reach this type of youngster or why have they not touched this type of youngster to any great degree? Dean PEELMUTTER. Well, that is kind of a long question, a question that requires- Chairman. PERKINS. Oh, yes. Dean PERLMUTTER (continuing). A long answer and for one thing the training that most people get in vocational education, the teachers, is training of a technical kind in t.heir vocation, in their subject mat- ter, a good electronics man, a. good sheet metal man, metallurgy and so on. He knows his field. He is not necessarily well trained, and even basically trained in the dynamics of behavior in general let alone this group. Whereas you might, say, from a social studies feature expect from him the social discipline to try to begin to understand this group, von will not get that from a. vocational arts, industrial ar& tëa~her. Occasionally you do, but this isn't the pattern. The pattern there is of a man who is very strictly, usually middle class oriented, wants a clean neat shop, a well disciplined class, and this is very difficult to achieve with this group and it requires a great deal of insight and understanding and tact and ingenuity to hold this group with devices other than compulsion. I am very wary about using compulsion here and punishment.. I would much rather use rewards. I would much rather give 20 cents for perfect attendance than to take 20 cents away, but there are many subtle things that have to be worked out here to really understand how to deal with these people. . . One of the big problems we have in training staff, and I stress that and I .don't know whether I have gotten it across to the committee or not. is the inner hostility that most of us have, teachers included, toward this group, which we are constantly repressing. This comes out when we take them and put them into sensitivity t.raining. Most of them, say they are nice; we are for them. But when you see a group of t.hese youngsters you represent a t.hrea.t to them and t.hey represent a threat to the teacher and to overcome t.his situation requires some very comprehensive training, not just understanding, but it is not just an intellectual training. The teacher is a symbol, and so is the schoolroom, of everything this' youngster has dropped out of, and the vocational school as ~onven- tionally set up in his neighborhood is that kind of a place. It is square. It is them. And if you introduce the Negro question there are a. whole host of other terms that we know that the boys or the youngsters will use. So when you are, say, rea.ching this kind of group, why, this is a horrendous problem for an ordinary school district. You have to have* a real expertise in this. We do not. have universities now imparting this kind of expertise to teachers in Job Corps or vocational schools. Chairman PERKINS. That. is just not presently in the universities' of this country. . . . PAGENO="0355" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2815 Dean PERLMUTTER. That is correct; it is not present. Chairman PERKINs. And it points up one thing, that that is one of the great problems of vocational educators now, to reach this type of youngster since you don't have the universities to train the teachers in these areas. Dean PERLMUTTER. But we do have individual men and women who are doing research, who are doing studies, and there are enough of them in the country that if we could begin to harness them and put them together as a team we could perform some miracles in social education comparable to what we have done in aerospace. Chairman PERKINS. From your knowledge of the operation of the Job Corps do you feel that they have commenced to harness the know~ how and to do something about this problem and are taking advantage of it to some degree, presently? Dean PERLMUTTER. Not very much, not very much. I have been an open critic. I asked very recently how much of their funds are being spent in this direction as a percentage and I think the answer I got was between 1 and 2 percent. There is no centralized uniform staff training for all of the urban centers, for example. There should be. Each center trains its own and this is an absurd situation because, for one thing, the insights required here are of such a specialized nature and in many cases not at all developed that you can't expect- what is it? Thirteen or fifteen centers to reinvent and rediscover it each time. There is a very unique informative systeni among, the çen- ters. 1 was one of `the first people when I was a consultant to invite all the center directors to a meeting. This was in August of 1966, a year ago last summer. Yes, a year ago last. summer. They came to that meeting in Washing- ton. It took me a year to get this organized, that is, to get the consent for it, and the center directors said, "We are delighted. It is the first time we have met one another." Chairman PERKINS. Do you see where this valuable know-how and information will be obtained from the research arms of these various corporations that are involved with training at the present time when they coordinate, and do you see where they can do this in the future? Dean PERLMUTTER. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. And provide the know-how that is necessary and pass it on to other centers? Dean PERLMLTTTER. I would like to see someone at about the level of an associate director in the Job Corps whose responsibilities would be precisely this, who would be responsible for interrelating all of the staff training of all of the centers, urban as well as rural, who would be responsible for all the program development which would come out of that one directly. Chairman PERKINS. I think that is very true. Dean PERLMUTTER. And all of the research and if I had to give proportions I would put the largest amount, say, soniethihg `like" `75 percent to be divided between staff training and program develop- ment-let me come to program development in a moment-and an- other 25 percent to pure research. You take something like the organi- zation of reading program for nurses," suc~i as Dr. George was desc.ri~bing. It would be magnificent in working that out that you had some psychoiogists, some graphic artists of top quality determining how that oan be put~ together. PAGENO="0356" 2816 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 There may be some technology involved in this. Perhaps the reading should be done through some sort of mechanical typewriter system. Perhaps it should be done through one of a great many technical methods that are now available to us which may not occur to the teacher of nursing or to the teacher of reading who is required to have this kind of expertise, but if we were to do this at a national level out of a director's office in Washington who could have the resources and bring in the best people-and I don't mean to have them there just as window dressing to serve on an honorary advispry board, but to be really put to work-let's detach, say, an outstanding expert from Harvard or Kansas or California and put him to work at a good salary in the Job Corps for 1 or 2 years just in his specialty, then just relate him to a larger group. I don't mean to unfold the plan here for you. I would want to work with the people to deal with these details, but it could be clone. Chairman PERKINs. Undertaking to visualize a residential center comprised of folks residents only going to school in the daytime, and others that have stayed in the center 7 days a week where, of course. you would have to be invOlved with two sets of regulations, how do ~-ou visualize that that type of center would work out for a real hard-core youngster that has never had a job and has been a problem child? Dean PERLMUTTER. You mean he would be a commuter? Chairman PERKINS. No, he would be in the residential center. There would be others that would not but would be commuter, but not the hard core. I mean another vocational school student, say. Do you mix them? Dean PERLMUTTER. I wouldn't categorically reject that or accept that. I think there would be a lot of educational factors here that would have to be examined carefully. This is not very different in kind from the sort of problem you face. I am facing it right now with our middle son-this isn't a residential problem-of receiving him into a school which is in a slum area of Albany and has a very mixed and rough and tough population, especially relative to this tender youngster, and I am weighing what are the advantages in going there, what are the dis- advantages. The instruction isn't so good but he is learning an awful lot by contact with these students and he has changed quite a bit. He has learned a great many things. I can see clear advantages for the residential students because I never disagreed with a number of proposals where these students ideally ought to be mixed with a larger population group. It is just that it is not practical to do this. If we could bring a more normal mix this might not be a bad idea, but I would want to look very closely at how this is being done. In some colleges, for example, you have a complete separation between the so- called day hops and those who are residential students and this isn't working out well in those schools. In other places there is an intelligent way of bringing them together for the benefit of both groups. A lot would depend on how that is administered. Chairman PERKINS. Now the so-called opportunity crusade I think as I outlined it to you a few moments ago provides for the transfer of the operation immediately to the Office of Education of the Job Corps' existing job corps through the various vocational educational school systems of the States. PAGENO="0357" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2817 That would be the way it would operate with the present vocational school system as set up and phasing out within 3 years of the Job Corps and in the meantime so many residential centers would be constructed. Assuming that we followed that course as provided for in the oppor- tunity crusade where would it take us considering the progress that we are making presently with the Job Corps? Dean PERLMUTTER. Well, I would say that first of all it would be premature both from the point of view of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare as well as from the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead and tell us why. Dean PERLMUrrER. On the side of HEW, and this is an opinion-I have no right to speak for the Secretary who can make his own judg- ments about what he is ready for or not ready for-but as I see HEW at close hand, and I am in there at least once or twice a month. It would seem to me that they have more than they can handle right now. They have a great deal on their hands and handing Job Corps to them would be giving them perhaps a task which is equal in complexity and difficulty to any single operation they have. This would be one reason. The second reason which I developed earlier this afternoon is 1 would not want to encourage this kind of operational tendency in the national agency. The virtue I see in OEO is that at some reasonable date we can terminate it and then see where it goes back into the local communities and the local schools. I don't want to build up the habit in HEW much as I love some of those people, of saying, "Well, you are running schools or supervising or we have some guys that you are not," but in reality they would be. From the point of view of the Job Corps itself you have a spirit of enthusiasm here as you have in any new organization that is just activated. You have a lot of people who are willing to devote time and energy to it who would look at a job in HEW as just another jobS There is much more flexibility in this agency. If I may trust what I hear the economics of the agency as an agency vis-a-vis the Federal Government is not bad. I don't know those facts, but I have heard them. So I don't know that there is an economic argument for doing that. I must say that one ought to, you know, canvass the people, at least the professional people who are actually involved in this work. How do they feel about it? And I don't think by and large from just an informal samplmg of them that in the centers that they would like this kind of transfer. Have you gotten indications from center directors or center staffs? Let me ask an open ended question which may embarrass me. Are you getting representations from people like Dr. George or her staff that would rather be- Chairman PERKINS. Not the first one. Dean Perhnutter (continuing) That they would like to be in HEW? I don't know what this great attraction is to be in HEW, why that would alter the problem very much. You still face many of the same problems with more bureaucratic obstacles. The problems wouldn't go away. It seems to have a kind of administrative sanitation to have ~t hnnch of (lcpartments and it says education and you put it in educa- tion. There are a great many agencies in the country today which are PAGENO="0358" 2818 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 involved in education which do not have the term "education" any- where near the title. I submit within the Government, the Department of Defense is running one Of the largest school districts in the country in its de- pendent school system It doesn't ha~ e to go into HEW Chairman PERKINS. You think it makes much more sense if we authorized the construction of a limited number of residential voca- tional~ schools in this country on an experimental and pilot basis, we may say, to work in cooperation with the Job Corps and over a period of years as we could build more vocational schools and the time would come perhaps when the Job Corps would work itself out of existence with this know-how and exchange of personnel and so forth. Is that your view? Dean PERLMUTTER. Yes, it is. Furthermore, I would like to see the concept-I don't; like to use the term "vocational." I would like to see technical training. . ` Chairman PERKINS. All right. . Dea.n PERLMUTTER. Technical training available easily and readily within the total context of educat.ion. We put a stigma on technical edu- cation. We make absurd dichotomies here between academic and hand taught. Tha.t is just as academic as anything else. If' it is taught it is academic and if you have to teach a hand how to use some complicated tools that is academic and this should not be separated. I suppose I am arguing for the concept of' the old comprehensive school, but we must bear in mind that this comprehensive technical education very likely is going to take place beyond the high school level and it is taking place. I .was surprised that this reporter wasn't at many of the 2-year tech- nical institutes. We have had about a half dozen to a dozen n the State system in work which a.re technical institutes. I have been to some in Illinois. I have seen magnificent operations of technical in- stitutes in the State of Indiana, beyond the high school level, because technical t.raining in our time is very different, from what most people understand by an internalized notion of manual arts. You go down there and get a block plane a.nd a piece of wood and a nice man in a white coat says square that piece of wood. No go into t.his same shop and there is a computer run drill press and you can't go near that drill press unless you have gotten some fairly sophisticated instruction and you have to be prepared for that. Chairman PERKINS. A couple of final questions. Does it make any sense to you to talk about a transfer when the technical facilities are completely lacking in .this country and when the technical know- how to operate the centers is lacking? Dean PERLMUTTER. No; I think it makes no sense to talk about this kind of transfer quite frankly. Chairman PERKINS. To me we might. as well be here. talking about. the folly of misspent youth-as to dis~uss throwing away the Job Corps where we don't have anything in existence in this country to replace it. Is that statement correct.? Dean PERLMUTTER. It is, sir. Furthermore, I don't understand why proposals of this kind a.re made after a trial of 2 years-and what-G `months, 21/2 years. It is really. not fair by American' standards. PAGENO="0359" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2819 Chairman PERKINS. Not fair by American `standards.. I agree with you. . Dr. GEORGE. I would like to go on record as a Republican in favor of what you are talking about. Dean PERLMUTTER. And, Mr. Chairman, you shouldn't make any presumptiohs about my political affiliation either. Dr. GEORGE. I think it is girls we are talking about, not bodies. Mr. DELLENBACK. You must not take up your purse yet, Dr. George.. All this'really means is that you are down to the newestmember of the committee, rather than that you are done. Dr. Perlmutter, may I ask you a couple of questions? I read your testimony, both verbal and written, as saying that you are not defend- ing the Job Corps across the board in toto as is. Am I correct in this? Dean PERLMUTTER. I am making a distinction which I always have to label when I am teaching a class, between a good idea and its implementation and practice. I am not really saying very much. I have touched upon it from time to time, I admit this, but I am not really talking about its implementation and practice because I realize it needs vast improvement. I am a very innovative educator and if I were to run one of these centers I would probably turn it inside out, but I am talking about defense of a concept. Mr. DELLENBACK. And it is that very fact that you are not talking about OEO as it has functioned, you are not talking about the Job Corps as it has functioned, you are talking in favor of the concept as you defined it through the course of your testimony, which you find desirable? Dean PERLMUrrER. You know, to make a distinction in the mind intellectual is one thing, but then when you look at the realities you are going to look at the realities in terms of distinction. I can't say that I am divorced from OEO. I wouldn't be here talking about it if OEO didn't exist. I can't help alluding to some of the experiences I have had. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am looking at the concept you have indicated so far as the Job Corps is concerned, and while your written testimony talks of the goal of renewal of human hope and the short run hope to take care of as many people as possible you subordinate both of these to the primary goal or primary concept of the Job Corps as a labora- tory, as I read you. Dean PERLMUTTER. Yes; because I came here to speak as an edu- cator. It is as if I were a professor of medicine or a GP. I am coming here as a professor of medicine. Mr. DELLENBACK. So you are here primarily to talk in terms of the Job Corps as a laboratory from which we can learn and hopefully go forth and apply. Dean PERLMETTTER. Right. Mr. DELLENBACK. Are you talking in terms in that concept of the laboratory that the Job Corps has been or are you talking in terms ~f the laboratory that the Job Corps could be? Dean PERLM1JTTER. Might become, that I would hope it would become. Mr. DELLENBACK. And really it is the laboratory that you hope it might become that you `speak in favor of. PAGENO="0360" 2820 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dean P~L~1urr~. Right. Mr. DEl LENBACK. Do you feel that it has served as this great lab- oratory today? Dean P~r~rurr~. Not yet, no; no, perhaps in a limited sense. I am sure we find some very useful data there. Essentially I think the main emphasis because of. the too early start up of 2 years, the humani- tarian aspect has been overwhelming. Mr. DELLENBACK. Right, but pinning down what you really are speaking here in favor of it today, it is this concept of the .Job Corps as a laboratory from which we can perhaps gain great benefit? Dean PEni~rurr~. Right. Mr. DELLENBACK. And you are talking not in terms of what it has done today or is doing at present. Dea.n PEl&~rurrEi~. As a laboratory; no. Mr. DELLENBACK. But you are talking in terms of what it might become if it is implemented through this matter of education and really going forth from here. Dean PERLMUTTER. Exactly. Mr. DELLENBACK. In this concept as a laboratory do you really feel that. it is desirable to, as an educator, concentrate this really immense amount of money in one type of laboratory, or as an educator would you rather see this amount of money utilized in a. series of different kinds of laboratories from which you can distill as much possible information as is ultimately available and then make an ultimately sound decision? Dean P~I~rm'rER. I think you ask a very good question. One of the things t:hat I would say in reply to you is that we already have other ways and we are studying various aspects of this problem, have been prior to the Job Corps. It isn't as if we have just waited for the Job Corps to come along, and other things are possible, but if I had this amount of money I would put at the top of my priority list setting up of the Job Corps and I don't think we have a large enough lab- oratory- Mr. DELLENBACK. If you had $295 million, which is what they ask for in the 1968 budget, would you take the whole $295 million and put it in 123 Job Corps centers, or would you use the bulk or a portion of it for Job Corps, and use the bulk of it or a portion of it for some other types of laboratories to yield you the information that you would like? Dean PERLMUTTER. You have a wonderful variety in that 123 right now. That is not a very large laboratory. We are talking a.bout a school system now of 40,000 persons. As far as school systems go that is not very large. Furthermore, we are getting a kind of diversity across the country here which is very essential to what we are doing. One of the things I know as a social scientist, here is a point raised by Dr. George that when we talk about poverty there is an enormous difference amongst them and we don't really know how these different groups are moti- vated, how their patterns of response, and again in this laboratory situation I would want to come as close to the reality, which is why I feel that we need something larger than, you know, you could say, ~c\~rhy don't you just t.a.ke three or four centers and experiment with that." PAGENO="0361" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2821 Here I would say we need something like a total system. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you had a chance to study H.R; 10682 in any detail? Dean PERLMUTTER. I don't think I have studied it first hand. I have * asked some of the congressional assistants to tell me a little bit. * Mr. DELLENBACK. You have gotten to a degree the very competent chairman's thumbnail sketch of what it imparts, but I would suggest perhaps that you read beyond and take a look at it yourself. * Dean PERLMUTTER. I gathered that. Mr. DELLENBACK. But there is in this bill the concept of the resi- ~dential skill center which as an educator you might find a different type. Chairman PERKINS. If the gentleman will yield for clarification, it irovides for the immediate transfer of the Job Corps, giving the man- agement to the Office of Education, or have I misread the bill. Mr. DELLENBACK. No, I am sure, Mr. Chairman, that you have read the bill carefully and- Chairman PERKINS. And the bill further provides that the Job Corps would be phased out within a period of 3 years and the funds cut~ back and the residential centers would be constructed and operated by the same way that the vocational educational facilities are pres- ently operated. Mr. QUIE. Will the o~entleman yield? Mr. DELLENBACK. ~lad to yield. Mr. QUIE. When the chairman talks about funds coming back he is embellishing on the program. He is adding more than is read into the bill. There is nothing of funds being cut back. The Job Corps centers would operate for 2 years and then the vocational education agency would decide which ones they want to retain and which ones they would drop. Dean PERLMUTTER. Which agency would do this? Mr. QuIE. The vocational education. Dean PERLMUTTER. Of where? Mr. QUIE. Of the Office of Education. Dean PERLMUTTER. In Washington, the national. Mr. QIJIE. Yes, sir. Dean PERLMUTTER. Not of the State agencies. Mr. QmE. Oh, it would operate the way the vocational education agency operates now. Chairman PERKINS. I don't think I misstated the reading of the bill. Mr. DELLENBACK. In any event, I suspect so far as the committee is concerned nobody is going to be persuaded back and forth in our battle, but from your standpoint- Dean PERLMUTTER. I would like to be persuaded to give you the opportunity to persuade me and let me persuade you. Mr. DELLENBACK. I really don't think that my task is to persuade you, nor is it frankly to lead you to any preconceived conclusion. I am really trying to find out what you have to say to us as an expert today. Dean PERLMUTTER. And this is all I want to do. Mr. DELLENBACK. You have in part said this to me in what you have said. You have talked in terms of what you really consider the PAGENO="0362" 2822 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Job Corps to be. You talked in terms of what you dream it can accom- plish. This has been very helpful in explaining exactly what you do here today speak in favor of. The one part of it that I am really not clear on or if I am under- standing you correctly, I am not sure why I read you this way, be- cause as an educational innovator interested in culling from experi- ence what the laboratories will yield in the way of experience, I am not sure why you would really feel that you should put your whole basket of $295 million in one particular type Of egg container, to mix my metaphors thoroughly. Do you understand what: 1 mean; that is, if you have $295 million to use for this type of laboratory result-yield- ing, then would you not as an educational innovator rather see it used in a series of different types of programs, or would you put it all in one program which hasn't yet proven itself? Dean PERLMUTTER. Let me tell you something about educational innovation, if I may, because this is where my life is spent. You need a receptive soil, the right environment, for educational innovation. It doesn't come about just because you grant money for, say, innovation. Very often you may wait decades until the right time arrives when you can do something. In the history of a university it may just ride and ride and ride and nothing happens and then the same talent. all of a sudden can manage to innovate. We happen to have at this time through the strangest series of his- torical circumstances perhaps involving certain personalities-per- haps they ought to be mentioned- Mr. DELLENBACK. Well, go ahead. Dean PERLMUTTER. But we have a confluence here of a group of people who are innovative. They are there. They have started. You know, you don't build ha.lf a building and say, "Well, we could have done it better. Let's move it down the street." We have the beginnings of a very fine structure here. I started with the metaphor of the excavation. That is where we are. `We got a little concrete for it. Then you come along with another bill and say, "Well, let's not spend all the money over here. Let's start several more in other places." Mr. DELLENBACK. I think, Dr. Perlmutter, you misinterpret what we would be, in effect, suggesting. What is in effect suggested here, is not a single building into which we are talking about putting $295 million. Dean PERLMtTTTER. I understand. This is a collective term. Mr. DELLENBAOK. If I may carry your example one step further, it would be as if one were seeking to design a type of structure which would really serve the future and with a given amount of money and a limited amount of money we decided that we would start construc- tion not of one building, but of 123 buildings, and in reaching for what is the perfect design, we insist on marching ahead with 123 sepa- rate but similar structures. The price we pay in part is we don't find ourselves anywhere. So expert with other types of structures, knowing that we are never going to have enough money to build all the struc- tures we would like, and we must design the structure which will really be as close to the perfect structure as we can get. PAGENO="0363" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2823 As I read your testimony, what you are saying relative to labora- tories, relative to prospects for the future, the part that perhaps we disagree on and maybe we don't really-were time available to push it further, some of us are deeply concerned about committing the whole available amount of money to one type of structure when we don't yet know that that type of structure will yield the optimum result as measured by other possibilities. Let me, if I may, question Dr. George because time is going to be chopped off here shortly. Dr. George, may I ask you just a couple of questions. I was interested in one line of questioning that you were following with my colleague from Oregon, Mrs. Green. Do you know what the unemployment rate in Cleveland is at the present time among young ladies, among women? Dr. GEORGE. I couldn't tell you that I know firmly, but it was some- where around 9 percent. Mr. DELLENBACK. Do you know how many unemployed there are in Cleveland among this age group and even that you deal with in your center? Dr. GEORGE. No, because I do not have any Cleveland girls in my center. Mr. DELLENBACK. Let's shift then to the national picture. Do you know how many potential persons there are who would fit within the general criteria of Job Corps centers were there enough centers avail- able compared to how many such persons there are in such centers at the present time? Dr. GEORGE. I know it is a very small figure compared to the po- tential. I don't know the figure. Mr. DELLENBACK. You raised the question with Mrs. Green why we should be trying various alternatives instead of pushing ahead just as hard as we can on the one alternative of the Job Corps center which has been devised and into which money has been poured so far, and let me take you just through one mathematical computation on this. Dr. GEORGE. I didn't communicate very well, evidently because I didn't really mean to say that. What I meant to say was why make plans to get rid of us when we haven't had a chance yet to do that because I got the impression from reading what I have had in my hands and talking to people that the plan was to really slowly strangle us to death in a couple of years. Isn't that sort of what you are doing? Mr. DELLENBACK. The goal for which we are reaching is the best way to take care of the maximum number of young people who are in such real need of help with the limited number of dollars that are available. Now, you realize that the request of the administration is for $295 million to take care of approximately- Chairman PERKINS. You propose to cut it next year to $190 million. Mr. DELLENBACK. This is your request, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. No; I think this is what the bill provides, isn't it, next year? Mr. DELLENBACK. I believe you, will find that the bill asks for $295 millioi~. PAGENO="0364" 2824 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. This year. That is this fiscal year, this next fiscal year. Mr. DELLENBACK. If we talk in terms of what we are talking about. in the way of money, approximately 40,000 young people would be cared for with this number of dollars, and we take 800,000 young peo- ple as one of the given figures as to how many young people~ should be in this sort of a program, and if we multiply it by the number of dollars that we are spending per young person, we are talking for just this program alone of something in the area of $6 billion *a year. This is a figure, Dr. George, which just isn't going to be available to us in the foreseeable future. Dr. GEORGE. It never once occurred to me you would even think about it. Mr. DELLENBAOK. Therefore, it becomes extremely important that we search as carefully as we possibly can search for methods of making the dollars which are available reach just as far as they possibly can reach. Dr. GEORGE. I would agree. Mr. DELLENBACK. And it is with this in mind that. we, in part, are reluctant to see programs which have not prove.n themselves certainly ~e the goal and the repository of all the funds that are available for experimentation in a given field. Dr. GEORGE. My only quarrel with that is that I feel t.hat. you are not fair when you say that it hasn~t proven, because you haven't given us time. You say to give to programs that have not been successful. Now, I don't think that is fair because we can kee.p a girl for 2 pears by law and some of the vocations, as cosmotology and some others- and I think I mentioned cosmotology a while ago-take almost 2 years. You haven't had any graduates long enough yet for us to really know. You don't know whether we have failed or not because we don't know whether we have failed or nOt. Mr. DELLENBACK. We are deeply concerned about some of the sta- tist.ics that have been yielded by the Harris polls. Now, polls cer- tainly aren't the end-all, but we found when Sargent Shriver was test.ifying before us, Dr. George, that he had thought enough of these polls to have some four different polls taken and t.hese polls yield a very appalling statistic that of the young people who have enrolled in Job Corps centers by and large across the country about a third have dropped out wit.hin t.he first 3 months, about a second third have droppe.d out within the second 3 months, and we thus even start with a statistic which is of concern to us when we are talking about making those dollars go as far as they must go if we are going to be able to achieve anything like the results we would like, to achieve. Dr. GEORGE. I am familiar with those figures, and I think it is appalling, but I don't think it is fair, and I quarrel with you about this because I don't think it is fair to put the Women's Job Corps urban center figures in with figures of conservation camps and other places where the population is different, the program is different, the objective is different, the whole thing is different. You are comparing not apples and oranges, but pineapples and potatoes, or something like that. It isn't even in the same category of foods, and I don't think it is fair to talk about what we are trying PAGENO="0365" `ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF' 1967 2825 to do in the Women's Job Corps centers in terms of what is happening to 100 and some odd other centers. Chairman PERKINS. Will the gentleman yield to me at this point? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. I think it is fair to say after the Job Corps was first inaugurated mistakes were made. Even before you took over in Cleveland, I think we can admit that mistakes were made, but the operation today is much better and we are profiting from those mis- takes. I think that is the material point here. Mr. DELLENBACK. We are delighted to see that the `mistakes are being eliminated. We are concerned over the fact, Mr. Chairman, and Dr. George, and Dr. Perimutter, that as you are, they haven't all yet been eliminated and our concern is over the number, over the statistics that indicate how grievous have been some of the mistakes today as we search to go forward and use the funds which you and people like you entrust to us as we seek to make them go as far as possible. Dean Pi~I~ru'rrEi~. You should bear in mind if you were to appoint the chief executive officer of a school or a college or a university, and tell him that you are going to monitor his mistakes in the first 2 years the way the public and the press have been talking about the Job Corps, you would never fill those positions. I am amazed that we get the people working in them the way we do. I will tell you something. I would think several times, if you `doubled my salary, to go into that job `because I think it is a very impractical sort of school system with 40,000 youngsters, to run it 2 years. It is like getting married and saying, "Let's get up every morning and consider whether this marriage is going to work. Let's divorce." We have the thing going for 2 years, and it is very bad management practice not to provide incentives to your personnel, to give them clearcut goals. The goals have not been fairly stated. You cannot really achieve the sorts of things that were stated in the first year. We realize that it is more a question of human renewal. We will take a much longer time. No one has made a study of what the effect was on a youngster who was in 3 months and, as some of you put it, dropped out. Did he benefit from these 3 months? Was it worth $18,000 or whatever that cost in the bookkeeping that you have set up? Maybe it was worth it. We don't know. We haven't made those studies yet. We haven't had time to make a fraction of the studies that need to be made. All I know is that education is a slow moving process. It took us 10 years, 1948-58, to just make up our minds in the State University. We ran through three presidents `before we did it. Then we appointed a fourth one who is building on the benefits of the three predecessors, and now after about 18 years we begin to sit back and say, "Well, we are making pretty good progress." Here we say "Zero," no students. We are sitting in an abandoned brothel over there in some hotel or office, in little suites that were fall- ing apart. Let's set up centers all over the country. We have those things set up. I remember when Camp Catoctin was opened as the first one in January 196~, great excitement. They found a boy in there with a PAGENO="0366" 2826 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 mouthful of bad teeth who couldn't eat because he needed about 14 extractions. You can't help it if some of us get a little attached to this project and want to see it given a fair chance, and 2 years is an absurd time. You ought to .give it 10 years easily-$295 million is not a big number for what you are doing. Mr. DELLENBACK. Some of us are concerned that the problem is so immediate that we cannot experiment for 10 years, Dr. Perlmutter, that the problem is indeed so urgent and that we must without wa.iting for 10 years find out whether one road is the road oiito which we should pour all our resources. We should soundly search now to determine whether there are alternative roads from which at the end of 10 years we may be in sounder position to choose. Chairman PERKINS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to yield. `Chairman PERKINS. I think I should point out here, and I did not get my point ac.ross a few moments ago when you yielded previously, the administration bill provides for an expenditure of $295 million for the authorization of the Job :Corps `during :its next fiscal year and the Opportunity Crusade only provides for $190 million-a cutback of $105 million in this next fiscal year. I think that should be made clear. Mr. DELLENBACK. But it illustrates the point, Mr. Chairman, which is part of what we are talking about because. as you both realize if we visualize this whole approach as part of the war on poverty you are as aware as we of the fact that the program under IH.R. 10682 involves a total expenditure which is greater than the total expenditure in- volveci in H.R. 8311, but it. illustrates the point that there should be a series of areas' in which funds are poured instead of a concentration this heavily in one area. Let me close with this because I recognize that you all have come a long distance and have been very helpful to us. The more I see of life, the more convinced I become that the difference between run-of-the- mill results and extraordinary results is really directly related to the involvement of extraordinary people and I think that on the basis of what you have demonstrated in your testimony before us you are deeply concerned. You have an extraordinarily deep concern over it and I just personally wish that there were many, many more people who were as concerned as you, who were as extraordinarily concerned and as willing to pour their lives into this as both of you obviously are. Were this the case I think that the results would be better even than they are today. Dean PERLMUTTER. And I thank you for these very kind remarks if I may, on behalf of both of us, but your job as a Congressman is t.o provide the conditic~is which will bring forth more people like this, and what we are saying is that this present organizational arrange- ment seems to be doing it and it is a "bird in the hand" and we are a little worried about this "pie in the sky." Mr. DELLENBACK. You are worried about it and you are willing to settle for what you by your own testimony, Dr. Perlmutter, have in- dicated, is a "bird which flies with crippled flight." You feel that hopefully it may one day fly strong and soar. Dr. GEORGE. Not crippled, just weakened. Dean PERLMUTTER. I have a 1959 Chrysler, but it gets me where I am going and you are promising me some Cadillac someday. PAGENO="0367" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2827 Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins. Mr. hAwKINs. No, I have no questions. I want to commend the witnesses. I think they have been excellent and I think they have certainly brought out things which would be well to consider in this proposal. I hope they would not go away with the idea that sweet talk of our Republican colleague means that they are going to ac- tually give someone anything. I think they should take the opportunity to read this bill because the more they read this bill the more they will understand that this sweet talk of our Republican friends just isn't what it sounds like at all. I certainly hope that we will be able to retain such individuals as Dr. George, and certainly to have the continuing interest of our very good friend, Dr. Perlmutter. We certainly have been delighted and I am glad we stuck around so long today. Chairman PERKINS. In general, Dr. George and Dr. Perlmutter, you are acquainted with the operation of the Job Corps, and just assume that the Job Corps was cut back $105 million as proposed in the Op- portunity Ci~usade fQr the next fiscal year. What. in your judgment would be the repercussions? Dean PERLMUTTER. You mean to comment? Cknirman P~RKINs Yes Dean PERLMUTTER. On the reduction of $105 million in the present operation? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, sir. Dean PERLMUTTER I think ue ~ ould hive to close `i great m'iny centers That is clearly evident More import'~nt than closing centers, I think wewould lose some of our best people who would feel that the program does not have the confidence of the Federal Government. These are people who are making clear decisions I think we would be sad Iled with. a large group of lame ducks. I think this would be a terribly discouraging thing with re~pect to the young people who look to these Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS Psychologically ~ Dean PEELMUTTER. Psychologically this would be a crippling blow. I think it would be a most unkind and uncharitthle thing to do and a most imprudent thing from an educational point of view because I think at one point the educational community might rise up on this. Chairman PERKINS. You feel by and large that the educational community throughout the country is in favor of the Job Corps approach? Dean PERLMUTTER. I must be honest with you, Mr. Perkins. I think at least the higher educational community with which I am most famil- iar has very little knowledge of the Job Corps. What it does know is what it gleaned from some pretty bad journalistic accounts and you read of~some police incident down in Texas and that makes the head- lines. They know v~ry little,' my own faculty, and I have many times told them of myinvolvement and they come back many times over and say, the "Job Corps? What is that ?" These are very sophisticated people. The Job Corps has not made the impact on the public that the Headstart and the Peace Corps have. Dr GEORGE You w ill know w fry ~ Bec'mse little children in He'td start don't get drunk and they don't ever now and then have an ille- PAGENO="0368" 2828 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 gitimate child, and it is easier to appropriate funds for it because no- body is going to accuse you of subsidizing immorality. That is why. D~an PERLMUTTER. But there are other reasons aswefl.~ Mr. }iAwKncs. Mr. Chairman, at this point in the rec:ord may I have some material concerning the Job Corps graduates from the Job Corps Center for Women, Los Angeles, inserted into the record. It is very very brief, three pages, giving the record of that Job Corps center. I do that because this is the type of a project that is going to be jeopa.rdized if H.R. 106862 goes through with its reduction in the appropriation and also it is notice of the discontinuance of these centers. I just want this center to be placed in the record as one that will be jeopardized. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The material referred to follows:) OFFICE OF ECoNoMIc OPPORTUNITY, Washington, D.C., July 21, 1967. Hon. ATJG~STt5S F. HAWKINs, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN HAWKINS: Some articles from recent issues of the Corps- man newspaper concerning Jobs Corps graduates from the Los Angeles Job Corps Center for Women have just been brought to my attention. I thought they might be of interest to you, and I have enclosed some copies. The first article is a success story about a graduate, Marilyn Desa, who has just completed her training for Trans World Airlines and is now working as a reservation travel agent for them. The second article is a success story about another Corpswoman, Marcia Boone, who is the first Corpswoman to graduate from the A.M.I. Trade School in Los Angeles as a qualified radio and television repairwoman. She writes that she is very pleased that she joined the Job Corps and is now working with a skill she thoroughly enjoys. The third article is about (Jorpswoman Lanetta Madden, who is the Nation's first Job Corps-trained dress designer and about the Los Angeles Center itself. This Center has just graduated its second "class" and announced receipt of funds to continue operation for another two years. This Center has a fine record. It averages 75% verified job placement for its graduates, and in its two years in operation, its training program has graduated 312 young women who were school dropouts or unable to find emplóymčńt. These are just a few of the many success stories concerning Job Corps and its graduates, but we are very proud of each successful center and individual. If I can be of any further service to you, please let me know. Sincerely, GEORGE P. MCCARTHY, Assistant Director for CoHgressional Relations. [From the Corpsman. July 1, 1967] Los ANGELES GRAD Is PLACED WITH TRANS WORLD AIRLINES There's a new reservation travel agent working for Trans World Airlines, and her name is Marilyn Desa. Marilyn has just completed training and is now a full time employee making nearly $100 a week. It was a long road, full of twists and turns, that led Marilyn to where she is today. She originally wanted to be a registered nurse but fOund death and suffering far too depressing. She was working as a waitress on the Hawaiian Island of Oahu, getting nowhere fast, when she heard about the Job Corps and decided to join. Narilyn trained at Los Angeles (California). Staff members recognized her talent for getting along with people and began looking for some kind of on- the-job training that would make use of it. They finally succeeded in placing her with TWA as a trainee for their reservation travel agent program. Marilyn's work is not easy. She has had to master very complicated time tables and procedures. She also must deal with busy, impatient travelers. But the pay and working conditions are excellent, and one day she'll discover the `special PAGENO="0369" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2829 bonus that makes airline work so satisfying-free travel. Then it will be back to Hawaii on that first vacation, compliments of TWA for work well done. TV REPAIRWOMAN: "I AM WORKING WITH A SKILL I REALLY ENJOY" First it was the vote, then it was driving cabs, and now there are even women TX. repairers. Marcia Boone, 22, is the first Corpswoman to graduate from the A.M.I. Trade School in Los Angeles as a qualified radio and T.V. repairman (or should we say repairwoman). Marcia did quite well in spite of the fact that she was the only girl in the class. She specialized in color and black and white T.V., radio and audio equipment. Her instructor, Dave Jacobson, said, "Marcia had above average grades, good attendance and an outstanding attitude." Marcia explains her choice of vocation in this way: ". .. I have always wanted to work in electronics. When I was a kid I used to tear radios apart and put them back together again just for fun." She plans to work in the Los Angeles area for a few months and then return to her home in Newark, New Jersey, to follow her new career. Her several other interests include progressive jazz, the violin, basketball and even Beatnik poetry. Marcia joined the Job Corps at the urging of her mother and now she is "awfully glad I followed her advice. I have no idea what would have happened if I hadn't, but I know now I am working with a skill I really enjoy." [From the Los Angeles (Calif.) Times, June 28, 1967] WOMEN'S JOB CORPS MARKS 2ND BIRTHDAY, GRADUATES 53 The Los Angeles Job Corps Training Center for Women marked its second anniversary Tuesday, graduated 53 corpswomen and announced receipt of $3.8 million to continue operation for another two years. Receipt of the money was announced by officials of the Young Women's Chris- tian Assn. of Los Angeles which administers the government program here. Among capped and gowned graduates Tuesday was the nation's first Job Corps- trained dress designer, Lanetta Madden, 23, of Kansas City, Kans. Miss Madden, one of the first to enter the Los Angeles Center at 1106 S. Broadway in June, 1965, has a job as assistant to the designer at a local apparel manufacturing company, Casa de Patricio. In the audience to see the young women get diplomas were representatives of local businesses, agencies, hospitals and schools which have cooperated with Job Corps to give them their training. In a keynote address, Mrs. Georgiana Hardy commended the businesses and other institutions for "the welcome Job Corps has been given by the City of Los Angeles. `It is reflected in the fine record of the women who have greduated from the Los Angeles center," she said. The center averages 75% verified job placement for its graduates. Onstage at the commencement ceremonies held in the Mayan Theater ~were City Councilman Gilbert W. Lindsay, in whose district the center is located; Mrs. George I. Hull, president of the board of the YWCA, Miss Barrying H. Morrison, YWCA executive director, and Miss Mary E. Doolittle, center director. In its two years, the training program here has graduated 312 young women between 16 and 21 years old who were school dropouts or unable to find employment. Chairman PERKINS. I likewise have letters from the Office of the Governor of the State of New Jersey, and from the Office of Governor of the State of Arkansas, Governor Rockefeller, and the Office of Governor of the State of Maine, Kenneth M. Curtis, and the Office of the Governor of the State of Kansas, Robert Docking, and the Office of the Governor of the State of Vermont, Philip Hoff, and Office of the GOvernor of the State of West Virginia, Hulett Smith. Unless there is objection I ask permission too that they be inserted in the record. SO-084----67-pt. 4-24 PAGENO="0370" 2830 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 (The setters referred to follow:) STATE OF NEW JERSEY, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Trenton, N;J., July 11, 1967. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: I understand that your Committee has recently completed hearings on the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967 and will shortly be reporting out this legislation. I should like to take this opportunity to indicate my strong support for the war on poverty and my belief that it should be strengthened and expanded as provided in the bill submitted by the Administration. In the three short years since the President declared war on poverty in these United States, much has been accomplished. Hundreds of thousands of people have received assistance which has enabled them to break the bonds of poverty, and millions across the nation have received assistance of one form or another through one or more of the various agencies created under the Economic Opportunity Act. We in New Jersey have felt from the beginning that this was one of the most important pieces of legislation ever to be passed by the Federal Congress, and we attempted to respond at the State as well as at the local level in the most imaginative ways we could. It is my firm belief that New Jersey is a better State today because of the assistance we have received under the Economic Opportunity Act. No revolutionary effort of this kind could be mounted so quickly without running the risks of both mistakes and controversy, and the war on poverty in general and the Community Action Programs in particular have had their share of both. However, it is a tribute to Sargent Shriver and the Office of Economic Opportunity that they have learned from these mistakes so that today elected officials at local and State levels, who were among the early opponents of certain facets of the legislation, can now be said to be among the most ardent supporters of increased appropriations for the entire anti-poverty effort. I strongly urge you to support the full increase in authorization requested by the Administration and to endorse the basic purposes of the substantive amend- ments proposed as well. There are undoubtedly some minor modifications which can be made that will strengthen the bill, but 1 believe that its basic concepts are sound and I strongly urge your support thereof. Sincerely yours, Hon. RICHARD J. HUGHES, Governor. STATE OF ARKANSAS, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Little Rock, June 30, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR REPRESENTATIVE PERKINS: Because of the hearings that are presently being conducted concerning the future of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964~ I have taken this time to outline some of my thoughts in this matter. Our state has strived to derive the maximum benefit from the various programs in keeping with the original intent of Congress when the bill was enacted. As a whole, the various programs have met with approval from the public, and Arkansas w-ill feel the impact long into the future. However, I am unable to see the wisdom in separating the more popular programs and placing them under other agencies. The present proposals asking for greater involvement of the states is definitely an improvement, and should lend itself to a more successful program. We are in a new era of growth. and I feel that our state should have a more active position in the direction of the War on Poverty. Success can always be improved upon, and we must each work in that direction. With all good wishes, Sincerely, WINTHROP ROCKEFELLER, Governor. PAGENO="0371" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2831 STATE OF MAINE, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Augusta, July `7, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, U.S. Representative, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: I have followed with interest the press accounts of the apparently growing criticism of the Office of Economic Opportunity and the "War on Poverty". As I have already indicated in my last letter, my basic feelings on the value of the OEO and its programs to the State of Maine are spelled out in the presentation which was made for me to the Subcommittee on Rural Development of the House Committee on Agriculture on June 15 in Wash- ington, D.C., by Clyde Bartlett, Director of the Maine Office of Economic Oppor- tunity. Copies of this have been forwarded to you. We have in Maine a serious poverty-based problem indicated by the fact that more than 22% of Maine families have cash incomes of less than. $3,000 a year. This poverty is predominantly rural in character. There is here, as in .many other areas of the nation, no question of need. We know that poverty and all its ac- companying social ills exist. With a few exceptions, we have also come to realize that both socially and economically it is not only desirable but also essential `that we eliminate poverty. The disagreement appear to center largely on the means and not the goals of the "War on Poverty". In a recent and very incisive, address, Senator Edward W. Brooke said the War on Poverty has developed into an "administrative night- `mare" characterized by overlapping jurisdictions, ill-defined responsibility, juris- dictional confusion and conflicting standards. I do not agree that the OEO pro- gram in Maine can be characterized in this fashion; however, I do agree that the very nature of the programs being offered and the goals of these programs produces administrative difficulties. Some of these difficulties are inescapable but they can easily be compounded by mistakes at the local, state or federal leveL First of all we have in recent years realized the futility of money alone in ef- fectively reaching the problems of poverty. Money without heart, without personal effort, without caring for the emotional and economic degradation of thousands of American families can never penetrate the hard shell of poverty. So we have embarked gradually in all of our more progressive social welfare efforts, and most recently in the War on Poverty, on an effort that will be not a palative but a cure for poverty and its associated ills. This is a task to which we have never addressed ourselves as a nation. We have indeed not yet even fully assessed the dimensions of the problems we seek to solve. But we have finally realized that these problems are complex, emotional and involve the entire spectrum of a family's existence from health to education, from housing to social acceptance, from civil rights to job opportunities. More importantly we have come to realize that what we do in any area may be of no avail if it is not strongly reinforced by a desire within the individual for achievement, for education and for life at the highest level of which he is capable. To reach these goals of ending some of the immediate ills of poor housing, little education, hampering physical disabilities, and lack of job skills at the same time that each individual's belief in his own abilities and possibility of achievement is nu~tured and developed has required the development of new programs, new administrative standards, and new techniques to match the new goals which we have set for ourselves. In Maine, as in the rest of the nation, `there have been some failures but there have also been many successes. We have community action programs in every area of Maine. We have active and successful Head Start programs throughout the state and have , recently received authorization for a limited number of year around Head Start programs. `The Legal Assistance program w-as funded within the last year and is starting `this summer on actively spotting and staffing local offices. Upward Bound is in operation at several Maine colleges giving a limited number of economically deprived students an indication of the bright promise that education holds to change their entire lives. The Neighborhood Youth Corps is operating in many areas of Maine with work positions that are benefiting the communities and `helping students to stay in school. We have other active OEO programs in such areas as Adult Basic Education, Work Experience, VISTA, and the Job Corps. `We are now concerned with drafting plans for a Maine Rural Youth Corps which PAGENO="0372" 2832 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 would reach to the heart of our rural poverty problem and would be the fir~t program of its kind in the nation. In the recent hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on Manpower, Employ- ment and Poverty, OEO Director Sargent Shriver noted that the national program has experienced both "success and failure". The successes in Maine have far outweighed the programs in which there have been administrative difficuit~es and a low level of achievement. To expect to inaugurate a program of the magni- tude of OEO and its far-reaching goals and do it with nothing but one hundred percent successes would be completely unreasonable. The question is not whether or not there have been some failures but rather whether or not we continue to accept the goal of the eradication of poverty in this country and whether or not we are continuing to improve our administrative techniques in reaching this goal. In the latter regard I would like to make three points: 1. The very nature of the programs makes complete evaluation difficult. This is not said as a justification for inefficiency or duplication or effort, but rather to point out that statistics alone do not indicate the extent to which we have reached the goal for which we are aiming. We can say with certainty how many meals were served and how many physical defects were corrected in our Head Start programs, but how can we measure the effect that these programs will have on the future of these children and their families. We can say how many children worked what hours for what amount of money in the Neighborhood Youth Corps, but can we really measure what it means to their enture future life to be able to complete high school and graduate with their class? 2. Secondly, it is obvious to everyone nationally and in the various States that the present level of effort u-ill alleviate but will not eradicate poverty. In Maine we are presently reaching only a fraction of those who need help with an average annual OEO assistance of about $75 for each low income family. If we are to root out the weed of poverty, we must dig deeper. 3. Lastly, in terms of administration of the program, I have already made a series of suggestions including closer coordination between funding deadlines and the issuance of guidelines for the administration of projects; more emphasis on clear-cut interpretations and model applications; earlier funding and less excessive earmarking funds; more long~range support for programs to ease the problems of recruitment and staff development and training. The administrative difficulties we have now would be multiplied many times over if we were to eliminate either federal or state centralized administrative control. Coordination, elimination of duplication, adequate in-service training, Public informatiOn-these and many other aspect~c of the overall effort become almost impossible of achievement without central control at the state and national level. I find myself in complete agreement with Senator Brooke in his recent stat~- ment when he said, in part, "Ultimately, more authority must be delegated to federal administrators working in the field, as w-ell as to state and local officiaI~ who are concerned with the programs . . . This suggestion is not inconsistent with the proposal that ultimate authority be more centralized. Policy decisions should be made by fewer people at the top, so that standards and requirements become less diffuse, and responsibility can be fixed. But operating and imale- menting decisions should be made by the men and women who are on the scene and who will usually be far more familiar w-ith specific problems and the context in which they must be combatted." If we accept the goals of the War on Poverty, I am sure that w-e can as reasonable people devise and improve on the administrative means by which we will reach these goals. The recognition of shortcomings in a relatively new and vastly ambitious program does not justify either vituperative attack or the reduction or elimination of anpropriations. Rather it demands considered and reasonable changes. We should be sure, however, that critics of the present OEO programs are not using an attack on administrative shortcomings which are capable of remedy as concealnient of their actual but unspoken opposition to any really effective program of assistance to the families of this nation who live in poverty. Sincerely, KENNETH XE. CIJETIS, Go rerno,~. PAGENO="0373" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2833 STATE OF KANSAS, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Topeka, July 7, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS, Chairman, Honse Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. Honse of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: The Economic Opportunity Program which has been underway since 1904, had had a modest implementation in the State of Kansas. We feel that we have moved cautiously and judiciously in taking advan- -tage of this program. We do feel that the implementation of the program in the State of Kansas has been directly related to the real and actual needs of the people of our State. Listed below is a summary of the active OEO programs for the State of Kansas as of June 16, 1967. Program Amount Headstart, summer 1966 $1, 812. 00 Beaclstart, summer 1967 609, 755. 00 Community action programs 3, 043, 911. 00 Neighborhood Youth Corps 2, 070, 770. 00 Work experience projects 157, 382. 00 Rural loans program 118,980. 00 Total, all programs 6, 002, 610. 00 As the Governor of the State, I am concerned about the matter of greater in- volvement in relationship to both federal and local programs. This administration Thas taken the position that we should think in terms of more responsibility being placed with state government. For example, we have improved and strengthened our Water Quality Control Act; we have established air pollution control legis- lation and we have greatly expanded our efforts in the area of elementary and secondary education. We do not want to increase the red tape that is involved in the development of projects. However, in that the Governor's Office is often the first port-of-call whenever a program goes wrong, it seems to us that it is important to keep the Governor's Office fully advised as to what is going on in the OEO program. I hope that there might develop an increasingly cooperative relationship between the Technical Assistance Office and the Regional Office as they try to work out programs for the communities in Kansas. I can see the Technical Assistance Office providing assistance to smaller communities with the Regional Office com- ing in and doing the final wrap-up as far as a particular. project is concerned. If the Economic Opportunity Program is to be an effective program throughout this State, it seems to us that the Technical Assistance Office must be at cabinet level in order that it might be actively involved in any decision-making process related to health, welfare, civil rights and employment. This is the manner in which we have operated the Technical Assistance Office in the State of Kansas under my administration. The coordinator of the office serves as my liaison person to the State Board of Health and to the State Board of Social Welfare. He has also served as the chairman of the State-wide Manpower Coordinating Committee responsible for drawing up the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System for the next fiscal year. The coordinator, Dr Robert C. Harder, has been actively involved in our legis- lative program relative to matters of health, welfare, civil rights, and employ- ment. it is my thinking that unless we have a great deal more money than is presently available, the most successful way that we can fight and win a war on poverty, is through the changing of policy at the state level and then getting this word down to the local level. Our experience in government at this point, indicates that often times while agencies are in the hands of good-hearted people, they get locked into procedures which may be oblivious to the needs of the people of the state. The Technical Assistance Office serves as a watch dog to make sure that the agencies remain open to all of the citizens of the State of Kansas. The coordinator is also in a position to interpret to boards and agencies, the problems of low-income people so that as policies are being shaped, there can be the inclusion of those ideas which lend themselves to a greater number of services for the poor. I hope that this kind of policy making. cabinet support to the Gov- ernor could be further enhanced. PAGENO="0374" 2834 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I think it would be a very serious mistake for the Technical Assistance Office at the state level to have any less power and authority than it does at the present time. As the Governor of a rural, urban state, I would point out that there should be variety in the OEO program. We have a great number of low-income people living in small towns in Kansas who could possibly use the services of OEO. I am encouraged to note that the national policy seems to be shifting to provide addi- tional services to rural areas. I see the need for the Technical Assistance Office working with small communities in our State providing assistance to them in the areas of housing and employment. In these smaller communities, there is not the expertise to develop programs. If programs presently available from the fed- eral government are to have wide usage, then it seems to us that the Tecimical Assistance Office cŕnbe an important arm in getting this information out to the communities. I think also that the Technical Assistance Office can serve as the back-up arm for these local communities and aid them as they draft proposals before forward- ing them to the Regional Office or to federal offices. Here, I am thinking not only of proposals related to OEO but proposals which are related to other federal agencies. In our State, as well as many other states, I am sure there is an increasing awareness of the need for social planning comparable to the physical planning: that has taken place over many years. I think that OEO and the Technical As- sistance Office, specifically, can make a real contribution. Their philosophy of coordination and cooperation, as well as trying to move w-ith some dispatch to get things done, would lend itself to the development of a social planning concept for the state. One of my great concerns relative to this legislation is the whole question of bookkeeping relative to the local programs. Dr. Harder, from our Technical Assistance Office, has indicated that the matter of internal control and the audit- ing of reports in a recurring problem with several of the community action agencies. I hope that the legislation might underline the real importance and necessity for the development of a comprehensive auditing system at every level. Even though we are dealing with a great number of people who may feel that government has slighted them in the past, it does not seem to us that this opens the door to the spending of public monies without a careful check on how these monies are being expended. I would like to see some system developed whereby the Regional Office, working in concert with the State Technical Assistance Office. w-ould be in a position to make a three-month check after the beginning of every OEO project. I think that there has been a number of good things developing out of the OEO program; however, I am concerned about the negative publicity that develops from time to time. I hope that as this legislation is considered and passed by the House and by the Senate, that there would be a clear mandate to all OEO affili- ated persons to be judicious in the manner in which these programs are operated. With every good wish. Yours sincerely, ROBERT DOCKING, Governor of Kansas. STATE OF KANSAS, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Topeka, July 20, 1967. Hon. C~nL P. PERKINs, Chairman, House Committee om Education and Labor, U.s. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: Since my earlier letter to you concerning the Office of Economic Opportunity. we have become more involved in budget prepa- ration. I am underlining some of the remarks in the July 7th letter. In my administration, the State Technical Assistance Coordinator serves as my personal representative to the State Board of Health and to the State Board of Social Welfare. In this capacity he is present for the early development of budgets. At this point, he Is able to remind the Boards that their responsibility is to all the people of the State of Kansas, including the poor. Also, he is able to get information back to me so that I am aware of the thinking of these two important Boards. Through the Coordinator, the Boards are in a position to know the general thinking of this administration. PAGENO="0375" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2835 The Technical Assistance Office has been helpful to me in establishing a close link between the Governor's Office and the various health and welfare connected agencies. It has also served me as a useful troubleshooting arm. The drive for decentralization of services in the federal government is strength- ened by OEO, the Technical Assistance Office. Through this Office, we have a vehicle for the decentralization of agency functioning. The Office of Economic Opportunity's insistence upon innovation and agency cooperation are important factors. Through this Office, I have a means for getting federal and state infor- mation directly and then relaying this on to the various local communities. By this decentralizing move, I feel that the State of Kansas is able to keep govern- ment closer to the people. I know the service I envision for this office does involve money. To staff such a T~chnical Assistance Office with state money, at the present time, would be extremely difficult. We appreciate the fact that the Congress is responsible for the major portion of the budget for the Office. If this were not the case, we would have to take immediate steps to close the Office. The Technical Assistance Office, OEO, has been helpful in my administration~ I hope the Congress sees fit to fund the program on a continuing basis. With every good wish. Yours sincerely, ROBERT DOCKING, Governor of Kansas. STATE OF VERMONT, EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT, iiontpelier, July 5, 1965. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, U.S. House of Representatives, Rayburn Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: It has come to my attention that the Congress is considering legislation affecting the nation's anti~poverty efforts. The effective- ness of the anti-poverty program in Vermont leads me to believe that we should support the funding of this program at least at its current level. During the past fiscal year, administrative procedures within the program have improved markedly. Further, the relationship between Washington OEO and the state of Vermont continues to strengthen with the resultant improvement in program administration. The Office of Economic Opportunity should be preserved and strengthened as a national agency; particularly since this organization focuses on the task of coordinating all governmental agencies for more effective social service, and is the only agency with a strict anti-poverty focus. The rural poor person does not live in a ghetto which insults our sense of decency by the drama of its poverty. Although less visible than the urban poor, because he lives in isolation throughout the environment, the poverty of the rural poor person is no less real. He is far removed from the services and resources which are available to most of the people in Vermont and would tend to be, if not for `the anti-poverty program in this state, an unknown man by the very nature of his invisibility. Poverty is still with us, and I hope that Congress can continue to maintain, if not expand, its effort to meet this challenge. Sincerely, PHILIP H. HOFF, Governor. STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA, OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, Charleston, July 19, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: In these United States both federal and state governments have initiated new and innovative programs to alleviate detri- mental conditions throughout our great land. Because these programs are not fully `tried and proven, we reach a time each year when we must determine and evaluate our success and failures in these efforts. PAGENO="0376" 2836 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 What will our evaluations determine? We still have deprived people in our communities; we still have inadequate housing; we have not eliminated the educational and medical deficiencies which have been discovered. But our efforts have been fruitful, and we can see definite progress in many areas. In West Virginia the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended, has given hope and initiative to those who have never really experienced the knowl- edge that someone cares enough to help them in their betterment. The deprived citizens of our state have learned that they can join together in a united effort to better themselves. The deprived have begun to work for their own betterment and to gain for themselves not only economic strength, but also strength of character and realization of self-worth. Through Job Corps, Head Start, our community action programs through- out the state and the many programs which they administer, new inroads have been made into the causes and alleviation of poverty. The community action concept has become operative in areas of community and individual betterment through adult basic education programs, home improvement components and many others. The VISTA program is meeting its challenges with an increased awareness of its mission, and a higher level of success. The "War on Poverty" efforts have been beneficial in West Virginia. Many of these programs are necessary for the betterment of our state and these United States. It is with this thought that I ask that you do all that you can in continuing this endeavor to the maximum extent. Through the agency of the Office of Economic Opportunity, if I, or anyone in West Virginia, can he of help in emphasizing the necessity for the continuation of these programs, please feel free to call on us. Let me again emphasize our pleasure in working with the Office of Economic Opportunity in its conduct of this Act and assure you that we will continue our efforts on behalf of this vital program and the deprived citizens in our state. Sincerely, HULETT C. SMITH, Governor. Chairman PERKINS. GO ahead and complete that answer, Dr. Perl- mutter, as to why the Job Corps is not popular like the Headstart. and Peace Corps. Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Chairman, may I ask special permission? Dr. George does have a prior engagement. If you don't have any further questions of her I would ask that she be excused at this point. Chairman PERKINS. Do you want to be excused? Dr. GEORGE. They have been having a reception for me with some Congressmen for an hour and a half. They have been waiting for me since 6 o'clock. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Dr. GEORGE. This is what I came here for. Chairman PERKINS. You have made a good witness today. Dr. GEORGE. If you have no other questions I would appreciate it. Chairman PERKINS. You have made us a great witness and we appreciate it. Do you have any other comments you would want to make before you leave? Dr. GEORGE. Just don't kill the Job Corps, please. Let us really have time enough to prove that we can or can't. I don't think we have had sufficient time. I think there is a lot of evidence that we are succeeding and that we are not really misusing the money too often. I think Con- gress understands also the difficulty of implementing recommenda- tions. They have had a few for a few years, the Hoover study, and I think they ought to understand the difficulty of implementing even good recommendations they approve and endorse. I think there ought to be some impetus there for you. We are trying to accomplish this. I hope we can continue. PAGENO="0377" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2837 Chairman PERKINS. Congressman Dellenback, did you have some- thing else? Mr. DELLENBACK. No, sir. Chairman PERKINS. I thank you very much. We appreciate your coming. You have made a good witness. Everybody appreciates your appearance here today. Go ahead, Dr. Perimutter. Dr. PERLMUTTER. I think you were asking why the Job Corps 1S not better known than it is. Cli an man PERKINS Th'tt is the question Dean PERLMUTTER. There are the intrinsic reasons t:hat the subject of the Job Corps is a lot less i omantic to the public th'tn comparable programs. We have an obvious affection for children. W~ have feelings of anxiety. I think there are even hostility and guilt feelings with it where the adolescent group is involved, especially from other ethnic and racial groups. We have a strong tendency as to the common state- ment you will hear in almost any part of the country when people talk about a youngster who is misbehaving that what he needs is, you know, a good thrashing or a good talking to and he ought to go or' the straight and narrow right after that. There isn't very much sym- pathy generally for this kind of adolescent misbehavior as most people look at it as misbehavior. I don't think it is misbehavior at all. These are behavior patterns for which very sound reasons exist which have to be understood and they are no more unreasonable than somebody behaving because he is suffering from a high fever and does certain things that seem strange. So intrinsically there are a whole set of rea- sons bound up with this population group. Secondly, there are a number of external things that make this un- appealing. For one thing, it is a very hard job. It means that educators have to have the humility to say that we have not succeeded. This casts aspersions on the American school system. It is not easy for me to come over here as I have today and face the fact in public that we have millions of adults-li million is the figure the Commissioner of Edu- cation cited-who read below the level of fourth grade. This to me is a much more significant matter than a dropout because supposing you are in school for 8 years and you end up reading at the fourth-grade level. You are a dropout then, too, even though you have been there. The point is the result, so that educators themselves and the people who support the educational ëommunity have very mixed feelings. If you come out in favor of the Job Corps you are really saying, "Well, we have not done it right." I think this was in the background of some of our discussion about vocational education I think this is in the b'rcb. ground of some of the career proposals, people saying "Well, we really can do it, but you did not give us a chance." Then some of us have to make the decision and we don't have a particular ax to grind that, well, we don't want to make this decision because quite frankly we don't think we can do it but we hesitate to say that. You are talking to a colleague here. You have enough to do with vocatioi~al education with just that upper lower class, you know, that in-between group that isn't quite middle class, and you have not done that successfully, in fact, the slum youngster, the kid in the West Virginia hills, so that the educational community itself does not jump with enthusiasm, does not have the vibrance of sending a Peace Corps group to Africa. PAGENO="0378" 2838 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 WThen I announced on my own campus that. we. would have two Peace Corps programs going down to South America, all sorts of people came out of the woods. "Well, we are interested in that, and I would like to go down on the survey visit, of Latin America," so-and- so would say. Students would come around and say, "I would be very happy to learn about this." I said at the same time. "I have an Upward Bound program. I have no money for it.." I used the words partly because I had suggested something like it a long time ago. I said, "1~Te will have an Upward Bound program right here in State University. Who will help me?" Well, I got my assistant. That was all. I didn't, even get any student. assistance. But if I asked, "Who will help me with children?" lots of people will volunteer; `~Who will help me with Peace Corps?" lots of people will volunteer; but we don't want. to admit. that we failed in education, we don't even want. to admit that we have a poverty problem, all of these things plus, I think, some mistakes. I must add that as a third extrinsic there were intrinsic reasons- extrinsic reasons in the educational community. The third set, I would fault the OEO here. In the beginning days there was, a strong. feeling in the .professional...group there that. they could do this alone as it were and that they would not get. sufficient comfort and help a.nd encouragement in the educational community, and I remember asking them, "Well, what about me? I am an estab- lished educator. I am dean' in the State University. Wily do you accept me?" WTell, they said here and there they would make an exception. "You are different." But I think they were wrong. I submitted a writ- t.en proposal early in the game establishing some sort of. perhaps it was a fantastic scheme of bringing the opinion leaders of the educa- tional community as a kind of advisory group who would maybe not be very substantively involved, but who would commit themselves to this and by their presence you would get the American Council and the NEA and the various academic associa.tions so that they would come out and say, "Well, this needs to be done and we will do it." This was never adopted. Nothing of this sort really exists. I believe Mi~. Shriver has some sort of distinguished advisory group around him, but this is for tile poverty program as a whole. What you need is an advisory group-this is apart from my research group that I was talking about-who would be for the Job Corps and who would represent the educational establishment in this country. We are not wicked monsters in the educational establishnlent. We want to see this happen. We would like to be involved. I think the OEO ought to take tile initiative and involve the ed- ucational establishment and if this were so, instead of having, you know, stray, isolated witnesses like myself here, you would have a rep- resentative from the American Council or the NEA or several of the academic associations. Now, with t.hese three sets of reasons, I think Job Corps turns out to be a relatively unknown program as compared with Headstart and Peace Corps. Chairman PERKINS. I think tha.t is a good a.nswer. I `don't think I will take any more of your time. PAGENO="0379" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2839 Do you have any questions? Mr. HAWKINS. No. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. No, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Dr. Perlmutter. Dean PERLMUTTER. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Is this your first appearance before the committee;? Dean PERLMUTTER. I must confess this is my first appearance be- fore any congressional committee. Chairman PERKINS. We hope to have you back again because you have been very helpful to the committee. Dean PERLMUTTER. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. And we regret that we held you here so late, but we will be looking forward to your appearance again. The task force will recess until 9 a.m. on Wednesday. (Whereupon, at 7 :53 p.m., the task force recessed, to reconvene at :9 a.m., Wednesday, July 26, 1967.) PAGENO="0380" PAGENO="0381" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 WEDNESDAY, JULY 26, 1967 HousE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9 a.m., pursuant to recess, in Eoom 2175, Ray- burn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Pucinski, O'Hara Haw- kins, Gibbons, Meeds, Quie, Goodell, Ashbrook, Erlenborn, G~urney, and Dellenback. Also present: H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; Louise Maxienne Dargans, research assistant; Ben- jamin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, in- vestigator; Marian Wyman, special assistant; Charles W. Radcliffe, minority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minority research assistant; and W. Phillips Rockefel- ler, minority research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. I am delighted to welcome you here again, Mr. Andrew Biemiller, who is the le~islatjve director of the American Federation of Labor- Congress of Industrial Organizations. He has been before this com- mittee many times in the past to provide excellent information and wise suggestions to assist us in our efforts. We are delighted to welcome you here again this morning. Many of us recall our pleasant associations with you when you were a fellow member. Speaking for the committee, we are always delighted to see you come back. You have worked all through the years for the welfare of the people of this country and that is why you stand out in everybody's mind as being a great American. We are delighted to welcome you here this morning and the gentleman who is with you. You may proceed in any way you prefer. STATEMENT OP ANDREW J. BIEMILLER, LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN PEDERATION OP LABOR AND CONGRESS OP INDUS. TRIAL ORGANIZATIONS; ACCOMPANIED BY JULIUS ROTHMAN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OP INSURANCE, APL-CIO Mr. BIEMILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for those very kind remarks. For the record, I am Andrew J. Biemilier. I am legislative director for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. 2S41 PAGENO="0382" 2842 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 On behalf of the AFL-CIO, I want to express our appreciation for this opportunity to present to your committee our views on the pro- posed 1967 amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act. of 1964. I am accompanied by Mr. Julius Rothrnan who is assistant director of our department of insurance and who in our organization the particular responsibility of following the development of the poverty program. Chairman PERKINS. We are very delighted to have, you with us this morning. Mr. BIEMILLER. When .President Meany appeared before this com- mittee in 1964 to testify on the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, he said: This is not a new war for us in the labor movement . . . The elimination of poverty is and always has been a primary goal of organized labor and a basic reason for its existence. And he went on to say.: ~ * * we hate poverty in all its forms and for whatever reason it exists." I cite this to emphasize the fact that I come here as a representative of a segment. of society that is deeply committed to the elimination of poverty as a fact. of life in our society. President Mea.ny made the point, that for generations the elimina- tion of want and the improvement of the cOnditions of work and life have been a primary goalof American trade unions. It is for this reasOn that the AFL-CIO is once again happy to lend its support to the all-important effort to make the war on poverty a success. The amendments now being proposed in H.R.. 8311 seek to accomplish changes which, it seems to us, will strengthen the operation and administration of the OEO and its component program~. In gen- eral, the AFL-CIO supports them. The results of the first two and a half years of operation of the. Office of Economic Opportunity are encouraging. Sargent. Shriver and his associates at OEO have shown courage and imagination in carrying forwardthe war on poverty. They have carried t.he war to new fronts, developed better ways of fighting poverty on other fronts. They have been both praised and castigated for their efforts, yet. they have cont.inued to move forward. The important fact is that the a.ntipoverty effort is reaching the poor and is opening doors through which t.hey can escape from the grind- ing reality of poverty. True, not enough of the poor are being reached. Not enough doors are being opened. This is not. the fault of OEO. The war against pov- erty is an expensive war and Congress has not been overly generous. The war against, poverty requires new techniques, new methods. There are no textbooks that spell out these techniques and methods. These must. be learned the hard way-by.t.rial and error. Despite these and other obstacles, it is our belief that the war on poverty has made a substantialimpact on the poor. Three years ago, when we testified on behalf of the Economic Op- portumty Act, we supported the potential, the promise t.hat we saw in this legislation for dealing with the problem of povert.y in America. Today. the AFL-CIO is in a position to base its testimony on hard facts which we have assembled as the result of participation in the war on poverty. We have assisted in tile policymaking process PAGENO="0383" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2843 through our iepiesentation on the N itional Adv1sory Council on Eco nomic OppOrtunity iii the persons of Mr. David Sullivan, an AFL- ClO vice president and president of the Building Service Employees International Union, and Mr. James A. Suifridge, an AFL-CIO vice president and president, Retail Clerks International Association. In addition, a group of 18 prOminent labor leaders serve on the OEO's Labor Advisory Council, which is under the chairmanship of Mr. Sullivan. This council consults regularly with Mr. Shriver on matters of mutual concern to organized labor an4 the war on poverty. At the local level we estimate that there are about 3,000 AFL-CIO leaders who are currently serving on CAP boards and committees, as we1l~ as pn the boards and committees of the component agencies of local community action programs. But, in addition to this involvement in antipoverty programs, there are many unions and lOcal central labor councils that have elected to become direct sponsOrs of OEO programs. We will refer to some of these later on in our testimony. Also, in addition to all of these more or less formal relationships between organized labor and the war on poverty, there are literally dozens of instances of informal cooperation by unions and union meni- bers with antipoverty programs and agencies While labor's participationin the war on poverty had some central direction and some national guidelines, yet a great part of our partici- pation was spontaneous, stemming from the interest, concern, and compassion of union leaders and just ordinary rank-and-file union members for the people who are poor. They wanted to do something to help the poor find a way out of poverty. From the variety of activities in which they have cooperated in their local communities, we have been able to get a real sense of the meaning of the war on poverty in the ranks of organized labor. The reaction has been positive. Our members have accepted the war on poverty Their willingness to participate in it is the best evidence of this. I have indicated that the AFL-CIO strongly supports the war on poverty. I would like to go a step further and put the AFL-CIO on record as also supporting the present structure of the war on poverty. Some members of this committee have introdUced a bill which would drastically alter the direction and thrust of the war on poverty. In fact, they would even rename it and call it the "Opportunity Crusade." They would keep the programs, give them new names, and destroy the agency that brought them into being and enabled them to produce results. They propose to scatter the component agencies of OEO among existing departments of the Government. This approach to the war on poverty is hard to understand. At a time when objective observers, such as the Harris poll, indicate that the war on poverty has the approval of a substantial majority of the public, it is proposed the program be decapitated. The AFL-CIO is opposed to any effort that would tamper with the existing structure of the OEO. We oppose it because: 1 Such `t move would eliminate the one Fedei al agency that cle'trly speaks for the poor within the Government. 2. Antipoverty programs would lose their visibility and their for- ward thrust. They would be forced to compete with other lower- priority programs within existing agencies. PAGENO="0384" 2844 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3. Current OEO programs would be fragmented by being depart- rnentahzed. Now it is possible to bring various elements of different departments mto cooperative and productive relationships. 4. The mnovative and imaginative qualities that have characterized the development of new OEO programs would be destroyed. 5. Overall direction in the war on poverty would be dissipated. The hue and cry about the administrative failures of OEO simply does not jibe with the known facts. When the AFL-CIO testified before the Subcommittee on Poverty of the House Committee on Education and Labor on the 1965 Amend- ments to the Economic Opportunity Act, we stated- Let us say first that we are encouraged by the imagination and vigor that have characterized the implementation of the Act thus far. Much has been accomplished during the brief six months since funds were first appropriated by the Congress. We are not unduly dismayed by the problems that inevitably have emerged, involving the relationships of the Federal, State and local govern- ments, and of private groups, in undertaking this novel and difficult effort. We are confident that these are `growing pains' that will, for the most part, cure themselves. The legislation that created OEO directed that a whole series of new programs be created without delay. This included the develop- ment of Job Corps centers providing education and training for poor young men and women between the ages of 16 and 22; local com- munity action agencies to meet the local needs of the poor; a massive program of youth employment and work study; programs for migrants in the fields of education, housing and job training; loans to small business and small farms; a domestic equivalent of the Peace Corps; a work-experience program to get welfare families off relief; and a method of coordinating the poverty-related activities of all Federal agencies. In the two and a half years since Congress issued this direction to OEO, it not only complied effectively, but it also managed to initiate a broad range of additional programs. It developed and put into operation such pioneering programs as Headstart, legal services for the poor, neighborhood health centers, Upward Bound, foster grand- parents and medicare alert. I don't think it is necessary to enumerate the achievements of OEO. You are all aware of them. We feel that it is an impressive record. We, therefore, urge this committee to continue the OEO as the spear- head, the central and unifying force in the war against poverty. It may well be that one of the most enduring and useful programs that the OEO has conceived is the community action program. Here is a new force in the life of the American community bringing added urgency and vitality to bear on the problems of the poor. It is in the community action program where the poor get the chance to partic- ipate in the development and management of local antipoverty pro- grams. It is in CAP where the poor can have a voice in shaping programs to help themselves. The community action program is an indispensable element of the war on poverty. It has brought the war to the local community, it has o'iven all citizens, including the poor, an opportunity to participate, it has served as the focal point for community action, it has served to identify the problems of the poor, it has served to stimulate the coin- inunity conscience about the poverty in its midst. PAGENO="0385" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 2845 For all these reasons we hope that the community action program will continue within OEO. We hope that it will not be spun off to an existing agency where it will lose its vibrant and crucial role in the war on poverty. Criticism has been directed at the community action program be- cause of the controversial nature of some of the activities which they have sponsored. This is understandable because local CAP agencies bring together people who never before talked together, or perhaps to put it more accurately, who were hardly aware of each other's exist- ence. Bringing together diverse elements of community life may result in conflict. Yet this conflict has often served to sharpen up local anti. poverty programs. It has helped to make clear to the majority of the community who live above the poverty level what the real and urgent needs of the poor are. The AFL-CIO supports the "maximum feasible participation" of the poor in community action agencies. The war on poverty was never intended to be a dole for the poor, but rather it was conceived as an op- portunity for the poor to become involved in antipoverty programs to assure the fact that these programs respond to their real needs. We are encouraged to note that of the almost 92,000 citizens serving on community action agency boards, committees and advisory councils, over 42,000 or about 45 percent, come from among those be~ ing helped. For this, the OEO deserves to be commended. In 1964, when President Meany testified on the original Economic Opportunity Act, he placed the AFL-CIO squarely behind the ~Job Corps idea when he said: this section-Title 1(A)-has great potential. These young people can be taught the routine of holding a job, the rhythm of it; the use of tools, the feel- ing for them, the familiarity with them, how to take care of them; the whole con- cept of being part of a work-group, with common obligations and, sometimes, common grievances. These simple experiences, which most of us take for granted are of the greatest importance. The trainees can gain from this the self-confidence they may have lacked be- fore. They can emerge from the program fully able to read, write, and figure, knowing what it means to have a job. And they wili thereby be better equipped to make their way in the world." We snpported the Job Corps in 1964; we support it in 1967. The idea which President Meany supported, has become a reality of which we c~m all be proud. The Job Corps offers young people who come from the poorest environments and the bleakest backgrounds an op- portunity to develop useful work experience, a chance to get a basic education and chance to live in a new and healthy environment. And perhaps, most important of all, it gives them an opportunity to rechannel their sense of futility and frustration into a new ~ense of pride in themselves and in their value, as human beings. The Job Corps has been criticized because of the. cost per trainee, the number of dropouts and disturbances in the centers. Current fig- ures indicate that the cost per trainee has been lowered considerably, that more boys and girls are staying in the Job Corps and are staying longer, and the problem of discipline within the centers is under con- trol. Anyhow, such arguments come from those with limited vision. We see the Job Corps as a human reclamation program taking these young people off the streets, away from meaningless lives full of frus- tration and anger and bringing them back into society where they can 80-084-67-pt. 4-25 PAGENO="0386" 2846 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 become useful, productive human beings. Reclamation is never cheap. But in the long run it is cheaper than riots in the streets, crime and public welfare. The job of transforming a youngster's sense of alienation from society, by bringing him into the mainstream, through useful train- ing, reeducation and self reevaluation, is only part of the story. When a youngster comes out of a Job Corps center, he needs a. job. A good job with decent pay. Otherwise, he will slide back into his old environment, lose his skills and his new-found self-esteem. We are happy to note that the 1967 Amendments of the EOA make provision for better placement procedures for those coming out of the Job Corps. This is essential to the success of this program. Because we in organized labor have been concerned about the place- ment of men and women coming out of Job Corps centers, we have cooperated with the Job Corps in developing a Job Corps center vis- itation and recruitment program. This program has a threefold pur- pose: to let labor leaders see the Job Corps in action, to get labor leaders to help the centers in the placement process and to help recruit for the Job Corps. Over 25 international unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO and 23 State AFL-CIO central bodies have participated in tours of Job Corps centers, with more than 500 labor people participating in visits to 10 Job Corps centers. The labor leaders who have participated in visits to one or another of the Job Corps centers in all parts of the country were impressed by what they saw and heard. John I. Rollings, President of the Missouri State Labor Council, AFL-CIO, after a tour of the Women's Job Corps Center at Excelsior Springs, Mo., said: I wish everyone could see the desire and dedication to develop into better citizens by these girls. I wish all union leaders here would go back to their or- ganizations and tell the story of the Job Corps. We must let our Congressmen know how we feel about the program and see that it is properly and adequately funded. Maurice Lieson, International Representative, American Bakery and Confectionery Workers Union, said that his union would cooper- ate with the Job Corps and would seek to get jobs for graduates of the Job Corps. He cited the fact that 50 percent of the members of his union were women. From a report of a visit of representatives of building trades locals from the Bowling Green, Ky., area, to the Job Corps Center at Great Onyx, Ely., states: We found the business agents of the Laborers and the Cement Mason's Locals interested in the placement of the Corpsmen. In addition, the above two locals offered on-the-job training during their busy season. . . . The State President and the State Secretary of the Kentucky Build- ing Trades Council requested Job Corps information in order to carry the message of Job Corps activities to local unions throughout the State of Kentucky. Time does not permit the inclusion of many other citations of this kind that are in our ifies. The AFL-CIO would like to call the attention of this committee to the work being done at the Job Corps Center in Jacob's Creek, Tenn. Sponsored by the International Union of Operating Engineers and its PAGENO="0387" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2847 affiliate, Local No. 917, the center is set up to teach young men to han- dle and operate heavy equipment. At the end of last month, the first contingent of 52 enrollees completed their training. The union has agreed to place each one of these young men in an entry-level job, maintaining heavy equipment. Their course of work at Jacob's Creek has prepared them to com- pete with other qualified applicants for a place in the registered ap- prenticeship programs in this industry. Upon completion of their apprenticeship, these boys will become full-fledged union journeymen iii a highly skilled and well-paid trade. The Job Corps provides educational programs, vocational training, work experience and counseling for those enrolled in this program. But it also has been able, to a large degree, to create an environment in which the enrollees can grow as human beings, gain self-confidence, de- velop an appreciation of their own potential. This important element in the development of these young people can never be supplied by existing vocational education facilities such as technical institutes, area vocational schools, and community train- ing centers. These facilities can serve youngsters coming from families with greater stability, youngsters who have not known acute deprivation or suffered from social discrimination. Job Corps enrollees, by the very process of their selection are young people who carry the scars of poverty and deprivation. We have ample proof that if given a chance these young men and women can "make it" regardless of their handicaps. But to ignore the fact that the needs of this group differs from those of more fortunate young people would be unwise. For this reason, we urge that nothing be done by Congress that would impair the existing residential structure and program orienta- tion of the Job Corps. We feel that the Job Corps should be retained as an integral, part of OEO and that it merits the continued support of Congress. We urge that it be expanded to offer even greater numbers of these severely disadvantaged young people an opportunity to make a place for them- selves in the economic and social life of our country.. Another program which the AFL-CIO thinks is proving ex- tremely useful in preparing young people for the world of work is the Neighborhood Youth Corps. The importance of the work experi- ence obtained through NYC projects becomes clear when seen in the context of the lack of employment opportunities open to these youngst.ers. The unemp'oyment rate for youth 16 to 21 in 1966 was almost three tin'ies higher than the national average for the tot.al labor force. But even this figure tells only part of the story. In the poverty areas of our major cities teenage boys had a jobless rate of 25 percent and teenage girls of 23 percent. However, for Negroes in the areas surveyed, unemployment rates in March 1966 were even higher. Teen- age Negro girls had a jobless rate of 46 percent, and for teenage Negro boys it was 31 percent. Organized labor has seen this program in operation. A number of unions have sponsored NYC programs. These unions have been greatly impressed by opportunities that this program has been able PAGENO="0388" 2848 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196.7 to open up for these young people, once they have been given help in overcoming the handicaps of inexperience, lack of education, and lack of skills. Probably the most dramatic example of the effectiveness of this program is the one in Watts, which is under the sponsorship of the Watts Labor Community Action Committee. The Watts Labor Com- munity Action Committee is a non-profit organization made up of 11 unions including the Machinists, the Building Service Employees, the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, the United Rubber Workers, and the United Auto Workers, among others. The `WLCAC developed a. project that includes programs for young people from various age groups. A program for youngsters aged 7 through 13 was called the Cadet Corps, another called the Community Conservation Corps included the 14- and 15-year-olds. The Neighbor- hood Youth Corps addressed itself to youths 16 through 21 years of age. The program is funded by the Department of Labor, by the ~eighborhood Youth Corps, and by funds from the unions. From a report evaluating the work of the WLCAC comes the fol- lowing quotation: The observation of crew chiefs who have worked .with the Watts area youths in the project since its inception in summer of 1966 is that "there has been a tremendous change in these young people. Their attitude toward themselves and, consequently, toward the staff and also visitors to the program are markedly outgoing, and the cussing and fighting which were common occurrences eight months ago are an exception now." Further on in the same report, we find this paragraph: A majority of the N.Y.O.'s have indicated an interest in receiving more than a salary-in being trained for (1) jobs, and (2) "leadership." Ted Watkins, formerly an active trade unionist, a resident of Watts and the director of the project, said recently: We want to make these young guys feel they've got a role to play as men. It's amazing to see the change in them-and amazing to see the change in the adults of the community, too-they used to be afraid of these kids. Some of these kids were the looters, they were the burners, they were the ones who started the riot. Now, they say to me, "we don't want to do anything in this community to mess it up no more." Now, they're saying this is our community, this is our program. On Wednesday, July 12, 1967, the Los Angeles Times, a newspaper that cannot be accused of being prola.bor~ ran an editorial commending the WTLCAC as "one of the most useful antipoverty programs t.o be inaugurated for the Watts area in recent years." The Central Labor Council of Alameda County, AFL-CIO (Oak- land, Calif.'), is the sponsor of another Neighborhood Yout.h Corps project. A three-phased project, it is intended to give 400 yout.hs good work habits and experience, then to train them in marketable skills and finally to place them in jobs at decent wages. The East Bay Labor Journal, labor's official newspaper in Alameda County, gives the union's reasons for sponsoring this project: "The CLC.leaders are determined to make the Labor Council's progra1n an effective contribut.ion to lowering Oakland's unemployment rate among teenagers and easing racial tension by helping youths help themselves. A large proportiOn of the youths in the program are members of minor- ity groups. PAGENO="0389" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2849 But just exposing untrained youths to job training won't be enough, those who planned the project realized. Many of the youths are on parole or probation, and all are high school drop- outs. A key element is to restore self-confidence destroyed through repeated failures since early childhood. Organized labor is strongly in favor of this program. Our experi- ence with it indicates that it has been efficiently administered, and imaginatively programed. We feel that this program should have added funds for fiscal 1968 rather than have its funds reduced more than $50 million as requested by the administration. The NYC, like IE[eadstart, has been one of the "success" stories of OEO. It deserves to be expanded. Organized labor has developed a unique partnership wlth OEO in connection with the training of union members for active service in the war against poverty. In three programs which have been funded by OEO, one in Appalachia, which is currently in operation;, another in the New England States; and a third in Pennsylvania, union men, and women, are being given training to enable them to participate in the OEO program in their home communities. They are being given specific information about the war on poverty and its programs. They are being taught how to help citizens groups apply for Federal funds when such funds are available to meet spe- cific local problems. They are being taught the skills needed to help poor people get together in their neighborhoods to discuss and seek solutions to their problems. They will also train other union members for active participation in community action programs. In the Appalachian region where 104 of the unionists have com- pleted their training course, these men and women have gone back home and provided a leavening in the community for citizen action through Community Action agencies. We can look for similar results from the New England and the Pennsylvania projects. We feel that these projects, by injecting trained and dedicated people into the community action program, will be of invaluable help in carrying forward local action in the antipoverty war. In 1964, President Meany heartily endorsed the provision which called for Federal assistance up to 90 percent of funding for local community action programs. The experience of local labor leaders who have participated in literally hundreds of local CAP agencies, em- phasizes the validity of our support of the 90-percent Federal contribution. Unfortunately, the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1966 call for the lowering of Federal contribution to community action programs from the present 90-percent level to 80 percent after June 30, 1967. This amounts to a 100-percent increase for local communi- ties wishing to participate in community action programs. Such anincreased local contribution would create a severe hardship for the poorer urban communities, for many rural areas, and for many smaller communities. For the larger cities with many poor neighbor- hoods, this increase would severely limit the residents of these poverty areas from developing new and needed programs. As we have already indicated; the community action programs are an essential component of the war on poverty offering the opportunity PAGENO="0390" 2850 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196.7 for involvement to all sectors of the comniunity including the poor. If the community action program is to maintain its catalytic effect; if it is to continue to create greater responsiveness to the needs of the poor in the local community, then it is essential that the present level ot Federal contribution to local programs be maintained. e urge this committee to restore the 90-percent Federal contribu- tion to the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967. Innovation in programing, new and better ways of helping the poor break the poverty cycle are essential if the war on poverty is to achieve its pllrpose. To meet this need adequate funds are required for demon- stration and research purposes. We are happy to support the administration's recommendation to increase the amount of funds available for demonstration and research purposes under the community action programs from 5 to 10 percent. We urge favorable action on this request by this committee. One proposal for amending the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 is not included in the bill under consideration. This is a proposal that seeks to provide $60 million for day care services. The proposal would give preference to children from families on welfare in which a parent chooses to undertake education, training, or employment. It further mandates maximum use of welfare recipients as sub- professional personnel in the staffing of these day care facilities. This measure may well provide another way to reduce dependency on public welfare and we support this approach to the problem. While substantial gains against poverty have been recorded, we know now that the eradication of poverty will not be achieved over- night. I believe we all recognize now that we have t.o plan for a long war. In light of this, we strongly urge that. the authorization for the anti- poverty program be made for more than 1 year and certainly no less than 2 years. This will permit OEO to plan more realistically both operationally and in program terms. We don't need an annual war of nerves in the war on poverty. To win the war on poverty, much more needs to be done. If more is to be done~ more money is essential. The war on poverty should be expanded. The proven programs should he extended. New programs should be developed to meet unniet needs. The administrati on's request for fiscal 1968 for $2.06 billion represents a small step forward. But it is not enough. In the face of 32 million persons living below the poverty level, this amount is woefully inadequate. More money is needed to expand such proven programs as Job Corps and Neighborhood Youth Corps, more money is need for the community action program, for VISTA, for migrant programs. The great need is to press the war on poverty with greater urgency on all fronts and with increased funds if we are to ixiove the poor from their intolerable condition. In our judgment, we can fulfill our commitments in Vietiu~m and elsewhere overseas and, at. the same time, support the war on poverty more adequately than we are doing now. The resources proposed for allocation to the war on poverty are altogether inadequate in terms of both the need and our capabilities. The war on poverty has stirred the hopes and aspirations of the poor ~dl over America. The bright promise of a better life has given hopB PAGENO="0391" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2851 to millions and already for thousands, indeed, tens of thousands, this promise has become a reality. For the millions who are still trapped in the mire of poverty, this bright promise must not be allowed to be extinguished. These citizens who have found new hope must be encouraged to continue their efforts to build a better life for themselves. We have all been distressed by the sorry rolicall of American cities torn by the riots of the past few weeks. We certainly do not condone these riots. Stemming, as they do, from the conditions which exist in our urban ghettos, we feel there is added urgency for more adequate support for the war on poverty. Our urban ghettos require a whole arsenal of programs to help people overcome the handicaps of poverty. The present level of OEO financing is certainly not adequate to meet the needs that exist in our centers of urban poverty. We, therefore, urge that the level of funding for OEO be raised sub- stantially to enable it to reach greater numbers of the poor. President Meany said' in his 1964 testimony: When this country, through the Congress, appropriates money for education, for health, for the services and facilities the peOple need-yes, and for the jobs that result from all these-it is making the best of all possible investments. We are here to urge you to expand, this investment, an investment aimed at ending poverty in America. Today, based on the experience of more than 21/2 years, we repeat our request with even greater emphasis, "let us expand this invest- ment." Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you, Mr. Biemiller,, on an excellent statement. I agree with your statement all the way through, including the last part of your statement to the effect we should expand the funds above the present proposal in 1967. How far do you feel we should expand in order to effectively do something about the needs of the metropolitan areas and the rural areas of America to have a real impact on the root causes of the dis- turbances that' are taking place at the present time? Mr. BIEMILLER. Let me ask Mr. Rothman, who has been working in this field,to comment on that. Mr. ROTHMAN. Mr. Chairman, we have deliberately refrained from putting a dollar figure on it. We think we could, but we feel that a great deal more has to be done in all areas whether they be rural or urban. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you but as an expert you have `studied, I presume, have you not, and give us an idea of your best judgment. Mr. R0THMAN. We would say the programs could be extended to about 50 percent of the present recommendation, and this money could easily be usefully employed in all areas of the program, both rural and urban. This wouldbe without waste. * I think what we are seeing now is the fact that `these programs are not adequate to the need which exists in our urban poverty areas, that we are only scratching the surface and that we need to enlarge Our programs tremendously. *** * ``` ` .* ** I would say without waste we could put 50 percent over and above the present administration's recommendation to work usefully. PAGENO="0392" 2852 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Chairman PnRKJNs. Do you feel that these programs more or less have served as a stabilizer to prevent rioting? Mr. ROTHMAN. I would say they have, sir. Unfortunately, as we have said in our testimony, we have not reached down far enough. I think it is only as we reach really into the hard core of poverty in our ghettos can we really begin to develop the stable factors in the com- munity that will eliminate the elements that are rioting. I think we have to recognize that we are touching a lot of people but not nearly enough. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Biemiller, I notice you have made a strong pitch to keep the CAP program within the OEO and keep the pro- grams all under one tent, so to speak. Do you feel strongly that that is necessary? Mr. BIEMILLER. Yes, and for the various reasons we have outlined in our testimony, we think it is essential that there be one focal point in the Government for the war on poverty. Obviously, we would ex- pect the OEO to cOntinue as it has been doing, that is, to utilize other agencies of government in the progran~i. I think, by and large, it has done this rather intelligently, but I repeat we feel very strongly there must be one focal point and that is the OEO. Chairman PERKINS. I am well aware of the way in which it oper- ates. There has been criticism from some groups, but just assume the OEO were transferred tO the Department of HEW as proposed in the opportunity crusade. How do you visualize the poor would be affected? Mr. ROTITMAN. We feel that in the first place there would be no special pleader for the poor in the councils of govermnent; that is,. no department, no agency, no single unit that had the special responsibility. HEW does a good job in this area, Labor does a good job, Agricul- ture does a good. jOb but they have broad responsibilities. They have t& serve the Nation as a whole and this makes sense, but we feel that the poor need a special pleader. Secondly, we say that once these programs go into existing agencies,. then they have to compete for budget, fOr staff, for the ear of the ad- ministration with other agencies that are Ongoing which may not have the urgency in terms of meeting the needs of the poor. We feel that because of this there has got to be one focal point in government that will direct its attention solely to the problems of the poor and do all it can to meet these problems. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that OEO and the CAP programs as presently cOnstituted are making progress tO the extent possible up to the present time and has experience been gained where more progress will be made if given the Opportunity to remain in existence? Mr. ROTHMAN. Yes, sir. I think One of the things we have to recog- nize is the newness of the agency. It is not quite 3 years old, actually, in terms of its operational life, arid we have to recognize that they have been in a sense a trial-ahd-errOr agency in the sense there has been no. guideline laid dOwn in the area in which they have been working. Although this does not mean a lot of things have not been done in the antipoverty field because there have been. PAGENO="0393" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2853 I feel that based on their experience and their knowledge of how to work in local communities and working with people, and I am talking about CAP now, how to relate to the existing governments within the community and existing public and voluntary agencies and how to work with the poor themselves in the neighborhoods, I think they have learned all of this and this is a body of experience that we ought never let out of our grasp because I think for the poor this makes the differ- ence between what we think of as a viable democracy and something else. I think the "something else" we are seeing now erupting in the streets of our city, unforunately, because when anger and frustration take over rather than the ability to work out your problems in sometimes heated conflict, to be sure, but nonetheless, working it out in eyeball to eyeball confrontation, I think we find there is a great difference. We can make our local community action programs serve the needs of the poor and of the whole community. We have that experience now and I think we ought never let it out of our grasp. Chairman PERKINS. The opportunity crusade proposes to take the operation of the Job Corps out of the hands of the Office of Economic Opportunity immediately and transfer it to the Office of Education to be operated as present vocational and training programs are operated and further, Job Corps funding would be cut back to $105 million during the last fiscal year. Do you see that as a move to help or cripple the program or just how do you view that? Mr. ROTHMAN. I would like to say, sir, I feel the Job Corps as Mr. Biemiller indicated in his statement, is a program about which we think highly. We think highly of it because it has reached into, the local community and taken from that community and put into a resi- dential situation a type of boy or girl who was in a sense not at all the kind of boy or girl who could adequately fit into the kind, of training programs, vocational training programs, I think, that we have on- going in our communities. Let me be clear. I think highly of our ongoing vocational programs. They meet a real need for a certain type of lad who comes from a rather stable background, who does not have the scars of deprivation all over him, who is able to adjust socially to his environment. I think this is excellent for these particular kinds of people. But I think we have to recognize, and this is particularly the genius of OEO. It reaches into the community and grasps these young people by the hand, puts them into a new environment, lets them get a new attitude toward themselves and toward work. Some of these kids have never known what work was. It begins to give them self-pride and lets them come out then, and then we hope they will then move into the productive process where they get jobs and become taxpaying citizens `and not, incidentally, welfare clients-in other words, they become productive human beings giving back to society a part of what they earn rather than being a drain on society and producing nothing. We see these as very special cases. As I said, this is the particular genius in this case of this program because it does reach this hard core of boys and girls who otherwise would be the kind of people, that ultimately I am afraid would either be on our welfare rolls or be in our jails or in some way socially dependent. ` PAGENO="0394" 2854 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you are saying the Job Corps reaches the hard-core youngster who is not presently being met by the vocational school? Mr. ROTHMAN. Exactly. I want to emphasize we have no quarrel with existing vocational programs but this serves another purpose. Chairman PERKINS. They just complement each other and there is no overlapping. Do you feel the experience gained from the operation of the Job Corps will be of tremendous value to the residential centers that are in existence and which may be authorized for construction? Mr. ROTHMAN. Yes, sir. I see the fact that some of these youngsters come out of the Job Corps and may very well go into vocational train- ing, you see. They may then be adaptable to this kind of training. Chairman PERKINS. Ordinarily with vocational training, the aver- age training is about 1 year in high school and the children in the Job Corps are lacking in the basic education, coming from greatly dis- advantageous backgrounds. Mr. ROTHMAN. That is about as good a profile as anyone could give on the kind of kid that goes into the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. Are you against spinning off these programs that you have enumerated in your statement today? Mr. ROTH3IAN. Are we opposed to spin-off? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. ROTHMAN. We are, indeed. Chairman PERKINS. Tell us why. Tell us why in your own words, briefly. Mr. ROTHMAN. We feel, again, the spin-off places or puts an agency into an existing department and we feel very frequently-I don't think we have a universal reason against spin-offs. The reasons will vary. I think, for instance, Headstart is an innovative program and will continue to be innovative. Maybe it is a good idea. that it stay in the hands of people who may not necessarily be "professional educators," not that we have anything against professional educators, but Head- start has been able to develop methods and approaches and programs that are particularly related to these kind of youngsters in this par- ticular economic and social category of our country. Therefore, we would see that program as being particularly unique within the OEO structure. Now, that should be coordinated, I am sure, with ongoing educa- tional programs. But the coordination with ongoing programs is one thing, but having it taken over and put under the administrative aegis of an ongoing agency is something else, and their attitudes and ideas and functions begin to show they are exactly the kind of innova- tion that has made these programs work. Chairman PERKINS. Personally, I have always been in favor of strong law enforcement. I always did as vigorous and as effective a job as I could as a county attorney back home, but I want your views on the impact of the poverty program, the impact it would have if we made more funds available than the present proposal calls for. In other words, what impact would those assumptions have on the rioting in this country in your judgment? Have we done enough? If we fail to act, what would be the consequences? PAGENO="0395" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2855 Mr. BIEMILLER. We certainly concur with your view that we want orderly law enforcement in the United States and we have no quarrel with your statement. Not only in the poverty program have there not been sufficient funds but in many other programs there have not been sufficient funds to deal with the problems of your ghettos and particularly the urban ghettos. The AFL-CIO has consistently been before this committee and other committees of Congress urging the appropriation of larger sums of money for various types of programs that will not only eliminate poverty but will improve the slum areas as well. I was appalled at the wisecracking about the bill which I thought was one of the most important bills to come before this Congress- the rat control bill. I think it is a bad day when such examples are displayed with respect to the model cities, the wiping out of the rent supplemental programs, the cutbacks in the education program, if you will, Mr. Chairman, which is not the fault of this committee. I am talking about the Congress as a whole. I think all of these cutbacks have had a very bad effect on the situation in out ghettos. I deplore rioting as much as any man in America. I don't think it solves anything, but I am fearful that as long as the very deplorable conditions continue, both the physical conditions of our ghettos and the hopelessness of many of the people who live in the ghettos in terms of seeing any job opportunities that we have the kind of a situation that opposites to one of two things-either incident which no one can predict which will spark off the bad feeling which exists in these areas or the possibility of playing into the hands of professional agitators. I am very disturbed at the statement I heard yesterday on TV by Stokeley Carmichael speaking from Cuba at a meeting Castro has called to promote guerrilla *arf are in the Americas in which Stokeley Carmichael said he was going to try to organize guerrilla bands in the United States. Certainly we are against everything Castro stands for and we are against Mao-type communism as well as Soviet-type communism. If we are going to allow the conditions that now continue in our ghettos, we will have an open invitation to the kind of thing that has been happening. I, for one, and I know 1 speak for the labor movement on this, would implore the Congress to take a look at this problem of discontent and the reasons for that discontent in our urban areas and do everything possible to strengthen every program which in any way can cure the problems of our ghettos. Chairman PERKINS. Would you care to comment, Mr. Rothman? Mr. ROTTIMAN. I would concur absolutely with everything Mr. Bie- miller has said. I am quite in agreement with him. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Pucinski. Mr. PUCINSKI. I'certainly want to congratulate you omi this excellent statement. As a matter of fact, I am going to depart from custom since your statement is in the record and I am going to put this statement in the Congressional Record today. While the politicians are arguing all over the country as to who is responsible for what is happening in the cities, you have come forth with a constructive program, and I agree with you. PAGENO="0396" 2856 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I have asked the chairman to order round-the-clock hearings on this bill and it would be my hope that we could triple the amount of money in this bill. I think this Nation should go to $8 billion and face up to the fact that this is the only way we are going to bring some order out of chaos in these communities. If it means stripping the space program and cutting the fat out of the defense program and if it means reduc- ing foreign aid, I am for it, because right now the crisis is in our cities. I think the American people would be for it, too. You have made an excellent statement calling our attention to the fact that unemployment among Negro boys is 31 percent and among Negro girls it is 46 percent. As I read your statement and look to my own personal experience with this problem, I come to the conclusion there are four elements: one, the staggering unemployment in the ghetto; two, the indescriba- ble slum problems; three, the unendurable heat where houses virtually become ovens in the heat of summer-I leave Chicago on a late plane and when I get to Washington late Sunday night as I drive past some of the housing units, I see people sitting out in front of their homes at 2 and 3 o'clock in the morning and little children who should have been sleeping 4 or 5 hours sitting out on the steps because it is just too hot to go into that house-and four, I believe, is the abysmal and total since of hopelessness that exists in many of these communities. I think these are the Four Horsemen of Apocalypse that are hitting American cities today. I think the formula for restoring peace to these cities is not more troops, obviously, but addressing ourselve to this problem. I am willing to go to the floor with a triple amount for this bill. Of course, there have been shortcomings. We could sit here for the next 3 months and tell about some foolish OEO employee that might have done something irresponsible in Newark or some not too smart or bright boy doing something in some other city. I hear in Newark in all of the chaos they have had there they picked up four youngsters that belong to the Job Corps. So the enemies of this program would like to indict the whole Job Corps because four youngsters have been picked up out of several thousands of people and have been arrested. I am willing to go to the floor with this bill and I am willing to go to the floor with a triple amount and then let those who want to cut it, who want to trim it, who want to reshape it, who want to restall it, want to vote against it, let them take the responsibiliy for the chaos and the rioting in America.. Let them take the responsibility for setting the stage for the Stokeley Carmichaels to make the kind of statements he made in Cuba. I am going to speak on the subject on the floor this morning because this happens to be July 26, the great holiday of the Cuban July 26 movement, but it seems to me, Mr. Biemiller, you have come here and given us the hard facts. I think one of the most important elements of your statement is what you describe as now existing in Watts. Not too lông ago the whole country was shocked with the uprising there. It is true. I have talked t.o Congressman Hawkins, who comes from the area. A lot of things should have been done 6, 8, 10 years ag6. PAGENO="0397" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2857 We have a way of responding to these crises instead of anticipating them. I think here is a chance for the Congress of the United States, for both parties, to join forces. If there is something wrong in the poverty program, let's clean it up. I also suggested to the President today that he call a summit meet- ing of Mr. Weaver, Mr. Wirtz, Mr. Gardner, Mr. Howe, and Mr. Shriver, this committee, the House Banking Committee, the Appro- priations Committee of the Senate to take a look at this whole pro- gram and let's get the redtape out of the way. A lot of these bureaucrats around here are sitting on requests, cross- ing every t and dotting every i. We have programs, there are formulas in America. This poverty program has done a great deal already. It seems to me if we move these things forward and move into these cities, if nothing else the hot summer of 1967 has demonstrated to .me that we can no longer wait. People living in the ghettos see on tele- vision the good things of life. They see in the newspapers, they see in magazines the good things in life and then they go into their slums and their ghettos and it does not take much from agitators like StOke- ley Carmichael and the fellow in Cambridge yesterday. It does not take much to trigger people off. People in these ghettos live under deplorable conditions 24 hours a day. So I say to you, Mr. Biemiller, your statement is one of the most significant to come before this committee and I hope the President und every Member of Congress will read it in the record and I hope we will respond and respond quickly and effectively. For that reason I renew my earlier request. I think we ought to have round-the-clock hearings, get this bill cleaned up. If there .are some shortcomings in it, correct them; and take this bill to the floor and show the people in these various areas that this country and this Government does care, that this Government is going to respond and eliminate the causes before we have any more eruptions. It is significant to me that in many parts of the country where the poverty program has been working well, and there are many such parts in this country, we have not had disturbances. I think we can prove and it is our hopeful intention to get this information together. In those areas of the country where there has been effective leadership and effective programs with everybody working together, wit.h the programs under our model cities moving into force, poverty moving into force, education moving into force, Job Corps, USES, job train- ing where you have effective leadership where all of these have merged together, these programs have served as a stabilizer and. have actually helped avoid much of the chaos we are seeing in the cities today. I agree with you and I think now after 21/2 years' experience the guidelines have been set, we know pretty well what we are doing, local communities know what they are doing, everybody has pretty much adjusted to the programs and for Our good friend on the other side now to come along and completely overhaul this program would mean 2 or 3 more years of indecision, chaos, confusion. I say you have a good program here right now and it is working. In your statement about Watts, Mr. Biemiller, you state, "Some of these kids were the looters, the burners, the kids who started the riot. Now they say to me, `We don't want to do anything in this community PAGENO="0398" 2858 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 to mess it up no more.' Now they say it is our program, it is our com- munity." Our good friend, who wants to rewrite this bill now, regardless of how well meaning he is, would add more confusion and indecision. I say let's go with the bill we have now. It is doing the job, let's correct the shortcomings that exist, and let's get moving. Mr. BIEnILLrn. I think you have made a very correct and eloquent statement about. the situation as it exists and certainly the thrust of our entire argument is to the same point. We think just because here and there you can show some flaw in the program does not mean you kill the whole program or try to revamp it and take another 3 or 4 years to see where it goes. I think you are quite right that the OEO through the executive office could get even a better integration than it has now. There are other programs which work which are doing a very fine job. Let me just cite one along the lines of what you are talking about. Under the MDTA program there is some excellent training going on. Our labor union at Santa Rosa, Calif., is running a program for power men which is particularly important in the roadbuilding in- dustry. They have now had 240 boys go through that experience there, everyone of whom was either a dropout or a juvenile delinquent, picked up purposely this kind of person. One person has dropped out of this program and the others are at work and again have become very useful members of society. I think this is the kind of thing that you say that not only in the poverty program in its narrow sense but in the broader sense of the war on poverty, if you can give these poor kids who have had all kinds of bad experiences, a real opportunity with a chance of becoming a useful citizen, they will become just as good Americans as you and Tare. Mr. PUCIN5KI. I think it is important to remember that this pro- gram suffered its greatest criticism during the early formative years. The guidelines were not clear. I am the first one to confess in the early years of this program various people came who tried to redo the whole of North America overnight, but I am rather encouraged by the fact that every major newspaper in this country has at some time or other in the last year completed a rather intensive study of the program in their own community and has written a long series of articles. When you read them they all tend to agree despite some faults here and there, minor in nature, the basic approach is the only approach if we are going to reduce the number of people living in abject poverty I think the American people should know this. The statistic you gave, about 25 percent of boys unemployed and 23 percent of girls unemployed, in the Negro community, you have a staggering 46 percent unemployed, and 31 percent Negro boys un- employed. With that, how in the world can you avoid any kind of tension? How can you avoid these people being ready targets for the agitators and the instigators? It does not take much for a guy like Stokeley Carmichael to get these people worked up. So I would say let's take this program. and implement and improve it so we can remove the causes of tension. PAGENO="0399" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2859 Mr. BIEMILLER. This is certainly our contention, and may I say we are honored that you see fit to put the statement in the record, Mr. Congressman. Mr. PUCINSKI. It is an excellent statement and it gives us a good working formula. Responsible citizens all over this country are asking what we can do and I think you spell it out in your statement today. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Meeds. Mr. MEEDS. I apologize that I was not here to hear your oral testi- mony, Mr. Biemiller. I have had an opportunity to read through your prepared statement and I would like to take the opportunity to con- gratulate you on this statement and the people who obviously have done the background research that has gone into the preparation of the statement. May I also congratulate the organization which you represent. Cer- tainly you people are not Johnnies-come-lately to the war on poverty. When you appear before this committee with the type of testimony that has been presented this morning, it is obvious that you speak with the authority and the voice of experience which we in the com- mittee know you have. I would like also to congratulate, you. One of the things that stood out to me certainly was what the gentleman from Illinois brought out-the fact that you have done something about the Watts and the Newarks and so on. I congratulate you on that. We would like to see more of this not only by your organization but by other organizations. There has been a good deal of talk in this committee and with various witnesses about the Job Corps; and I know you people are well acquainted with some of the operations of the Job Corps, the type of people going into and coming out of the Job `Corps. There seems to be a rather concerted effort by the certainly well-meaning gentlemen on the other. side of the aisle who would more or less make this an on-the-job training program by the thrust of their program. Is it not true that there are a lot more things needed, supporting services to reach the type of people we are talking about, not that that should not be a part of it; but can we just turn this type of person over lock, stock, and barrel to private industry and say, "You trans- form this underprivileged hard-core unemployed dropout, overnight by simply having an on-the-job training program"? Isn't there a lot more needed than that? Mr. BIEMILLER. If such an easy solution made sense there would be no point in having a war on poverty. Obviously, this is not the answer. As Mr. Rothman and I have said here and I want to repeat it again, the Job Corps does as much a social program as it does a job training program, and this, I think, is one of the great virtues of the Job Corps, that it does give the kid who has had no opportunity in probably more than half the cases has had brushes with the law, it gives him a chance to become a citizen, to get a feeling of responsi- bility, a feeling of participation in the life of our great Nation. I think this is one of the great features of the Job Corps that has been overlooked. It is a tradition, by the way, that is rooted in Amer- ican history. The CCC camps were a very comparable sort of thing, and I presume you have had the experience I have had of talking to many people who said the `CCC was the thing that gave them an opportunity to get back into normal life. ` PAGENO="0400" 2860 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 One f your distinguished members, Congressman Blatiiik, can tell you a great deal about the CCC camps. We were proud that BOb Hechter, head of the machinists union, headed the CCC. Actually, the Job Corps concept has been expanded beyond the CCC concept, but this basic approach that you are trying to do a social salvage job as well as an ecOnomic training job is the reason we feel very strongly that not only should the Job Corps be continued but it ought to be extended. Mr. MEEDS. I was very impressed by your statement here setting forth the precise reasons for your position against spin off. I think this will probably ttirn into One of the most, if not the most, hotly debated topics of the whole ~rnr against poverty concept. So I would like to go into those in more detail if I cotild. You state that the OEO is the one Federal agency that clearly speaks for the poor within the Government. Do you mean we don't have agencies that are speaking for the poor within the Government? Mr. ROTHMA~. Let me put it this way: Obviously, when the wel- fare administration speaks, it speaks for poor people. These are the poorest, if you will, in a sense. I am sure there are Other groups within other departments that speak for poorer people, but there is no one who is concerned with the totality of the poor, of poverty. This, it seems to me, is the problem that we have to recognize. When we set about as a national commitment to eradicate poverty from our midst we simply can't just parcel out to this department and say you deal with this, and ~ou deal with this, and so on, without having some coordinating force within the Government which will attempt to pull together the various programs that are ongoing in terms of the totality of the war against poverty. Mr. MEEDS. Do you agree with me that, if one can ascribe a prime reason to povery in the United States, in all probability the greatest. single factor in our failure to really do something about poverty prior to this time came from this precise reason you just stated. In other words, poverty is a many-faceted thing, and we have had different agencies plowing away in their furrows all attacking differ- ent facets of this total problem and no one was concerned and no one was attacking the overall problem and coordinating all of these ac- tivities into a rifle shot directed against poverty, and that is what the OEO is doing now and has been doing. Mr. R.OTHMAN. Precisely. That is exactly why we support the OEO as the central, unifying~ coordinating force. We hope they will do even a better job than they have done. We realize they have a lot, of problems in t.his area. We are not being unduly critical of them, of course. but we feel this is really where the job needs to be done. Mr. MEEDS. Another thing; and I am sure you have noticed it. and certainly the members of this committee have noticed it, because we have received some pretty sharp blows on such things; what happens when the Federal Government or local government or State govern- ment gets people all worked up with a new program, a dramatic, thr~ namic new program, gets them enthused, gets them interested and then just suddenly drops them? I Imow what we hear about it, but. what do you see? Mr. T?OTHMAX. Actually, this is the thing that ought never happen, especially when you are dealing with poor people. When a program is PAGENO="0401" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2861 funded and goes into operation and begins to prove it can do some- thing for the poor people, and then all of a sudden when it comes up next year for funding or renewal they hear from Washington that there are no funds available. At this point, the fiat which you build up in people begins to dis- sipate because it repeats a pattern which they have known only too well, the pattern of promises made and broken, and we cannot break fiat with the poor. You and I perhaps because we have a certain amount of inner sta- bility can have promises broken and not feel that necessarily we have to lose fiat in a given individual or program or operation, but the poor who have had this and who have known this as a stable aspect of their lives-promises made and broken-at that point you have `a long way to go to get their fiat again. This is what the OEO has done. It has kindled the fiat in millions of people about the possibility that they can escape from poverty, and this is why we say that we cannot break this fiat because if then we do, then the motivation, and there has to be human motivation if you are going to get out of the rut that you are in if you are a poor person, and there has to be a great deal of motivation. This human motivation that energizes the individual to do those things he can do through the program presented disappears, evapo- rates. At that point you have what amounts to a vegetable and society is then responsible for him and will continue to be responsible for him. Poverty breeds poverty and you may be responsible for his chil- dren and grandchildren. Mr. MEEDS. So the loss of the faith of the poor in this rather dy- namic program would certainly have this effect. Mr. ROTHMAN. Yes, indeed. Mr. MEEDS. As you perhaps put it, one, with the poor; and two, with a program which is a motivational program, other than someordinary program for middle class America in which it would be damaging enough to get their hopes up and then drop them; but in this type of program it can be at least doubly damaging, could it not? Mr. ROTHMAN. I think it could be fatal in terms of the groups we are working with in trying to train and motivation so ultimately they can become productive citizens. Mr. MEED5. If we spin off these agencies which have been under one roof or one umbrella and lose the momentum of this program, the very thing you are talking about here could very well inure, could it not? Mr. ROTHMAN. Yes, sir, this is why we say at this time there should be no spin offs. We are taking `this position and we don't take it for all time. Per- haps there may come a time when we say OK, the job is well enough along it may very well be that we will agree that this, that or the' other program belongs someplace else, but not now and not in the fore- seeable future, sir. Mr. MEEDS. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. O'Hara. Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Chairman, I want to apologize to the witnesses for missing their testimony which I am sure was very interesting. It was on our side. 80-084-67--pt. 4-26 PAGENO="0402" 2862 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 Chairman PERKINS. We commenced promptly at 9 a.m. with Andy Biemiller. Mr. O'IL&nA. Let me say I believe the AFL-CIO is to be commended for the support it has given this program since its inception. I think it is fair to say the AFL-CIO has been successful enough so that very few of its members receive wages that would put them in the poverty category. Yet the concern and interest that the AFL-CIO has shown for the poor and for well-financed programs to assist them out of poverty demonstrates again what has been demonstrated many times in the past. The AFL-CIO is a good deal more than just a narrow self- interest group. I think that is something we sometimes take for granted and, there- fore, I though this might be an appropriate occasion to reemphasize that point. I am sorry I missed your testimony, gentlemen, but when the six volumes of printed hearings come out, I will be sure to find your state- ment and read it. Mr. BIEMILLER. Thank you, Mr. Congressman, for your remarks about the AFL-CIO. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you, Mr. Biemiller, and Mr. R.othman, too, for the comments you have made. You have made a contribution and I think all members will agree when they read your statement, and I agree with the gentleman from Michigan. Again, let me thank you for your appearance. Mr. BIEMILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity. Chairman PERKINS. Dr. Arthur Fleniming. Dr. Fleinming, it is a pleasure for me to again welcome you before the committe. You appeared here when we were writing the ESEA, when it had ESEA up for amendments in the poverty program. You have always been interested in the welfare of the people of this country and you are a great educator and you are one of the most outstanding Secretaries of HEW where you pioneered so ably with the. legislation that was later enacted by the Congress. We welcome you. You may proceed in any manner that you prefer. STATEMENT OP ARTHUR S. FLEMMING~ PRESIDENT, NATIONAL COUNCIL OP THE CHURCHES OP CHRIST OF THE UNITED STATES Dr. FLEMMING. First of all, may I express to you my very deep appreciation for your generous comments. I can assure you it is a privilege for me to have the opportunity of appearing before you and the members of your committee on what I regard as very important legislation. For the record. I will identify myself as Arthur S. Flemming, of Eugene, Oreg., ~nd I appear before you today, Mr. Chairman, as president of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. The organization which I represent is a council of 34 Protestant and Orthodox denominations. One of the stated purposes of the council as set forth in the constitution is "to study and speak and act on conch- tions and issues in the Nation and the world which involve moral, ethical, and spiritual princiPleS inherent in the Christian Gospel." PAGENO="0403" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2863 Only the general assembly or the general board can vote policy state- ments on behalf of the council. The general assembly, which numbers about 800, is made up of lay church members and clergy who are appointed as representatives by the member denominations. About 270 of the general assembly representatives are then designated by that body to sit as members of the general board-a body which meets three times a year. The policy statements adopted by the general assembly or the gen- eral board are addressed to the council's member denominations and to the general public. No council action is binding on any member coffinTlunion. When the council adopts a policy statement or resolution it speaks oniy for itself. Policy statements and resolutions are used as a basis for testifying before legislative bodies on issues related to the subject matter of the statements or resolutions. Such testimony is presented~ however, only on behalf of the council and never on behalf of its member churches or their constituency. In December 1966 the general board of the national council adopted a policy statement on "the churches and the antipoverty program." In February 1967 the general board passed a resolution related to the policy statement. Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate it if the members of the com- mittee would permit the insertion of both the policy statement and resolution to which I have referred immediately following this statement. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it is so ordered. Dr. FLEMMING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The December 1966 policy statement makes clear that, in the judg- ment of the. general board, the church should be among the first to hail the declaration of public policy by the Congress of the United States in the preamble to the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 which says: It is the policy of the United States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in this nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for educa- tion and training, the opportunity to work and the opportunity to live in decen~ and dignity. A number of concerns are reflected in both the general board's policy statement and resolution which I desire to underline. First, the role of the Office of Economic Opportunity. In its February 1967 resolution, the board said that-- The Office of Economic Opportunity represents an essential spearhead in the War on Poverty. I believe that this is a sound position. There are times when new agencies are needed in the executive branch if Government is to deal with major issues in an imaginative and creative manner. I watched, first as a reporter for what is now U.S. News & World Report, and later as a member of the U.S. Civil Service Commission, the New Deal agencies come and go. They made significant contributions to the Nation at a critical period in oimr history. These contributions would not have been made by established agencies. Already the Office of Economic Opportunity has made contributions to the Nation's war against poverty which would not have been made PAGENO="0404" 2864 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 by established agencies. It has done so because it has been able to de-- vote all of its time, energy, and resources to the achievement of a. single goal, namely, the providing the poor with new opportunities to achieve their highest possibilities. It has not be,en encumbered by the precedents of yesterday and the- fears of those who regard new programs as a threat to old programs. Our Nation needs the leadership that this office can provide in the years that lie just ahead. Chairman PERKINS. Let me interrupt you to say that I don't know when we have had such a forthright and outstanding endorsement of the Office of Economic Opportunity as you are giving at this time,. Dr. Flemmrng. Dr. FLEMMING. Thank you, sir. The Office is needed to operate t.he programs for which it now has~ responsibility. If the programs were shifted at this point to estab- lished agencies it would take the better part of a year to restore the momentumthey now enjoy. The Office is needed, as the editors of Look magazine expressed, "to arguethe just demands of the poor from within the government." No staff agency can do this as effectively as an operating agency which is constituted in such a manner other agencies cannot ignore it. The Office is needed to continue the process of innovation and ex- perimentation in the war against poverty. We need an agency that, because of its single-minded purpose, will continue to explore and' implement ideas such as the one that brought into bein.g a legal service for the poor-a program which the American Bar Association has characterized as "well conceived and properly administered." The Office is needed to point up for other agencies in the executive' branch the opportunities that are. open to them in the war against poverty. An agency as the Office of Economic Opportunity can do just what Secretary of Labor Wirt.z says it has done when, in testi- fying before this committee in favor of the continuation of the Office, he asserted that the agency's innovative programs "have shaken US up * * * they have put a hair shirt on all of us * * * they have told us the truth about. poverty until it hurts * * * and now it helps." The second concern I would like to discuss with the committee is. under the heading of maximum feasible participation by the poor. The policy statement by the general board places major emphasis on this aspect of the Economic Opportunity Act. At one point the state- ment says: * * * This provision for the inclusion of the poor themselves in planning and execution of programs reflects deeper ethical insight in anti-poverty efforts. Two principles are involved which commend themselves to the Christian con- science: One is the recognition of the inherent worth and dignity of every human being regardless of his social or economic circumstances. The other is recognition that in a democratic society every person is entitled to a voice in shaping the decision and policies which affect his life. * * * We commend the Congress for incorporating this concept in the origi- nal Economical Opportunity Act, and encourage the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity to continue its efforts to embody the concept in actual structures and programs in the fleid. We believe that substantial progress has been made by the Offic& of Economic Opportunity in implementing this principle. PAGENO="0405" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2865 Members of our staff who have followed closely this aspect of the program view with concern, however, the provision in section 223 (C) which raises the matching funds requirement from 10 percent to 20 percent. Few, if any, groups of poor people would be able to raise such a sum. This could, therefore, have the effect of making it possible for only long-established institutions with broad-based support to submit proposals. Such groups should be involved in the war against poverty. They bring to it both a concern for the poor and an expertise in dealing with their problems. Conceivably, they should be asked to meet a larger matching fund requirement. But couldn't a needs test be applied in such a manner as to make it possible for groups of poor people to continue to submit proposals under a matching-fund requirement of 10 percent. Mr. GIBBONS. May we interrupt at this point because I think this is a misconception. Under the present law under which we are operating, the Office of Economic Opportunity has authority under exceptional circumstances to fund up to 100 percent of the cost of it. I think your statement is legitimate. They have not established any criteria but they can make the decision. It just has not been done. I think your complaint is one that should be addressed to the agency rather than to the Congress. Dr. FLEMMING. Is that same authority continued in the draft which is now before the committee? Mr. GIBBONS. I could not be positive on this but I feel sure it is. It is just a hesitancy on the part of the agency to make a decision as to -what agency is entitled to 100 percent funding and what is agency funding. They would rather put them all on the 80 percent basis so there is an escape valve there. Dr. FLEMMING. Oftentimes the problems of the poor are more clearly seen by the poor themselves than by any other group. Our third concern is that of organized effort by the poor. The policy statement by the general board includes this paragraph: Essential to the effective involvement of the poor in community-wide and church programs is the creation of a supportive atmosphere for the self-organiza- tion of the poor. The history of the human struggle for justice and equity reveals few in- stances in which the establishments of this world have voluntarily transferred power to the powerless or of their own free will granted redress of grievances to the exploited and the dispossessed. For the contemporary poor, as for other disadvantaged groups in history, self-organization for countervailing power is an essential ingredient of any sue- *cessful war effort against poverty. Mr. GIBBONS. We saw as recently as yesterday there is some in- nuendo that this involvement of the poor is the cause of the problems we are suffermg today in riots and so on. I realize you can't base it on evidence but I would like your opinion as one who is learned in this field of human relations. Do you think this is a contributing factor or what are your views on that? Dr. FLEMMING. Mr. Congressman, and Mr. Chairman, I appreciate that recent developments give rise to a question of this nature. I would PAGENO="0406" 2866 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 be happy to comment on such situations but if I may present my state- ment first, there are some matters which bear on this so it would save the time of the committee and avoid repetition. In his testimony before the Employment Manpower a.nd Poverty Subcommittee of the Senate, Labor and Public Welfare Committee, Sargent Shriver, the Administrator of the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity, said: We have learned that while organization for change is a vital ingredient of Community Action, lawlessness and partisanship can undermine the integrity of the program and destroy the faith of the community. And so we have written into the Bill safeguards against the use of federal funds for illegal picketing or demonstrations or partisan political activity. We urge that this committee give consideration to including in the Economic Opportunity Act a statement setting forth what persons connected with OEO projects can do when they decide to become in- volved iii action programs designed to bring about what they believe to be a desirable change in the economic, social, and political life of the Nation. Such a positive statement of rights will help to put whatever restric- tions are placed on the activities of persons connected with OEO proj- ects in a frame of reference consistent with the first amendment of the Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court related to that amendment. Also, we urge the committee to include language in the act designed to protect persons connected with OEO projects from coercive action designed; for example, to bring about their participation in political activity. The next concern is under the heading of local initiative. Under this heading the policy statement by the general board includes this para- graph: We fully recognize that many aspects of the war on poverty transcend the local community, and many of the resources required for its successful prosecu- tion must be mobilized on a national level. Within the framework of local-state-federal partnership, we commend the emphasis in this Act upon maximum local initiative, imaginative creativity, and flexibility. IVe have noted with approval that even when the decision has been made to launch programs such as Headstart and Upward Bound, vigorous efforts have been made to relate them to the objectives of the local community action programs. Both of these programs open up opportunities for reaching the families of participants that might not otherwise be opened up. It is our understanding, for example, that the preponderant majority of Headstart grants are made to Community Action agencies, and that these agencies in turn use a wide variety of organizations to operate Headstart programs. We have noted with interest that in the full-year Headstart pro- grams, 10 percent of the operating agencies are church affiliated organizations. We are confident that in the redrafting of the Economic Oppor- tunity Act, the committee will do everything it can to continue the em- phasis on maximum local initiative. We hope especially that the act will make clear that proposals de- veloped by the poor will receive a hearing on their merits even though PAGENO="0407" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 2867 there may be persons, in both the public and private sectors, who raise questions about them. Every effort should be made to make sure that proposals coming from the community do not reflect the lowest common denominator of thinking in the community. In this connection we have a drafting suggestion relative to 221 (C) which I will submit in a letter to the chairman of the committee. Finally, the fifth concern is that of adequate financing. The commit- ment of the general board of the National Council of Churches to the objectives of the Economic Opportunity Act and its confidence in the programs that have been developed to achieve these objectives is clearly set forth in this language from its February 1967 resolution: and also urges councils of churches, denominations directly, and through them their local congregations, and religious agencies to support a substantial sup- plementary-1966-1967-federa~ appropriation for the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity and a full funding of this agency for 1967-68 at no less than $2.1 billion in keeping with the request of the Administration of the United States Govern- ment We would like to underline the words "at no less than $2.1 billion." We believe that our Nation, having put its hands to the plow, must not turn back but must move forward in its determination "to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in this Nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the opportu- nity to work and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity." We recognize the progress that has been made through such pro- grams as Headstart, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, the Job Corps, Upward Bound, VISTA, Neighborhood Health Centers, and Com- munity Action Agencies. We believe that these programs must be strengthened. We also be- lieve that the way must always be open for the consideration and.financ- ing of new programs that give promise of replacing despair with hope in the lives of the poor. We are confident that the Congress of the United States is going to make it possible for the Nation to move forward in an undertaking that must succeed if our Nation is to demonstrate by its deeds its belief in the dignity and worth of every human being. Chairman PERKINS. I will yield to Mr. Gibbons for just a moment. I am fortunate because I have had the opportunity to invite you here on numerous occasions before the general Subcommittee on Education. You always come before the committee with an eloquent statement and in my opinion you know what you are talking about. I recall I got acquainted with you through the minority when you were an out- standing Secretary of HEW in the Eisenhower Cabinet. You were testifying with respect to certain educational legislation which later on was enacted. From your experience you have in my judgement so ably stated the role of the Office of Economic Opportunity couched in words that not many other witnesses have so clearly expressed. I believe in substance you state we would `be throwing away this experience that we have gained and as an administrator in one of the major agencies in this country, this proposal purports to transfer the so-called opportunity crusade, transfer many of these programs to HEW, particularly the Office of Economic Opportunity, and the Job PAGENO="0408" 2868 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Corps immediately to the Office of Education as vocational schools are presently operated. How do you feel it will affect the programs we now have underway assuming that the Congress went along with the suggestions and threw away the experience we presently have? Dr. FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, I am very happy to respond to that question and elaborate somewhat on the testimony I have just presented. As I am sure you appreciate, I have a very very high regard for the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. I have a very high regard for the Secretary of that agency, whom I have long thought of as this Nation's No. 1 educational statesman. I have a high regard for the career staff that have given the best years of their lives to the Department of HEW. But I recognize as I am sure you do and as the members of this committee do, since I was Secretary, Congress has assumed new responsibilities to the Depart- ment of Health, Education, and Welfare. The old responsibilities plus the new responsibilities place a very heavy burden on the Secretary. It is clear to me that the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare could not give his undivided atten- tion to the war against poverty as can the Administrator of the Office of Economic Opportunity. If an official under the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, such as an assistant secretary, should be as- signed such responsibility, he would not have the same opportunity to keep the program moving as does the head of an independent agency. I noted with interest that Congressman Quie in introducing into the Congressional Record of June 8, 1967, an explanation of the bill which Ihe and some of his colleagues have introduced, he said this: No independent agency can hope to coordinate effectively the many federal activities designed to help the poor. I would like to sayi believe that an independent agency can do this job in an effective manner, if the President of the United States makes clear that the head of that agency is his representative in a particular area. As you know, I had the privilege of serving for 4 years as the Di- rector of the Office of Defense Mobilization. It was an independent agency. In order to carry out the duties of the Office, one had to work with the heads of a good many Cabinet departments. President Eisenhower made it clear from the beginning that the in- cumbent of that Office was his representative in that particular area and he continued to make it clear as various issues would arise. Consequently, I found that I could work with the heads of the Cabinet departments in an effort to coordinate activities in that par- ticular area. I recognize that I was probably helped somewhat by the fact that although it was an independent agency the Congress in establishing it provided that it was to be in the Executive Office of the President, and this committee might want to consider such a possibility as far as the Office of Economic.Opportunity is concerned if you want to under- line the fact that the head of this Office is functioning very closely to the President. PAGENO="0409" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2869 But, actually, the important thing, as we all know, if the President of the United States makes it clear to the heads of Cabinet depart- ments that the head of the independent agency in a particular area is his representative, he will not have any difficulty in functioning and, in my judgment, can function far more effectively than assistant secretary in an established department. So, on the basis of my experience in Government, on the basis of my work with the two Hoover Commissions, I would say to you there is no question in my mind at all but at this juncture it is far better to place this responsibility in an independent agency under an administrator. In view of the fact that this has been operating just 21/2 years, if an effort should be made to transfer out of this agency many of its sub- stantive programs, in my judgment, there would be a serious loss of momentum. I have watched transfers take place in the executive branch of the Government. I have watched what happens during the period of time when people are speculating as to whether or not the transfer is going to take place. I have watched what happens when people are speculating as to how the transfer is to take place. I have watched what happens when people are speculating as to what the impact of the transfer is going to be on personnel in the agency that is carrying forward the job at a particular time, the impact on personnel in the agency to which it is to be transferred. May I say to you all of the speculations that I have identified serves just one purpose and that is to put the program on dead center for a considerable period of time. I think it would be very unfortunate for any aspect of this program at this particular juncture in our history to go on dead center. I agree with Mr. Biemiller's comments to the effect that the time may very well come when the Congress will want to look at this in- dependent agency just as it has looked at other independent agencies in the past and think about some transfer but I think this should hap- pen only after programs are well established and it is clear to the Con- gress that they desire to continue the programs, then they might very well think about transferring to another department or agency, but in my judgment this is not the time and it would hare a serious impact on the effectiveness of the war against poverty if the transfer should take place now. Chairman PERKINS. As an educator, I would like to put one more question to you: You are familiar with the Opportunity Crusade that proposes to cut back the Job Corps $190 million for the next fiscal year and would immediately transfer the operation to the Office of Education. Do you feel that we would be throwing away valuable experience gained from the operation of the Job Corps if we cut back on the Job Corps at this time and would it be depriving youngsters that are not now admitted in vocational schools, and do we have residential cen- ters available which the Office of Education could operate to effec- tively reach the type of youngster that the Job Corps is now reaching? What is your opinion? PAGENO="0410" 2870 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. FI~EI~IIxG. Mr. Chairman, in my judgment, the Job Corps is in a position where it is rendering an effective service and where it in the future can render an even more effective service. I definitely feel that a transfer at this time to the Department of Health, Education, a.nd Welf are, with the understanding that it would be made a par of the vocational education program, would be unfortunate. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GRREN. First of all, I welcome my fellow Oregonian and I must say I am delighted to have you here, Dr. Flemming. Mr. AS~BROOK. Would the gentlelady yield? Mrs. GREEN. It is obvious he had the good judgment to leave Ohio and go to Oregon. The facts speak for themselves. Mr. ASHEBROOK. Temporarily. Mrs. GREEN. If I understood you correctly, you are suggesting that the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity have a higher posi- tion arid you said if the President makes clear that the head of the agency is his representative then he would be able to have the say on all of the programs. Is that right? Dr. FLEMMING. It is my judgment that the head of an independent agency can function effectively not only in terms of the operation of its own programs but in terms of tying in other departments and agen- cies if it is clear that he is functioning as the representative of the Chief Executive. Mrs. GREEN. A lot of the programs in the Economic Opportunity Act, as we all lu~ow, are educational programs. Are you, in effect, say- ing that he have greater power in determining the final say-so on the educational parts of the war on poverty above John Gardner, who is the Secretary of HEW, and whom you just said was the finest educa- tional statesman in the country? Dr. FLE~IMIxe. N~, Mrs. Green, I am not. It is true, as you. indicate, many of the programs that have been developed by the Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity recognize the importance of education if the ob- jectives of the act are to be accomplished. It seems to me that these programs are tied in, for example, typically as I indicated in my testimony, with the community action programs of the OEO, I believe that tie-in is a very important one. I think that the Administrator of this office working cooperatively with the Secretary, of Health, Education, and Welfare can keep the programs moving along sound lines from an educational point of view and at the same time can keep them tied in with the overall objectives of the Economic Opportunity Act. Mrs. GREEN. Let me go to a few specifics if I might. As an educator, I presume you approve of the higher professional requirements that we are making in the schools? Dr. FLEMMING. There is no question about that. Mrs. GREEN. In Oregon, I think, we have now a requirement for a fifth year beyond college graduation. Dr. FLEMMING. That is right. Mrs. GREEN. Would you think that this professional training for the elementary teachers and the first-grade teachers is as important for any high school teacher? Dr. FLEMMING. Yes, I do. PAGENO="0411" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2871 Mrs. `GREEN. We had testimony yesterday or the day before on, for instance, a CAP agency in Oregon-the head teachers on the Head- start programs that are run by CAP there are high school dropouts. They gave these high school dropouts an intensive educational pro- gram that amounted to several months and gave them the equivalency *of a high school diploma and then put them in charge with Headstart programs. How does this square with educators if you are going to really do an effective job with youngsters? Dr. FLEMMING. It seems to me the type of personnel you describe ~an be `used in connection with a program of this type, but I would certainly agree with you that that type of personnel should not be placed in charge. Mrs. GREEN. I have no quarrel with their being aids but this is run by CAP and it does not have direct channels up to the Office of Education. Does it make sense now that anybody can head Headstart programs, anybody that any CAP agency thinks ought to run it, and they have been paid the salaries that they want to out of 90-percent Federal ~funds? Let me give another example. From an educational standpoint in trying to help the disadvantaged youngsters, does it make any sense to have 20 youngsters in a Head- start program with one teacher and two aids for the day and a higher comparative salary for the teacher, while in the same schools you have the same children from the same socioeconomic level, who have the adjoining classroom and are run by a kindergarten teacher who has 30 youngsters' in the morning and 30 youngsters in the afternoon and no teachers' aids? If you were the principal or superintendent of that school, is that the kind of arrangement that you would think is desirable ill making good educational sense? Dr. FLEMMING. As a general proposition, the answer would be `~No," not knowing the situation in the particular school and `just what the principal is up against in terms of getting. resources to carry on his program and so on, I would not want to pass judgment on the judg- ment that he apparently has exercised in accepting that kind of a relationship. Mrs. GREEN. He did not exercise any judgment because the Head- start program, because of the setup, has no coordination. They are run by two different agencies, two different Departments. This, then, was out of his control. Dr. FLEMMING. It is at this point that it does seem to me that the standards, the regulations' of the Office of Economic Opportunity could be worked out in such a way as to bring about this coordination provided that in. the effort to bring it about, in effect, if an impasse develops, nothing will happen. This is the only problem. I can conceive of some situations .and I am sure out of your experience you would also see where there might just be a resistance to utilizing the Headstart approach that `would not have a real basis in fact, but I would certainly think that the regula- tions should provide that every reasonable effort should be made. to develop a coordination between the local school system, between~ the PAGENO="0412" 2872 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT A~NDMENTS OF 1967 high school principal and the Headstart program before it was actual- ly funded. Mrs. GREEN. Let me give you another example. Under the Ele~ mentary and Secondary Education Act we have preschool programs that are run by the school system. Followthrough will be run by a similar system in the Office of Education. As I understand your testimony, you have said, in effect, it is more ]mportant to have Headstart or Upward Bound or Headstart and the small busmess loans under one agency that is directing its war on poverty than it is to have Headstart and preschool under one agency that shares the same objective and the same goal. Dr. FLEMMING. As I see it, the Office of Education deals primarily,. of course, as it works out its programs, with the State departments of public instruction, with the public school systems, and I think it is a very good thing for the Office of Economic Opportunity to be in a position where it can inaugurate some programs that are directly related to the objectives of the Economic Opportunity Act without being dependent on those programs being accepted initially by the public school system. In other words, I think this is one way of innovating and getting some new ideas into the picture which, if they prove themselves, will be ultimately accepted by the public school system. I am confident of that. I know it is difficult whether you are talking about higher education or whether you are talking about elementary and secondary education to innovate, to get experimental programs underway, and sometimes it is a good thing for those programs to be set up outside of the system so that they can demonstrate their effec- tiveness in the hope that the system itself will then pick them up. Mrs. GREEN. You are not suggesting in the school systems them- selves that there are not 1,001 examples of innovations, just as many probably as we have in the war on poverty. I am thinking of the model school in Portland which started before the war on poverty. If we went across the United States we could find scores of individual schools, and State departments that have done very imaginative, very innovative things. I find it difficult to accept the theory that the Office of Economic Opportunity is the only agency capable of innovation. Dr. FLEMMING. I accept the fact that the educational system has certainly at times been innovative and experimental in its approach and you could find many illustrations of that. But I likewise think we could identify many illustrations of cases. where the public school system has resisted innovation and experi- mentation. My feeling is that the Office of Economic Opportunity is in a posi- tion where it can be of assistance to the system, taking the country as a whole by being willing to innovate, demonstrating the sound- ness of certain approaches in the hope then that they will be accepted.. Chairman PEu~ms. Mr. Gibbons? Mr. GmBoNs. I think Mrs. Green anticipated what I was going to ask and she beat me to the punch-she usually does-so I will not. take up any more time. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins. Mr. HAwxn~s. It so happens that I have a person in Washington today who represents a group of parents from my particular districL PAGENO="0413" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2873 She is concerned with the fact that this educational system to which Mrs. Green refers, perhaps with good reason, about highereducational standards is not doing the job in Los Angeles. I cannot help but be- lieve that our school system is just as good as any of the districts in Oregon, but we have a school district which although it is an ex- *cellent one from a middle class approach, is not doing the job in slum ghettos. This person who is in Washington now, Mrs. Wright, who made a trip at great expense, at a great sacrifice, is representing mothers who are protesting today to the Office of Education that the ordinary school district is resisting any change and that their children in these schools with these very high educational standards are not being taught, with the result that they are dropping out, they are losing interest. The schoolteachers with these higher educational standards are trying to get out of the slum ghettos. Each day when the bell rings at the end of the day they get into their automobiles and almost run over the children trying to get out of the district. They have an idea that the kids that come from culturally deprived homes cannot learn and regardless of what they say the youngsters are not being taught anything and they are not getting good jobs be- cause they are not getting the education. It seems to me we can talk about building up educational standards but what we are talking about is building up these standards for mid- dle class schools, not for the kids in the slum ghettos. I think it should be clearly understood while we are not opposed to the strengthening of the school system and certainly are hoping to build higher educa- tional standards, we also have to try to innovate some new ideas for some of these school districts including my own. They are not doing the job in the slum ghettos. If you want to relate this to some of the disorders, certainly I think there is the relationship. It is just one of the many causes. Parents are so frus- trated that they don't know want to do. This mother spoke to me last night. She said, "I have an 8-year-old child who is with me. This child is not reading as well as a 5-year-old child." She said she had to change the child to many schools. She said she is representing other parents who are trying to improve things in our district so their children will learn and get better jobs and so they won't participate in any kind of disorder. I think some of us should face this challenge and start talking about higher educational standards because children are not being taught in some of the school districts. Chairman PERKINS. Would you like to comment, Dr. Flemming? Dr. FLEMMING. Obviously, from the comment I made earlier, I am in agreement with this approach. I think this is one of the great things about bringing a new agency into being now and then. It can develop new ideas and put them into effect. Congressman Gibbons addressed a question to me during the course of my testimony. I ~aid I would be happy to respond to it at the conclusion of my testimony. If you would like, I would be happy to respond. PAGENO="0414" 2874 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Right at this point, remain in your seat. We are going to recess for 10 minutes. We will be right back and then- you can respond. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. Dr. Flemming, if you don't mind, I will ask you to refrain from answering the questiOn of Mr. Gibbons, who will be absent for about 15 minutes for a radio program, and then he wifi be back. Mr. HAWKINS. I have a question relating to the involvement of the poor in the programs and funding of projects submitted by the poor or by neighborhood groups. I think Mr. Gibbons correctly indicated there is nothing in the law that prohibits this, and certainly from my observation, Congress has intended this. The counties throughout the country that are organized in the national organization and the cities that are also organized nationally for educational assistance, have brought a great amount of pressure through these national organiza- tions on the administration, and on the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity, and on Congressmen and so forth, to tile extent that it appears: to me the present atmosphere is to cut back on the programs that may involve the poor. There is a strong indication that this is an endorsement of social revolution, and if you involve the poor and give them the latitude that you have suggested should be done, and the flexibility, that the poor will involve themselves in suCh activities as rent strikes, consumer edu- cation, and so forth. There is a strong temptation to limit the program and to really destroy the program because of the very things you are suggesting should be done and the concepts you suggest should be strengthened. I don't know what is the answer. How do we get ourselves out of the position on the one hand where we say we want to involve the poor, and the act does state that in very beautiful language, and yet every organized group, the public agencies as well as the feeling of public officials here in Congress, is that they don't want to see persons who are not, and I hate to use the word establishment, that is not really what I am saying, but public agencies organized as great national organizations. We have had applications submitted from my own area which I thought were good applications, a.nd they were submitted not by the school system or the county, but by the time these agencies got any information on it and the mayor of t.he city of Los Angeles, who is a good democrat, at least a democrat, calls up the President and puts pressure on the White House and the Office of Economic Opportunity. the next thing we know, the money is withdrawn or the money is not given. So I quite agree with your statement, and I am not disagreeing with you, but it seems to me we are somehow expressing these wonder- ful concepts but leaving the people here in these expressions at the mercy of the very groups that perhaps need it if we are going to get the votes to put the program through. I don't know what can be done about it. I certainly commend your presentatiOn and the National Council of Churches for taking what I think is a most excellent position, but I wonder how we rescue those who take this position and what do we do about this practical situation in which we find ourselves? PAGENO="0415" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2875 Dr. FLEMMING. Mr. Congressman, of course, this is the kind of problem that constantly confronts government. It is difficult to insure the fact that an idea that is developed at the grassroots, in this case by a group of the poor, gets a hearing on its merits before a final deci- sion is made. There isn't any doubt in my mind but that the groups that you refer to, the associations of local officials, State officials, and so on have a very real contribution to make because very often they can take a look at a proposal of this kind and say in its present form it won't work, and they can make a clear demonstration to the effect that it just won't work. But at the same time they could make positive suggestions that would make it possible for it to work. The line to which I referred and which kind of points up your question is on page 51 of H.R. 8311, line 1. It begins on page 50, sub- section (c): The director shall prescribe necessary rules or application for assistance under this section to assure every reasonable effort is made by each applicant to secure the views of local public officials and agencies in the community having a direct or substantial interest in the application. Now that makes good sense, of course. But then it says "and to resolve all issues of cooperation and possible duplication prior to its submission." Personally it seems to me that that kind of a requirement would almost assure the fact that what gets to the office of the Director for consideration will be the lowest common denominator and that this brandnew, fresh idea that might have a lot to be said for it might not even get before him. So my suggestion would be in line 1, on page 51, insert after the word "and" "and that every reasonable effort is made to resolve all issues of cooperation and possible duplication prior to its submission." It is altogether possible that those drafting the section had in mind carrying over these words on line 23, "every reasonable effort," to the latter part of the section, but it seems to me it would be wise to make very sure that is the intent by repeating the words on line 1, page 51. I certainly have no objection to a requirement that they get the views of local public officials and agencies in the community and that a requirement that they do everything they can to resolve the issues, but if they are unable to resolve the issues, it seems to me they ought to be able to move the application forward anyhow and this will give them and the local public officials and the agencies in the community their day in court at the Federal level. I am always fearful of a provision that in effect forces a compromise before there can be a submission because the compromise normally will be the lowest common denominator within the group rather than the new idea. Mr. HAWKINS. There is also implied in some of the composition to the continuation of the program a threat to take projects, such as Headstart, and to put such projects into the established agencies. I am aware in my own area of many Headstart programs that are oper- ated by church groups and some that are operated by just community groups. This, of course, appears to be something which is justified be- PAGENO="0416" 2876 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 cause the expression is made that these educational programs-you have to some extent answered this already, I think-need reenforeing. Would you agree that the programs that are not school programs, that are programs operated by community groups, are serving a worth- while purpose and should be continued, or would you agree they are altogether educational programs or are there some other factors in- volved other than just pure education? Dr. FLEMMING. My approach is they are an integral part of com- munity programs as conceived and developed by the Office of Economic Opportunity. I think this is reflected in the fact, as I understand it, in the full year's program, and I am not talking about the summer programs now, the operating agency distribution runs like this: Public schools are involved in 35 percent, church affiliated organizations in 10 percent. Community Action Agencies in 29 percent, and other private nonprofit agencies, 26 percent. To me, this has helped, and I suspect in a fair number of the situ- ations where they are being operated by church-affiliated organizations or by Community Action agencies or by other private nonprofit agencies, they found it difficult to persuade the public school that it should operate the program so they turned to one of these other agen- cies. This is what is possible under the Office of Economic Opportunity setup and to me this makes good sense. I certahily have no objection to giving the public schools the opportunity in a particular area of operating. but the public school situation in some communities is such that you would not have a chance in the world of persuading them to pickup something like this and operate it. So then if you keep this under the Office of Economic Opportunity, it is possible for the Community Action Agency to turn to a church- affiliated organization or to other private, nonprofit organizations to become involved. Oftentimes these organizations will demonstrate the soundness of the concept, the soundness of the approach, and ultimately it will be accepted as a part of the public school program. They will be glad to take it over. But in many, many cases you just cannot make progress by theorizing or getting into theoretical arguments. Somebody has to take hold of it and try it out. Sometimes the agency demonstrates it is a poor idea~ but other times they demonstrate it is a good idea, and then after it has been demonstrated it is a good idea, other people get on the bandwagon. This is the way we move forward in this country. Mr. QUIE. Dr. Flemming, when you make the comments about Headstart, you realize that the Opportunity Crusade does not propose that the administration of Headstart would be through the traditional method of State department of education school boards, but it would be involved locally. Dr. FLEM~r'wG. I think it is wise to think in those terms. Actually the comments I have been making have grown out of the questions that were addressed to me by Mrs. Green relative to the desirability of keeping this within the public school system. As I indicated to her and as I indicated later, I have no objection to the public school system being involved, but if the public school system is willing to be involved, then I think we ought to give the PAGENO="0417" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2877 community a chance to try out something of this kind through one of these other devices. Mr. Qun~. In the administration's proposal. Followthrough will be delegated to the U.S. Office of Education who will begin with the local public school system as different from the opportunity crusade. How do you look on this feature of the administration proposal? Dr. FLEMMING. I noted that, and I think this makes good sense at this point because of the fact that they are now talking about children who have become a part of the public school system. That is, they have gone through the Headstart program and now, having gone through the Headstart program, they have become a part of the public school system. This is a program, a proposal to kind of stay with them and be of help to them as they get underway in the public school system. I think this aspect of it makes good sense. As we all know, the preschool picture in this country is very spotty. It is very spotty even if you are thinking about kindergarten. It varies from one community to another community and from State to State. As I read the provision on Followthrough, it says once they become a part of the public school system, then certain help will be available under certain conditions. Mr. QUIB. The preschool program, of course, has the same purpose as Followthrough; that is to upgrade them so they will be able to as- similate the educational program whether it is public or private school. Don't you think that in the administration's program there should be some agency which has the continuity of interest and developments of this program? Dr. FLEMMING. This is a very basic, fundamental question. My feel- ing is that at the present time after two and a half years of operation, that it is better to keep these Headstart programs related to basically the community aution programs and to think of them as an integral part of community action programs. I am certainly in agreement that every effort should be made by the administrator working with the Secretary of HEW to take full ad- vantage of the expertise and know-how of the Office of Education and other educators in developing their regulations and so on, but I still feel that it would be much better to keep it as a part of community action program because I think there will be more Headstart programs in effect than would be the case-than if you tried to work down through the regular system. Preschool responsibilities in the~ Office of Education are all to the good and to the extent communities and States are willing to take ad- vantage of it, fine, but I am very conscious of the fact, as Tam sure you are, that there are certain situations in certain communities and there are probably situations in~ certain States where the State is somewhat reluctant to take advantage of it, and then situations where the local community or the school board and those who are a part of the system in the local community are reluctant. Your Office of Economic Opportunity approach gives that coin- munity a chance to get a Headstart program underway and, hope- fully, having gotten it underway, then the school system will say it is good and they will pick it up and make it a part of their program. I think this is the kind of a program that, hopefully, you would work out of business over a period of time in that the concept would 80-084--67-pt. 4-27 PAGENO="0418" 2878 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 finally be accepted by your public school system and be made a part of the public school system. Mr. QUIE. On that part, evidently it took a while for the Congress to accept this concept as well because before the war on poverty and the Opportunity Act were enacted, I tried to get amendments through * which would set broad public policy where the Congress would put money aside particularly for preschool programs, not just starting with kindergarten, but with children 3 years of age. It is interesting that, as yet., the Congress has not. written the policy for preschool education. It has given OEO authority. I think it is good they have at least embarked oil the program that has great support locally. The first year they proposed 100,000 people for the summer pro- gram and they found over 500,000 really wanted to get into it, and more after that became interested in it, but evidently they put a freeze on the amount of money available for that kind of program. But I still have concern when people feel as you seem to, Dr. Flemming, that if the Office of Education administered the Head- start. program then it could not be administered through community action agencies. Yet you and I are in agreement on the innovative fea- ture of community action agencies and involvement with the poor, but what we seem to have a disagreement on is that only OEO can deal through community action agencies. Dr. FLEMMING. I recognize Congress could make it possible for any department and certainly HEW to deal with the community in essen- tially the same wa.y as the Office of Economic Opportunity, as they now have of dealing with the community. I recognize this to be the. case. This brings me back to my basic question on the organizational issue. In other words, I have the feeling as I reflected in my opening state- ment that at this juncture, 2˝ years after Congress first passed the Economic Opportunity Act, it is better to keep the programs in the Office of Economic Opportunity rather than transferring them to an established agency. I do not know whether you were here or not when I indicated I recognized that you could make provision for putting most of the programs, for example, under an assistant secretary. In fact, I think your bill does make provision for that, particularly the community action aspect. But my feeling is, within the executive branch an Assistant Secretary in HEW at this particular point could not be as effective in moving this program forward and maintaining the momentum that now exists as the head of an independent agency such as the Office of Economic Opportunity. I noted your comment about the liabilities that may: attach to the head of an independent agency within the structure of the executive branch. But I pointed out that the independent agency head can do the kind of a job that we envisage if the President makes clear that the head of the independent agency is his representative in this partic- ular area. I referred to my own experience as Director of Defense Mobiliza- tion where I was the head of an independent agency, but President Eisenhower made it. very clear from the outset that I was functioning PAGENO="0419" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2879 as his representative in dealing with the~ Cabinet departments that were related to defense mobilization. As a result, I found that as the head of an independent agency I could work with and deal with th~ heads of the Cabinet departments. I recognize that I had the added advantage of that independent agency being set up within the Executive Office of the President and I suggested that the Congress might want to think about that possi- bility as far as the war against poverty is concerned because essentially the person in the position of administrator of the Office of Economic Opportunity is being asked to serve as a representative of the Presi- dent in marshaling the resources of Government for the purpose of carrying on this very special and this very important effort. So I would see no conflict between putting the head of this program in the Executive Office of the President just as what was then the head of Defense Mobilization was in the Executive Office. It is now called the Office of Emergency Planning. I may say I personally feel the head of an agency with everyone knowing he is the representative of the President is in a better position to move a program of this kind forward than would be the kind of a council envisaged in your bill. I personally have the feeling that the Council of Economic Advisers should consider this as a part of their overall responsibility. I think the Council of Economics has come to the place where it does serve a very useful purpose in providing staff and assistance to the President and the Congress. But in this par- ticular instance in providing coordination that will move a program forward, I think the head of an independent agency is in a better position. I appreciate this is a matter of judgment. Mr. QTJIE. You recognize, and I reached that conclusion, too, in watching this program operate, that the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity does not have that kind of responsibility given him by the Chief Executive that he would have if it were placed in the Office of the President. Dr. FLEMMING. I am not in a position to comment on just how the operation is carrying forward at the preesnt time and just what the heads of Cabinet departments understand the relationship between the head of the agency and the President, assuming this is the rela- tionship, assuming this is the objective, I think the objective would be underlined very definitely if he should be put in the Executive Office of the President. Mr. QUIE. It seems to me there are two ways we could go. First, place the agency with the innovative force under a Secretary so it did have Cabinet-level status or else place it in the Office of the President so it would be over the Cabinet-level officers and be able to coordinate between them. I recognize the shortcomings of both of them and this was my recommendation and a number of others to transfer it to HEW be- cause this Department dealt with more of the programs and worked with the people in poverty than any other department of Government. However, I have said a number of times that if the Congress chooses not to take that route, then it ought to look very seriously at upgrad- ing the agency so it would be on an equal or higher basis. Dr.. FLEMMING. I think it is very difficult for one Cabinet officer to coordinate other Cabinet officers. This, I learned from experience. PAGENO="0420" 2880 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Quii~. What about a subagency? Dr. FLEMMING. Unless it is made clear the head of the agency is the President's representative in a particular area, then when he talks with and works with the heads of Cabinet departments, he is working with them as a representative of the President. This makes all of the difference in the world. I would like to say that I am not saying this puts him in a position where, as you express it, he is over them. It puts him in the position where when he talks withthe Cabinet officers, they know he is talking as the. representative of the President. There is a difference there that may be fairly slight, but I think it is very important. In fact, when I first went in as Director of Defense Mobilization, one of the Cabinet departments looked with a great deal of skepticism at certain authority which has been delegated to the Director by the President. I invited that Cabinet officer and some of: his staff over to have lunch with us, and we discussed some of the regulations we intended to issue. The di~cussion went on for quite a while and the Cabinet officer then said, "Look, when my father was Secretary of War in the Coolidge administration, if he wanted to see the President any time, all he had to do was to walk across the street"-this was in the Executive Office Building-"all he had to do was walk aQross the street and walk into the President's office and talk with him." He~ said, "Those days are gone forever," and all President Eisen- hower is saying in this area is, "Here is an area where I would like to spend a good deal of time"-and certainly Pfesident Eisenhower would-"but I do not have the time to spend, so I am asking someone else to work in this area on my behalf." This Cabinet officer said, "If we think the Director of Defense Mobilization is off the beam at any time in representing the President, we wouldn't hesitate to bring it up at a Cabinet meeting or discuss it with the President, but, if we do, that is the way we should relate to that. office," and this is the spirit that prevailed with respect to the relationship of the office. I think you can create the same type of atmosphere in this area. My trouble in going to an established agency, the Secretary has trouble coordinating with other Secretaries, but because of the sweep of his responsibilities, Secretary Gardner would have to have an As- sistant Secretary to work in this area, and it would be the Assistant Secretary who would be giving it full time and attention in contrast to the. independent agency closely related to the President and the head of that agency is giving his full time, thought, and attention, and I think he would have a little better chance of accomplishing what we all want to accomplish than would an Assistant Secretary in HEW. Mr. Qmr~. Provided he were upgraded to that level, and I don't see that Sargent Shriver has that full authority now. Chairman PERKINS. Let me interrupt to st.ate at this point, I asked Dr. Flemming to refrain from answering Mr. Gibbons' question until he returned. I t.hink we shall have to answer the quorum now and then we can return, and you can ask all of the questions that you want. Mr. GmBONS. As I recall, we tried to give Mr. Shriver this power and some people on your side objected to him being a czar. I recognize this problem of a man trying to handle a very large job without power, in other words, having plenty of responsibility with very little authority. PAGENO="0421" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2881 Mr. Flemming, I am not attempting to put you on the spot, and I realize you would not be speaking from any information that yOU could gather from investigation of specific instances, but the innuendo has been made that the whole idea of the Poverty Act and the way it has been carried out has been a contributing influence to the social unrest we have been having in this country now. I ask you this ques- tion because I know you have great experience in the whole field of human activity. I would like to have your thoughts and views in this area. Dr. FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, let me say, first of all, I do not believe that a positive effort to deal with a problem in a constructive manner ever leads to a situation that would bring about the kind of a crisis that confronts our country at the present time. I would like to go on and say this: There isn't any question in my mind or in the mind of anyone else, it is absolutely essential for us to maintain law and order in this country, and any program that is de- signed to undermine the concept of law and order, I mean any efforts that are made to undermine the concept of law and order should be dealt with in a vigorous and effective manner. But I also believe that this is a crisis. I am just as depressed a~s every- one else to read about what is going on, to watch television, listen to the radio, and so on. I believe that this is no time for recriminations. I believe that it is no time for trying to fix blame by indulging in sweeping generaliza- tions. Personally I feel we all share the blame for the sins of omission particularly that have brought us to the events of this week. I have noted the various suggestions that have been made relative to investigating the underlying causes with the idea of coming up with positive recommendations designed to make it possible for all segments of society to deal with this in a more effective manner. I personally, and this obviously is a personal suggestion, would like to suggest that the Congress give consideration to the establishment of a bipartisan commission to investigate the events of the past few weeks and to make recommendations for dealing with these basic problems and that this commission be constituted in the same manner as the two Hoover commissions; namely, that the Speaker of the House would appoint a Democrat and a Republican from the membership of the House and a Democrat and a Republican from outside Government; the Vice President would appoint a Republican and Democrat from the membership of the Senate and a Democrat and Republican from outside the Senate; and the President would appoint a Democrat and a Republican from within the executive branch and a Democrat and a Republicanfrom without the administration. I would suggest in this instance the law would provide one of the persons appointed by the Speaker, the Vice President, and the Presi- dent, one of those three appointing officers from outside the Federal Government should be associated with State or local government. So this would give you a commission made up of six persons from within the Government, two from the House of Representatives, two from the Senate, two from the executive branch; and it would give you a commission of six persons from outside of the Government, but three of those six would be related to State or local government, and it would provide you, obviously, with six Democrats and six Republicans. PAGENO="0422" 2882 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I served on both of the Hoover commissions, and I found that a commission constituted in that way was in a position to render a fine service. Right now I am serving as Chairman of another commission that this body set up to look into the Hatch Act, constituted in the same way, and I likewise think this is constructive. Mr. GIBBoNs. We hate to keep interrupting you, Doctor, but some- body is harassing us over on the floor with quorum calls, and we will have to get over there to answer those. Chairman PERKINS. We will recess for 10 minutes, and then we will return to permit further questioning. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. Mr. GIBBONS. If this committee decided to collect information as to whether or not any poverty employee were engaged in activities precipitating riots-I want to ask you not about that because I realize that is only what a factual investigation will determine, but I want to ask you about the philosophy of this program and the philosophy and the facets of it to get your view on it. Let's talk about maximum feasible participation of the poor. Is this something that in your opinion would incite riotous conditions or would it be amelioratory Dr. FLEMMING. It would be just the opposite in my opinion because it enables these people to develop a sense of participation in dealing with some of the issues that are very real to them. In other words, they don't. have to sit on t.he sidelines as spectators and complain but they are given an opporunity to partic.ipate in working out solutions to the problems. I know of nothing that can lead to more constructive results than that kind of approach in any area of life. Mr. QrnE. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. GIBBoNs. I yield. Mr. QUIE. This is what has bothered me. Detroit probably has the worst reputation for the nnmber of people participating in riots and the. number of people killed,yet I always thought Detroit. had a good community action program. I went there early in the program and made an investigation and before the poor were involved, and they did select. their representatives. What gets thrown up to me all the time is my strong advocacy of pa.rt.icipt.at.ion by the poor. I am asked is this the participation of the poor? What would your answer be? Dr. FLEMMING. It seems to me very important t.hat an impartial in- vestigation be made of that sit.uation so thaą before people arrive at conclusions or state conclusions t.hey have an opportunity of weighing the relevant evidence. I think it would be very, very unfortunate if without relevant evi- dence people jumped to the conclusion that the opportunities provided in an area like Detroit for development had not made a significant con- tribution to the life of that city in spite of what has happened during the past few days. I just feel it is very important for the Congress of the united States to make sure that impartial effort is made t.o assemble the evidence on the basis on which reasOnable people can arrive at a conclusion. Certainly you could very well explore the 4uestion even though we have traveled a considerable distance ift an area like Detroit we have nOt traveled far enough as a society along the road you have been advocating and `certainly I join with you in advocating. PAGENO="0423" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2883 Right at this point, Mr. Chairman, if I might, I made a suggestion for the establishment of a commission to be established along the lines of the Hoover Commission. I would like to say this: I think if such a commission were established by the Congress, the law should make it very clear that the commission was under responsibility to keep reporting periodically to the Congress on its evaluation of evidence and on the recommendations that it felt would be of help. I know one of the worst things to happen in Government is to set up a study commission and then anytime anybody has a proposal they are told to put it on the table until the study commission reports. This is one of the surest ways in the world of slowing down the processes of Government rather than accelerating those processes. So I think it would be very important for any group that is set up, whether it is set up along these lines or any other lines to be under mandate to keep reporting back and not wait until it has worked out a well-rounded report. Chairman PERKINS. I want to interrupt you to compliment you on that approach. I think Congress would be derelict in its responsibilities if we failed to take a bipartisan `approach along the lines you are suggesting. Mr. QUIE. Dr. Flemming, do you think it is important that we con- duct a part of the studies and have some answers to the involvement of people who were on the poverty staffs and the relationship. these people had with the rioting or attempting to quell it? If they were involved, we ought to know that so the facts would be before us when the bill reaches us on the floor for debate rather than letting conjecture be made at that time without any basis of fa~t. Do you not feel, also if that were the case, `that the whole concept of involvement of the poor in~ community action would be sorely in danger in the future? Dr. FLEMMING. Congressman Quie, I noticed in the newspapers this morning that the comi~nittee authorized and directed its staff to make this kind of in~ estig'ition I think this is very wise Otherwise, you are going to be confronted with a lot of generalizations that are not bised on f'ict My hope would be that the committee is in a position w heie tius could be doiie ~ ery quickly bec'tuse I `ilso think we `ire at `i point w here it is very impoit'tnt for the Congress to `ict promptly in connection with the Economic Oppoitumty Act I think there is th'it side of it, too As f'n `is I c'in see, there is `tgreement `ind what dis'igreement there is rel'ttes to orgamz'ition'tl m'itters, `tud so on I think it is veiy i ery import'tnt to get `icross to the country the fact that the Congress is not go1ng to go on de'td center in its consideration of this m'tttei, th'it it is going to move r'tpidly but I don't see a con flict betw een the tw o I think it should be possible to develop the factual information in an impartial, btpartisan matter very quickly so that, as you say, when this gets on the floor Members are not going to be influenced by generaliz'itions that have no basis in fact but w ill be influenced by the f'tctual situ'ttion `is it is presented I think if the country got the idea that because of what has hap-. pened we are going to slow downa program in this particular area, this ~aou1d be terribly unfortunate So I would hope the two things could go on simultaneously. ` ` PAGENO="0424" 2884 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. You recognize there is a danger? Dr. FLEMMING. I certainly do. I wonder if I could suggest at this particular point in my judgment the staff might be helped by making contact with appropriate church leaders in these communities, par- ticularly church leaders who have been staying close to this whole economic opportunity program. They might be able to give them help~ ful, factual information. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. GIBBONS. I would be glad to yield to Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. I apologize for not having been here when you first presented your testimony. For the record I would like it to be said that the witness before us today, Dr. Flemming, is not only a citizen of Oregon but is a citizen of my district. I count him as one~ of my leading constituents, one for whom I have great respect. He, of course, is well known to many of us from his background as the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. In our particular area he is known as the president of what we think is one of the leading universities of the Far West, and we think one of the leading universities of the Nation, the University of Oregon. It is a real pleasure to have you here, Dr. Flemming. May I ask you a question along the lines Mr. Gibbons was asking. Forgetting the specific bills at the moment, against this picture of urgency that you testified to, are there major things that you think the events of the last week or two say to us about major changes that we ought to be making in connection with this war on poverty? It is imperative that we act swiftly, you say, but we don't want to act blindly and we don't want to act in a way that will perpetuate weak- nesses and fail to remedy weaknesses. Are there any specific suggestions that you make to us as to significant changes in the approach that we have been adopting so far? Dr. FLEMMING. Thank you, Congressman Dellenback. My feeling is the events of the past few days undermine the im- portance of our making sure that we can capitalize to the maximum possible degree on the experiences that we have had during the past two and a half years. You have listened to a good deal of testimony from administrators who have been in the middle of this operation,. and I am sure they have identified both strengths and weaknesses in the program and those are strengths and weaknesses that you are now in the process of evaluating. I might say that I would respect very very highly the testimony of those who have been on the firing line. I do think the events of the past few days really make it all the more important for this agency that the Congress set up two and a half years ago to be given a green light in terms of moving forward with its existing programs, what- ever the changes the Congress in its judgment thinks should be made after listening to all of the evidence. I also think it is very important to receive from those who have been on the firing line, which you probably have already, their recom- mendations as to additional steps that might be taken growing out of their experience. I personally do not think that it is wise for a person in my position who has not been in the middle of it to just simply come out with' a new program or a new approach to the program. I have had the PAGENO="0425" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2885 opportunity, as you know, of watching the existing progiams rather carefully and I feel that the existing programs are headed in the right direction. There isn't any doubt in my mind that changes can be made which will improve them. We all learn by experience, but I think they have been imaginative and creative programs and that they have met a very real need. You can, of course, take any one of them and recognize that with additional resources they could go further in the contributions they are making. I think Upward Bound is making a very significant con- tribution, for example. We can cite chapter and verse of the contribu- tions it has made. I have been Chairman of the Advisory Committee for Upward Bound and I know this year the Office of Economic Opportunity turned down about 100 applications from good, solid organizations in this country that are willing to become involved. That is why I called attention in my general testimony to a resolu- tion of the general board where they felt the `Congress should au- thorize at least $2,100 million. Might I say that I have always had the feeling that the legislative committee that deals with the authorization of funds for a program of this kind is justified in keeping its sights higher than maybe the Appropriations Committee will be able to go when they finally look at the total picture. I would think that it might be well to take a look at these various programs and how they fit into an authorization of $2,100 million to see whether or not conceivably there should be a larger authorization because I suspect that the Appropriations Committee might be in- dined under present conditions and circumstances to maybe give these ~a little higher priority in relation to some other things in the budget than might have been the case a few weeks ago. Mr. GIBBONS. I appreciate the gentleman saying that. I did some rough calculations from a statistical point of view as to what it would take if we knew the formula, if we had the people and we could suddenly apply the economic impact to move every family in the United States from poverty to the area above poverty, maybe just 50 cents or a dollar a year above poverty and it would take $12 billion to do it and we have never spent in this program more than $li/2 billion so we are really just scratching the surface. If there is one legitimate criticism I note of this program it is that our promises have been too high and our backbone has been too weak to do the job. Perhaps you would like to observe a little more on that. Dr. FLEMMING. I think I have expressed my conviction on it. I do agree with you as we deal with areas of this kind we have to be. very careful about not raising hopes too high and then being unwilling to make it possible for people to realize these hopes. This is a real prob- lem in all human endeavors at all times and I think Upward Bound ~would be a good illustration. Mr. GIBBONS. If I may summarize your statistical view, you believe ~we are soundly launched but you believe we are underfinanced, and you believe we should not split the program into existing agencies. You also make the suggestion of a Hoover commission type agency. I agree I think you have made a great contribution. You have important and concise statements and your testimony has been excel- lent, and these have been the points that stick in my mind. PAGENO="0426" 2886 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. Qm~. Apparently both of us believe strongly in the involve- ment of the poor and the concept of community action. The Office of Economic Opportunity only administers about $1.6 billion and hopes to get now about $2 billion to administer. However, $30 billion, give or take some, is being administered by the Federal Government for people in poverty and other agencies and departments. Do you be- lieve that the community action concept ought to spread to other pro- grams like housing for the poor, health programs for the poor, and other education programs for the poor? Dr. FLEMMING. Congressman Quie, I certainly do, and I would hope that the kind of experiences that we are having with the Economic Opportunity Act would demonstrate the soundness and the necessity of this kind of an approach and that this would lead to the amendment of some of the existing laws to make provision for this approach. I agree with you wholeheartedly on that. Mr. QUIE. Then, at least. the purpose that. motivates those of us who have introduced the Opportunity Crusade. is agreed upon by you-but not the method by which we are trying to do it-but in the purposes we are trying to achieve in taking those steps toward that direction. Dr. FLEM~nNG. I have read both bills. I go back to the statement. I made earlier. It seems to me there is agreement on objectives, on a good many of the basic objectives. I think this is a great thing for t.he country but the disagreement obviously comes on organizational mat.- ters and also on methods. I don't think that I would agree with your approach on the level of the effort. I recognize that you feel that if the kind of approach you have outlined were taken that you could bring some State money into the picture that in turn would have the effect possibly of moving it from $2.1 billion to $2.4 billion. Mr. QUIR. Private enterprise money, too? Dr. FLEMMING. Yes, and private enterprise money, too. My own feeling is that as far as the Federal Government's involve- ment is concerned and the position taken by the national board is sound that it should be at least $2.1 billion and I would hope the Con- gress would take a look at that figure as an authorization figure. I do believe that by the approach that the Office of Economic Op- portunity has taken and the approach envisaged in the act, I gather you had the same thing in mind. We can't to those resources by stimu- lating involvement on the part of State and local government and on the part of private enterprise and on the part of the great volunter organizations of this country. This is one of our great resources, a.s I see it, including the churches as well as other private organizations. But, to the extent that you and your colleagues desire to stimulate, strengthen, and improve the community action approach I am in com- plete agreement. I feel you could do this better over the period of the next 2 to 3 years, let's say, by staying with your existing organizational structure instead of trying to break it up. My own rule of thumb would be that we ought to stay basically with the approach that the Congress decided on in 1964 for 5 years and then evaluate and see whether you want to keep everything there or whether von want to transfer some things, and so on. But I think it is almost impossible to make a truly effective evaluation short of that time in terms of its longrun impact. PAGENO="0427" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2887 Mr. QUIB. Do you agree the Congress was wise to transfer the work- study out of OEO to higher education, the transference of basic adult education away from OEO to SBA? Dr. FLEMMING. This is a good question to address to a university administrator in this instance. You know we all like to have things put together in neat packages. I suppose those of us in the university world like to be in the position where we can turn to one agency in con- nection with all matters of financial aid. Frankly, I would rather have had it stay in OEO because again you might keep it more closely tied into the community action program than when you get it over and make it a part of the total package. At the university, we have to think of it as a total package, it is true, and we should. When we are dealing with the individual student we think of everything that is available to him, but I would rather have seen that stay with the Office of Economic Opportunity. I think in terms of the objectives of the Economic Opportunity Act you would get a better contribution from OEO than getting it tied in with all of the other financial aid programs. Mr. QUIE. Then do you believe it was wise when OEO themselves delegated NYC to the Department of Labor, and rural loans to Agri- culture and Nelson-Scheuer was delegated to the U.S. Office of Edu- cation? Dr. FLEMMING. Not having had the opportunity of weighing all of the pros and cons that the Administrator of OEO made before he made that delegation, I don't think I would want to pass judgment on each delegation. I recognize that there is the other side of this, and that is that you want to utilize in your war against poverty to the fullest pos- sible extent the resources that exist in the departments and agencies of the Government. It is possible that there are resources in given de- partments which if they are used effectively and under the direction of OEO can produce a good result. The in'iportant thing here is that this was delegated, if I under- stand the situation correctly, by OEO. My philosophy of administra- tion always was and always has been that, as an administrator, I can delegate authority to act to others but I cannot divest myself of re- sponsibility for what is done when I delegate. So it seems to me that the Administrator of OEO is still responsible for those programs and if they do not go well, he cannot come back to the Congress and say that. is not my responsibility but it is somebody else's because they don't go well. Then he has to accept the fact that he made the wrong kind of delegation of authority to act. Mr. GIBBONS. None of these delegations is permanent. They do not have the inflexibility of law. Dr. FLEMMING. As an administrator I caii delegate some authority to act to one of my deans. If he does not handle the matter in the way I think it should be handled I can withdraw that delegation at. any time and I am responsible for what he does. If he is a success I can accept responsibility for the fact that he was. If he was a failure, I have to accept responsibility for that. Mr. QUIE. What if the political situation were such in your uni- versity that the dean asked for a program and you had no other choice but to give it to him? PAGENO="0428" 2888 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. FLEMMING. I imagine that kind of a situation could develop within a university just as it does in Government but I would stop and think a lot before I decided I had no other alternative if the re- sponsibility had been given to me. Mr. GIBBONS. Let's talk real frankly about this. The whole problem is we do not have the political support. for this program. That is our fundamental problem and we have had it all along since 1964. 1 wish, Dr. Flemming, that I shared your optimism about getting these pro- grams into operation and I share your enthusiasm for wanting to work them out, but let's lay the cards on the table so we can get it all in the record. I figure we have between 166 and 169 votes to keep OEO together and that Mr. Quie and the Opportunity Crusade have considerably less than tiiat, but neither one of us has control of the situation and I think we are in serious trouble. I think that the coun- try has to understand that and the administrators and the Members of Congress have to understand that. I do not see a whole lot of ways we can compromise with the Opportunity Crusade and send it all around the country and come out with the position that we can get a bill passed. We are here at 3 minutes of 1 on this day and we are at that situa- tion. Obviously we have to do something. You say speed is of the es- sence, but I want to lay the cards on the table. Dr. FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, I would certainly hope out of the hearings and out of the discussions that will take place in the commit- tee there might emerge a bill which said to the country in no uncertain terms Congress means business in this war against poverty; that we are disturbed and alarmed at the developments which have been tak- ing place during the past few weeks, and that we are going to ap- proach it with a kind of unity that characterized the Congress, for example, when I worked with it as a member of the Civil Service Commission when we became involved in World War II. I think the objective set forth in the Opportunity Act is a tre- mendously important objective for this Nation to achieve not in the next generation but in our generation. I said earlier I would hope there could be agreement which made it very clear that the Office of Economic Opportunity as the general headquarters for this whole operation has been given a green light, and even though people may differ with some of the things they have done in the past and even though people may have ideas as to the way in which it can be improved, nevertheless, they are going to make it possible for it to represent this Nation at this very critical point. Somehow or other as I listen to the discussion and listen to the ques- tions-well, let me put it this way. I would hope that it is not an im- possible objective that I have identified. Somehow or other I feel it is an objective that could be achieved. Mr. GIBBONS. The reason I have been so brutally frank about this is I agree with what you say but I do not think we have realistically faced this situation and every hour and every day we face grave situa- tions in this country, and things are not going well right now. Chairman P~xJNs. Mr. Quie. Mr. QmE. I share the views of Dr. Flemmning and my colleague from Florida. I guess this committee is going to determine whether we can operate in the kind of good faith) partisan politics being what PAGENO="0429" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AOP AM~N~ENTS OP 1967 2889 it is, to devise a program that can be supported on the floor of the House. Now, it is easy for me to lay blame on Democrats for the past ac- tion but, frankly, I admit there is a great deal of responsibility that the Republicans have now that they have added strength on their side. We shall find out how we shape up and this will be the test of it. I am concerned there is a strong possibility that this Congress will devise this program in such a way that the people who are involved in these programs will have no more voice than they had before, and then this ingenious feature, as controversial as it has been with the involvement of these people, might be lost. I can see that happening so clearly-more riots will be going on and the tendency that occurred in the last Congress will occur again this time. I would at least like to draw this out that we make up our minds as we move along and evolve and that we take a wise course because I am convinced as diffi- cult as these people are in poverty to work with, they must play a roie in their own betterment; otherwise we are not going to solve this problem at all. Dr. FLEMMING. I am in complete agreement there. I do not believe you were here when I called attention to some language in H.R. 8311 which it seems to me could be cleared up in an effort to underline the concept that you are underlining. You see, it is easy for a new agency to become an old agency very soon. This is possible also. It seems to me it is important for the Con- gress to make it clear to the agency that is charged with the responsi- bility for the administration of the act that the Congress does expect the involvement of the poor. I have made the point it is so easy for a good idea to be developed down at the community level by the poor but then to say before that idea can be looked at it has to be checked by this group and that group and another group and then even go to the point of saying unless all of the parties agree it is not going to be financed and so on, you have killed what might be a very exciting and significant idea. All you have is the lowest common denominator from that particular group. I think the Congress in the drafting of this bill ought to make abun- dantly clear the kind of conviction that you have stated so that the administrator is backed by that very kind of strong statement so we can resist more effectively some of these other pressures. The language that I referred to, just to point this out, and I will conclude, is on page 50, section 221 (c). In the draft it says- The Director shall prescribe necessary rules and regulations governing ap- plication for assistance under this section to assure that every reasonable effort is made by each applicant to secure the views of local public officials and agencies in the community having a direct or substantial interest in the application. Then it goes on to say- And to resolve all issues of cooperation and possible duplication prior to its submission. If that is interpreted literally that will kill some good ideas. I sug- gested that the language be inserted there, "and that every reasonable effort has been made to resolve all issues of cooperation." In other words, sure they should have the responsibility for trying to resolve it but if they can't resolve it the application ought to move forward PAGENO="0430" 2890 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196.7 so it can be acted on. Other than that we are going to get the dead hand of compromise killing off some excellent ideas. I agree with you completely. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Gurney ~ Mr. Gnu~n~r. No questions. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you, Mr. Flemming, for such an outstanding statement today. I have been laboring under the impression all day long, when we wrote the original act in 1964, that we set it up as an independent agency but as an executive arm of the Government just like the Office of Defense Mobilization was set up. Maybe my memory is not accu- rate on that very idea, but I do think we put the blame in an act which directed all of the departments of Government to cooperate with the Director of the Office. of Economic Opportunity and it has been con- sidered as an executive arm. I am convinced that you are exactly right in the observations you have made here today. Since we have gone into this, there is one point, and I feel there is complete coopera- tion on the part of the minority and the majority. You referred to the fact that the full committee took action yesterday in connection with full investigation. The resolution that was passed directed that the facts be gathered by the staff pro and con. At the direction of the committee, I am already working with the minority and we are in complete accord as to the means and methods to be used to bring about the facts. But if we undertake to go through- out the Nation, we will delay the enactment of this bill a long time and for that reason I would like to get from you-of course, the New Jersey problem is what brought the problem before the committee, and Detroit-could you give us a little more guidance, if I may use that terminology. I consider you one of the great administrators in this country, and I would ask you to what extent should we go before we bring this bill to the floor. I agree wholeheartedly we should approach it along the lines you have suggested and follow the pattern of the Hoover Com- mission, completely bipartisan so the people of this country will know just what is taking place and have confidence in any report and feed this information back to the Congress as rapidly as possible. But that will be another course of action. But directing your answer to the action this committee should take, what would be your suggestion? Dr. FLEMMING. Mr. Chairman, in view of the urgency that is involved from a time point of view, I think if I had the responsibility for such an investigation I would say we will investigate specific docu- mented allegations. In other words, I note as I read the papers that people are indulging in generalizations and I doubt if in many in- stances there are specifics they could point back to those generaliza- tions more than an emotional reaction of facts and it seems to me this would be a situation where the committee would be thoroughly justi- fied in saying where there are specific allegations that somebody is willing to put into writing relative to the involvement of Economic Opportunity personnel we will take a look at those. Obviously the committee would have the assistance of the total resources of the Gov- ernment in taking a look at specific allegations. If those resources were marshaled quickly and I would feel confident the President of the United States would be willing to- PAGENO="0431" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2891 Chairman PERKINS. Furthermore, if any party agreed to play poli- tics with this matter then you would feel you should place a time limit. Dr. FLEMMING. Absolutely right. Mr. Chairman, I feel very keenly that it should be possible for the consideration of this bill, the moving forward of this bill and the kind of investigation of the specifics that we have been talking about to move forward simultaneously, and I think there it could be helpful in the consideration of the bill. I agree unless allegations are run down and the facts provided somecne on the floor of, the House, for example, could influence votes by indulging in generalizations whereas if you had the~ facts the generalizations would not hold up, so I would urge that both be done but certainly done simultaneously. I think again if the country got the impression because of the events of the past few days this kind of legislation. was going to get put on the shelf temporarily, this could really be frustrating. This could really lead to a feeling of desiiair on the part of people~ Whereas, on the other hand, if the committee and the Congress make it clear that they are going to rise to the challenge of the situa- tion by accelerating and expediting consideration of this bill, and maybe even raising sights. in connection with it, it could have just the opposite effect on the country. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you there is a psychological effect here that could be devastating. Let me again thank you Dr. FLEMMING. I appreciate the opportunity to testify and I am always happy to come back for a visit. (The policy statement and resolution previously mentioned follow:) Tnu CHURCH AND THE ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAM (Statement Adopted by the General Board of the NatiOnal Council of the Churches of Christ in the U.S.A., December 3, 1966) The Church has a clear .and compelling, mandate, rooted in the scriptures of Old and New Testaments, to war against the evils,, the suffOrings and the human misery associated with. involuntary poverty. The response of the Church to this mandate has been ambivalent. On the one hand, the Church has sought to alleviate the worst rigors of poverty through the practice of charity, and frequently, although less con- sistently, it has involved itself in the struggles. for justice and economic reform. On the other hand selfishness callousness and indifference to the sufferings of others-sins which are prevalent in the Church as well as in the rest of the world-have persistently diluted the efforts of the Church to do effective battle against poverty. Through the centuries, moreover, the Church's attitude toward poverty has been conditioned by the fact that total elimination of this evil was impossible because of the primitive status of human technology and the scarcity of developed resources. In this situation, most Christians have been unwilling to extend their works of justice and charity to the point of threatening their own security. The Church, therefore, should be among the first to hail two new factors in our time which give promise of eliminating, poverty from. the United. States and eventually from the earth. One is the technological breakthrough which. makes it possible now in industrially develeped countries and potentially throughout the world to provide adequate levels of living for all. The other is the declara- tion of public policy by the Congress of the United States in the preamble to the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 which says: "It is the policy of the United PAGENO="0432" 2892 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMI~NDMENTS OF 19 6~7 States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in this Nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the oppor- tunity to work, and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity." Against this background, and in recognition of the fact that even these promis-- ing developments in economic life and public policy contain the seeds of new ethical problems, the General Board of the National Council of Churches seeks- in this statement to clarify certain specific issues and affirm some principles relevant to the current war against poverty in the U.S.A. POVERTY AS A MORAL AND SPIRITUAL issun The alleviation of poverty and its attendant sufferings and deprivations is both a public and private responsibility at all times and under all circumstances. In an economy which has developed the capaicty to abolish poverty no lesser goal than its total abolition can satisfy the moral demands of the Ohristian~ faith. In caffing for the elimination of poverty, the Church must recognize that economic poverty is generally accompanied by numerous related evils such as: cultural, psychic and spiritual deprivation. Although a* steady and adequate flow of income to the poor is essential to the elimination of their poverty, the Church must work for the restoration of selfhood and dignity and meaning to the lives of those whose economic poverty has damaged or destroyed these es- sential elements of an abundant life. It should challenge all other anti-poverty forces and agencies to join in this work. THE CAUSES OF POVERTY The causes of economic poverty are highly complex and deeply rooted.. Full analysis of these causes would take us far beyond the scope of this state- ment. We are impelled, however, to call attention to the fact that the predominant and overwhelming mass of contemporary poverty results from socio-economic defects, dislocations and maladjustments. Most obvious among these are: in- adequate economic growth; recessions and depressions including local and' regional depressions; lack of adequate educational and training opportunities at all levels (children, youth and adult) including absence of consumer educa- tion and training in money management; inadequate wage and income levels for many partially and fully employed persons; discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ethnic background and sex; social conditions which seem to lock some people into perpetual poverty; and inadequate income maintenance pro- visions for the nonearning segments of the population such as the very young, the aged, the incompetent and incapacitated and the unemployed. In addition to these more obvious factors in accounting for the persistence of massive poverty, we recognize and acknowledge the influence of unrestricted' economic individualism, developed during the era of scarcity, which hampers -the creation of adequate mechanisms for income distribution and incOme main- tenance in an affluent society. The importance of personal attitudes, motivations and efforts as factors in. determining the economic level of individual persons cannot be denied. Many individuals have risen out of povetry in the face of great soclo-economic odds.. Some of the poor live lives of spiritual wealth and sacrificial 1ove for their fel- low men. Such examples, however, provide us neither a solution for underlying' socio-economic problems nor an excuse for inaction. The churches should assume their full share of responsibility along with other economic, educational and welfare agencies of society in tackling the tough roots of poverty. MAGNITUDE AND COMPLEXITY OF THE TASK Even though our national economy possesses the capacity to- eliminate poverty immediately, at least at present Officially defined levels, the complexity of the problem convinces us that the war against poverty will be a long one. Without implying endorsement of all Federal anti-poverty activities, we wel- come the leadership which the Federal Government is giving in this effort and especially its expressed determination to get at the root causes of poverty. We know, however, that the Federal Government alone cannot solve the problem. The combined and coordinated efforts of private enterprises, voluntary agencies, com- munity organizations of the poor themselves, as well as all levels of government PAGENO="0433" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2893: will be required. As voluntary groups functioning in a free society, churches should be prominent among the agencies engaged in this war on poverty. In view of the magnitude of the task and the experimental nature of the pro- gram, mistakes are bound to occur both in the conception and the implementation of national policy. While fully exercising their duty of responsible criticism, the Church and church people should resist tendencies to condemn the whole effort because of occasional false starts, set-backs, errors of judgment or corruption. MAXIMUM FEASIBLE PAXTICIPATION BY THE ~oon The Economic Opportunity Act authorizes the funding of "General Community Action Programs" and includes in its criteria of acceptability under this title (Title II) "a program . . . which is developed, conducted, and administered with the maximum feasible participation of residents of the areas and members of the groups served." Although EOA is only one of a number of poverty-combatting programs cur- rently in operation by the Federal Government, this provision for the inclusion of the poor themselves in planning and execution of programs reflects deeper ethical insight in anti-poverty efforts. Two principles are involved which com- mend themselves to the Christian conscience: One is the recognition of the inherent worth and dignity of every human being regardless of his social or economic circumstances. The other is recognition that in a democratic society every person is entitled to a voice in shaping the decisions and policies which:. affect his life. We commend the Congress for incorporating this concept in the original Eco- nomic Opportunity Act, and encourage the Office of Economic Opportunity to con- tinue its efforts to embody the concept in actual structures and programs in the field. Participation by the poor themselves in planning and decision making may~ be threatening to the political and economic power structures of many commu- nities. Resistance to this concept and attempts to circumvent these provisions of the Act are predictable. We affirm that the principle of inclusion of the poor in anti-poverty program planning is morally sound and practicaL We urge the churches to support this principle in all public anti-poverty programs and to em-* body it in their own anti-poverty efforts. ORGANIZED EFFORT BY THE POOR Essential to the effective involvement of the poor in community-wide and church programs is the creation of a supportive atmosphere for the self-organization of the poor. The history of the human struggle for justice and equity reveals few instances in which the establishments of this world have voluntarily transferred power to the powerless or of their own free will granted redress of grievances to the exploited and the dispossessed. For the contemporary poor, as for other dis- advantaged groups in history, self-organization for countervailing power is an esesntial ingredient of any successful war against poverty. These indigenous organizations may often adopt unconventional modes of ex- pression and action. In evaluating such activities account must be taken of 1) the lack of access to conventional channels of communication on the part of these groups, and 2) the tremendous hidden power of the beneficiaries of the status quo to defend their positions of privilege merely by inaction or by mobilizing the political, legal, and communications channels which they control. Meaningful, effective, and lawful counter-activities of the organized poor* deserve the understanding support of the churches. If occasionally such activities violate the law, the churches have an obligation to understand and interpret the basis of such protests, and to participate in a re-appraisal of the laws, customs, institutions, and traditions which provoke the reaction of the poor. The Church also has a continuing ministry to perform in the establishment of meaningful communication and responsible relationship between those living in poverty and the more affluent in church and society. LOCAL INITIATIvE Another concept deeply embedded in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 is the principle of local initiative. This is found particularly in Title IT of the Act which provides for Community Action Programs. Communities are chaflenged to survey ther own poverty needs, problems and conditions, to develop their own SO-084-67--pt. 4-28 PAGENO="0434" 2894 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 anti-poverty structures, to devise and submit their own plans for attacking the causes of poverty. The role of the Office of Economic Opportunity is that of the maintenance of certain minimal standards and the provision of funds for community action ~rojects which meet those standards. But the initiative still comes and should come primarily from many local agencies and groups. Provision is made for local groups, who feel that they have been unjustiflably bypassed by official com- niunity action boards, to submit their projects directly for consideration by the federal funding agency. We fully recognize that many aspects of the war on poverty transcend the local community, and many of the resources required for its successful prosecu- tion must be mobilized on a national level. Within the framework of local-state- federal partnership, we commend the emphasis in this Act upon maximum local initiative, imaginative creativity, and flexibility. We warn against the almost inevitable tendencies toward bureaucratization in programs of his sort. We disapprove of an unlimited veto by any local or state official on community action projects as being a violation of the principle of local autonomy. We call for resistance to any tendencies to impose political domination upon community action programs. We urge the churches to support the principles of openness, flexibility, and local initiative in community action. As long as it ca~ be clearly indicated that they represent the real needs of the poor, either expressed or felt, and not the needs of the group or agency, we wel- come and support a policy of federal funding for projects sponsored by volun- tary groups and agencies a) for idiot demonstration purposes; b) where special- ized competence is thus utilized; or c) in cases where public proposals are clearly inadequate in conception or fail to be inclusive in sponsorship. RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO PUBLIC ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAMS Types of participation and action in relation to public anti-poverty programs which we believe to be suitable for local churches and religious agencies include: a. Encouragement of both clergy and laity to serve on community action boards and advisory committees b. Contribution of church or agency facilities for anti-poverty program uses, or rental of such facilities, provided the compensation received from public funds is not in excess of actual costs incurred in connection with the program itself. c. Participation by clergy or employed agency staff on a volunteer basis iii program leadership. d. Free expression of the church's corporate judgment in evaluation, sup- port, criticism, or protest with regard to anti-poverty programs. e. Sponsorship, within the limits established by its own policy and by law, of new or improved legislation designed to advance the cause of elimina- tion of poverty; and under the same limitations, opposition to present laws or proposed legislation deemed inimical to this goal. A society, in which abundance replaces scarcity and social structures are in- creasingly complex, demands reappraisal of traditional forms and relationships. The federal government is embarking upon new forms of social action which involve new relationships with the states, with local communities, and with voluntary agencies. These facts, as well as the challenge to eliminate poverty, to recognize and enhance the dignity of the poor, and to further the goal of justice in economic life, call upon us to re-think the role of the Church as servant and prophet. The Church must be alert to every opportunity for moving toward the goal of a society free from the blight of poverty. t~9 FOR, 0 AGAINST. 2 ABSTENTIONS RESOLUTION ON FUNDING ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAMS ADOPTED BY TIlE GENERAL BOARD ON FEBRUARY 21, 1967 In view of the policy position of the National Council of Churches in support of the war on poverty (Policy Statement on The Church and the Anti-Poverty Program-General Board. December 3. 1966) and in view of widespread reports of pressure upon Congress to reduce funds available to the Office of Economic Opportunity and other federal anti-poverty programs; PAGENO="0435" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2895 Be it resolved that the General Board reaffirms its judgment that the OEO represents an essential spearhead in the war on poverty and also urges councils of churches, denominations directly, and through them their local congregations, and religious agencies to support a substantial supplementary (1966-67) federal appropriation for the Office of Economic Opportunity and a full funding of this agency for 1967-68 at no less than 2.1 billion dollars in keeping with the request of the administration of the United States ~Government. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Gurney. Mr. GURNEY. Dr. Douglass is here. Chairman PERKINS. Dr. Paul Douglass is from Rollins College, Winter Park, Fla. I will call on my colleague Mr. Gurney to introduce Dr. Douglass. Mr. GURNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It gives me a good deal of pleasure to welcome Dr. Douglass here. We reside in the same community, we have been good friends for a long time, and even though we are on opposite sides of the political fence. He is one of our most distinguished citizens in Florida. Presently, Dr. Douglass is professor of government and political science at Rollins College in Winter Park, Fla. His career has been a very distinguished one. He served in the Legislature of Vermont for several terms bdth in the house and senate. Dr. Douglass was with the American University here in Washing~ ton for 12 years and president of that university. He was an adviser to Syngman Rhee, the President of the Republic of South Korea, in 1963. More recently, to indicate the respect in which he is held in Florida and the sort of things he does, he was on a special committee appointed by the speaker of the house of Florida and the senate to draft a code of ethics for the legislature. This code passed just a few days ago clown in Florida. He is noted author, lecturer, educator. He has written 25 or 26 books which have been published and last but not least, he is a Democrat precinct committeeman and I think it is in my own precinct in Winter Park, Fla., so we have a good working knowledge of each other and I have tremendous respect for him. Chairman PERKINs. Let me interrupt to compliment you for bring- ing before the committee such a distinguished witness. Mr. GURNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thought Dr. Douglass might be very helpful toward our delibera- tions this year. Part of the job that the Center for Practical Politics does at Rollins College is to make studies in depth about political and governmental problems in Florida and the one which has been done most recently, published just a few days ago, has been a study of how the Economic Opportunity program has worked in our home county of Orange in Florida, and that i~ why I asked him here. I thought he could help us in our deliberations this year. I believe Dr. Douglass has a prepared statement he would like to read at this lime and then I am sure the committee would like to question him. Mr. GIBBONS. Before Dr. Douglass proceeds may I say he is a friend of mine, and he is a fine man. PAGENO="0436" 2896 ECONO~flC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 STATEMENT OF PAUL F. DOUGLASS, PROFESSOR OF GOVERNMENT AND DIRECTOR, CENTER FOR PRACTICAL POLITICS, ROLLINS COLLEGE, WINTER PAR-K, FLA. Dr. DouGLAss. Ma-v I say, Congressman Gurney and Congressman Gibbons are on different sides and I worked for both and there was no greater pride I ever had than to see Sam Gibbons was elected to Con- gress and we don't want him to stop there. Chairman PERKINS. We are delighted to have both of these distin- guished gentlemen from Florida, and I think your State is to be corn- plimented for sending them here. Dr. DOUGLASS. I have a prepared statement which I ask be insertect in the record. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it will be inserted in it. (Statement of Paul F. Douglass follows:) STATEMENT OF PAUL F. DOUGLASS, PROFESSOR OF GOVERNMENT AND DIRECTOR, - CENTER FOR PERcrIoAr~ POLITICS, ROLLINS COLLEGE, WINTER PARK, FLA. My name is Paul F. Douglass. lam professor of government and director, Cen- ter for Practical Politics. Rollins College, the oldest senior institution of higher' learning in the State of Florida. I am a member of the bar of the District of Columbia and the bar of the United States Supreme Court. I am active in the local government section of the American Bar Association. Our area of Central Florida is the fast-growing metropolitan hub of the region of East Central Florida which reaches from lakes and citrus groves eastward to the Atlantic Ocean and to the space age operations located at Cape Kennedy. As a citizen I am a member of the Orange County Democratic Executive Corn-- mittee, elected from the silk-stocking Precinct 63 in Winter Park. My experience- with Economic Opportunity comes from (1) my membership on the board of directors of the Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., (2) my chairman- ship of the program committee of Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., (3) a Saturday afternoon class which I have conducted for two years for some forty Negro ministers in church administration, (4) my long record of association with civil rights efforts, (5) and my participation in Voter Registration campaigns and direction of citizenship training programs, based on my book How to Be An Active Citizen, for Negro groups as well as civic and political associations throughout the South. I may say that I was active in working with the under- privileged long before it was a popular status symbol. My membership on the board of directors of Orange County Economic Op- portunity, Inc., result from my election at the annual meeting of interested citizens. I may say in passing that I received the highest number of votes in the election. During this year, I have served on a lay committee, appointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the Senate of the Florida Legislature-as member and draftsman-to prepare a code of ethics first for the Legislature and then for the general administration. I should say in passing that both the House and Senate adopted our recommendations as a part of their rules and the Legislature enacted our bill. As a result, the State of Florida has for the first time standards of ethics formally adopted. Our Center for Practical Politics is supported by Rollins College, and not by foundation grants. From time to time we undertake assignments from public and' private bodies which we believe worthwhile. In our general operation we make continuing studies of various issues which concern the public welfare. For nine years we have conducted over the ABC Orlando-(WFTV)-a television program called Pro i Con. This is an award-winning performance. We were the first telecast in the South to discuss without fear, favor, or censored control the most controversial issues of our times. For a more than a year, we have been studying Economic Opportunity as it works in our community. We have enjoyed the close association with the local office in Orlando and the regional office in Atlanta. Our experience with the personnel of the regional office has been rewarding. The staff has been competent,. cooperative, constructive, and fair. PAGENO="0437" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2897 Since the effective date of Public [iaw 88-452 on August 20, 1964, the corn- inunity action program has operated as a new layer of local government- federally funded and for the most part federally packaged. The massive federal effort to break the cycle of poverty has been a learning experience for all con- cerned. The idea itself is not new but the apparatus is. Since Sidney and Beatrice Webb issued the Minority Report of the Poor Law Commission (1909) we have had the concept of devising a formula which would "ensure to workers by hand and by brain steady progress in health and happiness, hone'sty and kindliness, cul- ture and scientific knowledge, and the spirit of adventure." Since 1914 we have had the concept of The Great Society, discussed in a book by that title written by Graham Wallas. I shall not concern myself at this time with problems of local politics as they develop at the community level. These are matters for us as citizens to resolve in the give-and-take of controversy about public policy. Rather, I wish to devote myself to fundamental issues as we have identified them in our comprehensive and in-depth study entitled How Economic Opportunity Works in Orange County, Florida. I have submitted a copy of this report for the record. Let me deal with our findings one by one. I. USE OF COMMUNITY ACTION AS A POLITICAL MACHINE FOR DELIVERING THE NEGRO VOTE Community action, as a unit of local government, involves as voters in the political control and election of the board of directors, less than one out of a hundred registered voters. This body of "interested citizens" controls the elected officials who, through an executive committee, ostensibly report to and operate by the mandate of the board of directors. This small group of 13 members on the executive committee has major decision-making powers in the receiving and spending of hundreds of thousands of dollars and the employment of a staff. This staff has been engaged more for political reasons than for sub- stantitive competence. Our community action program has been operated-and continues to be oper- ated-by a determined and tightfisted junta of politically ambitious individuals unrelated officially to the Democratic or Republican Parties and really uncon- cerned with the situation of the poor. Experience has shown that the "organiza- tion" has not been very successful in "delivering" the vote. The determination exists, however, to keep a tightfisted control of the executive committee and the staff for some future purpose. Since by policy the War on Poverty deliberately determined to set up an organization outside the existing "community establishment," the community action organization is a "new" elite. In studying the situation in Orange County, I have come to the conclusion that the executive committee should by executive order include a strong and tough-minded minority of representatives from public governing boards and professional societies. In our county and under our charter and by-laws this structure would mean that out of an executive committee membership six of the thirteen members should be from governing bodies and professional societies. (In this way there would exist within the executive committee a widely repre- sentative group having channels of communication with existing agencies, but not dominated by them.) I believe that this change in structure would have highly therapeutic results and curb the natural aggression of human nature and politics which would like to handle money and people with rubber-stamp committees. II. FRUSTRATED EXPECTATIONS One of the problems which we have identified is the enormous expectation which has been built up in the minds of the poor. The appropriations have never been sufficient to satisfy even in a small degree the demands which have been generated. This situation creates unnecessary problems from the local com- munity up to Washington. It would be my suggestion that programs which are realizable within ap- propriations be activated and publicized. We should be fair and frank with the people by saying that these specified programs will be operated this year under sums available. Local, regional, and national offices are overwhelmed with good and bad projects demanding funding. The fact that there just isn't enough money to do the job we lead people to believe is capable of being done. To frustrate the PAGENO="0438" 2898 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 expectations of the poor is both bad business and bad politics-unless you like the fuel which they supply to riots and disorder. III. Basic in the War on Poverty is the helping people to get jobs, training them to do the job, upgrading them to perform better jobs at higher pay. This means employment, placement and education. It means teamwork of the employment office and the public schools-a close and professional teamwork among experts. In its role of fund recipient with power to delegate and contract for service, the community action structure adds an unnecessary step which acts to baffle the direct relationships of employment office and school. For the most part, the personnel of the local community action program is not qualified to provide a service, except elongating the bureaucratic distance between government and people in need. The new outcome of the present situation is to embitter competent profes- sionals and encourage them to drag their feet or go their own way. In the next section I make a recommendation concerning this operation. IV. HEADSTART AND DAY CARE CENTERS For anyone on the firing line, this fact is important: people generally believe in the purpose of Head Start. Likewise there exists a crying need for day care centers. It is my opinion that both of these operations will inevitably become functional parts of our educational system. The community action offices, good job though they may have done, are equipped neither by experience nor facilities to conduct the Head Start pro- grams either during the regular school year or during the summer. The school system is the only organization professionally experienced to carry on the program. It is my hope that this Congress will make available funds to integrate the Head Start program with the school system, both for operations and facilities. The reason why kindergartens, pre-school, and day care centers have not become a part of the public school system is financial. Funds were not available. The United States will find it both in the interest of economy and the effec- tive War on Poverty to take prompt action to fund and establish this exten- sion of the school system. A child who is four today will be seven in 1970 and a family person by 1985. We can do more at this level than any other. If we can reasonably believe that poverty can be eliminated in this century, then we shall make the quickest and most nffective progress through the Head Start and Day Care centers, with related diet, medical and dental assistance. It is therefore my suggestion that Congress assign Head Start, Day Care Centers, and Training Programs to the Department of Health, Education~ and Weif are and place them under an assistant secretary where these foundations belong. To this suggestion it may be objected that the United States cannot afford such humane largess. To this I answer that I shall be glad to sharpen my pencil and sit down with any Congressman to show where the funds can be found within existing budgets without increasing theni one iota. * * * * * VI. UTILIZATION OF EXISTING RESOURCES While we have been talking about "in-kind" contributions, and some have feebly been given, we have neglected to use magnificient resources already at hand. I shall pass over the vast resources of our church and synagogues which stand idle a good part of the day and week. I shall likewise pass over the enthusiasm of churchmen for federal programs. when they themselves are closest to the local commimity and its needs. The churches have an enormous oppor- tunity for innovation and service, the results of which would be more fruitful than an invasion of Alabama. I shall also pass over the belabored studies of academic grantee-racketeers who prey on government and foundations for funds to carry on "research," most of which has little value, a good deal of which was known before, and little of which is actually read, for example, by Congressmen and heavily burdened bureaucrats. PAGENO="0439" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2899 I confine myself to the enormous resources in the 4-H Clubs of the Depart- ment of Agriculture. Without the appropriation of a single extra nickel, we could involve every neighborhood in America with local committees, volunteer leaders, and expert professional supervision. Suppose we should organize hun- dreds of clubs in which the young men would study gardening and upholstry and the young women would study cooking, home-making, and interior decoration. Think of the homes we would ready directly, simply, and effectively. What pre- vents this kind of action? The failure of the imagination. VII. WALKIE-TALKIE ADVISERS At the moment we are engaged in the discussion of multi-purpose centers- a sort of network of area YMCA's with additional features. Government agents descend on communities to explain the programs. Community meetings are called to kindle expectations. Basic local research has been glaringly absent and the mostknowledgable people locally have not been consulted. Neighborhood pressure groups and mountains of persons of good will lay plans which probably will not be funded. It is our current operation to think that if we open an office, get some furniture, and a staff we are in business to win the War on Poverty. What we need rather is a corps of walkie-talkie mobile persons of competence and training who can move among people where they are, discuss their needs, and guide the needy to the channels of help. The channels do exist now in ample supply. VIII. FUTILITY OF COMMUNITY ACTION This brings us to the validity of community action-the revitalization and reinvigoration of the local democratic community by the involvement of the people and the poor outside of the "establishment." Let me say that the 19th century romantic and humanitarian concepts em- bodied in the present legislation cannot be supported by a single finding of contemporary behavioral political science. Except for the opportunity which it has provided for a new species of political interloper and associated staff, community action for the most part has generated confusion, animosity, and heat but not light. Community action provides a ponderous and complicated net of professed public purpose and private political connivance. This federally- funded layer of local government, in my opinion, should be dissolved before it becomes a permanent and disruptive feature of local government. IX. CONSERVATION OF STAFF In summary may I say that it is my opinion that since 1964 we have been learning. We hence learned a lot about the needs of fellow citizens. We have dramatized poverty so that the war on it is household knowledge. With greatest pains we should identify the area of most rewarding concern and reconstruct the campaign. We should recognize the splendid service performed by the vast body of OEO personnel and make provisions to use them, their experience, and their skill in a program designed to meet the needs of 1970 and beyond. X. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Let me recapitulate my suggestions: (1) Move the Office of Economic Opportunity out of the Executive Office of the President and relocate its major educational and training functions under an assistant secretary in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. (2) Establish the closest relations between the educational and training func- tions with job information and placement. (3) Incorporate Head Start and Day Care Centers into a federally-funded and permanent operation of the school system. (4) Make provision for a negative income tax or guaranteed annual income. (5) Maximize existing resources. (6) Establish mobile corps of Walkie-Talkies to move among the people where they are-rather than sitting in offices where they are not. (7) Preserve and conserve existing experienced and competent staff. (8) Dissolve the cumbersome layer of federally-funded local government. On the basis of the experience which we now have, we are in a position to define a program and make it work. PAGENO="0440" 2900 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. DOUGLASS. I have a detailed report on how Economic Oppor- tunity works in Orange County which I would like to submit for the committee. Likewise, I have a resolution from Orange County to Sargent Shriver. The resolution says they are imot pockets of poverty and such ~a label interferes with their real estate values, and so forth. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, the resolution will be placed in the record at this point. (The resolution follows:) RESOLUTION, BOARD OF COUNTY Co~r~rIssIoxERs. ORANGE COUNTY, FLA. Whereas some fifteen areas of Orange County, Florida, have been declared to be economically depressed areas by the Office of Economic Opportunity ap- parently upon the basis of a study made by the Stanford Research Institute, Menlo Park, California several years ago; and Whereas the Board of County Commissioners of Orange County, Florida, is of the opinion that some of these areas do not constitute poverty pockets or economically depressed areas within the federal guidelines as explained in vari- ous pamphlets and information sheets obtained from the Office of Economic Opportunity nor do they constitute poverty pockets in the usually accepted sense of the word "poverty"; and Whereas one area known as "Tangelo Park" has many attractive homes some of which are owned by people who work at local defense plants; and Whereas considerable resentment has been expressed by people in Tangelo Park because of what they feel is an improper and unjustified designation of ~their area: now, therefore, be it Resolved, 1. That the Office of Economic Opportunity be hereby requested to make such surveys and studies as may be necessary to careful identify any poverty pockets in Orange County, Florida, and to remove the designation of poverty pockets or economically depressed areas from areas which are, in fact, not economically depressed. 2. That the labelling of an area as a poverty pocket when it is not constitutes .a damaging allegation about an area which results in the depreciation of prop- erty values in the area due to the label and is unfair to people living in the area who are using every means possible to raise their standard of living, maintain economic independence, and have their pride in keeping their area an attractive place to live. STATE OF FLORIDA, County of Orange: I, ARTHUR W. NEWELL, Clerk of the Circuit Court and Ex-officio Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners in and for the above named County and State, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution as adopted by the said Board at its meeting held on July 17, 1967, as same appears of record in Commissioner's Book No. 43. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the official seal of said Board, at Orlando, Orange County, Florida, this the 21st day of July A.D., 1967. ARTHUR W. NEWELL, Clerk. By D. S. BANNER., Dep~tty Clerk. Dr. DOUGLASS. I was going to talk about the controversies but they do not go to the root of the things I was going to deal with so I would like to say a word from the standpoint of the person who is involved in local government. I hapnen to he chairman of the program committee of our Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., and I deal with these people. I think I should say on the record that the president of our Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., says if there is anything the mat- ter with the program I am to blame for it. PAGENO="0441" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2901 I was named chairman of that committee for that purpose and what- ever blame there is I will take it. I am going to avoid the problem of saying OEO is in politics, every- thing is in politics that deals with the public, and to say that this is a controversial issue is only to say politics is controversy and through controversy we are trying to get some sort of social organization which brings about agreement so we can do something. It is about that subject, not the controversy-that is all in the re- port-that is petty, local politics. To say OEO is a machine to deliver the Negro vote; that is a politi- cal truism, but everybody has to get elected. I would like to say from my experience that we have promised more than financially we can deliver. `We have promised more than we can financially deliver. As a result of that we have raised the expectations of people to the point where they are constantly frustrated. As a result of that frustration, it makes it difficult for the national, regional, and local offices to do their job because people are led to be- lieve the money is there and if they get the program right they will get it and poverty will be eliminated. So the first thing is I would like to see us not promise more than we can do within the limits of the appropriations; otherwise, we are going to have difficulties and frustrated people. That, we can achieve, I think, through proper public relations. Secondly, people are poor because they don't have money to speDd. That is the problem. The problem is how in the most simple way. most' directly, we can get money to the poor. W}ia.t they need is jobs. `What they need is training. What they need is education in the most direct and professional way with the least bureaucratic distance-least bu- reaucratic distances. So I would like to say I would like to see us concentrate on getting jobs for people which means the U.S. Employment Service, the voca- tional services, motivation of employers to get their people to do these things, opening up jobs. That means t)he strong direction of tile U.S. Employment Service in its local capacity with the local men. We should be helping people get jobs, educating them and that is the first suggestion I have to make. With all of this Nelsen amendment, and so on, they are all good programs but there is not enough money to do it. I would like to see us concentrate especially on the late adolescent and people in their early 20's. That is where the real problem is if we are going to deal with the problem today. Now comes the problem of tomorrow. That relates to the problem of Headstart, nursery schools, and day-care centers. People believe in these things. They are performing a purpose. I think we should make these programs, Headstart, nursery school,, and day-care centers an integral part of the school system, federally funded-we can find the money. I say in my prepared statement I would be glad to sharpen my' pencil and show where the money can come from. Promise what we can form, get jobs for people that need them, train jobs within the school system and operate Headstart, day school and nursery centers.' PAGENO="0442" 2902 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Now then I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that we eliminate com- munity action programs as such as a vehicle. I say that for several reasons. First of all, from tile standpoint of behavioral scientists there is not one iota of evidence to show this is the kind of vehicle to perform this job. Secondly, it widens the bureaucratic distance that is necessary to make the program effective. Thirdly, it sets up a new layer of local government which we don't want. We have always had community action. Local government is community action. So I would like to see us take these basic functions and put them in the Office of Health, Education, and `Welfare under an Assistant Secretary, preserving all that is good in the program, extending and doing a better job but simplifying the structure. Those, Mr. Chairman, are the results of my study. There is a lot of stuff in this thick study but those are tile points. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Gibbons? Mr. GIBBONS. I will yield my time to Mr. Quie. Mr. QmE. Since I was involved in some other conversations here, I yield to my colleague from Florida to ask questions first. Mr. GURNEY. Dr. Douglass, what is your opinion again of the local economic opportunity committee in Orange County? Has it been ef- fective or ineffective? Dr. DOUGLASS. Locai opportunity-the Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., in Orange County, has been ineffective. Mr. GURNEY. Would you tell the committee a little bit about how it. was organized and why you think it has been ineffective? 1)r. i1)OUGLASS. Our program got started under the leadership of the. public school system and got a good start. A former superintendent of schools of long standing was placed in charge of it. There was great community respect for the program and then the program was ceased by the Governor's Patronage Committee and since that time it has been deeply embroided in politics. Mr. GURNEY. As I understand it, when the committee was first organized there was initially a small group of people, I think five in number, who proceeded with the organization, and then appointed a hoard of directors supposedly representative of the community. Is that a fact? Dr. DOUGLASS. Supposed to represent the community? Mr. GURNEY. Yes. Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. Mr. Gmm~Y. Did this board of directors ever meet after they were appointed? Dr. DOUGLASS. During the first year after they elected the executive committee the board never met. In the present year, we h~ve ne* bylaws and the board is supposed to meet every month. . Mr. GURNEY. In 1965 and 1966, actually the board of director~ took no part ill the running of tile program and it was run by this Small politically oriented groilp; is that correct? Dr. DOUGLASS. That. is correct. . Mr. GURNEY. `Was there also constantly a struggle for rower in this affair? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. There is always a stru~rgie for power in politics and there were two groups, group No. 1 being the group that PAGENO="0443" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2903 represented the ptarOnage committee that wanted to hold onto the organization and the second group was a group of liberal people who wanted to take over the organization-two factions. Mr. GURNEY. Is it also a fact that. whenever there was a meeting of the board of directors or a meeting of the citizenry in general in connection with the Economic Opportunity Act, is it fair to say there was constantly a tremendous furor and struggle back and forth as to who was going to run the show? Dr. DoUcLAss. On the back of my report here I have some news- paper headlines, "OEO Battleground Gets More Headstart Scars." "Board Squabbles Are Up Over Release to Press." "Tempers Flare at OEO." They are all there. Mr. GURNEY. This is representative of most of the meetings? Dr. DOUGLASS. That. and the fact that they are extremely boring. Mr. GURNEY. What about the personnel? Dr. DOUGLASS. In Orange County one group defeated urban re- newal and the woman who led the crusade against urban renewal ap- peared as one of the keyworkers in OEO. Prior to that time she was a hat saleswoman. I would say she was not qualified for the job. The other personnel were equally unqualified. Mr. GURNEY. `What about the directors of OEO themselves? I)r. DOGULASS. rn se pool fellows have suffered. The first. fellow, Mr. Congressman, was the superintendent of schools. He left the county-he was a good man-he left the county and by political ef- forts he was given a position of professor of mathematics at the State university. The second man just served his term and resigned. He was a Burns patronage man. I have his letter of resignation here which is rather Pathetic. The third man is now in training at this great. training school at the TJniversity of Wisconsin. He just lacks it all. Mr. GURNEY. What about the support of the poverty war programs by various groups in Orange County, has it been supported or not supporter? i)r. Do~TGLAss. All I know-, the Rabbi who is chairman of the volun- teers committee, says he can't get any volunteers because the image of OEO is so bad he can't get volunteers. He wants to improve the image so lie can get volunteers. Mr. GURNEY. `Were these controversial facts surrounding OEO known at the regional office in Atlanta? J)r. T)OUGLASS. These are competent, sympathetic fellows. They have a file about this thick and I am sure Sargent Shriver has a file equally big. In fact, I think one of t.hese things said, "Don't let Congressman Gurney make a political issue out this thing." Mr. GURNEY. But it. is a fact. that the regional office was aware of the problems and was not. able to resolve them? Dr~ DOUGLASS. As a matter of fact., t.hey are down there investigat- ing today again. All of the documents and records are here, Mr. Con- gressman, which show their constant a.nd patient efforts to review the situation. PAGENO="0444" 2904 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Gm~nr. I notice on page 28 of your report, I notice the follow- ing statement: The meeting of the OEO regional staff with Orange County personalities was described in the memorandum as a "bar room brawl" characterized by "court- room gymnastics." I guess that is probably fairly representative of how they under- stood the program was going. Dr. DOUGLASS. I understand the regional office knows that very well. Mr. GURNEY. I know you have described this and yet I think it is well to restate it. How can we resolve these things in Orange County to make this program work? Dr. DOUGLASS. If we continue the community action program, I think there should be a requirement that the executive committee should have strong minority representation from existing professional organizations and governing bodies. That would broaden the base of comment and criticism review. It would make it more of a community action program and less of a political patronage operation-strong representation from profes- sional organizations. Mr. GURNEY. I understand it is also your thought, though, that poverty war programs in general would work better if you did not have this bureaucratic layer of government at a local level but trans- ferred into older and recognized departments and agencies; is that correct? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. Mr. GURNEY. Such as the Departments of Education and Health, Education, and Welfare? Dr. DOUGLASS. If we need local action advisory groups, I would like to see them advise with these other groups. Mr. GURNEY. I think it is your opinion, also, that Headstart, which. is essentially an educational program, ought to be run by the local education authorities; is tha.t correct? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. Mr. QUIE. I would like to find out more about your community action agency. How many people serve on the umbrella boa.rd? Dr. DOUGLASS. We have 61, but eventually it will be cut down to 41.. There has been nothing but confusion over the bylaws, whether they. were legitimately approved and in operation and currently we have our last revision which will provide for a board of 41 members. Mr. Quin. Has OEO urged you to do that. or has it come internally~ or what? Dr. DOUGLASS. These patient., competent fellows in Atlanta. in end- less correspondence and endless visits worked it out. We have sat through hours of meetings listening to these and we have had any number of lawyers drafting these things. Mr. QUIE. Of those 61, what kind of representation has there been, not poor poeple on the board but representatives of the poor people? Dr. DOUGLASS. We have a certain percentage. I will say off-hand. one-third representing the poor. We have interested citizens, public officials, poverty groups, and then within poverty groups we identify the people who are colored. PAGENO="0445" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2905 Mr. QUIB. So YOU think it was one-third? Dr. DOUGLASS. I can find that in a minute, but I think it was one- third. Mr. QUIE. One-third would be in the bylaws, which would be one- tlnrd of 41? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. Mr. QUIE. How about with the 61? Dr. DOUGLASS. I did not apply to them that is why we had to change the bylaws. Mr. QUIE. Did you have any money cut off because of that? Dr. DOUGLASS. Getting money cut off is always a constant threat but sometimes whatever we get comes. It is chiefly over Headstart. That is the only program we have and it is hard to get it but it gen- erally comes in the end. I would like to make a statement off the record. Mr. HAWKINS. I think all of the witness' statement should be on the record. Dr. DOUGLASS. I am not saying I am giving that on my authority. I had a telephone call this morning. Mr. HAWKINS. My only interest is in trying to see that the truth is developed. If you were trying to influence the members of this com- mittee by making such a statement I think we should have it in the record so that it can be verified. Dr. DOUGLASS. It is all right with me. I am not trying to influenc& the committee. Mr. QUIE. What about the previous statement that was off the record-that was where the employment service and all of these other organizations couldn't get along with OEO? Dr. DOUGLASS. I will tell you honestly about that statement. It can be verified. I can verify it, but I don't think it should be in the record. I am not trying to avoid the record and it is a true statement but if you want it input it in, but I don't care. Mr. QUIE. I am like Congressman Hawkins. I would prefer to have everything a person says on the record. Could you define what you mean by cannibalist? Dr. DOUGLASS. When summer Headstart gets started you are sup- posed to have, say, x number of students or a thousand students, and when somebody gets an inspection to conic in then you are supposed to have those students present. Evidently, they don't have the students present so they are trying to bring some in from the regular year- round Headstart program into the summer program so they can look good to get by the inspection. It is the same thing sororities and fraternities do. Mr. GURNEY. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. QUJE. I yield. Mr. GURNEY. I am not too familiar with your procedures since I am not a member of this subcommittee, but I did receive a letter from the rector of the All Saints Municipal Church of Winter Park, Fla., on this subject. This is a letter addressed to the Office of Economic Op- portunity to give a rundown of how the church is doing and the copy *was sent to Senator Smathers and myself. If I may, I would like to include it in the record. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it will be included. (The letter follows:) PAGENO="0446" 2906 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 JULY 20, 1967. THE OFFICE OF ECoNOMIC OPPORTUNITY, Washington, D.C. GENTLEMEN: We here at All Saints' Church are most concerned about the conditions of the Headstart Program in Orange County. I am confident you have heard a great deal about the trouble that the OEO is having in Orange County and we would like to be of any help we can. First let me say that we studied the Headstart Program beginning last Octo- ber and finally in May of this year assented to a summer Headstart Program here at All Saints'. Our Vestry (our governing body) was concerned that w-e render as much service as possible and receive no remuneration for it. For the most part, this is the way the Center is operating here at All Saints'. However, my concern is with the apparent lack of organization or ability to carry through a program with the local office. My criticism is not primarily of the local office but with the federal personnel who have been sent to occupy positions here which positions were applied for by local people quite capable of handling them. Also, I am concerned about federal personnel who come in to make observations and initiate changes that are detrimental to the children we seek to help through this program. The program was to have 100-120 children placed at the Center here at All Saints'. On the first day there were in the neighborhood of 30 children only. We were told that many of the children missed the busses or simply didn't show up. We were told that this situation would be worked out during the first week. We also discovered that the children we had were not those we were told we would have but those who should have reported to some other Center. The fol- lowing day we had a few less children but not the same ones that we had the previous day. By the end of the week, we bad built back up to about 25 children who were coming regularly. This continued during the following w-eek. - In order to build the enrollment, the teachers were out ringing doorbells and soliciting children to attend the school. They had built up the enrollment to 47 with an additional 8 who were planning to attend. Then on July 13th when the children normally would have arrived at 8 o'clock there were still no children here by 8:30. The teachers had not been notified of any change, I had not been notified of any change and no one seemed to know what was happening. Later on during the day, 16 children appeared but none of these were our regular students. Upon investigation with the local office, I was told that they didn't know what was going on and would find out. Later on that day, I was told that the repre- sentative from Washington had been here the day before and was not satisfied with the Center. In particular, he was distressed that the racial guidelines were not being followed. It was apparently he who rearranged the children. Now nearly a week later, we are back up to about 70 children and things do seem to be settling down a little bit. Of course, the program is nearly half over for the summer. The thing that I strenuously object to, and those who work with me also stren- uously object to, is that the indications on the part of the man from Washington are that the concern is not primarily to help children or to alleviate poverty but to deal with the issue of integration. We are delighted to have any persons of any race or background as members of our congregation or participants in the school, but when it becomes necessary to take 4 and 5 year old children and subject them to as much confusion and changing in their little lives as happened during the first three weeks of this program here, I seriously question its value. More important, I seriously question the value of the guidelines insofar as they appear not to be guidelines but rigid rules. Making pawns of children to satis- fy an unrealistic racial-political issue is not only unbecoming but is cruel. The routine line we hear from the local office is that it is the government's desire that this become a completely local operation. As far as I am concerned, I have grave doubts that it will ever function in terms of the values it seeks to establish and goals it seems to fulfill until such time as the guidelines are modi- fled and the program is, indeed, left up to local individuals. I regret that such a high ideal and fine objective is so botched up as to appear to be hurting little children and setting the program back instead of moving it forward. Sincerely yours, WTILLIAM H. FOLWELL. Rector, All Saints Municipal Church. PAGENO="0447" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2907 Mr. QUIE. How will the poor select this representation? Dr. DOUGLASS. They get together and caucus and name the person they want to have on the board. Mr. QUIE. Is this the way it will happen? Dr. DOUGLASS. I don't think human nature is like that. I would like to think it was, but I don't think it is like that. Somebody has to call a meeting. Somebody has to get the people out to vote and somebody has to tell them what they are going to vote about, so the idea that they just get together spontaneously is just a romance that does not work. Mr. QUIE. Somebody has to bring them together, but when they do come together, will they be able to select a person or will it operate as in some community action agencies, they in effect nominate and the board itself or the mayor or whoever is in power actually makes the appointment? Di. DOUGLASS. I don't think anybody who is responsible for it po- litically or ideologically will let somebody come on the board who is not a good person, in their opinion. Mr. QUIE. What about the executive committee? Do they plan to continue to run the show as they did in the past? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. Mr. QmE. Are there any plans to get representatives of the poor on the executive board in the future? Dr. DOUGLASS. I assume so, but I can't speak on that subject. What the executive committee has in mind or what the nominating com- mittee has in mind, I don't know. The executive committee is authorized by the State charter, which they have to appoint personnel and to see that it operates. Mr. QrnE. Have you had any voter registration drives? Dr. DOUGLASS. Do you mean for Negroes? Mr. QtrIE. Well, for anybody, Negroes, anybody else. Dr. DOtTGLASS. I was one of the original campaigners for it. I went down to Sam Gibbon's place and campaigned and put on training pro- grams as to how to vote. It was not popular to do it. It was not a status symbol in those days. Mr. QUIE. Was that done on your own or through the Democratic organization? Dr. DOUGLASS. In Tampa, through the Hillsboro Democratic Com- mittee and in our own section through voters registration. Now, who ran that or where it came from, but Mayor Carr and I used to go out and do everything we could to register. Mr. QUIE. What about in the last three years? Has there been any voter registration funded by your community action agency? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir. The woman with whom I used to work on voter registration became the Director of Headstart, and beyond that Idon'tknow. Mr. QUJE. You say that the community action agency tends to be just another bureaucratic agency which one must go through? Dr. DOUGLASS. I said it lengthens the bureaucratic distance between the needy people and the services which Government can perform. Mr. Qun~. I also got the implication from your statement that you favored the involvement of the people who were to participate in the program; namely, the poor. PAGENO="0448" 2908 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir, I didn't say that. What I said on that, ideo- logically I am in favor of it. As a political scientist, I don't think there is any one iota of scientific evidence to show that it is possible or that it would work. This is a long, long concept that we have had for many, many years. Remember when John Studebaker was head of the Office of Education. He wanted community forums and so on, but it does not work. We need professionally trained, sharp people to do this job. Mr. Qun~. In the future when you have the representatives of the poor, will they be selected from regions or districts within the total area? Dr. DOUGLASS. I think so and I should hope so, except the area of greatest need, which I am concerned with which is the vegetable-grow- ing area, and I hope it will be there, too. Mr. Qu~. That must be 14 areas. Dr. DOUGLASS. We have 15 areas. A good many of these areas now say they don't belong in there. This resolution asks Sargent Shriver to find out where these came from. Mr. QUIE. Where did the resolution come from? Dr. DOUGLASS. From the Orange County Board of County Com- missioners transmitting to Sargent Shriver that their area was čalled a pocket of poverty when they don't think it is justifiably so, that it is damaging real estate values, and so on. Mr. Qum. What do you think the other 14 areas are? Are they actually pockets of poverty? Dr. DOUGLASS. I don't know. The areas in which I and the welfare workers are interested in is called Zelda, which is a large area with migrant workers and not much has happened there and that is the area of greatest need. Instead of getting to the area of greatest need, we get to the noisiest area. The squeaking wheel gets the grease. Mr. Quin. Did you use census tracts to determine the area? Dr. DOUGLASS. That is a myth. According to the record, the Stan- ford Institute made some kind of study. I have never been able to find out the basis for it or the original documentation, but the big volumes of maps, you may know, that come from the OEO office of standard metropolitan statistics was developed by the Census Bureau. The only difficulty with those statistical areas is they do not show the country sections. Mr. GURNEY. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. QuLE. I yield. Mr. GURNEY. As I understand it, the poverty areas were designated pursuant to a study made by the Stanford people, I think, in 1959, except that no one in the Orange County Economic Opportunity Office has been able to produce the study; is that correct? Dr. DOUGLASS. That's right. Nobody I have ever found has been able to produce it. Nobody has ever seen the study. We have the pockets of poverty identified. Mr. QuID. You mentioned that these service operations of the Office of Economic Opportunity ought to be transferred to the traditional agencies. What would you leave in OEO? Dr. DOUGLASS. I am very clear about it. I would dissolve OEO as a new layer of local government and as the instrumentality which we PAGENO="0449" ECONOMIC OPPOETUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2909 operate. I would strengthen the program, increase its financing and locate it in established departments, because our'object is to get people jobs and give them training to fit those jobs and constantly upgrade them. Mr. QUIE. Those are all the questions I have, Mr~ Chairman., Chairman PERKINS Are there any further questions ~ Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. I would like to know more about the Orańge~ County Economic Opportunity Agency. By whom was this agency created? Dr. DOUGLASS. This was created by a State charter as a nonprofit corporation. Mr. HAWKINS. Who were the original incorporators? Dr. DOUGLASS. The original incorporators were a group from the Governor Patronage Committee. Mr. HAWKINS. Did he name these persons for the county? Dr. DOUGLASS. No; they were already well known and they served. Mr. HAWKINS. Served, in `what capacity? ` Dr. DOUGLASS. As hi's patronage committee and election community committee. Mr. HAWKINS. Does the county have a citycouncil? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. ` ` Mr. HAWKINS. Did you have a council of commissioners? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. Mr. HAWKINS. Why didn't one of these groups initiate some action? Dr. DOUGLASS. Some political vacuum had to be fulfilled and I give this group credit for going ahead and acting. Mr. HAWKINS. They acted then? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. ` , , ` Mr. HAWKINS. Do you have professional organizations within the county, such as school boards and so forth? Dr. DOUGLASS. The `school board had already `acted and was in operation. Mr. HAWKINS. Did any of the professional groups you suggested be on the board initiate any action? , ` Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir; not to my knowledge.' ` ` Mr. HAWKINS. You say that this group consists of how many di- rectors'?' ` ` ` ` Dr. DOUGLASS. Under the `bylaws, 41. ` Mr. HAWKINS. And you are a member or one of the directors? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. And `chairman of the `program committee? Dr. DOUGLASS. Ye.s, sir. Mr. HAWKINS.' And yOu were elected to the chairmanship of this group? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes; and I might say offhand I got the highest vote. Mr. HAWKINS. Would you say it was a good group for having elected yonor is a bad group or wknt'? Dr. DOUGLASS. All Jean say is that that is statistics. As a matter of fact, I didn?t campaign. It is a job I didn't want. I did it as a civic duty and I don't know who `would want it. Mr. HAWKINS. It recognized your ability to the extent they elected. you. ` ` ` ` " ` SO-054-67--pt. 4-29 PAGENO="0450" 2910 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. DOUGLASS. No; I think they would like to have pinned any fail-~ ure of the program onto me politically. I think that is the motivation of it. I don't think it was high regard or respect. All I know is I got the most votes. Mr. HAwKINs. How do you consider the vote that you got? Do you think that a high percentage of the folks got together and they decided they wanted to pin something on you? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir. The folks at the annual meeting thought I would help make the thing work. Mr. HAWKINS. Have you tried? * Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. Our program committee has met every month. Our minutes are voluminous. We have reviewed every one of those programs. Mr. HAWKINS. Have you filed any complaints? Dr. DOUGLASS. Our report is read by anyone. Mr. hAWKINS. Heretofore have you filed any complaints about the operations of the program with anyone? To whom have you com- plained? Dr. DOUGLASS. I was chairman of the program committee. I tried to bring these things in and make them work. There was nobody to complain to except at the board meetings. Mr. HAWKINS. To whom did you complain? Dr. DOUGLASS. To the board. I was not around to make complaints. I didn't even ask myself to be invited here. Mr. HAWKINS. I assume someone invited you. Dr. DOUGLASS. That's right. I am not making any complaint, MT. Hawkins. I want to see the program work in the interest of the people who need jobs and need income. Mr. HAWKINS. You would like to see it work by dissolving it? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir. I would like to see it work better by estab- lishing an agency in which there are considerably less political con- notations. Mr. HAWKINS. Are you confining your complaint to the Office of Economic Opportunity completely as it operates within the county that you happen to reside in? Dr. DOUGLASS. That is all I am testifvin~ on. I know other counties. I am not coming to make any complaint. I am coming as a citizen to say I think this program can work different through a different type of instrumentality in the interests of its purpose. Mr. HAWKINS. We welcome you as a citizen and I enjoyed your testimony, but I am asking whether or not your experience is com- pletely confined to Orange County, or are you suggesting that the pro- gram be modified on a national basis to fit the situation that has de- veloped in Orange County, assuming what you say is- Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir. Mv knowledge of Orange County is inti- mate. As a political scientist, I do make some suggestions which I think would make it work better in the interest of the Nation. Mr. HAWKINS. In another district, for instance in Los Angeles County, if the school system did not want a Headstart program and let's assume the people didn't want it, should they have that flexibility to have their Headstart placed where they want it as well as you would in Orange County would want it placed in the school system? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir. I think the school system is the proper PAGENO="0451" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2911. vehicle for the administration of Headstart, the nursery, school pro- gram and the day care center. Mr. HAWKINS. And you think that flexibility should be imposed upon the rest of the country? Dr. DOUGLAss. I think they should have that opportunity offered to them. Mr. HAWKINS. Of having it placed where they want it to be operated? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir; have it placed in the public school system or not having any. Mr. HAWKINS. Then you are not suggesting any flexibility. Dr. DOUGLASS. No, not flexibility. Mr. HAWKINS. You have made the statement that the community action agency in Orange County has been used as a political machine for delivering the Negro vote. Would you explain what you mean by that and also what substantiating evidence you have that that is true? Dr. DOUGLASS. The substantiating evidence is the machine did not deliver the vote. Mr. HAWKINS. You have made the statement that it is used to de- liver the vote, not to deliver the vote. Not in the negative. Chairman PERKINS. As I understand it, you stated that the sub- stantiating evidence was to the effect and the fact that the machine did not deliver the vote? Dr. DOUGLASS. That's right, but that was it purpose. Mr. HAWKINS. I am asking you how do you substantiate that that was the purpose of it? Dr. DOUGLASS. All I can say, by careful study of the record and knowledge of the local political situation. Mr.HAWKINS. It is purely personal then? Dr. DOUGLASS. In our records here at least there are a dozen letters which have been written to Sargent Shriver that repeat the thing. It is general common knowledge. Mr. HAWKINS. Did you submit those for the record? Dr. DOUGLASS. I have. Chairman PERKINS. Your statement there is solely based on these letters; is that correct? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. Mr. I-IAWKINS. You have also indicated that you believe that the board of directors operating the agency in Orange County should be broadened. At the present time does it include any representation~ let us say, from minority groups? Dr. DOUGLASS. According to our new bylaws we have a certain number of Negroes. Mr. HAWKINS. What about the old bylaws? Dr. DOUGLASS. It was not in there, but we had this as a matter of course. Mr. HAWKINS. When were the new bylaws adopted? Dr. DOUGLASS. At the January meeting of this year. Mr. HAWKINS. Do you have any representation `from minority groups now? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. ` , ` Mr. HAWKINS. How many? ,. PAGENO="0452" 2912 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. DOUGLASS. I can look it up here, but I would say about a third. Mr. HAWKINS. A third of the membership would be in minority groups at the present time? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir, of pockets of poverty. Mr. HAWKINS. They are elected by districts? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. Are these the board of directors or are these advisory members? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir; these are the official corporate board of directors. Mr. HAWKINS. How many is that ? Dr. DOUGLASS. Forty-one. Mr. HAWKINS. And you say one-third are Negroes or minority group persons? Dr. DOUGLASS. That's right. Mr. HAWKINS. What other groups are represented? Dr. DOUGLASS. Governing boards and professional societies. Mr. HAWKINS. By governing boards, do you mean local agencies? Dr. DOUGLASS. Local county commissioners, local mayors, munici- palities. Mr. HAWKINS. I thought you gave me the impression that this was a small,~ select group that waS pretty much under the domination of the Governm~nt? Dr. DOUGLASS. I was talking about the executive committee. Mr. HAWKINS. Who runs the agency, the executive committee or the board that you are now referring to? Dr. DOUGLASS. In my opinion, the executive connnittee. Mr. HAWKINS. Then on the executive committee of 13, is it? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. How is the executive committee named, by the board that you referred to or by the Governor? Dr.DOUGLASS. No, sir; selected by the board. Mr. HAWKINS. This board that you speak of has one-third minority representation, has the elected public officials of the county, and so forth, they are elected to the board of directors, the 13 whom you say is a board under the domination of the Governor? Dr. DOUGLASS. No; I didn't say that. The Governor is out of office and he was defeated. Mr. HAWKINS. The polls didn't do him much good then? Dr. DOUGLASS. No, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. It is not under his domination now? Dr. DOUGLASS. He is out, but his patronage coimnittee continues. Mr. HAWKINS. Is it controlled by this board? When you bring the patronage committee in, are you relating this to the board that is governing this agency? Dr. DOUGLASS. Yes. Mr. HAWKINS. Do they determine who tile personnel of the projects or of the operations-what is the role the patronage committee plays? Dr. DoU'GLASS. Controls the executive committee so they can control the appointment of the personnel. Mr. HAW~NS. How is it that a board that is named from a larger group of directors ends up not controlling the operation of the pro- gram, but then you say that this part of the operation is controlled by PAGENO="0453" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 29131 the patronage committee, which I assume is a patronage committee of the ex-Governor? Dr. DOUGLASS. His continuing representatives; yes, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. It seems to me that Orange County is in a terrible mess, not just OEO operations. Dr. DOUGLASS. You are right. Mr. HAWKINS. With that, I give up. Dr. DOUGLASS. All I can say is this is one of the thmgs we have been trying to straighten out as local citizens on the board. Mr. HAWKINS. I think you have a lot of things to straighten out. I can see why OEO's operation in this type of county might be typi~ cal of some of the statements you made, but I disagree with you that it is the fault of OEO. It seems to me that it is the fault of the people of the county that have gone to the extent of not democratically selecting their own representatives or certainly not operating in the efficient American manner that we like to think that a local government would operate. Dr. DOUGLASS. If local politics operates in that clear-cut fashion, then my experience has been different from yours. It takes time for political situations to straighten themselves out. Mr. HAWKINS. I don't think your experience in Orange County should cause you to testify before this committee that, because of that experience, this committee should modify its entire program. Your statement indicates that we should not follow the pattern of Orange County. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Erlenborn? Mr. ERLENBORN. I have no questions, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Our next panel of witnesses are Don Watson, director, Mahoning Valley Vocational School, Vienna, Ohio; P. W. Seagren, director, Lindsay Hopkins Vocational School, Miami, Fla.; and George Ramey, director, Mayo Vocational Technical School, Paintsville, Ky. Let me welcome all of you gentlemen here. I know we are running way behind time. We regret the Situation. We have to accommodate the members as best we can. Go ahead and make your general statement and, Mr. Watson, we will hear from you first. STATEMENT OP DON WATSON, DIRECTOR, TRUMBULL COUNTY VOCATIONAL SCHOOL, VIENNA, OHIO Mr. WATSON. Mr. Chairman, my name is Don E. Watson. I am director of the Trumbull County Vocational School, Vienna, Ohio. The purpose of this testimony is to point out the capabilities of the existing education structure and to consider the merits and potential of expanding this structure to the point of organizing, building, and operating a program designed to meet the training needs of disad- vantaged youth in each individual State. The existing educational structure under the capable leadership of the U.S. Office of Education of the Department of Health, Educa- tion, and Welfare, has demonstrated an ability to accomplish such tasks effectively and economically. PAGENO="0454" 2914 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AGT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 Each individual State department of education has cooperated with local educational institutions in channeling Federal and State money, combined with local money, into specific training programs and our overall public school system, making possible the largest, most effective educational system the world has ever known. Vocational education is a division of this overall system. A growing concern in recent years has emphasized a need to provide additional training opportunities for those unfortunate people who either never had the opportunity to acquire a decent wage-earning skill, or lacked the proper motivation and interest to do so, or both. 1 am referring, of course, to the so-called disadvantaged or poverty- stricken. The U.S. Government, through legislative action, could pro- vide an opportunity and incentive to these people by utilizing existing machinery, the same machinery so instrumental in building this Na- tion, the educational system. The basic structure of Federal, State, and local agencies cooperating and working together toward a common goal is a workable one. Consider the task at hand: that of training our unemployed and underemployed youth to earn a living and to perform jobs essential to our society. For such an important undertaking as this, is it not logical to assign the responsibility to a tried and tested system that has proven its worth over many generations? This same system is currently in- volved in developing new techniques in order to stay abreast of the present and future demand for more and better education. It is necessary that we evaluate our cherished tradition and deter- mine whether or not we should experiment and make changes in our approach to the problems at hand. We must never change just for the sake of changing; rather, we change to improve. Caution must be exercised in order to avoid the abandonment of a traditional approach that works. If the experimental method proves to be lacking in effectiveness, we revert back to the traditional method but with a different. approach. In essence, I am suggesting that the responsibility of training our unemployed youth be placed in the hands of the U.S. Office of Education and subsequently State and local edu- cational agencies. PART fl-VOCATIONAL EDUCATION IN O~O As an example of what can and has been clone under this system, I would point briefly to the overall vocational education program in Ohio and more specifically to the manpower development and training program, conducted by the State of Ohio, under the Director of Health, Education, and `Welfare, U.S. Office of Education. Current programs and planning in Ohio would have a total of 57 area vocatiOnal education centers located outside of our large cities. In addi- tion to this, we anticipate the addition of 15 vocational high schools within our cities and an expansion of certain areas of vocational educa- tion into each of the comprehensive high schools in the large cities. This is an indication of the leadership and progressive thinking present in our State. Similar conditions exist in all other States. The effective utilization and results of the Manpower Development and Training Act is a specific example of what can be accomplished through the traditional structure of Federal, State, and local coopera- tion and responsibilities. Individual importance and esteem must pre- vail in the planning and operation of all "people projects." PAGENO="0455" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2915 In fiscal 1965 Ohio trained 7,561 unemployed or underemployed peo- pie; in fiscal 1966, a total of 6,017 were trained under the Manpower Development and Training Act. The Southern Ohio Manpower Center was established in Jackson, `Ohio, to serve a geographic area of southern Ohio. This center, op- erating under the Manpower Development and `Training Act, officially got underway in January 1964. This i's a multioccupation center for `unemployed youth and adults. The placement percentage of graduates is 80 percent. Again, an example of strength generated by Federal, State, and local cooperation. Ohio initiated a pilot residential vocational school under the Man- power Development and Training Act that has proven to be the turn- ing point in the lives of approximately 1,300 disadvantaged youth. The material that follows is a description of the Mahoning Valley Vocational School and was taken from a statement before the General Subcommittee on Education on July 12, 1966. I'ART Ill-DESCRIPTION OF THE MAHONING VALLEY VOCATIONAL SCHOOL The Mahoning Valley Vocational School has been in operation since July 29, 1964, as a pilot experimental school. The school is operated `under the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962, which was written for the purpose of training unemployed or underemployed people through individual projects in various communities throughout the country. The residential-vocational school concept was conceived in the office of Dr. Byrl Shoemaker, director, division of vocational education, State of Ohio Department of Education, in January 1964 for the purpose of providing a broad vocational and basic education pro- gram, coupled with a controlled environmental situation to the dis- advantaged youth of Ohio. This concept was discussed with Willard Dudley, administrator, Bureau of Unemployment Compensation of `Ohio, and received wholehearted acceptance by that agency. An extremely high degree of cooperation between these two agen- cies has prevailed throughout the planning and operation of the Mahoning Valley Vocational School. Plans are now being firmed up to bring another cooperative agency into the picture. The Trumbull County Vocational School Board of Education will become the gov- erning agency for the training phase of the project. The onsite residence phase of this program is operated by a non- profit corporation, whose income is limited to a minimal daily sub- sistence allowance. No charge is made for supportive services or administrative overhead. `The Mahoning Valley Vocational School `Corp. is responsible for providing lodging, food service, recreational facilities, health programs, and other services not covered in the educa- `tional program. These services were initiated from a $250,000 trust fund established by the Leon A. Beeghly Foundation, and the con- tinuation of these services are dependent upon the solvency of the fund through room and board charges to the students. The charges made for board and room are equivalent to the sub-. sistence allowances received by each student. In order to keep this rotating fund on a fiscally sound basis, it is necessary to keep school ~enrollment between 400 and 450 students. PAGENO="0456" 2916 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Toward the end of each section, and beyond the time when replace- ments can be made, school enrollment dips below this level and, as a result, income is reduced. Also, when a student is absent and his weekly subsistence allowance is reduced, his payments to the corpora- tion are reduced proportionately despite the fact that the expense of operation continues. This less-than-need income does two things to the program: (1) the fund operates at a loss~ with no alternate methods of recovery avail- able, and (2) there are no funds available to provide services still needed nor to improve and expand those now being provided. The maximum capacity at Mahoning Valley Vocational School is approximately 485 with an average enrollment during the year of approximately 425 and a yearly total of approximately 900. These 400 plus trainees, referred from all over the State of Ohio, are being trained in one of 14 different vocational areas. The courses are either 6 months, ~ months, or 11 months in length, depending upon the ~ornplexity of the particular vocational area. The job placement rate of the graduates at the present time is approximately 80 percent. Thus, this school is an instrument of positive action in Ohio's cam- paign to provide a new opportunity for its male youth, to provide job skills and better employment opportunities, and to encourage a wholesome attitude toward society and life in general. There are many statistics on the cost of the program that have been kicked around on the cost of Job Corps programs, and the cost of Mahoning Valley Vocational School. I felt honored, when I came across a brochure by the Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity, to find that a whole page is devoted to the Maho- ning County Vocational School, even though some of their figures are incorrect. Mr. QUIE. Can we get you to correct the figures for the record for Mahoning Valley? Mr. WATSON. The figures are low. Of course, I cannot speak for the cost of the Job Corps, because I am not that familiar with the program. Mr. Quit. Let's just correct the Mahoning Valley figures so they are accurate. Mr. WATSON. The cost indicated for Mahoning Valley Vocational School, I believe, has gone up to $3,500 this coming year, having been running at a cost of $2,500 per student, and this, of course, is not for a full year. This is for the length of the program, which could be 6 months or it could be for a 12-month period. Mr. QUIE. Do you have the costs on a 12-month basis? Mr. WATSON. We have broken this down into a student-year cost and on a student-year cost we arrived at this figure by getting the total number of students and the total nmnber of days they were there and working it out on a 52-week basis in determining a student- year basis. We are breaking it down so that it could be compared with other programs. The cost per year includes operating costs, subsistence, training allowance, every cost, capital outlay-remodeling, equip- ment-$4,573. This cost is being reduced this year because we have most of our equipment. We are pretty well equipped now and our expenses now are strictly operating expenses. PAGENO="0457" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2917 Mr. Quni. Do you have the figure for capital outlay, because OEO does not include capital outlay. Mr. WATSON. Automatically we have a $100,000 per year transfer from Health, Education, and `Welfare to the Air Force for the use of the facility. We share a facility with the TJ.S. Air Force. This $100,000 includes such things as the security force that they felt that they needed because of our presence there. This will take up approximately 4Oor 50 percent of this $100,000. The other part of the $100,000 is for services that the Air Force renders to us, such as utilities which would be a legitimate operating expense, of course, whether the Air Force provided it or the county provided it. The original remodeling runs between $200,000 and $300,000. This is included in the average costs. The cost per student that we generally give is, I believe, $2,680. This is not per year. This is per student served. It is not an accurate analysis. We do not believe we have to have a student a full year or even 2 full years to help him. Our purpose is to train people to the point that they can go out and become employed. If we can do this in a period of 3 or 4 months, we do this and we encourage them if they feel they are solid enough to remain employed and not end up back in the same boat. I would like to hit quickly on the characteristics of the student at Mahoning Valley Vocational School. They must meet the criteria of being disadvantaged Chairman PERKINS. I hate to interrupt you, but we have to re- cess for 10 minutes to answer a quorum call. Your entire statement will appear in the record. (The prepared statement of Don E. Watson follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF DON E. WATSON, DIRECTOR, TRUMBULL COUNTY VOCATIONAL SCHOOL, VIENNA, OHIO PART I.-INTRODUCTION Mr. Chairman and Mr. Congressmen, my name is Don E. Watson. I am Direc- tor of the Trumbull County Vocational School, Vienna, Ohio. The purpose of this testimony is to point out the capabilities of the existing education structure and to consider the merits and potential of expanding this structure to the point of organizing, building and operating a program designed to meet the training needs of disadvantaged youth in each individual State. The existing educational structure under the capable leadership of the United States Office of Education: Health, Education and Welfare, has demonstrated an ability to accomplish such tasks effectively and economically. Each individ- ual State Department of Education has cooperated with local educational in- stitutions in channeling Federal and State money, combined with local money, into specific training programs and our overall public school system, making possible the largest, most effective educational system the world has ever known. Vocational Education is a division of this overall system. A growing concern in recent years has emphasized a need to provide addi- tional training opportunities for those unfortunate people who either never had the opportunity to acquire a decent wage earning skill, or lacked the proper motivation and interest to do so, or both. I am referring, of course, to the so- called disadvantaged or poverty stricken. The United States Government, through legislative action, could provide an opportunity and incentive to these people by utilizing existing machinery, the same machinery so instrumental in building this nation, the educational system. The basic structure of Federal. State and local agencies cooperating and work- ing together toward a common goal is a workable one. Consider the task at hand; that of training our unemployed and under- PAGENO="0458" 2918 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 employed youth to earn a living and to perform jobs essential to our society. For such an important undertaking as this, is it not logical to assign the re- sponsibility to a tried and tested system that has proven its worth over many generations? This same system is currently involved in developing new tech- niques in order to stay abreast of the present and future demand for more and better education. It is necessary that we evaluate our cherished tradition and determine whether or not we should experiment and make changes in our approach to the problems at hand. We must never change just for the sake of changing; rather, we change to improve. Caution must be exercised in order to avoid the abandonment of a traditional approach that works. If the experimental method proves to be lack- ing in effectiveness, we revert back to the traditional method but with a different approach. In essence, I am suggesting that the responsibility of training our unemployed youth be placed in the hands of the U.S. Office of Education and subsequently State and local educational agencies. PART 11.-VOCATIONAL EDUCATION IN OHIO As an example of what can and has been done under this system, I would point briefly to the overall Vocational Education Program in Ohio and more specifically to the Manpower Development and Training Program, conducted by the State of Ohio, under the direction of Health, Education and Welfare, U.S. Office of Education. Current programs and planning in Ohio would have a total of fifty-seven area vocational education centers located outside of our large cities. In addition to this, we anticipate the addition of fifteen vocational high schools within our cities and an expansion of certain areas of vocational education into each of the comprehensive high schools in the large cities. This is an indication of the leadership and progressive thinking present In our State. Similar conditions exist in all other States. The effective utilization and results of the Manpower Development and Train- ing Act is a specific example of what can be accomplished through the traditional structure of Federal, State and local cooperation and responsibilities. Individual importance and esteem must prevail in the planning and operation of all "people projects". In Fiscal 1965, Ohio trained 7,561 unemployed or underemployed people; in Fiscal 1966, a total of 6,017 were trained under the Manpower Development and Training Act. The Southern Ohio Manpower Center was established in Jackson, Ohio, to serve a geographic area of southern Ohio. This center, operating under the Man- power Development and Training Act, officially got underway in January, 1964. This is a multi-occupation center for unemployed youth and adults. The place- ment percentage of graduates is 80%. Again, an example of strength generated by Federal, State and local cooperation. Ohio initiated a pilot residential vocational school under the Manpower De- velopment and Training Act that has proven to be the turning point in the lives of approximately 1300 disadvantaged youth. (The following description of the Mahoning Valley Vocational School is taken from a statement (with minor revision) before the General Subcommittee on Education on July 12,1966.) PART m.-DESCBIPTION OF THE MAHONING VALLEY VOCATIONAL SCHOOL The Mahoning Valley Vocational School has been in operation since July 29, 1964 as a pilot experimental school. The school is operated under the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962, which was written for the purpose of training unemployed or underemployed people through indiivdual projects in various communities throughout the country. The residential-vocational school concept was conceived in the office of Dr. Byrl Shoemaker, Director, Division of Vocational Education, State of Ohio Department of Education in January. 1964 for the purpose of providing a broad vocational and basic education program, coupled with a controlled environmental situation to the disadvantaged youth of Ohio. This concept was discussed with Willard Dudley, Administrator. Bureau of Unemployment Compensation of Ohio, and received wholehearted acceptance by that agency. An extremely high degree of cooperation between these two ngenei~ has provailed throu~hout the planning and operafion of fhe Mahon~n~ Valley `Vocational School. Plans are now being firmed up to bring another cooper- PAGENO="0459" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2919 ative agency into the picture; the Trumbull County Vocational School Board of Education will become the governing agency for the training phase of the project. The on-site residence phase of this program is operated by a non-profit corpo- ration, whose income is limited to a minimal daily subsistence allowance. No charge is made for supportive services or administrative overhead. The Maho- fling Valley Vocational School Corporation is responsible for providing lodging, food service, recreational facilities, health programs, and other services not cov- ered in the educational program. These services were initiated from a $250,000.00 trust fund established by the Leon A. Beeghly Foundation, and the continuation of these services are dependent upon the solvency of the fund through room and board charges to the students. The charges made for board and room are equiva- lent to the subsistence allowances received by each student. In order to keep this rotating fund on a fiscally sound basis, it is necessary to keep school enrollment between 400 and 450 students. Toward the end of each section, and beyond the time when replacements can be made, school enrollment dips below this level and, as a result, income is reduced. Also, when a student is absent and his weekly subsistence allowance is reduced, his payments to the corporation are reduced proportionately despite the fact that the expense of operation continues. This less-than-need income does two things to the program: (1) the fund operates at a loss with no alternate methods of recovery available and (2) there are no funds available to provide services still needed nor to improve and expand those now being provided. The maximum capacity at Mahoning Valley Vocational School is approxi- mately 485 with an average enrollment during the year of approximately 425 and a yearly total of approximately 900. These 400 plus trainees, referred from all over the State of Ohio, are being trained in one of 14 different vocational areas. The courses are either six months, seven months, or eleven months in length depending upon the complexity of the particular vocational area. The job placement rate of the graduates at the present time is approximately 80%; thus this school is an instrument of positive action in Ohio's campaign to provide a new opportunity for its male youth, to provide job skills and better employment opportunities, and to encourage a wholesome attitude towards society and life in general. It is our humble opinion that Mahoning Valley Vocational School is perform- ing a very important function in a complex society. We have many success stories and some failures. In the following report you will find narratives on the characteristics of disadvantaged youth and the various phases of the Mahoning Valley Vocational School project. This program has been made possible by the cooperation of many agencies listed on attachment "A," including a tremendous amount of on-site cooperation of the U.S~ Air Force with whom we share facili- ties. Characteristics of disadvantaged youth Trainees are selected for the training program based on the broad criteria of disadvantaged; economically, culturally, educationally, and socially. Each has a complex multi-factor pattern of needs. The following is a list of some traits of this group that seem to be common to a large percentage of our trainees: 1. Intelligence potential is usually higher than tests indicate. Many lack the "know-how" of taking tests, therefore job performance or other manipulative experiences are truer indications of potential. 2. Basic educational skills, such as reading, spelling, writing, and arithmetic are usually below the true ability of the trainee. 3. Many have been out of contact with any formally organized influence on their lives. As a result, several boys past 18 have not even registered for the draft. Many do not have the slightest knowledge of their legal rights and respon- sibilities. This group has a higher rate of minor infractions of the law due to ignorance of the law. 4. The physical condition and coordination are very poor. 5. There is an untrusting attitude about adults. When the boys first arrive they test the staff to see what kind of reaction they'll show. 6. Social immaturity is quite prevalent. 7. Many have a very poor estimate of self and disbelieve any good about them- selves and will not accept the fact that they have any worth. 8: Many have been slow to learn but are not slow learners. They learn by ex- periencing and in concrete concepts. This is a slower process than by verbal abstract methods. PAGENO="0460" :2920 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AOT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 9. It is a~ rare~ case that a disadvantaged youth has successfully completed a public school vocational program of study. The preceding examples seem to be grouped as atypical shortcomings. This group has positive traits as well: 1. These youth have a code of ethics that is very strong. If they give their word, you can depend that they will almost do anything to keep it. They believe strongly in "fair play." 2. This type of young man is independent and can shift for himself. He will not hesitate to walk 20 miles to get somewhere. He will hitch-hike almost any distance with little or no money on his person. 3. Most are highly motivated to learn a skill or craft in order to live a better life. During private counseling sessions, most have expressed that their main reason for learning a trade is to get a "steady" job and raise a family properly. 4. There is a strong need to identify with something that is good and im- portant. They are proud of their school and take exception when anyone crit- icizes it. 5. The boys are not "culturally deprived ;" they have a culture of their own. They will hold onto it for security reasons while experimenting with the new culture they are exposed to. 6. Disadvantaged youth like and respond to action. He is a "gadget" minded person. He responds to teaching machines and other learning "gimmicks." The above lists of characteristics are indicative of a need for a training pro- gram that is involved in the "Total Child" if desired outcomes are to be realized. A traditional training program influencing only a fraction of the trainee's time, separate from his social and other after school experiences will not truly be effective in changing attitudes and neither will there be an exposure to another way to live, by actually living this type of life. Housing program Mahoning Valley Vocational School trainees are provided housing in one of four comfortably furnished dormitories. Depending on size, each room houses two or three men who are given considerajle freedom in the arrangenient of their rooms to suit their particular tastes and comforts. Each dorm has two large lounges for television and leisure time activities. Supervision is provided by a staff of 60 dedicated men and women offering a broad program in social living, moral attitudes, health, recreation and citizenship. Meals are served cafeteria style in the large dining hall under the manage- Tment of qualified individuals in the fields of dietetics and food preparation. A staff of cooks and food service personnel provide wholesome and nutritional meals seven days a week. Religious services and moral guidance are provided by the school's two chap- lains-a Catholic priest and a Protestant minister. Both Catholic and non- denominational services are provided each Sunday. Special arrangements are made for those of the Jewish faith to attend services at a local Synagogue. A registered nurse is on duty daily from 7:00 a.m. to 9:30 p.m. to provide first aid and minor medical service on campus. Medical emergencies are referred to the school's physician, who holds a clinic two afternoons a week, or to a local hospital. Each trainee purchases, for a nominal fee, medical and surgical Insurance to cover his major medical and surgical expenses. A broad recreation program is offered year around, seven days a week by a staff of six experts in the field. It includes: 1. Intra-mural competition in football, basketball, volleyball, and softball, plus a varsity competition in basketball in a local community league. 2. Badminton, horseshoes, weightlifting, wrestling, boxing, movies, ping-pong, bowling, snack bar, Bible Club and Catholic Youth Club. 3. Off-campus trips by bus for bowling, roller skating, ice skating, movies, plays, miniature golf, dances, etc. 4. Talent shows, exhibitions, and visiting "name performers." 5. A Letterman's Club for participants in all activities. Counseling and dormitory supervsion is provided by a group of 25 dedicated men, most with training and/or experience in sociology or youth work. A dorm leader is on duty around the clock in each dorm for counseling and supervision. Four dorm supervisors and a program director furnish additional trainee and staff supervision. Experiences in leadership and student government are available to mature and responsible young men who serve as appointed student dorm monitors and as elected officers in the Campus Council. The Campus Council provide oppor- tunities for the trainees to become involved in campus government. PAGENO="0461" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT~ AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2921 Ts ainsng program Through experimentation and research our instructors have created a train- ing program laden with workable techniques and methods. There are no plans which cannot be altered or cast aside. Our whole program and its success is based upon continual experimentation, research and revision. No set of materials or techniques is sacred and flexibility in. programing has allowed us to indi- vidualize our training to fit any given trainee. Included in the many varied approaches used by our staff are such workable tools as individualized instruction, grouping, simultaneous instruction (wh*ere a basic instructor teaches right in the vocational shop specific allied skills, i.e., a math instructor coupled with the blueprint reading teacher for welders), re- leased time instruction (certain boys are released from a vocational area for basic education work). In our current training year we will be making more use of machined or programed instruction as well as our "center concept" of basic education training. (Our "Center Concept" places all students functioning at virtually any level in a 2-3 room complex manned by 3-5 instructors. Surrounded with the latest teaching devices and materials our instructors are better able to meet practically any student need or deficiency.) Naturally we place heavy emphasis upon the use of audio-visual aids and self- instructional materials because of the motivational value (built in success) that they have for our trainees. Each year has found~ our staff engaged more and more in the development of teaching materials and aids. This is partly due to our willingness for professional growth and our desire to remain ahead of the pack. This has also been necessary because of the newness and uniqueness of our program plus the fact that quality materials have not always been available. By bringing the trainess to a well equipped center (rather than the materials and instructor to the trainee) we have been able to economize cost at the same time we are expanding educational offering. T7ocatio',ial education The vocational education phase of the Mahoning Valley Vocational School project is designed to provide the opportunity for all trainees to develop a sale- able skill in their respective vocational areas as assigned. The philosophy of Mahoning Valley Vocational School with respect to vocational training, and all related areas, is that of accepting the referred trainees as they are, determining their abilities and attitudes, and to work with them, on an individual basis if necessary, to enable them to take full advantage of their abilities and develop their potentials to the highest degree possible during the time they are enrolled in the school. We realize, of course, that it may be unreasonable to expect each trainee to progress to the point of being a completely employable individual. In cases of very low ability, lack of aptitudes and emotional instability, a "satisfactory progress" rating could very well be assigned when Improved social adjustment and work attitudes result. The vocational curriculum is structured to simulate on-the-job working condi- tions whenever possible; thus, the training is composed of both skill develop- ment and improvement in work habits. We are training at the present in the following fourteen areas: Number of Name of area: sections Electrical appliance repairman 3 Auto body repairman 2 Auto mechanic 2 Auto service station attendant mechanic 1 Baker, hotel and restaurant 12 Accounting clerk 1 General office clerk - 3 Cook, hotel and restaurant 4 Landscape gardener 4 Draftsman (entry) 25 Computer and peripheral equipment operator 25 Maintenance man, building 2 Production machine operator 6 Welding 6 1 ThIs course is only offered In the evenings. 2 One section of this area Is being operated during evening hours. PAGENO="0462" 2922 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 The duration of our courses for the new training year are a maximum of eleven (11) months and an average minimum of six (6) months. We have been able to determine through our previous experience that more sections in a vocational area could be scheduled without apparent loss of skills through more coordinated planning and concentrated instruction. The typical trainee in one of our programs spend eight (8) hours a day in shop training and aligned classroom instruction. Related basic education is provided to each trainee on an individual need basis determined through testing and instructor analysis. Most classes have a maximum enrollment of 20 to 25 trainees except for Land- scape Gardeners and Hotel and Restaurant, Cooks which have a 15 trainee maximum. All courses are limited to one training group at one time with the exception of two training groups running concurrently in Landscape Gardener and three concurrent courses in Drafting, Production Machine Operator, and Welding. The majority of the courses are offered in the daytime hours between 7:00 AM. and 5:00 P.M. but we do have evening classes in Baking, Drafting, Welding and Production Machine Operator. All of our training programs will be repeated at least once and some twice during our new project year. All of the vocational areas were constructed from an initial state approved outline and each instructor has now completed a full curriculum guide for his respective course. Many important changes are reflected in these guides. The vocational staff includes nineteen instructors who are all certifiable by the State Department of Vocational Education. Basic educati~ The basic education unit of the Mahoning Valley Vocational School has these important goals as its major functions: 1. Supplementing the job preparation of a vocational trainee by strengthening or developing specific mathematical, reading and communicative skills. 2. Enhancing the individual through offering special services to assist in over- coming certain hearing and speech handicaps, enlightening and extending more advanced trainees, making trainees more aware of health and safety and its effects on the future, and eliminating or correcting a possible job handicap through instruction in driver education. The basic education unit consists of instructional areas in reading, mathe- matics, programed learning and communications which require the services of fourteen (14) full time instructors. Five of these men are experienced and qualified reading Instructors, five are qualified mathematics instructors and the communications and programed learning departments each include two čx- perienced tčachérs in their ranks. In additiOn, the services of a secretary are included to aid the total instructional staff in the many clerical helps needed and two teacher technicians are used as instructional assistants and as possible future trained and knowledgeable instructors for the program. Reading The Reading Improvement Center at Mahoning Valley is geared to handle the multiplicity of reading-communicative problems arising in the course of training unemployed or disadvantaged youth. A program encompassing remedial, develop- mental as well as specialized or technical reading is incorporated in its curricu- lum. The following is a list of the five general objectives along with specific ob- jectives to explain each. (Materials and tests are available in the Reading Improvement Center for the support of these major objectives.) General 1. To test and diagnose reading problems which will lead to specific programs. Specific a. to test both generally and specifically for reading problems; b. to diagnose generally and specifically for reading problems; c. to determine generally and specifically what programs are necessary for these boys. General 2. To develop reading skills capable of maintaining a position for which they have been vocationally trained. PAGENO="0463" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2923 Specific a. to~ develop comprehension skills specifically related to the vocational: area of each student b to develop vocabulary mastery specifically related to the vocational areas c to develop spelling skills specifically related to the vocational areas General 3 To develop an interest in reading various kinds of literature Specific a. to develop interest in reading newspapers; b. to develop interest in reading news magazines; c. to develop interest in reading general information magazines; d. to develop interest in reading material related to their vocational areas; e. to develop interest in reading longer types of literature, i.e., novels, fiction, biographies, etc. General 4. To develop some listening skills. Spe&ific a. to develop listeningskills in general; b. to develop listening skills as to specific situations. General 5 To develop the ability to read critically and accurately Specific a. to develop some ability to criticize new accounts; b. to develop some ability to criticize general magazine articles; c. to develop some ability to criticize longer types of literature. Machines and programed reading materials are available for those trainees who wish to sharpen, refresh or advance an already well established reading skill. Systematic instruction is offered in reading, spelling and writing skills to those trainees ~who have the basic ability but need to expand this to meet the demands of current employment requirements. In addition, a controlled experi- mental program is being offered for those trainees who are completely devoid of basic reading skills. Thus, the total reading program has four distinct facets: 1. Technical-advanced reading. 2. Semi-self instructional reading improvement and extension. 3. Developmental reading. 4 Controlled remedial reading Mathematics The mathematics program stresses remedial and basic math with the hopes of attaining competency in computational skills. Programed math materials are available for more advanced trainees and functional illiterates. Vocationally oriented math is emphasized concurrent with remedial, basic or advanced math instruction. In addition, a controlled mathematics group permits the inclusion, on an experimental level of instruction in "new math." Our math department is the newest addition to our "Center Concept" of educa- tion. The new Math Center will have a large group instruction room, a small group instruction room and a center proper. It will be manned with a minimum of four (4) instructors every hour to offer the most individualized type of in- ~truction possible. In addition simultaneous instruction (team approach to teaching vocational skills and basic educational skills at the same time) has been expanded for our coming term. The three sections of welding-blueprint read- lug plus the Auto Body and Production Machine Operators related classes will have a math instructor and vocational instructor coupled for teaching purposes. Thus in our mathematics instruction we offer a good workable individualized program in the following areas: I. Remedial-basic mathematics. 2. Advanced mathematics. 3. Vocationally oriented mathematics. 4. Controlled experimental math instruction In "new math." ~5. Simultaneous instruction in shop area. PAGENO="0464" 2924 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 19 67 Programed ~earni~vg This area is necessary to fulfill the' needs and `desire for more advanced train- ing for certain trainees who are referred to Mahoning Valley Vocational School. It supplements the basic program and also' provides the services of a library. The double' coverage allows operation of the center during the day and also into the evening hours. The Programed Learning Center was opened at Mahoning Valley Vocational School in August of 1965. The PLO has been able to fill many voids inherent rn our type of educational situation. Programed instruction per se is not new. In fact it is as old as the Socratic method. We do feel, however, that in our creation of the center we are using in a most unique manner here at Mahoning Valley Vocational School. First of all, let us try to understand what is meant by the term programed learning. Programs~ are self-instructional courses. This means basically that the student is really learning by himself with the help of a programed text or machine. These texts are not written like ordinary books. All of the fundamental knowledge the programer is attempting to convey is broken up into small ques- tion-answer steps called frames. The student is involved in the learning situation for the program requires a response to every frame. Immediately thereafter the program allows the student to check his answer against the correct one. In this manner the student knows immediately if he is incorrect and needs re- view. If the student is correct, the process reinforces `his learning through repeti- tion and by showing him that he is correct. Psychologists have found that man learns better and faster when he is confronted with a minimum of errors. Pro- gramed instruction, through "framing," is geared to this end. There is an instruc- tor present to help the student with any academic problems or explanation of the programed course that may be necessary. Along with the text programs we are attempting to utilize some teaching machines. At present we have two Auto- tutors and five Didactor Teaching Machines. We are only using those machines ~which offer us the programs that we need. These machines offer some advantages in teaching certain types of students. These are trainees who need unique learn- ing experiences to break the monotony of programed instruction. Mahoning Valley Vocational School receives many students who we know will profit from the PLC. There are, many and varied ways In which we `are using this type of instruction. A few examples are cited here: 1. Students functioning on an educational level above remedial in math and reading may be channeled into the center. 2. Students may use it for taking courses aligned with their vocational area. 3. Students may use the facilities of the center on their free time. These are but a few of the many ways that we feel we are able to utilize our instructional center. We offer some 300 different courses of study in many gen- eral areas, including those in health and safety, leisure, sciences, languages, study habits, English, mathematics, economics,' vocatiOnally related topics, and' many general works. At any one time we have had as many as 50 different courses of study being pursued simultaneously. Each trainee referred to the PLC is given an interview by the director in' which Programed Learning is~ explained. All of the available courses are then shown to the trainee. We try to point out to each individual trainee those courses which would benefit him the most. We do attempt to leave the trainee some choice in the matter however. Usually he is allowed to make a decision as to what be will take within a range of courses. Our approach to non-vocationally oriented courses (such as Interior Decorating, French, Chess, etc.) has been~ to allow the student to take leisure courses if he is also willing to seriously pursue a voca- tionally oriented course. So far this individual approach has proved successful. In our first year of operation 450 courses were completed. We had our'trainees completing about 44 courses per month. The center is now completing its seeond~ year and the success has been fantastic. We have just finished our thirty' thousandth (30,000) hour of vocationally oriented programed instruction. Train- ees completed approximately sixty-two (62) courses per month in our second' year and a total of eight hundred and twenty-two (822) programs were finished. Following is a list of some representative courses with pre and post test scores: PAGENO="0465" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2925 Course . Hours Scores ~ Pre Post Reading engineering drawings Applied trigonometry Binary math Applied electricity Logic Nutrition Introduction to data processing 14 22 5 21 13 14 12 24 27 53 19 55 61 0 96 87 100 90 99 94 92 We have had very little evidence of unsatisfactory completions on the part of our students. We assume that the freedom of movement that they, are allowed in course assignment coupled with the individual attention our situation offers them has been greatly responsible for this. We conducted a short study concerning our programed blueprint reading course in the first two months of this training year. The statistics which follow were gathered to help a local industry `with a training problem involving pro- gramed instruction. Pertinent &~ta 1. Number of courses completed 11 2. Average number of hours to complete 14. 8 3. Average pre-test score (percent) 34 4. Average post-test score (percent) 93 [Percent Increase 59 percent average] Scores Course Hours __________ ___________ Pre Post 1 Reading engmeeimg drawings 14 48 91 2. Reading enginSering drawings ` - 13 32 97 3. Reading engineering drawings 14 20 86 4. Reading engineering drawings 12 56 95 5. Reading engineering drawings 15 28 94 6. Reading engineering drawings 19 22 94 7. Reading engineering drawings 12 36 94 8. Reading engineering drawings 18 30 97 9. Reading engineering drawings 13 44 88 10. Reading engineering drawings 14 44 96 11. Reading engineering drawings 18 12 85 With the experimentation in this new educational device many benefits have ,been reaped by Mahoning Valley and the vocational movement in Ohio. Following are a few: 1. Better quality job preparation for vocational trainees. 2. MDTA city programs incorporating P.L. Centers in educational structures in Ohio. 3. Joint Vocational Schools in Ohio are Incorporating Programed Learning Centers in building plans. 4. Co-ordinator of Programed Learning Center at M.V.V.'S. given N.E.A. 19437 award for outstanding work in Programed Instruction in U.S.A. Mahoning Valley has also been able to help six high school dropouts receive their diplomas through the use of programed courses. This in itself is a great reward for our Programed Learning Center and its work. Learning is the most important concern of our work In the PLC. We think that through the creation of their new educational tool we may be able to over- come some of our major problems. Much of our work at present is experimental in nature and it will take us sometime before we can really be sure our educational ideas and approaches are worthwhile. 80-084--67---pt. 4-30 PAGENO="0466" 2926 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196.7 Communication~ This area of the curriculum has been completely revised to include instruc- tion in: 1. Job orientation. 2. Future educational opportunities beyond MVVS. 3. Personal development. 4. Employment possibilities. 5. Environmental changes. 6. Business communications. 7. Common sense finances. Ł1pecial services Special services require a staff as follows: 1. One speech and hearing therapist. 2. Two health and safety instructors (now changed to Adult Living). 3. One driver education instructor. .~peeclv and laearing.-The purpose for including this service Is obviously the fact that a speech or hearing defect can and often is a serious job handicap. Past experience has shown that this is enough of a problem in our regular enroll- ment that a full time specialist is needed and desirable. Adult living.-This area, which was new to the curriculum two years ago, has shown its value and usefulness to Mahoning Valley Vocational School trainees. Classes allow discussion and training in personal development, the nature of man and his environment, personal health habits, Improving the environment, the ~`facts of life," the results of poor health habits, general safety habits, community health services, first aid, safe driving practices, and material and child health. Driver edvcation.-This area of instruction was added for several reasons. First, the trainees we work with need to learn the proper and safe techniques of driving. Secondly, the inability to drive is in most cases a job handicap which was shown by the research-follow up study completed last year. Third, the gradua- tion of students in any of our auto training areas who cannot drive is completely inexcusable. Much of the direction in the educational program has come by the suggestion and with the assistance of our guidance department. Guidance assists the instruc- tional program by suggesting areas of instructional need, acting as a sounding board for general educational tone with action feedback by the guidance direct to the basic education supervisor and department heads, developing cooperative testing procedures and individualized testing, counseling for psychologically sound teaching, preparing information on the composition and character of train- ing groups, record keeping and many additional supportive services. It is felt that guidance must be involved in curriculum through assistance and by sugges- tion. The counselors must have a means of making recommendations concerning the classroom situatIons. Thus curriculum revision is put on a much sounder basis. Guidance services This program involves the "total child" concept. In order to assist the trainee in receiving maximum benefits from his training experiences, the guidance department is involved with his total environment while at the Mahoning Valley Vocational School. This program also coordinates the efforts of the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation, Health Department, Trainee Accounting, Residence and Guidance Services. The guidance services, include: 1. Orientation of new trainees___ Interviewing, group sessions and tours. 2. Standardized Testing Determine potential and level of educational development. 3. Psychological Services Special trainee studies and counseling. 4. Record Keeping Cumulative file of training record, test data and reports. 5. Evaluative Services Provide Ohio State Employment Service with record of skills attained. 6. Counseling Services Personal, social, training progress, support- ive to residence and pre-employment (as- sisting the Ohio State Employment Staff). 7. Referral Services Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation (on campus), agencies near school and home of trainees. PAGENO="0467" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2927 8. Consultive Assist instructional staff and residential staff with program development and with indi- vidual trainees having special problems. 9. Trainee Accounting Attendance records. 10. Group Guidance Groups of trainees with similar needs, (mar- ried trainees, personal problems and pre- employment sessions). The above guidance services require a staff consisting of: Pupil Personnel Supervisor; Head Counselor; Pupil Accounting and Work-Study Coordinator; Psychologist; Social Worker; Three Day Counselors and Three Evening Counselors; Two Secretaries. Work-study programs (Sec. 13, PL 88-210) The work-study program at Mahoning Valley Vocational School was started July 1, 1905. This program was a two month summer program for July and August. The project involved forty boys earning a maximum of $45.00 per month and a full-time coordinator. The proposed budget was approved by the Ohio Department of Education, Division of Vocational Education. Columbus, Ohio for a ten month program starting September 1, 1965. This program was set up for seventy boys at a maxi- mum of $45.00 per month. Trainees on work-study program are assigned to one of the following work stations: 1. Cafeteria helper 2. Clerk typist 3. Custodian assistants 4. File clerks 5. Groundskeeper assistants 6. Teacher assistants 7. Building maintenance 8. Telephone answering service 9. Mail boy 10. Laboratory assistants Each trainee wOrking on the work-study program is assigned to a supervisor. The supervisor helps the trainee develop and maintain a responsible attitude toward his studies and the performance of his job. This provides practical work experience under supervision. Periodic evaluations are made by supervisors and work-study coordinator to determine the effectiveness of the program's objectives and the trainees' job performance. The past year's experience with the work-study program indicates that many of the boys completed their training who normally would have had to leave the school due to financial difficulties. This program is necessary because some trainees enrolled are not eligible for youth allowances. Included are the sixteen year olds, school dropouts not out of school a year, and those with no financial resources. This practical work experience has been an effective supplemental aid to vocational training. For these reasons we will continue a twelve month program. Benefits to youths I. Many of the disadvantaged youth are lacking in social maturity. They are unable to plan ahead and forego any rewards for a later fulfillment. A. The varied experiences in a residential program promotes and acceler- ates maturity. The area of financial responsibility is an example of this change; even though the trainee receives a very small allowance, the boys learn to plan ahead: 1. Expenses for traveling home on their weekend off. 2. Saving money in order to buy items of clothing. 3. Machine operators have purchased manuals. 4. Auto mechanics have saved, in some individual cases, up to $600.00 to purchase tools. B. Another important outcome is the ability to get along with people. Studies show over 60% of the failures on the job is due to this reason rather than lack of vocational skills. The assistance from counselors in training to PAGENO="0468" 2928 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 get along with others in all types of situations and under all types of conth- tions, results in a more understanding trainee in the area of human relations. C. Individual counseling, vocational and personal, is employed not only during the training hours but `also during -the -off-duty `hours. `This service has had a definite effect on the training -participation `as well as behavioral changes. D. Many of our boys were rejected by the Armed Forces as emotionally immature and/or educationally unfit. The residential program provides experience away from home of a semi-military atmosphere that is a bridge into the highly demanding life in the military. II. There are many special needs which disadvantaged youth have that deter education and training that residential programs help meet. Chief among these are the medical problems. A. Medicals needs are diagnosed more accurately when the trainees are in a 24 hours a day residential program. Treatment of these medical needs. with the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation assistance, is more assured. We have been running about 50% of our total enrollment receiving some medical assistance. `Cost~ analysis The following two pages is an attempt to break down the costs in various ways in order that a comparison to other programs may be possible. Due `to the experimental nature of the Ma'honing Valley `Vocational School the `reader can reasonably assume that stable on-going programs will operate at a lower cost. Breakdown of training costs Project Train- ees ap- proved Train- ees actually enrolled Train- Approved ees educational grad- training uated cost' ~ Aver- age cost per pupil 2 Approved training allowance, transporta- tion, sub- sistence I Aver- age , cost per pupil 2 Aver. age Approved cost total' per pupil 286(1-19) 5111-(1-4) 5166 5186-(1-16) 6l2S-(1-4) Total& - -- 640 859 95 90 25 28 805 833 95 107 1, 660~ 1, 917 442 53 11 433 55 994 $899, 912 38, 091 22, 182 953, 292 94, 379 2,027,856 J $1, 048 645 792 1, 144 882 1,058 $1, 188,603 135, 392 48, 430 1,379, 512 176, 626 2,928,563 $1, 384 1,504 1,730 1, 656 1, 651 1,528 $2, 129,318 193 483 70, 612 2, 332 804 271,005 4,997,222 $2, 479 2 1.50 2, 522 2,800 2, 533 2637 1 Costs indicated are approved amounts and not necessarily amounts expended. 2 costs are based on figures in column 3 which reflect trainees actually enrolled. Student-year cost, `Aug. 1, 1964, to June 3, 1966 Project 1 Student- 52-week years Total cost per cost per student-year 3student-year 52 48 48-week cost per student-year 52-week cost per student-year (operating) 1 48-week cost per student-year (operating) 286 (1-19) 350 378 5111 (1-4) 303'~ 33 5166 10~ 11 5186 (1-16) 327 342 6128 (1-4) 44 473/i Total 762 8113.~ $2, 129,318 $6, 083.76 (1,597, 680~ 193,483 6,343.72 (190,445) 70,612 6,724.96 (67,462) 2,332,804 7, 133.95 (2,004,322) 271,005 6,159.20 (236,041) $5, 633.11 5,863.12 6,419.27 6,821.06 5,705.33 $4, 564.80 6,244.03 6,424.96 6,129.43 5,364.56 $4, 226.66 5,771.06 6,132.90 5,860. 59 4,969.24 4,997,222 ~6,558.03 (4,095,950) 4 6, 158.05 25,375.27 2 5,047.37 `Training project approved under the Manpower Development and Training Act. 2 Student-years compiled by dividing total student-weeks by 52 and 48. 3 Total maximum cost of each project as approved; those funds not used are deobllgated and returned to State or National pool. Cost per student-year determined by dividing approved amount by student-years. `Cost per student-year determined by dividing approved amount minus costs other than normal operat ing costs (i.e., equipment, remodeling, security force by Air Force, etc.). N0TE.-The Mahoning Valley Vocational School project is a pilot experimental program; due to experi. mentation, costs are higher than the normal manpower development and training project. Numerous techniques, methods and materials are now incoruorated in other manpower projects as a result of MV'VS experimentation; PAGENO="0469" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2929 Research project We are currently conducting a research project that entails a thorough follow- up on each graduate or terminated trainee, interviews with employers, families, local school and employment service personnel. The interim report of this re- search project has given new insights and possible guide lines to be used in future plans for the continuation of Mahoning Valley Vocational School and similar projects. The final research report will be published in July, 1966. The following evaluations of services are taken from our research files. A. Marked attitudinal improvements: 1. Are more courteous. 2. Have greater self-esteem. 3. Show more respect for adults. 4. Have a healthier outlook on employment. 5. Place greater value on education. B. Trainee participation in community affairs: 2. Blood donation program-144 pints donated. Scheduled to be first civil- ian agency in smallpox program; will receive smallpox vaccine on July 27, 1966 and have blood mobile donation on August 24, 1966. 3. Participated in Golden Gloves. 4. Were part of church league basketball and softball competitions. 5. Entered competitive automobile racing team-have won 8 trophies this season. 6. Participate in Armed Forces Day. C. Acceptance by Industry (refer to employer comments in next section) 1. Local. 2. Statewide. D. Placement: Counting Armed Forces and job placement: 1. 1964: 791/2 percent. 2. 1965: 80 percent. 3. 1966: Anticipated 90 percent. 4. Research statistics indicate an overall job placement record of 80 per- cent (this figure includes graduates now serving in Armed Forces). Interview coniments from employers Capt. Oliver W. Jones, Senior Chaplain, U.S. Coast Guard Academy.-"It is a pleasure to say that the quality of Larry's work has been outstandingly combined with a pleasant personality and a willing spirit. In April of 1966 he was promoted to the rate of Yeoman, Petty Officer, third class. This promotion was in the shortest time permitted under existing Coast Guard regulations. I have every confidence that he will be qualified and promoted to the next highest rate just as soon as possible. "It is a pleasure to pass on this report to you and I'm sure it gives a rewarding satisfaction to you and the school you serve." Personnel Manager, Jennings Manufacturing Co.-"Richard has just recently been put on a welder learner program . . . we find him neat, able to get along with fellow employees, punctual, and work conscientious.. It is a pleasure to have hired Richard as a young man, who we believe, has real possibilities." Service Supervisor, Sky-Chef, Inc.-"In answer to your request on the progress of Phil, he is an excellent worker and has a very good basic knowledge of his job as a food preparer. From my conversation with him and supervising his work, I would say that a fine job was done by your school in introducing him to cooking. If Phil is any indication of the caliber of your graduates, I feel sure more of them would be welcome at Sky-Chef." Penn Ohio Supply Co., Data Processing Manager.-"In August, 1965, we em- ployed a graduate of your school as a machine operator in the Data Processing Department. Jack was employed by our company because he had received superior training at the Mahoning Valley Vocational School. He has demonstrated that his training has adequately prepared him for profession in Data Processing. He has been of great value and has proven his capabilities in helping us to convert from punch card equipment to 1401 Computer. He has been remarkably efficient and responsible in carrying out these duties. it is therefore with pleasure that I most ~nthusiastieally commend Jack and the Mahoning Valley Vocational School for the outstanding job they are doing in training their men of ability, competency, and talent." Service Manager, Kempthorne Dodge.-"Andy was a good boy and a good worker. I feel Mahoning Valley Vocational School did a good job in training. Since he was in a training program I feel he had a good knowledge of mechanical work. He worked on used cars, brakes and tune-ups." PAGENO="0470" 2930 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Restaurant Manager, Cleveland Hotel.-"Fred was hired as a bus boy and did an excellent job from.the beginning. He was very well trained at the school, was a very good worker. I used him as captain of the bus boys to train the new boys." Personnel Manager, Aro Corp.-"Richard's basic knowledge of drafting and math are very good. He is well versed in the usage of fractions and micro-finishes pertaining to drafting. There must be some real great instructors at Mahoning Valley Vocational School. I would hire six (6) more of your graduates right now with the same training that Richard has." service Manager, Pontiac Garage (southeastern Ohio) .-"Conrad was well trained but I would not have hired him without his Mahoning Valley Vocational School diploma." Foreman, American ~Standard Machine Co.-"I feel your trainees are very well qualified. I have rated Bob excellent in all categories. I would not usually hire a high school drop out without your type of training." Personnel Manager, Pease Lumber Co., Inc.-"Richard was clean cut and handled himself well in the interview. He did well on his test. I would not have hired a high school drop out, in fact I would not normally even take an application but I hired him because he had vocational training and a diploma from Mahoning Valley Vocational School." Local office personnel (O~E~) comments "When the boys return they look neater and better fed. Getting them away from their family was very good." "Three Mahoning Valley Vocational School graduates passed the employment test, which is very difficult, at a large local industry, they would never have done so without Mahoning Valley Vocational School." "I have noticed a difference in my referrals that have graduated. They have politeness, polish, and employer acceptability." "I'm sold on Mahoning Valley Vocational School, it's really worthwhile and it gets the boys away from their home environment." "When I visited your school I was very impressed with both the training and the facilities." "Your school was the start of Job Corps. It initiated the entire Job Corps concept." "The school did change one of our referrals personality. He was able to meet and talk with people and think for himself and he was uncapable of this before. He would not have been able to get and hold his present job without Mahoning \Talley Vocational School." "I have visited your school, my candid reaction: I'm impressed." "I am highly impressed with the quality of instruction at Mahoning Valley Vocational School. Every boy referred from our area, whether it was terminent or graduate. feels the instructors are terrific." "Almost all our returning graduates are impressed with your school. Most of them would like to return. Many good comments are made about the instructional staff and no criticism. Some thing you are doing is better than what our local programs are doing because placement is easier and job secured seem to be better. Your school is better equipped because of residence to do more than just training. You can work with personal problems and offer around the clock counseling, therefore your drop out rate is actually less than our local program. Your reputation has gotten around and employers are more ready to hire your graduates than local graduates. You are making headway in making them more socially acceptable. You can help when it is needed because they are there full time. Your school was the fore-runner of Job Corps." Parent comments "Mahoning Valley Vocational School was Jack's salvation. It straightened him out." "Your school is a good thing and there should be more of them. It does things for boys for whom high school has done nothing." "Mahoning Valley Vocational School gave my son a sense of responsibility. He is now going hack to high school." "Andy learned so much about the rest of the world while he was there. It gave him a better sense of values and of his own worth. I am very enthused over the whole program." "More boys should take advantage of your school. Education is needed and will be more so." PAGENO="0471" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2931.' "I would recommend your program to anyone. This is the only type of program that would accept a slow-learner. Living away from home helped him a 1ot~ Training such as yours cannot be bought in Ohio." "If it wasn't for Mahoning `Valley Vocational School, God knows what he would be doing now. It was a wonderful opportunity and a tremendous benefit to Bob, he is really interested in making machine operator his vocation." "Steve enjoyed the school and especially his instructor. It means a lot when teachers take the time and are interested." "Your program gives a boy an opportunity to further his education, and learn a'trade at the same time. It was very worth*hile~" "Larry's reading and education improved at Mahoning Valley Vocational School because the teachers really wanted to help. All male instructors meant a lot because `he lost his father at the age of nine." "I'm glad that Ed got to go. He wouldn't work in formal school and he didn't want to stay at home." "Mahoning Valley Vocational School training made it possible for Don to enter the service. Previously he had been rejected." "Ron was the first negro boy at the machine shop he is working in. They have hired others since. Your training was responsible for all' this. He has talked a lot about it and I am so glad he went." "When my son was home on week-ends he couldn't stop talking about the school." "Living in a dorm away from home did a lot of good for my son. It made him more mature. Your program is a wonderful thing that boys couldn't get other- wise. It means a lot to the boys financially because of the special training they receive." "Everywhere my son went with his Mahoning Valley Vocational School cer- tificate he was interviewed and they took an application. Employers would never do this for him before Mahoning Valley Vocational School." "I just can't thank the staff of Ma'honing Valley Vocational School enough for the fine job they did in molding my son's life. Prior to his attendance, he was quite a problem to me since his father passed away. When he graduated he was a changed individual with the motivation to succeed in life." "Mahoning Valley Vocational School should have been in operation many years earlier. As far as I'm concerned the best school in the country. It was a wonder- ful opportunity for my son to have a chance to further his knowledge since he was a slow-learner." "Attendance at Mahoning Valley Vocational School was the best thing that ever happened to my son. What a change-wonderful training-Mahoning Valley. Vocational School has done wonders for my boy. I really spread this around every chance I get." "My son was so pleased with your school he wanted to return." S~tudent comments Electrical Appliance Repairman.-"I would not have my present job if it wasn't for the training. It's a good program and I advise anyone who wants to further himself to go to Mahoning Valley Vocational School."~ Accounting Clerk.-"The instructors were wonderful. They all tried to help us." Auto Body llepairman.,-"If I had another chance I would study more. It was a good experience and it gave me confidence in myself. You must have an educa- tion to get a good job." `Auto service station Mechanic.-"Darned right I would encourage others to go to Mahoning Valley Vocational School. It has everything." General Office Clerk.-"The school, is a good opportunity. It has given me a better outlook on life. It made it easier for `me to get a job." Balcer.-"Mahoning Valley Vocational School helps a person grow up a lot." Auto $ervice station Mecli,anic.-"I enjoyed Mahoning Valley Vocational School a lot and got more out of it than anything else in my life. My instructor was wonderful." , , , ` Building Maintenance Man.-"Maboning Valley Vocational School made me realize that I am growing up. It wasn't so helpful in getting a job, but the basic ed really helped me. I also learned to live with other people." Electric Appliance Repairman.-"My class was the best class there. And my instructor was on the ball. The course was very practical with no nonsense. Everyone at the school gave me guidance." PAGENO="0472" 2932 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Cook.-"Mahoning Valley Vocational School is a good thing. I have given good reports everywhere, and I really didn't want to leave. I learned much about getting along with others, and much about life. Everyone there helped me." General Office Ulerk.-"Besides the great training facilities and the instructors being helpful in increasing my knowledge in this vocation, it made me realize there were other gentlemen in a worse predicament than myself at the time. My instructor did an outstanding job." Cook.-"A place where a person without an education can get an opportunity to better themselves and come up in the world." Tab Machine Operator._"Mahoning Valley Vocational School started me on a fine career. Of course I had one of the best instructors." Stock Inventory Clerk.-"The school helped me become more mature. My instructor did a fine job. I feel with this training I can now better myself." At~to Service Station Mecliani.c.-"I like my job and feel I have it because of my training. You should expand the program and get more boys in it." Ai~to Body Repa.irman.-"We should have had at least a half day in reading. Both auto body and reading are important, but you can't go anywhere without reading it's very important." Routernan.-"It was a real good thing. The opportunity of a life-time." Machine Operator.-"Gives a back-ground to gain your destination and makes up for a failure to get a high school education." Baker.-"I am baking in the service and I use all my recipes. My instructor. was the man behind it all. I am able to work in my area in the service because of the training." General Office Clerk.~-"Mahoning Valley Vocational School gives a boy a sec- ond chance to make good in life." Cook.-"I would encourage others to attend. If they don't they are missing a chance of a lifetime." Aitto Mechanic.-"I am very thankful for the opportunity to attend Maho- fling Valler Vocational School. It has helped me in a million ways. You have wonderful instructors." Tab Machine Operator.-"Mahoning Valley Vocational School is a great idea. You should expand to more vocations and impress basic education on everyone. I really learned the importance of education. It should be stressed more." Accounting Clerk.-"I got along very well with my instructors because we understood each other. This is the first vocational school that pays a person to reach a goal in life and a skilled trade." Auto Service Station Mechan~ic.-"My instructor was one of the greatest men I have ever known." Welder.-"I suggest you get more teachers and open more schools like Maho. fling Valley Vocational School." Anto Mechanic.-"Mahoning Valley Vocational School Is the best school. There Is no other one like it." Accounting Ulerk.-"Many young boys need a helping hand in realizing the importance of education. My instructor was very much interested in educating the young adults at Mahoning Valley Vocational School." Stock Inventory Cierk.-"I never would have been able to get this job without Mahoning Valley Vocational School. I appreciate the time the instructors took with me and I really didn't want to accept the allowance since I felt the chance for training was more than enough." Electrical Appliance Repairm..an.-"Mahoning Valley Vocational School corn- munications classes helped me to gain confidence in myself. I was shy and with- drawn and hesitated to participate." Building Maintena~tce.-"My reading and math Improved at least six grades while I was at Mahoning Valley Vocational School." A ecounting Uierk.-"Dorrn life was an experience I never had before. It was ~ very happy one and I made many friends." TVelder.-"I feel my attendance was tremendously beneficial to me. Before I attended Mahoning Valley Vocational School the only jobs I could get were part time. Today I am employed as a welder making a very good salary." A graduate, speaks Allen was a dropout in the 10th grade in 19~2. His principal in high school reported extrernel~ poor attendance, and that he had taken up with poor asso- yates. After many conferences with this student and his parents he was sus- PAGENO="0473" `ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS' OF 1967 2933~ pended from school. He was allowed back on probation but he was completely indifferent to his teachers, his subjects and to education in general. He was not a discipline problem when be was in school. It was just that he wasn't in school very much. His high school records show he started smoking in the sixth grade, had repeated auto accidents and was cynical with no desired for educa- tion. He came to the Mahoning Valley Vocational School after he received a medical discharge from the service for poor adjustment. His future looked rather bleak at the time of his arrival at the Vienna facility. He was one of the first two boys to register at the school. He wasn't happy about it, nor unhappy. Just indifferent.. Allen had a "you-gotta-show-me" attitude when he was interviewed upon his arrival. He completed the course, graduated, and moved to California. Recently this letter was received: Hi... Thought I'd write you a letter so you could update your statistical files. I have been employed for the past month as a computer operator with the Cor- porate Agency, a subsidiary of the California Finance Co. We do the data proc- essing work for three other associations. My starting salary was four hundred dollars a month, $4800 a year. The score I got on the IBM Computer Pro- grammers Aptitude was the `determining factor in my employment. However,. I certainly wouldn't have obtained the job if it hadn't been for the education and start in life I received at MVVS. By start in life, I am referring to the initiative that was stirred in me at the school, to start overcoming my handicap' of being a high school dropout, and the courage to further develop my desire to become a successful person, and help contribute to the betterment of the society we live in. "I will be going to San Jose City College this fall and intend to continue my career in college indefinitely-for as long as I am able to read and write. I feel now that a person shouldn't stop his education in college after receiving degrees, etc., but should continue the learning process throughout this entire life. "Although it has taken a year and 3,000 miles I hope ,that my success and perseverence may be an inspiration to others at the school who may feel they' haven't a chance of becoming a successful person. It's certainly not too late for' them if they have the initiative and desire. I think it might be a good idea if you make available to all the students, all the current books on positive think- ing. I have read several and they certainly helped' me in relation to the problem' I was faced with. I think it might also be helpful to the students if they are familiarized with the six steps of the Scientific Method for solving problems. I've' found they should be applied more often to the problems in life one faces as well as for the problems in textbooks. "I have read several articles in various newspapers, expressing the concern of the public over the cost of operating schools such as MVVS. It's unfortunate that the public can't keep a few facts in mind: We are all human and apt to make serious mistakes in life, such as dropping out of high school. Some of the greatest men in history have made similar mistakes in their lives before reaching their' important status. Then is it not also possible that some of us may possess the' same qualities and if given the chance to get. back on our feet may repay society many times in our accomplishments? Yes, it does take an awfully large sum of money to start these schools, but perhaps a few people should give it some second' thought. You certainly won't find any of the spoiled brats you find in so many other schools, demonstrating and protesting the freedoms and rights that persons such as myself have learned to respect, because of the mistakes we've made. Too many, of more fortunate students, who graduate from high school and then go on to college seem to feel that these freedoms are owed to them and don't realize' what they must do to keep these freedoms and earn them for their children. "I intend, and I hope to, repay you and all the other people at MVVS in my accomplishments in the future and my contributions towards society and the betterment of man." PAGENO="0474" 2934 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Armco Steel Ford Motor Co. Cleveland Post Office LeBlonds Firestone Mid-West Tool Co. Miller Meteor Corp. National Tube Bond's Clothing Champion Paper Co. Dominion Electric Chrysler Corp. Timken Roller Bearing Youngstown Northside Hospital American Screw Co. Gray Drugs Copperweld National Tube National Tool Co. Superior Die and Mold Warren General Hospital Benita Aluminum Homer Laughlin China Co. Canton Mercy Hospital Master Manifold Commercial Shearing & Stamping International Harvester Ottawa Daybrook Corp. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Aro Corp. Westinghouse McNicholas Transfer McCall Corp. Republic Steel Babcox Wilcox Pennsylvania Railroad General Electric St. Elizabeth's Hospital Pollack Steel Vicon Welding Goodyear Aerospace Bobbie Brooks Fashions American Shipbnilders St. John's Hospital Penn~Ohio Tnwel Co. American Standard Mnrion Power Shovel C~rboTool& Die Republic Rubber Hamilton Tool & Die Fruehauf Corp. Pepsi-Cola Co. Wierton Steel Pease Lumber Co. National Seating Lawson Milk Co. Cleveland Aircraft Roppe Rubber Ohio Brass Corundum Co. Westbrook Corp. General American Watson-Atlas Corp. American Steel Stolle Corp. Bessmer-Cooper Industries Mansfield Screw Machine Co. Harshaw Chemical Co. Newport News Shipyard Thew Shovel Co. Crane Company Ohio State Highway Department Lombard Corp. Warner-Swasey Co. Bellows-Valvaire Valve Buckeye Tool U.S. Steel Corp. Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. Boy Scouts of America Ann Arbor Bank Union Carbide Corp. Vista Volunteer Corps. Cincinnati Milling Machine Cincinnati Public Library Ohio State University Standard Register Co. Monarch Machine & Tool Toledo Board of Education W~nco. Tn~. Miami State University Rockwell-Standard Manufacturing Hanria Coal Co. Continental Can Corp. Roper Co. Borg-Warner Corp. National Rubber Machinery ATrAOHMENT A COOPERATING AGENCIES 1. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 2. Department of Labor-Bureau of Employment Security. 3. United States Air Force. 4. State of Ohio, Department of Education. 5. Ohio Division of Vocational Education. 6. Ohio Bureau of Unemployment Compensation. 7. Ohio Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation. 8. Local Service Clubs. 9. Local and State Wide Industry. 10. Public Schools. 11. The Mahoning Valley Vocational School Corp. 12. The Trumbull County Vocational School. ATTACHMENT B A SELECTIVE LISTING OP EMPLOYERS OF MAHONING VALLEY VOCATIONAL SCHOOL GRADUATES PAGENO="0475" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2935 Onio Is LEADING THE NATION IN NEW EDUCATION CONCEPT The root cause of urban poverty today in the U.S. is not prostitute mothers, ~drunken fathers, slums with rats and cockroaches, broken homes and racial prejudice. The root cause is our snobbish, impractical, intellectually dishonest and mis- guided public school education system. It is ill suited to most boys' and girls' real needs in our modern industrial and technological society and is geared mainly toward educating the 30 percent minority of young people bound for college and the tiny 14 percent minority destined to be graduated from college. Our out-of-date, undemocratic and unworkable public school system largely neglects or mistreats educationally the 70 percent of young people not college bound and not wishing to be, and is therefore mainly responsible for creating thousands upon thousands of drop-outs, delinquents, unemployable and welfare recipients. Determined to change the overall bad situation, the state of Ohio, under intel- lectually honest and dynamic Gov. James A. Rhodes, has taken the national leadership in trying to fulfill boys' and girls' real needs by providing them with the kind of vocational and technical education that enable them to find profitable employment with advancement for themselves and their families. At Penta-County Vocational School and Technical College near Toledo, and at Timken Vocational High School in Canton, the students and teachers, along with city and state officials, laid bare for me the roots of our social problems. At the Penta-County installation, young people from five counties near Toledo are rescued from the kind of all-day "book learning" public school education that was cruelly inflected on them by academic and sociological theorists responsible for the mess in our urban communities by claiming falsely that all boys and girls are equal and every boy and girl should go to college. The Penta-County school district covers 1400 square miles, serves 500,000 people, and offers three levels of vocational education-an area vocational high school, a technical college, and an adult evening division. THE SCHOOL DAY is about 19 hours in shifts and the buildings are in use seven days a week. The education aim is "to offer a program to meet the needs of students, business, labor and industry in the area." A student at Penta-County spends three-fourth of his or her day on vocational subjects and one-fourth on academic subjects. It was an inspiring experience in these times to see the marvelous results ob- tained at Penta-Oounty and similar results at Timken Vocational High School in Canton. Here were classrooms full of attentive, respectful, quiet and stimulated boys and girls hanging on teachers' words and bent on self-improvement. I SAW EDUCATIONAL wonders at Penta-County and Tinken schools in Toledo and Canton. I believe I met the future elite in our nation-the boys and girls who will give It good citizenship and are developing in school the good qual- ities necessary for responsible community leadership. In the historical past, Ohio has led the nation in being the home of future presidents of the United States, I believe it is now pointing the way toward developing future presidents of civic institutions, industrial enterprises, service groups and humanitarian organizations. The reason? Ohio is facing our nation's educational problems as they really are. Today Ohio is pioneering in establishment of the educational development that can bring a bright future to our land. While doing everything possible for the college future of 30 percent of young people, Ohio is beginning to give the other 70 percent their due so that as the young people put it-they won't "get done out" in school and can win out In adult life. PIONEER VOCATIONAL SCHOOL HELPS DISADVANTAGuD Bogs At Mahoning Valley Vocational School near Youngstown, Ohio there is flow taking place a unique pioneering effort in vocational training for disadvantaged boys from 16 through 21 years of age. Set up at a nhased-out Air Force base, the Mahoning School is operated by several state groups working together tn solve the basic edu~tional problem that led to hasty creation of the ill-fated Job Corps and similar poverty pro- gram activities. PAGENO="0476" 2936 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 The school, a residential training place, is a really good example of how seed money froni federal funds can be used effectively and prOfitably by local and state officials working with. educators and industrial executives. During several hours conversation with more than 30 young men who were school dropouts and former delinquents in one way or another, I heard the kind of plain honest talk that explains more clearly than volumes of acedeinic socio- logical studies exactly what these boys' problems are. "I WORK BETTER with my hands than my head," said a palefaced, blond boy. "Here at this school they don't put the pressure on you to be what you don't want to be and can't be. They don't look down on you for wanting to be what you want to be." "All that business about kids being equal is for the birds," said a youth about to be graduated froni the school, where he studied mechanical drawing and with an industrial job waiting for him. "I learned more math here at the drawing board that I ever did in school where most of the kids always were ahead of me. I just can't think so fast I couldn't keep up and the teacher just had to rush everybody along. My family is a mess and school was my chance to get away from them and ahead. But tryin' to go ahead at regular school and not learnin' a trade was too much, just too much !" SAID A BOY with an intelligent face showing new-found maturity: "Every- body was telling us that if we didn't make it through high school and to college we'd be on the junk heap. My folks took out insurance to send me to college. They said they were giving me a chance to get ahead and do better than they did in life. Well. I've got a job waiting for me when I finish up here that'll pay me more than my old man is getting right now. I read better, write better, and. talk better now and I like studying because I can see where it leads to." Like all human endeavors, the present system at Mahoning School was arrived at by trial and error. Early mistakes are now corrected. I never saw a more self- respecting, disciplined, ambitious and purposeful group of young men than the "disadvantaged" youths now in residence at Mahoning Vocational School. The pupil-teacher relationship is remarkably good. It is not surprising that a veritable pilgrimage to Mahoning is taking placa by officials in federal and out-of-state welfare departments. Seventy-five percent of the so-called "problem" youths trained at Mahoning in courses lasting from six months to a year have found jobs and are keeping them. "In vocational education." says Dr. Byrl R. Shoemaker, director of Ohio voca- tional education. we weave together the principles of math and science, skills and technical knowledge into a mix which will help youth and adults to enter and adjust to employment opportunities or to upgrade themselves in their chosen field of work." We should adopt new attitudes toward vocational education. A terrible disservice is being done to our youth today, in my judgment, by intellectual leaders, insurance and banking executives, government and indus- trial leaders who keep on telling young people they are destined for poverty and inferiority unless they get a college degree. Only 14 percent of young people become college graduates. Why not train the 86 percent so that they can answer the basic employment question: "What can you do?" Today 60 percent of the American work force is in the service occupations. Why not train young people to fill and hold such jobs well and efficiently, always leaving the way open to advancement? There always is "room at the top" for boys and girls determined to get there.. But why neglect or mistreat educationally the vast majority filling the rungs of the ladder from bottom to top? PART IV.-SUMMARY We have reviewed in general terms the merits and success of our Educational System (Federal, State and local cooperation), the very basis of America'.-~ de- velopment into the strOngest, most progressive country in the world. We dis- cussed, again, in general terms, the trends and progressive nature of State voca- tional programs. Finally, we have given a more detailed report on examples of positive action in vocational education with regard to utilization and effec- tiveness of the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962. I would em- phasize the value of the capable leadership at all levels of the existing structure PAGENO="0477" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2937 of our educational system. Effective leadership must be motivated by a sincere feeling of obligation and dedication to society and its membership. Also, adequate financing is essential in the implementation and operation of practically any venture. However, neither leadership nor adequate financing can stand alone; but a combination of the two results in a very effective and reliable organization. At this point in the history of the United States of America, as always, the world looks to us for examples of the good life, the proper approach to govern- ment and the problems each society inherits and develops. It behooves us to lead by example, not force, in establishing the feeling that: "Our way is best." If we are to set this example, we must, by necessity, provide opportunities to all our constituents to develop skills that will encourage individual pride and self-esteem. Our free enterprise system flourishes only if skilled and competent people are available to carry out the tasks. The existing educational system of the United States has the capabilities to accept the responsibility of providing such opportunities. The Vocational Edu- cation Division of this system has the machinery to build the program. Having some knowledge of the kind of people involved in vocational education, I am of the opinion that they would accept the assignment willingly. Speaking for the State of Ohio, I can assure you "we are ready." As an example of a possible network of residential centers throughout the country; Ohio estimates a need for six such center, *5ŘQ students per center, requiring an initial investment of approximately 2'/2 million dollars for con- struction and equipment, and an additional two (2) million dollars per year for operation of each center. The total cost would be $15 million initially and twelve ($12) million per year thereafter. Use of existing facilities and equip- merit, of course, would decrease the initial costs. Hopefully, the present needs would decrease to the point of being able to phase out the residential center concept and attack the problem where and when it should be, at the local level through high school and regular adult vocational programs. This, of course, is strictly an estimate and would require a more thorough study to determine exact needs. I would assume that an average of three residential centers per state would meet the needs providing adequate programs be available to those youth not requiring the residential setting. Again, this is only an estimate and would require an "in depth" study of conditions in each State to firm up a specific overall program. Ladies and gentlemen, please review the successful programs initiated and conducted by this and previous administrations and consider the logic of build- ing on this success in order to cope with one specific problem that hampers our society: "unemployed, unskilled, disoriented youth." You hold in your hands an instrument that would authorize an existing organization to attack the prob- lem enthusiastically, energetically and effectively. I humbly urge you to take the following action. PART V-RECoMMENDATIONS Considering the experiences of Mahoning Valley Vocational School and other successful ventures by our existing educational system, I would recommend that responsibility for the administration and Operation of the present "Job Corps" program be transferred to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, United States Office of Education, as stipulated in Title II, "Residential Training Programs," H.R. 10682. (Whereupon, ~t recess was taken.) Chairman PERKINS. The committee will resume its sitting, and go ahead with your statement, Dr. Watson. Mr. WATSON. I was discussing briefly a brochure published by the Office of Economic Opportunity, comparing Mahoning Valley Voca- tional School to job centers. As I pointed out, the figures here are not completely accurate. I dis- cussed briefly the cost of the program, and now point to program *Each residential center would accommodate a maxixDum of approximately 500 students; this limitation of enrollment cannot be overstressed due to the value of Individual identi- :fication with the total program. PAGENO="0478" 2938 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 achievement, dropout rate, which indicates 17 percent at Mahoning Valley, and 19 percent for Job Corps. I do not know how these figures were determined, but our dropout rate is approximately 38 percent, and I don't know if this is any indi- cation of all the figures. * Chairman PERKINS. You are basing this on the first 30 days, the ones that drop out within the first 30 days, from both areas? Mr. WATsoN. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. That is your comparison? Mr. WATSON. Yes.. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. WATSON. All right, placement, then, 70 percent completion. Of course, I can't speak for placement of Job Corps trainees, or gradu- ates, but our placements are verified to exceeding 80 percent of our graduates. Back to the program offered at Mahoning Valley, and I will touch. on this very briefly, we are now offering 14 different vocational areas,. pius basic education, plus pupil personnel services, plus a residential program, and under the residential program, we have, of course,. dormatories, food service, recreation program, many student activities,. such as campus counsel, public relations, Bible club, choir, art club,. community activities, ciubmobile program. Our students have given over 300 pints of blood this year to the local blood bank. Community Chest, $400 this year. They work with an orphans home, a county orphan home in remodeling the recreation room, and providing a Christmas party. To hit very quickly as an indication of some of the cooperation we have extended and have received from the community, I guess the thinking of all of the people involved in the Mahoning Valley Voca- tional School project is it is an excellent project, something that has to be done, and I think on a much larger scale, but at the same time, I think the feeling is that if every school in the country offered ade- quate vocational training opportunities, there would be no need for such schools as Mahoning Valley Vocational School. I hope that sometime within the next few years we get to this point of the Vocational Act of 1963 has started this thing going, and I think the progress that has been made in the last year, year and a half, indicates that we are going in the right direction. The overall results of the Mahoning Valley project, I indicated the placement figure of over 80 percent, and I think probably just as important if nOt more important would be the attitudinal improve- ments of the graduates. Some of the improvements that we have found through personal interviews with graduates, parents, employers, indicate that this group is more courteous, after being involved in the Mahoning Valley Vocational School. They have a. greater self-esteem, pointing again to the experience of its experiencing success. For many of these young fellows, this is the first time in their lives they have ever really experienced success, and another reason for this self-esteem that they a.re able to develop is the fact that the program is small enough, and interested enough in them that they do feel a part of it. * * They are not just one of a mass, as they have been, sOme of them, all of their lives. PAGENO="0479" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2939 They seem to have more respect for adults. A comment w~ get frequently is "This is the first time in my life I ever really knew that adults cared about me one way or the other." And I think this comes simply from adults that are sincerely inter- ested, and I think this is something we need to keep in mind on any' project of this nature, that we have to build into anything of this: kind the individual worth and the self-esteem, in any kind of a people project that we come up with. They seem to have a healthier outlook on employment. Many of them were unemployed, I think, prior to coming to the Mahoning Valley Vocational School, because they didn't want to be employed, and they have found that there is some satisfaction in being able to complete a job and complete it well. There is an indication that they place a greater value on education. in general, due to the fact that they have found that this can be a pleasant experience. Education is not necessarily drudgery, something to be pushed aside and fought, but it can be a pleasure. As evidence of this, many of them go back to school, and get their' high school diplomas. Many of them are given their high school di- plomas through the general equivalency exam. Many of them go on to adult classes after leaving, and we have had quite a number that have gone on to college after leaving Mahoning Valley. Again, there is much more detailed information in the prepared. statement that would get into such things as techniques used in voca- tional and basic education. Some of the innovations that have come out of the Mahoning Valley project, such as program learning center,, our success with this, our program instruction center, has now led to the State department of education, including a programed learning' center in every one of their area vocational schools. There are many things of `this nature, again, that can be, that are spelled out in `detail in the written report. I would like to go into the summary now, and give yOu more time for questions. Chairman PERKINS. All right. Mr. WATSON. In finalizing, I would say again that we have reviewed~ the merits and successes of our exist'ing system of Federal, State, and, local cooperation. In general terms, the trends of vocational education, I `think that'. trend is definitely progressing. The examples of positive action on the' part of our existing system, and I would point to the value of the capable leadership `that we have now at all levels, Federal, State, and local levels. This leadership must be motivated by a sincere feeling of obligation and dedication to society and its membership, and I think this has t.o prevail at all levels. Of course, we have to have adequate financing, but adequate financ-. ing will not stand alone, nor will capable leadership. The combina- tion of the two can result in a very effective and reliable program. If we are to set the example I think we are expected tO set now as always the other countries of the world are. looking to us for leader- ship on the best approach to Government, education, and a method of' handling problems, and I think if we are to set this example as we should set it, by convincing them that our way is best, we are going to have to provide the opportunities to all our constituents to develop skills that will encourage individual pride and self-esteem. PAGENO="0480" 2940 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 I think the vocational educational division of our present educa- tional system has the machinery to build this program. In closing, I would like to ask again that you please review the. successful programs initiated and conducted by this and previous ~tdministrations. I am referring specifically to the Vocational Educational Act that came out of this administration, and the Man- power Development Training Act that came out of the previous administration. These are just examples of successful programs that we can build on. And consider the logic of building on this success in order to cope with one specific problem that hampers our society, and that is un- employed, unskilled, disoriented youth. You hold in your hand an instrument that would authorize an existing agency to attack the problem enthusiastically, energetically and effectively. Therefore, I would heartily recommend that you con- sider these experiences, and would recommend that the responsibility for the administration and operation of the present Job Corps pro- gram be transferred to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, under Office of Education, as stipulated in title II, H.R. 10682. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. We will withhold questions until we hear from the other gentleman. The next witness is Mr. P. W. Seagren. Go ahead. STATEMENT OP P. W. SEAGREN, DIRECTOR, LINDSAY HOPKINS VOCATIONAL SCHOOL, MIAMI, YLA. Mr. SEAGREN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Philip W. Seagren. I am director of adult education for Dade County, which, of course, includes the Greater Miami area. I have had the privilege on previous occasions to appear before this committee. The most recent one was on the 13th of April. when we were discussing appropriations for the Vocational Act of 1963. At that time. we had some questions that concerned me considerably, which had to do with the attitude toward or about vocational edu- cation, and its status or its level, referred to as basement time of training, or things of that nature. I plan to devote most of my comments, Mr. Chairman, along that line of making a point that we have been striving to have quality in vocational and technical education. Now it is true in the early days, we had a dumping ground, with little or no standards. I think during World War II, we got into war production training, and we are working with advisory committees more realistically, and I think at that time, we started to develop along the lines of better quality programs. This was followed very closely, of course, by the veterans' training after World War II, and then we have had subsequent acts which have enabled the vocational technical division to extend and expand into all areas for adults. About this time, or shortly after World War II, we started to develop guidance departments in our programs. We set up pretesting, determined that the person had the ability, both in communications PAGENO="0481" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2941 and in math and in science, to be able to be occupationally employed at the end. And we had to take time to develop those prerequisites. I will say, however, that we never refuse any person 16 years of age or older, coming into our adult program. If they fail to come up to standards on communications or on math or science, we place them in an adult high school division, and help them to upgrade them- selves, and then they move over into the vocational section. Concurrently, across the Nation, we are working more and more with craft and advisory committees. I have a roster here that shows all of the various craft committees we have, some 60-odd committees that we work with that makes it possible for us to keep close touch with what is going on in business and industry. Not just paper commit- tees. They meet with us on a schedule three times a year at the very least, and in the case of electronics, we are almost meeting constantly to keep current with the times, but they help us to evaluate not only our course of study, they help us to evaluate the training itself, which is reflected in the end result of placements. They also recommend instructors, so that we have qualified instruc- tors coming from industry, who have the desirable working experience that is needed, and that goes right on through to where they help us develop higher standards on the type of quality that we have, so all in all, I would say that we have moved well forward in developing quality in our vocational and technical division. With these craft committees, our placement through their efforts has been increasing over the years, and I think in our regular voca- tional program, we have better than 90-percent placement in almost any category that I could mention, and I will leave a brochure here that will show you some 300 courses that are available at Lindsay Hopkins and its 13 branch centers. We maintain a current enrollment, throughout the year, that varies between 19,000 and 21,000 adults that are going to school. That is the county as a whole, and our actual registration showed that 65,000 indi- viduals attended school at the Lindsay Hopkins and the 13 branch centers last year, so I think that that does indicate that the people in Dade County appreciate what we are trying to do, and they are upgrad- ing themselves, and of course becoming more employable, or upgrading themselves to a better or higher job. One-third of this group are adults going in a high school program. They are now either working for a high school diploma or working just to take additional courses for their own interest. I would like to stop now and refer to an emergency training pro- gram that happened in Dade County several years ago, and we are taking about emergency programs here today. That has to do with the Cuban refugees that came into Miami and Dade County many years back. I had the pleasure of working out a plan with out of the Washington officials as to how we could go about financing this training for the Cuban refugees. I have had some experience with the redtape involved in MIDTA, or in manpower training, and I have been studying a way to go back to a similar program that we had during World War II, where we paid them by the hour. 80-084-67-pt. 4-31 PAGENO="0482" 2942 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 So with the contract with the Washington office, dealing with the emergency for the Cuban refugees, I had a one-page contract, whereby we stated that every classroom hour would be 48 cents an hour, and every shop hour would be 60 cents an hour, and we kept track of that actually on our roll books, where we marked by the hour in attendance, not present or absent, and as a result, we paid for the salaries, the supervisory cost and supplies, and even replaced some of the equipment. We have heard figures mentioned here previously today, and cost that goes into several thousand dollars. Here is a program that has functioned for a number of years and is still operating in our program. where if we took a thousand hours of occupational training, that would only amount to $600. These are realistic figures, and we are operating with it. We have a separate accounting system that can verify it. In the matter of a few weeks, because the influx at that time was coming in tremendous numbers, we had 7,000 Cuban refugees enrolled in English foreign- born classes at one time, and that continued to expand over a period to where we ended up at the end of a 3-year period, almost to the very day, we had enrolled a hundred thousand Cuban refugees. At the present time, for our fiscal year just closed, we have 22,900. That is in addition to the other figures I have mentioned, over and beyond the regular program. We have also handled manpower training in our stride, as has been indicated by tile previous speaker, and we, too, are doing better than 80 percent on the manpower training program. Unfortunately, the numbers are small because the funds are not available to our county in the amounts we would like to have, but with our large adult program, it hasn't hurt us any, because they are going to school on their own. Just a few weeks ago, the Director of the Neighborhood Youth Corps came to me and he had a problem. That isn't the first time we have sat down to talk problems in tile OEO program. He was concerned that of the 500 that are in the Neighborhood Youth Corps for metropolitan government, and the 450 in the south Florida group that is sponsored by tile Catholic Welfare Bureau, that tile trainees were not going into classes in basic education as they shou1d in accordance with the plan. We checked our records, and I would like to just quote from the supervisor of statistics in our Lindsay Hopkins Center. He said: The Director of Metro Group informed me that 2.50 of his 500 enrollees are under the registration certificates, indicating that they would register at Lindsay Hopkins or one of its branch centers. However, he claims that only a hundred are now attending. According to our records, only 60 from both metropolitan group and the South Florida group signed up for grade placements in January of this year. And speaking with the principal of one of our branch centers, he claims he has approximately 30 registered for classes at the beginning of the trimester, which was in May, and by the end of May, only nine were still in class. I feel with our experience and diversity and flexibility, and our training, whether it be in a high school program or in the adult divi- sion, that we would be in a much better position to absorb any type PAGENO="0483" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2943 of educational training and occupational training in the OEO Divi- sion that could be absorbed with our present staff without any diffi- culty, and we could move ahead just like we did when we took over the assignment of training all these Cuban refugees. That briefly is my comments, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Go ahead, Mr. Barney. Delighted to welcome you here, as being from my own congressional district, and to my way of thinking, you operate one of the good vocational schools in the country. One of the very efficient schools. Go ahead. STATEMENT OP GEORGE RAMEY, DIRECTOR, MAYO VOCATIONAL* TECHNICAL SCHOOL, PAINTSVILLE, KY. Mr. RAMEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am director of the Mayo State Vocational Technical School at Paintsville, Ky., and I certainly appreciate the opportunity of appear- ing before this committee. Paintsville is located in eastern Kentucky, right in the heart of the depressed area of eastern Kentucky. This school offers a total of 17 different subjects. Thirteen of these are trades, four are technical subjects. Most of the courses are of 22 months duration. It has an enrollment of approximately 500 students. This is the out of school youth and adults, 500. The average age is approximately 22. Approximately one-third of the enrollment are girls. I speak of the employment record, and maybe this is bragging just a little, but for more then 10 years, this school has placed better than 95 percent of its graduates. This past year, we graduated 280-some-odd students. We not only place the students, but after the students are placed, they keep their jobs. We actually don't have any educational background as a basis for the student entering. We let any student enter who sees fit to enter our school. However, on the other hand, we work very closely with all the high schools, and we much prefer that a student continue his academic education as far as possible before lie comes to our school. I get a little concerned, Mr. Chairman, sometimes on these short.- term courses. So many times, these people who are put in these short- term courses are the very people that need, to me, more of an educa- tional background in social studies, and all that. These people are going to have to live with other people, they are going to have to be citizens, and we hope that they form their place in the communities, and as a result, my institution makes every effort that is humanly possible, we think we do, to encourage the boy and girl to get as much academic education as possible before they come to our school. As a result, our enrollment is about 85 percent high school graduates. Chairman PERKINS. Eighty-five percent high school graduates, your enrollment has been? Mr. RAMEY. That is right. PAGENO="0484" 2944 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 But they do come from very low-income families. We feel that these people need more than just training. I would hope that we would never reach the place in our Nation that we just train people to do one certain thing. It should be broader than that, if they are going to be citizens of the Nation, in the future. The thing that concerns me more than anything else about our school is the fact that while we have approximately 500 enrolled, year in and year out, we have a waiting list of boys and girls wanting to enroll, and we have to deny them enrollment although we are making some progress under the 1963 Vocational Act. We will get a. building within the next year or so that will accom- modate some 250 additional students. I don't think anybody is any better acquainted with this, Mr. Chairman, than you are, because you get letters continuously from our people putting pressure on you to try to get them in my school. Chairman PERKINS. I write a few letters to try and get people in the school, too. Mr. RAMEY. That is right, but we just simply don't have room to do it. We need at present at least an enlargement of 800, or an enlarge- ment for at least 800 more students. Now we are talking about this war on poverty. It seems to be the theme of the meeting today. You Imow, these same people that are try- ing to get in school, and want to come to school, and some way or somehow can arrange to go to school, whether it is on the work-study program or the student loan, or the borrowing from some neighbor, are the very people that we are denying admittance to the school, and these same people then will come back later on in future years, and will be on some relief prograrn~ and they will be paid to go to school. To me, that just doesn't make good sense. Some way, we need to expand this to take care of the needs of the people that we have today, and fight the battle on poverty before it gets in the shape that many people have gotten into, and admit these people when they want to be admitted. Many of these people are from what you might say in our area the middle class, which may be wouldn't be the middle class someplace else, but these same people will be relief clients in years to come, and their families will he deprived of the things that we feel that people, any people, should have, if they are not getting an opportunity to fur- ther their education. To me it is the most pitiful thing in the world that boys or girls will try to better themselves by going to school and getting an eighth grade education or a high school education, and then have a road-block placed in front of them: "I can't get into a trade school, simply because they don't have room for me." ~igIit along with that, there is something that I don't imagine should be brought out here, although I think it should be in the record some place, and this is this dormitory business. ~\Te have a~ boys' dormitory where we house approximately a hundred students. We can do that very inexpensively to the school, and to the student. But we don't have any dormitory facilities whatsoever for the girls. Our boys' facilities should certainly be enlarged, and we certainly should have girls' dormitories, if an area school is going to be an area school. PAGENO="0485" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2945 Now I am talking about an area where it is fairly sparsely populated, not in the large metropolitan district. If it is going to be an area school where we can have a broad offering, that people want, to me some way, we just have to find ways of building dormitories, so these people can come in and have `some supervision while they are still young, and some place that they can live, and get their room and board at a price that they can afford to pay. And I have always wondered why in the world we can't have some- thing similar to the way the colleges have it, that maybe we could retire bonds, or retire the money that it takes to build these dormitories, as we collect the money. To me, that would be one of the greatest things that could happen t.o my school, the Mayo School. There is another point there that I think that too often we over- look. Our people are a little hesitant to leave the area, sometimes. We don't have any employment up there. If we had employment,, we wouldn't have a depressed area, and as long as it is a depressed area, we just don't have the employment, so they have to go someplace else, and it is bad. I have neighbors that have t.o leave and go to Ohio and Michigan, and sometimes, we feel that too many of them leave. I heard a little joke the other day that a lot of people thought that this brand of car, the "GTO," mea.nt "Going to Ohio," that so many of our people do go to Ohio. But as I say, they are hesitant to leave. On the other hand, I believe, and I can't give you the figures, but I am sure this would be true, that the students that come in there from the heads of the creeks and board in Paintsville are much more prone to leave and go someplace else to get a job than the student that comes directly from the head of the creeks, and he expects to go all the way at one big leap, and it is quite a leap to come from the head of Cow Creek, Congressman, to Chicago or to Washington. But if we just had these dormitory facilities, I think the social aspect would be worth the effort itself. Another thing that always concerns me about our school is why we can't participate in a school lunch program. Many of our students have trouble buying their lunches. Many of our students have in the past had only two meals a day, and they are not too good. Why in the world can't people participate in that, if they need it? To me, I think we get program-happy sometimes, and forget the indi- vidual, and I think some way that we need to look at the individual: What does this boy or what does this girl need in order to develop him into the thing that he can be developed into? I don't want to take up a lot of time, because frankly, I don't know how you people st.and these hearings day-in and day-out, but I would like to close by saying that I hope we don't have duplications in train- ing. I just don't think we have the money, or don't think we have time, don't think we have room for duplications. I do think that the vocational education has done and is doing an outstanding job in training for specific trades, so I would hope that we wouldn't have duplications.' PAGENO="0486" 2946 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 My only criticism of vocational education is we are justnot expand- ing fast enough, and we are not doing enough of the things that I feel that we all know should be done. And I thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank all of you gentlemen, and state that I largely concur in every statement that has been made, and I particularly concur in the statement that you have just made, Mr. Ramey, that we are not doing enough in the field of vocational education. I would like for us to go a lot farther, and neither do I want to see any duplication anywhere. Now I have always felt that we were almost a generation behind in vocational education. In late years, we have made tremendous prog- ress, but we have very few residential centers in the country today, and I am particularly proud of the school in Vienna, Ohio. I think this is a great institution, and I just wish that more States had inaugurated residential schools years ago; We may say that we are in an infant state, insofar as residential centers are concerned in vocational education, and I think all of you gentlemen will agree with that statement. Is that statement correct, Mr. Watson? We are in an infant state of residential centers? Do you agree to that? Mr. WATSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. All of you agree with that. Well, with that in mindS what percent of your students, Mr. Ramey, out of the 500 en- rolled, are now high school graduates? Mr. R~rEr. Eighty-five. Chairman PERKINS. Eighty-five percent. So, out of 15 percent of the 500 that are not, how much education would you say the other 15 perc.ent have when they come to educational school? * I am not talking about your MDTA programs. Mr. RAMEY. You are talking about the MDTA, too? Chairman PERKINS. No, just the other program. Mr. RAMEY. The others will average about the eighth grade. Chairman PERKINS. The others, about the eighth grade. Would you say the majority of that other 15 percent would have some high school education? Mr. RAMEY. I didn't quite hear you. Chairman PERKINS. Would you say the majority of the remaining 15 percent would have some high school? Mr~ RAMEY. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Now does that account for about the same ratio in your school system. Mr. Seagren, in Miami? Mr. SEAGREN. Well, because of the size of the program, Mr. Chair- man, I don't think I could give an accurate account on it, although we-~ Chairman PERKINS. What is your enrollment, though? Mr. SEAGREN. The current enrollment in the entire program, in the Lindsay Hopkins Center and its 13 branch centers, runs around 18.000 to 20,000 at any one time. Cha.irman PERKINS. Eighteen to twenty thousand. Just what per- cent would you say are high school graduates? PAGENO="0487" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2947 Mr. SEAGREN. Well, I don't think it would run quite as high as 80 percent, because some of the areas that we are working with, with adults that have been out for quite some time, dropped out in probably the eighth grade, a long time back, and are coming back at various age levels. So that would be hard to state, but I do say this: That in the tests that we give them to determine the levels that are required for a cer- tain type of occupations, we have a lot of high school graduates that come to us that rate around the 10th-grade level. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you test all of your students before they come there? Mr. SEAGREN. Yes. And I also want to say, Mr. Chairman, that we don't deny any of them in the training program, because we put them into the adult high school program, and built them up, and then put them over into our vocational program afterwards. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you one thing. In writing your vocational programs, you have a lot of applications that you don't serve, too-is that right, Mr. Seagren, in your area that can't be admitted. Mr. SEAGREN. No, I think we take in anybody that wants to come to the program, and because of the diversity. Chairman PERKINS. After you give them tests? Mr. SEAGREN. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, there is freedom according to your own regulations. Mr. SEAGREN. Right. Chairman PERKINS. What are your regulations that you screen them by? Mr. SEAGREN. Well, our psychologists have taken these regular standard tests that all high school students take to determine grade levels. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you give regular standard high school tests to all of them that are admitted to your institution? Mr. SEAGREN. Right. Chairman PERKINS. And if they fail this test, they are not admitted? Mr. SEAGREN. If they fail this test, they go over into our adult high school program, and continue on that, until they come up to the mini- mum standard, and then they move over into the vocational program. We don't turn them away, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Now my point is, here there is room for the Job Corps without any overlapping with the regular vocational training courses. I am talk- ing about the youngster that is at the bottom of the totem pole, that must, that needs basic fundamentals in education, needs extensive coun- seling, the youngster that has. dropped out of the third grade or the fourth grade, or the eighth grade, that has never had a job, and in many instances, are juvenile offenders, and above everything else, just are not recognized any more by society. That type of youngster, you don't touch, do you? Mr. SEAGREN. Well, I am sure we do, Mr. Chairman, because they are coming in there from all over the country. PAGENO="0488" 2948 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. I am talking about the youngster that is lack- ing in basic education. You are not touching that youngster, are you, in your vocational school? Mr. SEAGREN. I think we are. Chairman PERKINS. What about you, Mr. Ramey? Mr. RAMEY. I am afraid I would have to plead guilty to a large extent on that. We don't deny anyone admittance, but to me, and maybe I am wrong here, maybe we are too concerned about the future of this individual, maybe we are too concerned about his getting a job and keeping a job. In today's world the skilled tradesman some way just has to have some educational background. He just can't come in without bemg able to read and write intelligently and do fairly complicated mathematics, and become a skilled tradesman. Now there may be semiskilled, and we just haven't developed them in our school. So at the present, no; we are not taking those students. That is, they are not coming, because they know that they can't do the work that is set up in this course for them. Chairman PERKINS. Your dropout rate: Is it comprised largely of youngsters that are lacking in basic education at your vocational school? Mr. RAMEY. Our dropout rate is not tremendously large at all; but on the other hand, the news is out, good or bad, in our whole area, that if a boy wants to be an electrician, that there is quite a bit to being an electrician, so people just don't like to fail. I don't like to fail, and you don't; so he just doesn't come in and apply, and that is the person that I think that we all should be much more concerned with than we have in the past. Chairman PERKINS. Well, you have visited ~Job Corps, have you, Mr. Ramey? Mr. RAMEY. No, sir, I haven't. I am ashamed to say I haven't, but I haven't. Chairman PERKINS. You do know that from what knowledge you have obtained that they are giving special attention, special basic education, and special training to this type of youngster, at the bot- tom of the ladder. Do you understand that? Mr. RAMEY. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Vocational schools are not equipped to do it. Mr. QuIE. I should have taken exception with you. I found this interesting that you keep asking Mr. Seagren and Mr. Ramey these questions, and Mr. Watson runs a school which is very comparable. Chairman PERKINS. I will get to Mr. Watson. Mr. QurE. A very comparable program to the Job Corps, in com- parison of the job vocational education can do. Chairman PERKINS. The reason I am taking these two gentlemen separately is because they run a different institution from Mr. Watson. Mr. QtirE. I did not mean to infer that they are incapable of taking, only that all members of the panel are qualified to discuss this sub- ject, including Mr. Watson, and they should all be questioned. Chairman PERKINS. You did say, though, Mr. Seagren, that you tested all of them that came to your institution. Mr. SEAGREN. In the occupational areas, yes. PAGENO="0489" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2949 Chairman PERKINS. And that test was equivalent to a high school education. Mr. SEAGREN. No, no, I am sorry if you have drawn that impression. If a person is going into auto mechanics, we accept them at an eighth grade level on mathematics. We find that that experience is sufficient to do it. Now it is moving tip because of the complication of employment. Chairman PERKINS. How many youngsters in your school do you have below the eighth grade level, Mr. Seagren? If any? Mr. SEAGREN. We have a lot of them. We are not requiring that they be high school graduates to take a course. If we find out that they need eighth grade math to do a job. Chairman PERKINS. I am talking about your straight vocational education. Mr. SEAGREN. That is still at all levels, depending upon the type of occupation they are going into. It could be an eighth grade level for one type of occupation, it might be a tenth grade level for another. Chairman PERKINS. What do you have for a fifth grade level young- ster? Mr. SEAGREN. We put them into what we call operational type of programs, rather than going into a trade, and we take them at any level, in that case, for just job operations. Maybe filling station attendant, for example. Chairman PERKINS. How many do you have of those? Mr. SEAGREN. Well, out of according to the enrollment of some 18,000, 19,000, we may have well over 500, in that category. Maybe more. Chairman PERKINS. Would you document for the record the educa- tion and equivalency of your youngsters that are now enrolled? I imagine you have that information available where it would not be difficult, any difficulty. Mr. SEAGREN. NO, I don't have that at hand, because I can say this: That the average age of our group going to school may be up in the high twenties, or may be in the low thirties. That is the average age, but we have a sizable group of dropouts that are, or potential drop- outs that the guidance department and principal of the high school refer to us, because they are not adjusting in a high school atmosphere. They come down to us and they continue right in our program with the adults, and that group carries on. Your percentage dropouts with these youths is lessthan 5 percent. Chairman PERKINS. Now we have provided in our Vocational Edu- cation Act of 1963 that in accordance with any approved State plan, such funds may be used- * * * for any or all of the following purposes: Vocational education for per- sons who have academic, socio-economic or other handicaps, and permit them to succeed in a regular education program. Do you have a program of that kind? Mr. IRAMEY. Yes, we do. Chairman PERKINS. How much money are you spending? Mr. RAMEY. That is made up right in connection with our regular high school program, so that is absorbed in our regular instruction per- sonnel. I wouldn't know the cost. PAGENO="0490" 2950 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. That is absorbed in your regular program? Mr. RAMEY. Regular, comprehensive, high school program. We~ take them m at a lower grade level there, because we can help thernm the lower level of mechanical training again, or occupational training, and at the same time., give them their basic education sub- jects. Chairman PERKINS. What would you say was the average educa- tional attainment level of the people who attend your institution, your enrollees have? Mr. RAMEY. I would say the adult division would be above the 10th grade level. Chairman PERKINS. Adults, above the 10th grade level? Mr. RA~y. Adult division. Chairman PERKINS. And below that, below the adult, what would it be? Mr. RAMEY. You say below the adult, you are over in the high school program. Chairman PERKINS. You were talking about 21 years of age, weren't you? When you said the adult level? Mr. RAMEY. Oh, yes. That is in our adult division. My whole re- marks were devoted to adult education, because I am not in the high school division; That is operated separately, in our county. Chairman PERKINS. You would say about 10th grade? Mr. RAMEY. About that. There is a long slope to that, though, because it goes down to eighth or seventh grade, in many classifica- tions, and in our dental assistant program, for instance, those are high school graduates. It depends again on the nature of the course. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you agree with me that one of the prin- cipal problems of vocational educators today is to learn how to deal with the extremely disadvantaged youngster that is at the bottom of the ladder that has never had any basic education, that does not know how to read and write? Do you consider that one of the principal problems of vocational education today? Mr. RAMEY. Yes, and I think we are handling that, right at the present time. Right along with our regular program. And we even are having referrals from those that have been convicted of some in- cidents by courts, and we take them in and help them to rehabilitate. Chairman PERKINS. Do you consider that one of the great problems of vocational education, Mr. Ramey? Mr. RAMEY. Well, I think it would be for me. I wouldn't know about the rest of the country, because we 5ust haven't had a tremen- dous amount of experience along that line. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you feel that the experience that we are obtaining now from the Job Corps in dealing with that type of youngster can be fed back to the vocational schools, the secondary schools of the country, and this can be most useful for the whole program in the future, in developing residential centers? Mr. RAMEY. Yes, if we are going to get into that type of training, some place, there is going to have to be some research and some experi- ments with it. PAGENO="0491" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2951 Chairman PERKINS. What is your feeling, Mr. Seagren? Mr. SEAGREN. We are actually taking a lot of those from the Job Corps right into our program right at the present time. They are attending our school at the same part time while they are in the Corps, and some of them have by working with the adults in our program, in some of these basic education subjects, have moved over into our program to continue basic education, then over into vocational. We don't lose them. Chairman PERKINS. I want to visit your institution some time, Mr. Seagren. I know that it is outstanding institution, and I still feel that none of us, none of our institutions are infallible, but this is an area where we can benefit tremendously from the knowledge that we are now getting from the Job Corps. Have you visited the Job Corps? Mr. SEAGREN. No, members of my staff have, but I haven't. Chairman PERKINS. You have not, and you are not acquainted with the curriculum, or this special education and training they are giving this particular youngster? Mr. SEAGREN. My staff is, because they helped them develop some of those in the Job Corps. We have been working jointly with the Job Corps group, and with the Neighborhood Youth Corps group, because we meet once a month with the coordinating committee, and exchange ideas on that. Chairman PERKINS. You do not operate a residential center in Miami, do you? Mr. SEAGREN. Well, Lindsay Hopkins is considered an area voca- tional school, because we have students from all over the country that come there. Not just confined to Dade County, Fla., so I would say it would be considered an area training program. Chairman PERKINS. Now Mr. Watson, Mahoning Valley has a great reputation, and I know it is an outstanding institution, but tell us, who are the students, how disadvantaged are they, and how many are functionally illiterate, or have about a fifth grade education? Mr. WATSON. Well, of course one test, one indication of the degree of being disadvantaged would be their level of educational attainment, and now as in the past 3 years, we have had approximately 50 percent high school dropouts and 50 percent that have graduated from high school, but still unable to get a job because they did not have that skill required. Chairman PERKINS. You would say you had a dropout rate of about 50 percent? Mr. WATSON. Our enrollment would include 50 percent high school dropouts and the other half would have completed high school, but were still considered unemployed or unemployable because of lack of vocational skill. Chairman PERKINS. How many of them, would you say, that would average, have some high school, 75 percent of your total enrollment of 485? Mr. WATSON. I would say 50 to 75 percent of the people that have dropped out dropped out above the eighth grade. Mr. Qun~. Would the Chairman yield? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. PAGENO="0492" 2952 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. Do you know what the figures are for the Job Corps? Chairman PERKINS. Well, yes, we can get those figures. They have been put in the record. Maybe I am wrong. Mr. QurE. I don't recall them offhand. I know we heard about the fifth grade. Mr. HAWKINS. It averaged, as I understand, below the eighth grade. The reading only, I think, was about fourth grade, fifth grade. Mr. Qm~. That is something different. Maybe all it is is lower read- ing average. Mr. HAwKINs. But the average is still below the eighth grade. Chairman PERKINS. You have the figures. Could you give them to us? Mr. DAVID G0TrLIEB (Associate Director of Job Corps for Plans). Twelve percent of the boys are high school graduates, and 40 percent have been classified as functional illiterates, which means reading be- low the third grade level, sir. Mr. Qm~. What percentage have had some high school? Mr. GOTTLIEB. Thirty percent have had some high school but only 12 percent have finished high school, and almost 40 percent are classi- fied functional illiterates, which usually traditionally means reading below the third grade level. Mr. Qum. And some of those may be high school graduates too? Mr. GOTTLIEB. Twelve percent of the total Job Corps population, males, are high school graduates. Mr. QtTIE. And they may be functional illiterates? Mr. GOTTLIEB. Yes, there is very little relationship with how well they read. Mr. QUIE. And I think it would be well to have your name for the record. Mr. GOTTLIEB. I am David Gottlieb. I am the Associate Director of Job Corps for Plans. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead with your answer. Mr. WATSON. We have had, with a population of 400 students, our typical number of nonreaders would run, or, maybe 15 or 20, in this group that were completely illiterate, or nonreaders. The average reading level of our students has been running fifth and sixth, on fifth and sixth grade level. Mr. QUIE. About the same as the Job Corps? Mr. WATSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. WATSON. I am not sure how far you want me to pursue this as to the characteristics of the background. Do you want to get into the social problems our trainees have been involved in before, or scrapes with the law? I would have no accurate figures, figures indi- cating the exact number, but I do know quite a number of them have been in several scrapes with the law, and the testing that is adminis- tered when they enter Mahoning Valley is not to eliminate anyone, or not deny them entrance, but to determine exactly what area they should be in. In other words, we test them and then channel them into that area that they think would be the proper area, according to their inter- est, their aptitudes and their abilities, and of course, I think it is essential that they need to be in that area that they have the best chance of becoming successful, and they agree with this. PAGENO="0493" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2953 They don't want to try something that they have very little chance of being able to succeed in. As an example of this, I have a survey here that was conducted in one of the counties in Ohio that compared the referrals to Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you some questions. You stated a cost per trainee, I believe, was $2,500, down from what figure, did you state, a while ago? Mr. WAI~SON. This cost was $2,680, I believe. Chairman PERKINS. For a period of 6 months? Mr. WATSON. Well, not necessarily. This is for the number of students. This is the result of dividing the amount of dollars that are approved for the project and the amount of students. Chairman PERKINS. And the project, usually the average length of the project is how many months? Mr. WATSON. They run from 6 to 12 months, so I would say the average length would be 8 or 9 months. Chairman PERKINS. Now what about the hidden costs for improve- ment, staff training, educational materials, schooling, medical-dental care, travel, placement, and so forth? Who pays that cost? Mr. WATSON. This is included in the cost. Chairman PERKINS. Do you mean that you furnish them medical attention? Mr. WATSON. Right. These students receive a training allowance of oh, probably the youth allowance would be $20 per week, and they, the students themselves pay for insurance policy, hospitalization policy, takes care of part of the medical expenses. We have a medical service, a nurse on duty at all times, and a medical director, and part of this expense is absorbed through-we have a unique setup as far as the residential phase of our program is concerned, and that is, the total budget of a residential phase of our program comes from the subsistence pay that the students receive. Chairman PERKINS. The way I understood your figure a few mo- ments ago, the $2,500 did not include the expenses, such as medical, dental, clothing allowances find allotments and transportation. Mr. WATSON. Yes, it does. Chairman PERKINS. You mean that it does? Mr. WATSON. It does. Chairman PERKINS. And the actual training cost would run in the neighborhood of about $1,400. The total cost, generally the cost, the nontraining costs are about the same as the training costs, so we are up in the neighborhood of 26, you are saying 25. Mr. WATSON. I am saying 25 or 2,680. This is the figure that we were using at the end of last year, and this includes not only the administra- tive costs of our referral or referring agency, Ohio State Employment Service, that portion of the staff that is involved in this, it also in- cludes training allowances and subsistence pay to the students, trans- portation to and from school, as well as their training costs. Chairman PERKINS. Who pays for their initial capital outlay? Who makes those payments? Mr. WATSON. On the training, as far as the capital outlay on train- ing, the equipment and the minor remodeling is paid under the Man- power Development Training Act. PAGENO="0494" 2954 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. That was paid for under MDTA. Mr. WATSON. Right, and as far as the capital outlay- Chairman PERKINS. Let me a.sk you this: Are these youngsters tak- ing courses under the MDTA program there? Mr. WATSON. Yes. The total program is part of the Manpower Development and Training. Chairman PERKINS. The whole program? Mr. WATSON. That is right, completely, except now for the 10 per- cent State. The housing phase of the project, of course, as I indicated earlier, $250,000 was donated by the local industrialists to serve as a revolving fund, and this revolving fund is still intact. In other words, we reach, we have times when one project is com- pleted, prior to another group of students coming in, but housing has a very low income, so during that time, it is necessary, we still have staff to pay, and it is necessary to have a fund to operate out of, so what it amounts to is that it is a~ general fund that is used in lieu of the subsistence pay that we receive from the students. In other words, the income that our housing division has is deter- mined by our enrollment. Chairman PERKINS. What about your buildings? How did you come by your buildings, where the equipment is housed, the youngsters are housed? Mr. WATSON. This is an Air Force base. We are sharing the facility with the Air Force. I think we have 10 buildings. Now it was neces- sary to remodel some of these buildings. We didn't have to build these buildings, fortunately. We would never have been able to afford it, had we had to build, but through remodeling. Again, the training, if we have to, because of the nature of the Manpower Development and Training Act, we have to be very careful that we do not spend money that comes under our 4,000 series from Health, Education and Welfare to our State, back to the local level, we do not spend these funds for nontraining functions. In other words, we can't do anything in housing, out of training funds. Housing has to be self-supporting. Chairman PERKINS. What is your appropriation from the State of Ohio for the 485 youngsters there enrolled annually for the residential center? Mr. WATsoN. It would be 10 percent, now. In other words, if our operating costs are $900,000, the State's 10 percent would be approxi- mately $90,000. Chairman PERKINS. Is that all the public money that the State of Ohio is putting into it? Mr. WATSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Are you getting any other funds from the voca- tional education programs? Mr. WATSON. No, we can't qualify for funds under the Vocational Educational Act of 1963. We did realize some funds under the work- study program, Vocational Education Act, but we are going to lose this, I understand. Chairman PERKINS. You are presently; how many of these young- sters are participating in the work-study program? PAGENO="0495" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2955 Mr. WATSON. Well, during the year, we will have 60 to 70 students participating in the work-study program, and these would be students that are not eligible for training allowances. Chairman PERKINS. They do not work more than 15 hours a week? Mr. WATSON. Yes, they do not work more than 15 hours. Chairman PERKINS. Now what does this subsistence, what does your subsistence allowance include? Mr. WATSON. $5 per day per student, and the student has to be there, and we have tried since the beginning to get some kind of guarantee. In other words, if we have a student in the hospital, or if lie just doesn't come back, say, he doesn't get back from the weekend until Monday or Tuesday, we still have our same Chairman PERKINS. No expenses are included except when the youngster is present? Mr. WATSON. Right. Chairman PERKINS. How residential is the program? Are all youth from Cleveland, or do they spend weekends at home, evenings? Mr. WATSON. They spend weekends at home. Normally, 50 percent of them go home every other weekend. Chairman PERKINS. How close are they to their homes? Give the committee an idea. Mr. WATSON. They could be anywhere from Cincinnati, Toledo. Cincinnati, I think, is around between 200 and 250 miles. Chairman PERKINS. Yes, and how often do they go home? Mr. WATSON. Every other weekend. They don't all go home, but they are permitted to do so, if they like. And I guess Cincinnati would be the farthest distance any of them would have to travel. Chairman PERKINS. How were these youngsters recruited? Mr. WATSON. Our Ohio State Employment Service recruits all the boys that come to Mahoning Valley, through their local employment service offices. Chairman PERKINS. These are all Ohio State Employment Service recruited? Mr. WATSON. Right. Chairman PERKINS. In what occupations are your graduates em- ployed? Give us the starting wage and how many are still on the initial job 6 months. Mr. ~EAGREN. Mr. Chairman, I have to make a plane. I wonder if I may be excused. Chairman PERKINS. Let me refrain from asking the gentleman any more questions, and yield to Mr. Quie here, to make sure. Mr. QUIE. I think if Mr. Seagren wants to leave, I would be will- ing to ask my questions of the other two gentlemen. Chairman PERKINS. We thank you for coming, Mr. Seagren. Mr. SEAGREN. Well, I appreciate the opportunity. Chairman PERKINS. We appreciate your appearance. You have been helpful to us. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. QUIE. In other words, the same organization, Mr. Watson, is recruiting your enrollees as is recruiting the Job Corps enrollees? PAGENO="0496" 2956 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. WTATSON. Yes. I know that they are recruiting 100 percent of ours, and I understand t.hey are recruiting 100 percent of the Job Corps. I cannot swear to this. I am not sure. Or whether they are making all the referrals from tile State of Ohio to Job Corps. Mr. QUIE. Do you have a.ny trouble getting enough enrollees for your school? Mr. WATSON. In some areas, we do. Some that are considered less de- sirable, we have problems, sometimes, filling a class. Normally, we have pretty full complements. I cannot say that is a major problem, because we generally have enough recruits, and in some areas, we will have more than we can handle. Not that they are not- that they are not qualified, but there just isn't room for more. Mr. QuIE. So you don't have any problem getting enough for tile school, but you do have a problem getting enough for some classes? Mr. WATSON. In some areas; yes. Mr. Qu~. So in this way, it operates differently from the Job Corps, which has gone to a big recruiting task sometimes, to get enough people? Mr. WATSON. Yes. Mr. QuiR. To come into the corporation. I judged by your comments to Chairman Perkins that you then take in a group which is very com- parable to the Job Corps, and would be able to make a judgment, from your school, as a comparison to the Job Corps because of that, would this be right? Mr WATSON. Yes, I would say that they are very similar in char- acteristics. Mr. QuiR. Do you have any idea how the Ohio Bureau of Employ- ment Security makes the determination of whether they recommend a young person to the Job Corps or to Mahoning Valley Vocational School? Mr. WATSON. I think one criterion they would use, I would imagine, would be based upon the preference of the student. I think if a young fellow would walk into the Employment Service and ask specifically to go to Job Corps, I imagine they would make every effort to channel him into Job Corps. I know many referrals come about. from an unemployed youth coming in, looking for a job, a.nd after determining that he really had very little to offer in the way of a skill, that they may suggest that he go to a training program. such as a Mahoning Valley or Job Corps. Mr. QuiR. Now you give the basic education as well as the vocational education at Mahoning Valley. Mr. WATSON. Yes. We have what we think is a very complete basic education program. A typical day schedule at Mahoning Valley would be a student may be in his vocational classes maybe 6 or 7 hours a day. He would be scheduled into basic classes of reading, communications, and math for another 2. Every student is scheduled for 9 hours per day. In the beginning we were setting up an 8-hour-a-day schedule, a.nd we were told it wouldn't work; we couldn't hold them this long. And we found that we can hold them 8 hours. In fact, they are scheduled now for 8 and 9 hours, and many of them go back into the program instruction center at night on their PAGENO="0497" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2957 own for an additional 2 or 3 hours. So we have many students that are being trained 10 or 11 hours per day. Mr. QUIE. It is interesting that just recently, Dr. George F. Cleve- land of the Women's Job Corps Center spoke of the fact that they now have 8 hours of classes for the girls. They seemed very insistent that it is possible, and they are doing that. In fact, they said after they had been there for 3 weeks they were in this class for 8 hours. But other Job Corps programs, I notice, have them in class for 5 hours, looking over one report on them. Has there been any evaluation of the results of Mahoning Valley School and the Job Corps? I know we used the information-this was last year-that one time you had a Job Corps dropout in Ma- honing Valley. Mr. WATSON. Yes, this is the case. We have more than one. But, of course, at the same time, I couldn't say the Job Corps doesn't get some of ours, too, whether we have had boys that have been in the Job Corps prior to coming to Mahoning Valley. We have one survey that involved a relatively small number of students. In other words, one county has referred 45 boys to Mahoning Valley, and they referred 39 to Job Corps. Mr. QUIE. Which county is that? Mr. WATSON. Ashtabula County. And of these 45, we had 17 gradu- ates from Mahoning Valley, and we had 25 that were terminated, as well as three presently in training. Of the 39 the Job Corps referred, they had four graduates, and they had 31 terminations, as well as four currently in training. Mr. QtTIE. Thirty-nine with four graduates, 31 terminations, and four still in training. Mr. WATSON. Right. Mr. QmE. You have 45? Mr. WATSON. They referred 45 to Mahoning Valley. We had 17 of these 45 graduated. Mr. QUTE. And 28 terminated. Is that the figure? Mr. WATSON. Twenty-five terminated. Mr. QUIE. Twenty-five. Mr. WATSON. One for good cause and 24 for not good cause. Mr. QUIE. What do you mean by "good cause" and "not good cause"? What do these terms mean? Mr. WATSON. If, as an example, a student were being terminated for good cause, that is because in our opinion the student had absolutely no choice but to leave the school. Maybe this would be for medical reasons, that he would need to go back home, or maybe for emotional reasons. Or it could be because we found that we could not cope with his particular problem. "Not good cause" would be that he would become involved in one kind of situation that we couldn't live with him. Maybe we could train him, but we couldn't live with him. Or maybe he just dropped out. Now this is the case, I would say for the majority of those 24 that were listed for "not good cause": They just went home and and did not come back. We know that many of these fellows that just go home and do not come back find jobs. We try to follow up on those cases as much as we can, to determine whether they are working or not, what kinds of jobs they have, and 80-084---67-pt. 4-32 PAGENO="0498" 2958 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 if the job they have is the result of what training they had at Mahon- ing Valley, or if this helped them in any way. This report I have here is about 13 pages long. It makes a compari- son all the way through of characteristics of the referral, the age at the time of the referral, and the educational attainment. Mr. QU~E. At the time of referral? Mr. WATSON. At the time of referral. Mr. QUTE. How do they compare between the Job Corps and the Mahoning Valley School? Mr. WATSON. All right, I will break this down into three parts. One is the educational attainment of the graduates at the eighth grade or less. Now this is based on 17 graduates of Mahoning Valley and four graduates of Job Corps. Seven of these 17 have eighth grade or less education. That is, they dropped out prior to the eighth grade. Five dropped out somewhere between the ninth and 11th grades, and five of them were high school graduates. Of the four that graduated from Job Corps, two of them were eighth grade or less, and one had attained ninth through the 11th. One was a high school graduate. One of the four. Of the 25 of those people that were terminated from both Mahoning Valley and Job Corps, 25 that. were terminated from Mahoning Val- ley, 12 of them were eighth grade or less, 11 of them attained some- where between ninth and 11th grades, and two of them were high school graduates. For Job Corps, 20 of the dropouts had eighth grade or less, 11 had ninth through 11th attainment, and there wasn't any terminants that were high school graduates. Currently in training: One Mahoning Valley, eighth grade or less; two in ninth or 11th. And Job Corps: three eighth grade or less, and one ninth through 11th. Physical characteristics, the handicapped, the graduates: Five Mahoning Valley were handicapped, one in the Job Corps. Terminants: Five in Mahoning Valley were handicapped; one of the Job Corps was handicapped. Then it gets into labor status at the time of referral, whether they were employed or unemployed, the weeks of employment prior to re- ferral, in an effort to get a comparison between the two, employment status now, the graduates Mahoning Valley has. Of 17 of them, 15 obtained employment from Job Corps. Of those currently employed, 12 of the 17 were Mahoning Valley graduates. One of the Job Corps graduates is now employed. Then it gets into the activity since gradua.tion, time employed since then, number of jobs held since then, number of weeks between grad- nation and employment, and a change in earnings. Before they went to Mahoning Valley or Job Corps and then the earnings after they graduated, those figures are given. Mr. Qur~. What. were the earnings? I assume they were improved. Mr. WATSON. This comparison was made by averaging the hourly earning of all trainees with known earnings prior to training, with the average of all known earnings following training. Mahoning Valley: Before they entered, $1.28 per hour; after, $1.72 per hour. This was the figures on the graduates. PAGENO="0499" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2959 For the terininants there are the figures: $1.28 per hour before they entered; after they left Mahoning Valley, $1.51 per hour. On Job Corps-and again this is referring to only four people, so it would not be very valid in this particular case: An average of $2 :an hour before they went and $1.84 after they came back-and there is something wrong here. Mr. QULE. It sounds like regressive training. Mr. WATSON. Determinants, before they went to Job Corps were $1.07 per hour and after they came out, $1.68 per hour. You have this on record, and you can refer to the more specific de- tails. It would take quite a long time to go through the total report. There is a note at the end worthy of mention, that the total number of trainees referred to Mahoning Valley (45), 10 met the employment security specifications as handicapped. Of the Job Corps it was one. This is saying 10 of the 45, that they referred to Mahoning Valley were handicapped and one of the 39 Job Corps was handicapped. Mr. QUIE. That is interesting. Your program student year basis is probably less than $2,000 a year. You have 17 graduates compared with four from the Job Corps. We see an increase in salary when they graduate from here- Chairman PERKINS. I think the witness said that in his judgment that was not a fair comparison. Mr. QUIE. It is a comparison that the Ohio Bureau of TJnemploy- ment Compensation made of it, and it is true there may be some others. *From this it looks like they are doing a far superior job with less money in the Mahoning Valley School. If vocational education can do that kind of job, we ought to turn it over to them. How do you consider peaches with apples when it turned out to be 10 handicapped on top of it, as compared with one handicapped from Job Corps? It looks like they had more difficult apples in Mahoning Valley. Chairman PERKINS. You had the local employment office recruiting youngsters, many of them with a high school education, a majority of them had already had jobs. Recruiting them locally, for a local ~school, a residential school partially, not all together, not a problem child. Mr. QUIE. Just problems in the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. The child was going to enter this school with the understanding that he could go along home and on his own in the community every weekend. It is just more or less training for the con- venience of the youngster. This is altogether different from the prob- lems in the Job Corps. Mr. QUIE. They are dealing with, evidently, from the figures here, a comparable group. To me this is the advantage of having the school or the facility in the community so that enrollees can go home on the weekend. Chairman PERKINS. I well understand what your argument is along that line, but we just have very few residential. schools, and this is only a partial residential school. Mr. QUIE. What do you mean a "partial residential school"? Chairman PERKINS. I mean they can go home, if they want to, right in their own communities. It is more or less a boarding school. It is not a school to deal with problem children. That is my point of view. PAGENO="0500" 2960 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIB. Well, if the Job Corps changes to where they take them closer and closer to home and get away from this flying all over the country, they are going to be in the same boat, and they will have the opportunity to go home. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I wish we had more true residential schools over the country to deal with these problem youngsters, and they are not just in existence today. Where can you name any schools- Mr. QUIE. The question is with regard to those schools that we have. Is it better for OEO to continue here and they have been making ter- rible mista.kes in the Job Corps, at tremendous costs, and we had to get a limit on it last year, or~ Chairman PERKINS. I would say that within 10 years the Job Corps will work itself, perhaps, out of existence, and the secondary schools- Mr. HAWKINS. Due and deliberate speed. Chairman PERKINS (continuing). And we can do something about this problem youngster. Let everybody work together. But as I see it today, to undertake to cut back on the Job Corps' operations when we do not have the residential centers would be turning our backs on the problem youngsters in this country. Mr. QmE. I would say that OEO and Job Corps have worked them- selves out of a job already, and it depends on whether Congress has the wisdom to transfer it elsewhere. Chairman PERKINS. Many of use feel that the OEO has clone an ex- cellent job, and intends, in the future, to do a better job, and OEO has profited from their experience. Mr. QUIE. When you look at the example of a school run on a military base, with the same kind of children all the way through,. comparable to the Job Corps, where they can run it for less money, with a better graduated- Chairman PERKINS. What you are trying to make is an evaluation on one school that isn't even a comparable situation. I don't think it would serve any useful purpose for us to go on. Mr. QmE. It is as comparable as it ever could be. It is more corn- parable than some of the Job Corps are with each other, if that is what you are trying to prove. But we have pointed out in Mahoning Valley, and I am sorry we haven't had a chance to hear from some of the other schools-but I mentioned Milwaukee-some time, which is not a residential school, and I would wager if they had the opportunity to run a residential school that they would have as great a success as they do with their day program. When I talked with them they had 600 in school and 550 on payroll. These are not exactly the best children in the school. They had an 85-perecent placement in the area of training, those who completed training, which I think is a pretty good record. too, and I don't think we ought to turn our backs on these facts and informa- tion that are ma.de available on it. Chairman PERKINS. I feel it is perfectly appropriate for us t& maybe go beyond the pilot project for residential centers in the future, because by the time they are constructed and we get them into opera tion, we are gaining all the time from the experience in operating the Job Corps, and the experience gained will be fed back into the opera- tion of the residential centers, and the State vocational people. PAGENO="0501" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2961 That is one of our biggest problems today in vocational education, like Mr. Ramey stated, is the problem child. We have not experi- mented. We need to experiment much more than at the present time. Mr. QUIR. It looks like the experimenters in the Job Corps, they, went full fledged into it, and now people who have had years of ex- perience say, "We can experiment a little bit." The Mahoning Valley did not use 100 percent funding- Mr. WATSON. It was 100 percent the first 2 years. Mr. QUIE. It went to 10 percent later? Mr. WATSON. It went to 10 percent this year. I think the trend is to do more on the basic education problems. I know it is in Ohio- Chairman PERKINS. Up to the present time we have done very lit- tle in the vocational schools, on the basic education level. Would you agree to that? Mr. WATSON. I up until the last 3 years, yes, because the manner of vocational education didn't have enough funds to have a large enough program. So they ended up getting- Chairman PERKINS. It doesn't have enough funds now to handle the program. Mr. WATSON. No, it doesn't. Chairman PERKINS. We are in agreement. Mr. WATSON. Yes. And if the funds become available there would be a definite decrease in the need for residential schools. I have made this statement time and time again everywhere I go. Local school administrators say, "That is a pretty expensive program you are operating," and it is. We are not really proud of what it is costing Mahoning Valley. It is an experimental program, but the same job, if it were done where it should be, back in the local school level and the trend is in that di- rection-we are going to get there, and I hope that this would occur through a network of residential vocational schools. For example, if we could catch up- Chairman PERKINS. I think we can agree to this, that all of us in Congress would like to see the residential schools work themselves out of a job, and Job Corps work itself out of a job, and maybe some of these days in the future we can, when the high schools, the compre- hensive high scooLs, can do this. Now that is today, we certainly need the Job Corps; it is doing a job that has never been done before. We need to expand it. We are only touching the surface, if we consider all the dropouts that we have in this country today, about 600,000 annu- ally. We are only touching the surface, and where does it make sense to cut back on the Job Corps this year $105 million when we do not have the facilities? Mr. Qtru. Let me ask you a question: If you were given the money it takes to run, or that share, to run the Job Corps, given the oppor- tunity through the State Vocational Education Agency, do you think you could do the job? Mr. WATSON. I haven't any idea how many dollars this would come to in Ohio. We have worked out a tentative plan that would call for five or six residential schools in Ohio, and if we-of course, if we could get existing facilities that would require only minor remodeling, the investment would be lower, but it would cost two and a half million dollars per facility for new facilities, this would be a total of $15 mil- PAGENO="0502" 2962 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 lion for the first year, and an estimated operating cost including every- thing of about $2 million per center. or $12 million per year. We could meet the need in Ohio with these six residential centers,. and there is a little more detailed report in the written statement, but I think the significant thing here is that the size of these schools would be limited to about 500, and I think a network of this, and I made an estimate of an average of three per State-I known some States would have to have more than three, and some States could maybe get by with one or two-but I think this would meet the need, providing ade- quate programs are offered for those people that do not require the residential setting. Chairman PERKINS. Let's stick to the illustration as you have given to the committee: the six schools; and you have to make your own capital outlay investment, it would cost the State of Ohio, oh, $15 million for the construction, and how much to equip those schools in addition to the $15 million? Mr. WATSON. This could include Chairman PERKINS. The equipment? Mr. WATSON. Right. Chairman PERKINS. How long would it take, if you had the money tomorrow, to get those schools completed and get them into operation? Mr. WATSON. It would depend on whether there are existing facili- ties that could be made workable, or whether we had to start from scratch and build. I am not that familiar with Job Corps. But if we had to build then from the bottom up, it would take 2years. Chairman PERKINS. If you had to build from the bottom up, what do you figure costs would be per enrollee, stretching your capital out- 1ev out over a period of 15 years? Mr. WATSON. I would estimate it would be less than we are spend- ing at Mahoning Valley, over a period of 15 years. I think- Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any figures along that line? Mr. WATSON. Just our experience at Mahoning Valley. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any other figures you can give the committee, projecting into your future, on the six schools you propose? Mr. WATsoN. The operated costs would be $2 million per center, or $12 million a year. Chairman PERKINS. And that would be. for 3.000 enrollees in the six centers? Mr. WATSON. NO. It would be more tha.n 3~000, because this would be a maximum of 500 per center, but we could handle as many as 800 to 1.000 students per year. Chairman PERKINS. You are planning on making a day center in connection with the-day schools in connection with the residential centers? Mr. WATSON. I am saying we wouldn't keep them all for a year. I think this is the darnrer of tvainin~ too `ong. Chairman PERKINS. Here, then, you are going to provide two sets of regulations: one, for your problem youngster, and another Set for the youngster whois only,going.to be there in the daytime? Mr. WATSON. There wouldn't be anybody there but resid~ntial cen- ters. We are in agreement. I am just Saying that even though the maxi- mum enrollment would be 500, there may be a turnover of two. PAGENO="0503" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2963 In other words, we may handle two groups of 500. In other words, I am saying it is not necessary to keep them a full year to make them employable. I would say we could do it in 6 months, and then take in another 500. This is not the case in all areas. Production machine operators, auto mechanics, some of these areas require more than 6 months. Many other areas can be made trainable in 6 months, and I think it is a mistake to keep them a year or two if it is not necessary. We have boys who don't wnat to leave Mahoning Valley because they have found security, and we have--- Chairman PERKINS. I know your State director, Dr. Shoemaker, and he is a most outstanding one, and he has my good wishes. Tell him, furthermore, that he has had a good representative here today promot- ing the residential center concept. I certainly have no disagreement with the residential center, but I want to see residential centers come into existence. But from my knowledge and experience, we cannot af- ford to turn our backs on the present operation of the Job Corps be- cause the residential centers are going to provide benefits much too far in the future to meet real urgent present-day needs, and the problem that we have is so great that it would be a terrible mistake, and my colleague here will have to admit that we don't have these facilities in existence at the present time. I just wonder what they are going to do when they cut back $105 million on Job Corps. Mr. QUIE. We find vocational education can do it so more efficiently than OEO, that they can keep the present centers open, and start new ones. Mr WATSON. There would be existing facilities that could be used within 3 months. It took us 3 months to start Mahoning Valley. Chairman PERKINs. You had an Air Force Base there. Mr. QUTE. The Job Corps had the same thing. Chairman PERKINS. The Job Corps has constructed several new centers. 1~'fr. QUIE. They didn't do it overnight either. Chairman PERKINS. No. They did it in a period of a couple of years. From the time they made the announcement it was a couple of years. Mr. QUIE. They did it when there was a better than 2-to-i majority of Democrats in control of Congress. Chairman PERKINS. I don't know whether the Republicans or the Democrats-well, the Job Corps has made mistakes, and it welcomes criticism. Mr. QrIIE. Have you had any trouble with the loss of your staff? Mr. WATSON. I mentioned this the last time I was here. We have lost two to the Job Corps, and one of them is coming back. I under- stand-I probably shouldn't say this publicly-Job Corps friends may wonder who it is and when they are leaving, and maybe word hasn't gotten out, but we did lose two of our staff, and we did not particularly want to lose one of them, and I think we are going to get this one back, but we couldn't pay them what they could make in Job Corps. Mr. QUTE. What kind of an increase did they receive when they went to Job Corps? Mr. WATSON. I am not sure. One, I understand, was a sizable one, of $3,000 or $4,000 per year increase. PAGENO="0504" 2964 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. QUIE. That is quite an inducement. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, please. Mr. WATSON. I would like to mention just one more thing to the committee as far as using the existing structures to operate a network of residential centers. I think if each State were given responsibility, I think there would develop a friendly competition there that would make every State want to do the job and do it well, provided they had funds to do it, and I think this network, with the leadership that is available now at the Federal and State level, that this network could be put into effect pretty quickly and effectively, and I think there would be a great deal to be said for the State being so actively controlled and actually respon- sible for taking care of problems in their State, and I think the State and local people would have a better view, knowing exactly what the problems are, where they are, and what has to be done about these problems. I know the criticism has been made, "Sure vocational education is moving nicely in some States, but not in other States, and what are we going to do about this?" And I think it is very simple: If the State isn't doing the job, HEW contracts directly with industry, or some agency in that State to get the job done. I am confident it would work the same way, and I think the respon- sibility placed in the hands of the individual State departments of education would not only get residential training available to more people that need it-I think eventually it would strengthen vocational education overall, to the point of letting them see what can be done with the means provided-if the means were provided. I agree with many of the things that were said this morning, that there is very little innovation and experimentation in some of our public schools, but I think the matter of being caught in tradition so long with no money to do it gets to the point of "What's the use?" And I have enough~ confidence in the educators of America that if the funds are made available they will innovate and experiment and stay up to date. I think a striking example is vocational education, and I don't want to sound-appear to be bragging by mentioning Ohio so often, but this is the only true example you have that I can cite with any degree of justification, and that is, when the funds were made available, they moved, and they are doing well, and vocational education is moving in Ohio. If it had not been for the Vocational Education Act of 1963, we would be right where we were before. I think this has happened in other areas of our education too. Chairman PERKINS. I have gone through your residential center in Ohio, and I have gone through several Job Corps centers. I have gone through George Ramey's school there, but everywhere I have gone I have seen a different kind of youngster in a Job Corps, and in the vocational schools. I would like to ask Mr. Ramey what experience you have had in the MDTA programs in training youngsters and adults who lack basic education, whether the State of Kentucky is oriented in that direction. Tell us something about the problem we have in Kentucky along that line. PAGENO="0505" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2965 Mr. RAMEY. Maybe we have been criticized in Kentucky some, on skimming the cream of the top off with the manpower development. program, and I think maybe that has been true. Personally, I haven't had too much experience with the bottom of the totem pole, you might say. We are right now in a problem in Kentucky where the work ex- perience training program had to get rid of some of their clients, and they gave them to the vocational school to train, and some several of these trainees were just functionally illiterate, and frankly, we are in the process of doing something with them. We are going to drop them, because we are not set up at the present to handle these. I am not saying we shouldn't be set up, but we are not. If you take a class of 18 people and five of them are functionally illiterate, the others are somewhat better, it creates quite a problem. there. Maybe it is a problem of selection- Chairman PERKINS. I think you have as high a placement rate as any vocational school in the country. Do you know of any vocational school in Kentucky that is competent to give training to this kind of youngster at the present time, or have they all been taking the cream of the crop and have we been overlooking the youngster at the bottom of the totem pole? Mr. RAMEY. It goes back, Mr. `Chairman, to lack of facilities. If you have 18 prospects, it may be good business to take those instead of 18 poor prospects, because you can only train 18 at a time. That is prob- ably true all over the State. I couldn't verify that statement. I can only speak for the one school I am a director of, but I think that is. true all over, the State. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you feel that is true, limited facilities, all over the United States? Mr. RAMEY. I think so. Chairman PERKINS. And you have associated with vocational train- ing program people all over the country? Mr. RAMEY. That is true. Mr. QUIE. Could you do the job if you had the money? Mr. RAMEY. Congressman, I would hope so. I would hope so. You asked me a direct question. I don't know whether we could or not. We might be able to teach law in our schools. I don't know. We just haven't tried it. We might be very capable if we tried it. I don't mean to evade the question there at all, but as far as know- ing, I don't. Mr. QuTE. Do you think you can do it as well as corporations who haven't had any experience? Mr. RAMEY. This is the second time I am embarrassed- Mr. QuIR. You are like the witness we had the other day who said of all the things she had not studied, she had not studied the Job Corps most. Mr. RAMEY. It is embarrassing, because as an educator I should have visited them. I intend to visit them. Mr. QuIR. That is all the questions I have. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you another question, Mr. Watson- go ahead, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. HAWKINS. No, go ahead. PAGENO="0506" 2966 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. How do you define a graduate, Mr. Watson, at Mahoning Valley? Mr. WATSON. This is a boy that has completed the requirements as scheduled. We put our proposal in a year in advance and our various vocational areas require different lengths of time, determined by the complexity of that particular vocational area. To cite just two ex- amples, our production machine operators, we feel that to offer them everything they should have, they should be there 12 months. Now we are revising our thinking a little bit on this, and we think now we can do the job in 9 months, and, of course, if we can, this is going to increase- Chairman PERKINS. How many Negroes are in your center? Mr. `WATSON. Thirty-five percent. In that neighborhood. Chairman PERKINS. What percent are high school dropouts, and how many are urban-how many of your enrollment? Mr. WATSON. Of the total, 50 percent are high school dropouts. Chairman PERKINS. And how many are urban? Mr. WATSON. Here, again, I would just have to guess, that 60 per- cent of them come from large cities, and 40 percent from, the rural areas. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any survey, or have you made a survey or followup on how long your graduates hold jobs after they have completed the course of training? Mr. WATSON. Of course, we only have a 3-year experience factor to base it on, and I am not sure I can answer that accurately. I have placement data here for the years of fiscal year 1965 and fiscal 1966. It does not tell how long they have been employed. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you made no study along that line? Mr. WATSON. I do not have a study available, but our Ohio State Employment Service would have this information on how long they have been employed. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. I think that you or someone from the State of Ohio did testify before another subcommittee in support of expansion of vocational education. Mr. WATSON. I did in ~July 1966. This was on amendments. Mr. HAWKINS. So you do need additional money for the vocational education programs? Mr. WATSON. Definitely. Mr. HAwKINS. You have a waiting list of students for your schools now, don't you? Mr. WATSON. Well, with the money that is available now, a priority list has been established, and for example, a project we are working on now, we have a priority list, and I doubt if we will' come up as being eligible this year for funds under the Vocational Education Act of 1963. . . ` Mr. HAWKINS. If you had the money, who would you use the money on, on the disadvantaged students, or the ones who are more highly qualified and the more trainable ones? Mr. WATSON. If this money would come-well, it could-it would depend on the purpose and source of the money. If it were under the Vocational Education Act of 1963 for the purpose of expanding voca- PAGENO="0507" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2967 tional curriculums in the State for high schools and adults, it would go into that direction. If it would come for the purpose of disadvantaged youth- Mr. HAWKINS. Are you saying it would be used only for disadvan- taged youth if the Congress earmarked the money? 1~Ir. WATSON. If the money became available for this purpose, that is where it would all be used. Mr. HAWKINS. Have you ever considered using money for this pur. pose even if it is earmarked by Congress? If it is so desirable, and you have said it is, why don't you go ahead and do it in the State without waiting for the Congress to hand it over to you? Mr. WATSON. We have our existing public education offerings that are inadequate as far as the vocational education is concerned. We are trying to head the problem of before they become disadvantaged *youth, 16 to 21 years old. This is where we have to get at the problem first, and this is the problem we are working on with the Vocational Act of 1963 money. That act does not provide for residential centers. Mr. HAWKINS. But it does provide for money to deal with the prob- lem of the disadvantaged. Apparently your States and the other States haven't used much of it for that purpose, and yet you have testified you would like to get the Job Corps. I wonder why you don't institute the program even now. Is it because local money would be involved, is it because the States as well as the local district would have to contribute money as they do for the vocational education program? Mr. WATSON. I am not sure I am correct on this. But there is an amendment to the act of 1963, I think section 13, that would provide the residential centers, but there was no appropriation made for this particular thing, and without the appropriation, then, even though it is legal, we cannot do it. As I say, we are concentrating our efforts on- Mr. HAWKINS. Do you think you are prohibited from doing it? Mr. WATSON. If there is no money, yes. Mr. HAWKINS. Quite aside from the money, you received Federal money, and the thrust of my question is, you obtained money. Are you going to leave those out completely, those being served by the Job Corps, and ignore them unless you are specifically directed to do so? Why don't you place them in the same category you do as the *others who are also seeking vocational education? Mr. WATSON. We are using the Manpower Development Training Act to work with the disadvantaged in Mahoning Valley, and several other centers are working with disadvantaged youth now. Mahoning Valley is not the only institution in Ohio which is dealing with the disadvantaged youth. We would do more. For example, our manpower appropriations last year were cut from $13 million the previous year to $8 million this last year, and if this appropriation-we could have used twice as much. We have manpower projects that have not been funded simply hecausethere is not enough in the appropriations to cover the cost. Mr. HAWKINS. You indicate the actual cost is $2,680 per student. I assume that is on a 9-month basis, is it not, sir? Mr. WATSON. That is the number of students served, whether they were there for 6 months or a year. So. I would state the average would be approximately that. . . . PAGENO="0508" 2968 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. HAwKINs. Does this include equipment- Mr. WATrS. It includes everything. Mr. HAWKINS. Does it include the $5 subsistence allowance you indi- cated was paid to each student? Mr. WATSON. Yes. Mr. HAWKINS. I calculate that $5 a day would amount to $1,350,. and you talked about $1,400. How do you get that under the figure? You haven't included land, transportation, equipment, administration,. and a lot of other items. Where does the $5 a day come in? Mr. WATSON. The training allowance and the subsistence allow- ance- Mr. HAWKINS. Is included under the $5? Mr. WATSON. Yes. That $5 a day is not everyday. It is on the days they are in class. Mr. HAWKINS. Assuming they are in class virtually every day- Mr. WATSON. Five days a week. Mr. HAWKINS. Using 9 months, this would be over a thousand dol- lars, substantially over a thousand for that one item, and in the $1,400 in the actual training costs, that would come to $2,400 itself. Now what about medical and dental care? You have indicated that that is included. Mr. WATSON. Part of the medical and dental care comes from a hospitalization policy which the students pay for themselves, $1.50. per week. Mr. HAWKINS. This is only in the event that they have some service rendered during the year. Is that right? Mr. WATSON. They pay for it whether they ever need it or not,. just as you and I would pay for an insurance policy. Mr. HAWKINS. It does not include any corrective medical care at the time of entry into the school? Mr. WATSON. This has been one of our big problems. We do have the cooperation of the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation that came into the picture about 2 years ago. That has helped on this and of course the work that the Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation does is not included in this figure. Mr. HAWKINS. What would you do if an individual comes with half of his teeth out and is in need of glasses and a lot of other mental and health problems? Mr. WATSON. If it is a problem that would prohibit. his being em- ployable, he is qualified, then, for Bureau of Vocational Rehabilitation benefits. Mr. HAWKINS. How many individuals were so qualified? Mr. WATSON. We have had as many as 40 or 50 percent of our students that would be qualified for those benefits. Mr. HAWKINS. This is not included? Mr. WATSON. No, this is not included. Mr. HAWKINS. So all the other costs would be added to the $2,680. You have added one at this particular point. So would you not, in a comparison of costs~ add that. ~2,680? Mr. WATSON. Well, if it-well, this would be an additional cost that would be- Mr. HAWKINS. If you were going to make it comparable to the Job Corps, which does this at the time the kid comes in. PAGENO="0509" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 .2969 Mr. WATSON. Does the Job Corps use in their figures capital outlay? Mr. HAWKINS. You are not using that itself. You are getting free land, as I get it. Mr. WATSON. There was no cost for land. Mr. HAWKINS. The comparable cost in the Job Corps is $3,500. Ap- parently you have not-I am trying to find out then what you have included in the cost and then of course we can get the cost from the Job Corps, but apparently you have not included medical and dental care which is rendered under another program. What does the sub- sistence allowance include? Does it include land, equipment materials, construction, or any of these items? Mr. WATSON. There are two allowances. There is a training allow- .ance that the trainees receive, the ones that are eligible. Some of them are not eligible. Mr. HAWKINS. Is this training allowance in addition to the $2,680? Mr. WATSON. No, that is included. Normally, we figure that the training allowance is about 50 percent of the total cost and the addi- tional cost of subsistance and trainees' weekly allowance is the other 50 percent. For example, if we had a project approved for $2 million, approxi- mately half of that, or a little less than half of that would be for training expenses, instructoral salaries, equipment and instructional supplies, costs of this nature, directly related to the training. You see, the Manpower Act was not designed to be used as a residen- tial training program, and for this reason we have problems that we do not like to have, and this is one of them. Our residential phase of the program does not have the kind of budget we would like for it to have, because it is based entirely upon the $5 per day subsistence that the trainees received ançl turn back over to the housing division for paying the dormitory staff members, food services- Mr. HAWKINS. The training allowance comes under the $1,400; is that so? Mr. WATSON. Well, this is confusing. We are talking about training costs. We normally refer to those as instruction costs, anything we need in the way of equipment, salary and so forth. The training allowance, which is often confused with this, is the money that the boys receive to put in their pockets once a week. The ~training allowance is $20 a week. So that is a training allowance, and the other is the training expenses, and this is expenses that are-that come out of the Manpower Development and Training Act. Mr. HAWKINS. What about transportation? Is that included under the 2680? Mr. WATSON. Yes. This is not per year. This is per student. You could get this out of the Health, Education, and Welfare, Depart- ment of Labor statistics on the number of dollars we have been given, divided by the number of students that we have handled, and to my ~knowledge, the only additional costs would be that that we receive, the service that we receive from the Bureau of Vocational I~ehabilita- tion, and that does not handle all of our medical expenses. That han dies part of it, but we have two full-time nurses, we have a medi- cal director who is at the school twice a week, and then the hospitalize- ~tion that the policy takes care of that the boys pay for themselves. PAGENO="0510" 2970 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. HAwKINs. Did you indicate the average rate completed of the enrollees? Mr. WATSON. I said that 50 percent of them were high school drop- outs, and in the testing, well, the first 2 years, the average was around the sixth grade, overall. Mr. HAwKINs. Let's stick to the other 50 percent- Mr. WATSON. They were high school graduates. Mr. HAWKINS. Would that mean an average of about the 10th grade? Do you know how this would compare with the Job Corps? Mr. WATSON. I know little about the Job Corps. Mr. HAWKINS. How many coeducational students do you have? Mr. WATSON. All of our students are boys. We would like to have a center in Ohio for girls. Mr. HAWKINS. You say the reading grade level is what? Mr. WATSON. The first 2 years, the attainment level, or functional level, would be around the sixth grade. Mr. HAWKINS. Are you aware that it is less than the fifth grade in the Job Corps? Mr. WATSON. No. I would have no way of knowing this. Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Are you aware that 23 percent of youngsters who were enrolled in the Job Corps are vocational school dropouts? Mr. WATSON. No, I wasn't aware of this. As a matter of fact, our experience, on occasion-we have very few students that have been involved in vocational education, and this indicates to us that if more of them were given opportunities in vocational education they would never have come to us in the first place. Chairman PERKINS. 50 percent of your youngsters are high school graduates, and the other 50 percent have had high school education?' Mr. WATSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie, any other questions? Mr. QmE. I just refreshed my memory-I believe it was the Gov- ernor of Indiana who came here in 1965-no, it was 1964-testifying on the Job Corps, and he had the experience where the boys who were illiterate, that in their school they ran for the problem boys-they had an average, I think it was of about 10th grade they had gone through that were illiterate, so I think this is quite an indictment of our public school system, it is true, but it surely shouldn't be an indict- ment of Mahoning Valley- Chairman PERKINS. I think Mahoning Valley is doing a good job,. but it is not a comparable situation with the Job Corps. Mr. QmE. If anything, they have some toughter problems. There is one county where they showed there was 10 handicapped in Mahoning Valley, where there was only one who went to Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. This is more like a community college, set up to accommodate the youngsters in the area, and they are screened for that purpose. So it is quite different from the problems that we have here involved in the Job Corps. I say that this school is doing a wonderful job. I just wish we had more of them, and you have got one of the best vocational education directors in the whole country. Mr. QUIE. He wouldn't be in the Job Corps. PAGENO="0511" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2971 We are going to get Job `Corps enrollees who drop out of the Job Corps. We need something like that- Chairman PERKINS. 23 percent of the Job Corps enrollees are drop- outs from vocational schools. Mr. QUIE. That is Mr. Ramey's type of vocational school. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ramey has perhaps as high a placement record as anybody in the whole country. I have seen outside indus- tries there to pick them all up before they even graduated. Is that correct, Mr. Ramey? Mr. RAMEY. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. He is dealing with the cream of the crop. That is the difference. Mr. QUIE. I imagine that Mr. Ramey may have some connection with private industry too. Mr. WATSON. We bave had excellent cooperation with industry, and this would be another hidden cost that I have not indicat.ed here. We have been provided instructional supplies in the way of steel from local industry to use in our welding and machine shop courses. This would not be a significant increase, but it does indicate the cooperation. We have now, as our classes come out, we have many representa- tives from industry coming in recruiting boys to go to work for them. We have had them come in from all over the country trying to get our boys to go with them, and many boys will have a half a dozen offers of jobs, and it is a matter of selecting the job he wants. Chairman PERKINS. Any further questions, Mr. Quie? Mr. Qtm~. It would be interesting to see the adequacy of Mahoning Valley and the Job Corps. The Harris poll shows that Job Corps training-well, it would be interesting to see what you have been able to do with the same type of individuals. Chairman PERKINS. That is a good way for him to make a self serving concluding remark. Mr. QUIE. I have learned from the chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, gentlemen, for your appearance. You have been most helpful to the committee. We invite you back again. Mr. RAMEY. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you for your experience here today, gentlemen. Chairman PERKINS. Come around, Mr. Mitchell. We are sorry to keep you waiting here today like this. You have been before the committee several times. You represent several organizations, and you represent them well. We are delighted to hear from you at this time, and I know the committee feels the same way. Mr. HAWKINS. In view of the lateness of the hour, I want to under- score what you have said, Mr. Chairman, to welcome Mr. Mitchell to this committee. Chairman PERKINS. Incidentally, we had your brother before us the other day. He made an outstanding statement. Mr. MITCHELL. I am glad to hear that. He is much younger than I am. PAGENO="0512" 2972 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I am very fond of him, and I am happy to hear he made a good impression here. I would like to have your permission to file my statement. Chairman PERKINs. Without objection, your statement will be filed in the record at this point, and any other supporting data you want will be inserted in the record. (The prepared statement of Clarence Mitchell follows:) STATEMENT OF CLARENCE MITCHELL, DKECTOR, WASHINGTON BUREAU OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Committee: I am Clarence Mitchell, direc- tor of the Washington Bureau of the NAACP. The principal purpose of my appearance today is to express support for HR. 8311, the Economic Opportunity Act. The more than 2,000 delegates from 44 states who attended our national con- vention in Boston (July 10-15) passed the following resolution: "This nation has at its command the basic resources to eliminate deprivation, want and hunger, and the moral and political responsibility to provide a more just distribution of income and wealth among its people. There are more than 32 million people living in abject poverty, of whom 40 percent are children under 15 years of age. While Negro citizens constitute more than ten percent of the nation's poor, and the Negro poor are 52 percent of the total Negro population, American Indians and people of Spanish and Mexican origin and poor whites also constitute a high percentage of disadvantaged poor. This condition is intoler- able and inexcusable. "The Economic Opportunity Act is a vital part of the war on poverty, and its role of marshalling resources through community action must be continued with increased and flexible funds. "The community action program was designed to stimulate local intiative and to muster local resources in an unprecedented attack on poverty in the urban and rural communities of America. Its hallmark should be flexibility, ingenuity, and bold local leadership. It should focus on the need for fundamental admin- istrative and political changes, responsive to the needs of the disadvantaged citizens by giving the poor an opportunity to participate and hold positions of leadership in effecting these changes. Community action provides the framework for coordinated attacks on poor education, bad housing, inadequate job skills and neglected environments. Flexibility and local decision-making are the heart of community action, and adequate Federal financial support is its life blood." The NAACP heartily supports the program of the Office of Economic Op- portunity. We do not pretend that it is perfect. We have acted and will con- tinue to act to correct problems within the agency and in communities where the program is operative. However, we oppose any dismemberment of the agency. We are against giving the O.E.O. functions to the U.S. Department of Labor, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare and others. We are shocked by the intemperate and partisan attack made on the President this week. This is no time to play politics with human misery. President Johnson, most public officials, the NAACP and millions of Americans want peace and progress in our country. All of us condemn crime, riots and anti-social behavior. The terrible calamities that have befallen our great cities in recent days should cause the men and women of good will to be united as never before in seeking solutions. Nothing will be gained and a great deal of dangerous bitterness will be generated, if those who may disagree with the President for political or economic reasons try to buttress their arguments with appeals to base emotions and to racial prejudice. No one can provide a simple formula for preventing riots. All will agree that demagogues who fan the flames of hate or participate in acts of violence should be dealt with sternly and swiftly in a manner approved by the United States Constitution. But we also have a duty to try with might and main to use our wealth, our brain power and our resources to correct the causes of want and despair. We must find ways to build confidence, to provide opportunities for self betterment and to lift the level of those lowest down in our country. The pro- gram of the Office of Economic Opportunity is one way of trying to accomplish this result. PAGENO="0513" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2973 A year ago I was in Newark, New Jersey. One of the daily papers carried twd stories of great significance to me. One story said that the Employment Service had more jobs than it could fill. The other story said that unemployment among colored people was about three times as high as unemployment among white people. Ever since I read those stories I have been trying to get an answer to this question, "How can we get the unemployed into the available jobs?" Perhaps we shall never find the complete `answer, but we have a better chance to find it if we continue to try new ideas and pioneer in the manner that is possible under the O.E.O. programs. During the March, 1967, hearings conducted by the Senate Labor and Public Welfare Subcommittee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty, we heard the voices of the poor who were urging greater expenditures to meet the problems of their communities. We also heard mayors testify on the needs of their cities. Perhaps some of the most poignant words uttered during those hearings were spoken by a witness who said, "These problems seem like nothing to you. But they're mountains to the people." Perhaps the most helpful words came from :Mayor Jerome P. Cavanaugh of Detroit. Representing the United States Con- ference of Mayors he said that at least $3 billion was needed for the war on poverty during fiscal 1968. At mid-point' in 1967 we are confronted with massive destruction and the loss of human life in our cities. Yet there are those who seem to think that we can continue to pinch pennies and practice false economy while our fellow Amer- icans. are in want or are denied opportunity. No one can say that we did not have ample warning that during the summer of 1967 the demagogues would do all in their power to promote friction and discord. Yet we also had great op- portunity to deprive them of a platform by vastly expanding and rapidly imple- menting the programs that will better the lot of the common man. Instead of seizing the chance to begin fulfillment of the dreams and aspira- `tions of the poor, we have consigned them to uninhabitable housing by killing the rent supplement program. We have laughed at their plight while refusing to make war on the rats that infest their neighborhoods and bite their children. TNow there are those who would make further inroads upon the hopes of the deprived by emasculation the program of the O.E.O; We must not let that happen. The NAACP urges that this committee and the whole Congress support the concepts of self help and community organization that are a part of the philos- ophy of the OE.O. We urge that you continue the independence of the agency and that you give it adequate funds to do the job that the times demand. Mr. MITCHELL. I would like to associate myself with the positions `of my longtime friends, Mr. Andrew Biemiller and Dr. Flemming. We have had many years of experience together in Washington, and I think their views represented the usual good commonsense they `express. It is very comforting to know that while Mr. Biemiller has a record of having been elected to the Congress as a Democrat, and Dr. Flern- ming is clearly a Republican, and has always been, as far as I know, `they both have a common point of view on this problem. I think it is important to note that, because it is my judgment that what we are faced here with is the problem that Mr. Gibbons men- tions earlier in this hearing, and he said that we are in a situation where we are down to 166 to 199 votes as possible votes from the House in getting this program through, which means the only way we are `going to get it through is that there is going to have to be substan- tial support from the Republican Party. I have a voting residence, and at that meeting-at that voting resi- `deuce I am registered as an Independent, but I have tried through the years to be fair to members of both parties, so much so, that a lot `of my Democratic friends think I am a Republican, and which I am not, but I would like to say for the record and for the Republicans `that the future of OEO is really in the hands of the Republican Party. We have had some unfortunate experiences in this session of the SO-0S4----G7-pt. 4-33 PAGENO="0514" 2974 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Congress, when the elections were held a number of newspaper re- porters came to me and said, "Things are going to be awful for you now because the Republicans have increased their numbers in the House." I went through the records of the individual Republican members, member by member, and said to the press that I did not see on the basis of the records that we would be substantially worse off just be- cause Republicans had been elected. Then along came the rent supplement program, and all of us know that the number of Republicans who voted for that was very small, which is really a terrible blow to colored people in this country, in that they are depending on that program to try to break out of some of the slum conditions in which they live. I have, for example, from Albany, Ga., where a hundred-year-old Negro church is embarked on a program of providing 100 units of rent supplement type housing for Negroes who now have to pay as much as $60 a month for-$60 a week for adequate accommodations without the conveniences that they ought to have. Now, the church proposes to reduce that rental fee to $50, and it would do it if the church got the money to have this rent supplement project built. If a vote is cast against the rent supplement, it is a vote cast against that particular church in Albany, Ga., which is trying to make it pos- sible for colored people to get decent housing at a decent price. We had an awful problem with the food stamp program, and the question, as you gentlemen know, was whether Mr. Sullivan's amend- ment was going to prevail which would knock out that requirement that there be a. State subsidy of 20 or 30 percent. I cannot remember which it was. I am sorry to say, when I looked down in the well of the House, I saw people for whom I have a high regard, Republicans, voting against the amendment. The story was different on the rolicall. The same might be said for other programs I mentioned. I bring it up merely to say that the posture of the OEO at this point, is ex- actly like the posture of these programs which have either been emas- culated or threatened because of the changes in the congressional seats in the last election. I say to you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, that there is a direct relationship between these votes against the things that make it possible for people to have a better life in this country and some of the incredible, brutal, and stupid things that we see in the cities that have exploded. Now I don't think we can get anywhere by attacking these programs for partisan reasons. I think that if we are going to really act in the best interest of the country, and we have some alternative program to offer, it seems to me that we ought not to throw out a program which is in operation, but we ought to have whatever the alternative ready, and be able to demonstrate that it is really going to meet the need. I was listening to this colloquy here on the vocational schools, for example. Now I have lived in Minnesota, Mr. Quie. I lived in the good city, St. Paul, and as a matter of fact my first son was born there, and I know, and I am sure that anybody living in the Northwest knows, that PAGENO="0515" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2975 the regular vocational schools have not gotten colored people into them to the same extent that we are able to get them into these pro- grams under the Job Corps and things of that sort. So to say that we are going to shift this program to the vocational schools of this country would merely mean that we are going to shift the Negroes out, and we are going to consign them to a category 0ą persons who are not skilled. This gentleman from Ohio who was here happens to come from a State where we have had to go into court just to get colored people opportunities to work at skilled trades and become apprentices, and get into certain kinds of things in vocational schools even if they are going to work on State-financed projects. Now I can't see how, in any fair program, it would be suggested that we be again thrown into a den of lions, as far as vocational train- ing is concerned. I heard the gentleman from Florida speaking and talking about how we should transfer this program to the Florida schools. They are the worst foot draggers in the country as far as desegregation is con- cerned. They are under sanctions from NEA. When we say give it to vocational schools, gentlemen, or the Florida education system, we are saying, give it to more discriminators, and of course, the colored people of the country are expected to accept that and assume they are being treated fairly by their Government. I would like to say another thing, which I think is awfully im- portant in this picture: There has been, in my judgment, a most unfair attack on the President of the United States in connection with some of the disturb- ances. As I have said these disturbances are in large part directly traceable to some of the failures on the part of the Government. In my judgment, this has not been the President's fault. All of us know that when the President starts trying to spend the money for some of these programs, there is a great hue and cry about economy. In the city of Cambridge, Md., it is my personal belief, on the basis of facts I know first hand that that trouble could have been avoided if we had had more money with which to face some of the needs of that community. It came to my attention that there was a great deal of community discontent about the fact that a swimming pool program was not in operation so that the adult, or young adult colored group could par- ticipate in it, and I understood that that was, while only one thing, it was a rallying point of discontent. I understood further that there was a great deal of difficulty about. the matter of jobs ~nd housing. Well, I have brought this to the atten- tion of people who were in a position to do something about it here in Washington, and the main reason why they couldn't do some of the things that needed to be done in that situation was because they just didn't have the money. Now one of the agencies that could have acted but didn't have the money was the OEO. When the money was not forthcoming the dem- agogic group moved into the picture. I have no hesitancy about con- demning demagogues. The first newspaper assignment I ever covered as a reporter back in 1933 was a lynching of a Negro down in Princess Anne, Md., down on Maryland's eastern shore. PAGENO="0516" 2976 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I condemned those monsters then, and I condemned those who went down there and stirred up the people with racial animosty then. But I say the people who live in Cambridge, Newark, Chicago, and New York, would not be susceptible to those kinds of appeals if our Government would not be the victim of these narrow, pemiypinching types of activities which try to prevent money from going to where the people need it. WTe don't hesitate to spend money for the- betterment of pigs, and I think we should expend money for the betterment of pigs, because this is good for the economy of the country. We don't hesitate to subsidize the airplanes and the railroads, and we waste an awful lot of money on rockets that go out into space and don't function. We don't say anything when we have a couple of mil- lion dollars in an airplane or rocket that fails, but let somebody in OEO or the Job Corps or something slip up just one little bit, and we are right at the throats of those people of that agency and trying to show that the program is no good. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think that we have a duty to the people of this country. I am proud to say that circumstances and life make it possible for me to be a taxpayer to my Government, and I am proud that I am in a position to see my tax money spent for things that bene- fit the people of this country. I consider the antipoverty program one of those kinds of programs. I think we have a clear choice in this Nation. Either we are going to continue to spend our money in a way that is making it possible for every single human in this country to live decently, to be able to say to his children, "America is a land of opportunity," or we are going to have a thousand jungles around the country where people are going to fight. on the lowest level for recognition. I am happy to have enough faith in this country to believe that the great majority of our people are not going to revert to the law of the jungle for survival. I think they are going to mobilize their political strength, their intelligence and their decency, and they are going to make America what it ought to be. But I implore you gentlemen who are on this committee, and par- ticularly the Republican Members, some of whom are my really dear friends, and very good on matters of civil rights, I implore them not to take chances at this time with the OEO program. I implore you to spend more money trying to do the constructive things. I implore you not to turn this over to the agencies which have so long neglected this problem. The Employment Service would be the worst possible agency to which to give any of the functions of OEO. I was in Newark last year, and one of the sad stories that came out in the papers there was one story which said that the Employment Service had more jobs available than it could fill. In the same paper was another story which said that the rate of unemployment among ~egroes was three times as high as the rate of unemployment among whites. I have been busy with the Employment Service trying to ftnd out why this is so. I get a lot of nice talk out of that agency, but I know why it is so. It is so because the Employment Service does not believe PAGENO="0517" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2977 that it ought to be the agency which tries to place these people that it is difficult to place. They want the easy placements. They don't want to get the kind of people that the chairman has been talking about, who are school drop- outs, who have to get specialized training in order to be put back into the mainstream of society. But, gentlemen, we can't turn our backs on people like that. We have got to bring them into the mainstream of society. OEO is doing, in my judgment, a very credible job in that respect, and it would be a tragedy if we say we are going to turn this back to the same people who are responsible for the country being in the plight that it is now insofar as employment is concerned. I have really come to the end of what I might say. As I said at the outset, my statement is incorporated in the record, but I would just like to close with a brief mention and comment about the investi- gation that the committee is undertaking in connection with the riots. To me, it is fantastic that anyone would make the charge that work- ers fromthe OEO would be the starters of riots. It is incredible tO me that that charge is dignified by an investigation. But in addition, I would worry about who is chosen to do that investigating. We have the FBI, which is a competent investigative agency; we have the Treasury Department, Secret Service, if we want to use them. We have all sorts of really competent investigators that we can send out to check on these things if we really want to check on theiń. I would really worry about whether a group of investigators from a committee of Congress, under the present emotional circumstances, would be able to come back with a reliable report and I don't want to sound cynical, but experience has taught me the facts of life here in the Congress. I would say, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, respect- fully, that I doubt whether whatever is found in that investigation would change a single vote on this antipoverty program. The only way we are going to change votes in this antipoverty pro- gram is for those who have now made up their minds that they are going to emasculate it and dismember it, to be human and considerate and merciful enough to continue this program in a way that is going to help the people who need to be benefited. Ithankyou. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you for an excellent statement, Mr. Mitchell. Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. I agree with everything Mr. Mitchell has said, and the only question I would like to ask him-I assume the statement is going to be filed, Mr. Chairman? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, it has already been ordered filed. Mr. Quie? Mr. QUIE. No questions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Mitchell, do you feel that we have inade- quately supported the antipoverty programs this far? Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. I support the position taken by Mayor Cavanaugh of Detroit. He said that he thought we needed $3 billion to give adequate attention to the antipoverty pro- gram. I don't think Mr. Gibbons was being at all unrealistic when he PAGENO="0518" 2978 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 talked in terms of $12 billion. A great, rich country like this ought to be willing to spend that if it means the rehabilitation of our popular tioi~, so I don't think we are spending enough. I don't think we are even asking for enough if we were to get the maximum that the bill calls for. Chairman PERKINS. You feel that the Negro population of this country would not receive fair consideration if the OEO-Office of Economic Opportunity- Mr. MITCHELL. Yes, sir. I would like to support that with this state- ment. The Employment Service has been notorious for years. I don't know whether you remember Secretary~ Schwellenbach, when he was Sec- retary of Labor, but my first attempt to correct the conditions in the Employment Service was under Secretary Schwellenbach, and a few months ago I was in the same room where I had met with Secretary Schwellenbach meeting with some of the people there now trying to correct the same sort of situations that existed then. If we talk about putting this in HEW, the HEW is under virulent attack because it hastried to -move forward in enforcement of title VI. I would predict the same forces that have attacked HEW would also attack OEO functionings if they were put in HEW. I would also think that being a sensible agency, HEW would try to protect its regular functions and in doing so would neglect the func- tions put into it from OEO. As for the schools, the record is clear. This is 1967. The school desegregation decision was handed down in 19ö4. Those same people running the educational system of this country, who have done every- thing they can to promote racial segregation, and footdragging in the schools, cannot be entrusted with any kind of educational program that calls for innovation, imagination, and forwardlooking attitudes. I would say it is a clear disaster for colored people in this country if there is any intention to put this program in the hands of those who have always been in favor of turning back the clock. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Mitchell. We ap- preciate your appearance. You have been helpful to the committee. The committee will recess until 9 :30 a.m., tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 5 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 9:30 a.m., Thursday, July 27, 1967.) PAGENO="0519" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 THURSDAY, JULY 27, 1967 HOUSE `OF REPRESENTAIIVES, C0MMrrrEE ON ED13OATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Ray- bui n House Office Building, Hon Carl D Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Thompson, O'Hara, Hawkins, Gibbons, Ford, Ayres, Quie, Goodell, Ashbrook, Reid, Ei lenborn, Dellenback, and Steiger Also present H D Reed, general counsel, Robert E McCord, sen ior specialist; Louise Maxienne Dargaris, research assistant; Benjamin Reeves, editor of committee publications, Austin Sullivan, investiga toi, Marian Wyman, special assistant, Charles W Radcliffe, minority counsel for educ'ttion, John Buckley, minority investigator, Dixie Barger, `minority research assistant; and Phillips Rockefeller, minor- ity research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. The ~ommittee will come to order. A quorum is present., The first witness this morning is Edward Robie, vice president, the Equitable Life Assurance Society of New York. Mr. Robie, I am' de- lighted to welcome you here today and I am most anxious to know your views on the Economic Opportunity Act. Unless there is objec- tion, your prepared statement will be inserted in the record and you' may proceed in any way you prefer. (The prep'ired st'itement of Edward Robie follows ) STATEMENT BY EDWARD A. R0BIE, VIOE.PRESIDENT AND PERSONNEL DIRECTOR, EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY OF THE UNITED STATES I am Edward Robie, vice President and Personnel Director of the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States. I'm' here today to discuss with you our. viewpoint, and share with you our experiences in an area of major concern to the' Equitable and to the Nation. This concern centers `around what can and should be done to help the growing number of our nation's unskilled, untrained and unemployed young people, many of whom face the additional handicap of coming from proverty-ridden households and racial minorities. It is my hope that my comments will be helpful `to you in your deliberations concerning HR10682 and specifically regarding Title IV of that Bill calling for an Industry Youth Corps. The Equitable is the third largest life insurance company in the country. We are headquartered in .New York City and have offices in all 50 states, Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. We have approximately 12,000 salaried employees, 7~00O at our Home Office and 5,000 at field locations. In addition, we have more than 6,500 commissioned agents who sell our insurance. ` ` The Equitable's concern regarding the employment of youth grows out of two separate circumstances. First, ourS Chairman, James. .F. Oates, Jr., has for many years had a deep conviction that employers have a social responsibility 2979 PAGENO="0520" 2980 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 to do what they can to solve the problems of unemployment among America's; youth. His concern was such that he readily agreed to serve as a member of the late President Kennedy's Committee on Youth Employment when he was asked to do so. His concern was irefiected in the approach which the Equitable,. on a completely voluntary basis, adopted to help a troubled segment of our- unemployed youth, which I will discuss shortly. The second circumstance from which our concern grows is the fact that we are a major employer of young men and women in their teens, particularly in New York City. In fact, during this month (July) well over 1,000 teenagers from the graduating class of June 1967 will begin employment with us. We are expecting about 1,000 new employees from this age group at our Home Office, and a total of about 500 at our field locations. As a major employer of youth, we feel a special obligation to be concerned with and sensitive to the problems this population is facing. Our concern is heightened as we find we must adjust to a changing labor pool prompted by the flight of the middle class to the suburbs. Our concern is strengthened each time we note that many of the jobs being done away with, as a result of increased use of electronic data processing equipment, were formerly filled by young inexperienced men; and women. Our concern is intensified each time we hear statistics like the one which tells us that there are about 100,000 young men and women between the ages of 16 and 21 Out of school and out of work in the City of New York alone. As evidence of its concern with the problem of youth unemployment, and at Mr. Oates' specific urging, the Equitable several years ago addressed itself to doing something about a particular segment of this population-the high school. dropout. In addition, again several years ago, we put considerable time and the effort of some of our, senior-level officers into formulating suggestions and an approach, to combating the overall problem of unemployment, with particular attention given to youth unemployment. The result was a major speech advancing some new and innovative ideas given by Chairman Oates at the 34th National Business Conference of the Harvard Business School Association in June of 1964. I would like to share briefly with you our experience in aiding the high school dropout, as well as some of Mr. Oates' thought-provocating suggestions. In 1961 the Equitable started a special program for the employment of some so-called unemployable youngsters who had for varying reasons dropped out of' school and who ,did not meet our normal employment standards. We were interested in seeing if these youngsters could do Equitable's `beginning-level' jobs, and if they could be prepared, like the hundreds of inexperienced high' school and college graduates we hire' each year, for positions with greater responsibility and higher earnings. We've been working on this project in a modest way since 1961, and by 1965' we had employed over 80 of these so-called unemployable young men and women~ The youngsters who came with us started as general clerks, inside messengers, mailroom attendants, addressograph clerks and Xerox machine operators. For the most part, general clerks start In jobs which require that they open and sort mail, and after a period of training, that they become familiar with the responsibilities of various units of a department so they can see that the right individual receives all changes of beneficiaries, anothet gets all correspondence asking for a change in the manner in which premiums are paid, and so on. Inside messengers, we euphemistically call them `appchasers, are responsible for. searching out policies or applications for insurance which are in various stages of. the processing pipeline when they are needed for special attention, or when additional information is received or is needed. Our mailroom attendants~ staff a number of small individual mailrooms on each floor which are connected by a conveyor system, and are responsible for the pickup and' delivery of mail on a set schedule. The fact that these rooms are spread throughout our 38- story building means the employees assigned to them have a considerable amount of unsupervised time. Addressograph clerks and Xerox machine opera- tors carry out `the duties that their job titles imply, with the understanding that they are often responsible for scheduling the use of their equipment and establishing priorities. Over the last several years our starting salaries on be- ginning-level Jobs have gone up from $5~ to $67 per week. Promotions to more demanding work are available to the young~ters who prove themselves' reliable and capable. . PAGENO="0521" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2981 * It won't surprise you that we have had problems as we have sought to help :these so-called unemployable youngsters adjust to our work environment. For example, we encountered difficulties In instilling in these employees an apprecia- ~tion for the importance of punctuality and attendance, for many of these young- sters came from homes in which there were no established routines, often no one to see that they left mornings on time or at all. In some cases they were actually being criticized at home and by their friends for attempting to hold down a regular job. In some instances we faced the problem of poor attitudes, "chips-on-the-shoulder," and in most instances our usual performance standards were not met on the normal time schedules with normal training routines. But, thanks to a specially selected group of sensitive and understanding supervisors, by 1962 and 1963 we began to appreciate and combat the pressures these youngsters were encountering. We decided special counseling help was necessary for many of the youngsters, and we were able to secure the services of a young man on work-leave from the Union Theological Seminary, who gave support and guidance to them. Between 1962 and 1965 we used three such counselors for a year each, all from Union. But, along with .the problems we encountered we also had our successes. By late 1956, we still had 18 of a total of 82 dropouts with us. In view of some of the difficulties they encountered, this turnover rate of about 77% does not com- pare unfavorably with the turnover rate we have generally averaged over recent years with the rest of our younger employee population. Several of our former unemployables have advanced to second and third level jobs and have assumed supervisory responsibility for younger, newer employees. It is our hope that with increased experience and training, some will move to technical or supervisory level jobs. We are also encouraged by the fact that several returned to evening school in an effort to retrace their steps and pick up the high school diploma they bad missed. In late 1966, contrary to our earlier thinking but building upon our experience, we decided to include a requirement for supplemental education aimed at pre- paring a group of newly hired dropouts, through formal classroom preparation, for their high school equivalency diplomas. It was our plan to select 20 young men from a larger number who were to be screened and referred to us by J.O.I.N. (Job Orientation in Neighborhoods), an agency of the City of New York which works primarily with dropouts. At the same time we entered into an agreement with the Board for Fundamental Education, a non-profit organiza- tion chartered by Congress to provide education and training for the disadvan- taged, which called for them to provide a curriculum, instructors, and materials to prepare this group, through formal classroom Instruction, to pass the New York State Equivalency Tests. We understand that we are the first employer in American industry to offer this opportunity. On October 13, 1966 we had 20 young men scheduled to begin work on regu- lar, full-time jobs with the understanding that they would be attending class on their own time for two hours each night, four nights a week, for about one year. It was surprising to us, and here perhaps there is a lesson to be learned, that in spite of three screenings-by J.O.I.N., to determine the extent of their interest in getting their equivalency diplomas, as well as general suitability for the work which the Equitable had to offer, by the Board for Fundamental Edu- cation, to again gauge their level of motivation and importantly to determine the extent of their verbal and arithmetic skills so that the curriculum could be tailored to the group, and by the equitable for the standard pre~employment inter'view,-three of the 20 young men did not appear on their first day of employment. We later determined that one young man received his induction notice and chose not to report, one decided he needed a job which paM more money (the group was starting at $58 per week), and one literally disappeared and we were unable, after repeated tries, to locate him. We continued to inter- -view and screen applicants in the weeks to follow, had two early terminations, and 30 days after the original group began we closed the program to new entrants with 17 young men at work and attending class. We are encouraged by the fact that the course of study these young men are pursuing will be completed in three-quarters of the time we expected, or about eight to nine months rather than one year. The method used by the Boardfor Fundamental Education is geared toward ~having those in a class who pick up a subject first* share their grasp of it with their classmates. The fact that the course will be completed ahead of schedule is attributed by the B.F.E. instructors to this sharing and a general climate of -cooperative learning that existed. In addition, we have already had one young PAGENO="0522" 2982 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 man receive his New York State Equivalency Diploma and have 11 others ready to take their examinations. Although we have lost 6 of the young men from the 17 we had in the program after its shakedown period, we find it encouraging that this number compares almost exactly with turnover among a random sampling of high school graduates hired at about the same time as this group. In the past, turnover among dropouts has, as I pointed out, beenhigher than that among high school graduates. Of our 6 terminations, one was to enlist in the Armed Forces, two were due to move from New York City, and one was involved in a scrape with the law. It was necessary to terminate two others because they failed to adjust to the requirements of their jobs and were generally performing in an unsatisfactory manner. We fully expect that the opportunity for full-time employment, and the chance to prepare for and hopefully to pass the Equivalency examination, will start most if not all of this group of young men on the road to becoming successful, pro- ductive members of society. From all indications the Equitable and its policy- holders, as taxplayérs, will benefit from this experiment and the $700 fee neces- sary to provide this educational opportunity for each of the young men in this group. At the. moment we are in the process of evaluating this project with an eye toward our future plans. As I mentioned earlier, the Equitable's concern with youth employment, while reflected in our program to employ the dropout, was also the subject of an address given by our Chairman, James F. Oates, Jr., before the Harvard Business Association in June 1964. I think Mr. Oates' own words best state his concern and commitment to finding possible solutions to this problem. To quote from bistalk: ". . . let me remind you again of the very special character of our national unemployment problem. It has a hard core, and this hard core presents unique and most disturbing features. I refer to the fact that a very substantial per- centage of the unemployed today are young people, teenagers. These young people are a vital national resource. Their lives lie in front of them. If their problems are not effectively dealt with, whole lifetimes will be lost in idleness and bitter- ness, with corrosive long-term effects on our economic and social structure. Con- sequently, the problem of the untrained, unskilled, unemployed teenager requires special study and profound reflection." Mr. Oates went on to disagree with those who feel a substantial segment of these teenagers are permanently unemployable and to suggest that bold new avenues must be explored, including those that might appear novel and startling. Mr. Oates noted the relationship between minimum wage laws and youth em- ployment: "Each time the minimum wage rate is raised to a higher level or its applica- tion is extended to cover additional job classifications, businessmen are given a financial incentive to eliminate jobs. They are stimulated and challenged to cut out services or to substitute machines in order to help keep their price structure competitive and to maintain the profitability of their business enterprises." He mentioned that the unfortunate aspect of this situation is that, "this powerful negative incentive must result in denying job opportunities to many people, particularly the unskilled, untrained, young workers." By no means was Mr. Oates suggesting the repeal of the minimum wage laws, but only drawing attention to the fact that if his fears were well founded, "we have unwittingly brought about the elimination of jobs in precisely those unskilled categories in which our unemployed labor force is expanding . . ." Mr. Oates asked that measures be explored, "to ensure that the burden of these laws shall not fall entirely on one harassed and desperate minority-the un- employed youth." Mr. Oates saw a number of alternatives to dealing with the problem of un- employed youth. Among them were provisions for a payment by the Government of a proportion of wages necessary to cover the differential between labor's true economic value and the minimum legal rates. He expressed confidence that the American businessman would be able, given access to a supply of labor, priced at its true economic value, to quickly devise ways of using it effectively. Obviously Mr. Oates' suggestions, made in 1964, are similar to Title IV of HR. 10682 covering the Industry Youth Corps. Actually Mr. Oates, and those at the Equitable who had devoted significant amountsof time to studying this question, saw at that time two possible methods that could be used to encourage employment of marginal labor-one being a federal income tax incentive, and the other a direct payroll subsidy. Mr. Oates PAGENO="0523" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 298S compared the income tax incentive to the investment credit which was incor- porated in the 1962 revenue bill. He suggested that a similar tax credit could be offered, "to employers who make payroll expenditures at the legal minimum. rates for certain carefully defined classes of unskilled, marginal labor whose employment we seek to encourage." While this idea is not before this Committee because it incorporates a tax approach, I feel sure that members of the Com- mittee are interested in its careful consideration by the Ways and Means Com- mittee, in the form of H.R. 4574. (Human Investment Act.) Regarding the Industry Youth Corps payroll subsidy approach that is before the Committee, we recognize that care will have to be taken to avoid having sub- sidized labor simply replace or compete with labor being paid at the full minimum wage. Employees receiving the benefit of the subsidy must also receive on-the-job training preparing them to move up into the regular, unsubsidized labor force, and, in some cases, supplemental basic education as well. Experience must be gained with local community action groups in the development of programs de- signed to meet local conditions and needs and opportunities with adequate con- trols, but a minimum of red tape. Although this approach might begin with unemployed boys and girls, it also has possible applications in aiding displaced adult coal miners and farmers. The total costs to our society of the payroll subsidy should be viewed against the sav- ings resulting when the people involved start contributing to the national product to the full extent of their ability, where formerly they were being supported in idleness. We have embarked on our approach to the employment of dropouts completely voluntarily and without Government subsidy. The number of jobs to which these youngsters can be assigned is limited. But we believe most employers, large and small, have appropriate employment opportunities for some of these young- sters, provided the incentives are positive and the approach and methods of training are demonstrated as we and a few other companies have been able to do. It is especially true that small employers cannot mount complex training projects of the kind contemplated in the Manpower Development and Training Act, and it is small employers who can still use a very high proportion of our unskilled labor If the price is right and a local agency is willing to provide imaginative approaches to make the labor avalable and to help train it. We see very distinct advantages in having the applications for, and the administrative procedures associated with these subsidies, kept as simple as possible. We also see great merit in having responsible local community action groups involved In such a program. It seems reasonable that those at the local level could best thrash out such problems as to the selection of both employers and employees. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, for this opportunity to make known the Equitable's concern regarding the question of youth employment. We intend to continue to do what we can in an effort to find workable solutions to what is certainly one of the Nation's major domestic problems. STATEMENT OF EDWARD ROBIE, VICE PRESIDENT, EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY OP NEW YORK Mr. ROBIE. The scope of my remarks will be somewhat less broad than you had perhaps hoped or anticipated and certainly broader than you indicated in your invitation. I don't feel that I am qualified to comment on the entire Economic Act or many sides of it. I have come here with particular intention of discussing one aspect of H.R. 18602 that is before the committee and particularly the In- dustry Youth Corps proposal in that bill. There are two reasons why I feel I may have some helpful informa- tion and experience to give the committee. One is because the chair- man of Equitable, James F. Oates, Jr., has for some time had a special interest in the youth employment problem which led him PAGENO="0524" 2984 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 several years ago to make some proposals, one of which is very much similar to the proposal for the Industry Youth Corps. The second is that this same concern by Mr. Oates and by a number of the rest of us has led us to do some experimentation with the em- ployment of youngsters who don't meet our normal standards. This experimentation I want to share with you. Chairman PERKINS. That is what we want from you. Mr. ROBIE. First, I guess I should say just to give you a framework that we are a large mutual insurance company, t.he third largest in the country. We have employed 7,000 people in our home office in the heart of New York City and about another 5,000 throughout the country, and perhaps another 6,000 or 7,000 sales agents throughout the country. My responsibilities as personiiel director have to do with these salaried workers. Unlike the automobile industry, which can use sub- professionals for such routine jobs as bolting automobiles together, our routine clerical work is done by youngsters right out of school. A high proportion of these people are girls. A good many are not career people. They stay with us for several years until they get married and then they leave. So there is a high turnover of these lower level people. As a result of this we are as an industry probably the biggest em- ployers of youngsters, both Equitable and, the insurance industry in general. For example, just in our home office building, this summer we will employ over 1,000 youngsters just graduating from high school this year for their first job. Naturally, we have a particular interest in what is happening to the youngsters and we have a particular concern when we find the changing population mix in our cities, particularly in New York, a different labor pool than we have seen in the past. ~Over a thousand of these youngsters in New York City are out of work, dropout youngsters, supposedly unemployable. This gives us a great deal of concern. About 5 years ago we decided to see what we could do to find out more about the so-called unemployable of the dropout youngsters and with that in mind we employed a small number of these, cooperating with a local agency. We have actually cooperated with several agen- cies over a period of time and most recently our cooperation has been with a city agent called JOIN-Joint Orientation in Neighborhoods. It was our intention to employ a limited number of dropout young- sters. Initially the thought was just give them a job that they can do and let them learn the discipline of working and see what this will do to improve their motivation and to give them some chance to support themselves. We have `employed in 5 years about 80 of these youngsters. Before our program beginning late in 1966, which is a little different than I will come to in just a minute, of these 80, we have about 16 left. These youngsters have been given on-the-job training but no supple- mental education. We have learned from our experience that just giv- ing these youngsters a job and on-the-job training is not adequate. They need basic educational help, supplemental help, and they need counseling. They come from homes in some cases where even' holding a regular job is looked on as something derogatory. PAGENO="0525" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY' ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2985 They `come: from homes where there is nobody to get them up in the morning, any kind of a schedule to get any "place on time is something they are completely unused ta,so they need special counseling, special supervision and they need a great deal of care in'job assignment. Having learned this, in 1966, we decided to `change our program somewhat and to offer a special kind of supplemental education to these yOungsters. This was provided through a contract with the Board for Funda- mental Education, which is a nonprofit educational agency chartered by the Congress which has specialized in developing unusual tech- niques for, first, adult education of various levels of illiterates. I think we were the first experiment trying to apply these unusual basic educational techniques to youngsters. The arrangement we made with approximately 20 young dropout boys was that we would give them jobs at the lowest level, messengers, Xerox machine operators, addressograph operators, APT chasers, fel- lows who go around and locate papers throughout the building as we need them. It was decided they would go to school-we didn't call it school- they would take extra education 2 hours a night, 4 nights a week, and we would provide the education. The Board' of Fundamental EducatiOn provided two instructors under this contract. The cost was geared to be $700 to $750 per boy `for approximately' 1 year's education on this basis, and the goal was the high school equivalency examination and high school equivalency diploma. We now feel we have had enough experience with these tech- niques to say it works. Eleven of these youngsters have been able to stick it out and we think are going to be a'ble to pass their high school equivalency in the near future. We think that these youngsters have also demonstrated enough ability on the job so that they will be able to have reasonably good careers with us. Some of them can even get up into the supervisory levels and the technical job levels, we think. As a result of this, we are encouraged to think that with this kind of care, with this kind of supplemental education, these youngsters are not unemployable. They may be a hard core that we have not touched that are although I doubt even that if enough care is given but these so-called unemployable youngsters are not unemployable. They can be taught but it costs money and it takes time. To go back to Mr. Oates' earlier ideas, I expressed when I started my informal summary here, I believe about 3 years ago at an address at the Harvard Business School, Mr. Oates pointed out that one of the' problems with these youngsters was simply that as far as jobs were concerned they couldn't produce enough on the job to warrant the minimum salary level that was required to pay them. The financial `loss was there and there was no financial incentive. He suggested drawing on the 1962 tax incentive formula. This was em- bodied in a bill before the Ways and Means Committee or the idea of a payroll subsidy was suggested by Mr. Oates as a way of making up the economic difference between what the company would pay these youngsters and what it would pay for educating them and what they were actually worth on the job. PAGENO="0526" 2986 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 This payroll subsidy idea is substantially involved in the title IV of the bill, the Industry Youth Corps bill, before you. It is our thought that with the experience we have had with a very limited number of these youngsters and the experience some other companies have now had with this sort of thing, it indicates that with a financial incentive a number of other companies and especially per- haps small companies that can't mount complex programs might be encouraged to negotiate with local community action agencies in such a way as to give jobs to these youngsters and provide supplemental education of the type we have and thereby start them on careers and get them off the welfare rolls and out of the prisons of the future. It is essentially this experience that led me to come down here. I am afraid on many other aspects of the poverty program, the Equal Opportunity Act, the Manpower Development and Training Act, and so on, I am simply not qualified to talk. I would be happy to share with you any aspects of this experience we have had that you think might be helpful. Chairman PERKINS. You do not feel that you are competent to state whether you feel the present program should be held together in a separate agency which is the executive arm of the Government with- out being transferred to HEW? Mr. R0BIE. No~ sir, I don't. I do think it is fairly obvious and prob- ably not very helpful for me to say that one'of the mayor problems that we have run into is the problem of coordination. Whatever way will provide the best coordination, I think that is the best way, but I don't feel qualified to say whether that would be with the present or- ganization or with some other form of organization. Coordination is a very serious problem. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel we are making progress under the present setup? Mr. ROBIn. I would say we are making progress but I have no standard to judge whether the progress is good or bad. To say we are making no progress means we are doing nothing. I think we are doing some things and whether we could do more and faster and achieve better coordination under a different organizational setup, it is diffi- cult to know. We have no standard by which to judge that. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. QrnE. I will yield to Mr. Goodell. Mr. GooDnr~. Mr. Robie, thank you for your very excellent state- ment. Could you give us an idea of your viewpoint of the cost to the com- pany per student or per trainee in this type of situation. Mr. ROBIn. Yes, our cost for this supplemental education piece looks like it is going to be about $700 per youngster. Interestingly, and this turns out to be about 25 percent of the wage level at which a typi- cal employer would employ these youngsters, $60 or $70 a week is a beginning clerical unskilled wage more or less around the country and as they progress and stay with the company they go into higher levels and beyond that. Chairman PERKINS. You are talking about high school graduates? Mr. RoBIn. Yes. It is our notion that we should not employ these dropout youngsters at the same level as is paid to the high school graduate beginners. Say 25 percent of a $60 or $70 wage turns out PAGENO="0527" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2987 to be relatively close to the cost we found it takes using this kind of supplemental education for merely the supplemental education piece and if one assumes that the other time, the counseling time, the special supervisory time and so on doesn't amount to a great deal in cost, then it could well be that the 25-percent subsidy would provide enough to give adequate supplemental education. Mr. GooD~IL. What kind of process do you go through in screen- ing these youngsters? I notice that you now have an organization called JOIN screening the youngsters for you. What process do you go through and what process do they go through? Mr. RomE. Even with the most careful screening it surprised us to find out that all of the youngsters did not show up on the job. We started out this program thinking we would get 20. The JOIN organization, the local community agency first screened basically using two or three criteria. One criterion was the your~gsters should specifi- cally be told the kind of company and work and express some interest in that kind of work. In our earlier program we found the kids were sent to us just for a job and we had kids that the last thing they wanted in the world was to be in a clerical operation. This was just not their cup of tea so we decided part of the screening should be an interest in our kind of org~anization, our kind of work. Second, we did require a minimum educational attainment. We did not for this particular program want complete illiterates. \Ve knew we were getting dropouts but we did want some minimum educational requirement. Third, because we have a very large number of young girls in our organization, there were some minimum requirements with regard to things like narcotics involvement and sex offenses and things like that. We did not eliminate anybody with a police record but if they had a record we took a look at the record. Then the board of fundamental education screened youngsters to find out about their attainment level. This involves the youngsters working together,. and a big part of their new technique is getting the kids to work together in education, helping each other. Therefore, it was important for them to find out how much variation was there in the educational level attainment of these youngsters to begin with and they had to gear their program to that. We screened them with our normal preemployment interview to see if there was any serious motivational problem. The youngster who was being pushed into it, and said he wasn't too sure he wanted to come, we didn't want. Even after this screening for motivation, educational achievement and attainment for our kind of work, of the 20 kids set to čome to work, two did not show up, so you really can't tell about the motivational problem. Screening is very necessary. You can waste an awful lot of time and effort setting up a program for kids whom you could tell in advance are not interested. Mr. GOODELL. One of your major concerns in screening, I take it then, is determining the motivation of the youngster to take advantage of the type of job opportuiiity that you can offer and; secondly, to evaluate what qualification or ability he has so that you can cope with those in the training period. Mr. RomE. That is right. PAGENO="0528" 2988 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. GOODELL. If I understand you correctly, you are not eliminating: those who possess some difficult educational problems. Mr. ROBIE. By and large, all of these youngsters are difficult educa- tional problems and all of these youngsters exhibit one or another' form of rebellion and difficulty. Mr. GOODELL. To put it another way, you are not just trying to take' the cream of the crop? Mr. ROBIE. No, depending on how you slice it. I am sure there are youngsters with problems who need help who, compared with the' youngsters we took, would make our youngsters look like the cream of the crop. But if you compare our youngsters with the youngsters we have been normally taking they are definitely below the normal level of standards. Mr. GOODELL. I did not mean the hardest core. We all recognize that special programs are necessary and you named some of the categories of those who were screened out. I am interested that you point out that the dropout rate with these' youngsters was given special attention and now it is comparable to the shakedown period for breaking in a high school youngster. Is that a fair statement? Mr. RomE. Yes, sir. The dropout rate for the youngsters for the first 5 years before `we learned to deal with them was higher. The dropout for the 1966 program is comparable to the normal group. Mr. GOODELL. Could you expand a little bit on the concept which you explain on page 7, the concept of sharing? Mr. ROBIE. Yes, sir. I should first say that my knowledge of this is second hand. I have not spent hours in these classes watching these' youngsters but there are several elements in the way the board of' fundamental education goes at this that are important. First of all,. and I am just describing what they say and do, they don't believe' in using normal teachers. One of their qualifications to teach these' youngsters is that the teacher has never taught before. Mr. GOODELL. What is behind that? Mr. ROBIE. I think they feel they have special problems that have to' be dealt with in a special way and too many of the teachers who have' had teaching experience already have pretty fixed notions. I certainly would not want to be quoted here as saying this is true or damning of all teachers but it has been their experience the unusual techniques they want to use, teachers who have had normal teacher' training, have a hard time adjusting. It is easier for them to teach. people, who have certain qualifications, their techniques. For example, they look for people who have actually had jobs, held' a job and gotten a paycheck other than a teaching one. They think that is necessary. They think it is necessary for the guy who is teaching' these youngsters to know what it is to work on the kind of job these' youngsters are aspiring to. That is one aspect. Secondly, they are looking for people who are dedicated or have a' special interest and are dedicated to the kind of experimentation we are teaching these kinds of kids they are doing. They are not looking' for a person on a kind of Peace Corps basis to come in for a couple of years. They are interested in people who are making a career out of a new kind of education for adults who a.re improperly educated or' who haven't got a good basic education or for youngsters. PAGENO="0529" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2989 It has been their experience, at least, that it is better to have people who have not had teaching experience before. Furthermore, as far as the technique in the classroom is concerned, they have built their own textbooks. They have done some of the things that I read out, the educators having done. They have pulled together their subjects. They try to relate English and arithmetic and so on together in one textbook so these don't appear to be separate subjects. They try to get the youngsters who move along a little more rapidly and who become leaders in the class to help the kids who move along more slowly. They try to get coaching between the youngsters going. What they do, and I am not describing very well: how they do it, I am afraid, is build a climate in the classroom in which it is the "in" thing to do to move ahead educationally. Everybody is interested in everybody getting ahead. That is really what they do. I might mention I understand the genesis of the experience of the board for fundamental education was working in prisons and work- ing with prisoners, many, if not most, of whom had the same kind of educational problems. It was trying to determine how to overcome the frustrations of these prisoners in education that led them to the tech- niques that they are using now. I understand they have just signed a contract with the steel workers and the steel companies to do a very ambitious educational job for some of the unskilled steelworkers. I think some 10,000 steelworkers are gOing to have the experience of this kind of education under a con- tract with the steelworkers and the board of fundamental education and I believe this particular contract is financed under fundamental education. Mr. GOODELL. You make one point in quoting Mr. Oates, the presi- dent of Equitable, which is in complete accord with my viewpoint on minimum wage. You favor the minimum wage but you recognize its impact on employment opportunities for young people. I think you recognize it realistically. It does destroy a certain num- ber of employment opportunities and it makes it a little more difficult to hire these youngsters, and to a degree, it stimulates the process of automation instead of employment. Do you feel that a program such as the Industry Youth Corps in which the Government could pay a portion of the wage for a year and then possibly in another year's extension, perhaps combined with on- the-job training help, personnel and equipment, could be an induce- ment to employers to get these youngsters started, to train them so they can hold a job? Mr. R0BIE. We feel very strongly this idea is worth an experiment. To say it would work as the panacea or on a huge basis to start out with would not reflect our views. Mr. GOODELL. I agree with you. Mr. R0BrE. We know this is a tremendous problem and we know you are just as much, if not more, concerned about it than we are. We are far from having found successful solutions. It is a problem that is going to haunt us for many years to come. We note that the many experiments such as the Job Corps at a great annual expense that are being tried, we think this particular way of going at it with the payroll subsidy with a local agency in- 80-084---67-pt. 4-34 PAGENO="0530" 2990 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 volvement, with a minimum of redtape, with the opportunity not only to involve large employers but especially to involve the hundreds of thousands of small employers where the unskilled jobs really are, we think a simple procedure like this simply understood, hopefully, rea- sonably and simply administered which would have to be worked out because that would-part of the experiment offers, great promise in being another way of dealing with this problem. Mr. GIBBONS. Would the gentleman from New York yield? Mr. GOODELL. I yield. Mr. GIBBONS. For a year and a half we have been doing exactly what you have been talking about. They have the community action program and they built Neighborhood Youth Corps centers. The amendments we passed last year make all of this possible. We do it not only for youth but we do it for older persons, too. I am very happy to hear this responsible gentleman from' business say what he has and I think his comments as well as what you are talking about can be expanded into something useful. I think it is a good concept and it would work well in many communities. Mr. GOODELL. I don't know what is happening in your community but the law as written does not include private profitmaking compa- nies as employers with one-quarter of the wage being able to be paid. All we did was expand it to On-the-job training. Mr. GIBBONS. That can be pretty generous. Mr. GOODELL. This is, in effect, what Mr. Shriver said. They circum- vent the law by being generous about the training. Mr. GIBBONS. Let's say they live on spirit. I am not arguing with you, I am agreeing with you. The only thing I say about training, of course, is it is more flexible than a flat 25 percent. In some types of jobs 25 percent may be too little and in other places it may be too much. Mr. GOoDELL. Our percentage is up to 25 and can be more or less and secondly, it can be combined with your subsidy of training costs. Mr. GIBBONS. If we are falling down in that area' it is because we don't have the follow-on basic type of education as a compulsory part of the program. But what you are saying has been done in New Haven, Conn., for instance. I want to commend you for what you are'talking about. I will have some questions later. Mr. GODELL. I will yield to my colleague for questions. Mrs. GREEN. I have been reading your statement. Are you associated at all with the "Plans for Progress?" Mr. ROBIE. Yes, Mrs. Green, we are. At the time we became asso- ciated with it we were not involved in Government business so' we did not do it for that reason. We did it because we thought it would help us make progress, and I am happy to say it ha's. It has been very helpful. Mrs. GREEN. I have not been familiar with this Board for Funda- mental Education which has been chartered by Congress. When was it chartered? Mr. ROBIE. I am sorry I camiot give you the date. I think it was relatively recent. My memory says about 1961, but I would have to check on that. PAGENO="0531" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2991 Mrs. GREEN. Prior to the establishment of the Office of Economic Opportunity? Mr. R0BIE. I believe so. I would be happy to get that for you and submit it to the staff of the committee. I am sure this is easily obtainable. Mrs. GREEN. As I was listening I thought I remembered your talk- ing about young women who were employed and your statement re- ferring to men. Do you have both young men and women? Mr. iRomE. Yes. Actually for our lower level jobs, the highest pro- portion is young women. Overall, we employ about 60 percent women and about 40 percent men. Mrs. GREEN. For this particular program? Mr. ROBIE. For this particular program. The one I spent most of my time describing is all young men. There are a couple of reasons for this. One reason was we felt that the hardest core of the problem is the young men, not that there are not problems for the young girls, but as we talked to people in the city, the opportunity for the young men who dropped out of school to get jobs seemed to be one that people were having moredifficulty in solving than women. Secondly, we did employ some dropout girls earlier but we found that they seemed to need less of the fundamental education addition than the boys did. We could put these girls into our regular typing and steno training. We train most of our typing and steno training ourselves. The school system in New York City does not turn out enough to meet the mark and we train our own rather than meeting the premium price for girls trained by the school system. We learned that the girls seemed to do relatively better than the boys in typically girl-oriented jobs. What I am saying is equally im- portant for the girls as well as for the boys and one of the things we are going to think about in the future is extending the same basic type of education to girls as well as to the boys. However, I think the toughest part of the problem in the ghetto area is the boy part, not the girl part, and the girls don't have the career aspirations that the boys have. Mrs. GnEEN. Do you have a more detailed report or study of the number involved? Mr. R0BIE. We have several more detailed reports which have been prepared for various reasons, and I would be happy to make available any additional information you would like but I don't think we have any one report that might be looked on as a detailed summary of everything about all of these programs. However, there is nothing about any part of these programs that is confidential and we would be happy to share any of our information with you or any member of the committee staff. Mrs. GREEN. I would be glad to have any additional information that you have. I think it is a great program, and I know that some of the companies in my area are part of the Plans for Progress and I havegreat admiration for what they are doing. In regard to compulsory school attendance and child labor laws, would you or any member of your company have recommendations here for any changes? Do you think these add to the problems? Mr. IROBIE. I think I would have to speak very personally on this and not as a representative of the company. It is not a problem to PAGENO="0532" 2992 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 which we have given detailed company attention. I have a personal opinion perhaps growing more out of my experience as a member of a school board. It would lead me not to particular notions with regard to the impact of the existing laws, school-age laws on this problem. It seems to me in general the combination of the environmental factors prior to school and the kinds of techniques that have been developed over the last 50 years in public education are such that the school just does not provide what these youngsters need. It is not just there. I don't say this necessarily critically about the schools, but by and large, these youngsters have had it as far as school is concerned. This is why when we started out the program not to provide the kids with any more schooling because the kids don't want anything like school. We learned then that the problem was more complicated. They needed school and they needed what school would provide but you had to provide it in a kind of setting with a kind of technique that was acceptable to these yoiuigsters and that is when we looked around for somebody who had somethui~g like this. That is when we founded the Board for Fundamental Education and thought if what they had done worked reasonably well with adult illiterates and people deficiently educated, particularly people in prison, maybe it would work with kids and they were interested in seeing if it would work with kids. To go back to your original question, I don't see anything in the requirement that normally kids should stay in school to such and such an age and some of the other requirements that bears on this problem unless perhaps if a way could be found to surround the local school systems with less redtape with regard to what they do and encourage more experimentation with new techniques. I think this would be very promising. As a member of a school board, I remember the oceans of redtape we had to go through with, I am sure over the years, well-intentioned controls, but many seemed to inhibit the types of experimentation we need for these youngsters. I should add, I had contact with the most dedicated kind of educa- tors and teachers in our school system, too, and I would not want what I am saying to say these people are all blind to the problem are not trying to do fine things because, of course, many of them are. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Rohie, I would just like to commend you on your statement. You have a wonderful experiment there. There are several questions I would like to ask you concerning the administrative prob- lems it seems to me may be involved in a substantive approach. Are you suggesting under this approach that subsidy would equal the difference between the actual worth of the individual and the wages paid? Mr. R0BIE. This would have to be an approximation. I think we are suggesting it makes economic sense to say that a youngster who con- ceivably is worth economically perhaps 75 cents an hour or $1 an hour is difficult for a lot of employers to employ at minimum wage levels without some help, particularly if he has to give some additional train- ing expense to these youngsters. We don't see any sense at all in trying to repeal the wage laws as a way of getting at those youngsters. Not only does it not make ecOnomic sense, but it does not make political sense. PAGENO="0533" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2993 Therefore, it seems to us building from the Investment' Credit Act experience, here is a simple approach for approximating for some youngsters at least their economic value to their employer and what he has to pay them or what he should pay them. Mr. HAWKINS. You make it sound very simple. I certainly agree with your desire to get away from redtape, but I am wondering who is going to ascertain the actual worth of the individual and the differ ence between that worth and the salary that would be paid? Is this going to be fixed by the employer who does the training or will it be fixed by some neutral agency, some governmental agency, or who is going to ascertain.this for the various industries? I assume that yours would not be the only industry which would take advantage of it. Now, who will, do it for various industries? Mr. RomE. As I understand the proposal, and as I would contem- plate it, the notion of making any kind of exact economic difference is not really involved. I would say this would be succesfuly administered only if this~ 25 percent were thought of as a rough approximation of the kind of incen- tive that would be sufficient. Mr. HAWKINS. Would this vary from industry to industry? Mr. R0BIE. Theoretically, as I understand from Mr. Goodell, there could be a situation in his bill leaving it flexible so than 25 percent or less' could be given. The 25 percent we have provided for the youngsters in this experiment happens to equal about 25 percent of .their wages for 1 year, so I assume the research that went into the drafting of the bill took this into consideration, too. Itis not just a coincidence. Mr. HAWKINS.. You have had experience in this ` field. You have employed young people for a long time at the lower level jobs. Is it not conceivable that some industries would not have that experience, and maybe it would not be 25 percent or maybe 30 or 33 percent. if you are going to equalize it? Mr. R0BIE. I think the administrative questions, and actually they are more than administrative questions that you raise, are all impor- tant questions, and some of these administrative details would have to be worked out. Actually, these are not different problems from what the poverty program is already facing. When negotiations are under- taken for the Manpower Development and Training Act subsidies these, same questions come up and determinations still have to be made as to whether the youngsters are the appropriate youngsters to get this type of subsidy and whether the industry is the appropriate industry and also with regard to the number of subsidies needed. Some say that the trying at Chrysler Corp. is a great success. I am one who admires this although some say too much Government money is being spent and that the companies ought to spend more money. Mr. HAwKINs. We are trying to avoid redta.pe and it seems to me we must also anticipate instituting this system would involve a lot of redtape and administrative problems and they will not abate simply because we shift to a new concept. Mr. RomE. I agree there will undoubtedly be administrative prob- lems but there are some concepts.that are sufficiently attractive and dif- ferent from what has been clone im to' now to give it promise both politically and psychologically and also in terms of a stated attempt PAGENO="0534" 2994 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 to eliminate some of the kinds of redtape that are now existent in the programs that are available. I might say that we did look into, I suppose rather superficially, the opportunity to get money under existing programs for what we are doing and for the size and level of our operation and we just decided it was not worth the effort. We have had some experience with some other dropout kids that we have gotten through a program the Urban League has and in order to get their money we have to provide them with certain information that is part of the administrative controls. We got a little taste of how much you have to get into for that. Then when we found out how much more we would provide for the training we are doing we just said it was not worth it. It may be that any such program, even the Industry Youth Corps, would end up with sufficient redtape to make us say it was not worth it, but it is my hope that there would be some aspects to this that would enable us to do it in a simpler way. Mr. HAWKINS. Also with the incentives offered, would it not auto- matically mean that screening might become a device to gain a com- petitive advantage over those competing against you? If there were an increase in cost and competition with others, wouldn't you attempt to screen out those that might be the most difficult cases and try to obtain the very best that you possibly could during the screening process and if so, would you not automatically reduce the cost, at least either increase or decrease the subsidy advantage that would be forthcoming? Mr. ROBIE. I would say there might be what I would consider a minor danger of this. To say there is no danger is certainly wrong. However, there are a couple of reasons why I think it is minor. One is the qualifications of the youngsters you are starting out with are such that it would appear to me that an employer could not get a great financial competitive advantage from the kind of manipulation you are talking about. You are pulling these youngsters from a labor supply that is now largely unused and thought to be unusable. Frankly, it seems to me fairly clear that it would cost a little something even with a subsidy, for any employer that was involved in this, but most employers want to help. They are proud of their communities and they want them to be better. I think many of them would go into it, perhaps, if it were properly promoted and administered it for this reason. I just don't think there is enough money in it to get a competitive advantage plus the type of kids that they would be required. to take who are largely unemployable. Mr. HAWKINS. Do you think other companies would accept a refer- ral from a governmental agency, let us say, that would send you a cer- tain number of these applicants, jobseekers so that you would obtain a cross section, that you would obtain not just the best but would you accept such a referral from a neutral agency? Mr. ROBIE. This would all have to be agreed upon in advance by the local community action agency and an employer. Mr. HAWKINS. Are you speaking of those local community action agencies created under the law or in a general way? PAGENO="0535" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2995 Mr. R0BIE. Both, there are those under the existing law that are adequately set up as I think in some cities. We just had a referral to New Haven where they did an outstanding job in setting up such an agency. It does not make sense to set up another one since that has been done so well. It would be my hope that one effective local agency would sit on one side of the table and the employer would sit around the table with a labor union representative and possibly a local school official and they would say what is our problem. Here is a way of working out our problem. How can we work out the program so it would not be manipulating or anything but would do the job? The experimentation could see if that could be done within a limited number of dollars and along with the Job Corps and Neighbor- hood Youth Corps and a lot of other things we are doing whether this adds another dimension. Mr. HAWKINS. I may not agree with all of the things you have said with respect to the simple administrative problems on the ~innQyative and creative matter on which you have approached the subject. I personally believe it can be done under existing law but whether it can or can't I think you have certainly offered something for us to consider. It has been very constructive. Mr. R0BIE. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Erlenborn. Mr. ERLENBORN. I am very interested in the statement you made and some of the questions that have been asked of you indicating that to accomplish this might be too difficult. The so-called Industry Youth Corps to a great extent would be pat- terned after the present Neighborhood Youth Corps so the administra- tive problems would not be any greater. Mr. ROBIE. As I understand, the Neighborhood Youth Corps has been designed and implemented mainly as a public operation but in broad concept the notion of a payroll subsidy and certainly some. of the same administrative problems, I suppose there are public agencies that want to make a good `and proper deal that has to be avoided so in that respect I would say some of the Neighborhood Youth Corps ex- perience which I think has been pretty successful could be applied. Mr. ERLENBORN. We have Neighborhood Youth Corps programs now in the law and there `are programs outside of Government. I would like to have you verify that there is a great wealth of op- portunity for employmentof this sort among small employers who can- not afford the type of program you have undertaken-a great wealth of opportunity that is just not being used. Mr. R0BIE. This seems to be a reasonable proposition. It seems to be well worth exploring. Certainly the jobs and the work are there. Whether this avenue would open it up is the question and I think it has a good chance. ,, ` Mr. ERLENBORN. I think it seems obvious an employer who could hire two, three, five people of this sort cannot afford to establish the recruitment and the training program that is necessary to go along with it, `but there must be many small employers in this category who could, if someone else did the recruiting and took care of the training, enter into a' prpgram such as this. Mr. ROBIE. This certainly seems' to be true, and it seems to me to have the merit of the commonsense observations and experiences of PAGENO="0536" 2996 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 all of us, particularly in dealing with service a.gencies that are almost always short handed, almost always looking for people, and almost always behind in keeping the inventory up, keeping the store straight and so on. This certainly seems to me to be true by observation. Mr. ERLENBORN. Maybe the scope of our inquiry here is beyond the scope of this area but you touched on it in your statement. We have children who have been employed in the past but must now have their skills upgraded and who prObably don't fit into a pro- gram of recruitment, the educational training we are talking about. As I take it from your statement, you feel the same sort of approach we have used to induce industry-employers to invest in equipment and capital expenditures can be used here to encourage these employers to invest in upgrading the skills of the present employees who are not used as fruitfully as they might be or who might be displaced be- cause of improvement in technique. Mr. ROBIE. I would have to say I would have a little more ques- tion about the extension of this principle. I think some of the ques- tions Mr. Hawkins was asking become a little more difficult to deal with when you get into using this kind of payroll subsidy or tax credit approach for upgrading training. Employers carry on a tremendous amount of upgrading training now at their own expense. I see some administrative problems sorting out the type of training the Government should pay for and the type it should not. I did refer to something that perhaps the committee should know more about than I do. The recent steel agreement where Government money is being spent to upgrade a lot-I think it is 10,000 unskilled steelworkers who need help and the Fundamental Board for Educa- tion that we have used has the contract for that and their apparently careful investigation has shown that it is worth spending some Government money and I imagine the steel companies are putting in some of their own money and unions, too. So there is an example that tends to combat what I said about my fears that this would be difficult. I am afraid any automatic scheme, any automatic payroll subsidy would have more administrative diffi- culties if you applied it to general upgrading training. I think that would have to be looked at on a special case-by-case basis more carefully. Mr. ERLENBORN. Your fears would not lead you to say we should not try it, though, would they? Mr. ROBIE. They would lead me to say that in setting up the ex- periment one should include elements of control that recognize the problem as a little different. The problem of misuse is a little different when you get into upgrading and training existing many employees than when it is that you are giving financial incentive to take kids off the street who are virtually unemployable and giving them a job. Mr. ERLENBORN. What has been your experience with respect to the training these children have been getting compared to what they would get in school? Do you have to design a different program for them? . Mr. ROBIE. There is a section in here that deals with that. Our experience which has been very limited has been very definitely you have to design a special kind of education. There is a lot of. experi- PAGENO="0537" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2997 mentation going on on this. I am quite encouraged by the techniques that we have been using and I also have a fairly strong bias; I guess you would have to say, that the normal educational techniques wouldn't work with these kids and you have to use some of these new techniques that involve cooperative education between the kids. Helping each other, small group instruction, special textbooks, special, and I didn't mention this previously, connection between the job and the education. You see our kids know that they are surrounded by kids who have got it from their point of view and they have the same expectation that the high school kids have, some of them higher, oddly enough, and there is a reinforcement in their knowing if they are going to get promoted not as a cold requirement but as a basic necessity, they have to be able to read, they have to be able to do some arithmetic and so on, and they see that. We get that reinforcement. We give them the education in our com- pany building in a training place and these two things reinforce each other. Some of these elements about which I could talk more expertly which. the Board of Fundamental Education has developed seemed to be necessary. Possibly some of them could be developed more effec- tively by the public schools and probably are in some school systems. Mr. ERLENBORN. Thank you very mučh. Chairman PERKINS Mr Gibbons Mr. GIBBONS. I am so glad you came here and I am so glad our Republican colleagues invited you to be one of their witnesses. I agree with about 99 percent of the things you have said and as I have interjected from time to time in this testimony a lot the things you are doing can be done and should be done right now and they are being done right now in other places in the United States. I want to commend your company for the progress and leadership in this. Mr. R0BIE. There are a lot of employers doing the same things or similar things. I don't know enough about the specific programs to specify them but the Prudential, as one example, has been involved in a very interesting program along with some other companies to traiii clerical workers in special education classes. I think these were largely girls, typists and stenos in a multicorn- pany training effort from which they would then draw some employees for themselves and others would go elsewhere. I am not sure of the details I believe the Connecticut General in Hartford has done some special work I know Eastman Kodak and Xerox, to get outside of our industry, have done some work I mentioned the steel industry. It seems to me Owens-Illinois has done some work. More and more employers are experimenting in a small way with this kind of thing, but it is my feeling that what we need to do is multiply this by a thousand and particularly to get the small people involved because big employers have fewer and fewer of these jobs We are automating these jobs out of existence, and particularly the manufacturing companies Mr GIBBONS Let me say I heartily agree with you there and I think it is the most realistic type of opportunity we can offer people, having a great deal of built-in motivation factors, and it takes people off the so-called Federal payroll and puts them in private employment where they should be. PAGENO="0538" 2998 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I have pushed this in my own community wherever I could get an audience to listen. Let me talk about tax credit because that seems to be an issue here and let me express my own opinion to see if you agree with me. In larger industries, you have people sitting at your management level and you are always looking at opportunities to take advantage of the tax laws so that you can perform certain services, but the aver- age small businessman does not find out about these tax credits until finally some alert bookkeeper or professional accounting service says, "You know if you could go back and reexamine a few of those vouchers you paid last year you might be able to get a tax credit." That has been my experience in small tax credits and I think that is what would happen if we got into a massive tax credit for massive training. Based on your experience, do you think this is a reasonable as- sumption? Mr. R0BIE. I think it is a reasonable fear. First, I should say that we are in an unusual tax position in the insurance business. We are not taxed the way other companies are taxed. We don't get the same kind of credits that other people get. I am a personnel director and not a controller. First of all, I don't know enough about the tax picture in our company but I know enough to know that we are different. I think the tax credit technique does have certain dangers which you mentioned. If we begin multiplying the uses of the tax credits I can se~ some problems but it does happen to be~ a method that worked when we were trying to get something else done. Mr. GIBBONS. For equipment, I agree, and the reason why is all of the salesmen of equipment come in and. say, "I can. save you a lot of money this year," but you are not going to find poor people knocking on the door, particularly of small business, and saying, "You, can save money by hiring me," but when somebody comes in and says, "I can sell you a Xerox machine that will probably cost about a thousand dollars for the machine and this tax credit if you buy it this year is going to save you a lot of money." Their ears begin to perk up and they buy it, but you have pointed out that industry is so involved in training anyway, wouldn't we in effect have a tendency just to try to tax credit all of the training we already do? Mr. ROBIE. I know darn well I do not know enough to be of any help to you on this at all. I think the tax credit idea is worthy of consideration but the tax laws are so darn eomplicated' a~d''there are so many dangers, all of these things have to be looked at and I don't know enough about it. Mr. GIBBONS. Let's get off taxes and ask you as a personnel man if a community has a broad base like the labor unions, the poor, and others typical of our community action agencies, with a person like `that coining around to you and saying, "Mr. Personnel Officer, we have many people here we would like to interest you in. We know there are excellent job opportunities in your company and there is a rather unique" group you are talking about and you are going to take a little time to train them, we will help you work out a training program and agree on the cost of that training program, and we will reimburse you for the training." PAGENO="0539" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 2999 Is that a viable technique for getting job opportunities opened up for the hard core unemployed? Mr. R0BIE. Yes, and it is being done but it does not seem to me that it is being done anywhere near enough. I am not sure there are enough people in community action agencies if we expect them to take all of the incentive to come around to enough personnel directors. I am not sure there are enough personnel directors on first blush who are going to sit down that sympathetically. The thing that inter- ests me about the Industry Youth Corps is that you might work it in such a way that the personnel director or in a small company. where they don't have a personnel director, the president, or an officer of the company would take the initiative. Now we have an Industry Youth Corps, something that is easy for us to understand. We realize we have to work it out but I think the psychology and the incentive to get going is somewhat different. Mr. GIBBONS. I agree with you and that is what some of us attempted to do. I think we succeeded in doing it in last year's legislation. Per- haps we don't have the right title on it and perhaps with the com- munity action agencies there is a lag inleadtimebetween the time the Congress acts and the time that an administrative agency at a local level has a chance to put a local program into operation, particularly when it takes this bureaucracy up here 6 months to get out simple guidelines so the action we took last fall is just beginning to trickle down to the local level. That is one of the problems of looking at the program every year- we see what we did 2 years ago. Let me say in closing, I certainly agree with the techniques that you have used. I think that they ought to be expanded vastly and I think there is a great potential in hiring not only young people but wouldn't this technique also work for older people? Mr. ROBIE. Yes, it seems to me particularly since the educational technique was started out on older people, I see some potential for farm workers which, certainly, in many parts of the country are a problem, I see some potential for miners and I would think the tech~ nique certainly could work very well~ for adults as well as for youngsters. Mr. GIBBONS. I appreciate your remarks. Mr. R0BIE. Of course, this whole thing is predicated upon a grow- ing, healthy economy. I see the whole thing going up in smoke if we do not have that. Mr. GIBBONS. That was in our report last year, and none of this would work unless we have that. I agree with you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Robie, I regret that I did not have a chance to hear your tes- timony but I have had an opportunity to read it while you were answer- ing Mr. Gibbons' questions. I note from the testimony, and I think you just gave this as an an- swer to a question a minute, ago, that normal ~techniques. of. teaching don't work with these kids. It is either in the testimony or something you just said. By and large, do you feel that the program even so far as youth taking it has been successful? . PAGENO="0540" 3000 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF :19 67 Mr. ROBIE. Yes, if you will accept our standards which you could have as many standards as people looking. Also, if you accept or ap- preciate the qualification that we have dealt with very few kids and the part of the program that seems to me now to be working best has been going a very short time. With all of those qualifications, I guess we should sho~w we are showing encouraging signs that what we are doing will work out suf- ficiently well to be worth the money and that it has implications which if tried through the medium of something like an Industry Youth Corps might be quite helpful. I qualified it all over the place, I realize, but I think it is necessary. We started out with 17 kids. We tried to get 20, but it turned out to be 17. We have 11 kids still going and we think all of those kids are going to make it as far as the equivalency examination is concerned. When you look at those who dropped out, many dropped out for behavior reasons-two went into the service, two moved away, and so on, and I think we just had two we couldn't do anything with. They couldn't come in on time continuously and they couldn't develop work habits. Mr. DELLENBAOK. I think that is an excellent record. In the selection of the 17, how selective were you? Mr. ROBIn. We were reasonably selective and I can only tell you in general the criteria. These youngsters had to have a motivation, a posi- tive motivation about working for us. We had to be reasonably as- sured that the kids were coming with a positive notion and were not being bopped on the head to come. Secondly, they had to have a minimum educational level. We did not accept complete illiterates. This involved certain test scores and so on. I believe, and I should know the answer more accurately, it was roughly the eighth grade level that we were looking for. Of course, eighth grade level is different to different people, but there were the educational people we were working with did apply some minimal educational standards. Part of the problem was we could not work both with the same group of kids some of whom were complete illiter- ates and some who had some literacy. The scope had to be within minimal levels. The others had to do with narcotic offenses and sex offenses. `We did eliminate those who had narcotic or sex problems or particular emotional problems, particularly those that might threaten our young girls. Mr. DELLENBACK. So there must be screening and I think it is im- portant that we realize that you are not here talking about a program which goes down to the complete illiterate. You are not talking about taking the young person who is at the bottom of the educational ladder, the really lowest level and starting from scratch. You were selective in what you did. Mr. ROBIn. That is correct, although the educational people and the professionals who have done the educational piece started out, as I understand it, developing techniques and are still using these tech- niques on complete adult illiterates. They started their programs in the prisons dealing with people who couldn't read or write and de- veloped the techniques there and more recently they have three levels. Level 1 is grade 1 to 5, level 2 is 5 to 8, and level 3 is 8 to 12. We were PAGENO="0541" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3001 here dealing with level 2 which they had a little experience with adults and level 3 which they had no experience with at all. They were drawing on some of the techniques they learned at level 1 but we were not in our program taking complete illiterates and we didn't want them for this. Mr. DELLENBACK. With this plan that you are working with at Equitable, do you feel you need residential control over the young people or are you able to function successfully having them within your control from the time they begin in the morning until whenever the last classes are completed? Mr. ROBIE. No, we don't need residential control. In fact, it is a practical impossibility. I should not say that. I should say it is not within the cards for us to try to get involved with residential control. Some of our problems grow out of our lack of it which is not an- other way of saying we would like to have the control. The homes from which some of these youngsters come are just impossible by standards many of us would think were normal. Our experience seems to show so far, at least, that the work experi- ence and the educational experience on the job is a sufficient counter- balance to work out successfully without the residential control. Mr. DELLENBACK. I think that is important, and I think there are several phases of this which it is important that the record show be- cause there has been a good deal of testimony about the need for resi- dential control over young people in order to achieve the results. I think that when the flat statement is made that there must be residential control, to use that particular phrase, they fail to realize there is quite a continuum with people at the bottom of the ladder, the center part of' the ladder and at the upper end of the ladder. You don't necessarily need control for all of these young people. You may need it `at one spot on the ladder, but what I read you as say- ing to us is that there is a group `of young people who might otherwise be considered unemployable whom you are able to bring in and through what you do on the job and through what you do with the education which is an `adjunct to the job, into productive society without residen- tial control. Do I read you correctly? Mr. ROBIE. Yes, sir, you do, and I would also agree with you that we would make a big mistake to say all these kids are the same. There is a continuum and even where residential control is necessary, I think we have a lot to learn about residential control. We have a very inter- esting experiment in New York which involves residential control virtually in the same kind of section that the kids came from, the Bed- ford-Stuyvesant area, against the Job Corps, take them out to a camp- type of thing. In our experiment, the kind of kids we have been getting it looks to us like residential control is not necessary. Mr. DELLENBACK. Since you have been this selective in choosing your still relatively small number because you are still reaching forward experimentally with the Equitable program, I assume, do you feel that your experience has been sufficiently successful that Equitable is going to go on with this program? Mr. RomE. We are now taking a look at' what we are going to do in the future. Since we have not decided, I can't make a čornmitrnent. We just have not made our decision. PAGENO="0542" 3002 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967 Expressing the view that. I would expect to add to other views in helping to make this decision, I hope we will go on with in in a modest way as we have done for the last 5 years. I hope we will build on the experience and go on with about the same number, perhaps, of kids that we have been trying to build into the program each year for the last 5 years but we have not sat down and taken a look and included the costs and decided. Mr. DELLENBACK. What is it that we might be able to do with Federal legislation to help assist Equitable and companies like Equit- able come to the conclusion that they were performing a very valuable social function here that they ought to continue? Mr. RomE. This really, I suppose, is one of the reasons for our interest, in the Industry Youth Corps. We look at that proposal and it. looks to us as though reasonable administrative arrangements would qualify what we are doing and it looks to us as though the cost fears we have-we have to worry about our policyholders-in a sense, we are taking money out of their pockets to put into this program-and we have to feel it is a worthy thing from their point of view and cer- tainly one of our fears is whether what we are doing is justified or not, whether it would be greatly enhanced if we could see getting this roughly $700 back under a program of this sort. I cannot honestly say it would encourage us greatly to enlarge the numbers because there are a limited number of jobs. There is a matrix of things that have to be fitted together, but I think it would give us encouragement to go on at a reasonable level if we had something like the Industry Youth Corps and that kind of subsidy if we could do it without a lot of redtape. Mr. DELLENBACK. As you are aware, and as I am sure Mr. Gibbons is aware, a tax credit. really is not involved here; it is involved in the Human Investment Act. To confine our thinking and talking here to the opportunity crusade per se, we are talking about. some type of direct governmental assist- ance to companies like this. But is it your feeling then that we really are dealing here with a group of young people who might otherwise be considered unemployable, whom social conscience so far has driven Equitable to make a given attempt to bring into employability and for whom you are going to have to decide for the future whether you are going to cont.inue the program. If there were some governmental assistance akin to the t.ype that is involved in the Industry Youth Corps you would be much more apt to go forward and possibly expand the program at least in modest degree? Mr. ROBIn. I think that is a fair statement assuming the admims- trative arrangements could be kept reasonably simple and we would not conclude that it was not worth the candle to fuze with it. I know that is a statement of principle at least that is involved in bill because there is a statement of hoping of leading for simplicity of arrangements. Mr. DELLENBACK. I am very encouraged by some of the statistics I read in your testimony, Mr. Robie, because I see here when you talk in terms of the 17 in the program for example, the statement in your testimony that you ftnd it encouraging that the six young men t.hat you have lost compare almost exactly with turnover among a random sampling of high school graduates hired at about the same time as this group. PAGENO="0543" ECOISTOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3003 This shows, it seems to me, that there is real potential in this group of dropouts, that there is a reasonable expectation that if industry approaches it with an enlightened and sound and concerned attitude, you are going to be able to do something with this group. Mr. BOBIE. It certainly leads in that direction. I don't want to re- peat this more often than necessary but we are dealing with an awfully small number. I would hope that we could conclude that this is en- couraging but not conclusive. Mr. DELLENBACK. It is this type of experimentation that must go on in various places so that we can learn either that this is good or that this is poor and then take it and hopefully multiply the good results throughout all of the other companies in the United States that might be able to do something with it. Essentially, if I may say this to you, and it has already been in the record in prior testimony among those of us who are involved in at least considering the Opportunity Crusade, we feel very strongly that to a great degree the private sector of, the economy, private industry has not really been brought into this war on poverty to the degree it ought to be. The war on poverty has to date been largely a matter of governmen- tal involvement in an attempt to do some things. Here is this great, tremendous instrument of private enterprise of the private sector of the economy. which has been largely left standing on the wayside to go its own way while the war on poverty is waged by Government. We are convinced that if we are really to succeed with the number of young people and older people with whom we must succeed, if the war is to be successful, it can be done only if we ~an take private enter- prise, companies `like Equitable that are sound and forward-looking and bring them right into the middle of the battle. Without this we are wasting probably the greatest asset that we could have in the war. This is our feeling. I don't ask you to comment on this because I think your. testimony today and the record of Equi- table shows that this is the feeling of your leadership. Again I thank you, Mr. Robie, for your testimony and the help you have given us. Mr. STEIGER. I would have no questions for Mr. Robie but to com- mend you and to commend Equitable for the job you are doing. Your testimony is eloquent, compelling testimony in support of the Youth Corps concept. I think that the job that you are now doing is outstanding. I am going to send your testimony to Northwestern Mutual in Milwaukee to ask what they are doing and why if they are not doing it, because I think you have taken the leadership and the initiative necessary. I am very, very happy to have you here, and thank you for coming. Mr. ROBIE. Thank you, Mr. Steiger-and they are a very good company. Chairman PERKINS. I take it from your testimony that there is a certain type of youngster, the youngster lacking in the basic education, for whom your normal techniques wouldn't work and we have to have special training and special instruction, and for that reason I think we feel the Job Corps is doing a good job in the way of giving these youngsters some of that special instruction. Mr. ROBIE. I really can't comment on the Job Corps because I have not had any direct experience. I have been interested enough PAGENO="0544" 3004 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF t 967 to read quite a bit about it, and I don't know that our particular ex- perience has much bearing on the Job Corps. I have the impression that the Job Corps is dealing with a different kind of youngster. Chairman PERKINS. That is what I wanted to bring out. You do have the impression that the Job Corps is dealing with a different type of youngster than the youngster with whom you deal. Just explain that a little. Mr. ROBIE. My impression is that the Job Corps youngsters are from a less employable, harder core, if you want to call it that, group, perhaps a group with police records, if you will. I don't know this. I have this impression. Whether or not the Job Corps method for dealing with that kid is a good method, I don't know. I have personnally in the past, not speaking for my company, sup- ported some continued experimentation with something like the Job Corps because I think we have to continue experimenting, the same argument that leads me to say we should experiment with an Indus- try Youth Corps for a reasonable time, at least we should experiment with something like the Job Corps. Chairman PEnxINS. Don't you feel the experimentation of the Job Corps and the techniques and know-how that we are obtaining to bet- ter deal with this type of youngster will be fed into industry to bene- fit you and benefit the educational system? Mr. ROBIE. I would certainly hope so. Many of the Job Corps con- tracts are run by industry so industry techniques are being fed into them and hopefully this will help. As you know better than I, this is at tremendous cost. Mr. GIEBONS. I know the gentleman at the table did not want to run down Job Corps enrollees, and I think the record shows that not all Job Corps enrollees are what you might classify for want of a better word, a "bad" boy, or a "bad" girl, coming out of some institution. Some of them come from some really isolated places in the United States. You will find the youngsters of some farmers or fishermen living in isolated areas. Really, it is the only technique where you ca.n get enough of them together so you can get a viable enough unit together for instructional purposes. Perhaps you and I come from rather large cities and we tend to think in terms of our own environments, but there are a lot of small creeks and hollows, and by and large, many of these people who are really fine individuals are finding their way into the Job Corps and they are as my colleagues over here want to talk about residential skills, these are residential skill centers. I will admit some of them in the Job Corps have pretty unsavory backgrounds. Perhaps we are making a mistake by mixing unsavory with ones who are untouched, but I think we do a disservice to a great many Job Corps enrollees by continually blighting them and by continually saying they are all a bunch of misfits and people who have had a chance but they goofed and this is their last chance. They are not all that. They are from rural, isolated America. Mr. ROBIE. I am very happy to have any impression that I might have created to the contrary corrected. I think you have already heard PAGENO="0545" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3005 from a feflow who seems to me to have some of the most objective views and that is Sol Levitower. I have seen some stuff from him on the Job Corps which I find immensely helpful. Chairman PERKINS. You do not handle this type of youngster at Equitable Life? Mr. ROBIE. What type do you mean? Chairman PERKINS. One lacking in basic education. Most youngsters you employ are graduates or have had some high school. Mr. R0BIE. Most of the youngsters we employ have graduated from high school. We are now, as I have indicated, beginning to employ some numbers both in the special program and to some extent beyond it which I did not mention, who are, in our judgment, seriously de- ficient in basic education, so I would say we are employing youngsters with deficient education and with the statement Mr. Gibbons just made I suppose some of the children we are employing are different from some Job Corps kids. If you took the average quantity and standardized them that way, there may be a difference. Chairman PERKINS. Up until recently you have always screened them to try to get the best personnel in your recruitment? Mr. ROBIE. This is correct. Even with our best screening we have taken kind of a cross-section. The market is pretty competitive. And I did not mention this earlier, one of the reasons for our experimenting in one way we have is kind of selfish. We have a problem of getting this low-level, very boring, uninteresting competitive work done. It is a paper factory. We also have a problem of creating a pool to pro- mote people to technical levels. One of our fears was we would put so much emphasis on the pro- motional pool that we were putt.ing youngsters into these lower level jobs that were highly underqualified and this was contributing to high turnover and cost problems. One of the interests in our dropout problem was to see in taking less- qualified youngsters for the lower level qualified jobs which would not be as promotional might be more efficient. I didn't want to leave the impression we were taking a uniform level of youngster. We have had sort of a cross-section in recent years. Mrs. GREEN. In regard to age, what age bracket would you think that this kind of a program would be best suited for? How young do you take them? Mr. ROBIE. If I recall the title 4 correctly, it seems to me it was 16 to 22. I, frankly, have not given much thought to the age question. That sounds reasonable to me. I guess that is all I really ought to say. It has potential beyond that, and Mr. Gibbons brought that out, the possibility of extending this principle to adults, say, people from farm areas or miners. It seems to me that is promising but we were directing our thoughts and the industry corps seemed to be the problem of the kids and if you are going to do that you have to have some brackets. Mrs. GREEN. If this has been discussed before I will read it in the transcript. What age do you have? Mr. RomE. The youngsters in our experiment? 80-084-67-pt. 4-35 PAGENO="0546" 3006 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs. GREEN. Yes. Mr. ROBIE. I would have to estimate because I did not foresee this question and did not check on it. I think these youngsters vary. I think the youngest one is 17 and the oldest one I would estimate at about 21. If it turns out to be different I will correct this for the record but I think it is about 17 to 21. Mrs. GREEN. Have you or have others who have engaged in the plans for progress program run into any conflict with child labor laws? Mr. IR0BIE. No, we have not. That might become a problem in a dif- ferent kind of industry but it has not been for us. We don't have a lot of machinery of the type that would be involved with the child labor laws. We have not used these youngsters on night shift work. We do have some night shift work but we have not used them for this. It may be for a program that was very promising in many other re- spects; it may be necessary to make some special arrangements through the Secretary of Labor if that were possible. I can conceive of that being a problem. Mrs. GREEN. Has any thought been given to lowering the age to 14 in sort of an apprentice program as we know it? Mr. ROBIE. We have not given any thought to that principally be- cause there are so many kids in the age bracket we are considering we are only taking a handful, and also just quick whether I would have some question about the degree of maturity of youngsters anyone than the ones we are taking to associate the kind of offers and atmosphere and climate and job that we have. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your appearance here this morning. Mr. GOODELL. Perhaps you were questioned on this when I had to step out. On page 10 you made a reference to the proposal for human investment. I would like you to briefly and for the record, indicate whether you feel that with these various other proposals, the industry Youth Corps and OJT and other improvements, a proposal for a tax credit for employers who accept human investment, would have some significant impact in this area in motivating employers. Also, tell us a little about the need for something of this nature because of the special problems involved with moving in that direction. Mr. ROBIn. Mr. Gibbons did ask me several questions on the Human Investment Act principle which quickly demonstrated my lack of qualifications in the tax area in terms of the `types of administrative de- tails and problems and dangers that are involved. I think I should limit my comment on that to the notion that if the experts in tax legislation, in tax problems, in tax controls and so on, felt that a way could be figured so that a tax incentive could be a fairly clean-cut, simple way to achieve this result, I would think that it would be promising. Mr. G00DELL. I might say there are various proposals for this, but Congressman Curtis who originated the idea has pressed for it and has got over 100 Members of the House supporting the bill. One of our outstanding Members is a member of the Ways and Means Coin- mittee. He has estimated the total cost of a 7 percent tax credit for all types `of training, not limited to the unskilled or uneducated, to be in the neighborhood of $300 million per year. PAGENO="0547" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3007 Now when we are talking about that amount, compared to the money we are spending in other areas, `and in this program as far as that is concerned, it could conceivably have `a rather great stimulative effect. If it applies to all expenses in training and educating, training and upgrading employees, it would then be a very simple tax procedure. In other words, what I am trying to establish, and I won't go into it since you have indicated that you are not an expert, it can be done across the board with a ceiling of something like $300 million. Mr. R0BIE. I think Mr. Erlenborn also asked some questions along that line and I am happy to repeat some uneducated fears about the administrative problems of Government subsidies across the board for all kinds of training, including upgrading training and so on. Mr. GOODELL. It would be through tax credit. Mr. ROBIn. I guess I must say I just have not given this enough thought to be able to comment intelligently. My problems have been pretty much focused on the youth problem which seems to be one of the major national problems we have in a time of great prosperity. Mr. GOODELL. That is another way to focus it. You could just set up a program for which only youngsters under 22 years of age would qualify. Mr. IR0BIE. That is where my attention has been focused and I don't think I can be helpful on commenting on the other. Mr. GOODELL. You have been extremely helpful to the committee and I thank you for testifying today. (The following material was submitted by Mr. Robie:) AETNA Liri~ & CASUALTY, Hartford, Conn., July 18, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Representative in Congress, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN: You may find it helpful to have the views of a business- man on the legislative and budget proposals for the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity now before the House. I urge prompt, favorable action. Through OEO we have begun our first organized assault on the causes of poverty. Conventional welfare programs serve the needs of those who are tempo- rarily poor because of industrial layoffs, disability, loss of the breadwinner or age. A different kind of help is needed for those disadvantaged by birth or upbringing. We need both kinds of programs. If OEO receives generous support now, it may succeed eventually in making itself unnecessary by removing the causes of hard- core poverty. The logic, economy and humanity of turning tax-spenders into tax-payers is obvious. As a member of the Business Leadership Advisory Council to OEO, I am in- formed as well as interested in the services it perfornis nationally and in Connecticut. To give you examples of OEO at work, I am enclosing a report on the Community Action Program in Hartford. Such activities place demands on the consciences of all more fortunate Americans. Sincerely yours, OLCOTT D. SMITH, Chairman. REPORT ON THE COMMUNITY Acriox PROGRAM IN HARTFORD, JULY 1967 Hartford saw the need for the Community Action Program approach early. In 1962 the Greater Hartford Community Renewal Team (CRT), which became the Community Action Agency there, was established. Its purpose was to coordinate a number of existing programs and to formulate the new ones needed PAGENO="0548" 3008 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 to attack the root causes of poverty. As an agency of the Office of Economic Opportunity CRT continues to be more than a contracting agency channeling funds to other agencies. It is an operating agency itself. It innovates, develops new programs and passes those that succeed along to city, state or private agencies. In addition to financial support received from the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity, CRT has received grants from the City and the Greater Hartford Chamber of Commerce. These grants were for a 3-year period ending in Sep- tember 1967. Hopefully they will be renewed. In the spring of 1967 the Connecticut Legislature passed a Community Development Act, which will bring an infusion of State money. The business community gives CRT both financial support and the concern and leadership of business executives who participate in CRT activities. All elements of the community participate in CRT. The 72-man Board of Direc- tors includes business, labor, professional, religious, government and civic lead- ers-and 29 elected members who represent their neighbors in the poor sections of the city. The poor were a key part of the enterprise from the beginning. On balance the success of our combined effort exceeded expectations. CRT cur- rently supports 14 major activities. Rather than outline all, I will cite a few of the outstanding ones. (The appendix contains a list of all activities.) The Neighborhood Youth Corps has been functioning with overall success, but two notable examples come to mind. One is a young man who on release from a boys' reformatory applied for help. They helped him find his first job-at the minimum wage-and encouraged him to secure training that brought him em- ployment as a laboratory technician. Another young man a year after joining the Corps was employed as a chef in Alaska at $16,000 a year. The Manpower Development Program has established a high degree of inter- agency involvement. Welfare, government, business, labor and churches work together to counsel and guide the unemployed. One young man they placed works as a commercial artist earning $8,000 a year-quite a step up from welfare. Contrary to reports from other sections of the country, Headstart is extremely successful in Hartford. The Board of Education feels that a large part of the success comes from the involvement of parents. The children find encourage- ment at home from parents who understand and appreciate the opportunity being offered. The Community Service Corps hires neighborhood people at the minimum wage to serve for 6 months as welfare, training, instructional and recreational aides. The services they perform are useful. Even more valuable in the spread- ing effect in the neighborhood that comes when their friends see them leave welfare and start off on their own. With the new-found self-respect, many aides find places in the job market and their success encourages others. What is the future of CAP in Hartford? For the long range, hopefully it will play a diminishing role as it eliminates the causes of poverty and equalizes the opportunities for education, jobs and decent housing. For the near future it must play a much larger role. Economy demands that we move ahead faster so that our work will be completed sooner. The continued financial support of the City, the Chamber and the major corporations is still needed. Desperate human wants will go unserved. Both for humane and economic reasons the work of The Office of Economic Opportunity must go forward as rapidly as possible. To do this it must have much greater financial support on the municipal, state and federal levels as well as the continued and increasing support of the business community. Admittedly our nation has pressing international obligations. It also has domestic fiscal responsibility not to impair the system that serves so many of us so well. But I urge federal administrators and congressmen to travel the path of true economy by giving the full financial support needed for a suc- cessful assault on the root causes of poverty. There is no economy in doing less than our humane instincts demand from us. THE CoMMuNITY Aerrox PROGRAM IN HARTFORD The overall CAP organization in Greater Hartford is the Community Renewal Team. The current CRT program shown below includes the funding rate for the year just ending. Budgets for the year ahead have not been approved. PAGENO="0549" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3009 Program Objectives Operating agency ~ 1966-67 Federal funding rate Child development- Runs year-round preschool for 750 Hartford Board of Edu- $396,465 Headstart. 4-year-olds. cation. School-community work Provides staff for program in which do 50,308 study. 400 high school youths work half- time in Hartford industries. Homemaker-teacher Instructs families in child rearing. Hartford Welfare Depart- 41,340 home management, etc. mont and Family Service. Administration Provides administration, program de- Community renew-al 71, 564 veiopnient, and control for all CRT team. operations. Assistance to residents of Provides tenant relations advisers in Housing Authority of the 64,818 public housing. low-income housing projects. City of Hartford. Services to unwed Provides education, social and health Children's services, Hart- 42,199 mothers. services to young women pregnant ford Board of Education, out of wedlock. Visiting Nurse Associa- tion. Welfare aides Provides nonprofessional aides hired Hartford Welfare Depart- 38,330 from city welfare rolls to assist city ment. welfare caseworkers. Community Service Provides for development of neighbor- Community renewal team 76, 236 Corps. hood projects by neighborhood groups and unskilled manpower to work on these projects. Neighborhood services__ - Provides for multiservice centers, do 261,162 smaller neighborhood progress cen- ters, consumer protection program, CRT fieldworkers and fieldworkers contracted to Hartford neighbor- hood centers and city of Hartford. Comprehensive man- Provides for strengthening and co- Community renewal 272,440 power. ordination, including intensive data team, Hartford Board and followup on all activities in of Education, city of Hartford. Hartford. Legal services Provides neighborhood-based legal Neighborhood Legal 53,400 services for the poor. Services, Inc. In-school Neighborhood Provides work experience for 186 high Hartford Board of Edu- 355, 000 Youth Corps. school youths paid $1.25 an hour in a cation. variety of school and other jobs. Pro- gram increases to 200 in summer. Out-of-school Neighbor- Provides full-time work experience in Community renewal team 308, 760 hood Youth Corps, a variety of agencies for 200 out-of- and YMCA. school youths paid $1.25 an hour. On-the-job training Provides training costs to companies Community renewal team 75, 000 and stipends to trainees for 200 im- and Urban League of employed or under employed at Greater Hartford. more than 24 companies. NOTE-In addition, CRT supports several small locally funded projects, including housing, Project Companion (operated at St. Michael's Church), and recruitment and training assistance for Girl Scout operations in low-income neighborhoods. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Our next witness is Mr. Richard Boone, Citizens' Crusade Against Poverty. Come around, Mr. Boone. I know you are the executive director of the organization. STATEMENT OP RICHARD W. BOONE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CITIZENS' CRUSADE AGAINST POVERTY, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. BOONE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Poverty, as we know, is nonpartisan. It knows no difference between Republican or Democrat or other party affiliation. The solutions to the complex problems of poverty require an unrelenting inquiry and un- derstanding that goes beyond partisan politics. Your committee, with the enthusiastic support of the administra- tion, molded the most significant tool in the history of American pov- PAGENO="0550" 3010 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 erty fighting-the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. This was bold legislation, drawing upon the experience of past successes and failures, along with the best knowledge available then as to the Federal Gov- ernment's responsibility in this area. I. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS CONCERNING THE ECONOMIC OPPORT~2~ITY ACT A. In establishing this act, the Congress declared that the Nation needed a fresh and vigorous effort to fight poverty in the other Amer- ica. Old ways of doing business simply hadn't worked to our satisfac- tion and, in making community action programs the central force in this new national commitment, the Congress established the vital role of the Federal Government as one of helping people to help themselves. rfhe community action concept rejected old forms of public pa- ternalism. By offering local communities and community groups the opportun- ity and responsibility to play vital roles in a war against poverty, the Federal Government established an important precedent. In offering the poor the right and responsibility of a first-class partnership in local programs it reaffirmed and gave new life to the concept of self-help with Federal support. This commitment to local community action was and still is vital to developing a sensible war against poverty. Any congressional dismantling of OEO by the outright transfer of programs would be a disservice to the poor of this Nation at a time when the war on poverty, even with the limited resources extended thus far, is beginning to win significant victories. The Citizens' Crusade Against Poverty supports the Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity as the central antipoverty agency of the Federal Government, with particular emphasis on the community action program. B. Our national security is dependent as much upon the well-being of our people as it is upon the strength of our foreign commitments and our exploration in space. The question of national priorities must be raised now. Are we, as a nation, committed to a war against poverty? Are we willing to forgo just a few of our luxuries in order to marshall resources necessary to wage this war? As of now, the answers to these questions are not heartening. In 1966, Americans spent four times as much on tobacco ($8.4 bil- lion) as the administration is requesting for OEO this year; More was spent on TV commercials in 1966 ($2.75 billion) than in all OEO antipoverty efforts; In the development of military hardware, we spent $1.5 billion to build two B-70 aircraft, $500 million for parts and drawings of the Skybolt missile, $400 million for studies and drawings of the Dynasoar missile, $170 million for parts and drawings of the Advent missile. This amounts to a total of $2.570 billion on weaponry which, because of obsolescence or defectiven~ss, never got off the ground; The combined community action efforts of New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Detroit, the District of Columbia, Atlanta, Boston, St. Louis, and Houston in fiscal 1966 was actually $30 million less than the cost of developing and launching one Saturn rocket. PAGENO="0551" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3011 We urge the Congress to provide a minimum of $3.6 billion for Economic Opportunity Act programs for fiscal year 1968. This is a conservative amount based on 5-year projections for the Office of Economic Opportunity. C. Greatly increased versatile funds need to be appropriated for the hub of all antipoverty efforts-the community action program. Congress should continue to support the local community's right to determine the shape of a community's antipoverty program. While there are many common problems in. dealing with the elimination of poverty, availability of local talent, resources, and desires make the solution of poverty in each community a unique undertaking. D. Central to the community action program is the concept of maxi- mum feasible participation of the poor in all aspects of local anti- poverty programs. We view the words "maximum feasible participation" as an act of rededication to fundamental democratic principles-and as a public acknowledgement that all Americans are entitled to enjoy the full status of citizenship, including the opportunity to contribute toward the common good. Participation of the poor seeks to bar condescension and paternalism and confers the right to participate. * * * We would hope that the Congress would continue to stress the importance of this concept, highlighting the "quality of involvement" of persons from low-income areas in these programs. Some have mistakenly suggested that supporting such involvement has only led to trouble, and, in fact, to riot. Actually, the contrary is the case. It is where the poor have gained the power to influence their immediate communities that the spectre of riot does not hover. We need not less, but more, involvement of the poor. We need not less, but more, support of OEO programs embodying this principle. E. One of OEO's most important innovations has been in develop- ing "subprofessionals" and "new careers" jobs for the poor. Origin- ally developed in response to the Congress mandate that the programs of OEO be developed with the "maximum feasible participation" of the poor, these jobs have gone beyond involvement. Through redesigned jobs, "new careerists" have also proven they can assume many of the less technical tasks of professionals, thus in- creasing the efficiency of the professional staff and relieving pressing professional manpower shortages in health, education, and public welfare. Just underway are programs funded under the Scheuer amendment to the EOA. They are potentially one of the most effective means of training poor people for new jobs and carriers to help them gain the skills needed to permanently escape poverty. F. The administration proposal to raise local matching contributions by 100 percent would be disastrous to local antipoverty efforts. Many rural areas, particularly in the South and smaller cities, would find it difficult, if not impossible, to provide 20-percent matching contribu- tions. Stipulating such an "entrance fee" would be a severe blow to the poor of this Nation who would be precluded from continuing and developing new self-help programs. The Citizens' Crusade Against Poverty (CCAP) opposes increasing local matching contributions to 20 percent and urges the Congress to reduce the amount to the original 10 percent. We fully support the PAGENO="0552" 3012 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 law's provision authorizing the Director of OEO to. waive even the 10-percent requirement when this amount would produce a hardship to local antipoverty programs. G. The CCAP supports the recommendations of the administration to increase from ~ percent to 10 percent the moneys available for dem- onstration and research purposes. H. Crucial to successful national and local antipoverty planning is the extending of congressional authorization for OEA programs from the present 1 to 2 years or more. This would allow communities to plan ahead and `to better facilitate the hiring of quality personnel. The uncertainty of year-to-year authorization only serves to add con- fusion to the very difficult and complex task of eliminating poverty. I. In addition, we urge this Congress to create a Joint Congressional Committee on Poverty not only to recommit the Nation to what should be its No. 1 priority, but, in a systematic way, to gather and dissemi- nate the best h~owledge about eliminating poverty. II. THE ISSUE BEFORE THE NATION The most important domestic issue in this Congress is the war against poverty. What at one time were seen as remedies to this great domestic problem have fallen far short of solutions. Poverty has per- sisted as a cancerous sore imbedded in our communities. In suffering, cynicism, anger, and as a challenge to our democratic system, its costs are enormous. We have begun, though much too slowly, to launch new programs, many of them important deviations from the old, ineffective ways of attacking these problems. There are ftmdamental dangers in our solutions if we proceed to launch programs based alone on our crisis reactions to issues or on commonly advertised, facile panaceas to these problems. Tragically, poverty is a part of the fabric of American life. If the goal of attack- ing poverty in America is basic institutional change, it is important that the change be in keeping with basic goals of our society. Too often, in our anxiety to solve problems, we have developed strategies whose primary thrust has been "on target," but whose secondary ef- fects have produced new problems for the beneficiaries and the society as a whole. The question before us all must be: Consistent with our need to pro- tect individual opportunity and responsibility as fundamental to a free society, what are the best tools with which to attack poverty? Poor people are powerless people. People who are powerless do not have the opportunity to be responsible. Yet a free society is dependent upon the actions of responsible individuals. From decisionmaking based upon alternative choices comes the process of acquiring respon- sibility. This does not take place quickly. It does not happen over- night. Yet it is basic to the preservation of a free society and the elimination of poverty. Too often, in the name of curing the Nation's ills, we have created machinery which has reduced, rather than extended, individual oppor- tunity and responsibility. Of course, at the program's inception, we haven't seen it in that way. We did not think that much of our public housing would degenerate into bureaucratic paternalism. We did not think that many public welfare programs would become institutional- ized, devaluating human life generally. PAGENO="0553" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 3013 It is not implied that we must penalize the poor in the interest of a free society. A society cannot be free with huge numbers of poor peo- ple. But we must carefully choose our tools and find those which can be used to eradicate poverty and build a free society. In the current crisis of grinding poverty amid highly visible afflu- ence, the immediate alternatives seem clear: We can establish new crash programs and temporary task forces, pumping money into urban and rural ghettos through pub- lic programs and institutions which have thus far failed to move toward solutions. This might be called the "cooling out process," or the "temporary relief syndrone." We can greatly step up our police activities, deciding that the basic task is one of repression. In so doing we can prepare for a lengthy period of guerilla activities among the more militant poor. We can proceed to help build local communities and neighbor- hoods, consistent with the needs and aspirations of their residents, making available the kinds and volume of resources necessary, and making certain those resources are used in a self-help process-not superimposed on the people and not used as the instruments of those who would detract from and pervert the process of self-help. Obviously, we opt for the third alternative. And we believe of all the Federal agencies, the Office of Economic Opportunity, and the community action program in particular, represent the soundest ap- proach to reach this goal. The philosophy of the community action approach is creative, dy- namic, and democratic. What should be done is not to weaken that program, but constantly seek to improve it, demanding levels of per- formance consistent with the terrible need that is upon this Nation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINs. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am sorry I did not hear all of your testimony. First of all I would like to pay my respects to this group and to Walter Reuther's leadership. From the beginning it has shown a very enlightene4 attitude toward the whole program. I am also in agreement with you in terms of the dollars spent. I don't know how we can wage a successful war on poverty if we are un- willing in other programs-education, and so on-to make the kind of investment that has a reasonable chance of paying off. As I understand your statement, you would not make any change at all in the organization in the Office of Economic Opportunity. You would leave this intact? Mr. BooNE. We would leave the Office of Economic Opportunity intact, believing that any changes which could or should be made could be made as a matter of executive or administrative discretion. That is to say that we see already that the Office of Economic Opportunity has delegated some programs to other agencies, probably most note- worthy is the Kennedy-Javits amendments program. These kinds of procedures by the Office of Economic Opportunity obviously take place under administrative and executive decisionmaking and discre- tion. We see that if there are to be further moves in that direction, this can be separate and distinct action from congressional action. Mrs. GREEN. I am at a loss to understand the very inflexible posi- tion of this group and others that the Office of Economic Opportunity PAGENO="0554" 3014 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 simply must not be touched even if the Congress or if their members feel that there would be a greater coordination of programs that are identical in purpose if they were put in one agency. Why this attitude? Somehow it seems to me the witnesses have given the impression it is almost sacred, that you cannot touch the official there or you are going to destroy the whole program. I am thinking of }}Ieadstart. Educa- tional leaders across the country have testified repeatedly that this program should be coordinated with other preschool programs and should be under the administration of local educational people and directed down from the Office of Education. `Why is your position such that you would not do this? Mr. BOONE. To review what I just said, Mrs. Green, we feel that the kinds of changes which can be made to increase the effectiveness of the Office of Economic Opportunity can and should be made with- in the framework of the office itself and the discretion of the adminis- trator of those programs. We feel further that the Office of Economic Opportunity should re- main the central coordinating vehicle of antipoverty programs. I might even correct that and say it should become the central co- ordinating vehicle of antipoverty programs simply because we do not believe there has been the effective authority present with which to effectively coordinate Federal antipoverty efforts in relation to and in support of local antipoverty efforts. Mrs. GREEN. On page 7 you said Congress should continue to sup- port the local communities' right to shape programs. What you just said, I think, would negate this. First, wha.t do you mean by the local communities' right? Mr. BooNE. I am referring to the local community action agency in establishing priorities based upon its survey of local need and expectation. Mrs. GREEN. What you really mean is Congress should continue to support the CAP's right to determine the shape of a community's antipoverty program; is that right? Mr. BOONE. Only if there is an on-going monitoring evaluation of the effectiveness of local community action programs and their abili- ties to respond effectively to local need and expectations within their communities. I say that- Mrs. GREEN. That is a pretty big "if." Mr. BOONE. It is a very big~"if." I think the community action pro- grams can be successful only if there is a system of evaluation and monitoring and only if that system is backed up with the authority to act based upon the results of that monitoring and evaluation. I think that in all Federal programs we have seen a great deal of evaluation, a great deal of monitoring without results being taken to change those programs consistent with the evaluations of them. I think this requires coverage. I think it requires a lot of guts. I think the community action programs cannot succeed unless such systems are developed and ad- hered to. Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentlelady yield? Mrs. GREEN. Yes; I will be glad to yield. Mr. GOODELL. May I ask in simplified terms what you feel OEO should do? You, in effect, feel that OEO itself should be concerned with a minimum of the administrative details but should be the conduit PAGENO="0555" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3015 through which all'funds shOuld travel and to the maximum degree pos- sible it should delegate the administration of the programs to existing agencies. In doing this, OEO should retain some authority and guidance, evaluation, and power over the funds. Is that a fair statement? Mr. BOONE. I think it is not a statement of the crusade as a policy position because the crusade has not gone into detail on that question. The Congressman, I think, is quite familiar with my personal view on the matter. I do think that the Office of Economic Opportunity has in an interesting way set a precedent for the type of action to which you allude, the delegation of programs. As mentioned before the foster grandparents program, the Kennedy-Javits impacted areas program are both demonstration of this delegation authority carried into being. Consistent with that, I think a key role of the Office of Economic Op- portunity, once those programs are delegated, is to be responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of those programs under that delegative authority and have the right and the responsibility to act upon the re- sults of that evaluation. Mr. GOODELL. I take it that the answer to my question is that the crusade has no position and to that degree you personally agree the answer is "yes"? Mr. BOONE. My answer stands as given, Mr. Congressman. Mr. GOODELL. I do not have any desire of putting you in the position of having to testify beyond the policy of your organization. But I would like to ask you, as long as the gentlelady has apparently yielded permanently to me at this stage, a question about your evalua- tion of the degree of involvement of the poor in the community action program across the country today-true involvement. Mr. BOONE. When you talk about involvement versus true involve- ment- Mr. GOODELL. I focused the question to true involvement. Mr. BOONE. I think I get your point. I would say that there is a great deal of variability in the quality of involvement. I refer to the quality of the involvement of the poor. I think that, generally speaking, two areas of involvement can be identified, have been identified, tradi- ditonally, in the program. First is the role of the poor or their representatives in establishing procedures and `policies around programs and in `developing program priorities. The other is the entitlement of working within programs. In many cases the growth of the subprofessional program in the Office of Economic Opportunity is a demonstration of that kind of in- volvement. I am assuming that you are referring to the first, the so- called policy- Mr. GOODELL. I am interested in both aspects. Mr. BOONE (continuing). Policy level involvement. Again I would say there has been great, great variability in that. Mr. GOODELL. Let me put to you a very specific question. As you know, the Quie amenchnent was passed last summer. It re- quired at least one-third of the membership of the community action boards to be truly representative of, and chosen by, the people to be served. The deadline has passed for compliance. It is our own view that many communities have essentially conformed to the requirement. PAGENO="0556" 3016 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It is the view of OEO that all but a handful have complied and have true representation, and they have so testified. I believe they listed at one point early in our hearings eight to 12 communities that had not complied and subsequently indicated that this number was smaller now because others have complied. Do you agree that there are only 12 or less community action agencies in this country that have failed to comply with the require- ment of true representation of one-third on community action boards? Mr. BOONE. It would be very difficult for me to agree with that. First of all, I think all of us should be concerned with the problems surro~mding how representatives of the poor or residents of the areas affected are chosen or are elected or whatever they are for policy- making positions. Let me be very candid. Although I would say I have no substitute for the so-called election procedures, the fact remains that the great majority of poor people are disorganized. One can point to very few leaders in poverty-impacted areas who have any kind of organized constituency. The process of selecting or choosing people to sit on boards is one which can either be a facade or it can be one that repre- sents a bone fide moving up of people as effective representatives of poor people, people who have responsibility to be responsive to their constituency, and I mean constituencies of poor people. I think that one of the reasons that there are such great problems in the whole policymaking area and the choosing or the election of people for policymaking positions on CAP boards is that the people who get there are often not spokesmen and often not effective repre- sentatives of the supposed constituency which they supposedly repre- sent. Sometimes this is the fault of the system which chooses them, and I mean the system from above. Sometimes it is a problem directly related to the process from below. WTe have already seen that it is rare in local antipoverty elections for board membership that. the local vote is over 3 to 5 percent. There is something wrong somewhere if that vote is so small. I am not prepared to say what is wrong, but it does speak to the quality of the processes by which poor people are chosen or are elected to sit on and participate on antipovert.y boards. Mr. G0ODELL. Mr. Boone, you obviously like short questions and long answers, but I prefer short questions and short answers. Let me give it to you directly. Your organization is one of the leaders com- mitted to true involvement of the poor. I agree with you. As a matter of fact, I worked with you in this connection. Now, of all of the organizations, yours should be able to give us a direct evaluation of what we have achieved thus far. The Office of Economic Opportunity has told us that they have complied with the letter and the spirit of the one-third requirement, and they have told the American people that apparently there are just a handful of com- munities that have failed to comply. Now your organization certainly should be one that could evaluate that statement in direct, meaningful, and understandable terms. It is my understanding that you do not agree with that assessment, that we are a long way away from getting true involvement. I agree with all of the statements you have made in answer to my questions PAGENO="0557" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3017 about the difficulties in getting involvement, but I think you and I could sit down right now and identify a hundred of these community action agencies that are far, far away from true involvement in repre- sentation on their community action boards. Mr. BOONE. I agree with you that there are many, many community action programs that are far away from what I would call quality involvement of low-income people on community action boards-far away. I don't have any quarrel. Mr. GOODELL. Let me put it this way. I don't like to get obsessed with one particular community, but it always comes up, and I am very familiar with how they select their representatives of the poor. The city of Chicago is listed as in compliance. Do you agree? Mr. BOONE. I would not agree. Mr. (i0ODELL. After great deliberation, I appreciate that short answer. I think that it does a disservice to the whole cause-and I don't ask for your comment on this-of true representation when any- one comes before this committee and says Chicago has true representa- tion. This is the plantation type of involvement, if I may say so. Selec- tion is by the administrators who choose people who can probably ac- curately wear the label of being among the impoverished, but there is virtually no process from the bottom up. Mr. BOONE. I might say, Mr. Goodell, in view of my recent contacts with Chicago, I feel called upon to say that the mayor of Chicago interestingly has recognized the value of effective neighborhood par- ticipation, and I might say not on his coattails by endorsing the fund- ing of the Woodlawn organization's proposal to deal with unemployed, out-of-work youngsters, many of whom I presume are members of youth gangs in the area. I look upon that as a noteworthy move in the right direction. Mr. GOODELL. I think it is a hopeful sign, but frankly, if you have converted Mayor Daley, I will put you in the category of Saul being transformed into Paul with a vision. I think it is probably a minor concession that had to be made. I talked with people around him and have heard so much from them, not only of their resistance to the con- cept, but their aggressive antagonism to the whole concept. From my knowledge of Chicago, I have seen very many signs that this has changed significantly. Mr. BOONE. I just point to one, Mr. Goodell. Mr. GOODELL. May I ask one other question on which I think we do agree? You do feel strongly, not only that the concept of the involve- ment of those to be served is an essential part of the community action program, but that this concept should be infused into as many other programs affecting these people as possible? Mr. BOONE. I am particularly glad that you asked that because I do feel that many of the Federal programs are extremely rigid and are in very few ways, if any, responsive to this concept of participation. Only 3 days ago our office received an urgent television call from a coalition of mimsters in an eastern city asking what we might do to help them convince the Urban Renewal Administration not to fund the proposal being forwarded to the Urban Renewal Administration by that city's mayor. The group felt that the people had not been involved in the develop- ment of that proposal and were fearful that if the proposal were PAGENO="0558" 3018 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 funded, that it would in fact be another human removal program and could very well lead to great unrest and disorder in that area. It has taken us two and a half days, maybe 3 days now, depending upon what happens this afternoon, to get through to the Urban Re- newal Administration the kind of problem we think they are dealmg with. I would heartily endorse the idea that there should and must be ways found for much more effective involvement of the supposed bene- ficiaries of programs on the part of the Federal agencies. Mr. GOODELL. Let the record show that he underscored the word supposed. I do anyway. Thank you very much for your testimony. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie, do you have any questions? Mr. QmE. I will do this real quickly because Congressman Goodell asked some pretty good questions involving the poor, and in spite of what has happened in some of the communities, I am strongly for, as I have always been, the involvement of the poor. I think this is still the key to eventual involvement of people in the ghettos and rural de- pressed areas. You mentioned the riots and the national tragedies that we have witnessed. You say they result from years of frustration, helplessness and denied opportunities. The unrest that I have intimate experience with, is that which I have seen in the rural area. When times get worse, the people there get upset. Violence occurs when prices go down and their income has been greatly reduced. Despite the fact that we have not brought the people out of poverty in 3 years of the so-called war on poverty and with many, many years of substantial Federal expenditures to help these people, I have the impression that they are slightly better off than they were 3 years ago and at least not worse off. Am I wrong on that, or has there been a regression for these people? Mr. BOONE. I would not say that there has been an absolute regres- sion. I think one of the problems is that the progression has been so limited and so small and when there is, in fact, grinding poverty, and in so many of our urban and rural ghettos, and at the same time afflu- ence, the riches of the Nation and in fact sometimes the promises of the Nation have been so great and so visible, it is that highly visible, relative difference that I believe becomes the spark for and the catalyst for the kind of upheavals that we see today. Mr. Quit. You would say, then, that it would be wiser for the Fed- eral Government to make promises within that which it can deliver rather than make promises and thereby embarrass the Congress into delivering to the extent of the promises? Mr. BOONE. Two things, Mr. Quie. One, I heartily agree that to promise more than you can produce is disastrous, and I believe it has already produced certain kinds of disastrous consequences. Secondly, however, as I have tried to make clear in testimony, I think it is high time that the Nation reevaluate its priorities and make some basic decisions as to whether it is prepared to fight a war against poverty or is prepared only to launch skirmishes. Mr. Qur~. We seem to find the same difficulty in our war in Vietnam and in our war on poverty in this country. They both seem to be run- ning pretty much at a stalemate from what I have been able to observe PAGENO="0559" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196 ~ 3019 even with substantial expenditures of money. By the war on poverty I don't mean the $1,600,000,000 we spent last year, but the addition as well. Even though we have not won the war in Vietnam or did we win the war in Korea with the high expenditures, an armistice is pretty well accepted since the Defense Department has preferred to make a better Military Establishment and have it better coordinated than the one before. You used the reference to the Defense Department saying we would not suggest dismantling that. I don't find that kind of analogy with all of the efforts the Federal Government is making tofight its war on poverty with its total expenditures. There is a tendency in the Office of Economic Opportunity to do this within its own programs. However, some of them have been trans- ferred already to other agencies. OEO has decided to delegate some of this responsibility elsewhere. Don't you agree there really isn't the kind of coordination of the efforts to help people in poverty in the Executive Branch as there is in the Department of Defense with the efforts of the military? Mr. BOONE. I would agree. I think that the coordination of the war on poverty is much more complex, much more difficult than the co- ordination of the defense effort. Mr. QuIE. Don't you agree, however, as limited as this coordination is, that the Congress needs to pursue ways to effect a better coordi- nation? Mr. BOONE. I would certainly fully endorse the Congress' right and responsibility to examine that question. My own feeling, however, is that effective coordination of Federal antipoverty programs-and obviously I go beyond those directly under the responsibility of the Office of Economic Opportunity- effective coordination of those programs is going to be dependent upon the firm support of the President. Mr. QUIE. No matter what kind of administrative changes we can write into the law, without the effective determination of the President to back this coordination, we probably would be moving in vain. Is that what you are saying? Mr. BOONE. I am saying there is, has been, and I presume always wi1~ be a Federal bureaucracy, and that the bureaucracies are part of the Federal agencies, and while performing many, many valuable serv- ices, also in many cases they are also anticoordination. They have vested enclaves, and certainly in many cases they are not particularly willing to evaluate their own services and then act rationally and ob- jectively upon that evaluation. I think to deal with that problem is basically an executive respon- sibility, should be an executive responsibility, must be an executive re- sponsibility if there is to be effective coordination. Mr. Quri~. What should we do on the legislative side then-sit idly by? Mr. BooNE. No, I have suggested some points in my testimony which I would hope you would give consideration to. I do feel this, Mr. Quie, that at least from where I sit that one of the most effective demands the Congress could make would be for sys- tems of evaluation and monitoring of programs and an accountability by the Office of Economic Opportunity to respond categorically to what it finds in the field. PAGENO="0560" 3020 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I know very few Federal agencies which act quickly and objectively upon evaluations of their own programs. I think this is extremely dif- ficult to do, given a whole variety of circumstances, but I do feel that the Congress has an unusual opportunity to move strenuously in the area of demanding this kind of evaluation and demanding action upon the results. I would say one other thing, and I have been saying it for a long time. In the evaluation of human service programs, I find that from the university world on down there is a strange tendency not to ask the consumer of services what he thinks about them. There is a reticence to do this. One can ask those who are in charge of delivering services what they think about those services and how they think they are affecting the people, but we draw back from asking the crucial question-what the people themselves think of the quality of resources that they are getting. I would hope that the Congress would push for this kind of on- going evaluation or market research of our programs. Mr. QUIE. You make your point very effectively, and I hope we can make some headway in bringing this to a realization. I thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you feel that without specific instruc- tions from the Congress that it is elementary, on any agency, that where we have programs, after reasonable period of time, there should commence some evaluation? Do you likewise feel that way, Mr. Boone, without instruction from the Congress as to what public funds were being expended? Or don't you feel any good administrator in this country would believe that? You would not throw money down rat holes if you knew it was going down rat holes. Mr. Boo~. Of course not. Chairman PERKINS. You did not mean to state that various pro- grams like the Job Corps should be delegated, did you, Mr. Boone? Mr. BOONE. The Citizens' Crusade Against Poverty has taken no position on that. Chairman PERKINS. I take it you are against the spinoff? Mr. BOONE. Yes, we are against the spinoff, and I would like to make that distinction clear in any statement that we have made about delegation. Chairman PERKINS. That is what I wanted you to clear up. Mr. BooNE. This does not mean in our terms the complete sepa- ration of the program from the authority of the Office of Economic Opportunity. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you still feel that the Office of Economic Opportunity should be maintained as presently constituted because it is doing a good job? Mr. BOONE. This is the position of the Crusade. Chairman PERKINS. You are making no recommendations to the committee to spin off any functions that the Office of Economic Op- portunity is presently engaged in? Mr. BOONE. That is correct, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. I think you have made a good statement. I did not think that your prepared statement jibed with one of your state- ments there about the delegation. It threw me off a little and I wanted to make sure I understood. I am delighted that you have come here PAGENO="0561" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3021 to so ably represent the Citizens' Crusade Against Poverty. You are their executive director, are you not? Mr. BOONE. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. From your experience, let me put this question to you: Do you feel it would be a real great mistake at this time to transfer Headstart to the Office of Education? If that is not in your statement, I am just asking from your experience. I know you know something about Headstart and the value of it. Mr. BOONE. If I may, I would like to respond to you, as I think you have suggested that I might, as an individual. First of all, I am against any kind of spinoff of programs, that is to say, the outright transfer of any program from the Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity to any Federal agency I think is destructive to an effective, coordinated war against poverty. Chairman PERKINS. Let me state that I think more of your own personal views in this matter than your views of the organization. I think you have had considerable experience in this area and know something about the whole poverty program. From your personal viewpoint you are against the spinoff of the Job Corps. Mr. BOONE. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. And against the spinoff of any of the programs? Mr. BOONE. The spinoff of any of the programs, yes, sir, that is correct. Chairman PERKINS. Again I ask you for your own personal views. I take it that you believe that we should keep the Office of Economic Opportunity as presently constituted, and give us your reasons. Mr. BOONE. First of all, I think in being in the Executive Office of the President, structurally it has the opportunity to perform as an important coordinating link and have the major coordinating function in the war against poverty. I feel that that Office should have a planning program development, program operations, program delegations, program monitoring, pro- gram evaluation function. Chairman PERKINS. I personally feel that Sargent Shriver is one of the good administrators we have in the country and from my con- versations, of course, you cannot start out to evaluate a program from nothing, but he is making every effort to evaluate the on-going pro- grams. Mr. BOONE. I believe Mr. Shriver is setting into motion the kind of evaluation machinery that could become the model for other Federal agencies in human service programs. I think that every effort should be made on the part of all us in and outside the Government, in and outside the Congress to support that effort. I say that, Mr. Chairman, because I- Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you, the governmental agencies and the Congress likewise should support this and see that it is ade- quately funded. Mr. BOONE. I agree and I say this for a specific reason. It is one thing to develop good evaluation machinery. Very few Federal agencies have done this. I think the Office of Economic Opportunity holds out the possibility of developing good machinery if there is enough money to do it and if the will is there, and I think Mr. Shriver has the will. The real question is whether a variety of special interest groups will 80-084-67-pt. 4-36 PAGENO="0562" 3022 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 tolerate effective, corrective action based upon effective evaluation. Mr. Shriver will need the support of the Congress to take corrective steps as that evaluation material- Chairman PERKINS. I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. I know there will be times when he will need the support of Congress and I think every time he comes here before this committee or any other committee that he will have the support of the Congress and not only the committees in the Congress but the Congress itself. He deserves their support. I have one final question and here I will ask for your personal view. Tell me whether you feel personally that we should delegate either the Job Corps or the Headstart program to any governmental agency other than the Office Of Economic Opportunity. Mr. BOONE. Are you making a distinction between delegation and spinoff? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. In spinoff you lose complete control and in delegation you may not lose complete control. That is the distinction I am making now. Mr. BooNE. First of all as I have said before- Chairman PERKINS. The timing of anything you had reference to here-did you mean in the futue? The timing is perhaps where we may have misunderstood you. Mr. BOONE. I think we understand each other completely when I say I am against the spinoff under any condition. On the question of delegation where the Office of Economic Op- portunity does continue to have control over the program, I would say that, No. 1, the Office of Economic Opportunity has already delegated some programs and I would say it is very possible in the future that- a date which I would not care to predict-it may find it important from its own administrative vantage point- Chairman PERKINS. From obtaining the experience we are obtaining at the present time? Mr. BOONE. That is correct. It may be important to delegate other programs. I am certainly not so bold as to suggest I have a timetable. Chairman PERKINS. I appreciate that answer. Mr. Boo~. I want to thank you very much for your appearance here today. You have been most helpful to the committee and we appreciate your coming. You are certainly one of the experts in the field. Do you have any other data there with you that we have not in- serted in the record ~ Mr. Boo~. No, sir; I believe not. Chairman PERKINS. Our next witness is Mr. Lawrence Speiser, of the American Civil Liberties Union. `Without objection, your prepared statement will be inserted in the record. (The prepared statement follows:) STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE SPEISER, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION The American Civil Liberties Union appreciates the opportunity afforded by this Committee to testify on H.R. 8311, a bill "to provide an improved charter for Economic Opportunity Act programs, to authorize funds for their continued operation, to expand summer camp opportunities for disadvantaged children, and PAGENO="0563" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3023 for other purposes." Once enacted this bill will constitute another significant step forward in this nation's battle against poverty. Although eminently desirable, such measures do not fall within thepurview of our organization. In testifying today, I will therefore limit myself to those provisions of the bill which, in our opinion, raise civil liberties questions. A. ~novisio~s OF THE ACT THAT LIMIT THE POLITICAL ACTIVITIES OF OEO EMPLOYEES UNCONSTITUTIONALLY INFRINGE THEIR RIGHT OF FREE EXPRESSION. The Hatch Act, first enacted in 1939, prohibiting governmental employees from engaging in political activities, was conceived with the most laudable of inten- tions, and was based on a sound philosophy of government. The original Act, and those provisions of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, and H.R. 8311 that deal with partisan political activities, are designed to safeguard the political independence of federal employees and prevent them from becoming subject to political coercion. However, we believe that some of these provisions raise serious and funda- mental civil liberties questions that demand comprehensive modification. It is our strong belief that these provisions infringe on the constitutional rights of Office of Economic Opportunity employees, and even those who are not govern- ment employees who work for private delegate organizations. These restrictions are far out of proportion to the pressures they were designed to mitigate. Because of those provisions, the vast majority of employees covered by the above provisions elect to remain completely detached from any involvement in political activities, although some limited political activities are allowed. The American political system is therefore deprived of the contributions that could be made by many well-informed, interested citizens who are intimidated by the existence of these provisions. As Senator Daniel Brewster of Maryland has said in regard to the Hatch Act itself, in hearings before the Senate Subcommittee on Privileges and Elec- tions 89th Congress, 1st Session: "[The] Act has gone from preventing improper political pressure on govern- mental employees, which is desirable, to hampering United States citizens in the performance of their normal civic responsibilities and has prevented them from carrying out their fundamental right as United States citizens, the right to participate in government." Justice Black recognized this situation when he stated that: "Certainly laws which restrict the liberties guaranteed by the First Amend- ment should be narrowly drawn to meet the evil aimed at and to affect only the minimum number of people imperatively necessary to prevent a grave and imminent danger to the public. Furthermore, what Federal employees can or can- not do, consistently with the various civil service regulations, rules, warnings, etc., is a matter of so great uncertainty that no person can even make an intel- ligent guess." 1 We state our unequivocal support of the fundamental concept of the Hatch Act, contained in § 107 of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, that "no officer, employee or enrollee shall use his official position or influence for the purpose of interfering with an election or affecting the result thereof." 2 It is essential to retain this flat prohibition on any employee being subject to political coercion by his superiors, and on use of government time or facilities for any partisan purpose. However, we emphatically disagree with the requirement that "no officer, employee or enrollee of the Corps shall take any active part in political manage- ment or in political campaigns" ~ and the interpretations given this provision in memorandum 50-A of the Office of Economic Opportunity.4 We believe that this provision is repugnant to the constitutional guarantees of the First Amendment. Deletion of this section from H.R. 8311, coupled with continued vigorous 1 JustIce Black dissenting in United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 110 (19471. 2 This provision modelled on the first sentence of § 9 of the original Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. § ilSi) Is preserved without change in § 118b of HR. 8311. 2 This provision modelled on the second sentence of § 9 of the original Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 118i) is contained in § 107b of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, and is included in identical form in § llSb of HR. 8311. Memorandum No. 50-A of the Office of Economic Opportunity, December 1, 1960, constitutes the official interpretation regarding restrictions on political activities to OEO operations under Titles IT-A and Ill-B. Although § 107b of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, covers only Title I, these interpretations are based on ITS. Civil Service Commission Poster, Form 1982, March 1964, and as such constitute the Hatch Act restric- tions designed to cover all governmental employees. PAGENO="0564" 3024 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 enforcement of the second provision of the first sentence of §107b (~118b in H.R. 8311), barring use of official positions to interfere with or affect elections, would be sufficient to continue the present situation, under which misuse of government authority to influence elections has been negligible. The interpretations of Hatch Act activities deprive a large segment of the population of their fundamental American right and responsibility to participate actively in the operations of government. We find it deplorable that these regu- lations proscribe many voluntary leisure-hour pursuits carried on away from government property, such as: 1. Be a candidate for or delegate to a political convention. 2. Act as an officer of, or prominent participafft in, a primary meeting, caucus, or mass political convention. 3. Hold office on a political committee, club, or organization, or be a member of a committee of a political party, organization, or club. 4. Act at the polls as an accredited checker, watcher, or challenger of any party or party faction. 5. Solicit votes, or help to get out votes on election day. 6. Distribute campaign literature, badges, or buttons. 7. Publish or edit a partisan political newspaper or newsletter. 8. Express opinions in public in such a way as to constitute taking an active part in a political campaign.5 When coupled with the vigorous enforcement of the prohibition against using official influence in connection with any of these activities, these activities by themselves cannot be considered detrimental to the fulfillment of the federal employee's responsibilities. While we favor widespread liberalization allowing political action on the part of Office of Economic Opportunity employees, we recognize that there may be exceptional cases where some restriciton is necessary. Such exceptions would have to be worked out after detailed study of individual situations. We strongly support the dissenting opinion of Mr. Justice Black in United Publk~ Workers v. Mitchell: "Legislation which muzzles several million citizens threatens popular govern- ment, not only because it injures the individual muzzled, but also because of its harmful effect on the body politic in depriving it of the political participation of such a large segment of our citizens. Forcing public employees to contribute money and influence can well be proscribed in the interest of `clean politics' and public administration. But I think the Constitution prohibits legislation which prevents millions of citizens from contributing their arguments, complaints and suggestions to the political debates which are the essence of our democracy; prevents them from engaging in organizational activity to urge others to vote and take an interest in political affairs; bars them from performing the inter- ested citizen's duty of insuring that his and his fellow citizens votes are counted. Such drastic limitations on the right of all the people to express political action would be inconsistent with the First Amendment's guaranty of freedom of speech, press, assembly, and petition. And it would violate, or come dangerously close to violating, Article I and the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution." B. THE OATH REQUIREMENT CONTAINED IN §10cc SHOULD BE DELETED Section 104d of the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, whose wording is retained without change in §1060 of H.R. 8311, provides that: "Each enrollee (other than an enrollee who is a native and citizen of Cuba described in §104(a) of this Act) must take and subscribe to an oath or affirma- tion in the following form: `I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I bear true faith and allegiance to the United States of America and will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States against all its enemies foreign and domestic.' The provisions of §1001 of title IS. United States Code, shall be applica- ble to the oath or affirmation required under this subsection." This oath is identical with that required under the National Defense Educa- tIon Act and the National Science Foundation Act. The 1st session of the 80th Congress wisely repealed the negative disclaimer oath required by the original Economic Opportunity Act, Pub. Law 88-452. 78 Stat. 1009. However, we believe that many of the objections presented against the original oath still remain true even with the oath as amended. Although it is true that governmental benefits can be withheld altogether, it is not true that they can he Offico of Economic Opportunity, I~Iemorandum No. 50-A December 1 1966 ~ 330 U.s. at 111. ` PAGENO="0565" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3025 subjected to any conditions which the state desires to impose. Cf. Speiser v. Randall, 352 U.S. 531 (1958) and Bherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398 (1963). The oath raises serious constitutional questions under the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments. It has no reasonable relationship to the purpose for which distribution of funds under the OEO is designed. The oath constitutes an in- fringement on the rights of freedom of speech and privacy which encompass the right to remain silent, or to refuse to proclaim one's loyalty, or to make any statement, unless some clear and present danger requires it. The terms of the oath are vague and indefinite. What is meant by the terms "bear true faith and allegiance to the United States" and "will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States ?" Specifically, is there im- plicit in these terms a promise to bear arms in any or all wars? 1 Does the second phrase stated above imply a disavowal of any intent to change any law or constitutional provision now in effect? ~. The Supreme Court has dealt with affirmative oaths in two recent cases. In both the oaths were found unconstitutional, either because of infringement with the right of free association, Elf brandt v. Russell, 384 U.S. 11 (1966) or because of a denial of due process resulting from the vagueness of the oath, Baggett v. Builitt, 377 U.S. 360 (1964).~ We agree with the statement of the National Association of Social Workers that: "We do not see how the poverty program is involved in matters affecting the security and safety of the U.S. . . . It is our firm conviction that benefits and services including employment opportunities should be available without regard to race, color or political beliefs." The fact that the oath itself serves no purpose is seen by the fact that a special exemption is provided citizens of Cuba. This exemption indicates that loyalty to the United States as manifested by the oath is apparently not regarded even by the bill's drafters as essential for participation in the Job Corps. Oaths of allegiance have historically been required as part of the ceremOnies when individuals assume government positions. Their value has been largely ceremonial. Recently, however, there has been an undesirable trend-reflected in this bill, and in the National Science Foundation and National Defense Education Act- of requiring oaths of allegiance as a condition for getting a federal grant or funds. This demands the historical importance of oaths. The Washington Star in a perceptive editorial stated the case against dis- claimer loyalty oaths when the Economic Opportunity Act was first being de- bated. Much of what the Star said is also relevant to the affirmative oath found in H.R. 8311. "They are demeaning and insulting to selected groups of citizens. They are superfluous, since any substantial `disloyalty' to the Nation has always been punishable as treason. Finally, they are a monumental exercise in futility, since obviously anyone in any field who had determined to practice `disloyalty' to the United States would not hesitate to take an oath that be had no such intention. "The oaths have alienated parts of our intellectual community from the whole society and convinced many of our best friends abroad that we were in the grip of a national paranoia. It would be a sign of maturity if the whole silly business would drop in every State. The sooner the better." ~° Similarly, Justices Douglas and Black in their concurring opinion in the case of Wert Virginia Btate Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 627 at 644, in- Cf. Girouard v. United states, 328 U.S. 61 (1946) ; a Keyishian V. New York Board of Regents, 35 U.S. Law Week 4152 (1967). 8 The oath in Elf brandt as reported in 384 U.S. at 12 stated that: "I, (type or print name) do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Consti- tution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Arizona; that I will hear true faith and allegiance to the same, and defend them against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of the office of (name of office) according to the best of my ability, so help me God (or so I do affirm)." The opinion of the court by Justice Douglas dealt primarily with the legislative gloss on the oath regarding Communist Party membership. 9The oath in Baggett as reported in 377 U.S. at 361, 362, stated that: I solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the constitution and laws of the United States of America and of the State of Washington, and will by precept and example pro- mote respect for the flag and institutions of the United States of America and the State of Washington, reverence for law and order and undivided allegiance to the government of the United States." ~0 Washington Star, June 14, 1964. PAGENO="0566" 3026 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 volving a required affirmative pledge of allegiance, stated succinctly and trench- antly the same thought. "Words uttered under coercion are proof of loyalty to nothing but self- interest." C. SECTION 1201 OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT, AS AMENDED, SHOULD BE REPEALED, BECAUSE IT CONSTITUTES A BILL OF ATTAINDER AND DENIES DUE PROCESS Section 1201 of the Pub. Law 80-794, 80 Stat. 1477, provides that: "No part of the funds appropriated under this Act to carry out the provisions of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 shall be used to provide payments, assistance, or services, in any form, with respect to any individual who is con- victed, in any Federal, State, or local court of competent jurisdiction, of inciting promoting, or carrying on a riot, or any group activity resulting in material dam- age to property or injury to persons, found to be in violation of Federal, State, or local laws designed to protect persons or property in the community con- cerned." Although § 1201 requires a conviction prior to the imposition of a cut-off of funds, the automatic nature of the cut-off precludes escape from the bill of attainder clause. While the conviction necessary under § 1201 was obtained through the judicial process, there is no judicial determination as to whether a cut-off of "payments, assistance or Services" is a justified punishment for one convicted "of inciting, promoting, or carrying on a riot." For a bill of attainder to be present it is not necessary that individuals be named, only that the legisla- ture has made a decision to inflict some punishment without a judicial determina- tion as to whether the punishment is warranted. United States v. Brewn, 381 U.S. 437 (1065). Further, there is no question that a cut-off of funds as found here constitutes punishment, which is one of the criteria to establish a violation of the bill of attainder clause. United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946). The contemporary view of the bill of attainder clause, formulated by Chief Justice Warren in Brown, is that it seeks to preserve a separation of powers between the legislature and judiciary. The judiciary, with its institutionalized procedures, can more accurately determine what punishment those inciting or encouraging riots deserve. As Brown itself said: "[TheJ bill of attainder clause was intended not as a narrow, technical (and therefore soon to be outmoded) prohibition, but rather as an implementation of the separation of powers, a general safeguard against legislative exercise of judicial function, or more simply trial by the legislature." ~` The penalties imposed by § 1201 bear no relationship to their avowed purpose of curtailing civil disturbances. Where such relationship is absent, a violation of due process is present. Cf. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390 (1923). In the absence of some rational relationship between the ends desired and the means employed, the action assumes the appearance of mere arbitrary flat. No matter how many years have passed-even thirty or forty-an employee cannot be paid if he has ever been convicted of these crimes. Further, § 1201 unwisely interferes with civil service requirements regarding discharge of governmental employees. The practical effect of a denial of funds to any employee is the same as a discharge from employment. The statute con- tains no standards whereby a discharge is to be effectuated. Provisions for re- moval of classified civil servants is contained in 5 U.S.C. § 562. Included within this section is the requirement of notice of charges, opportunity to answer the charges, and the right to receive a copy of the decision. Such safeguards are missing from § 1201. A person's competence for the position he holds can better he determined by his superiors than by those whose only criticism is directed at his outside activ- ities, rather than his professional competence. In the United States, with its separation of powers, it is important that "the acts of each [branch of government] shall never be controlled by, or subjected, directly or indirectly, to. the coercive influences or either of the other ~epnrt- ments." Mr. Justice Sutherland in O'Donoghve v. United States, 289 U.S. 516, 530. 11 351 T~.S. nt 42. See p1c~o Cizmrnine~ v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277 (1867) and Er-porte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333 (1867). PAGENO="0567" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS' OF 1967 3027 D. THE PROVISION IN § 214 PROHIBITING ACTIVITIES IN CONNECTION WITH THE PER- FORMANCE OF DUTIES THAT ARE IN VIOLATION OF LAW SHOULD BE CLARIFIED § 214 of ELR. 8311, which has no counterpart in the Economic Opportunity Act, as amended, provides that: "Each community action agency shall. .. define employee duties of advocacy on behalf of the poor in an appropriate manner which will in any case preclude employees from participating, in connection with the performance of their duties, in any form of picketing, protest, or other direct action which is in violation of law." We are afraid that this provision might be used to prevent OEO workers from championing the rights of the poor by such means as protests when there is serious question as to the constitutional validity of the law they are supposedly iolating by their protest. These protests may be no more than verbal ones, and state laws which preclude such protests may very well contain provisions that are contrary to the first amendment. Some clarification is therefore warranted, either in the report that this committee will file, or in the act itself. STATEMENT OP LAWRENCE SPEISER, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION Mr. SPEISER. I will merely summarize the points.that are in the pre- pared statement. Chairman PERKINS. You may do so. Mr. SPEISER. Although the bill, H.R. 8311, and its predecessors are eminently desirable and necessary in our society, such measures don't fall within the purview of the American Civil Liberties TJnion. We are solely concerned with what we conceive to be the civil liberties issues that exist and are present in the bill and my remarks are di- rected to those problems. First of all, the bill continues a provision extending the Hatch Act to employees and enrollees and members of the Job Corps so that they come under the Hatch Act. Basically, our position is in opposi- tion to the provision of the Hatch Act which bars officers, employees, or enrollees from taking any active part in political management or in political campaigns. The Hatch Act bars voluntary political action and there have been a number of civil, service rulings on the Hatch Act section which indi- cates the wide scope of the Hatch Act and in barring political activi- ties. We believe one of the purposes of the Job Corps is to train good citizens and we fail to see how this is accomplished by quarantining members of the Job Corps from engaging in permissible political actlv1ty which individuals in private life can participate in. First of all, they are not really Government employees. They are there because it has been determined that they need t~raining and it seems that this is a false kind of lesson to giv~ them to indicate that you are going to bar them from political activity. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you a few questions along this line. I take it that you are against the principle of the Hatch Act, that you feel, it is interfering unduly with the freedom of the Government worker? Mr. SPEISER. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. That is your feeling. Mr. SPEISER. That is right, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. It is for that basic reason that you are against the Hatch Act principle? PAGENO="0568" 3028 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. SPEISER. That is correct. It is the extension of it here. I think there is an additional factor I might suggest and that is Job Corps enrollees are not Government employees and I think you are com- poundmg the error by expanding it to cover individuals in that situa- tion. The provision of the antipoverty program which covers em- ployees and officers who are direct employees of the Government- Chairman PERKINs. But you would have no objection to it covering the direct employees? Mr. SPEIsER. No. We have an objection to that because we basically disagree with the concept of the Hatch Act. Let me make it clear that we do not disagree with the provision of the Hatch Act that bars coercive political pressures on employees or officers of the Government but we are concerned with the provision which bars them from par- ticipating in political campaigns and activities as a way of sterilizing the process. Chairman PERKINS. I just wish more members of the committee had been here. We have your statement in the record. Do you have any other material you want to put in the record? Mr. SPEISER. I have three additional points. I recognize the hour is late, Mr. Chairman, and I will just briefly mention the other points as well. Chairman PERKINS. You may go ahead. Mr. SPEISER. There is an oath of allegiance that is required for Job Corps enrollees. It is the fairly standard kind of oath of allegience that is required for persons who obtain employment. We object to that oath under the circumstances on the grounds that you are singling out these Job Corps enrollees who are not Government employees and making it a condition for them to get Federal financial grants. There is a wide range of Federal financial grants and subsidies and programs and there have only been two other instances in which I know an oath Gf allegiance has been required as getting them, the National Defense Education Act and the National Science Foundation which requires the oath of allegiance as a condition for getting fellowships or grants under those programs. We believe this demands the kind of oath which historically has been used in a ceremonial fashion for when individuals go into public office. There is also an interesting problem I believe in the oath of alle- giance, although it has a provision excluding nations as Cuba, in it effect, excludes or could have disastrous effects on aliens who are in this country who may very well be in need of the Job Corps program. Many countries have similar provisions similar to our laws which, al- though the question of the validity of our expatriation laws is very much in doubt, holds that an individual takes an oath of allegiance to a foreign country thereby loses his citizenship to the country to which he belongs and we do not feel this is a necessary condition for individ- uals being in the Job Corps. Thirdly, we are opposed to the so-called Broyhill amendment which was not in this present bill but it is a continuation of the law last year that was added to the act without any debate, as it has been this year to the appropriations for the Departments of Labor and Health, Edu- cation, and Welfare. Although the original Broyhill amendment barred those who participated in riots or promoting or carrying on riots, it was changed so that it covered those who were convicted of such crimes. That does not solve the problem. It is still a bill of attainder; it still PAGENO="0569" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3029 bars people from programs even though a conviction of those crimes may have occurred 30 or 40 years ago, and they were fairly frequent- ly, as the chairman may recall, individuals who were involved in labor organization strikes in which it was a very common phenomenon of individuals being convicted of engaging in riots. It is unlikely that any- body will be in the Job Corps program who would be in a labor strike many years ago, but the fact is, individuals participated in civil riots- demonstrations-over a period of time. In many cases they were arrested after demonstrations caused riots in the sense that onlookers objected to the demonstrations. They were convicted in many Southern States and for a number of reasons they did not appeal their decision and they are thereby disqualified in the Job Corps. This is a bill of attainder and it has no place in the law. With the riots going on, wide range of people being picked up, the question of guilt is an individual one in determining whether people are guilty of crimes. With that vast number of people, there is a problem as to whether some people are going to be improperly convicted. The fact is you have a bill of attainder in the present antipoverty law which has no business there. Lastly, there is a section in provision 214 of section. 103 of setting up the community action program which says: Each Community Action agency shall define employees duties of advocacy on behalf of the poor in an appropriate manner which will in any case preclude employees from participating in connection with the performance of their duties in any form of picketing, protest or other direct action which is in violation of the law. Many States have laws that are unconstitutional and infringing on freedom of expression in picketing and protest. There is some ambiguity about them and you seem to have a provision here which seems to give the OEO the right to spell this out. It seems to me if in- dividuals do get involved in activities, if they are convicted, if it is determined that their convictions should disqualify them from par- ticipation in the program that is time enough to determine whether they should be eliminated after proper notice, hearing and charges. Thank you for your attention. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. The committee will stand in recess until quarter after two. (Whereupon, at 1:10 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 2:15 p.m. of the same day.) AFTER RECESS Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. We will have our next witness, Mr. John E. Hansan, executive di- rector of the Community Action Commission, Cincinnati. Come around, Mr. Hansan, we are delighted to welcome you. STATEMENT OP JOHN E. HANSAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION, CINCINNATI, OHIO Mr. HANSAN. Thank you, Mr. Perkins. The clerk of the committee has been given a copy of my testimony as well as some exhibits to go with it and also attached is a factbook with a good detailed breakdown PAGENO="0570" 3030 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 of costs, participants, and the other things that invididual members may want to refer to at some future time. I would also like to call attention to the picture book there that was paid for by Mr. Jeffry Lazarus, a prominent Cincinnati busi- nessman. With your permission, I would like to read my prepared statement and then, if there are any questions, I would be pleased to answer any questions. First, let me say it is a. great honor to appear before this distin- guished committee and I want to take this opportunity to say I admire you for the courage and sensitivity you demonstrated in recommend- ing the original Economic Opportunity Act while maintaining its basic integrity over the past 3 years. That you have been able to do this is evidence of your commitment to making the TJnited States a truly open society. I am here as an advocate for the community action programs. While all parts of the Economic Opportunity Act are important and con- tribute to the alleviation of specific problems, the most significant and most needed contribution has been community action. * Using Federal funds, local communities have been enabled to develop and conduct the kind of programs they know to be needed. Just as all the Federal money in the Treasury won't eliminate pov- erty without local initiative, so local initiative alone can't work with- out Federal money. This partnership of effort is essential to our success in Cincinnati or wherever community action is at work. As you gentlemen know, the law requires that community action programs be coordinated with other efforts to eliminate poverty, and also that there must be maximum feasible participation of the poor. Both of these requirements have benefits far surpassing what most of us ever imagined. The heavy emphasis on coordination has brought together different sources of funds, public and private agencies, and it has sparked a* degree of cooperation at the local level, which is re- freshing to all who experience it. The brilliance of title II, however, remains in the fact that com- munity action has insisted on total involvement of the poor. Serving on boards, planning groups, and actually conducting the work of many programs, poor people have been brought in to achieve jointly what none could do alone. Because of the successful participation of poor people in community action, it is not an exaggeration to say there has been a rebirth of a sense of democracy wherever community action has been doing its job. I am appearing before this committee as a public voice for the thousands of poor people in our community who still live in silent despair, waiting for community action to touch them. The experience of Cincinnati in mounting a local war on poverty is probably typical of most of our Nation's communities. We have made a few mistakes, encountered a number of difficulties, and we have been frustrated in our attempts to do all that needs doing. Our very existence is a measure of our success. For the program was born quickly and has had a stormy youth; but it has survived and it gives promise in ways we have not seen before if we continue to have the support of Congress, local public officials, community leaders, the poor themselves, and all those concerned with one of the most serious problems of our complex society. PAGENO="0571" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3031 Even in conservative, skeptical Cincinnati few will say, "We don't need a poverty program." Some may call for a change of name, demand * more Federal control or less of it, but few responsible Cincinnatians are willing to surrender or even curtail the effort that has been mounted. More than 600 community leaders, governing 22 public and private organizations, have responsibility for the control of the community action funds the Congress has made available for our area. Government ofllcia'ls, educators, social workers, religious leaders, businessmen, and civil rights leaders have joined with them and asked for more, not less, help in combating our local problems. Those few individuals who, without the firsthand knowledge or responsibility for the programs, criticize without knowing, must speak either from ignorance or malice. Established as a nonprofit private organization in September 1964, the Community Action Commission of the Cincinnati Area serves five counties in Ohio and Kentucky. Our board of trustees reflects a broad range of community interest groups, including a heavy proportion of elected officials. We have developed a system of autonomous neighborhood councils in every target area from which we obtain representative poor people to serve on the board of trustees. Most of the services funded by OEO were developed during our first year of existence. Essentially, the funds go for education, neighbor- hood organization and employment programs. This is contained in the detailed factbook I have given to the committee. Among the most important contributions we have made in our short time of existence has been that for the first time there is a single voice in the community speaking for the needs of the poor; for the first time there is an awareness of an involvement by the. total community in meeting the needs of the poor. The Community Action Commission helps make other Federal pro- grams more responsive to local needs. Community action stresses coordination, melding of funds, blending of services, seeing the person as a whole, eliminating competition, duplication or unnecessary overlap. Community action is becoming a reservoir of vital information about the poor. Community action has demonstrated that poor people, given opportunities, will use them fully. Then, Mr. Chairman, I refer to some activities we have had with the education system. The employment programs funded by a variety of sources, I call your attention to the fact that there is still not enough job opportunities for the untrained; then I make reference to the dialog that has developed between the county welfare department di- rector and the clients on welfare. Then I touch on the very excellent relationship we have with the United Appeal or Community Chest, it is called different things in different communities, pointing out without their financial support we very well might never have met the 10-percent-local-contribution requirement. Poor people and residents of poor neighborhoods usually feel out- side of the system. Education systems in the five-county area have been stimulated to provide additional programs to fill the many needs of the poor. Two PAGENO="0572" 3032 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 thousand nine hundred twenty children in Heacistart and preschool programs, 20,854 medical and dental visits, 48 school community cen- ters, school social work for 413 children are a few examples of pro- grams successfully started and which give promise of being cont.inued by our public school systems. Much of this has been done, using poor people as staff to get an important job done. In the Cmcinnati public schools alone, 356 target area residents are employed as teacher assistants or aides. Employment programs, too long fragmented by a variety of sources of funds, have been brought closer together through the efforts of the community action commission. Focusing on the needs of the individual poor people, the CAC has been able to influence and bring about significant change in the State employment service and the board of education as well as the Federal agencies charged with the responsibility for training and employment opportunities under the Manpower Development and Training Act. Using neighborhood people trained especially for the task the CAC has reached 2,604 unemployed persons and assisted them to obtain jobs or training opportunities. In addition, more than 291 youth have been recruited for the Job Corps, and we have assisted in the placement of hundreds in the various Neighborhood Youth Corps programs in the five-county area. Despite what we have done and despite the full cooperation of the Labor Department, the OEO, and other Federal agencies, there are still insufficient job openings for the untrained. While our community has enjoyed the benefits of one of the finest county welfare departments in Ohio, this department like all others, has become overworked and understaffed for the gigantic tasks im- posed by our changing society. Not surprisingly, the welfare department is often viewed as insensi- tive to the individuals who require financial assistance. Community action programs have stimulated a dialog between the clients and the administration of this most important public agency. Also, with financial aid from title V of the EOA the welfare de- partment is training 175 persons for jobs. Twenty-two trainees have already secured permanent placement. United Appeal agencies, long a bulwark in the war against poverty, has given full cooperation to the community action commission. Much of our accomplishment is due to the techi~ical knowledge and com- munity support we have received from experienced professionals and dedicated board members of the private health and welfare agencies. While there have been times when it was necessary to be critical or challenging of one particular service or another, we have found gen- eral support to go in the direction envisioned by the legislation. A major source of our local contribution has come from the new funds raised by the United Appeal. The president of the community chest and council officially appealed to our local congressional repre- sentatives, urging the continuation of Federal funding for community action programs. Poor people and residents of poor neighborhoods usually feel out- side of the system. The personal lives of the poor, their poverty, their schools, their housing, and in fact their whole environment demon- strates to them constantly their inability to do anything about condi- tions which affect them. PAGENO="0573" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITy ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3033 Today, this is changing because of the leadership of the OEO and the stimulation of the local community action programs. Working through 10 automomous neighborhood service centers, usually with poor people as staff, we have developed a large number of groups which are designed to help individuals to feel a sense of participation while achieving worthwhile goals. In Cincinnati, community action funds have helped create: 25 com- munity councils, five credit units, 111 block clubs, nine Headstart ad- visory committees, seven neighborhood welfare committees, four neigh- borhood housing committees, five consumer education committees, four police-community relation committees, six recreation committees, and a host of other task-oriented committees. It is a fact that there is now more citizen participation to improve our city in the slum areas than in all the other parts of the city combined. The people who have the least of everything, including opportunity, are working hardest to make our community a good place to live in. This is and should continue to be a major purpose of community action. Community action programs were never funded to take the place of the welfare department, the State employment service, the community chest agencies, or city government responsibilities. Rather and more to the point of these hearings, community action programs were created to bring out the best of these established agencies and to instill hope and interest in the hearts of the poor people so that they would use better the resources available to help them move into the system-the same system that makes this the greatest Nation on earth. Then, Mr. Chairman, I give some personal observations on the amendments that are being considered, the hardship of the present 2O-percent-local-contribution requirement, the earmarking of funds, the tendency to promulgate personnel policies and procedures of the OEO and community action agency and the community action agency program, a plea to try and obtain for the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity more than a year's authorization, and then, five, a request that you consider higher authorization because in Cincinnati under' the present legislation we are going to have to cut back more than a million dollars and finally, I want to add my voice to those asking you to revise the movement to dismantle the Office of Economic Opportunity because the OEO is needed on the Federal level the same as the corn- munity action is on the local level. In conclusion, I would like to say as a social worker who has worked 17 years in slum neighborhoods, I know community action is vital to our national effort to create a great and open society. Members of this committee have demonstrated already their cour- age by recommending the original legislation. I am here on behalf of the board of trustees, the public and private agencies, the hundreds of people who have responsibility for these local programs, and the poor who benefit fromthese efforts to confirm your belief in the right- ness of this legislation. . Despite public attacks, misleading headlines, charges of misman- agement, or worse, community action under the leadership of the Office of Economic Opportunity is working as the attached program statistics and exhibits clearly indicate. PAGENO="0574" 3034 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Whether it goes forward 1 year and back another, whether it is expanded or restricted, community action is here to stay because we know it is needed. Our communities, urban or rural, need community action to be a bridge between old systems and new problems. It is a new means for bringing together public and private resources and solving problems which are not confined to either the public or private sector. We need community action to revive and sustain democratic partici- pation for all the groups in our communities. I firmly believe it can help us in all these ways and many more. All the problems will not be answered nor will all the needs be met, but it is a step forward and in the right direction. Chairman PERKINS. I want to compliment you on what I consider to be a very fine statement. Have you done all your social work in Cincinnati? Mr. HANSAN. No, sir, I have worked in Kansas City, Missouri; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Peoria, Ill., and then Cincinnati. Chairman PERKINS. I wanted to say it has been my observation that some of the most effective local directors in my. State have been so coordinated. Mr. Ayres? Mr. AYKE5. I will pass until I have the opportunity to read the first part of his statement. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ashbrook? Mr. ASHBROOK. One of the things said about the poverty program is that most people are insensitive of what is going on and we don't know about the larger world of poverty. I am inclined to agree. But when we hear these glowing comments of how OEO is operating, I am inclined to think there is another world of OEO that is not getting as much attention as it should. While I feel there are a great many problems not brought to our attention in Cincinnati, I realize that is not Mr. Hansan's problem alone. First, the community councils mentioned on page 27, you say 25 community councils have been set up. Mr. HANSAN. Yes, sir. Mr. Asm3ROoK. Are you aware of the West End Community Council? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, I am very much aware of it. Mr. AsuBRooK. I notice your address is 820 Linn Street Mall, and the Community Action Council is 822 Linn Street Mall, so I presume it is next door to you? Mr. HANSAN. It's upstairs. Mr. ASHBROOK. So I assume you are aware of their activities. Are any of the employees on the staff working in the West End Commirnity Council? Mr. HANSAN. Let me say first of all, it may help you to realize my further connection with the program, when I was director of com- munity house, it was my job to revive the West End Community Council before the war on poverty was initiated. Subsequently we have had offices in several locations, but because of the limitation of funds, and so on, they use this space that my PAGENO="0575" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3035 office is in. I am real sensitive to this because we get watched very carefully. Mr. ASHBROOK. You would know more about the West End Com- munity Council than most of the other 25 councils since it is in the same building? Mr. HANSAN. Yes. The West End Community Council, for the in- formation of the committee, is an association of residents that has, usually, articles of incorporation, bylaws, and so on; it receives no funds from us or from anybody that I know of. They may have a picnic, or a dance, or a festival, and raise a few dollars. Mr. ASHBROOK. They are one of the 25 you are taking credit for, for helping to start out and sustain them? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, helping to sustain. I would like to point out one of the purposes we stated in our original proposal and that we have tried to follow through on was to use community action funds through established neighborhood centers, and one of the purposes of these centers is to staff such councils. If they are not in existence, they will bring them into existence and try to bring them along and try to extend them. Mr. ASHBROOK. I thought this 822 might be next door. Are you aware the West End Community Council has called for a customer boycott against a Kroger store? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, I am aware of it. Mr. ASHBROOK. Do you think this is a proper function for the coin- munity council? Mr. HANSAN. Yes. Mr. ASHBROOK. Are you aware that of the 14 points they make, seven V1Olate the Civil Rights Act? Mr. HANSAN. I am aware of only a few. I know I personally have tried to shop there, and, if I had a preference, I would try not to. Mr. ASHBROOK. For instance, the people want-a Negro manager from the West End, a Negro bookkeeper from this area, preferably all Negro employees, remove the white policeman, Negro clerks from the West End, Negro produce man available at all times, Negro youth to be employed as bag boys. Is this the kind of activity you are trying to stimulate in the West End Community Council? This of course violates the Civil Rights Act. Mr. HANSAN. If we are in violation of any law, we will be notified right quickly, I am sure. What the West End Community Council ex- hibits is the interest of the people who reside in the West End. Mr. ASHBROOK. In legal or illegal activities or preferably just legal activities? Mr. HANSAN. What I am saying is it reflects the interests of the peo- ple in relation to this supermarket. If they know whether it is legal or illegal, I am not aware. It does not have any bearing on the poverty funds, the council is a separate organization. Mr. ASHBROOK. You have taken credit for this council on page 27, and you said you knew more about it than the other 24 councils, and you said it is in the same building you occupy, so I would think the activi- ties going on there would be more under your supervision than some of the others. Mr. HANSAN. May I make one point? Mr. ASHBI~OOK. Yes. PAGENO="0576" 3036 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. HANSAX. About this matter of supervision-this is difficult for the OEO to understand, too- Mr. ASHBR00K. It is difficult for me to understand. Mr. HANSAN. We in Cincinnati do not control everything ourselves; we contract out to public and private organizations to do much of the work that is in fulfillment of the goals of the Economic Opportunity Act. This particular area of the city, the project we identify as a coIn- munity action funded project is conducted by Seven Hills Neighbor- hood House, which, as I said, is a community chest program. Mr. A5HBR00K. With Federal funds? Mr. HANSAN. They have Federal funds and community chest funds. Mr. ASHBROOK. Mr. Chairman, if I may have my time and Mr. Ayres', there are several points I would like to develop. I rarely request the extra time, but I have done extensive study- Chairman PERKINS. You may have all the time necessary. Mr. ASHBROOK. Thank you. If I take too much time, remind me. There are four names on this bulletin, James Gray, chairman, pov- erty committee; James McGriff, chairman, strike committee; William (Babe) `West, president (WECC), and `William (Bill) Mallory, execu- tive secretary. Are any of those employees of your program? Mr. HAX5AN. Not that I know of. Mr. Mallory is the State rep- resentative from that district. Mr. West is the president of the West End Community Council. Mr. A5HBR00K. Mr. McGriff or Mr. Gray, as far as you know, are not employed in your agency? Mr. HANSAN. My own agency only has about 16 employees includ- ing my office in Kentucky and in Claremont County. I don't recognize the names as part of my staff. To my knowledge, they are not a part of the neighborhood service projects staff of Seven Hills Neighbor- hood House. Mr. ASRBROOK. One of them might be working, and I would ap- preciate it if you would, when you return to Cincimlati, find out if either of these employees is employed by you. Mr. HAN5AN. I will do so, but, even if I find out, I don't think there is a regulation that says they can't be members of a community council and work for a CAP-funded program. Mr. ASHBROOK. Probably not, but I think some of the activities might be of interest to this committee. One of the other bulletins put out by this community council, one of your 25 councils, it says- Attention, Attention, Attention, Soul Brothers and Sisters. Are you tired of being pushed around. . . . Hit in the head. . . . Taken advantage of. . . . Put in jail for no reason!!! If so, then come to the West End Community Council Office Sunday, July 9, 1961, at 6 o'clock p.m. . . . 822 Linn Street Mall, behind the Provident Bank. That is your headquarters. "Refreshments will be served." Signed by James Gray, James McGriff, chairman of the West End Community Council. I point this out because so many times this is the other side of the property program which is not pointed out. I don't know how closely you follow riots, but this "Soul Brothers and Sisters" business, "Are you tired of being pushed around, hit on the head," and so forth-this is the kind of inflammatory reference that sparks riots. PAGENO="0577" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3037 Mr. HANSAN. Would you rather we didn't have a West End Com- munity Council ~ Mr. AsHBRooIc. No, I have not said that. I would rather they work along the objectives you point out in your wonderful report here. Mr. HANSAN. Our program cannot set the program in any associa- tion of neighbors. We don't control them. Mr. ASHBROOK. You create them, as you say on page 7. Mr. HANSAN. That is correct; but we operate on the basis that the vast majority of people in the United States are good people, if n9t all of them, the vast majority of them are good people, andthese peo- ple coming together will ultimately choose what is best for them. Mr. ASHBROOK. That is the way many of these riots are being stirred up around the country. They say that is best for them. Mr. HANSAN. We can talk of the riots if you want to, but what I am saying is this committee and others-I don't think a man on the com- mittee would deny it-is `that with the people in poor neighborhoods, particularly slum neighborhoods, there has been an apathy that is devastating, and one of the reasons for this is these people don't think they can do anything about their own lives. Through community councils they have done a great deal. You have a few examples in front of you about things you think are question- able, but we can talk all day and all night about activities you would be proud of. Mr. ASHBROOK. As I say, there are two points: we have: been ac- cused of not knowing the world of poverty, and I think sometimes we are not aware of the other world of the poverty program. Mr. HANSAN. Let me say again, the actions of the community coun- cils are not the actions of the programs funded by the OEO. These are independent associations; they don't get a nickel from us. Now, staff helped to organize and keep them going, but it is the residents-the people-who decide what they are going to do. Mr. ASHBROOK. Let's look at something that has been funded. In the words of Mr. Sargent Shriver himself-I have the June 21, 1967, edition of the- Chairman PERKINS. Before you leave that point, if you will yield, I think we should leave it. clear in the record that no funds, no OEO funds were involved at the time of the meeting where these remarks were made at this west end council. Mr. ASHBROOK. No, I wouldn't want that said. Mr. Hansan said he helped create it. He said the west end council is in the same `building as the Community Action Committee of Cincinnati? Mr. HANSAN. The west end council is a resident association that has as their address this office. Mr. ASHBROOK. They meet there. They have the same address as your office-822 Linn Street Mall? Mr. HANSAN. It is a separate office paid for by the west end neigh- borhood service project, part of Seven Hills Neighborhood House. Not only is this true of west end, but of many neighborhoods. The address for community councils is in neighborhood centers. They may or may not be funded by OEO. Insofar as they are using space, lights, heat that are possibly paid for by poverty funds, it is so connected, but their actions, their work, their postage, and all of that, to my knowl- edge, is out of their own treasury. 80-084-67-Pt. 4-37 PAGENO="0578" 3038 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ASHBROOK. Isn't this so often the case, we take credit for things-I say "we" in the sense of the agency and the Director-we take credit up to a point, but from then on we don't want credit anymore? But there is one thing Mr. Shriver has taken credit for, that I would like to discuss. I started to refer to an article of the June 21 Evening Star, which mentions that OEO funds have been used for people ar- rested in riots in cities, including Cincinnati. Can you tell us about that? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, the Legal Aid Society has been in existence about 50 years in Cincinnati. That is the delegate agency to receive legal service funds from us. When the riots occurred and there were many, many arrests, the Legal Aid lawyers provided for them, plus the public defender who receives part of his salary from community action funds, went and worked to prepare these people for hearing. I have testimony of this, and I also have a commendation to the direc- tor of the legal process, Judge Heitzler, which I received from Judge Heitzler, which I can enter in the proceedings. Chairman PERKINS. That will be fine. (The letter referred to follows:) CITY OF CINCINNATI, CINCINNATI MUNICIPAL COURT, Cincinnati, Ohio, June 26, 1967. RALPH F. Ciascr, Attorney at Law, Legal Aid $ociety, Cincinnati, Ohio. DEAL SIR: I would like to express my appreciation for the past prompt and efficient action of your organization, in furnishing attorneys to represent all defendants brought into Criminal Court during the recent riots. I would espe- cially like to thank Messrs. George Darden and Robert Gorman, who worked day and night to assure each defendant a fair trial and protected all their legal rights. Yours very truly, GEORGE S. HEITZLER, Presiding Judge. Mr. AsliBRooK. It is interesting to hear both sides of this. As a director of the community action program in Cincinnati you would certainly be able to state whether or not any of your employees of your poverty agency have been involved in riots or arrested for in- volvement in riots. Mr. HAN5AN. Two persons that I know of were arrested. To my knowledge neither has been brought to trial so I could not say-~ Mr. ASHBROOK. They are obviously still working for your agency so you feel you could not prejudge? Mr. HANSAN. That is correct. Both were arrested during the per- formance of required duties on their part, Mr. George Dardin and the other Mr. Layton Johnson, assistant director of the Cincinnati Federa- tion settlement, who was trying to calm down some of the teenagers in Cincinnati. He has just been accepted in the doctoral program at the University of Cincinnati. He is leaving the agency in order to get adoctoral program. Mr. ASIIBROOK. What about cormnunity workers, not employees? Would you know whether anybody from the West End Council or other poverty program affiliates have been involved in the riots? Mr. HANSAN. No; as I say, my own personal investigation only turned up these two. The OEO I know has had somebody down there. PAGENO="0579" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3039 I did not talk to the man myself but I heard that he was in town. I am almost certain that if they knew of anybody they would have, sure as the devil, been on the phone to me. I would like to say it is possible there were some youth from the Neighborhood Youth Corps who were arrested. It is hard to know because these are kids-they don't release the names to the paper if they are juveniles. I would also like to enter for Mr. Ashbrook's information the sta- tistics on who was arrested in Cincinnati, which came out of a special report in the Post and Times Star by a Miss Marilyn Magness and Salli Nichols who broke it down into ages, the race, previous arrests, employed~ and unemployed. As we can expect, one of their conclu- sions from it, anyway, was that the majority of those unemployed fall into the 18 to 25 age bracket and most of those employed had un- skilled jobs. (The information follows:) Wno TOOK PART IN RIOTS (By Marilyn Magness and Sallie Nichols) Three hundred sixty-two riot-connected arrests were made in Cincinnati from June 13 through June 18. What is the background of those persons who were arrested during the dis- turbance? The following statistics will providesome of the answers. How many persons were arrested? * Adults-298; juveniles-64. How old are those who were involved? 12 to 17- 64 36 to 40-6 18 to 20-119 41 to 50-5 21 to' 25- 96 51 to 60-4 26 to 30- 43 No age given-2 31to35-23 What is therace and sex of the adults?. MaleNegro-227 Female Negro-27 Male White- 44 Female White- 0 How many of those arrested had previous police records? 126 of the 298 adults had previous records. Male Negro-105 (Juvenile record, 25; adult record, 56; both, 24.) Male White-13 (Juvenile record, 3; adult record, 6; both, 4.) Female Negro-8 (Juvenile, 2; adult, 6.) How many of the rioters do not have jobs? 114 What is the breakdown of employment figures according to race and sex? Male Negro: . ` Employed-129 ` Unemployed-88 Student-9 No information-i Male White: Employed-28 Unemployed-12 Student-3 No information-i Female Negro: Employed-13 . Unemployed-14 ` Some additional information gathered from police records: The majority of those arrested were charged with disorderly conduct-112. The second most frequent charge was loitering-42. Twenty-four were released without being charged. , ` Three hundred two adult arrests were made. One man was arrested three, times on three different days. Two men were arrested twice. Of the 302 arrests, . 143 were made June 14 PAGENO="0580" 3040 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 During the first three days of the disturbance, most of the rioters were from 18 to 22 years old. As the riot progressed, more older persons became involved. The majority of those who are unemployed fall into the 18 to 25 age bracket. Most of the ones who have jobs are unskilled laborers. QUARTERLY PRoGREss REPORT, LEGAL An) SoCIETY, CINCINNATI, OHIO LEGAL SERV- ICES PROrECT All of the activities described in our last Quarterly Report are continuing. In this past quarter, seven of our attorneys attended the OEO-sponsored course on Consumer Credit given at Ohio State University by the Ohio State Legal Service Association. In the last report, we indicated that we were working with the Better Business Bureau in drafting articles of incorporation for a consumer credit counseling service; this has now been done, and I am enclosing a news- paper clipping which refers to and discusses the new corporation. We will con- tinue to work with George Young, and hopefully this project will be operative within the next few months. During this period we also drafted a new proposal for the coming fiscal year. I am enclosing a copy of this proposal, and one of the proposed budget. The month of June, 1967 saw Cincinnati involved in its first race riots of this century. We did take, and are still taking, an active part in the defense of the indigent persons charged with acts committed while the riot situation was rampant. Events transpired in this manner: on Monday, June 12, several stores in two predominantly Negro areas had windows smashed, automobile windows were shattered, and a few Molotov cocktails were thrown into some businesses. On Tuesday, June 13, the rioting became much more serious; "Soul Brother" signs offered the only protection in some areas, as more damage was done, and several large establishments were set aflame by Molotov cocktails. One large commercial laundry in the area of our Walnut Hills-Evanston office was prac- tically demolished, having almost $750,000.00 of damage done to it; another fire to a large business caused over $300,000.00 in damage. Large crowds of rioters \vere seen in all the predominantly Negro suburbs, and looting became the order of the day. It was at this time that the city manager called upon the Governor to s~end in the National Guard and declared the city in a state of riot. The Riot Act was printed in the newspapers on Wednesday, and was read to the crowds the same day. The i~Iunicipal Judge who was sitting in Cincinnati Criminal Court at the time made the statement to the press that all rioters con- victed of acts of violence during the period while the riot state was in effect would be given the maximum sentence, which is one year in the workhouse and $500.00 fine. This same day, the judge personally called me and requested that we have additional men available in Criminal Court to represent the people who were picked up as a result of the riots~ On Thursday morning, there were well over a hundred riot-connected cases on the Criminal Court's docket. Four of our attorneys, our voluntary defender, and a number of volunteer lawyers divided the cases, interviewed the people, and presented their defenses that day. A. few of the rioters had retained private counsel, but most of them were unemployed and unable to afford an attorney. There were some dismissals; however, the majority of those who were charged were convicted, and were given the maximum sentence as they had been warned. I am enclosing an article taken from the front page of the Cincinnati Enquirer on Friday, June 16 describing the scene in court after Judge Mathews had sentenced twelve persons to the maximums under the Riot Act. That evening for the first time in the history of the City of Cincinnati, night court was held, so that those people picked up could be brought before the Municipal Judge immediately for hearing or for setting of bond. Our men were at Criminal Court in City Hall until 2:30 Friday morning working on. that evening's cases. Friday morning and afternoon we also had five men in court, together with volunteer lawyers from the NAACP and the ACLU. After the trials, motions for new trials were filed for all of the defendants, including those whose cases were heard on Saturday. These motions were overruled, and the judges were asked for stays of execution, which were granted, and bonds were set in each case individually. This was the result of a series of negotiations between the mayor, the city manager, the safety director, the city solicitor, and the judges, as well as the defense attorneys. It took about two days of meetings before the judges would agree to set bonds and grant the stays of execution. PAGENO="0581" ECONOMIC: OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3041 In the meantime, working in conjunction with our local Community Action Commission, we gave the names of all of the defendants, together with copies of the ROR form, to the neighborhood workers. The CAC neighborhood workers went out and interviewed the families, friends and neighbors of the defendants to obtain information which could be helpful on the motions for new trail, as well as giving us some basis on which we can appeal to the Parole Board to allow these men out on parole if other relief fails. As Earl Johnson, Jr. stated to the Congressional committee, "It would be a violation of legal ethics for us to separate the deserving from the undeserving or the popular from the unpopular in providing legal representation." This office echoes these sentiments very strongly; we further feel that among those who were convicted, there are quite a few "innocent bystanders." We here at Legal Services know that the hard core rioters and looters were not all caught. As a matter of fact, it is our feeling that only a few of these hard core agitators were ap- prehended, and that it was the people who .were swept up by the hysteria who were in court and being tried. This is in part based on our investigation into the background of the defendants whom we represented, which indicated that not too many of them had prior police records. This has been a joint effort with the lawyers and other leaders of our Negro community and with the Community Action Commission. We feel that the CAC has done a marvelous job in assisting us in conducting these investigations, and it is this type of cooperation that will foster good working relations in the community. Our latest legal move was to file notices of appeal and applications to file them without court costs. I am enclosing a copy of the application, which we mimeo- graphed because of the large number of cases. We are continuing to work with the CAO's neighborhood workers, and I have assigned one of our aides as a liaison man to coordinate information and to work in the communities where the riots occurred to ascertain what we can do to perpetuate the calm that has pre- vailed since the riots ended. All three of our full-time neighborhood offices are centrally located in the riot- torn areas, and it may or may not be significant to note that none of them was touched in any way. Another significant development in the past quarter again involves activity with the CAC. The two juvenile judges called a meeting at which they, our Juvenile Court attorneys, members of the Court's staff and I discussed the vari- ous problems arising from the Gault decision. The first proposal made by Judge Schwartz was to appoint our neighborhood staff attorneys as special referees of the court; however, it was our feeling that we do not want Our offices to be "courtrooms," nor do we want the people whom we serve to feel that we had be- come judges and prosecutors rather than defenders of their legal rights. The suggestion that we then approved, in order not to make official records on all juvenile cases, is this. Judge Schwartz will appoint some of our volunteer lawyers as Juvenile Court referees; it will be their duty to hear complaints while sitting in the neighborhood where the juvenile lives, as is presently done in other cities and villages in Hamilton County. The referee will work closely with the CAC neighborhood worker to try to alleviate some of the conditions which cause de- linquency. The judges felt that with this grass-roots approach, the neighborhood workers will also benefit, by being able to observe the legal side of the situation. The referees will "hold court" in the various CAC neighborhood offices, and at the present time it is proposed that a neighborhood worker be assigned to the "courtroom" during all hearings. The more serious cases, of course, will still be referred to the judges for disposition. We at Legal Services have high hopes that this project will succeed and per- haps be used in other parts of the country. We shall keep you informed as to the progress of this project. The consumer credit and landlord-tenant legislation which we proposed is presently in committee, and some of it has already been passed in the House of Representatives, and is now awaiting Senate approval. Some of this legislation was proposed directly from our office and drafted by our attorneys; some canie as a result of a meeting of all the project directors in the State of Ohio called by the Ohio State Legal ServicesAssociation. Respectfully submitted. R~H F. Caisor, Project Director, LegaZ Aid Society of Uincinnati PAGENO="0582" 3042 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ASUBROOK. I thank Mr. Hansan and thank the other members of the committee. I realize I have taken a- great deal of time on this problem but there are a few additional points I would like to clarify. I would only conclude from my study that there are more than 110 Federal programs in Cincinnati at the present time spending upward of $300 million in and through OEO, HEW, and the Department of Labor. I strongly urge the chairman to accede to the request of Mr. Ayres and myself and others to send a committee to Cincinnati to see first hand how this program is working'in the field. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to the gentleman that I have never denied any member of' this committee the opportunity to bring in witnesses just like you brought them in today. If you want to bring any more witnesses, you have the opportunity, but I know we can't hold this record open indefinitely. I have been on a timetable, more or less, but, if there is any other witness in Cincinnati that you want to call here yourself, you call him ,in and we will hear him tomorrow. Mr. AsnmtoOK. I would say respectfully that there is so much to be gained by afield-hearing that it is much more important than adhering to a timetable. - Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to the gentleman we know, the situ- ation existing in this country at the present time and if we undertook to hold up the bill until' we made investigations throughout this Na- tion, we never would get a bill this year and some of my friends would like to see that happen. If, any mayor from any city,' if any chief of police, or responsible individual makes the charge that employees of OEO, or local community action committees, if the,OEO has any con- trol over them, we will certainly send investigators out but we are not going to run' out there at random, and I don't' think any responsible person would want us to run out there and commence investigating, because w~ don't know: where we are going. But if there are any charges along that line by responsible people, bring them before this committee and we will send investigators. ` ` - - `Mr. Foim. I would like to ask Mr~ Ashbrook, did I understand you to say there were 110 poverty programs? Mr. AsnBRooK. I said Federal programs. I mentioned HEW and OEO. Mr. Foim. Funding $300 million? Mr. Asn~nooK. Funded for $300 million over the years. Mr; Foim. The point I am trying to reach is, are you suggesting that we have `spent, under the legislation before this committee now, the Economic Opportunity Act and the so-called poverty program, $300 million in Cincinnati? Mr. ASHBROOK. No, I said all programs. Mr. FORD. Do you have the figure we spent on Sargent Shrivër's program in Cincinnati? Mr. ASHBROOK. I could give you that but I was going to spare you. Mr. FoRD. ~300 `million could scare the pants off some people and I would not like the discrimination~of that figure for Cincinnati to show up in my State. Mr. -AsnuRooK. Ican give you this itemization; it has the breakdown on the numbers. Mr. FoRD. Could you give us the figures for what has been spent in Cincinnati? PAGENO="0583" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3043 Mr. ASHBROOK. I will add them up. Mr. HANSAN. With the chairman's permission, I think I can save Mr. Ashbrook some time. We have had slightly over $15 million come to the Cincinnati area, that includes more than Cincinnati. The Cin- cinnati area, since the legislation was initially funded in October or November 1964, our present spending rate, Mr. Ford, on a year's program under title II is approximately $4 million. Tinder title I, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, it is a little better than two and a half million dollars. If you throw in title V, a proportion fQr VISTA, and a proportion for basic literacy, and so on, it comes up a little higher. In round figures we say we. benefit from this legislation by approximately $7 million, my office, the Community Action Commis- sion is only responsible for about$4 million of that. Mr. O'HAit~k. Mr. Chairman, I want to commend my soul brother, Mr. Ashbrook, for his movement, in what 1 think is the right direction. A couple of years ago when we took up the Civil Rights Act of 1964 he did not feel he could support it and now today he is apparently trying to extend it. Certainly, I point out to the gentleman from Ohio, nothing in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits the urging, advocating, or. whatever, in. support of hiring of Negroes, or Caucas- ians, or Swedes. It has nothing to do with . urging. The only provision- Mr. ASHBROOK. Will thegentleman yield? Mr. O'HAii~&. Yes, sir. . . Mr. ASHBRQOK.. I think the urging of the consumer boycott action against the Kroger Store, would be breaking the law. If they hired them just. because they were Negroes, they would be brealçing the law. Mr O'HAR& If they hired Negroes only for that reason, the act would be violated but for a grOup to merely urge the employment of more Negroes is not a violation of the civil rights law. Mr. ASUBROOK. But certainly their actions are questionable tactics. I think the gentlem'Ln from Michigan would agree to this conclusion Mr.. O'HARA. I think it is a questionable tactic and I would like to see the gentleman. from Ohio join me on my bill which would pre- vent boycotting of stores .by farmworkers by putting them under the National Labor Relations Act. . . . Mr. ASHBROOK. I will endorse that. . . Mr. O'HARA. I was also interested in the comment with respect to use of OEO funds to defend persons connected with charges arising from the recent disturbances in Cincinnati. I gather OEO funds are used to pay the personnel of the legal service agency and also used to pay part of the expenses of the public defender of Hamilton County, is that correct? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, that is correct. Mr. O'HARA. I know my friend from Ohio is not suggesting that the public defender's services should not be available to people who other- wise qualify. for them. . . Mr. HANSAN. I might add. on this legal services program, it has been a service of the Office of Economic Opportunity to every city and State in the Nationthat. more and more people are availing themselves of'this help. .. ... . . .., .. PAGENO="0584" 3044 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. O'HAi~. I think it is an excellent idea. As one who worked in legal services for the poor before coming to Congress, I can testify to the need for this type of service and to the great lack of it that has heretofore existed. I would like to just straighten out one question that seems to have gotten fuzzed up a little bit. As I understood it from Mr. Ashbrook's questions and your responses, one of the things your agency has under- taken has been to inspire and assist in the creation of neighborhood councils. Is that right? Mr. HANSAN. That is correct. Mr. O'HAit~. Do you in any way fund the continued operation of these neighborhood councils? Mr. HANSAN. No, sir, we fund neighborhood centers which are staff, and part of the purpose of a neighborhood center staff is to foster organizations of a variety of kinds. The community council is one but they also organize mothers' clubs, cooking classes, or they might or- ganize something like recreation committees, or any number of these things. I might add it was the role of the neighborhood centers to do this long before the Economic Opportunity Act but, because of the limited united appeal funding, it has never been able to make a significant impact. Mr. O'HAJtA. Once a neighborhood council is organized, whether on its own or with the assistance of a neighborhood center, they are on their own, they have their own constitution and bylaws, adopt their own resolutions, raise their own funds, et cetera? Mr. HANSAN. That is right. And I might add when they get real good they begm to criticize the neighborhood center and me and our office. Mr. O'ILutA. I was going to get to that. I imagine one of the things they frequently do after they get going is criticize the poverty pro- gram and the way it is implemented. Mr. HANSAN. It is particularly difficult for me, if I may presume on your time, so many are in Negro areas and they feel if they ask Mr. Barry of OEO he will straighten me out and take the heat off. Mr. O'H~nA. I am glad this matter in straightened out, I don't know if Mr. Barry has time to handle all these problems. He must be pretty busy with his own responsibilities. Mr. HANSAN. You can't convince the people in the neighborhood of that. Mr. O'HARA. I think it is clear you do not exercise any control over resolutions and actions taken by neighborhood councils once they are organized. I wanted that straightened out for the record. I have read your testimony and I have had the occasion to hear a few things about the Cincinnati area program. As community action programs go, the Cincinnati program is a pretty good one because I think you have more neighborhood activity and neighborhood involve- ments through the operation of your neighborhood service centers and through the creation of these neighborhood councils than many other cities. I am in accord with your philosophy in doing this. One of the most important things in these neighborhoods is to get people banded together, discussing and becoming aware of each other's common prob- lems, and taking the first steps toward common action to meet common PAGENO="0585" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3045 problems. I think that is a legitimate function of a community action program. I think your organization in that regard has been successful. Mr. JIANSAN. Thank you. Mr. AYnE5. I have had the opportunity to read your complete state- ment plus listening to your testimony and I understood that you testi- fied previously that you are not a native of Cincinnati? Mr. HANSAN. That is correct. Mr. Aym~s. What would prompt you to say, "Even in conservative, skeptical Cincinnati." What makes Cincinnati stand out as conserva- tive and skeptical? Mr. HANSAN. Well, the person testifying after me can probably tell you better than I about the history of Cincinnati. All I can tell you is `~conservative" is a word Cincinnati residents use with pride in refer- ring to themselves in business, politics, education, and many other fields. In skeptical Cincinnati, I am referring to the fact there are many persons and there have been many persons who have questioned the philosophy and the purposes of the program as envisioned under the Economic Opportunity Act. *Mr. AYRES. The reason I ask is it is very unusual to find editorial- izmg such as you have taken the liberty to do in statements brought be- fore~ the committee of that particular nature. I am glad for your ex- planation. I would have to respectfully disagree with you and I am not from Cincinnati either. You also mention educators, social workers, businessmen, civil rights leaders, and religious leaders have joined with them to ask for more help in combating our local problems. What part have religious leaders played? Mr. HANSAN. Since creation of the community action programs and the general stimulation in the poverty problems, the archdiocese in the Cincinnati area has created a formal commission on poverty. In addi- tion to that the archdiocese has made poverty one of three points for study by the newly created pastoral council and the various parish councils that relate to it. In addition, the council of churches has been one of the delegated agencies through the memorial community which started the Mount Auburn Council. In addition, members of these councils serve on our board and there has been an interfaith commis- sion which is trying to figure ways and means for the lay people in* all the faiths to become involved in affairs in community problems. Mr. AYRES. Does Mr. Bob Taft work with this at all? Mr. HANSAN. Not directly, although he is a warm supporter of the kind of activity in the community councils. That is all I can say about that. Mr. AYRES. The chairman discussed the possibilities of sending in- vestigators into your areas where there was some doubt as to the effec- tiveness of your programs but he did not think that field hearings would be necessary. Do you feel perhaps this committee could gain by talking to these local leaders on a firsthand basis? You know, it is much cheaper for us to take a few members of the committee to Cincinnati than for you to bring these people here. As far as the Chairman is concerned, I love him dearly; but I do feel it incumbent upon me to point out that it does not cost that much to. take a few members of this committee out on a field hearing. Many of our members have been to Sweden, England, Italy, France, in fact, PAGENO="0586" 3046 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 we have been around the world. I fail to see why we can't hold field hearings where necessary and essential. I intend to bring this to the committee for a vote. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to my friend- Mr. Aym~s. If the gentleman will yield, we might even get over into Kentucky if the situation so requires. Chairman PERKINS. I would be delighted for you to come to Ken- tucky on any occasion. You are welcome. You may go anywhere you want to go but I told Mr. Ayres that I would discuss this problem with the leadership on this side of the aisle, on this side of the com- mittee aisle. We took this matter up before the full committee the other mormng and voted on it. It was the view of your side and of the minority on this committee that we should proceed in the way that we are now proceeding. Mr. AYRES. If you will yield for a moment, to clarify the record, I should po1nt out it was a meeting of the executive session; I didn't vote the proxies. If I had we would have the mayor of Newark before the Commission to find out just what happened up there and why, and thus be better able to prevent similar occurrences elsewhere in the future. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say if you get any statement from any responsible public official, or any responsible private individual that poverty workers have done the wrong thing in connection with incit- ing. any riot or any other wrongful act, we will send investigators, but first come in here with some responsible statements and let's not just go fishing trying to do the program much harm. Mr. AYRES. It is not the intent of any member of this committee to do anything that would disrupt helping the poor, but I think theAmer- ican taxpayer is becoming a little confused with hundreds of millions of dollars going into this program without creating very many jobs. It has always been my observation until people learn to earn you are not going to break the pockets of poverty. I definitely think we should all direct our efforts in that direction. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with my friend that we should all direct our efforts in the direction of improving the program but, to my way of thinking, much good has come from the program, from the Job Corps, the work-study program, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, these are programs that have kept thousands and hundreds of thousands of youngsters in school and we have given them the necessary training to earn. I know mistakes have been made, and I don't defend the mistakes. I know we come across instances where poverty employees have gone overboard, done things they should not have done but, by and large in my mind where one has done wrong, 99 have done good for the welfare of the country. Mr. Ayit~s. I move that we recess so we can answer the call for the final passage of the bill before us on the fioor~ Chairman PERKINS. The committee will stand in recess for 10 minutes. (Short recess.) Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. Go ahead, Mr. Ashbrook. Mr. A5KBR00K. Mr. Hansan, you have stated that very little poverty funds were used in this west end community council. It is my informa- tion that all of these circulars, just two of which I brought to your PAGENO="0587" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3047 attention, have been printed in the Office of Economic Opportunity in Cincinnati at 820 Lynn Mall. I assume you probably wouldn't know about that. It is something that you wouldn't have direct access to, or maybe you would have specific information? Mr. HANSAN. No, I do not. It is not unusual that mimeographing and paper and supplies are provided for community councils, although this would vary with the neighborhood. Mr. ASHBROOK. I can well understand that this wouldn't be some- thing over which you would have day-to-day. knowledge. Mr. Chairman, that is all I have. Mr. HANSAN. Mr. Chairman, may I make just a brief reply to the question of Mr. Ayres? Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. HANSAN. About the number of programs that use Federal funds and he listed HEW, OEO, and Labor, and he gave the figure of $300 million. In our model city application submitted officially to the Depart- ment of Housing and Urban Development the figures were given about the year to year contract grants such as those received by my office and that totals $42 million. That includes all of the funds that are received in our area under the Manpower Development and Training Act, various programs like the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the Economic Opportunity Act, the National Institute of Mental Health programs, and these go to the University of Cincinnati, the city of Cincinnati, the community chest, and many other public organi- zations, but the very large amount of Federal funds that comes into Cincinnati comes into the city of Cincinnati to our government for urban renewal and this is the very large grant, and I think the figure is misleading. In the papers what has been the request to you to have an investi- gation in Cincinnati about all Federal funds has been more or less boiled down to an investigation of the poverty program, which I do not believe is what Mr. Clancy, the Congressman from the Second District, requested. And I would for myself and the board of directors of the Community Action Commission feel very honored if this committee would come again to Cincinnatito do an investigation of the program. You will recall that 2 years ago your staff did an intensive study of program in Cincinnati. Finally, I would like to point out that through the generosity of the Federal Government the U.S. Department of Commerce, we have re- cently received an EPA grant to permit the city Government to do something in the field of unemployment in which they have not done much before. Now with this $130,000 grant they are going to pick up some suggestions that our office and others have made over the past year and a half. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much. Will Mr. Ayres be back? Mr. ASHBROOK. I don't know, Mr. Chairman. I think he is catching a plane, to be honest with you. Chairman PERKINS. I certainly don't want to leave any wrong im- pressions. Mr. ASHBROOK. I don't think there were any. PAGENO="0588" 3048 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. The committee the other morning acted and. Mr. Ayres did offer a resolution and then a substitute resolution was offered by Mr. Gibbons from Florida, The substitute resolution reads as follows: I move that under the direction of the Chairman the Staff be deployed to collect information and report back immediately to the Chairman and the Committee on the involvement of any persons employed by the Poverty Program in any of the riotous actions that have taken place in the United States. If the minority want an investigatioi~ in Cincinnati t~ey are going to get it by the staff just as that resolution provides, and if any re- sponsible individual makes a statement to me as chairman of this committee that poverty workers have gone overboard and done the wrong thing, who are on the payroll of the U.S. Government, there will bean investigation in Cincinnati. So none of us is trying to cover up anything. In fact. I feel that everything should be exposed. The bill is so important that if there are any weak points in the leg- islation it is the duty of us all, and incumbent upon the membership of this committee, to improve t.he legislation in every way possible. I for one know that mistakes have been made and don't intend to defend those mistakes. I think that we have laws and we all must ad- here to the laws that are already on the books and if there are amend- ments that can improve this legislation, and I know there are amend- mnents, I know it is the duty of the committee to amend the legislation accordingly. Thank you very much for your appearance. Mr~ HANSAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Our next witness is a member of the city coun- cil in Cincinnati. We are delighted to welcome you here. Come around, Mr. Held. I notice we have one of our distinguished colleagues here, Represen- tative Clancy. Mr. CLANCY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Congressman Clancy, go ahead. STATEMENT or HON. DONALD CLAIWY, A REPR~SENTATXVE IN CONGRESS PROM TilE STATE OP OHIO Mr. CLANCY. It is my pleasure and my privilege at this time to present to this distinguished committee a very, very distinguished member of the Council of the City of Cincinnati, Mr. John E. Held, my long time friend, serving in many capacities with the city council, and he at the present time is the chairman of the Crime Study Com- mittee, a special committee of the council, and is here to renew the re- quest that he made through me several weeks ago in which I sent to you a telegram respectfully requesting that this committee appoint a committee of Members of Congress and not staff to come to Cincinnati and to observe first hand the programs over which this committee has jurisdiction. This request was made in response to a letter that I received from Mr. Held shortly after the riots in Cincinnati in which several members, who at that~ time, represented themselves as being spokesmen for various groups of the city of Cincinnati, came to the chambers in city hail and said that nothing was being done for the underprivileged and the unemployed. PAGENO="0589" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3049 Mr. Held asked that I contact you and we did that and we are here at this time to present some of the facts that enabled us to reach the conclusion that an investigation is warranted and that you should appoint a committee of members and have them come to Cincinnati to see and to hear just how these programs are working; whether they are efficient and whether they have achieved the results that those who have preceded us have indicated by these brochures which we do not have, and by the pictures and the testimony which we have not had the opportunity to present to you because we do not know. So we are here to assist you and perhaps you can assist us. And it is my pleasure and privilege at this time to present to you Mr. Held. Mr. ASHBROOK. Before Mr. Held proceeds, could I intervene at this point? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. ASHBROOK. It wasn't my intention to take issue with the chair- man, but I think the gentleman from Cincinnati has ably pointed out the different aspects of what the investigation is to be. The proposed in- vestigation was not necessarily to look into the activity of the poverty people and riots, but look into the general effectiveness and the opera- tion of the program. I think this is the one point where I would make such a distinction to what the chairman said just a few moments ago. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to the gentleman that we have been conducting hearings since June 12. I made a statement earlier and invited all the Members of Congress to participate at our hearings and offer suggestions in any way that they could and no witness that wanted to come before this committee has been denied that oppor- tunity. Now when the riots had started over the Nation the question came before this committee based on a rumor that some so-called anti- poverty workers had gone overboard, maybe, and perhaps violated the law, and we considered it in this committee. A resolution was adopted and I will read the resolution that was offered by Mr. Gib- bons of Florida. There was no record vote on this resolution, but I was hesitant, and it passed on a voice vote without vote being requested. I am stating publicly that the resolution was adopted overwhelmingly and many members on the minority side supported this resolution, supported this approach. They thought it was the soundest approach. We know that this is an important piece. of. legislation and we know that we have to approach a problem of this magnitude with due care, and here is the resolution: "I move that under the direction of the chairman and staff that the staff be deployed to collect information and report back immediately to the chairman and the committee on the involvement of any persons employed by the poverty program in any of the riotous actions that have taken place in the United States." It is the purpose of this committee to write the best piece of legisla- tion possible. . Mr. THOMPSON. Will the chairman yield for an observation? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, I yield. Mr. THOMPSON. I arrived late on the day this was adopted but I arrived in time to hear the last 30 minutes or so of the discussion. The Gibbons' amendment was a substitute to another amendment which had considerable support Howevei, `I m'ijority voted it down `md PAGENO="0590" 3050 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 then it is my recollection that the adoption of the substitute was vir- tually unanimous. Chairman PERKINS. Anything further? Mr. THOMPSON. I am talking about the actual passage of the Gib- bons' substitute after the Ayres' amendment had been rejected. Chairman PERKINS. And I want to make it perfectly clear that my district runs within 50 miles of Cincinnati, with papers of course in the northern part of my district, and somebody else quoted for me then. I didn't even object to that, but my point is that we are not try- ing to cover up anything around here. We are glad to have the sug- gestions and I am delighted to welcome you here today, Mr. Held, and you proceed in any manner that your prefer. STATEMENT OP JOHN E. HELD, MEMBER OP THE CINCINNATI CITY COUNCIL AND CHAL~tAN OP THE CRIME STUDY COMMITTEE, CINCINNATI, OHIO Mr. HELD. Yes, Mr. Chairman. My name is John E. Held. I am a member of the Cincinnati City Council, which is the equivalent of an alderman in some of your areas. I am delighted to be here and I am grateful for the opportunity, sir, to appear before this committee. I think it is very fair of you to invite any witnesses who would like to come forward to come before this committee, but I would like to say to you that if all the people who have contacted me either personally or by phone or by letter, if all of these were to come before this committee, sir, I think you would iieed a special train. Chairman PE~n~s. Let me say this to you, Mr. Held: I know how those things happen. I have served as a prosecuting attorney, but you are a responsible city čouneilman and any witnesses that you bring in here between now and next Wednesday night I will hear him whether it is a trainload or whether it is a half dozen. Mr. HELD. I was about to say also, Mr. Chairman, that most of these folks couldn't afford the train fare, to be quite honest about it. I might add that I came up here at my personal expense. Quite frankly, sir, it. is a personal sacrifice, I want to point that out, a financial sacrifice. The people I am talking about really would find it impossible to appear. I don't say this critically, sir. I wanted to simply point it out. Chairman PERKINS. I take it that you have some good evidence that you can give us, some witnesses who have violated the law. That is what we are after. Go ahead. Mr. CLANOY. Mr. Chairman, if you will permit me to. speak at this time- Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. CLANOY. Again the record is very clear that I sent to you a tele- gram, not requesting an investigation as to whether or not any specific law was violated or not. We asked you to appoint a group of members of this committee to come to Cincinnati to determine whether or not what was stated in the chambers at the city hall was correct or not. That statement was that the programs for the poor and the under- privileged and the unemployed were doing nothing for their particular circumstances at that time. That is what I requested of this committee, PAGENO="0591" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3051 not as to whether you should come to see whether there is a law violated or not. We are not here for that purpose today. We know that this committee has under its jurisdiction many, many programs other than OEO. Mr. THOMPSON. Will the chairman yield? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey. Mr. THOMPSON. I don't know whether I understood Mr. Clancy's statement correctly, but if I did it would seem to~ me that he has reached the conclusion with which he wants us to agree. It seems to me that this isn't bilateral in the slightest, if I understand the state- ment. Apparently they are about to establish in their minds involve- ment which we are to agree with without having the opportunity to hear both sides. Now, your offer, as I understood it, is that both sides will be heard. I appreciate the witness's sacrifice of money and time and effort to be here. I think it is splendid. Somehow or other an arrangement could be made to hear other people, I am sure. Mr. O'HAEA. Will the chairman yield to me for just a moment? Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman from Michigan. Mr. O'HARA. The gentleman from Ohio suggested that a statement was made in the City Council of Cincinnati that this program hadn't done the people of Cincinnati any good at all. Mr. CLANCY. No, sir. Mr. O'HARA. What was the statement? Mr. HELD. That was not said. Could I read my statement? We will go from there and you cross-examine me afterwards. Mr. O'HARA. I am not going to cross-examine you now, but I just simply wanted to say that as I understood Mr. Clancy's statement we are being told that we ought to go to Cincinnati because a statement had been made in the city council that this program, although spending money, was not doing any good. I would simply like to suggest that if the author of the statement would care to present the facts and figures on which he based that statement, perhaps the committee might be willing to go. Mr. HELD. Mr. Chairman, may I reply? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. HELD. Sir, there was never a statement made, that this program, this OEO program, by anybody was a failure. In the aftermath of our riots a self-appointed group of leaders came to the city officials and simply stated and restated-and it is in the public press, which I will be happy to send to the committee, sir-that nothing has been done for the downtrodden, the underprivileged, and the unemployed. It was our position that if this statement is true we should find out about it and find out where all this money went, and if it is not true I think we ought to know that too, sir, but if I could go on with my statement I might answer some of my own questions, sir. Cincinnati first of all, is a com- munity of 502,000 people in a metropolitan area of about I million peo- ple. I am not here, and I want to make this quite clear, as an official rep- resentative of the Cincinnati City Council. But I feel sure, and I think you can be sure and I think you can find out easily enough, that my queries, my observations, and my appeal to you here today do reflect the sentiments of the vast majority of the citizens of our Cincinnati community. PAGENO="0592" 3052 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT A~NDMENTS OF 1967 Our city is in deep and serious trouble. The criminal riots and the lawless actions, the anarchy of the past few weeks has placed our city government, and this isn't Cincinnati alone but I am interested in Cin- cinnati, in a physical and a financial crisis that might well be classified as an emergency. We have already been told that we are going to have to reduce essential city services before the end of the year to try to * continue to make ends meet. Our people, the citizens of Cincinnati, are scared and they are disgusted. Millions of dollars worth of businesses have been destroyed. Countless employees have been thrown out of work by the destruction. The morale and the outlook of the business owners who survive these riots is bad. In Short, gentlemen, Cincinnati is genuinely as many other urban communities, at the crossroads and we are here to say we need all the help we can get. tinder these circumstances to waste 1 Federal dollar that could be put to productive use in our own area constitutes a crimi- nal act against the taxpayers. If the war on proverty in Cincinnati is a boondoggle, the public has a right to know it. If it is being used for political purposes, the public has a right to know. If it has been a hope- less failure the public has a right to know and if it has been a success, the public should know. If the public doesn't know and if we local of- ficials don't know, and believe me we don't know, certainly if you gentlemen don't know firsthand there is really very little hope for truly effective action in our Cincinnati area. You gentlemen of the committee are the only ones who have the power to get allthe answers and in my judgment, and I say this respect- fully, sir, I don't think you can get them here in Washington from pro- fessional witnesses. You can only get these answers by coming out into our area and getting the facts firsthand. We urge you with all respect to investigate, to assess, to evaluate the effectiveness of the Federal funds that are flowing into Cincinnati and the programs these funds are supposed to support. We local officials are helpless. We have no way of getting this information. Now, sir, I have a letter here. It is just one of many. It is from a man of the cloth~ He has no political connections. He has no motive other than he is dedicated to working with the poor. I will be merci- ful and not read the whole thing. I will try to stick to what I consider the pertinent points in the letter. I think the enclosed letter is self-explanatory. I really feel frankly in favor of what you and Congressman Clancy are trying to do. This whole antipoverty program, and I quote, "stinks to the high heavens and it is about time the public found out about it." Now in the letter to Congressman Clancy, I will skip the first para- graph which generally compliments the Congressman for his interest. As you know, I spent five years as assist pastor at St. Leo's in North Fairmount and just two months ago, I was transferred to St. Bernard's in Winston Place and the Mother of Christ Mission in Winston Terrace. All of these places are so-called `target areas' for the anti-poverty ~rogram~ I might add that Congressman Clancy was born and raised in one of thOse target areas and he can tell you first hand about that area in North Fairmount. I am no expert on these things by any means, but I have observed enough of these programs in action to say (and this is about the most charitable comment I can make) that they leave much to be desired. PAGENO="0593" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3053 One of the complaints of Negroes during the recent. riots in Cincinnati was that they have been lied to. It is my feeling that they are right in many in- stances and that the very anti-poverty program which is supposed to help them is actually becoming a cause of increasing discontent. What I mean by that is this: tremendous promises are made about what will be done and statements are forthcoming about the hundreds of thousands of dollars being appropriated for this that and the other thing, and then nothing happens. The effect is the same as when a parent keeps promising his child things and then never delivers. To make this concrete, allow me to cite three examples of what I mean: (1) Shortly after the June riots $140,000 plus was designated for the hiring of additional recreation workers to supplement the `Cool Summer' program. In our area of Winston Place-Winston Terrace-Findlater Gardens, seven additional workers were hired. By their own admission, they have been able to do nothing, because they have no funds available for equipment, programs, etc.-all of their appropriation was spent on salaries. The net effect is that seven people collect salaries for doing nothing and the area benefits not at all. (2) The Metropolitan Housing Authority last year promised to set up six "Tot Lots" in the above-mentioned areas. They were to be ready for July 1, 1967. When July came, two lots were equipped with inferior swings, slides, etc. pur- chased at Sears. The equipment lasted one day and collapsed under the heavy use it got. The explanation was given that no more money was available ($160 having been spent for this equipment), but that something would be done next year. (3) I spent an afternoon with Sister M. Cherubine, OSF of Our Lady of Angels High School. She is a diocesan coordinator for federal projects in the poverty schools. St. Henry's School in Cincinnati-in the heart of the poverty area-has benefited so far to the tune of two pairs of shoes. She expresses frustration in her efforts and disgust for deviousness of officials who maintain that funds always run out just before they get to the grassroots level. I cited these three examples to bolster my contention that money is being spent alright and plans are on paper, but people are not being helped. Appro- priations are being spent on administration and a little trickle is reaching the people. It is not fair to the taxpayers who think they are doing so much for the poor, nOr is it fair to the poor as we build up their hopes and then leave them high and dry. I am convinced that by doing this, we are laying the groundwork for the next series of riots, not only in Cincinnati, but throughout the country. Before one more cent is spent on a Federal antipoverty program, we should find out where the money Is going and why people are not being helped. You're not going to find this out from the people who administer the program. You can find it out only from the people in poverty areas, from the poor themselves and from the people who are trying to work with them. There is plenty or a Congressional committee to see and hear in Cincinnati, provided that they are sincerely interested in learning the truth and then doing something about it. Kindest personal regards and best wishes to you and thanks for all of your hard work on behalf of the people o~ this district. God bless you. Father LAWRENCE R. STRITTMATTER. Mr. HELD. I think that letter is self-explanatory. We have other letters. I should also like to read from the Cincinnati Enquirer. I will read only two paragraphs from an editorial dated July 14, with which I fully agree: Despite the anguished cries- Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Thompson. Mr. THOMPSON. I would ask unanimous consent that the letter, the statement of the gentleman and such other statements as he has be made a part of the record at this point. I will be glad to sit here and listen to them. This isn't a court, of course, but these are something short of evidence. Mr. HELD. Sir, they are not intended as evidence. 80-084-67-pt. 4-38 PAGENO="0594" :3054 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. THo~rrsoN. No, I don't think so. It is my understanding that -the gentleman and our colleague, Representative Clancy, are asking That this committee look into the matter. I think it should in one way or another. I think that our staff will no doubt report back. and :make suggestions upon which the committee can act. I do ask this, though. I think it is important that these statements be put in the record in full. Mr. HEr~r~. I will be happy to do that. Mr. THOMPSON. Let the gentleman summarize rather than read all of them. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ashbrook. Mr. ASHBR0OK. I would object to that. It seems like very good testi- niOny. I assume we want tO hear about the other poverty. Mr. THOMPSON. Do I understand the gentleman is objecting to my unanimous consent request that the letter just read and that any other letter or clippings that the witness has be put into the record? Mr. ASHBROOK. No. What I was objecting to is the gentleman articulating that the wit- ~ness somewhat cut down on what he is saying. Mr. THOMPSON. I am not asking that. The gentleman who read the letter did say, I am paraphrasing what he said, "I shall read parts of it." I would think it would be to the advantage of the writer, the ad- dressee, and the witness that the whole letter be made a part of the record. I withdraw my unanimous consent request. You make it. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask the witness to proceed as he started out. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. HELD. Mr. Chairman, dated Friday, July 14, 1967, it is an editorial: Despite the anguished cries of "preposterous !" and "Smoke screen !" that have arisen from some quarters over the forthcoming congressional investigation of the manner in which the antipoverty program- Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman, I object to the reading of this edi- torial. I do not Imow whether the witness is reading it in full, whether he is reading parts of it, or what. I want him to have the opportunity to be heard. Even though I don't agree with the philosophy in some of this, I am not objecting in any way to his opportunity to be heard. I simply want to insure, as I am certain that he and Mr. Clancy want, that the whole story be made a part of the record. Then he can do whatever he wants with it, but I want to insure that the committee has the opportunity to see the entire letter, the entire editorial and any ~other materials that the gentleman has. Mr. A5HBR00K. I will ask unanimous consent that all of the docu- ments, editorial, letters, et cetera, referred to by the witness from Cm- cinnati be included in toto in the record and that he then synthesize, as the chairman suggested. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it is so ordered. Go ahead and identify now what you are reading. Mr. HELD. I am not going to read the editorial. The only reason I wanted to read it was to point out that we didn't come up here like darned fools just to ask for this without reason. I am trying to point out why, what brought all this on, our request. So I won't read that. I will just submit it for the record. It is not that important. PAGENO="0595" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3055 I would like permission to read a letter, though, dated July 1967. I will read it in full. This is a letter from Hewis H. Evans, the Area Manager of the Ohio State Employment Service. It is to the city man- ager of the city. of Cincinnati. The purpose of my reading this letter, gentlemen, is to show the lack of coordination or to indicate it, the lack of coordination between programs particularly our manpower prOgrams in the city of Cincmnati. DnMi Ma. WIOHMAN: You are no doubt aware of a public announcement appearing on Friday, July 7, concerning the establishment of a "temporary labor exchange" involving cooperation of several job finding agencies which is to begin Monday at the Community Action Commission. The release indicated that plans have been worked out among four agencies, including the Ohio State Employ- ment Service and contained a plea to all employers who have summer job open- ings to contact the Community Action Commission. Our office was completely unaware of this arrangement prior to reading the announcement and did not participate in the planning. The Cincinnati office of OSES, including the Youth Oportunity Center, began planning early this spring to participate in the President's campaign to secure summer employment for youths which was spearheaded by Vice President I-Tumphrey. Much publicity attended the initiation of this campaign and included the mailing of hundreds of letters to local employers to solicit their active par- ticipation in the program and encourage them to list all their summer job open- ings with OSES. The program has been pursued diligently and, of course, is still in progress at the present time. We are also heavily involved in a permanent program of Human Resources Development (HRD), in which the full coopera- tion of other agencies and groups is not only heartily welcome but is mandatory if the desired results are to be achieved. We are not in a position to delegate the responsibility assigned to our agency by the President of the United States and we consider the "temporary labor exchange" as a dilution of this nationwide effort, a situation which we have con- stantly tried to avoid in Cincinnati and which surely can only work to the dis- advantage of those whom we are obligated to serve. Mr. Chairman, I am not pointing a finger at the Community Action Commission or anybody else. I use this just to indicate some of the con- fusion we have in our area regarding these programs. I also would like to say at this time that we are not here to scuttle your program or your bill in any way. I think our purpose is the same as Mr. Hansan's. I think we feel we represent the poor also. I think our main reason is to try in our way, and obviously you and some of your members don't agree, to insure, be insured in a maximum way that this program will be as efficient as is humanly possible, particu- larly. under current circumstances, and that we would do everything to see that it is. I will finish with myfinalparagraph. . Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. Some of us on this committee have sat here for dozens and dozens of hours and we have probably listened to 3 or 4,000 pages o testimony. I don't see why the gentleman who is a member of the city council of Cincinnati should try to decide how much of the editor- ial he wants to read, and I am requesting that he or Mr. Clancy would read that editorial. I as one member of the committee wouldappreciate it at this time. Chairman PERKINS. He has the right to read it and he refuses to. Mr.. HELD. Mrs. Green, we appreciate your courtesy. Thank you. I really don't think it is that pertinent. I was only at the time trying to point out the reasons and leading up to the reasons of exactly why PAGENO="0596" 3056 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 we are here so there are no misunderstandings when we leave this chamber. Mrs. GREEN. It seems to me it would make the record more complete if either you or Mr. Clancy would read the editorial as you started to do a few moments ago. Mr. THOMPSON. Would the gentlewoman yield? Mrs. GImEN. Yes. Mr. THOMPSON. My unanimous-consent request was that the witness have the opportunity to read any or all of whatever he had. He had said earlier that he was paraphrasing it. I wanted him to have the op- portunity to take his choice, to synthesize; if that is the proper word, or to read it in full, but that the record include the entire correspond- ence and any newspaper clippings and editorials that he had. It was in no way an attempt to silence the witness. Mrs. GREEN. I don't think there is any person in the room who is not aware of what has been said and what has been done in the last half hour, so Mr. Chairman, I would renew my request that he read the editorial he started to read. Mr. HEu. I would first like to say, Mr. Thompson, I wasn't trying trickery. I should know a little better because I am on committees myself. Mr. THOMPSON. I didn't mean that you were. * Mr. HELD. ,Just so we understand each other. Mr. THoMPSoN. You read a letter from a priest and you said in the * course of reading it that you weren't reading every bit of it. Mr. HELD. You are correct. Mr. THOMPSON. I simply wanted you to have the opportunity. Mr. HELD. I appreciate it. * Mr. ThoMPsoN. To have the whole thing in the record and not to be silenced. Was it your impression that I was trying to silence you? Mr. HELD. No, sir; in no way. Mr. THo~rPsoN. Thank you. Mr. HELD. Dated .July 14, 1967, Cincinnati Enquirer, lead editorial: THE POVERTY PROBE Is NEEDED Despite any anguished cries of "Preposterous !" and "Smoke Screen !" that have arisen from some quarters over the forthcoming congressional investigation of the manner in which the anti-poverty program is being administered in Cincin- nati we believe such an investigation, properly intended and conducted, will have good results. And these could apply both to those persons for whose benefit the program is designed and the taxpayers whose money is being expended. One would get the impression from some of the reactions of those opposed to the probe that a witch-hunt is about to be launched. We firmly believe such is not the case. Rep. Carl Perkins (D., Ky.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee, agreed to make the field hearings following a request by Cincinnati's Republican Rep~ Donald Clancy. Mr. Clancy said he made the request at the suggestion of Councilman John E. Held. At the moment, at least one other city, Phoenix, Ariz., is on the committee's schedule for a similar inquiry. There may be others, according to the committee's ranking Republican, Rep. William Ayres of Akron, who said other large cities may well request reviews. Representative Perkins' committee currently is considering a request for 83 billion in antipoverty funds, and it seems beyond argument that their efforts would be enhanced by gleaning information on how the program is working in various American cities. PAGENO="0597" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1 96~ 3057 There have been numerous charges that the antipoverty program suffers from excessive administrative costs, that in many ways it is fioundering~ that its effects on the betterment of those whom it purports to assist are not what they should be, that indeed the antipoverty program is begetting more poverty. The more airing that can be given to such charges, and their concomitant countercharges, the better, we think. It would seem, indeed, that those charged with the administration of the program would be among the first to welcome inquiry. The fact that the exact opposite seems to be the case convinces us even more that the congressional review is a good thing. Mr. HELD. End of editorial, and with this I will conclude my re~ marks, my personal remarks, and my opinions. Now it is not really important what I think as a city councilman~ but you can be certain and a field trip would quickly convince you that a great skepticism and a dark cloud of distrust exists in our city, rightly or wrongly, toward the federally funded programs that are supposed to be designed to assist the downtrodden, the underprivi- leged, and the unemployed. The drift and the business-as-usual methods and the lack of co~- ordination between programs, the report of the abuses, have no place in our quest for urban survival. / Gentlemen, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this time and I thank you all for young courtesy and I do urge you to come out and inves- tigate our program. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank you and I want to thank your paper for performing so well on so much hearsay information. Mr. HELD. In the editorial, sir ~ Chairman PERKINS. Sometimes-I know, we all know-newspapers can be one of the greatest sources of hearsay in the world and come by it innocently. Mr. HELD. That wasn't the reason I didn't read the whole thing, sir. Mr. ASHBROOK. What the gentleman is saying is that sometimes he *didn't recognize his own statements when made by others. Chairman PERKINS. No; I am not necessarily insinuating that my statements have been made by anybody. It is one of the outstanding papers in the country and I do not want the belief to go out anywhere that we try to cover up anything. That is not the case and I think we all hold the same view, that we want to improve this program and do not want to destroy the program. It is impossible for this committee to run all over the country. That would be the heighth of irresponsibility. I can take you to my office and show you a half dozen letters that I received today just condemning me for not making investigations in my home district about this thing and that thing, that the program was worthless, nobody had received any value from the program, and it is a difficult program to understand. It is a program that is in its infancy and there is a lot of misunder- standing and we can understand statements of that kind-the com- mittee can-and we have been trying to go before the public and expose the operation of the program here for the past 6 months. I agree with the statement that to waste a Federal dollar to be put to a productive use in our urban areas constitutes a criminal act against the taxpayer and I think that as to your statement here today even though it is not specific and you are simply saying what other people have stated who say that the war on poverty in Cincinnati is a boon- PAGENO="0598" 3058 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 doggie, the public has a right to know it. If it is being used for political purposes the public has a right to know it. If it has been a hopeless failure the public has a right to know. If the public doesn't know, if we local officials don't know, and certainly if you gentlemen don't know, there is very little, really, very little `hope for truly effective action. Now, I think as a county official many, many years ago that I knew how every dollar in my county was expended at that time. I knew I was going to be held responsible and I think you should know and I am going to see that you do know how every dollar has been expended. I am going to call on the OEO to tell me how the funds have been expended in Cincinnati and I call Mr. Hansen up here and I think if he has any figures right now, since he is here that we should let him follow that point. If you have any breakdown as to how these funds have been expended just answer concisely and don't get on any other issue. FURTHER STATEMENT OF TOHN E. RANSAN, EXECUTIVE DIREC TOR, COMMUNITY ACTION PROG~RAM, CINCINNATI, OHIO Mr. HANSAN. Mr. Chairman, you are particularly interested in the Economic Opportunity Act at this point? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. HANSAN. In the factbook which I gave to each member of the committee there is a page by page breakdown representing each proW gram in the Cincinnati area including northern Kentucky and Cler- mont County. The total level of spending in the Cincinnati area, if you include everything, is about $4,550,000 for 1 year. That includes some pro- grams over which we are not directly responsible. It breaks down ap- proximately like this :Legal services, $190,000; Headstart, $885,000; Foster Grandparents, about $70,000 the Small Business Development Center which has been phased out, $90,000. All other programs under title II which would include the neighborhood centers, family plan- ning, all of what we call undermarked, would total about $1,485,000.. We were very generously treated by the President's special appropria- tion for summer program and have received in Cincinnati and Cler- mont County $250,000. We have received $78,000 for the area of north~ em Kentucky and particularly Covington and Newport. We have `received in the past month or two a $60,000 grant jointly funded by the Office of Economic Opportunity and the Labor Department. We have received $130,000 for title V to the Hamilton County Welfare Department. We have received a $46,000 grant for a Vista Training program which will be completed next week. We have received-this is a difficult figure-approximately $2 million in Neighborhood Youth Corps funds. Then the most recent and the one we are the very most proud of is that we have received a $50,000 planning grant for a pilot neighbor- hood center which is- Chairman PERKINS. How many benefits from your NYC funds? Mr. HANsAX. At least 2,255 Neighborhood Youth Corps kids are involved in programs at the present time. `This does not include an- other 100 in the `city of Covington, so we wOuld have 2,355 Neighbor- hood Youth Corps enrollees both in school and out of school PAGENO="0599" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3O59~ Mr. ASHBROOK. Mr. Chairman, may I interrupt with a question at that point. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. ASHBROOK. That is an impressive amount of money and I real- ize not all funds are directed toward specifically helping the poor in the sense of getting them off the poverty rolls. A lot of it is to help the council and Neighborhood Youth Corps but with all that money can you give me the name and address of one family that is not on relief rolls, now that you have been spending all this money? Mr. HANSAN. I perhaps couldn't give you the address, but I could. give you the names of persons and I might- Mr. ASHBROOK. Who were on the welfare rolls and are nOt on the welfare rolls now. Mr. HANSAN. With your permission I would like not for the- Mr. ASHBROOK. The name. Mr. HANSAN. No, the question of welfare. Mr. Shriver got mad at me once before when I said in answer to Mr. Clancy, "We are not in. the business of taking people off the welfare." As you know from the State of Ohio, if you can get on welfare in. Ohio you darn well deserve it. It is a program that is set up to help people who by definition and by investigation are not employable.. They are children, old people, sick people, and disabled and I am tired of people asking because of the misinformation they get over and over again how many people have been taken off welfare. That is not our job. Mr. ASTIBROOK. It isn't? Mr. HANSAN. No, sir. Hopefully it is to prevent people from going on welfare. Mr. ASHBROOK. Let's go to just one other question. I don't want to take too much time. What percentage of the total funds spent that you just indicated, A, for Federal employees, B, for other employees; C, for other administrative costs? Do you have a breakdown on that? Mr. HANSAN. Under the title II funds you could roughly estimate that 80 percent of the funds are for personnel. Mr. ASIIBROOK. That is Community Action programs? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, title II. Under the Neighborhood Youth Corps, title I program, you could say, almost 88 percent is for salaries, which. again is for all the youth, and only about 12 or 15 percent is adminis- trative cost. In some other programs it would be more difficult to break down, but I have said before, and I will say again, that it is correct in saying that almost all the funds given by the Office of Economic Opportunity or the Labor Department in this legislation are for salaries. The reason for that is, as you so well know, this law does not permit giving an individual person or a company money for anything other than a service performed on behalf of the program. Mr. ASHBROOK. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. . Mrs. GREEN. Did I understand you to say that 12 to 15 percent of the NYC programs are spent for administrative costs? Mr. HANSAN. I think that is correct. That is what I stated, yes,. ma'am. I am not administering the Neighborhood Youth Corps in Cincinnati. I have not been responsible for it. I don't even have an opportunity to monitor it financially or otherwise. This is a failing* PAGENO="0600" 3060 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 of our community. We have been unable to get the Neighborhood Youth Corps sponsors to use the local board of trustees, the Community Ac- tion Commission, and we are very hopeful that the Labor Department will be more insistent on this in the future so that we can become informed about the actual financial operations of the program. The Neighborhood Youth Corps is not a local program in the sense of Community Action. Chairman PERKINS. If the gentlelady will yield to me, I think you were way off base because the administration of the Neighborhood Youth Corps is done through agencies that are already constituted whether it is a day-school program or out-of-school program. I doubt that the cost of the administration of the program would exceed 3 percent. Mr. HANSAN. You could very well be right. I just know in one out- of-school program I think it was something like 12 percent. I don't have any figures for the inschool program. Mrs. GREEN. For what out-of-school program would it be 12 percent? Mr. HANSAN. No, the out-of-school is the one sponsored by a city agency in Cincinnati called the Citizens Committee on Youth. Mrs. GREEN. What do they do? How is this operated? For the NYC? Mr. HANSAN. They operate it. They get the money from the Labor Department. Mrs. GREEN. But you said you know in that one case it was about 12 percent administrative cost. I just want to know what kind of a program would bring the administrative cost that high. What do they do? What do the kids do? Mr. HANSAN. Most of the youth work in public or private non- profit settings, such. as the general hospitals, the city departments, community chest agencies, hospitals, and the like. Mrs. GREEN. And the administrative cost of that is 12 percent? Mr. HANSAN. Again I am sorry, Mrs. Green. I do not have the facts on this. Mrs. GREEN. I misunderstood you then. I thought after the chair- man spoke you said you did not know the total, but you knew that the one out-of-school was 12 percent. I thought that was what you said. Mr. HANSAN. No, that is what the one I did refer to I believe, on memory alone, that I recall asking this same question of the director and I got the information that approximately 86 percent went for salaries, the other 13 percent went for administrative costs. You see, there is another problem. I have not the figures to support whether or not this figure includes the local contribution which is almost all overhead and is allocated in terms of supervision on the part of the host agency. Mrs. GREEN. Who runs Headstart? Does CAP run it? Mr. HANSAN. No~ Ma'am. In Cincinnati it is run by the Cincinnati Board of Education. We also have a very small program run by the Cincinnati Montessori Society for three-what you would call Head- start classes. . Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I think you asked just to testify on the costs so I will hold for later the other questions I have for any of -the witnesses. PAGENO="0601" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3061 Mr. O'HARA. Will the chairman yield? Chairman PERKINS. I was going to call on Mr. Thompson. Mr. THOMPSON. I yield. Mr. O'HARA. I thought this might be useful to the committee. The witness, Mr. Held, read a letter I believe from a priest that contained some specific criticisms of the community action program. I believe it would be useful if Mr. Hansan were to respond to those criticisms. Mr. HANSAN. Mr. Chairman, in answer to Mr. O'Hara's question, one of the pomts that was brought out in the letter of Reverend Stritt- matter refers to a grant my office made to the city of Cincinnati for $100,000 to expand a summer recreation program which locally had been called Operation Cool Summer. For the benefit of the committee, this Operation Cool Summer was planned and approved prior to any racial or riot troubles. Our request to the OEO for summer funds preceded any such trouble and I had written a letter to the city manager as soon as the President's funds were made available asking what the Community Action Commission could do to help the city during the summer. The first response we got was from the recreation department and they asked for more money to hire more people for their Operation Cool Summer. We agreed to that and funded it. Now, the point of the letter that they had nothing but salaries does touch on a problem we have in Cincinnati and that is that in many ways of city of Cincinnati as a city government has done very little to assist on these kinds of programs. You know, I think that is what the Negro leaders were saying when they made the statement in the city council that they are not doing anything. They were directing it at the city council. They weren't directing it at the Federal Government. We put in this money especially for salaries, but we also agreed to pay for fringe benefits, travel, and these other things, but we forced the recreation commission to keep it down to a minimum, hoping they would use their own resources for equipment, supplies, and trucks and whatever other capital equipment. Mr. ASHBROOK. It is my understanding that the poverty program has made the promise in this area, not the city of Cincinnati. Am I incorrect? Mr. HANSAN. That depends on what you are asking, Mr. Ashbrook. The people who were appearing before the city council were asking for improved housing and more jobs, more opportunity. These were the kinds of things they were. These are not all poor people directing these complaints. Mr. ASHBROOK. Maybe we ought to talk to some of these people.. Mr. HELD. Could I take exception? Mr. ASUBROOK. Mr. Held thinks differently. Mr. HELD. I was in the city council, and this gentleman I never have seen in the city council, and he knows what these gentlemen said. Commonsense tells me that if you hire seven people and pay salaries what does that have to do with your appropriated money? Why don't you buy some swings and only hire three people. It is ridiculous. Ted, if you want to testify sit up here and quit prompting this gentleman. Mr. CLANCY. You have been prompting him all afternoon. PAGENO="0602" 3062 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT A~NDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Theodore M. Berry (Assistant Director for Community Action Programs, OEO) : I haven't even said anything tohim. I will speak for myself. Chairman PERKINS. Let's have order. Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Chairman, may I ask the witness if he said that the cool summer program was run by the city? Is that correct? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, that is correct. Mr. O'H~nA. Mr. Chairman, since you called Mr. Hansan up I wonder if he would respond to some of these specific charges, unless he has nothing further he wants to respond to. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, point of inquiry. I refrained from asking further questions a moment ago because I had understood the chairman to say that he wanted Mr. Hansan to con- ~ne his remarks to the amounts spent. If that is not the procedure, then I would have some questions. Chairman PERKINS. That was what I stated but you may go ahead. Mr. O'}L&RA. If the gentlewoman will yield, I didn't ask any ques- tions. I suggested to the chairman that he might want to ask him to respond. : . Mrs. GREEN. I will ask, Mr. Hansan, on the matter about which you were~ just testifying, On the salaries, I don't quite understand your answer to that, that $100,000 was spent exclusively on salaries. Mr~ HANSAN. For example, the city recreation department would like to have had from us, say, a playmobile. The OEO and our own office, andI will ta:ke personal responsibility and riot put it on the OEO, wherever possible, Mrs. Green, we have tried to make the dollars go into salaries rather than into capital improvements or equipment, this sort of thing, hoping that through the local resources, private contri- butions, or local funds, this kind of equipment can be bought. Mrs. GREEN. Then it is correct that the $100,000 was spent on sal- arieS? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, ma'am. Mrs. GREEN. What did the people do who were being paid $100,000 in salaries? Mr. HANSAN. Most of them were young people themselves who were hired and they were hired to assist trained playground leaders, you know, as just another pair of arms and legs. They were assigned to a team. Some of them with less skills than others were given jobs of repairing a tot lot. We have a place where we have a fire engine and a train and these kinds of things and they restored that to good order and manned it. They are the kinds of jobs that the Neighborhood Youth Corps often do. Mrs. GREEN. It would be similar to the NYC, then? Mr. HANSAN. Yes, ma'am. * Mrs. GREEN. How many were employed for the $100,000? Mr. HANSAN. I have to say I don't know that. I am sorry. I have so many different grants that I would be afraid to give you the-just a rnoment. There was an article in yesterday's paper. No, I have a large figure hero, butT could not break down just that $100,000. I am sorry. Mrs. GREEN. Would you break it down as to how many were NYC employees and how many were staff of NYC ? Mr. HANSAN. None of them. What we did on this one was we coor- dinated it through the office of our local NYC program in order that PAGENO="0603" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3063 youth who had been on the waiting list for the NYC would have first crack at these jobs. Wherever possible they were to be poor youth, meeting the poverty definition, and they would be the kind of youth who would ordinarily be qualified for the national youth program but for whom there was not enough room. I think you all know there has always been a waiting list for the Neighborhood Youth Centers. Mrs. GREEN. One statement was that seven additional people were hired. The inference is that that took up quite a lot of money. Is that correct? Mr. HANSAN. Without investigating, the salaries for the youths were in the $1.25 range. Mrs. GREEN. And the adults on the staff? Mr. HAN5AN. For supervisor it was in this case $2. There were one or two jobs for specialists. I think they got the standard civil service rate of $3.75, or whatever it is. Mrs. GREEN. How many staff office positions came out of this? Mr. HANSAN. There was one clerical person on the whole $100,000. There were three specialists, arts and crafts, and music and drama, then there were something like five, seven, supervisors and then the rest were all youth and there was one supervisor to every 10 youths, so in that case we certainly gave supportive assistance to the recreation department as well. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that at this point in the record Mr. Hansen furnish a breakdown of that $100,000 in terms of the people that were employed and the salaries that were paid. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it is so ordered. (The data referred to follows:) SPECIAL SUMMER PROJECT Sponsor: Cincinnati Department of Recreation. Purpose: To provide jobs for youth and to expand "Operation Cooi Summer," :a special Recreation Department program designed for 10 target areas. Personnnel: a. 100 youth at $1.40 hour for 400 hours $56, 000.00 b. 13 leaders at $100 week for 10 weeks 13, 684. 00 c. 5 specialists at $3.30 hour for 400 hours 6, 600.00 d. 1 clerk at $71.90 week for 10 weeks 719.00 Fringe benefits: Society security and workmen's compensation 3, 927. 18 Consumables 13,400.00 Travel 4, 069. 82 Total - 98, 400.00 Chairman PERKINS. Any further questions, Mr. Ashbrook? Mr. ASTIBROOK. No, I think the chairman certainly points out, and I -say parenthetically, the need for a real case study of how much money is being spent in this area. I fully realize you are getting requests from many areas, but I think from what the information we have been able to elicit here this afternoon, it substantiates the need for a field in- vestigation. I would say, and I hope it won't be taken wrong, it cer- tainly is not a threat, not meant to be a threat, but Mr. Ayres author- ized me to say, and the other members of the committee on this side have authorized me to say that we think there should be an investiga- tion in Cincinnati. We hope it will be done on a bipartisan basis, If it PAGENO="0604" 3064 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 is not done on a bipartisan basis a Republican task force will be sent to Cincinnati to investigate. Chairman PERKINS. Let me reply by saying that I will work 100 percent with the leadership on your side of the committee. Mr. ASHBROOK. Thank you. `Chairman PERKINS. And when they say we need a staff investigation in Cincinnati we will go there. Mr. Asm3iiooK. Let me make it clear we did not say staff. We said~ Members of Congress on both sides. Chairman PERKINS. If information discloses that we need an in- vestigation by congressional committee we will certamly abide with the resolution that was adopted by this committee 100 percent. Go ahead, Mr. O'Hara. Mr. O'HArLk. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Held a ques- tion: How long have you been a member of the City Council of' Cincinnati? Mr. HELD. Five years, sir. Mr. O'HARA. Then you have been a member of the city council since before there was a poverty program, right? Mr. HELD. Yes, sir. Mr. O'HARA. In your statement on page 2 referring to how program funds are being spent in Cincinnati, you said, "We local officials are helpless. We have no way of getting this information." Do you really mean that? Mr. HELD. I could answer that. Mr. Clancy made a request. Do you' want to go into that, Don? STATEMENT OP HON. DONALD CLANCY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN' CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OP OHIO Mr. CLANCY. I would be very happy to. Mr. HELD. I will tell you what we ran into, but he can tell you better,. sir. Mr. CLANOY. As to obtaining information, Mr. Chairman, do I have the opportunity to speak? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, sir. Mr. CLANCY. I may sa.y to you, Mr. O'Hara, that for several years' now I have attempted `to secure information pertaining to the poverty program in the Cincinnati area. I have written to what I thought would be to the proper authorities, none other than the Director, Mr. Shriver. I have contacted Mr. Hansan in Cincinnati by letterS have asked' for information from him. I may say that one time I asked just what you are asking right here, as Mrs. Green was interested in, that you are interested in how much of the money that is going into the Cincin- nati area is being paid out in salaries. Now, it would seem to me that that question could be answered by an administrator of the status and stature of Mr. Hansan within a matter of 4 or 5 hours. If my memory serves me correctly, it took meG weeks to get that information from him. I may say that I wasn't entirely satisfied after I got it. Now, we can constantly write to these gentlemen. We can make' phone calls. We can do everything. And just this week I did that PAGENO="0605" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967. 3065 same thing again. I wrote to Mr. Shriver. I requested certain informa- tion. It was delivered to my office at noonday. Now, in obtaining the information it may be of interest to you to know that I specifically asked about the activities of this organization with respect to the Job Corps. I also asked that same question of Mr. Lewis Evans, who is the area manager of the Ohio State Employment Service Division, Ohio Bureau of Unemployment Compensation. I went to Mr. Evans and asked him about the Job Corps activities in Cincinnati. With your kind permission I wOuld like to read you that. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Put.th.e whole correspondence.in. Mr. CLANCY. I will put this into the record, Mr. Chairman, with your kind permission. I will submit the entire letter that he responded .to my request. . . (The letter referred to follows:) " OHIO BUREAU OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION, OHIO STATE EMPLOYMENT SERVICE DIvIsIoN, JUly 25, 1967. THon. DONALD D. CLANCY, . . U.S. Post Office and; Courthouse, Cincininati, Ohio. DEAR DON: This is in reply to your request for information concerning pro- grams of the Cincinnati office, Ohio State Employment. Service related to job training. You recall that the publication of March 1, 1967 indicating training opportuni- ties for the Cincinnati area lists a total of 5180 trainees. This figure represents a total of all programs to March 1, 1967 plus those that were requested but were not approved and those whose starting date fell after March 1. Subsequent to that time, twenty eight (28) programs for 1119 persons have been submitted for the fiscal year 1968, however recent cutbacks of the Ohio allocation will substan- tially reduce the number of programs and consequently the number of trainees available to the area during the coming year. Cincinnati is expetced to receive $864,372 dollars during fiscal 1968. Statistically, thirty one hundred seventy four (3174) persons entered Man- power Development and Training Act vocational training programs during the period July, 1962 to January 1, 1967. Of this number 929 persons dropped out while 569 were still in training. Fourteen hundred ten (1410) of the 1676 gradu- .ating trainees were surveyed by this office to determine labor force status. The survey showed that 689 persons were employed in training related jobs, 319 were unemployed and 402 persons could not be located to establish labor force status. From the inception of the MDTA a total of $1,290,621 in payments `wereniade to trainees, exclusive of the costs of the training facility.. Perhaps the most successful of the MDTA training courses have been those in Auto Mechanics, Welding, Lathe Operators, Milling Machine Operators, Tool and Die Makers and Draftsman (Mechanical). These occupations géńerally have high degree of mechanical operations involved plus being those considered by employers as difficult to fill. On the other hand those occupations where mechan- ical requirements are minimal where judgement factors and/or,, public . contact factors are essential, the training programs have met with little success. The first MDTA program held in Cincinnati was one to train unemployed persons ~to become secretaries. Upon completion of the program' it was difficult to place graduates with the employing community because of the many factors involved `in the job of a secretary. Comments concerning the appearance (dress, make-up, hairstyle, etc.) and abilities (found through pre-employment testing) of the graduates were forth- ~coming from employers. some employers felt the training itself was not proper for the trainee; that it was inadequate and did not provide the trainee with the proper perspective of secretarial duties. There have been no training programs conducted under the MDTA for secretaries since that time even though a high demand persists in the community. ` ` The Urban League of Greater Cincinnati, desirous of fulfilling Its contractual ~agreements with the Labor Department and in an `atmosphere of cooperation -with us, has in the past used our service for the purpose of seeking individuals PAGENO="0606" 3066 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 to place with employers agreeing to employ and train the unemployed. Our service to them and theirs to us is on a continuing basis and is carried out in good order~ A brief analysis of Job Corp activities in the Cincinnati area reveals that 751 persons have been screened and initially considered for referral to Job Corp camps: Of this number, 435 have been accepted by Job Corp and have received'. some training since the beginning of the program early in 1965. The Community Action Commission has referred 36 of these persons to our Youth Opportunity Center, which acts as the exclusive referral agency in Cincinnati. Two hundred forty five (245) trainees have returned to Cincinnati and have contacted the office for assistance, eighty five of these were considered graduates the remainder having completed less than the required time to graduate. Twenty six (26) of the graduates have been placed in training related jobs. The present rate of unemployment in the seven county Cincinnati Standard Metropolital Statistical Area is 3.1 percent. Estimates for Hamilton County range from 2.8 to 3.3 percent depending on the method of estimating used. Should you be desirous of further information, we will provide all that i~ at our disposal as quickly as possible. Very truly yours, Luwis H. EVANS, Area Manager~ Mr. CLANCY. "A brief analysis of Job Corps activities in the Cm- cinnati area reveals that 751 persons have been screened and initially considered for referral to Job Corps camps. Of t.his number, 435 have been accepted by Job Corps and have received some training since the beginning of the program early in 1965. The community action commission has referred 36 of these persons to our youth opportunit~V center, which acts as the exclusive referral agency in Cincinnati: Two hundred forty-five trainees have returned to Cincinnati and have con- tacted the office for assistance; 85 of these were considered graduates,) the remaining having completed less than the required time to grad- uate. Twenty-six"-at a cost of approximately $7,000, mind you. 26. As your committee has so often said to the other Members of the Con- gress-"26 of the graduates have, been placed in training related jobs." Now, wasn't~ it the very purpose of establishing the Job Corps to train these young people and prepare them to go back to the com- munities from whence they have been recruited to obtain employment with the skills that they learned in the Job Corps? I think I heard you, Mrs. Green, say that on several occasions; you, Mr. Thompson, you, Mr. O'Hara. Mr. Tuo3rPsoN. Not me. Mr~ FoRD. Will the gentleman yield for a question? Mr. CLANCY. I will yield, yes; be very happy to. Mr. Fonn. Was it your request or was it the option of the agency that gave you that very qualifying figure on the 26? You know, we never, in evaluating the success of the public schools in Cincinnati, or in Michigan for that matter, say that the school is a failure because the boys who took a course in mechanical drawing don't end up as draftsmen. What weare concerned about is whether or not they are, after the schooling, engaged in gainful employment com- mensurate with the skills that they were given plus what they may learn after they get out. The figure you give is 26 people employed in training-related occupations as, distinguished from the number employed. I think, with all due respect to you, a Member of the Congress who hasn't had this particular figure kicked around as much as the mem- PAGENO="0607" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3067 bers on this committee, you ought to recognize the great difference in discussing this statistic; the difference between the kind of figure you have given if you use that qualification and the generally accepted idea among the public of a trained person available for employment. Do you have any figures or did you ask for figures on how many kids were working? Mr. CLANCY. How many of those were working? No, I just wanted to know how many were brought back into the community and ob- tained gainful employment from the skills that they acquired in the Job Corps. Mr. Fonr. That isn't the answer. Mr. CLANCY. That may not be the answer that you want, Mr. Ford. That is the answer that I want. That may not be the point that you want; that is the point that I want. If you, Mr. Thompson, did not say that, then I respectfully withdraw what I said. I thought I heard you over the year debate on that. Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Clancy, please. I don't recall what I said or didn't say. If you will repeat what you attributed to me, then I will acknowledge whether or not I said it. Mr. CLANOY. What you thought you had said on several occasions in discussing this matter and when matters were before us on the floor, you have indicated that the purpose of the Job Corps was to train youth of this Nation in skills that would enable them to go back to the communities where they were recruited from and obtain employ- ment with the skills that they acquired in the Job Corps. Mr. THOMPSON. I don't know whether I had the opportunity to speak on the floor and say that, but if I didn't say it I thank you for phrasing it better than I could. That is the purpOse. I would add, only in qualification, that I never said that if a youngster is in for train- ing to become an automobile mechanic that he had necessarily to end up as an automobile mechanic. He could end up being a refrigeration mechanic or a motorcycle mechanic. There are a lot of them around today. Mr. CLANCY. He may become a refrigeration mechanic by not going to the Job Corps. Why would he have .to go to the Job Corps if he was going to acquire a job as a refrigerator repairman? Mr. THOMPSON. Your question is rhetoric. This is a unique experi- ence for me. I will sit here and have you cross-examine me at will. Mr. CLANCY. You can do that to me, too. Mr. THOMPSON. But I do think that if you quote me, and I don't remember everything that I say- Mr. CLANCY. I thought I heard you say that. I could be wrong. Mr. THOMPSON. That is all right. You can argue with me all day. It is part of my profession, and yours. That's fine. Mr. CLANOY. May I continue, Mr. Chairman? We started out about acquiring information. Mr. Shriver's office sent to me information that I have not even had the time to evaluate nor did I have the time to read it but in going over it it appeared to me that the figures pertaining to the Job Corps recruitment in Cm- cinnati differed from what we received from the Employment Service. This is what I attempted to indicate to the members of the committee, PAGENO="0608" 3068 ECONOMIC OPPORYUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 how difficult it is to secure information and correct information, and that is all we want, sir, the facts. That is what we are here for. There is no point in my taking up more of your time. If you have made a decision not to make an investigation in Cincinnati, that is well within your prerogative but I am going to say to you, Mrs. Green, that one of the matters in which you have been so interested and I have admired you for, you have known, not only in your own commu- nity but throughout the Nation, there has been a great need for secre- tarial service and you know that this need is becoming increasingly more and more each year. While we are not talking about OEO we are now going to talk about something which this committee has jurisdic- tion over, and that is the Manpower Retraining Act. I can only say to you that I have attempted to secure information on this program that was initiated in Cincinnati several years ago through the public school authority. If my memory serves me cor- rectly, and I don't have the facts in front of me but they took into that program, Mrs. Green, 200 young ladies to teach them to be secretaries. It was a rather extensive training program and it lasted for, I believe, some 32 weeks and I stand to be corrected on the length of the program. But I have been unable to find out from any source the exact num- ber of those trained in that program that are now actively and gain- fully employed in my community as secretaries. I tell you that in Cincinnati there is a great demand for secretarial services at this particular time. There are jobs that are going unfilled and I can't tell you, Mr. Chairman, and I doubt if any one of these gentlemen can tell me on that one because it is not their official func- tion but it is a function of this committee to supervise some of these programs pertaining to manpower retraining. I would like for you to find out for me, Mr. Chairman, how many of these young ladies that were trained in that program are now gain- fully employed as secretaries because this program was at the time it was instituted several years ago. It was one of the first in Cincinnati. It is referred to in Mr. Evans' letter that I am going to submit for the record. I only ask you again, Mr. Held wrote me a letter asking me to re- quest this investigation, call it a review, or a field hearing. Maybe it could be of great assistance to this committee if a committee were sent to Cincinnati and review this program there. Maybe all of us could assist them in some way as far as recruiting. If they talked about over 751 people and only 26 come back after graduating are employed, I think that I may be able ~ help a little bit, maybe not much but a little in recruitment. I may be able to give a little assistance. I would be happy to if I could, Mr. Held would like to, the city council would, so I think our objectives may be the same but nevertheless we would like for you to do this. I think it would be of great benefit and our taxpayers, all they say is they are entitled-I will just conclude and answer any question I can. We all send questionnaires to our constituents. I sent a questionnaire this year and the question I asked about with respect to the war on PAGENO="0609" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3069 poverty program was this: "Do you believe that the war on poverty program has been successful to date in improving conditions for the poor?" I tried to word that as objectively as possibly I could. We have had over 22,000 returns on that questionnaire. Of those who answered that question, 78.9 have said "No," 10.9 have said "Yes," and the other percentagewas no answer. Mrs. GREEN. That is 78.9? Mr. CLANCY. 78.9 percent of those responding said "No" to that question. Mr. THO~rrsoN. 1-Tow many of them were poor? Mr. CLANCY. I would have no way of knowing that. We would like to find this out, how many of the poor feel as stated by Mr. Held. I am not going to state what was said in city council because I was not there but I understand representatives came to city officials and said nothing was being done for the poor. That is why we are here. I would like to know how many of these were poor and responded. Mr. Ti-Io~IrsoN. Your question in the first place, I believe, could be objective. The analysis of the percentage of response would be scientific if you had economic indicators, income, race and other indicators so that you could- Mr. CLANCY. No, I did not and we would like -for you to come to Cincinnati and ask the poor that question that you just asked me. We would like for you to do that. Mr. ThOMPsoN. They are your constituents; you know them better~ than I do. I am intrigued by the percentage reply and I would be more intrigued if it were scientific enough to know how many of those 70 percent were poor and felt they had not been helped, how many had been helped, or how many were indifferent about it. Mr. CLANCY. I could not agree with you more, but you recognize the limitations we have in analyzing a return of a questionnaire of this magnitude and size but this would be v~ry, very fine and I would agree wholeheartedly with you in everything you said. We would want to know does the poor, the underprivileged and the unemployed in Cincinnati feel that this program is assisting them. That is why we are here. There isn't anything further to discuss. That is why we are here. We are asking this committee to help us. Mr. TIioi~IrsoN. Your statistic is indicative of some sort of atti- tude, but isn't definitive in any scientific polling in a sense; is it? Mr. CLANCY. You can be critical of my questionnaire all you want. If that is your purpose you be critical. I would like to break it down and say would you kindly indicate your income on this but there are limitations as far as information is concerned but again we would be very happy if you would come to Cincinnati and ask that question. Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Chairman, about 10 or 15 minutes ago I asked the witness if he were serious in stating that public officials were helpless in getting the answers and I take it his answer is yes. Mr. HELD. Yes, sir, Mr. O'Hara, my answer to that is "Yes." When we get the information we don't feel it is thorough enough or broken down. Mr. O'HARA. I have had opportunity to look over the membership of the board of trustees of the Community Action Commission in SO-084-67-pt. 4-39 PAGENO="0610" 3070 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Cincinnati and I find one of the members of the board of trustees is a man named Walton F. Bachrach, mayor of the city of Cincinnati, and then three city councilmen Myron Bush, ~STillis Gradison, and Thomas Gugen. I don't know if they are from Cincinnati or else- where. Are they members of your city council? Mr. HELD. They are members of the city council and Walton Bach- rach is the mayor. Mr. O'}LUtA. If these people are on the board of trustees and if you were desirous of information it would seem you could ask them to get this information. Have you asked any of them to get this information for you? Mr. HELD. Sir, I would strongly suggest if this committee does not go to `Cincinnati that you have these gentlemen here, although you will have the darndest controversy you ever had in your life. Some of the members of the city council on that board are constantly at odds with Mr. Hansan rightly or wrongly. I came here on my own to ask you. I know what their opinion would be. Two would be favorable. I think I can say this with some assurance. Some would be very favorable to the way it is being carried on now. Councilman Gradison I think I can say with conviction would express great dissatisfaction and agree with many of the things I have said. He knows a great deal more about this than I do. I can't answer for the mayor. Mr. O'H~A. Have you asked them for information and have they been able to supply it to you? Mr. }IEIi. Sir, they don't have any information. Their information will all be different. It is all opinionated information. I think Mr. Hansan will agree with what I am saying. There is a great deal of controversy on this board and it is highly publicized. Mr. O'HAi~&. I am surprised to hear that. I would think the mayor and city councilmen would at least `be able to give information con- cerning a program for which they are trustees. Mr. HELD. I heard Mrs. Green ask the gentlemen a question on breakdown of salaries versus something else-I think I am correct- and if you consider what you got back as information, as a councilman I could not use that-round figures, no accounting of the money, everything in round figures. If this is information it would not be any good to me and I certainly would not trust it. I trust the man, don't get me wrong, but if I were a. businessman I would not act on that kind of information, $78,000 or $90,000. There must be a breakdown somewhere in pennies just like a business ledger. There must be one somewhere and I would be most desirous to see this. Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. O'HARA. I yield. Mrs. GREEN. I would say in Mr. Hansan's defense if he did not bring that paper with him he would not have that detailed breakdown. I would say as a member of this committee, and as a ]~Iember of Congress I often have difficulty getting information so I don't think it is hard for the members of the committee to understand other people trying to get information. I have written letters and I can also think of a report for which I asked comments on. The report was issued in March and I got the PAGENO="0611" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3071 comments on it a couple of weeks ago. So I don't think the members of the committee ought to be blind to the fact that it is difficult to get information. People have a right to have that information, and I think one of our purposes would be to facilitate this and make it possible. While I am critical of parts of the war on poverty, I also think the people who are working with it are working on the most difficult problems in the country and I have great sympathy for them. But if we get the real facts, then this committee would be in a place to make a judgment on those parts of the program that should be left as they are and those parts of the program that ought to be tightened up, those parts of the program where we could get a better return for the dollars we spend. I would think that is what we are all after. Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Chairman, one of the specific criticisms of the program read into the record by Mr. Held appeared in a letter from the Reverend Strattmitter. It has to do with the cool summer program which, as Mr. Hansan has testified, is a program operated by the city recreation commission. Have you attempted to get any information with respect to that program from the recreation commission? Did you have any difficulty in doing so? Mr. HELD. We are in the process of getting it and we have gotten a lot of it. I would like to say one further thing, in fairness to Mr. Han- san when I said it is difficult for us to get information as councilmen and you have the power to do it I was including all of the programs, the board of education programs, the labor programs. For instance, we can't go to the board of education-I don't think we have the authority as city councilmen-I don't think we have- they might give it to us, but I feel you folks could create more confi- dence and get rid of this skepticism than we can. Mr. O'HARA. I think you have a good point there. It has been sug- gested by several that the poverty program should operate through the local city government. It is not unanimously agreed to but that suggestion has been made. Obviously, an effective program cannot be developed with just one-shot information. Do you feel that we would have better local control if the poverty program were to operate through the city government? Mr. FIELD. Sir, I would rather not answer that. I am not prepared to answer it. Off the top of my head I would say no. I would say the more politics you can keep out of the poverty program the better you would be. That is just off the top of my head. Chairman PERKINS. Would the gentleman yield to me at this point? Mr. O'H4RA. I yield. Chairman PERKINS. It is my view here, Mr. Held, and Mr. Clancy, we will cooperate and I will cooperate with the minority and Mr. Ayres, just as soon as he gets back, and Mr. Ashbrook. We will get you all of this information. I think I know what you want. We tried to~ get some of it in the record today. Then if you are dissatisfied, if the minority wants to send the staff down there-but I think the minority will agree with me that we ought to wait until this so-called nonpar- tisan city election is over with down there before we meet again. PAGENO="0612" 3072 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ASHBROOK. Would you hold up enactment of the poverty program until then? Chairman PERKINS. No, I don't think so. Mr. FORD. Would the g~ntlernan yield? Mr. O'HARA. I yield. Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, in looking through the previous exhibit here of the witness's I see exhibit No. 9, which is a memorandum to the community action commission delegate agencies dated May 4. It is now already in the record. It makes reference to the fact-I thought this was interesting since we have had all of this discussion in tile last hour-to the fact that Cincinnati, Hartford, Conn., and Miami, Fla., were the subj2ct of a study made by an independent firm, Daniel Yankelovich, Inc., which does survey work for NASA and General Electric and similar clients and tha.t there is a formal report rendered by that company on these three cities which contains professional opinion sampling of many kinds as well as other evaluation data. I just wondered if we couldn't ask one of these gentlemen from Cin- cinnati if he would make available to tile committee for its records a complete copy of the Yankelovich report and that part of the report which pertains to Cincinnati. I don't think we should burden the record with Miami and Hart- ford, Conn., if it can be deleted without damaging tile report. I would like to ask unanimous consent, if the report is available, that it be included in the record. (See p. 3086.) Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it is so ordered. Mr. O'HARA. May I finish up with a couple of short questions. Mr. Held, I want to say I am pleased that you and the other mem- bers of the city council are as interested in the progress of this pro- gram as you are. I am sure you have been closely observing it. I am not at all certain that we are going to get out to Cincinnati before we go into executive session on this bill. I think tile executive sessions are supposed to begin next week. I w9uld like to ask you if with your observations of the Poverty Program and your knowledge of the city of Cincinnati and its people, if you would have any specific suggestions about the programs in Cin- cinnati, the way they are operated and any improvements that might be made in the program that you would like to see expanded or any programs you would like to see discontinued. Mr. HELD. Sir, I don't know enough about the programs to make any suggestions. Mr. O'HAu~. I was hoping that you might. The Chairman referred to a nonpartisan election that is coming up. What election is that? Mr. HELD. For city council. We run every 2 years the same as you do. Mr. O'HARA. You have my sympathy, then. Mr. HELD. I don't like the way you said that. Mr. O'HARA. If you have to run every 2 years I know it keeps you pretty busy. Mr. HELD. Yes. sir. Mr. O'HAR~&. Mr. Chairman, I have taken up too much time al- ready. I will yield back the balance of my time. PAGENO="0613" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3073 Mr. CLANOY. We will be willing to answer any questions you have of us but we do intend to catch a plane shortly. Chairman PERKINS. I want to assure you we intend to cooperate and we will attempt to get you all of the information you seek. As far as I am concerned, if you want to get up with one of these poor witnesses, I will pay the expense of one and you pay the expenses of another and you pay the other. Mr. AslimiooK. All we want is your usual fair consideration. Chairman PERKINS. We will give you the usual fair consideration. Mr. CLAN0Y. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity and courtesy of appearing before your committee. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection and with the unannnous consent of the committee, we will place in the record at this point vari- ous pieces of correspondence on this subject. (The documents follow:) CINCINNATI, OHIo, August 1, 1967. Representative CARL PERKINS, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.: We urgently request your committee to act favorable on the administration's economic opportunity legislation. We particularly urge continuation of the com- munity action programs believing that maintenance and expansion of youth employment programs are crucial in these days of crises. This is no time for Congress to practice political or economic retaliation against the large proportion of innocent Negroes in order to punish the limited number who have caused and participated in city riots. Mrs. JAMES M. DOLBEY, President, Church Women, United National Council of Churches. Ciru OF CLEVELAND, Julij 25, 1967. lion. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: In view of the grave concern expressed by many Congressmen for the Office of Economic Opportunity, I would like to take this opportunity to relate to you the urgent need I feel for the continued existence of that agency, and the many significant programs it has fostered in our com- niunity. OEO has sponsored programs in the Greater Cleveland area that are responsible for bringing to bear unique, innovative efforts upon the debilitating conditions of poverty. The prospect of the termination or dismemberment of these programs is, at best, alarming: it threatens the whole effort at dealing with pressing urban needs. Cleveland has already felt the effects of substantial reductions in funds avail- able for OEO programs. In the early months of this year, the Community Action Program in Cleveland was forced to terminate several programs and such services as Adult Education (educational opportunities for low-income adults) and the Police Athletic League (preventing/combating juvenile delinquency) had to be transferred to other auspices, which resulted in a severe curtailment of service. This turn-of-events resulted in loss of income to some, a more cynical attitude by many toward promises made and hopes raised, and, in numerous cases, personal and family tragedies of major proportions. I am particularly concerned with the continued vitality of the versatile Com- munity Action Programs. It is through funding for versatile programs that Congress has shown its faith in the local communities and persons involved in the poverty situation to marshall their unique forces in a way to have a maxi- PAGENO="0614" 3074 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 mum impact on the urban poverty problems. These unencumbered funds, respon- sive to local need, have been crucial in Cleveland's progress. Cleveland has enjoyed vigorous and successful anti-poverty programs. On numerous occasions I have offered to appear before appropriate committees of Congress to testify concerning these successes and in support of continued, and enlarged, funding of OEO programs consistent and commensurate with the dem- onstrated need. I renew that offer to make such appearances, and I earnestly request that you schedule a time for me to testify before your committee. Sincerely, RALPH S. LOOHER, Mayor. STATE BAiL OF MICHIGAN, Lansing, Mich., July 31, 1967. Hon. CHARLES E. CHAMBERLAIN, Rayburn Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN CHAMBERLAIN: For many years, the State Bar of Michigan has been in the forefront of Bar Associations in the development of Legal Aid programs-that is, programs designed to provide legal service to those unable to pay a reasonable fee to a private practicing lawyer. With the advent of the Legal Services Program of the Office of Economic Opportunity, this Bar Association took immediate steps to expand its program of Legal Aid, always accepting its responsibility to initiate, administer, and control such programs. Following the strong leadership of the American Bar Association, this State Bar passed a Resolution on December 6, 1965, reaffirming its professional respon- sibility. (Copy attached) We wish to point out we have implemented this Resolution by many positive actions. 1. A special committee of this Bar Association was established, first from among the members of the Board of Bar Commissioners, and later, enlarged to include a strong cross-section of Bar Leadership. (Copy attached) 2. Hundreds of our members have devoted countless hours of time to the development, supervision, administration, and educational aspects of these pro- grams. To date, i.e., June 30, 1937, there have been 15 programs funded entirely or in part by the Legal Services Program of OEO. A list of these is attached, together with the amounts of these grants. 3. In addition, there are two programs in process which, although critically important, have not been funded due to lack of available monies. A brief descrip- tion of these unfunded programs is included on a separate page after the listings of the funded programs. 4. One of our major concerns is adequate continued supervision of these pro- grams. Accordingly, the State Bar of Michigan has just provided, at its expense, for a full-time staff attorney who will be responsible to the Board of Bar Com- missioners for the continuing success of these programs. There is a Legal Services program funded by the Economic Opportunity office in your Congressional District which is being administered by the Greater Lansing Legal Aid Society. This program was funded at a total cost of approxi- mately $37,580, April 1, 1987, for a four month period and will be refunded on september 1,1967, for a full 12 months. Poor people in the counties of Ingham, Eaton, Clinton and Shiawassee will have legal aid available to them through this program. The Bar Associations of all four counties are involved in the program and many lawyers have worked tirelessly to construct a program which would be responsive to the needs of both Urban Lansing and the rural communities in the four counties. We have some concern about the future of these programs. First, the $15,000 maximum salary limit is unrealistic as applied to professional services. Doctors in independent agencies are not subject to such limits; neither should lawyers be. It is difficult, If not downright impossible, to secure and retain an experienced lawyer-administrator for our major offices-such as Detroit, with 21 lawyers- PAGENO="0615" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3075 unless we are permitted to pay a competitive salary in the community. We are asking to be permitted to set salaries* based solely upon a strong showing of the comparative incomes of comparable positions of responsibility in the legal profession. Second, the 10% or 20% local matching fund requirement is unrealistic. We are not suggesting that we be excused from any contribution; on the contrary, we firmly believe that the required local contribution has brought the practicing lawyer into close contact with the people he is striving to serve through the Legal Aid Program andkeeps him directly involved. However, the Legal profes- sion has only its time, knowledge, and cash contributions to use as matching funds. It does not have physical resources such as land, buildings, equipment, etc., as other segments of the community do. With respect to the programs in Michigan, the current 20% requirement converted into dollars represents a minimum of $15,000 to a maximum of $230,000 per program. Remembering there are 15 programs in Michigan representing a 12-month total cost of approximately 3.6 million dollars, our professional resources simply cannot produce the required level of local contribution. The Medical profession is specifically exempt from the matching fund requirement; we strongly believe that the Legal profession should have some relief from this restrictive provision. Third, our experience in the last two years leads us to seriously question the advisability of Legal Services being part of the Community Action Agency (CAA) Section of the Statute (Section 205). While it is true that Legal Services has been semi-autonomous in operation, and has had the full support and complete cooperation of Mr. Shriver and Mr. Berry, we have, nevertheless, experienced serious delays in the implementation of our programs. The delays experienced, in many instances, stem from the fact that even though each Legal Services proposal contains a provision requiring independence and freedom from control of any agency, there seems to be a reluctance to accept this as fact. This independence is, of course, essential, because the lawyer must base his conclusions exclusively upon the best interests of his client without regard to any other considerations. As you are aware, the lawyer is governed solely by the Canons of Ethics of the State Bar of Michigan, as approved by the Supreme Court of this State, and he must, at all times, not only protect the interests of his client, but also the confidentiality of the lawyer/client relation- ship, regardless of who the opposing party may be, including the CAA, OEO, or any other agency of government. In other instances the delay stems from the fact that we must compete with other CAA programs for funds, inasmuch as Legal Services does not have a separate budget. So long as OEO continues as an entity, with its present realistic attitude, we would prefer to stay there, but with an independent status and a separate budget. How-ever, should OEO be dismembered, then we suggest that the type of service and the scope of our program would justify Legal Services as an independent agency in the Office of the President. At the moment, the Legal Services Program is utilizing nationally, approximately 33 million dollars; President Johnson has recommended 47 million for fiscal 1968; the American Bar Association, National Legal Aid and Defender Association, and National Bar Association, together with the National Advisory Committee to OEO on Legal Services, have all rec- ommended 90 million as a minimum to meet the already programmed needs. Legal Services then, is already approaching the total annual budget of the Denartment of Justice and will surpass that organization in size and budget, if the Congress in its good judgment, sees fit to continue this project and expand it so that the goal set can be achieved. A second alternative is the Department of Justice. Our concern here is the question of conflict of interest. Since many of our cases will be against other Federal programs, we will be opposing Department of Justice attorneys. This raises a series question of ethics and independence. A third alternative is to place this program in the AdmInistrative office of the U.S. Courts. This agency now sunervises the operation of the Criminal Justice Act: it should be able to administer the Civil Legal Services Program. No other existing agency appears even remotely suitable. HEW for example. woiilcI be the worst possible position for the program. It would be submerged in a large agency; the lawyers would be in an impossible position so far as PAGENO="0616" 3076 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 ethics and independence of judgment is concerned. An old mistake, corrected many years ago, would be repeated. At one time, a number of local Legal Aid Societies were a part of Family Service Agencies (welfare organizations). We learned painfully at that time that such a relationship was destructive of the concept of Legal Aid, and all Legal Aid Societies have been removed from tne domination of Family Service or any other welfare organizations; they have been made distinct entities responsible to the Legal Profession. The State Bar of Michigan is heartily in accord with the philosophy of repre- sentation on the Legal Service Boards of Directors, of the people whom we are trying to serve. Any proposals made by u.s for independent status presuppose a continuation of this philosophy in the decision-making process of the programs, subject of course, to full recognition that what is being rendered is a legal service; that this service must be rendered in accordance with the ethics of our profession and hence control must rest with the Bar. Finally, if it can be fairly stated that the overall goal of the anti-poverty effort is Justice in the broadest sense to the underprivileged, then Legal Aid, in bringing a knowledge of the law, a demonstration of the law, and a respect for the law, must be given a very high priority. When we convince a person that the law can be an effective weapon for him also; when we prove to him he can get basic justice; when we convince him that pursuing his legal rights and assuming his legal responsibilities is the best path to follow in resolving his problems, then indeed we have helped him take the first step up the ladder leading out of poverty. Our hope is that through your favorable consideration and support, we will be able to accomplish our mutual goal of "Equal Justice Under Law" for all citizens, by providing the required professional representation to handle the overwhelming and justifiable demand from the indigent for legal services. Yours sincerely, WILLIAM M. ELLMANN, President. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF CoMMIssIoNERs, STATE BAR OF MICHIGAN Whereas, the organized bar has long acknowledged its responsibility to make legal services available to all who need them, and this Association has been a leader in discharging this responsibility; and Whereas, the organized bar has extended legal services to indigents for many years; and Whereas, individual lawyers traditionally have rendered service without charge to those who cannot pay; and Whereas, despite this considerable effort of individual lawyers and the organ- ized bar over many decades, it is recognized that the growing complexities of modern life, shifts of large portions of our population, and enlarged demands for legal services in many new fields of activity warrant increased concern for the unfilled need for legal services, particularly as to persons of low income and that the organized bar has an urgent duty to extend and improve existing services and also to develop more effective means of assuring that legal services are in fact available to reasonable cost for all who need them; and Whereas, the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 provides for cooperative pro- grams with state and local agencies through which various services, including legal services, may be rendered to persons of low incomes who need advice and assistance; and Whereas, freedom and justice have flourished only where the practice of law is a profession and where legal services are performed by trained and independent lawyers: Now, therefore, be it resolved, that the StateBar of Michigan reaffirms its deep concern with the problem of providing legal services to all who need them, includ- ing indigents, and to persons of low income who, without guidance or assistance, have difficulty in obtaining access to competent legal services at reasonable cost; and authorizes the officers and appropriate Sections and Committees of the As- sociation. including such additional special committee (if any) as the Board of Commissioners may establish, in cooperation with local bar associations to im- prove existing methods and to develop more effective methods for meeting the pub- lic need for adequate legal services; and PAGENO="0617" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3077 Further resolved, that the Association through its officers and appropriate com- mittees, shall cooperate with the Office of Economic Opportunity and other ap- propriate groups in the development and implementation of programs for expand- ing availability of legal services to indigents and persons of low income, such programs to utilize to the maximum extent deemed feasible the experience and facilities of the organized bar, such as legal aid, legal defender, and lawyer refer- ral, and such legal services to be performed by lawyers in accordance with ethical standards of the legal profession; and Further resolved, it is the responsibility of the organized bar to take such action as is necessary to assure that such programs are initiated, sponsored, imple- mented and controlled by the bar to assure to the client the highest standards of service and the maximum ethical protection, and that the Association's Commit- tees on Legal Aid and Lawyer Referral Service shall, in the absence of the crea- tion of a special committee for the purpose, have primary responsibility for (I) implementing these resolutions and (II) reporting back to the Board of Com- missioners of the State Bar of Michigan. Adopted by Board of Commissioners, December 6, 1965. STATE BAR Co~n~IITTEE ON OFFIcE OF EcoNo~fIc OPPORTUNITY, 1967 Harold H. Bobier, Chairman, Federal Building, 600 Church Street, Flint 48503. Cyrus At Lee, 225 W. Cedar Ave., Gl'adwin 48624. William Barense, 210 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor 48108. John S. Clark, First National Bank Bldg., Petoskey 49770. John W. Cuinmiskey, 465 Old Kent Building, Grand Rapids 49502. William M. Ellmann, 1800 Penobscot Building, Detroit 48226. John Fitzer, Jr., 2138 Dime Building, Detroit 48226. John R. Hathaway, 1001-S First National Bldg., Ann Arbor 48108. Carl F. Ingraham, 950 E. Maple Rd., Birmingham 48012. Charles W. Joiner, University of Michigan Law School, 320 Hutchins Hall, Ann Arbor 48104. Kenneth McConnell, 1001 Pontiac State Bank Bldg., Pontiac 48058. Robert C. Murphy, 500 Northland Towers, Southfield 48076. Roy Rogensues, 22552 Gratiot Ave., East Detroit 48021. Robert S. Rosenfeld, 2961 Guardian Building, Detroit 48226. A. D. Ruegsegger, Suite 1500, One Woodward Ave., Detroit 48226. Anthony Schwartzly, 7628 Gratiot, Saginaw 48603. Weston L. Sheldon, 121 McDonald Street, Midland 48640. Burke H. Webb, Box 13, Marcellus 49067. PAGENO="0618" Funded programs Name of prograsu Area of service Original funding Refunding Counties Major city Total cost Month and year Period (in months)' Local share (percent) Number of lawyers 2 Total cost for 12 mo Data Local share (percent) Neighborhood Legal Services Orarid Rapids and ICent County Legal Aid Society. Wayne County Suburban Legal Services. Oakland County Legal Aid Society. Saginaw County Legal Aid Society. \Vashtenaw County Legal Aid Society. (lenesee County Legal Aid Society. Calhoun County Legal Aid Society. (ireater Lansing Legal Aid Society, Inc. Macosnb Coutity legal services program. Muskegon-Oceana Legal Aid Society. Berrien County Legal Aid Society. Bay-Midland Legal Aid Society - Upper Peninsula Legal Services, Inc. University of Detroit Total Increase, if funded for 12 mo Grand total T)otroit only Grand Rapids_ None Pontiac Saginaw - Ann Arbor Flint Battle Creek Lansing Mouiit Cleinons - - Muskegon Benton Harbor and St. JOseph. Bay City - None Detroit Kent Wayne Oakland Saginaw Washtenaw Genesee Calhoun Clinton-Eaton, Ingham- Shia- wasee. Macornb Muskegon-Oceana Berrien-Cass, Van Buren. Bay-Midland Entire Upper Peninsula-il counties. Wayne $390, 761 128, 648 368, 934 91, 100 86,476 -A08,464 150, 809 87,301 52, 028 235, 524 69,812 71,200 109, 208 217, 119 352, 428 May 1967 Juno 1967 June 1966 June 1967 May 1966 do Juno 1997 May 1966 April 1967 Juno 1960 April 1966 June 1967 May 1966 April1969 October 1966~ - 4 7 12 6 12 12 14 12 4 12 12 8 12 12 12 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 50 0 21 5 10 4 3 2 3 3 4 4 2 2 3 7 4 0 0 0 20 d 20 20 ci 20 10 ~ 10 20 C.) 10 10 ~ 10 ~ 20 20 20 12 0 p-& $1,168,500 241, 480 368, 802 187, 756 81,067 93,858 135, 048 88, 768 1(13, 818 249, 626 64, 671 98, 385 109, 856 220, 056 ~ 360, 000 Aug. 31, 1907. Dec. 31, 1907 Nov. 30, 1967 1)oc. 31, 1907 July 31, 1067 do July 31, 1968 July 31, 1907 do August 31, 1907_ do January 31, 1968. July 31, 11)68 February 29, 1908 October 5967 52,519,872 q,060,826 3,580,698 ~3,57i,69i PAGENO="0619" Approxi- mate number of students Program and period Neighborhood Legal Services (4 m Grand Rapids (7 mo.) o.)_ Oakland (6 mu.) Lansing (4rno.) Berrien (8 no.) Total 761 $390, 648 128, 100 91, 52, 71,200 733, 737 12 mo. $1 172283 220 540 182, 200 112, 740 106, 800 1, 794. 563 Dillerence 1 As of Jamsary 1967, the termination date of all programs funded under sec. 205 of the This figure includes equipment, supplies, insurance, and bonding at the full-year cost. statute must coincide with the end of the fiscal year (program year) of the local corn- Thus, the figure upon which refunding is based is $37,580. munity action agency. Thus, programs funded in the summer of 1966 for 12 mo. were 4 Estimated figure based on maintaining the same level with the allowable 3-percent extended, to the extent the program still had funds, to the end of the community action salary increase. agency's fiscal year. If the program did not have sufficient funds to operate beyond the This figure would increase by $1,060,826, if all programs had been funded for 12 mo. original ternsination date, the program was refunded for a short period and the new (See schedule below:) termination date set to coincide with the community action agency's fiscal year. Any __________________________________ ___________ ____________ ____________ programs submitted after January 1967, were funded short with a termination date coin- ciding with the fiscal year. This means that a new program could be funded from a mini- 9 mum of 4 mo. to a maximum of 11 sno. No program was funded for less than 4 mo. Rather _______________________________ ___________ __________ it was funded for a full year, plus the short period; i.e., Genessee was funded for 14 mo 2 These programs provide for the use of law students in addition to full-time attorneys: $781, 522 91,892 91, 100 60, 712 35. 600 ~ 6 Refunding fignres eliminate nonrecurring items such as furniture, equipment, etc., University of Detroit Law School. but reflect personnel on a full-year basis. The original funding required the personnel to ~ Wayne State University Law be phased in over a period of months. Sclsool and Detroit College of See footnote 5. Law. University of Michigan Law School. Program University of Detroit Neighborhood Legal Services~ Washtcnaw 50 50 50 Source of students 1, 060, 826 01 01 f's C Cs -3 ~--1 PAGENO="0620" 3080 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 PROGRAMS IN PROGRESS 1. The Michigan State Bar Foundation has submitted a program which will assume the responsibility of coordinating all Legal Services programs in Michi- gan. It will also function as the clearing house for all educational material, test case litigation, briefs, and legislation, either prepared by, or referred to, the Legal Service Programs. 2. A program to provide legal aid to the indigent in the 33 counties located north of Mt. Pleasant and south of the Straits (commonly referred to as the NORCAP area). AVONDALE COMMUNITY COUNCIL, INC., Cincinnati, Ohio, July 25, 1967. Representative CARL PERKINS, Chairman, House Education and Labor Committee, ~ Ho use of Representatives, Washington. D.C. Di~n CONGRESSMAN PERKINs: It may be well to note that the Economic Oppor- tunity Act of 1964 was introduced to Cincinnati in early 1965. Since that time hundreds of persons who never before had decent jobs have been hired to work in various phases of the program. Hundreds more have been helped to enter training programs and find decent jobs outside the program. Pre-school children who are never really expected to be able to compete with their more fortunate counterparts in later life are now reading, writing and speaking as well or bet- ter than the average 5-year-old. Little children who have long suffered from mal- nutrition and lack of adequate medical care are now well-nourished and healthy because of programs like headstart and pre-school. Senior citizens who many times feel unwanted and useless are now engaged in healthy productive activities which are not only beneficial to themselves but to others as well because of programs such as Foster Grandparents and Recrea- tional Therapy for the Aged. Many young mothers who have been burdened with unplanned, unexpected and untimely childbirths are now- able to live happier and more productive lives because of the planned parenthood program. Many youth who have been caught in the throes of an urban ghetto community which discourages normal cultural and intellectual development have been up- lifted through tutorial, library and other experiences which have been a part of the School-Community Center program. Adults, who never before have been part of community life, find themselves in leadership positions and willing to accept leading roles in the determination of their ow-n destinies. The merits of this program are, no doubt, well documented elsewhere so there is no need to belabor the point here. One of the founding fathers of the Community Action Commission was the City of Cincinnati. Since this is true it seems utterly stupid for an elected repre- sentative of city government to request information from Washington about programs which the arm of local government he represents has some responsi- bility for operating. Councilman Held seems to have proved on more than one occasion that he is making political hay out of programs which could seriously affect the lives of many people, but this time he surpasses himself. Councilman Held is in no way qualified to speak to the issue of the operation of the Poverty Program in this city, nor is he qualified to speak for any of the persons for whom the program was intended. Any testimony he might give should be regarded as another attempt to ensure his re-election to Council and not an attempt to render a service to the people of this city. Congressman Clancy seemingly has only been concerned w-ith the Poverty Program when community groups began to move toward voter registration. This concern, no doubt, was expressed because he felt that the newly registered voters would not vote for him. He probably knows less about the program than Council- man Held and can hardly speak for those persons for whom the program was intended. If it is necessary to have hearings on the use of Federal Funds to support this program or any other program operating in this community, I w-ould strongly urge that people close to the program be heard. Sincerely, BAUEY W. TURNER, President Avon dale Community Coun eu. PAGENO="0621" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3081 ROCHESTER, N.Y., July 26, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.: In re telegram of 21st, based upon my experience in Treasury and Health, Education,, and Welfare Departments and local experience, I am convinced that the separate independent agency, as now functioning, can be more effective in directing national effort against poverty than to distribute functions to regular departments. Individual program can be transferred as is already being done when experience indicates that functions can be carried on effectively in depart- ments. Actual experience with War Production Board and Marshall plan clearly demonstrated the need for separate independent agency to obtain results in a major specific project which affects many different agencies whose prime con- cerns are in other fields. MARION B. FoLsoM. HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL, Boston, Mass., May 31, 1967. LEE B. MACnT, M.D., Deputy Medical Director and Principal Psychiatrist, Job Corps, Office of Eco- nomic Opportunity, Washington, D.C. DEAR Da. MACnT: I am writing to let you know the high opinion I have devel- oped of the Mental Health Program in Job Corps which you direct under the supervision of Dr. Joseph T. English. As you know in my capacity as Senior Psychiatric Consultant to the Office of Economic Opportunity I have learned a great deal about your program in the Job Corps, and during the past year I have also bad an opportunity to gain experience of the accomplishments and poten- tialities of this program at the grass roots level in my consultation to the Rod- man Job Corps Camp in New Bedford. I believe that the work you are doing in the Job Corps is in direct line with the accomplishments of our mental health program in the Peace Corps over the past six years and represents a most im- portant development in American psychiatry. I have just returned from a conference in England on the training of young people for rescue, relief and service under the chairmanship of H.R.H. Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh and at that meeting I reported on some of your achievements in the Job Corps. I particularly stressed the educational potential of your institution in fostering maturation and personality development of dis- advantaged adolescents and emphasized the significance of this program for the entire field of promoting mental health and preventing mental disorder in the population. The leaders of British medicine and service organizations who were present at the conference were tremendously impressed with your achievements in the Job Corps, and felt that they can learn many lessons from it which might be utilized on their side of the Atlantic. I am glad that as in the Peace Corps psychiatrists have been able to contribute to this educational and health promotional program. It is important that we psy- chiatrists expand our activities outside Our strictly clinical domains to use our skills in fostering the development of personality strength in populations at special risk such as young people disadvantaged by reason of poverty, prejudice and social and educational deprivation, so that they will be better able to master the stresses and strains~ of life in healthy, socially acceptable ways rather than being forced to escape into mental disorder and abnormality. As you know I am currently preoccupied with the major problem of changing the training of our young psychiatrists both in medical schools and in State and Veterans Administration mental hospitals in order to equip them to play a more effective part in the comprehensive community mental health programs which are being so actively fostered at present both by federal and state govern- ments. I feel that the Mental Health Program of the Job Corps provides an un- rivalled opportunity for field work both for the psychiatric residents and their supervisors in the enrichment of traditional training programs and in the devel- opment of new community oriented techniques to supplement Our traditional clinical methods. It is important for psychiatrists to get outside their clinics and hospitals into community institutions and situations where they can deal with people who are having problems of adjustment which are not defined as yet in psychiatric terms, but which if not handled appropriately might easily lead to mental disorder. By providing such an Opportunity spread out over the whole country and therefore potentially available as a practicum in many different PAGENO="0622" 3082 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 psychiatric training programs the Job Corps is making a most important con- tribution. I am most happy to be associated with it and I am pleased to support it in any way possible. Yours sincerely, GERALD CAPLAN, M.D., Clinical Professor of Psychiatry. BALTIMORE, MD., July 20, 1967. lion. EDWARD A. GARMATZ, House Office Building, Washington, D.C.: It is absolutely essential for the preservation of the domestic peace and tranquility that OEO appropriations be increased and the OEO structure remain intact there is massive unemployment among colored citizens in Baltimore City and the counties in the State. Jobs is the number one problem. Urge you use your influence with your fellow congressmen to help prevent riots by alleviating the critical unemployment problem. OEO must be increased and enlarged and the people given hope that you our congressmen understand their needs. Maryland State conference of NAACP Branches: Mrs. Juanita Jack- son Mitchell, President; Walter W. Black, Jr., State Director of Branches; Rev. Richard T. Hicks and Rev. John W. Ringgold, State Coordinators. THE JuNIoR COLLEGE DISTRICT OF ST. Louis, Clayton, Mo., July 17, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS, Chairman, House Committee on Education and Labor, 1?ayburm House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: As President of a two-year, comprehensive com- munity junior college district in the metropolitan area of St. Louis, St. Louis County, Missouri, I would like to emphasize the importance of Sec. 122, "Com- munity Employment and Training Programs", in an amendment to Title I of the Economic Opportunity Act, as an educational institution faced with the very difficult problems of rapidly increasing enrollments with resultant increased needs for professional staff. The Junior College District is moving strongly in the area of sub-professional assistance to the teaching staff. This type of assistance is of great importance for the following reasons: 1. It helps alleviate the shortages of man power in the teaching profession by permitting teachers to spend all of their energies in teaching and thus eliminat- ing the trivia which is often a part of the teacher's responsibilities. 2. It curtails expenditures by utilizing lower paid staff members. 3. It permits people who are interested in education but who would not have the professional qualifications needed for a teacher to become a part of the educational institution. Each of these reasons is important to society and, specifically, as mentioned before, to the teaching profession, to the tax-payer and to the sub-professionals. It is also important to note that our institution and others like us provide career ladders for those sub-professionals which permit them, within their abili- ties, to achieve and to, therefore, come close to realizing their potentials. Educa- tional institutions, certainly, should be in the forefront of this type of activity for it is just as important for them to provide opportunities for their implement to progress, as it is for them to provide educational opportunities for the out- standing student. Your support of this section will be most appreciated. Regards, JosEPH P. COSAND, President. DIvIsIoN OF POLICE, THE DEPARTMENT OF PuBLIC SAFETY, Newport News, Va., July 21, 1967. Hon. THOMAS N. DowNING, Congressman, Old House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN DOWNING: I would like to take this opportunity to express to you my views with relation to the Newport News Office of Equal Opportunity under the able direction of Mrs. N. Downing, Executive Director. PAGENO="0623" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3083 In the year 1966, the crime rate of the City of Newport News decreased 22.5%. I feel, without a doubt, that the fine program instituted in this City by the Office of Equal Opportunity has contributed largely to this rate of decrease in crime. As a result of the activities and programs of the OEO in Newport News, there has been a marked improvement and change with reference to lower income people that this Program is able to come in contact with. The OEO Program was started in this City on February 1, 1966, and at the present time they have an able Staff of 30 personnel. The Neighborhood Youth Corps, which is a part of the OEO Program, has given opportunities to at least 250 Youths to be gainfully employed. The primary objective of the local OEO Neighborhood Youth Corps is to offer Youth proper job experience and proper job attitude, besides the secondary pur- pose of giving the Youth of our Community an opportunity to be gainfully employed. The louths under this Program also attend regular counseling sessions, and information given to me from Mrs. Downing indicates that at the present time there are openings for at least 250 more Youths, and I have been further advised that if further funds were available, at least that many more Youths would be able to be gainfully employed, properly counseled, and also given the opportunity to gain proper job experience and attitude, which would most certainly be an asset to them in their adulthood. I wholeheartedly, without hesitation, endorse the Office of Equal Opportunity as being immensely beneficial to the Community and to the citizens as a whole. I would therefore respectfully request of you that every effort be exerted by your Office to assist this beneficial Program, and every effort be made to obtain additional funds to expand the Program. I feel certain that every effort will be exerted by your Office in this matter, and rest assured that in the event I may be of any assistance, please let me know. Yours truly, W. F. PEACH, Chief of Police. CINCINNATI, OHIo, July 21, 19d7. Hon. DONALD D. CLANCY, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR DON: It was with great elation that I read of your request for a Con- gressional investigation of the anti-poverty program in Cincinnati, and it was with equal dejection that I learned that your request was turned down. I feel that little can be accomplished by summoning executives of the Cincinnati pro- grain to Washington. They will be able to give evidence of projects that look marvelous on paper. but offer little in reality. As you know, I spent five years as assistant pastor at St. Leo's in North Fairmount and just two months ago, I was transferred to St. Bernard's in Win- ton Place and the Mother of Christ Mission in Winton Terrace. All of these places are so-called "target areas" for the anti-poverty program. I am no expert on these things by any means, but I have observed enough of these programs in action to say (and this is about the most charitable comment I can make) that they leave much to be desired. One of the complaints of negroes during the recent riots in Cincinnati was that they have been lied to. It is my feeling that they are right in many in- stances and that the very anti-poverty program which is supposed to help them is actually becoming a cause of increasing discontent. What I mean by that is this: tremendous promises are made about what will be done and statements are forthcoming about the hundreds of thousands of dollars being appropriated for this that and the other thing, and then nothing happens. The effect is the same as when a parent keeps promising his child things and then never delivers. To make this concrete, allow me to cite three examples of what I mean: (1) Shortly after the June riots $140,000+ was designated for the hiring of additional recreation workers to supplement the "Cool Summer" program. In our area of Winton Place-Winton Terrace-Findlater Gardens, seven additional workers were hired. By their own admission, they have been able to do nothing, because they have no funds available for equipment, programs, etc.-all of their appropriation was spent on salaries. The net effect is that seven people collect salaries for doing nothing and the area benefits not at all. (2) The Metropolitan Housing Authority last year promised to set up six "Tot Lots" in the above-mentioned areas. They were to be ready for July 1, PAGENO="0624" 3084 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 1967. When July came, two lots were equipped with inferior swings, slides, etc., purchased at Sears. The equipment lasted one day and collapsed under the heavy use it got. The explanation was given that no more money was available (~16O having been spent for this equipment), but that something would be done next year. (3) I spent an afternoon with Sister M. Cherubine, OSF of Our Lady of Angels High School. She is a diocesan coordinator for federal projects in the poverty schools. St. Henry's School in Cincinnati-in the heart of the poverty area-has benefited so far to the tune of two pairs of shoes! She expresses frustration in her efforts and disgust for deviousness of officials who maintain that funds al- ways run out just before they get to the grassroots level. I cited these three examples to bolster my contention that money is being spent airight and plans are on paper, but people are not being helped. Appropria- tions are being spent on administration and a little trickle is reaching the people. It is notfair to the tax-payers who think they are doing so much for the poor, nor is it fair to the poor as we build up their hopes and then leave them high and dry. I am convinced that by doing this, we are laying the groundwork for the next series of riots, not only in Cincinnati, but throughout the country. Before one more cent is spent on a Federal antipoverty program, w-e should find out where the money is going and why people are not being helped. You're not going to find this out from the people who administer the program. You can find it out only from the people in poverty areas, from the poor themselves and from the people who are trying to work with them. There is plenty for a Congressional committee to see and hear in Cincinnati. provided that they are sincerely interested in learning the truth and then doing something about it. Kindest personal regards and best wishes to you and thanks for all of your hard work on behalf of the people of this district. God bless you. Father LAWRENCE R. STRITTMATTER. [The Enquirer, Friday, July 14, 1967] THE POVERTY PROBE Is NEEDED Despite theanguished cries of "Preposterous !" and "Smoke screen !" that have arisen from some quarters over the forthcoming congressional investigation of the manner in which the antipoverty program is being administered in Cincin- nati, we believe such an investigation, properly intended and conducted, w-ill have good results. And these could apply both to those persons for whose benefit the program is designed and the taxpayers whose money is being expended. One would get the impression from some of the reactions of those opposed to the probe that a witch-hunt is about to be launched. We firmly believe such is not the case. Rep. Carl Perkins (D., Ky.), chairman of the House Education and Labor Com- mittee, agreed to make the field hearings following a request by Cincinnati's Re- publican Rep. Donald Clancy. Mr. Clancy said he made the request at the sugges- tion of Councilman John E. Held. At the moment at least one other city, Phoenix, Ariz., is on the committee's schedule for a similar inquiry. There may be others, according to the commit- tee's ranking Republican, Rep. William Ayres of Akron, who said other large cities may w-ell request reviews. Representative Perkins' committee currently is considering a request for ~3 billion in antipoverty funds, and it seems beyond argument that their efforts would be enhanced by gledning information on how the program is working in various American cities. There have been numerous charges that the antipoverty program suffers from excessive administrative costs, that in many ways it is floundering, that its effects on the betterment of those whom it purports to assist are not what they should be, that indeed the antipoverty program is begetting more poverty. The more airing that can be given to such charges, and their concomitant countercharges, the better, we think. It would seem, indeed, that those charged with the administration of the program would be among the first to welcome inquiry. PAGENO="0625" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3085 The fact that the exact opposite seems to be the case convinces us even more that the congressional review is a good thing. JULY 7, 1967. Mr. WILLIAM WICHMAN, City Manager, City of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. DEAR Mn. WTICIIMAN: You are no doubt aware of a public announcement ap- pearing on Friday, July 7th, concerning the establishment of a "temporary labor exchallge" involving co-operation of several job finding agencies which is to begin Monday at the Community Action Commission. The release indicated that plans had been worked out among four agencies, including the Ohio State Em- ployment Service and contained a plea to all employers who have summer job openings to contact the Community Action Conimission. Our office was completely unaware of this arrangement prior to reading the announcement and did not participate in the planning. The Cincinnati office of OSES, including the Youth Opportunity Center, began planning early this spriněg to particpate in the President's campaign to secure summer employment for youths which was spearheaded by Vice President Humphrey. Much publicity attended the initiation of this campaign and included the mailing of hundreds of letters to local employers to solicit their active par- ticipation in the program and encourage them to list all their summer job open- ings with OSES. The program has been pursued diligently and, of course, is still in progress at the present time. We are also heavily involved in a permanent program of Human Resources Development (HRD), in which the full coopera- tion of other agencies and groups is not only heartily welcome but is mandatory if the desired results are to be achieved. We are not in a position to delegate the responsibility assigned to our agency by the President of the United States and we consider the "temporary labor ex- change" as a dilution of this nation-wide effort, a situation which we have con- stantly tried to avoid in Cincinnati and which surely can only work to the disadvantage of those whom we are obligated to serve. Sincerely yours, LEwIs H. EVANS, Area Manager. STATEMENT OF COUNCILMAN JOHN E. HELD, CINCINNATI, Oitio Mr. Chairman, I am John E. Held, a member of the Cincinnati City Council. Cincinnati is a community of 502,000 people in a metropolitan area of one million people. I am not here today as an official representative of the Cinëinnati City Council, but you can be sure that my queries and observations and my appeal do reflect the sentiments of the vast majority of the citizens of our Cincinnati community. Our City is in deep and serious trouble. The criminal riots and lawless actions of irresponsible anarchists have placed our City government: in a physcial and financial crisis that might well be classified as an emergency. We are told that we are going to have to reduce essential city services before the end of the year to try to continue to make ends meet. Our people-the citizens of Cincinnati-are scared and disgusted. Millions of dollars worth of businesses have been destroyed. Countless employees have been thrown out of work by the destruction. The morale and outlook of the business owners who have survived these riots is bad. In short, Gentlemen, Cin- cinnati is genuinely at the crossroads, and we need all the help we can get. Under these circumstances, to waste one Federal dollar that could be put to productive use in our urban area constitutes a criminal act against the taxpayers. If the war on poverty in Cincinnati is a boondoggle, the public has a right to know it. If it is being used for political purpOses, the public has a right to know. If it has been a hopeless failure, the public has a right to know. If the public doesn't know, if we local officials don't know, and certainly if you gentlemen don't know, there's really very little hope for truly effective action. You, Gentlemen, are the only ones who have the power to get the answers, and you can't get them here in Washington from professional witnesses; you can only get these answers by coming out into our ärča and getting the facts first hand. We urge you to investigate, assess and evaluate the effectiveness of the 80-084-67-pt. 4-40 PAGENO="0626" 3086 ECONOMIC OPPORYUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Federal funds that are flowing into Cincinnati and the programs these funds are supposed to support. We local officials are helpless. We have no way of getting this information. (Read Father Strittmatter's letter and letter to Mr. Wichman from Lewis Evans.) Now it is not really important what I think, but you can be certain, and a field trip would quickly convince you, that a great skepticism and a dark cloud of distrust exist in our City toward the Federally-funded programs that are supposed to be designed to assist the down-trodden, the underprivileged and the unemployed. The drift and business-as-usual methods, the lack of coordination between programs, the reported abuses have no place in our quest for urban survival. EVALUATION OF THE CINCINNATI Co~1~1uNITY ACTION PROGRAM PREPARED FOR OEO SUMMARY STATEMENT With almost half a million people, Cincinnati is Ohio's second largest city and the center of a metropolitan area of 1,313,000. Originally largely settled by Germans, who gave the city an enduring tradition of solid conservatism, Cincinnati is a major industrial center with plants of many national manufac- turers. Despite a high level of business prosperity, the Cincinnati area is esti- mated to have more than 100,000 people living in poverty. The city, located on the Ohio River in the southwestern corner of the state, has traditionally been a gateway to the North for migrants from the South, both Negroes and mountain whites from Appalachia. The city's slums, in which many of these newcomers settle, are easy to see, but with production and employment at high levels the problems of poverty have not aroused general public concern. In 1964, however, inquiries by public and private groups, coinciding with passage of the Economic Opportunity Act, lead to organization of the Community Action Commission of the Cincinnati Area as the local agency for the antipoverty campaign. The Community Action Commission has achieved substantial results since that time: It has created a network of Neighborhood Service Centers, using both new and established agencies, that has touched the lives of about 46,000 people-or almost half the estimated poverty population. Participation in OEO programs by poverty families who are aware of the programs is twice as high (8 out of 10) as for the nine cities studied as a whole (4 out of 10). For the first time, the poor themselves have been actively involved in the planning and operation of programs for their own betterment. As a result of the neighborhood organizations inspired by the Community Action Program, the poor have begun to bring their needs directly to the attention of public authorities. The CAC programs are believed by many informed Cincinnatians to have contributed to the absence of racial/poverty riots or civil disturbances in the Cincinnati area. There have been some weak points in the administration of the Community Action Program: A sense of public relations-of how and when to act to achieve a favor- able public response-appears to be an urgent need. Some of the unfortunate publicity it has received seems, in retrospect, to have been avoidable. At least one effort was made by the staff to obtain Board approval and funds for a public relations program. Some of the most insightful observers urge that new efforts be made to solve this problem. The relations of the CAC with the press have not been good. While to some extent this reflects the conservative nature of the local dailies, there is also evidence that the CAC lacks a sophisticated understanding of the nature of news and of press coverage. The result is poor communication between the agency and information media. This study shows that knowl- ecl~e b~ community leaders is largely limited to Neighborhood Centers and Head-Start. despite an extensive and varied program. Further, awareness among poverty families of CAC prorrams is lower (4 out of 10) than for the entire study of nine communities. The high participation level in Cincinnati, PAGENO="0627" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3087 previously cited, demonstrates the critical importance of good communica- tions with the entire target population. There is need for better evaluation of the effectiveness of the various competing antipoverty programs. The agency itself is now seeking ways to make this evaluation. Relations between the Commission and the Cincinnati city government could be improved. Elected officials, with some exceptions, have not been sup- porters of the programs. Many of the difficulties, however, clearly stem from the fact that the city government is dominated by conservative political ele- ments who are suspicious both of Federal programs and of government ac- tivities in social welfare. Close cooperation has not developed with certain state and local government social agencies. Since these agencies are ultimately responsible to elected government, some of the political problems mentioned in the preceding com- ment apply here also. The situation is further complicated by the reported weakness of some of the agencies in question. While approximately 2 out of 3 CAC staff positions have been filled by target population persons who work as nonprofessionals, the training aiid up- * grading programs are not well developed. A major goal of CAC has been to work with the existing social welfare agencies in ways which will bring about much needed changes of the agencies without losing their cooperation. This "tightrope walking" goal has been only partially achieved. The CAP staff's philosophy-"we want to work with as many of the agencies as we can" -helped considerably. So did the ability and willingness of the Community Chest and Council to work out a blueprint for CAP activities which could become its accepted mandate. A CAC policy which encourages purchases of agency executives' time and maximizes program delegation has also been a helpful factor. But inevitable problems occur with increasing frequency as CAC's budget is reduced and choices must be made which impinge upon the agencies' interests. INTRODUCTION This document is one of nine city reports submitted in conjunction with the report entitled "Detailed Findings of Study to Determine Effects of CAP Pro- grams on Selected Communities and Their Low-Income Residents." The main body of the report which summarizes the data for all nine cities was presented to the Office of Economic Opportunity in March, 1967. The data in this report on the Cincinnati Community Action Program (including Hamilton and Clermont Counties ~n Ohio, and Boone, Campbell and Kenton Coun- ties in Kentucky) is based on interviews with members of the CAA staff, com- munity leaders and more than 600 families living in areas contiguous to the Neighborhood Centers. The community leaders include elected officials, educators, public welfare and housing officials, executives of private social welfare organiza- tions, labor leaders, members of the press, civil rights leaders and businessmen. For a detailed description of the methodology of this report, the reader is referred to Page 218 of the summary report mentioned above. It should be noted that the interviews with members of the CAA staff were designed to provide basic factual data on CAA operations in the Cincinnati area. Interviews with community leaders and families have been utilized to evaluate and measure the impact and achievements of CAP programs. Detailed statistical data on Cincinnati, as well as the other cities included in this report, may be found in Part IV of the summary report entitled "Statistical Reports From OEO CAP's and Communities," also submitted in March, 1967. DESCRIPTIVE DATA The con~munity The area covered by the Community Action Commission of the Greater Cin- cinnati Area falls into three divisions. By far the largest is Hamilton County, Ohio, of which the city of Cincinnati forms the major part. The city has a popula- tion of 499,500; the rest of the county has 437,200 more. Negroes compose 14.3 percent of the total county population. There are 285,400 households in Hamilton County, and it is estimated that 16.5 percent of these have incomes below $2,500 per year, with 28.7 percent below $4,000. In 1960, Hamilton County had an unemployment rate of 4.0 percent, somewhat lower than the national rate of 5.6 percent. This rate was higher than 53 percent of the counties in the United States. These statistics reveal, in summary, that the poverty problems of this area are not as acute or extensive as those found in some of the other communities studied. PAGENO="0628" 3088 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 One other Ohio county is included in the CAO area: Clermont, immediately to the east. Hilly and rural, with a population of only 93,100 people, Clermont is essentially part of Appalachia. The Negro population is only 1.2 percent. There are 24,700 households. The proportion with annual incomes below $2,500, and below $4,000 is similar to Hamilton County (29.5% below $4,000). The 1960 unemployment rate was also similar, 4.8 percent. The county is lacking in public facilities-it has no hospital for example with its residents being advised to make use of hospitals in surrounding counties-and is seeking industrial development. Three Kentucky counties across the Ohio River from Cincinnati also come under the Community Action Commission. Among them, Kenton, Campbell, and Boone counties have a total population of 243,000 people, with 71,100 house- holds. The proportion of households in these counties with less than $4,000 annual income is also just below 30 percent. The median income per family is $5,363, and 16.4 percent of the families have incomes below the poverty level of $3,000. About 9.3 percent of the children under 18 live in one-parent or substitute homes. The median educational level is 9.4 years of schooling. Figures for two of the three counties show 2,200 "dilap- idated" dwelling units. The unemployment rate in Campbell County in 1960 was similar to the Ohio counties, but was much lower in Boone (2.3%) and Kenton (3.6%) counties. There are only about 5,000 Negroes living in these three counties or a little over 2 percent of the population. Kenton County is more than 3 percent Negro, the others below 1 percent. About 61 percent of the Negroes are said to be engaged in menial jobs. Judging from figures for Covington, the largest city in the area (50,000 population), their standard of living is markedly lower than that of their white neighbors. Some 15 percent of the Negroes in Covington have family incomes of less than $1,000 a year, as compared to only 4 percent of the whites. The Negro median family income is $3,288 a year, over $2,000 less than the median for Covington's white families, and barely above the poverty level. This study was made at a time when Cincinnati was enjoying a high level of prosperity. Unemployment had fallen sharply and industry was actively seeking workers with job skills. It was also a time when, in the eyes of a number of local leaders, Cincinnati was placing renewed emphasis on its traditional conservatism. Variously attributed to the ethnic or religious background of the city, the city's conservative outlook is viewed by many residents, regardless of their own posi- tion, as the most distinctive characteristic of Cincinnati. Two recent events reinforced this feeling. In November, a liberal Congressman, one of the founders of the Community Action Commission, had been defeated for reelection by a more conservative opponent, and conservative candidates in gen- eral had made a notably good showing. Secondly, two successive referendums had turned down a special school tax levy that the Board of Education had declared essential to pay for many school programs-among them a number of OEO anti- poverty programs. The question of whether these would now have to be suspended because of the inability of the School Board to make the required matching payments was unanswered at the time the field work for this study was done. Since that time, one Board of Education program has been transferred to ESEA funds, one has been dropped, and two are being carried on with the local contribution made up by services in kind. The CAA The roots of the Community Action Commission predate OEO itself. Early in 1964 a committee of the Cincinnati City Council held hearings on the extent and nature of poverty in the city. This was followed by a study of poverty prob- lems carried out by three task forces under the auspices of the Community Chest and Council. When OEO came into existence, the Committee's proposals to a large extent became the program of the Community Action Commission estab- lished as the local OEO agency in the fall of 1964. The City of Cincinnati, Hamilton County, the AFL-CIO Labor Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the Board of Education, and the Community Chest joined in setting up the Commission. Funding The Commission received its first Federal funds in January, 1965. Various grants and renewals provided a total of $3,276,000 in Federal funds for 22 Title II programs and one Title IT-B program. These ran for varying periods throuoh September, 1966. PAGENO="0629" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3089 As of October 1, 1966, the Commission received a total of $3,745,000 in Fed- eral funds to operate a total of 27 Title II programs for the 12 months through September, 1967. Administration costs run 6 percent of the total. The largest amount, about 50 per cent of the total, goes to twelve programs for neighborhood services and organization. About 26 per cent goes to five education programs, and some 10 percent to five health programs. The balance, about 8 per cent, goes to four other programs, including Foster Grandparents, Legal Services, Talbert House (for paroled prisoners), and Small Business Development. All programs except administration are delegated to other agencies, so 94 per- cent of the Federal funds go to programs that fall into the delegated category Structure of the UAA The Board of Trustees of the Community Action Commission of Greater Cincinnati is its governing body, with an executive committee that provides more immediate direction. There are 40 board members. The founding groups noted in an earlier section are each represented by a single trustee, two repre- sent Clermont County, and six others represent the three counties in Northern Kentucky. (The counties other than Hamilton also have local Community Action Councils but these are subordinated to the overall Board.) The poor of the area have fourteen places on the Board (25%). At present, eight of these are chosen by the Metropolitan Community Action Board, an advisory body that is composed entirely of representatives of the poor. Three members at large were originally chosen as representatives of the poor and have been accepted by the MCAB. These seats will eventually be filled by election. In addition, two of the Kentucky representatives and one from Clermont County will be elected by the poor. The balance of the trustees are members at large drawn from community and professional leaders and interested groups. The policies voted by the Board are carried out by the Commission's Executive Director and his staff. There is an Assistant Director for programs in Clermont and Northern Kentucky and Deputy Directors for programs and neighborhood services. Altogether, the administrative staff includes nine full-time persons, in- cluding executives, and six part-time. The chief voice of the poor, other than representatives on the Board, is the Metropolitan Community Action Board, elected by the ten local Neighborhood Councils in target areas. The trustees have given the MCAB responsibility for reviewing and making recommendations on any project involving the expenditure of funds. The Neighborhood Councils, informal bodies in which membership is open to people who live and work in the local area, screen and review local projects. Representatives of the poor are reported to take an active role in policy discussions and decision making at all levels. The poor are also represented to varying degrees on the boards of almost all the private delegate agencies. All of the board members of the Lincoln Heights Neighborhood Services program, for example, are drawn from the area, as are almost all of those on the Steele neighborhood project board. In other cases, e.g., Legal Services, the proportion is generally about one-third. In a few agencies, the poor have their own advisory committee. The Mayor, the Director of County Welfare, three city councilmen, and the President of the Cincinnati Board of Education all sit on the Board of Trustees. Nevertheless, as noted elsewhere, relations with the city government have not been close. The Director of Welfare and one of the Councilmen, who is a Trustee, have been persistent critics of the CAC operation. Use of nonprofessionals There are nonprofessionals working in all but three of the CAC programs. As the programs are set up, there are places for about 630 full-time and 365 part- time staff members. Of these, about 370, or 59 percent, of the full-time jobs, and about 250, or 70 percent, of the part-time places, are described as nonprofes-. sional. A CAC survey of the income earned by staff members the year before they came to work for CAC showed that 39 percent of those answering had made less than $3,000. A number of staff members did not reply to this question, how- ever, and not all the nonprofessional posts were filled at the time the survey was made. The training of nonprofessional staff workers varies from program to pro- gram. Employment Specialists are trained by the Commission itself in a four week course at CAC headquarters. Each of the Neighborhood Service Centers trains its own nonprofessionals with in-service courses for varying lengths of PAGENO="0630" 3090 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 time. Training for Head-Start Teachers Aides is handled by Head-Start, which contracts with local universities to provide one to two week courses. A few Head- Start aides attend an eight to ten week course at the University of Michigan. Although GAG has asked repeatedly for training funds, these requests have always been denied. The organizing principle of the CAL The leadership of the Community Action Commission views its activities as equally concerned with services to the poor and organization of the people in the target areas. As pointed out by a senior official, projects and neighborhood organization go hand in hand: people can only be organized in relation to a specific activity. From the emphasis placed on the Neighborhood Centers and services by GAO, it is clear that organization plays a major role. (This is also reflected in the com- plaints of a political leader that GAO "shouldn't stir up the neighborhoods so much," because it "just arouses unrealistic expectations.") An important aspect of the GAO operations is its deliberate effort to work through and buy services from existing social agencies whenever these can handle a project. This has obvious advantages in winning the cooperation of the agencies, which are closely tied to the community power structure. It also helps pave the way for the eventual establishment of some programs as a permanent part of local social welfare activities. On the other hand, there has been some criticism that the program is too much under the control of the profes- sional social workers. Some critics believe that this group lacks the administra- tive skills required. Others criticize the social workers as unwilling to seek basic changes in social patterns they believe needed to remove the causes of poverty. Relationship of the CAL to other OEO programs in the Greater Cincinnati area The Community Action Commission handles recruiting for the men's Job Corps, and there are a number of other antipoverty programs operating in the Cinicnnati area with which the Commission has a cooperative relationship. Among these are the Tn-School Neighborhood Youth Corps, administered by the Cincinnati Board of Education, and Out-of-School NYC, administered by the Citizens' Committee on Youth. The latter non-profit agency also sponsors PEPSY-Preparation and Employment Program for Special Youth. The Youth Opportunity Center, admin- istered through the Ohio State Employment Service, using United States Depart- ment of Labor funds, has been fed young clients by GAO. In addition, the Commission cooperates with a Title V Work Training Pro- gram, administered by the Hamilton County Welfare Department, and has pro- vided assistance to an Upward Bound project at Eariham College. Finally, GAO has contributed funds and effort to the applications being de- veloped for pre-maternity health programs of HEW. IMPACT AND ACHIEvEMENTs5 Effect of the Cornmnnity Action Commission in Cincinnati The view of GAG Officials.-"CAG is a system by which the needs of the poor are met-either through OEO or otherw-ise." Expanding his one-sentence sum- mary of the agency's role, a GAO senior executive described it as performing a triple task: To gather information, about the hard-core poor in order to develop under- standing of their needs and problems; To help the poor to solve these problems; To encourage maximum participation by the poor in the planning and operation of the programs designed to help them: "CAC provides the only meaningful, extensive involvement of the target population." In administering OEO's antipoverty funds, he explained, GAO matches social services to the needs of the poor. Where existing social welfare agencies are competent. CAC works through them, stimulating and coordinating their activi- ties. The Legal Aid Society and the Cincinnati Board of Education, for example, *All the community leaders interviewed in this study are residents of Cincinnati, and their comments concern the city and the adjacent sections of Hamilton County. In addi- tion, the Clermont County antinoverty programs are described by a CAC staff member who is narticularly familiar with tham. To avoid confusion. his comments on Clermont County have been set apart in parentheses. PAGENO="0631" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3091 are contracting agencies. Where no social agency exists-or existing agencies are not competent to meet the need-CAC creates a new agency, for example, the new Neighborhood Services it has set up in some target areas. Has CAC succeeded? "In a sense, our mere existence is our success, the CAC executive declared. Enumerating the agency's activities, he pointed out that the Commission operates $4 million worth of OEO programs, and has a hand in programs costing $4 to $5 million more, under various titles of the OEO Act. He listed some programs established by the agency: a dental clinic in the Cincinnati schools, preeducation programs in Cincinnati and adjacent Lincoln Heights in which 100 nonprofessional Teachers Aides are paid for by OEO and 150 more by Cincinnati; a Montessori program demonstrating very advanced teaching techniques for preschool children; and an OEO grant, matched by the Legal Aid Society, to provide legal services for the poor. The executive empha- sized that the CAC urged the residents of the target areas to serve on the Boards of the participating agencies, while encouraging the agencies to hire indigenous people as nonprofessional workers in the programs. CAC also provides a center for exchange of information and the interfitting of antipoverty programs, the respondent pointed out, and coordinated Manpower Services-job training, job development, and employment. "The Commission is a gadfly for the community," he declared, "pointing out to the social agencies where there are needs, duplicated efforts, examples of institutional rigidity." (The CAC official concerned with Clermont County described the agency's role there as "primarily to move the people of poverty out of poverty." To do this, the CAC office concentrates on coordinating public, private, and other groups in an all-out effort to improve economic conditions in the County. CAC does not operate programs itself in Clermont although it intends to in the future. (The respondent declared that "the program has been mighty successful-one of the best. It took six months to get things started-then the operation snow- balled." Among other things, the County, a depressed area, has raised money for an industrial park, established an Adult Education Council, and started a recreation program. (The CAC official explained that he had gone to Clermont County as Cincin- nati CAC representative in the face of considerable local opposition. Many Cler- mont people had wanted the County to have its own, independent community action agency and to hire their own director. "Now," he declared, "there's a new feeling of unity with Cincinnati and Hamilton County, which were formerly dis- trusted." The Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce is assisting Clermont to obtain new industry; the Cincinnati Hospital Council is helping set up the Clermont Hospital Program. ("There's a new attitude in Clermont, which a lot of people attribute to the Community Action Program.") The View of Other Uonimwaity Leaden-Interviews with community leaders acquainted with CAC and its programs found an overwhelming majority prais- ing the OEO agency as a positive benefit to the city. "Worked out well," "benefi- cial," "positive effect," "of significant value, both economically and socially," were typical of the majority's comments. Although these respondents had many suggestions for improvement, they agree on the validity and success of CAC's basic approach. Two respondents, however, sharply challenge this favorable view, pointing to what they believe are fundamental flaws. Since their viewpoints are poles apart, however, they arrived at quite opposite conclusions about what is wrong-pro- grams versus execution. Singled out for repeated praise by the majority was the impact of the CAC programs on the poverty population. "The programs have made people in the poverty areas more keenly aware of the possibilities for improving their lives," a school official said. And a businessman: "CAC has made these people aware of their own identity and power-of their own importance as people." A social worker declared: "There's been a stirring in this community such as I've never seen before. In the city as a w-hole, there is a more active concern at the neigh- borhood level about a variety of problems-a sense that `Things will happen if we speak out.' This is not just in the target areas but all through the city." A labor leader declares that the CAC programs "have changed the attitude of the target population from apathy to action and self-help," and he went on to give an example from his own neighborhood, "In the past, potential leaders have had only marginal opportunities-running ball clubs and that sort of thing. PAGENO="0632" 3092 ECONOMIC OPPORTITNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The neighborhood as a whole had done nothing for itself-just received hand- outs. OEO got them aroused about such problems as housing. The Neighbor- hood Council developed a plan for moving people into new housing before tearing down their old houses for urban renewal. This seems obvious but it hadn't been proposed before. Now the neighborhood people proudly give advice to others on how- to get things done." A social worker said that, "These neighborhood organizations mean that you can no longer control the neighborhoods-as they were previously controlled by the Community Chest, w-hich in turn is controlled by the power structure." A civil rights leader said that the programs had "given many people in the poverty areas an opportunity to project themselves through such activities as serving as block workers. They are stimulated to get more education. At the same time the programs have brought a lot of money into Cincinnati and raised the economic level of Negroes in the city." A labor leader declared that the CAC programs "meant that Cincinnati, unlike some other cities, did not have poverty riots last summer." A newspaper reporter qualified her praise: "Overall progress has been made-I frequently see examples of people who have gotten jobs as a result of the program-although the Welfare Director denies that OEO has reduced welfare costs, attributing a slight decline in relief payments to the high level of employment. "Many helped by OEO might have moved ahead anyway-those active in the Community Action Programs were already local leaders before the antipoverty programs started. However, the programs have certainly developed more leaders. "I am disturbed because the only Negroes I see getting ahead are women. Progress among men is vitally important to the success of the antipoverty program." Several respondents saw the programs as educating the public. "They have made the community aware of the existence of poverty in Cincinnati," a business- man declared. A housing official said "GAO has made a marriage between the average citizen and the underprivileged." A lawyer felt that the effect of GAO was generally good "although the pro- grams were not too well thought out at the beginning. They grew like Topsy." They are important "in the sense that it would he pretty bad if the programs were abandoned." According to a businessman, staffing the agency was a prob- lem at the outset when GAO was trying to get off to a fast start. He declared emphatically that "GAO has done a lot-but now it could do a lot more because its people are becoming better trained after iS months of operation." While believing that "some spots could stand some brushing up," this respond- ent felt that the programs had worked out well. "The programs had been given a black eye with some people who object to government-but actually OEO gives self-help programs, not doles or handouts." "There should be better administration and a more realistic approach," a newspaper reporter declared. "Give the social workers less say-they don't know how to do things in a business-like way. GAO should have a Board of Education type of administrator-a professional administrator with a background in social work." This respondent added "GAO is always bragging about how much Fed- eral money it obtains. You wonder if they are getting their money's worth." On the other hand a prominent attorney said flatly that "I am confident of the ability and integrity of the local GAO administration." A businessman de- clared: "I am not critical of GAO operations. They do well. There is very little political influence in the operations." A social worker said that "The politicians have been shown that the antipoverty campaign cannot be politically controlled." And a civil rights leader felt that "The programs are pretty well handled now, within the budgets available to work with." A civil rights leader said that GAO should demand a more creative use of OEO funds by the Board of Education, "including teacher training in the cul- ture of poverty." One respondent urges more use of nonprofessional workers- but with more training for them. Another declared that both the professional and nonprofessional needed better training. Several respondents urge enlargement of the programs. A labor leader de- clared that OEO should "ask for more money-the programs are underfunded all around." Many suggestions concern specific programs. An official wanted expansion of job training, on a housing project basis, to develop skills and creativity. More programs in housing, urban renewal, and housing rehabilitation were PAGENO="0633" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3093 urged by a labor leader. More training in job skills-and more job procure- ment-were supported by several respondents. A union official wants more emphasis on education-"the whole program is too skimpy." A lawyer would like to see more experimentation. This respondent also urges greater local con- trol of how antipoverty funds are spent. "For example, twice the money was set aside for Legal Services as the Bar Association recommended. The programs are greatly affected by Federal controls, congressional appropriations, and so forth." Public relations is a weak point in the program in the eyes of several of the community leaders. An elected official declared that GAO had made tactical errors and "should handle its public relations with more sophistication." A col- league agrees: "CAC should cultivate the press . . . and make more meaningful and concise response to criticisms." And he urges that "the programs should be projected in more meaningful terms. Lack of this has been a great shortcoming of the agency." A labor leader suggests that GAO should use publicity to gain more acceptance of racial and social differences in the community and to empha- size racial integration in housing. A businessman noted that press reports had given GAO unfavorable publicity. "In newspaper stories about CAC Board meetings, arguments over a new public relations program crowded out the approval of important programs." This respondent sees need for "a comprehensive public relations effort, through all media, to make the average citizen of Cincinnati aware of the needs of the poor-which he isn't now." He also suggests a stepped-up effort to have people visit the poverty pockets, see how the poor live, learn about their problems. "Not 4 out of a 100 Cincinnatians-outside of the poor themselves-are familiar with the needs of people in these poverty areas." This is a big problem, a moral responsibility of the community, be declared-"People in the suburbs just drive in and out on the expressways and never see where the poor live." A labor leader urges another type of information project-"a clearing house of information about the programs." He explained, "You should be able to find out what's going on by visiting just one place, instead of having to go through a maze of doors and be passed along from person to person-frequently by receptionists who don't know very much about the programs. Information must be accessible to the community." He does not believe that CAC is equipped to carry out this function. Better evaluation is another need brought up in several interviews. "One thing that bugs me," a businessman declared, "is the difficulty of measuring progress. Perhaps it's because we're dealing with people. There was an evaluation committee when GAO started, but it never functioned. Maybe it can't be done- or at least not except over the long-term." What he would like, he went on, "is to have social scientists from the universities and planners from industry work- ing together at finding a way to measure results to evaluate. This is becoming particularly necessary as OEO withdraws and local people must decide which programs to keep." A school official declared emphatically: "Before any changes are suggested there should be a complete analysis of needs, using both profes- sionals and nonprofessionals, people from the community at large and from the poverty areas. This should set priorities for setting up new programs and eliminating old ones. This study would provide a breathing space for the programs." A. top union official suggested other research studies. "There shouTd be more job surveys to find out what skills are really in demand, so that we can match training programs to jobs. Take beauticians, for example-when does a community become saturated with beauty shops? Small shops don't give their workers decent pay, so there's a tendency for girls to onen their own-and a tendency for them to go bankrupt. Training a person in the skills for a specific job is not the same as teaching a person how to run a business." The respondent developed his point further: "That's why the suppOrting services offered by the social agencies should be enlarged. It's not enough just to give a man job skills. When he makes a paycheck he's likely to overspend. get his wages garnisheed. He doesn't understand the situation." The union official emphasized his conclusion: "Preparation for metropolitan living is as important as job skills for these people, and is greatly needed." A major critic of GAO is an elected official-in private life a businessman- who was one of the founders of the Community Action Commission. He admits that it has useful achievements to its credit yet believes there were basic weaknesses in the agency's approach. His ambivalent relationship to the agency is reflected in the fact that he was listed by various respondents both as one PAGENO="0634" 3094 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 of the most helpful in developing the programs and as one of CAC's leading opponents. His criticisms fall into three general sectors: tactics-the way OEO set up the Community Action Program and its relation to existing public and private agencies; priorities among the various programs; and the basic approach to dealing with the people in the target neighborhoods. "The general result has been good-CAC has made a major contribution in stirring interest in the poor," he declared, "but a lot more could have been done" if CAC bad been set up differently. CAC should have spent a year at the outset to plan the programs "instead of giving out money quickly to whoever applied." Specifically, CAC- Should have tied its activities in more closely with city departments. Should have been "less critical, less of a thorn in the flesh of the existing public and private agencies. Now GAO wants to work with these agencies and runs into resentment that is hard to overcome." Should have worked more through the state agencies instead of going around them-"This would have helped to strengthen them." "Although I realize that the poor, particularly Negroes, have unmet needs," he said, "programs for the poor are only one of Cincinnati's problems. Only the most worthwhile parts of the poverty program can be continued. The Com- munity Action Commission should have recognized that it would have to set priorities to save the best programs. Now they'll wind up cutting out many good programs." On this question of priorities, the respondent was particularly critical of the Neighborhood Centers. "Less should have been spent on this and more on jobs, health, and services," he declared. This criticism is closely related to the respondent's unfavorable view of the oprangization of target people for community action that took place at the Centers. "Don't stir up the neighborhoods so much," be urged. "It just arouses unrealistic expectations. A lot of time and effort are required to argue against the demands of these people. In the end the poor aren't any happier and we bavc~ just used money unproductively." The other major critic has a diametrically opposite viewpoint. A. civil rights leader declared, "The individual services are being more effectively offered and are producing better results, but I originally expected that OEO would offer a power base for organized action-and this generally has not happened. Com- munity organization has been secondary to the extension of individual services to the poor." He concedes that the Agency has set up neighborhood services, but asserted that CAC had not tried to pull people together to take their own action. "OEO programs are not reaching people at the grass roots," he declared. "The community organizations and councils tend to be tea-party type operations. The result is increased social welfare paternalism." Social workers, he feels, had too much say: "The control that the social wel- fare agencies have over the neighborhood services should be drastically limited." he declared. "Perhaps I'd even put them right out of the picture and have indigenous advisory committees instead." Reactions of Various ~eginents of the Cincinnati Community to GAG Activi- tics.-The respondents were queried about the reaction of ten individual seg- ments of the community, as well as the general public, to the OEO programs. Of these groups, education officials and the social welfare agencies are consist- ently rated the friendliest and most cooperative. The press and the public- perhaps a significant linkage-are considered to be the least friendly. The role of elected officials is the most controversial, with respondents giving them both top and bottom ratings. The top leadership of CAC describes Cincinnati's ELECTED OFFICIALS- considered as a group-as basically against the OEO program. A majority of the City Council are seen as generally critical of Federal programs with a conservative outlook typical of Cincinnati. Community leaders on the other band see Cincinnati's elected officials as having a somewhat friendlier attitude. More than half the respondents state that the officials have responded favorably to the needs of the program. Those who are themselves active in political life consider that this group have been real spark plugs but add that "the tide has changed and feelings are now becoming negative." PAGENO="0635" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3095 A social worker says that CAC has been successfully kept out of politics-a a view that is backed by several respondents. Another declares that "as a result of OEO efforts, the climate for acceptance of other Federal programs has been immensely fostered." "Somewhat grudging" is the way a labor leader describes the attitude of this group. "The city was slow' to participate in the programs. Republicans opposed them in theory and the Democrats were ineffectual. The program may be in trouble from now on as attitudes change." A civil rights leader also believes that party feelings prejudiced Republican elected Officials against the programs, but nevertheless felt that "The city admin- istration has generally taken a middle-of-the-road stand." Another civil rights official sees the city fighting the pr1ograms, while Hamilton County officials have been more cooperative. In the eyes of at least one elected official, his colleagues have "not had much real effect. It takes a lot of time to keep up with this program," he added, "and most don't do it. A few' have, and they are opponents." (In contrast, CAC leadership says that the elected officials in Clermont County have responded favorably to the antipoverty program. They are described as having put up cash, space, and such services as bookkeeping to make up the required local 10 per cent contribution. Office holders attend meetings and other- wise show an active interest.) In contrast, Education Officials are described as one of the friendliest commu- nity groups. A senior CAC executive views the educators as spark plugs. "They spurred the effort and scrambled for school-related CAP programs. What's more, they have shown an ability to develop their own programs." Almost all the community leaders interviewed see the educators as friendly and responsive to the program and about half of them feel that this group has been outstanding in their cooperation. A labor leader describes some school offi- cials as "enthusiastic-some from a sense of responsibility, others because they want to get themselves in on the act." Several respondents, including all the private social welfare officials, describe the School Board as having opposed the antipoverty program at the outset (as well as such things as Federal support for "free milk and free lunches"). "Slow and reluctant," "have dragged their feet," "had to be coaxed and led by the hand," were some of the comments. While some believed there had been a basic change, there were fears that there might be more difficulties ahead because of pressures on the school budget. An elected official saw' the educators "now be- coming negative as the school system has had its dollars cut." (CAC leadership gave a much more mixed report on Clermont County educa- tors. The County School Superintendent reportedly gave little support to the programs after seeing that OEO grants weren't coming his way. Out of nine local School Boards, two were described as having been outstanding supporters of the program, four as having responded to its demands, and the remaining three as having fought it.) CAC leaders find Cincinnati Health Officials at best lukew'arin to the anti- poverty program. An example cited is the long delays encountered in trying to get the Public I-Iealth Council to play its agreed part in submitting a proposal for health projects to HEW. Among the other respondents, all but one describe local health officials as at least not opposed to the program~, while several consider this group as enthusiastic supporters. Two elected officials call the health people "spark plugs," but one notes that "Their past director was excellent, but has recently quit be- cause of a lack of money for his programs. At the Board level, there has been resistance." This resignation was mentioned by several respondents as an un- favorable factor. Several respondents agree with the view' expressed by one that health officials had "made a minimal response and health is the weakest field of OEO activity." A labor leader made a further point: health officials "are conscious of the power structure and reluctant to take forward action on their own." One re- spondent declares that this group is ultraconservative and has fought the program. A civil rights leader said that the Health Department as a whole was "pretty good," but complained about opposition to having Negro dentists serve in health clinics. In the eyes of a senior CAP executive, Cincinnati's Welware Officials have been at best weak and ineffective-and at their worst an obstacle. "The Director PAGENO="0636" 3096 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 of Welfare doesn't think he is an obstacle but I do." The respondent ascribes this hostility to the fact that "OEO has irritated tile Welfare Department by or- ganizing its clients." Community leaders split sharply in their assessment. About three-fourths of these respondents describe welfare officials as friendly to CAC and responsive to its needs. A school official reports that this group "like some aspects of the OEO programs but dislikes others. CAC's grass-roots operations have stirred UP problems for them." A labor leader sees a change in attitudes: "The welfare people were an ob- stacle at the start but are now giving grudging support." He added that the Welfare Department had been annoyed with CAC for hiring aw-ay some of its best staff members. (The respondent noted that those left apparently tried harder and did a better job.) A journalist said the Welfare Commissioner had frequently been at odds with CAC. "He thinks they are doing too much dreaming and spending money un- wisely." A civil rights leader sees a different situation. "The commissioner is about to retire-and in the meantime he's not going to change the status quo." A substantial minority describes the reaction of tile Public Welfare Depart- ment as passive or hostile. Tile Department was "initially angered and insulted by tile undiplomatic entrance of OEO into the community, although OEO has had a positive influence on it," according to a welfare agency official. (Clermont County Welfare officials are said by a CAP official to be real spark plugs. "CAC is in the same building as the Welfare Director and has friendly relations.") A senior GAO official declared that Cincinnati's Social Welfare Agencies had been major supporters of the programs, with the Neighborhood Houses and Health and Welfare Council particularly active. At the beginning, GAO had fol- low-ed a blueprint prepared by a Cincinnati Civic Association task force. The CAP agency, he emphasized, was not using "Alinsky tactics," but was w-orking with those sections of the establishment that w-ere able to contribute to the pro- grams. For example, three old-line settlement houses, Legal Aid, and the YMCA w-ere among organizations funded by OEO. New agencies were started only where none existed-or where tile existing ones were not worth working with. Community leaders also see the social welfare agencies as extremely friendly to CAG-one of tile most cooperative groups in the community. Half of the re- spondents feel that the agencies have sparked the OEO programs. l~one view them as opposed, although some report a mixed response, with some agencies taking the lead in working with the programs while others dragged their feet. A journalist said that "The agencies go along with the CAC program com- pletely-the only group except for the schools to give wholehearted support. The agencies dominate the antipoverty effort." A civil rights leader describes the agencies as "enthusiastic in support of the program. It's meant money and has been a lifesaver to them." An education official outlines the relationship between CAC and the agencies: "The agencies have tied their operations into those of OEO. In the beginning the agencies provided the leadership and did much of the original staff work for tile first projects. Later when CAC got ifs own staff the agencies bowed out. The Community Chest has now contracted to provide OEO with the assistance of its research peOple." One elected official agrees with the majority view. "OEO has been operating through the existing agencies so the level of support has been good." But a col- 1ea~ue has an entirely different opinion: "OEO has generally taken the position that existing social w-elfare people didn't do the job and never would. This has been resented." (Clermont County's voluntary agencies are also described as highly coopera- tive-the member agencies work on the CAC committees that are the main strength of CAC.) Labor organizations also are rated as friendly to CAC and its prorrams in interviews with both the arencv strif and community leaders. It ~uicklv be- coTnP~ clear, however. that to an unusual extent this ordnion is based on the o't~vities of one man. As a CAC executive explained. Al Bulk, when President of the Cincinnati AFL-CIO Council. had played a major role in the original ~fnhlisl~ipent of the Community Action Commission. (Since then lie left for a. labor union po~t in Washington end has just returned.) Otherwise, this re- spondent considers the attitudes of the city's labor to be uninspired. None of PAGENO="0637" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3097 the unions has opposed the CAC programs, but he feels that many labor groups were indifferent. Following Bilik's departure, no labor representative has taken an outstanding part in the antipoverty campaign. Among the community leaders interviewed, two persons who are active political- ly consider the Cincinnati unions to have spark plugged community action. Three others characterize organized labor as strongly in favor of the anti- poverty programs and most of the others described the unions as responding. A number, however, have reservations about some elements in the labor movement. Here too, Bulk's name comes up repeatedly. "Bulk was a leading CAC supporter and he's the key to labor here in Cincinnati," "hand-in-glove with the CAC," "one of the architects of the local plan." Bulk aside, there is considerably less enthusiasm about labor's role, and there are some highly critical comments on certain segments of the labor movement. A school official said, "Local labor has not been a stumbling block to (OEO trained) kids getting jobs-we have agreements with them saying they will co- operate. The labor people usually find a way to help when asked for it. Or at least," he added, "they go through the motions." "Building trades unions are an obstacle to employing Negroes in their crafts," a labor official declared, adding, however, that "individuals have been helpful." A housing official reports that "as a result of a slow process the unions have been well coordinated with the job training programs-but they held out as long as they could against admitting minority groups." "Now, however," he went on, "there's been a definite breakthrough in this area: except for the electrical work- ers, something is being worked out." But he added throughfully, "I believe it's been a hell of a fight to get them to cooperate." A top labor union executive notes that the "biggest problem is to get people to understand socioeconomic problems: this area looks like a natural for labor." But he went on: "There have been problems trying to convince the craft unions that rehabilitation and on-the-job training programs couldn't threaten their own jobs. The approach has been to disprove criticisms as they are made, and to point out that programs won't damage job security. Those who were critical at first are now salesmen for the programs-it's most gratifying." Although one civil rights leader describes the unions as supporting the pro- grams, another was extremely critical-not only of the Cincinnati unions but of Bulk himself. "In general, organized labor has not been very helpful," he declared. "It sees the training programs as a threat to its apprenticeship system. The unions fight preapprenticeship programs. Bilik was a great white liberal until we (the re- spondent's civil rights group) had a sit-in in his office." This 27-hour demonstra- tion, the respondent explained, had followed Bulk's refusal to sign a statement that the labor movement would try to eliminate discrimination, on the ground that there couldn't be any discrimination because it was already forbidden by. union charters. "Bulk was then head of the Democratic Party and a buddy of Gilligan and the others," the respondent said. "He sparked the beginning of the OEO program but I feel he was politically motivated rather than working for the good of the city." A Negro candidate had defeated Bilik for the last seat in the City Council race, the civil rights official noted, adding that "the unions have forgotten why they were founded. They have become too fat." (There is so little organized labor in Clermont County that the unions play a very small part in GAO operations there, according to a senior member of the GAO staff. However, he noted that a representative Of the Upholsterer's Union who sits on the Clermont CAP Board "is both respected and vocal.") The respondents mark the PRESS as one of the least friendly segments of the Cincinnati community. There is general agreement that at times the papers bad been extremely critical and had become more unfriendly in the past year. There are differing views, however, on why this change has occurred as well as on whether the newspapers are basically hostile to the program. "Although the papers think they have done well by us, their overall position has been negative. We've made mistakes and they've clobbered us," was the comment of a senior GAO official. He cited what he felt were unfair stories about GAO salaries, misused interviews, "nit-picking," and minimal press coverage when Sargent Shriver and Vice-President Hunphrey visited Cincinnati. Basically, he felt, the papers were hostile-which he attributed to their Scripps-Howard ownership. As for the other mass communications media, the CAP executive believes that they generally tend to take the same line as the newspapers. He accepts WOYN, a Negro radio station, and WOKY, which he felt were more liberal and objective PAGENO="0638" 3098 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 than the others. As for television-"I won't give you a nickel for all the TV sta- tions-they run criticisms and never let us get in with our answers." The community leaders divide into three groups in their views of press atti- tudes. One group thinks the papers have responded to the GAO programs, an- other that the papers are pretty much on the borderline between being responsive and unfriendly, the third and largest group sees the press as actively hostile to OEO. Elected officials and labor are particularly inclined to see the press in opposi- tion: "The papers fight Federal programs. Some articles are fair but they don't miss a chance to jump on mistakes and problems. They are certainly not a help to CAO." This was the comment of an elected official (who had himself been an outspoken critic of some Community Action Programs). Another describes the press as "a real problem. When OEO was in the developing stage the press was fair, but as it began to develop, the papers became very critical. They couldn't find anything to criticize locally so they ran a lot of national source stories that were very critical and this has promoted a generally negative attitude. The press has been the greatest single influence in creating hostility toward OEO." Social workers among the respondents also see the press as hostile. "They have used national incidents to hurt local efforts," one declared. Another said that "The nature of the news stories depends on who's writing them and whether they are under orders to slant them politically to match the paper's policy." Labor officials commented in a similar vein. "The papers talk about the War on Poverty in terms of distrust without digging into what the problems are," a union official declared. "The press has not been helpful; rather it has helped create an atmosphere of opposition to OEO." Another labor leader said that while the papers had supported-or at least not denounced-OEO programs as such, "they are biased against Federal programs in general. The press," he went on, "attacked CAC over proposals to hire a press agent for the programs and they ask snide questions about salaries, political activities, and so forth." This respondent felt that TV stations owned by the papers had taken a similar attitude. "The smaller radio stations are useful in publicizing programs but have not given them strong support." Some local officials-not elected-see things differently. "The newspapers have done a damn good job," a housing official declared. "They've not been belligerent or bitterly opposed, but they print the news about defects in the OAO program." A school department official agrees "In general the papers have been pretty good. They have run a series of articles on antipoverty programs in general and the GAO programs in particular that have had a positive approach. They of course quote critics of the program but overall have been cooperative. The edi- torials have been generally favorable." (The respondent referred particularly to an Enquirer editorial in December, which concluded: "The real issue in the present debate is whether the hope that has been so carefully nurtured in the last two years is to flourish or whether it is to be crushed. Those who would crush it are playing with dynamite.") (In Olermont County, a GAO staff man reported, the situation is quite differ- ent. The half dozen weeklies in the County (there are no local dailies), as well as the Olermont pages of the Cincinnati papers, give favorable play to GAO releases. "We haven't had one hostile article yet," the respondent noted. There are no radio or TV stations in the area.) Civil Rights Organizations are viewed by the respondents as generally friendly to the Community Action Program but not as playing a major role or providing leadership. A senior GAO official describes the civil rights organization as essentially middle-of-the-road groups that "support OEO programs in a vague w-ay" but do not really participate. (An exception, he noted, are the Black Muslims, who oppose the programs.) The civil rights organizations are not an important group locally, the respondent explained. "In Cincinnati even the Negroes are Ger- mans"-that is, they are basically conservative. By better than 5 to 1, community leaders see the civil rights groups as friendly to GAO; some view them as indifferent; only one, as really hostile. A housing official said civil rights groups were "if anything pretty strongly for GAO. Many individuals are pretty heavily involved in the programs." A publisher sees them as "with GAO all the way-their representatives always vote with the pro-GAO majority on that agency's board." Both civil rights leaders interviews see their groups as supporting the programs. "Enthusiastically behind it from the early days," said one. Several respondents noted that there were many civil rights people working in the programs, and one declared that at the local level the civil rights and CAC organizations were almost identical. PAGENO="0639" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3099 Some of the respondents, however, described these groups as weak and in- effectual and lacking good leadership. "Neutral-neither helped nor hindered," "Weak, no factor," were some of the comments. A labor official called them "basically ineffective" adding: "They could have done a lot niore to support the programs. "Their backing has been nominal and they wouldn't fight for the programs~ Civil rights leadership in Cincinnati has been poor." Another labor leader declared that "the NAACP is immediately involved in community action, but it has also unfairly criticized administration of the pro- grams as inaccessible and not doing enough." He added "There is a lack of communication-these people don't understand the scope of the programs. When hope is aroused but then their kids are turned down, it causes criticism." An education official pointed out that "civil rights organizations are supposed to protest-not be satisfied. Most of them would like to see more OEO programs, but they are not critical of the existing ones." An elected official commented sharply: "The civil rights organizations are weak. They have criticized the program and have been fighting internally. They have been competing with each other and helped to create a negative atmosphere." (In Clermont County, according to a CAC executive, there are no civil rights organizations. Less than 2 percent of the population are Negroes and most of these have jobs-there is a very little Negro participation in such work pro- grains as the Neighborhood Youth Corps.) Most of the GAO staff and community leaders describe Cincinnati's business community as passive but not unfriendly. "Overall, CAC has received tolerance from the Cincinnati business community," a senior GAO official said. "They recog- nize that we have run a clean organization and they respect us even if they don't agree with our ideas." He noted that the Chamber of Commerce was one of the original incorporators of GAO and that businessmen on the CAC board showed a continuing interest in the agency. The respondent neverthiess believes that business support of the programs has been very weak. CAC had had no contact with insurance companies. General Electric, whose Evandale plant is just across a street from the Lincoln Heights target area, has been no help to the Community Action Program. On the other hand, he observed, the most business help had come from Federated Department Stores. This company, which had~ a vice-president on the CAP Board, had as- signed a public relations officer to advise on CAP public relations jobs. However, the respondent said, the average businessman was poorly informed about GAO. "He tends to get his opinions from the newspapers, not directly, and it is hard to evaluate his views." Community leaders generally see business as passive but at least not obstacles to the CAC programs. Several respondents, however, see businessmen as un- aware, mixed in reactions or even hostile. One union leader described business as giving mild support to the programs, and hiring OEO trained people. And he added, "They recognize that OEO brings money into the community and that they stand to benefit if the programs work." Another labor official pointed out that workers are in short supply in Cincin- nati-the 3 percent left unemployed are the long-term jobless and there are almost no production workers available. As a result industry, formerly reluctant, is now interested in training people. Despite this, he felt, business had shown very little activity-"They are from Missouri and must be shown. Their first reaction was against payment of the $1.25 minimum wage." A civil rights leader, reporting that business had gone along; "business had never fought the OEO programs because it has never been threatened by them. No one really objects to individual services-and they don't cost the community money." Another civil rights leader who felt that business had had a hands-off attitude towards OEO-"not all out for the programs but not trying to block them"-noted as relevant that "there hasn't been the massive political activity connected with the OEO programs in Cincinnati that there has been elsewhere." A respondent active in politics noted that a number of businessmen on the CAC Board had become involved with OEO through being on private agency boards. These had become somewhat positive in attitude but he predicted that in any conflict with the city establishment, they would back off and remain neutral. Another respondent pointed out critically that the business community had not sponsored any OEO programs. He felt that business could help with job training and similar programs. A school official cites as evidence of top business support a recent meeting between the Board of Education and a high-level committee on interrace rela- PAGENO="0640" 3100 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 tion. In discussions about what Cincinnati school programs might have to be deleted as a result of the voters' turndown of a special school tax levy, business leaders on the committee emphasized the need to continue the school-sponsored OEO projects. Business has cooperated in job entry for members of OEO youth programs, this respondent reported, "though sometimes it's double talk." He knew of no organized segment of the business community that had come out against the programs, although there had been a setback when attacks on government spend- ing were emphasized in the recent political campaign. Nevertheless, the re- spondent himself had recently had an enthusiastic reception from a young busi- nessmen's group to which he spoke on OEO programs. (The attitude of the Clermont County businessmen was described by a CAC official as "by and large favorable." The Clermont Industrial Development Com- mission (a CAP group) he noted, includes manufacturers, real estate men, bankers, and others from the business community and sponsors a monthly dis- cussion group.) The target population is seen by almost all the respondents as favoring the CAC. Many also believe, however, that a large segment of the poor are still un- aware of the programs' existence. A CAC executive said that the dominant mood of the target population is apathy: "CAC gets no help from the grass roots." Despite a good beginning in getting the poor to take part in the CAC programs, there are still compara- tively few involved-and a long job lay ahead. The respondent pointed out, however, that the reaction varies from one target neighborhood to another, de- pending on such factors as the type of residents, and the quality of the local staff. In some areas, there is strong support, with CAP activities well-attended. Among the community leaders, an elected official said that the poor had responded when the programs reached them-but that the resources of CAC had been too limited to make strong contacts. A colleague, however, feels that the poor "have all been stirred up and so far still feel that OEO has helped them." This respondent takes a dim view of the future. "I'm afraid of their reaction when the program steadily recedes and they are forced to recognize that they won't be helped." A school official describes the poor as "at first not satisfied with their own in- volveinent in project planning, but pretty much so now." He added, however, that some feel "they should have representatives on the boards that actually operate the neighborhood service projects." A social welfare worker involved in the CAC programs declares that "some- times they are mad at us because we don't have enough money to do what we said we were going to do. Sometimes they are with us. Sometimes they don't know what is going on." Another social worker agrees that the response has varied. "The most difficult areas have been those with an existing organization," he said. "There the attitude toward CAC people has been `what are you fellows doing here now?'" A labor leader asserts that the target areas accept the programs. "The Neigh- borhood Houses have done a tremendous job-they tal1~ easily to people and have had some quick successes that show what can be done." Another union man described the growing involvement-and continued reservations-of the poor in his own neighborhood. "In the beginning the poor were cynical and didn't be- lieve in the programs, giving only nominal support. In the West End, CAC hired the natural leaders of the community. Now the people give CAC overwhelming support-but they still don't think the programs will work." (A CAC official said that the response of the target population in Clermont County is difficult to evaluate. "They don't show much reaction." The poor there are not concentrated into neighborhoods but scattered widely over the County, so it is hard to get them involved. "The north-south roads in the County are very poor so that travelling 15 to 20 miles to meetings is a real chore." "But those that are serving on committees seem to like what we are doing.") The respondents are divided about how the GENERAL PUBLIC of Cincinnati feel about the OEO programs, but nobody sees any enthusiasm or even very much friendliness. Almost half described the public as hostile to CAC. An equal number believe that the public is simply unaware of the programs-or at least not informed about them. A small minority suggest that the public is at least a little bit responsive to the programs. A senior CAC official saw the public in general as not knowing what's going on but "if they did, their attitudes would range from disinterest to hostility." PAGENO="0641" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3101 Considering the basic conservatism of Cincinnati, "We're going upstream in this town and I don't think we'll ever win a popularity contest." The respondent quoted surveys carried out by Cincinnait's two Congressmen before the last election: they showed western Cincinnati about 4 to 1 against the programs and the eastern half divided about equally between opponents and supporters. A civil rights leader. pointed out that Cincinnati's large Catholic population is particularly conservative and that many oppose so-called giveaway programs. A school official commented that some sections of the city "particularly middle- class suburban areas"-don't understand the programs. "They feel that too much is being done for these people-what do we get out of it?" He added, however, "when they are informed they respond differently. Five to six hundred volunteers, many from the suburbs-take part in the programs as tutors and participate in Saturday morning enrichment programs." (Another CAP official said that despite press publicity and innumerable talks to service clubs, etc., people in Clermont County still ask what CAP is. "I would like to believe that the general public likes us, but I can't really give a reading on this-not too many of them know we are there.") Effect on communitij costs 1. Welfare.-There is little tendency to see the CAC programs as having any major effect on Cincinnati's welfare costs. Half of the respondents who com- mented on this point agree with a senior officialof the Welfare Department who said that he "knows of no reduction." Among the few who speculate on a possible connection, a civil rights leader believes that OEO job placement and other programs had cut the number of welfare recipients. (At the same time he complained that CAC had not raised the level of individual welfare payments, which he felt desirable.) A housing official denied firsthand knowledge, but "had heard reports" that the programs had cut payments. The most positive opinion came from a labor official: "When the OEO programs are effective, the rise in welfare costs is arrested, but this is masked by the increase in population. It is too soon to see a decrease in welfare costs, but this is a possibility for the future." Two respondents working in the social welfare field believe that if anything the programs would-and should-send welfare costs up. "Reduction of welfare costs will not be the purpose of the program until all those eligible are on the rolls and services reduce dependency." 2. Crime.-Several respondents believe the programs might be having an im- pact on the costs of juvenile delinquency and crime. One respondent declared: "It is hard to show a change on the record. But give a person something to do and you keep him out of trouble. Participants in the programs are not involved in incidents and vandalism has fallen off." A housing official reported that "there is less vandalism in the housing projects-and in some areas the crime costs have been cut. The programs have a potential for future gains in this area." A school official reported some indication of a decrease in juvenile delinquency arrests- "and the only new element in the situation is the OEO programs." On the other hand several social workers commented that juvenile delinquency was too com- plex to be clearly affected by a single factor, such as the programs. A civil rights leader was not impressed by the impact of the programs, even if it were shown to be favorable. "By keeping kids off the streets you cut down the number of crimes-but you are not getting at the causes of crime. The OEO programs are essentially a baby-sitting job for potential delinquents." 3. Other Costs-The civil rights leader says that the OEO programs were, "if anything, increasing the costs of muniëipal services because more services are now being asked for." Another civil rights leader sees an offsetting factor: "The pro- grains have increased the city's revenues from its local income tax by the take from people whom OEO has trained to hold jobs." And a labor official saw one big economy: "The riots that didn't occur save Cincinnati a lot of money." Matching funds in Cincinnati In the past the required local contribution to OEO programs does not appear to have been a problem. In recent months, however, three developments have complicated the picture: The required contribution has been increased from 10 to 20 percent, doubling thedemand on local resources; Defeat of the special school tax levy in referendums jeopardized the larg- est single source of local contributions; Cutbacks in OEO programs raised questions of project priorities and the extent of local control over the selection and retention of projects. 80-084-67-pt. 4-41 PAGENO="0642" 3102 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 According to a senior CAC official, there has been controversy over the match- ing funds from the Community Chest agencies. A school official pointed out, however, that the agencies had hitherto been able to make up its 10 percent largely from services. "The new 20 percent requirement," he said, "will be a real problem to some of the voluntary agencies, particularly those that have no finan- cial resources except the Community Chest. The Chest hasn't committed itself to providing funds for the local share. Some private agencies will be unable to provide the necessary matching funds and will have to close their CAC projects." The increase in the matching contribution bit the Cincinnati Board of Educa- tion at a bad time. As a labor leader explained: "The matching contribution has become a bone of contention in the Board since defeat of the special tax levy. The Board claims it was putting up its share in cash and must withdraw its support in order to trim its budget." The respondent personally disagreed. "I feel that this is largely untrue-that the School Board's contribution has been largely in kind. In any case the community can certainly do more." There is sharp disagreement among the respondents as to how much the city of Cincinnati had done to make up the local contribution. A CAC official described the city's share as a "pittance" and a former Congressman declared that "local government had put no cash into the matching fund." A newspaper reporter went into more detail. The city or county put up no money "except for the Citizens Commission on Youth, which uses city money for the dropout por- tion of the Neighborhood Youth Corps." A far different picture of the situation was given by an elected member of the city government. He reported that there had been very stormy discussions of the local contribution. "I feel strongly that the city should not give CAP unrestricted funds to use as they judge best. I believe that too much is spent on the Neighborhood Centers and not enough on the service programs. As a result I initiated long discussions in the City Council on the subject. Until this year the Council had voted the 10 percent. This year OEO funds w-ere cut so some programs will have to be reduced . . . It is clear that OEO is asking the very people it has been criticizing-the Welfare Department, Board of Health and so forth-to pick up the OEO program." (CAC officials report that Clermont County bad been generous in contributing space and services-utilities, auditing, disbursement. The County also paid cash for alterations to the health clinics, while doctors provide medical services for the in-kind contribution to the clinic project. It has not yet proved necessary to figure in the time of volunteers to make up the required local contribution.) PROGRAM ANALYSIS Neighborhood centers and services The Neighborhood Centers and Services Program is clearly regarded by the respondents as the heart of the Community Action Program in Cincinnati. Some three-fourths of the community leaders, more than endorsed any other project, listed it among the most valuable CAC programs. Its support was broad: it simul- taneously drew praise from all the businessmen and all the civil rights leaders interviewed. Yet, at the same time, the neighborhood programs drew some of the most sharply critical comments. To a senior CAC official, the Neighborhood Centers and Services "exemplify the bases of community action"-the decentralization of services into the target neighborhoods and the involvement of the poor themselves. "Lasting change in the poor depends on their learning to help themselves," be said. "To do this they must organize and must improve their ability to communicate with each other and with other groups in the community." The programs started in each target area by the Neighborhood Centers help the people to do both. "People can't learn to organize and communicate in the abstract," he declared, "they must do it through a concrete program." Besides encouraging the target area residents to organize into meaningful patterns that enable them to help themselves, he said, the Centers provide a vital link between the people who need help and the resources that can provide it. At the same time, the neighborhood programs themselves provide major services missing in urban poverty areas. (There was no Neighborhood Centers program in Olermont County at the time the survey was made.) PAGENO="0643" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3103 A wide range of benefits provided by the neighborhood program were cited by the community leaders. Nearly half of these respondents emphasized the effect of the program in providing motivation. Several welfare workers agreed. "It has given the poor. a sense of participation," said one. Another said that now the poor "walk a little taller." "It's snapped the people out of lethargy, an elected official said. "It helps build initiative and self-respect" another respondent said, "and provides the leadership needed to galvanize the poor into action." A business leader declared that the program "made people in the poverty areas aware of their own identity as people." A labor leader described one Neighbor- hood Center council as having transformed the morale of the community from apathy to a feeling that it is possible to do something about the situation. The impact on the whole target community is frequently mentioned. A bum- nessman states he has "high hopes and great faith that the program will succeed because while flexibly adapting its services to each target area it f'treats each neighborhood as a whole and gives the residents unity and purpose as a group." Several persons emphasize the value of the Centers for communication. A businessman points out that the Centers let the target area people~ know that the whole community is interested in their problems. A former Congressman, noting that the program was reaching people never reached before, declares that "4 out of 5" (of the poverty population) do not even know what services are available to them, and have a built-in suspicion of authority." A businessman has his own reason for praising the program. The Centers, he says, provide a way for "haves" to help the poor in a more personal way than by just making a contribution to the Community Chest. Volunteers work with child care, tutoririg-sometimes just talking to the people in the Centers. The dialogue helps both of them. A civil rights leader values the Neighborhood Serv- ices for reaching out through family workers into the homes: "Many people in. poverty areas don't realize that their way of living is not normal until somebody points it out to them." Participation of the poor is emphasized. "This is the first time an attempt has been made to get the poor to do things as a group," a businessman declares. And another respondent points out that the Centers provide "places where neighbor- hood people can discuss their problems together and act as a community rather than as individuals. Now they have a voice-and are more likely to be listened to by City Hall." A social worker makes this point. "This program gets at the basic problem of the poor-their lack of communal and personal resources or power. The city's services come only in response to the organization of the community. If the poor are given encouragement, resources, hope, they'll do this. The Centers provide the poor with these things. The only lasting benefit to the community is to get people to do things for themselves and this means they must be in a power posi- tion from which they can do things for themselves and make requests." Giving the target people a "voice" draws critical comments as well as praise. A newspaper reporter believes that "social workers encourage unrealistic proj- ects," citing as an example "agitation to increase the level of welfare payments." Formation of an ad hoc committee and organization of a "March on Columbus" to push the issue were, the reporter believed, encouraged by CAC workers----"CAC denies this, but its people were always on hand." The respondent states strongly that "while this kind of activity may be okay, it disturbs the public in a con- servative city like Cincinnati. The Neighborhood Centers weren't really set up to do this sort of thing." He also criticizes a voter registration drive held by the Centers: "These people don't vote and the drive was a big flop." A labor leader disagrees: "Now these people can muster opposition to the power structure as never before." As examples, he describes organized protests in the West End that had blocked downzoning for a filling station and defeated an attempt to raise rents in public housing. These incidents are also cited by a senior CÁO official as showing the impact of the neighborhood program on local government. This staff member lists other, less dramatic examples: the bringing together of city departments and local residents to plan for the West End community; an increase in the number of Health Department clinics; more concentration on HOusing Code enforcement- more attention to neighborhood improvements such as traffic signals, street lights, signs; a planned decentralization of recreation facilities. "As the programs give the poor an increased feeling of identity," a business- man reports, "they begin to ask the Welfare Department to answer a lot of ques- PAGENO="0644" 3104 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 tions and explain its policies." Most of the social welfare workers among the respondents agree that the program has had an impact on Welfare Department operations. Another businessman explains that the City Welfare Director has been meeting with people from the Neighborhood Centers for two hours on Sat- urdav mornings so that they could ask him questions. "One result has been that the Metropolitan Action Board, made up of representatives of the people served by the Neighborhood Centers, has been asked by the Welfare Department to serve on an advisory committee on welfare problems." The Centers' program is also described as having a tremendous impact on welfare operations in Clermont County. "It has resulted in improved programs, a greater readiness to listen to suggestions, and a work training program." A lawyer declares that the neighborhood program "has increased the aware- ness of local welfare people of what welfare is all about- and that welfare hasn't done the job of getting people out of poverty." There is general agreement that the Centers and Services have also affected the approaches and techniques of the private social welfare agencies. "The agencies have acquired a heightened awareness of their distance from the poor," a CAC official said, "and they are trying to get in touch." He lists a number of ways this is being done-adding clients to agency boards; hiring nonprofessional workers, changing the pattern of services to increase decentralization and outreach. "Agencies are becoming more aware of the way services are offered," he declares. "There's less looking down their noses by the staff. They are under more pressures-and are more responsive to needs." "As a result of OEO operating through them, the agencies have become more responsible," a political leader agrees, "but if OEO money dries up they would slide back into their old conservative ways." A civil rights leader believes that some of the changes have been forced upon the agencies. Another respondent comments that the agencies "are observing OEO programs and searching for new approaches. But I'm not sure that they have found any meaningful new insights." One respondent who is personally active in the social welfare field believes the program has had relatively greater impact on the group work type of agency-such as the Boy Scouts and YMCA-than the casework organizations. A lawyer cites another important point: "The program has clearly made the Community Chest more aware of where the needs are. This is the big reason for setting up the major evaluation of Community Chest programs that is now under way." A senior CAC official also refers to this self-examination by the Com- munity Chest agencies as largely inspired by CAC. There is disagreement among the respondents as to whether the neighborhood program is having any direct effect on the community's budget for welfare, delinquency, and other social problems. A CAC official believes "there is no way of knowing-there are too many variable factors, such as economic trends." Others point out some possibilities. An elected official observes that welfare expenditures have been reduced and Aid to Dependent Children cut in half. A social worker observes that welfare costs have dropped, but two others contradict this and state that costs have actually gone up as the result of more elIgible people applying. Another elected official notes that the programs might be a factor in the absence of any juvenile delinquency riots. A labor officials is more posi- tive: "the Neighborhood Centers, along with other OEO programs, have meant that Cincinnati, unlike some other cities, did not have poverty riots last sum- mer-and the riots that did not occur saved the city a lot of money." One businessman sees no savings in welfare, but believes the programs have helped reduce vandalism and juvenile delinquency. A lawyer agrees there has been some impact, "but it's hard to measure bow much. Parents aren't doing their job with their kids-it is hard to say how much worse the situation would be wit hoyt the OEO programs." Expansion of the Neighborhood Centers and Services program was urged by three-quarters of the respondents. "Absolutely," said a senior CAC official. He points out that right now the problem is to hold onto the Centers already in existence-"but money should be provided for anywhere from three more to double the present number of centers and provide services not now available." An elected official agrees that "more money should be put into community action," but adds: "It should be directed into the more successful programs and expansion should be coupled with more research and firmer controls." Expansion of job training through the Centers wasurged by a union officiaL A businessman points PAGENO="0645" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3105 out that some sections of Cincinnati, in need of Centers, lacked them: "For example, the East End of Cincinnati is a poverty pocket of Appalachians. This is a group whose problems have been overlooked-when we think of the poor we think only of the colored." A civil rights leader believes that the program should be expanded both in Cincinnati's West End and in Northern Kentucky. "There should be more staff- both professional and nonprofessional at the Centers. All the staff, including volunteers, should have more training in community leadership. And there should be more consultants and staff for community research and planning." This respondent also believes that "youth components are needed at the Centers-a staff that concentrates on the problems of young people, such as they already have in the Evendale neighborhood." A substantial minority of respondents are firmly against expansion of the Centers' program. "Not unless the need can be proved" a businessman declares. "It is all too easy to expand programs when we should be pruning them." A lawyer also casts a negative vote: "The program has enough money now-we should learn to spend it better, more efficiently." Two workers in the social welfare field also oppose expansion at this time, feeling that the program should instead be "sharpened and focused." An elected official is even more negative: "Too much of the budget has gone into the Centers in relation to their value. Two million dollars has been spent, and there is no evidence to prove that the Centers are worth it. While the CAC cites the number of families served, this doesn't prove the value of the pro- gram." In his view, "this program raises false hopes among the `poor. We just can't meet all their needs." Most of the respondents paint a grey picture of what would happen if the Neighborhood Centers programs were curtailed or dropped. "The reaction of the people in the target neighborhoods would' be a blend of'disgust, apathy, and hostility-the proportions varying with the relation of each Center to the com- munity around it," a senior CAC official declared. "Where the programs are good, the people would be very unhappy-in the West End neighborhood, for example, there would be mass demonstrations. But where the people are very poor there would be no reaction-they would be too far down the ladder." A civil rights leader makes a similar prediction: "the Neighborhood Services program is the only one people would care about losing. In the West End there would be anger and frustration with a potential for riots." And another respond- ent, active in the civil rights movement, declares that "curtailment of the pro- grain would certainly increase the anger and frustration that we are trying to keep down to a reasonable level." A social worker predicts "marches on city hall." A labor leader `is equally outspoken. "Curtailment of the `program would be the biggest crime of the century," he declares. "You can't slam the door in the faces of the neighborhood people. In time to come, if you awaken the expecta- tions of these people and then slam them down again, there will be riots, like in `Watts." A businessman points out that "how much the neighborhood people think of the Centers is shown by how hard the East End is pushing to get a Center of its own. If the program `were cut `the people would `feel the loss-they would really miss the opportunity to communicate with each other." Another business leader' comments that "curtailment would certainly be a waste of effort and momentum." A lawyer states, "without professional workers and facilities people would slip back into the morass of hopelessness and indifference-not that they are all out now." The respondents take a gloomy view of `the chances of anyone picking up the program if it were dropped by OEO. A senior `CAC staff member believes that local government lacks the money-and if it should `try to carry on the program it would change the nature of the project. "Social welfare `organizations are already doing their utmost just to provide the local contribution and fill in `for anticipated cuts." Nor does he see any Federal agency as ready to pick up community action. The community leaders are no more hopeful. The least negative comment comes from a businessman. "I `would hope that local government would pick up `the program-this `is an obligation upon the' commimity. `We should'have `had a Neighborhood Center program before the `War on Poverty even began. `But the chances of local government acting are not too good." There is"slightly `more `optimism about `the private `agencies. Several respond- `ents thińk they' would try to carry' on-and might "do a little. "But `a "respondent PAGENO="0646" 3106 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 familiar with fund-raising drives in Cincinnati points out that the Community * Chest was "already raising eight million dollars a year and it would be hard to get more." As for the Federal government, several respondents suggest that HEW might pick up the program; others suggest BUD or the Labor Department. Head-Start Head-Start is named by more than half the community leaders interviewed *as a highly beneficial program. It draws the support of all respondents from the business community and individuals in most of the other categories. Many of the respondents discuss Head-Start jointly with a very similar but much smaller preschool program carried out to demonstrate the advantages of Mon- tessori teaching methods. The special value of these preschool programs is summed up by a CAC execu- tive. *`They compensate, at the earliest possible moment, for the inadequacies in health, welfare, and schooling of a disadvantaged child's environment," he states. ~They give these kids .a chance to catch up with their upper and middle-class peers so that they will have a fair start in school." Most of the community leaders agree: "Head-Start attacks the basic cause of poverty-poor education-at a critical time, when the deprived individual is still young," one declares. Another notes approvingly that the program tackles all the problems of a deprived child-physical, social, moral, emotional-to "remove his predisposition to failure and give him maximum readiness for school." A journalist praises the program for giving underprivileged children some cultural background-"showing them there are other things." Several re- spondents particularly value the way the program involves parents. The use of target area people as Teachers Aides in Head-Start classes is praised by an elected official for simultaneously making possible small class- room groups and giving useful jobs to the poor. This same respondent has par- ticular praise for the Montessori program, as "the only one with evaluation built in." He adds: "It's expensive, but at least they know what they've achieved in relation to goals and objectives." A businessman believes that the recent defeat of a special Cincinnati school tax levy gives Head-Start particular pertinence. Should lack of tax funds force the schools to drop kindergartens, "Head-Start would have to fill the hole that would be left." Not all the evaluations of Head-Start are favorable. "Such programs are meaningless unless they organize people to change their environment," a civil rights leader comments critically. "Otherwise they are just hatching a new group of the powerless poor in the same environment." Respondents differ on whether the programs have had any impact on the activities or techniques of local government. A CAC official believes that it has "loosened up the Board of Education to consider the value of child development programs-taking into account a child's physical and emotional needs-as contrasted to so-called `pure' education." This respondent also believes that Head-Start has helped the school system to recognize the value of parent in- volvement and the use of nonprofessional Teachers Aides. "While CAC pays for 100 such Aides," he point out, "the Cincinnati Board of Education has hired 130 more. This is a real breakthrough." In contrast, an official of the school system states he is not "sure there had been any effect." The same respondent, however, believes that the private social welfare agencies are "beginning to reappraise their own Day Care Centers in terms of Head-Start." A senior CAC official does not see the program as having any effect on the community's budget for social problems. An elected official states that for the present "the program has actually increased public costs, since the school sys- tem is paying for its own preschool teachers. In the long term, however, there may be savings, since the Head-Start kids are less likely to become public charges." In the view of a school official, Head-Start has probably had some effect m reducing the number of juvenile arrests. "The mothers of smell ohildren are likely to feel better about public agencies because of the proor~m." he deolares. "As a result, they are more ready to encourage `their other children to accepted cocial behavior They are le'~q likely to be antisocial This seems ~rettv definite- and is one reason Cincinnati has not had any major civil distnrb~Twes." Exnansion of the proaram is urged by a majority of respondents. A CÁO executive declares that there shou1d~not~only be more children enrOlled in more PAGENO="0647" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3107 schools for longer training, but the program should be expanded into new areas- "for example, preschool programs are needed in Newport, Kentucky, where the Board of Education is very weak and there is no program of remedial help for the underprivileged." An elected official, although critical of several other aspects of CAC gives a resounding "Yes" to expanding Head-Start. "We've only scratched the surface. Money should be taken from other programs and put into this one." Another respondent, noting that Cincinnati Head-Start now serves 1,300 children in the summer but only 575 during the school year, declares that "many more year- round classes should be held-summer classes don't come near doing the job. One year is a minimum-two years would be better." A businessman agrees and notes that "the Montessori people are seeking a program that would extend over two or three years." This respondent is worried by surveys "that seem to show that the benefits of Head-Start are lost after the child has been in a regular school a few months. These underprivileged children are not getting enough of a head start to see them through." A news- paper reporter has also heard that Head-Start benefits are lost "when the chil- dren go back to those horrible homes." The respondent declares: "Attempts should be made to keep the good effects-not just say Head-Start is no good because the effects don't last." Another respondent emphasizes that Head-Start should be followed up by adult education programs for parents. The possibility that Head-Start might be curtailed has already produced a strong reaction in the community, a school official reports. "This OEO program has received more sympathetic support than any other," be states. "The people whose children are in the program are also strongly for it-many letters have been received from parents asking that Head-Start be continued." A social worker believes that Head-Start curtailment would flood the Day Care Centers- and other children would become "doOrkey" kids, left alone all day. "There would be some increase in crime, children molested, etc. The parents would be upset." A businessman concurred. "Hopefully, many families would say `our children need this education to do better than we have.'" But he concedes that some working mothers would merely regret the loss of their Head-Start "baby-sitters." A journalist doubts that there would be much, if any, visible reaction from parents-"they just don't realize the value of the program." Opinions differ as to whether there is any hope of someone else picking up Head-Start if OEO dropped it. A CAC staff executive states that neither local government nor the private social agencies have the money to keep the preschool program going. As for other Federal sponsors-"sibling rivalry among the Federal agencies makes it certain that any agency that can get hold of the money will take the programs." But he warns that if HEW picked it up "they will provide help for the whole community-rich and poor alike-and the special needs of the poor won't be recognized." Although one respondent believes that Head Start has a better chance of being carried on by local government than any other program, the failure of the special school tax levy is cited as making it unlikely. "In fact the Educa- tion Board is even talking of dropping kindergartens," this commiintiy leader points out. As for the private agencies taking over, a school official believes that they might pick up some of the load "but nowhere near as much as the schools carry. The agencies lack recruiting and training facilities as well as the necessary physical facilities. Classes would have to be held in substandard rooms with inadequate personnel." Several community leaders think there is a possibility that the Office of Educa- tion might come to the rescue under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act-"After all, Head-Start is more important than some present ESEA pro- grams," a businessman states. (The summer Head-Start program in Clermont County, carried out inde- pendently of those in Cincinnati, is discussed critically by a senior CAO official. He notes that while the schools generally like the program, some of the districts that need it most, such as New Richmond, are unwilling to accept it. This respond- ent believes there has been too little involvement of parents-an important element of the program-and not enough pains taken in the selection of the children, particularly in regard to income level. "There was also insufficient care in hiring Teachers Aides. These were supposed to be selected from among the parents of the children, but actually few of these were hired. Most of the Aides were college students home for summer vacation.") PAGENO="0648" 3108 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Legal services The Legal Services. Program is named by slightly over a third of the commu- nity leaders as one of the most valuable CAC projects. A senior staff member of the agency states: "This program has transformed the Legal Aid Society from an agency serving only middle class to one that also helps the poor. The salary of the director was increased from $8,000 to $13,000 a year, so~ that a better man could be obtained for the job, and the staff lawyers now devote full time to the agency, taking no outside clients. Representatives of the poverty population sit on the board of the agency." The prevention of exploitation is considered the major value of the program by most of the respondents. "Now the poor have weapons to fight injustice." "Now poor people can find out what their rights are" were some of the com- ments. "We should have had this program before OEO-we didn't recognize the needs of our brothers," a businessman declares. He places particular stress on the value of having Legal Services offices in the target areas. "This enables poor people to get advice on a wide range of problems right in their own neighbor- hoods instead of having to go to a plush office downtown." A notable achievement of the program to this respondent is persuading the city courts to accept recognizance bonds from defendants who thus escape pay- ing high bail fees to professional bondsmen. "This not only means a saving for a poor person but improves his attitude toward the community by giving him the feeling he is trusted," the respondent states. "If local government doesn't trust these people, they won't trust the government." A leading attorney views the program as beneficial, but comments that it could have been carried out for less money. A school official declares "the program is still new and its value is just being recognized. If its successes are seen it will boom-it's just a matter of promotion." One respondent hopefully notes that the program might decrease the need for the private social agencies, by helping poor people to keep out of trouble. For the same reason, he believes it might decrease the community's expenditures for crime and delinquency. Asked whether there is a need for expanding the program, an elected official sees this as impossible to judge without a general evaluation of CAC projects. Others are less cautious. A journalist urges expansion into more areas-"People are unlikely to get on a bus and start off to find a Legal Aid office. Many don't have the money to do so." A businessman declares that "there should be six more Legal Aid offices in addition to the four present ones. There should be one in each Neighborhood Center." The same respondent predicts that curtailment of the program would bring "the shyster right back in there with high interest rates and all the other evils." He adds, however, that the recognizance bond might survive the end of the pro- gram as a permanent reform. Should curtailment come, some respondents believe, the Legal Aid Society might try to carry on with the help of the Cincinnati Bar .Association-"but they couldn't continue the program in the same manner." Foster Grandparents Only two respondents-both businessmen-single out the Foster Grandparents program as highly beneficial but they are enthusiastic advocates. On the other hand, three other respondents list the program as one of the less valuable CAC projects. "The Foster Grandparent program simultaneously helps both children and the elderly," one of its supporters declares. "The foster grandparent, an elderly per- son, fills a gap in the life of a child by providing parental love. The child-any- where from 1 to 5 years old, lives in an orphanage, a hospital, an infant home. Five days a week his `grandparent' visits the child, holds him, feeds him, plays with him-and loves him. Human beings are born with a need for parental love and these children have no parents to give it to them." The "grandparents" are paid $1.25 an hour, the respondent explains: this small income is enough to keep some of them off relief. "But the thing the grand- parents talk about is not the income, but their happiness. Before they were lone- ly. Now the grandparents have a light in their eyes because they feel that some- body needs them after all." The respondent believes strongly that the program should be enlarged to cover every parentless child in the eligible age group. "Other social agencies will want to enter the program when they see that it works," he declares. PAGENO="0649" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS. OF I ~67 3109 What if the program were cut instead'? The effect on the children, the business- man believes, "probably Wouldn't show up until adolescence." But, he adds, "the grandparents would be returned to a void. While the program lasts, they are living happier and probably longer lives. The activity may well' be keeping some of them out of mental institutions." Little likelihood is seen that local government would pick up the program- "they have never recognized the problem in the past." The voluntary agencies are viewed as a possibility: "Catholic Charities' might turn the program over to the St. Vincent de Paul Society, which has elderly members." Or possibly HEW might provide Federal money under Aid for the Aging. Critics of Foster Grandparents downgrade the project in relation to other programs. "It may do some good for older people," an elected official declares, "but it won't break the poverty cycle. It would not be high on a priority list." And a businessman states: "I am not sure the Foster Grandparents program is near the center of the target." A journalist believes: "this is a nice program but too small in scope to have much impact-and I don't know what good it is going to do either. The main emphasis should be taking care of the young, rather than working with the old." This respondent adds: "I can't see paying people to do a job that volunteers will do." a sentiment echoed by a businessman. But a supporter of the program gives this answer: "The social welfare agencies tried_ the same thing before OEO, but using volunteers. It didn't work. You couldn't count on the volunteer grandparents to show up." Lighted ~S~ehools The Lighted Schools program is praised by one community leader, a civil rights leader. (The Lighted Schools are public schools kept open in the evening.) The respondent points out that "the Lighted Schools are the only place in most target neighborhoods where the entire family can go together in the evening. The activities there-neighborhood clubs, discussion groups, self-improvement courses, for example-bring family members closer together." The program also gives families a sense of community spirit and "provides opportunities for self- improvement and gives individuals a heightened self-image." The respondent believes that as a result of this program families that had been' on welfare for two generations were becoming conscious that there was another way of life. "As they become aware of their own plight," he states, "they begin to demand more of the Welfare Department." In the long run this may mean higher welfare costs as the demand grows for a more realistic level of payments. The program is described as a definite factor in reducing delinquency-"kids go to the Lighted Schools at night instead of roaming the streets." The re- spondent believes that the program needs more workers, to increase the amount of family involvement. He also urges the addition of more schools to the program and the "opening of schools around the clock." Curtailment of the program, the respondent declares, would "leave the people out on a limb and angry at the government. Many of the Lighted Schools programs would stop entirely." Adult Literacy The Adult Literacy program is strongly supported by a journalist. "This program gives people a chance to better themselves by preparing for better jobs," the respondent declares. "At the same time it gives those who are parents a better understanding of how important it is for their children to get an educa- tion." The reporter, pointing out that most of the classes were in the West End neighborhood, urges expansion of the program to provide classes in all the target areas. "And if possible, some classes should be scheduled at times when men can attend-most of those going to the classes now are women." Curtailment of the Adult Literacy program would upset and discourage the people it serves, this respondent contends. "If you take the trouble to go to a class to learn to read and write and then somebody cuts it off, you'll be pretty disgusted and blame the government." The Clermont programs Although rural Clermont County is part of the area covered by the Community Action Council of Cincinnati, its antipoverty programs are separate and admin- istered locally by a CAC office in the County. PAGENO="0650" 3110 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The senior CAC staff member most intimately concerned with the Clermont programs lists two of them as among the most effective: the CAC office itself and the Dental and Well-Child Clinics. Because none of the community leaders reached by this study came from the Olermont area, the comments that follow are entirely from the staff respondent. 1. The Clermont Office of thee Community Action Commission.-The CAC office in Clermont is described as essentially a catalyst for bringing people together to work on the problems of this depressed rural area-"people come to us for coordi- nation on joint projects-getting them started." The CAC office tries to build local leadership-"a slow job"-while working for the simultaneous social and physical development of the area-"you can't go ahead on a basis of just con- crete and bricks and steel." Examples of activities in this role include: A County Improvement Corporation to finance new industry and develop industrial parks; An Industrial Development Commission that initiates a variety of other programs; Planning for a Metropolitan Housing Authority; An Adult Education Council; A Community Attitude Commission, concerned with such improvements as clean-up campaigns; A Recreation Committee. "Previously there was no attempt to unify the County through joint projects and there was distrust of neighboring Hamilton County (Cincinnati). There was no attempt at industrial development." CAC activity led the Clermont County social service agencies to expand their efforts and join in providing information about the social services available, as well as in setting up a Volunteer Service Bureau to find people willing to give their services to social welfare programs. There has been a marked decrease in Clermont County's welfare budget, for which CAC activity may be partly responsible. CAC activities should not be expanded in Clermont at this time: "We are pushing as hard as we can-if we do any more we'll antagonize people." The programs are not yet strong enough to be carried out by local resources. If CAC activities were cut "the situation would in many cases slide back to what it was before." Adult Education programs and Clermont Industrial Development activities, for example, would stop. A proposed new hospital for the County would be delayed in getting off the ground. On the other hand, housing plans for the County would continue. No alternative sponsor, local or Federal, is seen for the Community Action program, should OEO bow out. 2. Thee Clermont County Health Clinics: Dental end Well-Child-The Cler- mont clinics were established only over the opposition of the local Health Com- mission. Aid was received from housing and other officials in setting them up. Before these clinics were established there were no health services for poor peo- ple in Clermont County. Most of the people who come to the clinics have never seen a doctor or a dentist-90 per cent of the children have serious dental problems. In six weeks the clinics uncovered 69 different kinds of health problems, from tuberculosis to eye tumors. The clinics start children off in life with a strong foundation of good health- important to their ability to learn in school, their future contribution to society, and their personal happiness. The clinics have no direct impact on local government, since they do not serve young people on welfare, who are covered by Title 19 of Medicnre. The clinics do, however, work closely with the social agencies, with cross-referrals. The result is better identification of the poor who need help. So far there has been no evidence that the project has had any effect on the community's social prob- lems budget, either favorable or unfavorable. However, availability of the clinic services might conceivably reduce pressure on parents to turn to crime to get money for family needs. The program should be expanded-in several ways. Although it would not be practical to set up additional clinics at this time. the size of the present clinic should be doubled. There is now only enough money to run the Dental Clinic for 35 weeks a year and the Well-Child Clinic for 24 weeks. As a result appoint- ments must be scheduled months in advance. The clinics should also be expanded PAGENO="0651" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3111 to take care of adults. (An adult dental clinic proposal was submitted, but turned down.) Cancellation of the program would be a severe blow to the poor people of Clermont County. If this should happen, the County itself might try to cover part of the expense. The private social welfare agencies might wafit to pick up the project-but it is hard to see how they could manage it: it is very difficult to raise money in Clermont County. As for other Federal help-HEW might take the clinics over~ "At least it would be worth a try." (The Clermont Clinics draw critical comments from an elected official among the Cincinnati respondents. He questions the need for the clinics on the grounds that there are already four hospitals-outside the County-serving Clermont residents.) Other programs A few programs draw only unfavorable comment. Talbert House, a program for paroled prisoners, is criticized as too special in nature and too far removed from the main antipoverty effort to be appropriate to the Community Action program. The Small Business Development program is described by several respondents as ineffectual. Some believe that its weakness is due to an inability to get loan applications approved further up the line. A social worker declares flatly that SBD suffered from "poor leadership and inadequate professional staffing," and adds: "Also, the financial community has not been sufficiently involved in its activities." Some programs were not discussed, in most cases because they are too spe- cialized in nature to be of general interest. In this group are the Dental Services Program, Family Planning Service, Therapeutic Recreation Program in Institu- tions for the Aged, the Lincoln Heights School Social Work Project, the Preschool Program in Lincoln 1-leights, and the Salvation Army Case Work Pro- gram in Clermont County. This study did not involve community leaders in the three Kentucky counties. However, the major programs in these areas parallel the most widely discussed programs in Cincinnati, Neighborhood Facilities and Head-Start. AWARENESS, PARTICIPATION, AND BENEFITS TO FAMILIES 1. In Cincinnati 4 out of 10 respondents, living in poverty areas contiguous to the Neighborhood Centers, report that they are aware of the programs and ac- tivities sponsored by the "War on Poverty." This incidence of awareness is lower than the average reported for the nine communities studied (6 out of 10). Total contacts ~ Total contacts, Cincinnati Numberingroup 5,720 Unaware of program (percent) 38 Aware of program (percent) 62 602 60 40 2. Among the households contacted in Cincinnati, participation in OEO "War on Poverty" programs by one or more family members is reported by 3 out of 10 respondents-slightly higher than the participation level (1 in 4) noted for the nine communities, on the average. Taken as a function of awareness, the incidence of participation in Cincinnati is at a much higher level (almost 8 out of 10) than is reported among the nine communities studied (4 out of 10). 3. Those who participated in the CAA programs in Cincinnati (the "affected- poor" 1 interviewed) have, by and large, similar characteristics to the "affected poor" interviewed in the nine areas. A high proportion are under 35 (about 4 out of 10). The average household size is about the same (5.8). Unemployment is as prevalent-3 out of 10 reporting no family member employed. 1 Those respondents reporting participation by a family member in one or more programs are identified as the "affected poor." PAGENO="0652" 3112 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Their per capita income is parallel-$670. Most of the families report having one or more children (age 5-18) living at home. The majority of families are fully formed-with both parents present in the household. However, some differences exist which set them apart from the total "affected poor": A high' proportion are Negro (3 out' of 4)-as compared to the Negro distribution of about half in the nine areas as a whole'. They are not as well-educated as the total "affected" group-2' out of 10 have completed a high' school education as compared to 3 out of 10, on the average, in the nine communities. 4. The critical needs reported by the "affected poor' `interviewed in Cincinnati follow the same pattern as those expressed in the nine communities in aggregate. These needs revolve around three basic issues-their children, their finances and their health. Of lesser importance in both Cincinnati and the total poverty population studied are those factors relating to education, job opportunities and material benefits. 5. The most widely used program, among those who were eligible 2 j~ Cin- cinnati, is Head-Start. In about 2 out of 3 o~ the families eligible, the head of household reported that one or more of their children has participated in the Head-Start program. Interestingly, this incidence of participation is on a lower level than was reported by the nine communities in total-where participation was almost universal (99%). Considering' the other programs available in Cin- cinnati, participation by eligible families varied significantly-from 1 out of 2 heads of households reporting participation in Health Programs to less than 1 out of 10 heads of households reporting participation in Household Management (administered through the Neighborhood Centers). Another difference between Cincinnati and the nine areas combined is the high `reported utilization of Educa- tion' Help for Grade School Children (believed principally to reflect the Lighted Schools program)-by a 4 to 1 ratio. 6. In almost all (9 out of 10) of the households, in Cincinnati, where a child was enrolled in the Head-Start program, the head of household reports that a change. primarily for the better, has taken place in their children. Indirect benefits-such as more interested in school, eager to learn and gets along better with children-are reported in more than 9 out of 10 households. Direct effects-reported by somewhat few-er than 9 out of 10 households-include benefits such as doing better school work, speaks better and learned to read and write. Both direct and indirect benefits are on a par with those reported by the total "affected poor" in the nine communities. Heads of households in Cincinnati attribute essentially the same benefits for themselves, as was reported by the total "affected" group-with about half re- porting that they have been positively affected by the child's participation in the Head-Start program. The majority of benefits are indirect (at about the 50% level), e.g.. child getting more attention, get more done around the house, nicer to child. etc.,-rather than direct (at the 15% level)-e.g., able to shop bet- ter. get work, and take courses. In general, the participants in other programs in Cincinnati, aside from Head- Start, also reported major benefits. The number of participants in these pro- grams, how-ever, are too few' to permit separate reporting for Cincinnati. The quality of the benefits of each of the programs is described in the volume entitled "Detailed Findings of Study to Determine Effects of CAP Programs on Selected Communities and Their Low--Income Residents" where data are presented for all nine communities in aggregate. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will be in recess until 9 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 5 :20 p.m., the committee was recessed,. to be recon- vened at 9 a.m.. Friday, July 28,1967.) Eligibility is defined as those families who meet the requirement for participation (e.g., for Headstart-the presence of a child). PAGENO="0653" ECONOMIC .OPPORTLTNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196.7 3113 (The following material was submitted for the record:) TUE SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, Washington, D.C., July 3, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, House Education and Labor Committee, House of Representatives, Washiugton, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In reading the transcript of the June 21 hearings on the Economic Opportunity Act Amendments, we noticed that some concern was ex- pressed about the relationship between Upward Bound and Talent Search. Since we are responsible for the administration of the Talent Search program, we thought that our view of the differences between them would be helpful to you. The differences are these: 1. MISSION Upward Bouud's mission is to prepare under-achievers for college. As OEO's statements put it, "students selected for Upward Bound shall be those who have potential for success in college or other post-secondary education, but whose present level of achievement and/or motivation would seem to preclude their acceptance in a college, university, or other post-secondary institution." So far as we understand the program, this is an accurate description. On the other hand, Talent Search's mission is not a preparatory program but, as stated in the Higher Education Act of 1965, one of ide~tiflcation a~d encourage- ment of "qualified youth" to complete secondary school and undertake post-sec- ondary education, and encouragement of secondary school or college dropouts to reenter educational programs. While there is some small overlap with the [Jpward Bound target youth, "qualified youth" under Talent Search are limited to those with good high school records, good enough to qualify them for college entrance. Upward Bound serves the harder core youth with a poor high school record, who require major remedial programs. Upward Bound serves "poor youth with undemon.strated aptitude" who might, if given intensive academic remediation and enrichment, be prepared for post- secondary education. Essentially this means that Upward Bound works primarily with under-motivated youth. Talent Search, on the other hand, generally serves poor youth "with demonstrated aptitude" providing college admission and finan- cial aids counseling for such youth. 2. PROGRAM Upward Bound provides to poverty youngsters, at no cost to them, the full range of academic pre-college courses in residential summer schools and by tii- toring and special classes during the school year. Medical and dental care is provided as well as a weekly stipend of up to $10 per week per student while on campus. Talent Search, on the other hand, counsels qualified youth about college careers and publicizes college admissions and financial aids data. Any remedial or com- pensatory work would be incidental. Subsistence, medical and dental care, and stipends are not provided. 3. FINANCIAL STATUS Upward Bound is currently serving 22,000 poor youth in 250 projects at a Federal cost of approximately $1,250 per . student. The faculty/student ratio is 1:7. Talent Search currently serves 250,000 to 500,000 students in 57 projects at a Federal cost of $5 to $10 dollars per student. The counselor/student ratio is 1 to 1100-i to 2200. 4. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT Upward Bound projects operate in conjunction with Community Action Agen- cies and the universities and colleges to provide counseling, remedial, and sup- porting services and to identify youth. Talent Search, on the other hand, relies mainly on college and high school per- son1lel for its counseling and publicizing projects, and the extent of community involvement varies from project to project. The programs are presently quite distinct in their specific objectives and opera- tions. Much of what is learned through Upward Bound, however, has been and will continue to be useful to us in the administration of the Talent Search pro- gram. PAGENO="0654" 3114 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 We feel that it is essential to continue to support Upward Bound and the im- provements it is bringing about in dealing with the problem of reclaiming talents that would otherwise be lost. A change at this time would, we believe. imperil the substantial progress which is being made in helping disadvantaged youngsters develop their talents to the full reach of their potential. Sincerely, JOHN W. GARDNER, Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE, Washington, D.C., August 10, 1967. Hon. CARL P. PERKINS, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR Ma. PERKINS: At the time I appeared before the House Education and Labor Committee on June 23, 1967 in connection with the authorization hearings for the Economic Opportunity Act, requests were made for the following: (1) a breakdown by sex for Title V trainees who left projects for reasons other than employment, entered advanced training and completed assign- ment. This information is contained in the enclosed table providing data for the period December 1964 through April 1967. (2) an interpretation of Section 503(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act regarding the 36-month limitation on an individual's participation in a Title V project. Enclosed is a copy of a memorandum dated July 11, 1967 from Mr. Joseph H. Meyers, Acting Commissioner of Welfare, which incorporates the construction of this section by the Office of General Counsel of the Depart- ment of Health, Education, and Welfare. (3) a "rebuttal" of the Community Associates, Inc. "Case Study of Leslie, Knott, Letcher, Perry (LKLP) Community Action Council, Eastern Ken- tucky prepared for U.S. Senate Committee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty." Enclosed are comments, as requested, from the viewpoint of the Title V, Work Experience and Training Program. (4) comments on the staff paper entitled "Work Experience and Train- ing" prepared by Dr. Sar Levitan for the Sub-Committee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Wel- fare. Enclosed is a general statement regarding Dr. Levitan's paper and spe- cific comments on a number of items in the paper. Sincerely yours, LISLE C. CARTER, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Indivicival and Fancily Services. Enclosures. Work i~xperience and training program-Other reasons for termination by sex, December 1964 to Apiii 1967 Reasons for termination Total Male . Female Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Good cause Disability andmedicailyunqualifled_~ Child care Ineligible Hour~ofwork Transportation problems Educational limitatioas 47,700 100. 0 20,964 44.0 26,736 56. 0 17,363 36.4 5,900 12.4 11,463 24.0 10,017 3,721 1,908 190 1,062 525 21.0 7.8 4.0 0.4 2.1 1. 1 4,247 324 830 38 240 221 8.9 .7 1.7 .1 .5 . 5 5,770 3.397 1,078 152 762 304 12. 1 7.1 2.3 .3 1.6 . 6 Not good cause 15,407 Poorattandance 8,825 Dissatisfied with assignment 3,339 Lackofprogress 1,955 Misconduct 906 Refused assignment 382 Projects terminated 2,814 Other (reasons not specified) 12, 116 32.3 8,259 17. 3 7, 148 15. 0 18.5 7. 0 4.1 1.9 0.8 5,224 1,396 702 634 303 11.0 2. 9 1.5 1.3 . 6 3,601 1,943 1,253 272 79 7.5 4. 1 2.6 .6 .2 5.9 25. 4 1,038 5, 767 2.2 12. 1 1,776 6,349 3.7 13. 3 PAGENO="0655" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3115 INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 503 (b) OF THE ECoNo~IIC OPPORTUNITY ACT I understand that when you testified before the House Education and Labor Committee in connection with authorizations under the Economic Opportunity Act, the Chairman, Congressman Carl D. Perkins, requested a constructiOn of the 36-month limitation on participation in Title V projects. The following reply has been received from the Office of General Counsel: "This is in response to your request for an interpretation of section 503(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended. Section 503(b) reads as follows: Work experience and training programs shall be so designed that partici- pation of individuals in such programs will not ordinarily exceed 36 months, except that nothing in this subsection shall prevent the provision of neces- sary and appropriate follow-up services for a reasonable period after an individual has completed work experience and training. The provision in the House bill was identical to the one enacted except that the limit was 24 months. The House report, H. Rep. No. 1568, 89th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 22, contains the following statement: No individuals can participate in these programs for over 24 months, although followup services can be extended for a reasonable period after the completion of work experience and training. The Conference Report H. Rept. 2298, 89th Cong., 2d Sess., p. 35 states: The conference substitute differed from the House provision by extending the limit on the duration of work experience and training programs from 24 to 36 months. It seems clear from the language of section 503(b) that the 36 months' limita- tion applies to individual participation in work experience and training pro- grams and not to the programs or projects themselves. This is reinforced by the House Committee report. The language in the Conference Report suggests the contrary, but is directed to the length of the period rather than its effect, and in any event would not, in our opinion, override the clear language of the statute. Thus, it would be permissible to extend or review a project which has been in operation for three years or more. Although the 36 months' limitation is imposed on individual participation, the statute directs that it be achieved through project design. Accordingly, in the formulation and approval of projects-and especially in connection with grants for periods approaching or extending beyond the project's third birthday, as well as for periods thereafter-particular attention must be given to compliance with the statutory limitation. Section 503(b) allows some flexibility in directing that projects be designed so that individual participation will not ordinarily exceed 36 months. There is implicit recognition that, while participation in a work experience and training program for three years or less may be sufficient for most individuals, there may be some few (perhaps especially disadvantaged) individuals for whom a longer period is necessary. Also, in the carrying out of a project, there may be specific cases where an individual has been ill or for other good reason prevented from following his employment plans or training schedule, so that his participation in the program beyond 36 months would be warranted. Similarly, if a participant has fallen behind and can complete his schedule within a few weeks, an extension might be granted. These are only examples, and we do not attempt here to envisage all of the situations that would justify an extension. The House Committee report states that no individuals can participate in the programs for more than the specified limit. We do not view this statement as superseding the language of the statute, but it does indicate the committee's intention with respect to section 503(b), and it suggests the need for restraint in allowing individuals to participate in projects beyond 36 months. COMMENTS FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF THE TITLE V, WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING PROGRAM ON THE "CASE STUDY OF LESLIE, KNOTT, LETCHER, PERRY (LKLP) COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL, EASTEkN KENTUCKY (WHITESBURG, KENTUCKY) Although this report deals primarily with the community action program in the four designated counties, some references are made to the Work Experience and Training Program authorized under Title V, Economic Opportunity Act and administered by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The Work Experience and Training Program in these four counties is part of a 19-county PAGENO="0656" 3116 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 project in Eastern Kentucky which provides work experience and training for approximately 3,800 unemployed fathers.1 The Kentucky Department of Economic Security administers the Title V, Work Experience and Training Program under a grant of $12.5 million in Federal funds for fiscal year 1967. Although the Ken- tucky Legislature in 1964 passed enabling legislation for the State to claim Federal matching for aid to families with dependent children in need as a result of unemployment of a parent, necessary State matching funds have not been appropriated for the past several years. Neither the State nor localities provides general assistance in the 19-county area so, aside from the Economic Opportunity programs, there Is practically no other means of livelihood for large numbers of families headed by unemployed fathers. Most of these men previously earned a living working in the mines. They are a somewhat older population (average age 39) with a relatively low educational level (almost 36 percent of all Title V trainees had completed only the fourth grade and under.) The Community Associates, Inc. study is generally favorable with respect to the Work Experience and Training Program except (1) to charge a lack of imagination in utilizing participants for a variety of purposes including con- struction of dams, low cost homes for public assistance recipients, aid to com- munity development, etc. (reference is made to suggestions offered by trainees themselves In the April 1967 issue of the "Sorry Times") ; and (2) the opinion "that the vocational `training has been weak, due primarily to lack of suitable heavy equipment, and some field supervisors who are `straw bosses'." (The latter reference is not too clear.) With respect to the first point, it is agreed that the suggestions for program activities made by the Work Experience and Training trainees themselves offer some excellent possibilities. On May 31, 1967. staff of the Welfare Administra- tion (Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) met with a representative of the Mid-Atlantic Regional Office of the Office of Economic Opportunity to dis- cuss possible implementation of these suggestions. It was learned that the Office of Economic Opportunity is in a position to secure heavy equipment (Govern- ment surplus property) from the General Services Administration, w-hich will be of major assistance in carrying out some of the activities suggested. Other activities, such as construction of low cost housing for welfare recipients, are not authorized by law as far as the Title V program is concerned. However, while construction of housing is not authorized, Title V trainees in Eastern Kentucky have received training in home repair skills through patching the roofs, fixing broken doors, and windows and otherwise making the rundown homes of public assistance recipients more habitable. It should also be pointed out that there has been considerable work done under the Title V project in Eastern Kentucky in the way of conservation of natural resources, beautification of roadsides, renovation of classroom and other public buildings, building of bridges to enable children to attend school, repair of roads so families can get into town, clearing of streams for fishing and recreational purposes, etc. An example of such activity w~s observed 2 in Wolfe County, Kentucky which is rated the second poorest county in the United States. Here some 150 unemployed fathers are enrolled in the Title V program. Under a project sponsored by the Soil Conservation Services, approximately $1 million worth of flood control work has been provided by Title V trainees in the Red River Valley. A garbage dump was constructed on land donated by a private citizen. April 13. 1967 was desig- nated as the town's first "Clean-up Day" with Title V trainees manning borrow-ed trucks to pick up trash collected by local residents. The second point of criticism made by the Community Associates, Inc. report is with respect to limited vocational training provided under the Title V project. This point should be considered in relation to the characteristics of the group being served in Eastern Kentucky. As pointed out previously, about 36 percent of the trainees have completed only the fourth grade or under (about 6 percent reportedly had no schooling at all). Consequently as a first step in upgrading their employability about 95 percent of the trainees w-ere enrolled in adult basic education courses. This was carried out right from the beginning of the project in January 1965 with the wholehearted cooperation of the State Department of 1 The other 15 counties included in this project are Bell, Breathitt. Clay, Elliott, Floy& Harlan. Jackson. Knox. Magoffin. Martin, Menifee. Morgan. Owsley, Pike and Wolfe. 2 During a visit on March 27-30, 1967. by representatives of the Office of the Secretary, Department of Health. Education, and Welfare and Office of the Commissioner, Welfare Administration, D/HEW. PAGENO="0657" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3117 Education in making available funds under Title IT-B of the Economic Oppor- tunity Act to cover the cost. As a result of this initial effort, it was possible for 476 trainees to advance into high school equivalency courses by 1966. Since, until quite recently, Manpower Development and Training Act was not an available training resource in this area, funding for some 200 full-time one- year vocational educational training spaces was approved under the Title V project on July 28, 1966. This number was being further expanded when addi- tional MDTA training resources weremade available last spring. Another significant training resource under Title V has been the provision of on-the-job training through the use of private employers. 658 trainees have been assigned to such placements with an almost 100 percent success rate as far as securing resultant employment. In fact, taking into account the prevailing economic conditions in this area,3 the 33 percent job placement rate is quite favorable. A report for the period January 1965 to May1966 shows that a total of 1,936 trainees had been terminated from the project during this period. Of this number, 943 (48.7 percent) had been involuntarydue to agency policy (regarding absenteeism, misconduct, etc.) and 993 (51.3 percent) had been voluntary. Of the voluntary terminations, 640 (64.5 percent) had left the project because of having obtained employment. A labor mobility demonstration project was approved as of July 1, 1966 in this area sponsored jointly by the D/HEW and the Department of Labor. The cost of actual relocation of family heads and their dependents is paid by the Department of Labor grant. The D/HEW grant covers financial assistance, if and when needed, medical care, and casework and related services before and after relocation. There have been 83 participants in the demonstration project who have been relocated from Eastern Kentucky, most of them to Lexington, Louis- ville and the northern part of Kentucky, with some working in Indiana, Ohio, and Virginia. These men found jobs as material handlers, painters, assemblers, truck drivers, and auto body repairmen with rates of pay ranging from $1.74 to $2.46 per hour. As of April 15, 1967, 208 trainees in the Kentucky Title V project have been referred to the Division of Employment Service under the mobility demon- stration and were interested in being including in the demonstration. A number of these trainees are located in the four counties covered by the Community Asso- ciates, Inc. report. Most of them would not have been brought to the point where they could relocate and qualify for jobs in other communities were it not for the services they received under Title V. Apparently the inference which the Community Associates, Inc. report tries to make is that vocational training is limited because of the use of "straw bosses." We assume this is with reference to the use of selected Title V trainees to serve as crew foreman for other trainees engaged in work experience. The pur- pose is to provide closer supervision to smaller groups of trainees (one foreman to crews of 10-20 trainees). A two-week foremanship (crew chief) course is provided under contract with the Uuniversity of Kentucky. Since the crew chiefs are among the most successful in moving into vocational training and private employment, it is necessary to reschedule the training course periodically in order to fill vacancies. The use of crew chiefs is not intended as a means of providing voca- tional training but is intended primarily to supplement project staff supervision of work experience to assure that the work experience is actually instilling good work habits. The Community Associates, Inc. report devotes considerable attention to the manpower coordination problems (see especially Appendix III). It should be noted that need for coordination in this area is of fairly recent origin since up until recently the Work Experience and Training program under Title V was practically the only work-training program in this depressed area. Parentheti- cally, it might be added that a recent analysis made by the Office of Economic Opportunity showed that the Work Experience and Training program has put more money in the 182 poorest counties in the country than any other anti-poverty program, although it is not one of the largest poverty programs. As a result of other manpower programs beginning to concern themselves about the problems of the bottom layer of the poor, we can expect to find more and more need for coordination. In this respect, the Cooperative Area Manpower Planning System (OAMPS)-of which the Title V program is a fully participating part-should afford a mechanism for bringing about a more effective deployment of resources The Community Associates, Inc., report indicates unemployment rate in some counties as high as 53 percent, although it states that its data may be off as much as 10 percent to 20 percent. 80-084-67-pt. 4-42 PAGENO="0658" 3118 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 to meet needs. The Community Associate~ Inc. report states that under the CAMPS all participants agree "not to relinquish any of their statutory powers" and hence implies the effort will not "yield satisfaction to income-hungry men in Eastern Kentucky." Obviously agencies cannot divest themselves of responsibility which has been assigned to them by law unless there is specific legal provision for this to be done. Nonetheless, the CAMPS holds promise for achieving closer working relationships among the various programs and for the more effective deployment of resources. The sharing of program information alone among the various agencies is one important benefit. In fact, if a local CAMPS coordinating committee had been operating in this area, the difficulty referred to in this report regarding difficulty in understanding policies, rules and regulations and criteria for referral to the various programs (Work Experience and Training, Manpower Development and Training Act, on-the-job training and Nelson-Scheuer projects) would have been largely eliminated. Since the CAMPS effort was initiated only this year by the Department of Labor on an inter-departmental basis, it is not yet fully operative in all geographic areas (such as this one). The initiation of manpower programs (other than Title V. Economic Oppor- tunity Act) came about largely as a result of the curtailment of the Work Ex- perience and Training Program due to the imposition of a 12% percent ceiling on the amount of funds which can be allocated to any one State. The impact of this in Eastern Kentucky was a decrease in funds from around $17 million in fiscal year 1966 to $12.5 million in fiscal year 1967. In terms of trainees, this meant a reduction from about 5,100 in February 1967 to 2,800 or 3.000 by Septem- ber depending on how fast trainees could be phased out. Every effort was made not to disrupt trainee participation in vocational training programs which were underway or trainee enrollment in high school equivalency courses. At times, this presented problems as the programs, such as MDTA. which were being de- veloped required higher qualifications which only the advanced Title V trainee already involved in a training or high school equivalency program could meet. The reaction of a Community Action Director is described in Appendix III of the report where he states "We were not even told what policy would prevail in making the selections. This caused a considerable delay since we were forced to fight for our rights. We simply refused to hire many from the first batch of re- ferrals." This was obviously no solution for the former Title V trainees who are among this "first batch" who did not qualify for Nelson-Scheuer projects. An- other hitch developed when question was raised about the eligibility for medical benefit coverage under Title XIX of the Social Security Act for former Title V trainees and their families who were transferred for Nelson-Scbeuer projects and other manpower programs. This is now being straightened out so the participants under Nelson-Scheuer projects will qualify. However, in view of this uncertainty plus the lower level of payment and short-term nature of the Nelson-Scheuer projects, it is no wonder that the unemployed fathers originally on the Title V program have indicated their strong preference for meaningful jobs with decent income-not so much on training. They are critical of the different income range for differently sponsored programs. In their perceptions, there really wasn't much of a difference in the programs. except as they differed in income. Their solution would be then, assigning enrollees to work programs based on income needs (size of family. e.g.) rather than on degree of education, literacy and potential for learning a skill. In view of the characteristics of the group and the prevailing economic condi- tions of the locality in which they live, this seems a very realistic solution. It does not, of course, provide a cure for the widespread poverty in this region which requires, as this report recognizes, large-scale economic development. The solu- tion recommended does, how-ever, afford the means of meeting the financial and health needs of individual families at the same time the father is provided the opportunity to engage in constructive work activity and training where appro- priate. Among existing programs. the ones expressly designed to meet these require- ments are AFDC-TJP combined with a Community Work and Training Program under Title IV of the Social Security Act. Unfortunately, the State of Kentucky has been unable to come up with the necessary matching funds to implement these two provisions. Of the programs which are available wIthout substantial State matching, the Title V Work Experience and Training comes closest to serv- ing the purpose. The Community Associates. Inc. report implies that another defect of the Title V program is that it is administered by the State public w-elfare agency. The main criticisms made in the report against the public welfare agency are: (1) PAGENO="0659" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3119 "secrecy" surrounding rules and regulations governing the program; and (2) fear on the part of trainees of "retaliation by the welfare bureaucracy" if they express opposition to the way the program is being operated. The report refers to an article in the Mountain Eagle (November 17, 1966) which quotes attorney Harry M. Caudill of Letcher County (author of Night Comes to the Cumberlands) as saying that "neither he nor any other Kentucky attorney that he knows of has been able to obtain a copy of the rules and regu- lations which govern the everyday lives of the recipients." On the other hand, 1~ir. C. Leslie Dawson, Commissioner of the Kentucky Department of Economic Security, stated in a telephone conversation on July 11, 1967 that any group or individual who is representing a dissatisfied claimant will be provided with a copy of the manual of public assistance policies. He further advises that a copy of the manual is available in every local public welfare office for the inspection of any person who wishes to see it and public welfare staff has been instructed to offer all necessary assistance in finding the information being sought. Follow- ing the visit of a member of the staff of the Office of the Commissioner, Welfare Administration, to Whitesburg on March 27, 1967 a copy of the Federal Handbook of Administration of the Work Experience and Training Program was sent to Mr. Tom Gish of the Mountain Eagle. The letter of acknowledgment stated that it was found "very useful reading (if a bit dry)." The Community Associates, Inc. report cites the dissolution of a committee of Work Experience and Training enrollees organized to Baíve the Jobless Program as due to a "combination of the availability of on-the-job training, the Nelson Amendment programs and to fear of retaliation from the welfare bureaucracy." No evidence is presented to support this charge regarding "retaliation from the welfare bureaucracy." It is known that applicants and recipients who are dissatis- fied with the Work Experience and Training Program are not afraid to exercise their right to appeal; This is shown by the fact that earlier this year there was a backlog of 20 appeals for hearings. In order to clear them up a full-time hearing officer (or referee) was appointed to act on Title V appeals. This position was reduced to half~time after the backlog was taken care of. The first step in the appeal procedure is a hearing before the referee. If the claimant is not satisfied with the referee's decision, he can appeal to a Commission consisting of the Commissioner (Mr. 0. Leslie Dawson) and two other members. Mr. Dawson states that the Commission has overruled the referee's decision in about four out of five cases brought before it. In other words, where the referee ruled that the worker had correctly applied agency policy the Commission overruled the referee and the worker. This indicates that the appeal and hearing procedure is an avenue for clients to express dissatisfaction and that it is being used. The role of the Federal Goveimment in seeing that the State administers the program in accordance with established policies should also be taken into con- sideration. The Regional Title V staff member visits the Eastern Kentucky 19-County project every three months. The State agency has encountered diffi- culty in recruiting staff at the required ratio of one work experience and training position to each 60 trainees. The Bureau of Family Services has notified the States that September 30, 1967 is the deadline when this ratio must be reached in order to assure that individual employability plans are developed and carried out in a manner that enhances the trainee's employability. In summary, it is the opinion of most observers that the Title V program has a satisfactory record in this area. This is attested `to by the alarm and concern that was expressed when it was necessary to curtail the number of Title V trainees this spring to stay within the 12'/2 percent limitation imposed by Con- gress on the amount of funds that can be allo-cated to any one State. A `local clergyman, who has taken a very active interest in the welfare of the poor people in Appalachia, summed up his feelings as follows: "The Jobless Fathers program was probably the most inspired experi- ment-and the most notable success-of all the social welfare innoTations of the poverty war. Are we to stand mutely by-and by our silence, acquiesce- as it is dismembered and gradually destroyed?" STATEMENT REGARDING THE STAFF PAPER ENTITLED "WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING". PREPARED BY Dn. SAR LEVITAN The overall thrust of the staff paper prepared by Sar Levitan entitled "Work Experience and Training" is that the Title V program has not accomplished much in the way of improving the employability of unemployed parents and other needy persons. In our view, Title V h~is been (1) successful in reaching and upgrading PAGENO="0660" 3120 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the employment potential of a large number of severely disadvantaged persons; and (2) that the program has achieved results which have not been bettered by any other government program actually serving a similar group of individuals. Since December 1964, the program has accomplished the following: EMPLOYMENT EARNINGS 35.700 unemployed parents and other needy persons have been placed in jobs. Seventy percent of these persons were recipients of public assistance-among the poorest of the poor. The remaining were either on general assistance or had a family, income of less than $3,000 a year; They went into jobs earning 75 percent more on the average than they had received previously from public assistance. Their monthly earnings average $258 as compared to the $144 average public as- sistance payment. A Title V trainee recently recognized for outstanding achievement illustrates the return on the public's investment in this program. Mrs. Bertha Evans. the widowed mother of 12 children. 8 of whom are still at home, had been a recipient of AFDC since 1961. When a Title V project was established in Conway County, Arkansas in 1965, Mrs. Evans was accepted as a trainee and enrolled in a one- year course for licensed practical nursing. Upon completion of the course, she gained immediate employment and is now serving in a supervisory capacity in a rest home at wages of $250 a month. Without Title V it is a reasonable to expect that Mrs. Evans and her children would have continued to be supported from public assistance for at least the next 12 years. For an investment of about $1500 in training for Mrs. Evans, there will be a saving of $15,000 in public assistance funds. Seventeen percent of those employed receive public assistance in addition to their wages which result in au even more adequate income for these families and a reduction in public assistance payments. (Supplementation of earnings by pub- lie assistance is sometimes necessitated because care of the children limits the mother to part-time employment. In the case of large families, some jobs do not pay well enough to provide full support. This is particularly likely to be true in rural areas where about 40 percent of Title V training spaces are located. Nearly half of the employed trainees (16,000) went into skilled jobs including sub-professional and technical. Among the many skilled jobs, taken by this group of trainees, were licensed practical nurses. teacher aides, secretaries, bookkeep ers. key punch operators, carpenters, mechanics and salesmen. Over one-third of the employed, trainees (13,000) went into service occupa- tions which range from jobs such as policemen, firemen, and barbers to home- maker aides, waitresses and janitors. The remaining sixth of the employed trainees (7,000) went into other occupa- tions such as truck drivers, gardeners, common laborers, maintenance, gas station attendants, and road workers. REACHING THE TARGET GROUP One-third of all `Title V trainees have neved held a job for as long as six months. Less than 21 percent had completed high school at the time of assignment to a Title project. Of those trainees with less than `high school training, 26 percent had not advanced beyond the 7th grade level, and one-third of these had an educational level of 4th grade or lower. Exclusive of the Eastern Kentucky and West Virginia projects that have few Negroes in their general population and also exclusive of the Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands projects that do not report race, 5 out of every 10 trainees are Negro and a small percentage is made up of Indians and Orientals. Four out of 10 training spaces are located in rural areas, many of which have high unemployment rates. TRAINING, EDUCATION, AND OTHER SERVICES More than 4,600 persons have left Title V to go into advanced vocational train- ing. This proportion can be expected `to increase under the 1966 Amendments to the Manpower Development and Training Act. The Title V program has upgraded the educational level of over 60,700 trainees by providing adult basic education-a necessary first step in equipping the func- tionally illiterate for the work experience and training they need to find and keep gainful employment. Over 8,100 trainees benefitted from high school equivalency courses and over 24,500 developed new work skills through full-time vocational education. PAGENO="0661" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3121 EVALUATION It is difficult to evaluate the Title V program on the basis of comparison with other programs because there is but limited experience by ether agencies in serving this population. A recent study by the Department. of Labor reports on public assistance recipients trained under MDTA program from the beginning of that program through February 1965. The placement rate under MDTA was estimated to be 64 percent. The Department of Labor report refers only to the placement rate of public assistance recipients who "graduated" from MDTA programs. Using a similar concept for the Title V program in terms of "gradua- tion"-i.e., those who have completed their assignment, the rate of employment is 62 percent. The Department of Labor report was based on a cumulative total of public assistance recipients trained as of February 1965. Their information is based on a sample of 14,000 recipients representing about 18,000 public assistance recipients trained. It is interesting to note that two and one-half years after MDTA began operations, only 18,000 public assistance recipients out of a total of 195,000 trainees were served by the Department of Labor. During a comparable length of time (December 1964 to April 1967), approximately 100,000 Title V trainees were drawn from this same category. The effectiveness of the MDTA program is hard to compare with that of Title V because of the wide variation in the characteristics and location of the public assistance recipients trained. Nearly all of the MDTA trainees came from densely populated and highly industrialized States were employment opportunities are relatively more abundant. Title V, in contrast, has allocated about 40 percent of its training spaces to rural areas and about 30 percent of all Title V funds are allocated to rural projects. As of March 1967, more than 7,700 trainees (12 per- cent) were in projects in Eastern Kentucky and Mississippi where only negligible efforts were made by `the MDTA program. Moreover, the education level of Title V trainees was signficantly lower in comparison to that of public assistance recipients trained under the MDTA. In the latter program, about 19 percent of the trainees had eight grades or less of formal schooling, whereas in Title V more than 40 percent fell into this category. Finally, the previous work experience of these two groups of trainees varied considerably. About one-third of all Title V trainees had less than six months continuous work experience before enrolling in Title V. Of all public assistance MDTA trainees, only 17 percent had no prior work experience. In sum, the public assistance recipients trained under the MDTA were better evaluate a program such as Title V. Not only do other programs not reach the high labor demand. Despite the fact that Title V `trainees were more severly disadvantaged, the rate of employment based on a similar concept of "gradua- tion" was comparable. The paper prepared by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Program Coordination of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and submitted for the record describes the complexities surrounding any attempt to meaningfully evaluate a program such as Title V. Not only do other programs not reach the same population, neither do they bring to bear such a wide variety of resources to bear on the problems. The paper points out that evaluations of Title V have been hampered by the lack of baseline data with which Program performance can be compared. For this reason, aggregative measures of "success" such as the place- ment rates which were discussed above are of limited value for evaluate purposes. Aggregative analyses also overlook the wide variations in the effectiveness of individual projects. Approximately 50 percent of this variation is attributable to differences in: prevailing economic conditions and social and demographic characteristics of participants These factors operate independently of any particular administering agency. SPECIFIC COMMENTS ON STAFF PAPER PREPARED FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE BY DR. SAR LEVITAN ENTITLED "WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING" 1. "High" drop-out rate The paper refers to a high drop-out rate as evidenced by the figuresthat "only one out of every four completed the assigned course of training." This state- ment does not take into account the number who left to take a job before com- pleting their assignment (approximately 16,320). Nor does it take into account the fact that many who left will probably return once their problems are taken PAGENO="0662" 3122 ECONOMIC OPPORflJ~ITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 care of, such as those medically unqualified (10.017) lacked adequate child care (3,721) or transportation (1,002). The most recent data available show that 15 percent of trainees are actual "drop-outs" for such reasons as left because of refusal of employment, poor attendance, misconduct, dissatisfaction with assign- ment, etc. At the outside, the percentage of drop-outs could go as high as 27 percent if the 12 percent were included who left for unspecified reasons. 2. Bulk 01 assignments limited to low paying, unskilled occupations As of January 31,1967 approximately 30,000-almost half of the 67,300 trainees in Title V projects at that time were assigned to training in skilled occupations including sub-professional, technical, clerical, and sales. Approximately 23,000 (35 percent) were assigned to service occupations, which included a wide range of jobs at many skill levels. Trainees assigned to services occupations may be assigned to training as policemen, firemen, meatcutters or grounds maintenance. Another 3,000 (4 percent) were assigned to farm and non-farm occupational training which ranges in skill level from operating a combine or washing dairy equipment to designing food packaging. Approximately 11,000 (16 percent) u-crc assigned to semiskilled and unskilled occupations ranging from carpenter help- ers, and plumber helpers to common laborers and street sweepers. Many of the trainees will move from training in a low skill occupation to training in a higher skill occupation once they have learned good w-ork habits. acquired basic skills, and there is indication that they are capable of function- ing in a job requiring a higher skill level. The above distribution of trainees by occupational category is the initial assignment only and does not reflect the skill level the trainee may reach by the time he terminates from Title V. 3. No evidence that Title V led to more advanced vocational education 4600 of those who bad left the program as of April 30, 1967 went into advanced training. 24,500 received full-time vocational education while on the program. The 19-County Eastern Kentucky Title V project affords an example of up- grading trainees to the point that they can benefit from advanced vocational education. About 36 percent of the trainees had completed the 4th grade or under (about. 6 percent reportedly had no schooling at all). Consequently, as a first step in upgrading their employability about 95 percent of the trainees were enrolled in adult basic education courses. This was carried out right from the beginning of the project in January 1905 with the wholehearted cooperation of the State Department of Education which made available practically the entire State allocation of funds under Title Il-B of the Economic Opportunity Act for this purpose. As a result of this initial effort, it u-as possible for 476 trainees to advance into high school equivalency courses by 1966. Since, until quite recently, Manpower Development and Training Act was not an available training resource in this area, funding for some 200 full-time one-year vocational training spaces was approved under the Title V project on July 28. 1906. This number u-as being further expanded when additional MDTA training resources were made available last spring. 4. Public welfare agencies had little or no erperience with training or placement and awareness of labor market conditions This statement ignores the very considerable experience of some of our largest State welfare agencies-notably California. Illinois. Minnesota and New York- as well as others. Mr. Harold E. Simmons. Deputy Director of the California State Department of Social Welfare, in his testimony before the Sub-Committee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty of the TJ.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare and before the House Education and Labor Committee, reported on some of the early activities in this area. He stated that some Cali- fornia county projects date back to 1951. "Included were a rehabilitation and evaluation workshop, remedial and skill training in classrooms, work habit and skill on the job training in government agencies. Several counties have bad special staff for over a decade to provide vocational counseling, develop and coordinate projects, and to provide liaison with staff of the State Departments of Rehabilita- tion, EmplOyment and Education or their local counterparts. State law and Social Welfare Department regulations have, since 1951. increasingly stressed the requirement of self-support activities. Since 1903. they have been mandatory." Long before the passage of the Economic Opportunity Act, Illinois had incor- pOrated training components into its 1ong~standing work program under general assistance. Its previous experience resulted in a particularly effective adminis- trative organization and staff and a program which has attracted nationwide interest. New York likewise has had long-standing experience in this area and PAGENO="0663" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3123 in Minnesota, the Ramsey County Welfare Department established a bureau of employment and rehabilitation to serve public assistance recipients in 1962. In all, ten States had, adopted community work and training programs for public welfare clients prior to the enactment of the Title V program in 1964. It is true that many of `the remaining State welfare agencies did not have experience in training and placement. While they previously had been con- cerned primarily with providing financial assistance and social services, they quickly saw the value of work experience and training in helping clients become self-supporting. Invaluable experience has been gained over the past 2% years of operation of the Title V program 1y public welfare agencies. During this time, knowledge of how to work with the group to be served which public welfare agencies have long had, has been augmented by experience in developing train- ing, work experience and placement services especially designed to serve welfare clients. 5. Title V projects have been administered ifldependently of Community Action Agencies and other manpower programs The most convincing evidence that Title V projects are not operating inde- pendently but are taking advantage of the experience and resources of other programs in the community is the following table showing the value of services provided from other sources in 1966. This table shows fiscal effort only which by no means reflects total community cooperation: Total $21, 491, 000 Department of Labor: a. Vocational instruction (MDTA) 2,238,000 b. Counseling, testing, guidance, and job development 722, 000 Vocational instruction outside Department of La~bor 670, 000 Adult basic education 2, 987, 000 High school equivalency 110, 000 Medical 450, 000 Child care 50, 000 Other 1, 833, 000 Sponsors (work experience and training units contributions) a. Supervision and instruction 7, 008, 000 b. Tools and materials 4, 362, 000 c. Work space 908, 000 d. Other 144, 000 Specifically, with respect to cooperation with Commnity Action Agencies, a recent survey shows that of the 251 local Title V projects operating in fiscal year 1967, 172, or 70 percent, were components of Community Action Programs. 6. Shortage of trained social workers to provide pretraining, supportive and other services in Title V projects The paper quotes an excerpt from an address given by the administrator of the Title V program at the Federal level (Mr. Andrew R. Truelson). He stated "Therefore, in Title V the program objective embraces the needs of the entire family. We must teach wives and mothers the art of good home managenient, the maintenance of a clean home, how to take care of money, how to buy proper food, and prepare nutritious meals, personal hygiene, and the proper care of their children." Dr. Levitan comments "The assumption that social services can achieve all these objectives is one w-hich even the most ardent advocates of wel- fare work would question." Many Title V `projects are reaching the objectives outlined above by means of individual and group counseling, classes in home management, consumer educa- tion, instruction in child care, grooming, etc. These services are provided either directly `by the project staff (as on the Fort McDermitt Indian Reservation in Nevada), through cooperation with other programs, such as community action agencies (as in Conway County,' Arkansas) and `the Agricultural Extension Services (as in Puerto Rico) or the regular public welfare program (as in the Housekeeping Aide Training Program in New York City). Provision of these kinds of concrete services does not require trained social work staff. They are being performed~ effectively by a `wide range of aides in Title V projects, e.g. homemaker and child'care aides. Many of the other positions involved in administering Title V projects also `do not require social workers, but project administrators, work experience and training specialists, counselors, etc. PAGENO="0664" 3124 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In the beginning of this program (as is true in almost any other) difficulty was experienced in filling staff positions. As of June 30, 1965 about one-half of the authorized positions were unfilled. By the end of March 1967 about one-fifth of the positions were vacant. Despite staff shortages, it has been possible to operate the program effectively as shown by the fact that as of April 30, 1967, 61,000 spaces were filled. Faced with staff limitations innovative approaches have been tried in order to assure proper supervision of trainees involved in work experience and other project activities. One of these is the use in Eastern Kentucky of selected Title V trainees to serve as crew foreman to oversee other trainees engaged in work experience. One foreman is assigned responsibility for supervision of a crew consisting of 10-20 trainees. A two-week foremanship (crew chief) course is provided under contract with the University of Kentucky. This use of crew chiefs has resulted in better supervision to assure that the work experience is actually instilling good work habits. 7. Sparing use of private employers for on-the-job training Private employers have been used in Title V projects and the results have been outstanding. An informal survey in which approximately 85 percent of the returns have been received to date shows that 1,130 trainees have gone into employment of w-hich 660 (58 percent) were employed by their private employer sponsor and 470 w-ent into other employment. At least 3,000 Title V participants are currently in training with private employers. Some projects using private employers as sponsors of training units are: Con?? ecticut: Oil heating industry skills Denver County, Cob.: Automotive repairing Wash in gton-Kn oa-Hancock-TValdo-Kennebec County, Maine: Canning and cabinet making Acadia -.JefJ erson Davis-Vermilion Parish Project, Louisiana: Auto servicing and repairing Cleb urn e Siw County Project, Arkan sas: Food locker and storage service Auto repairing 19 County Project, Kentucky: Small engine repairing Auto glass installation Cook County, Ill.: Taxicab operation and National Cash Register As Dr. Levitan has noted, the use of private employers is not authorized under Section 409 of the Social Security Act on w-hich the Title V program is based. Therefore, it has been necessary to grant a waiver for this purpose. Such waivers have been granted since April 1965 on the basis of the policy decision quoted in Dr. Levitan's paper. In order to avoid any exploitation of Title V trainees, how- ever, the following safeguards are required: The public welfare agency must provide assurance that such training is constructive from the standpoint of upgrading the employability of the par- ticipants and that participants are not exploited as a source of free labor. The training period should be reasonably related to the nature of the job. The participant is not to be given tasks other than those associated with the duties of the skill he is learning. As in all of our units under Title V par- ticipants in training with private employers may not displace or adversely affect regular employees (including substitute workers) or additional work- ei-s who would otherwise be hired. Despite such caution, a complication has arisen in connection with the im- plementation of the 1966 Amendments. The Department of Labor has raised question about Title V placements with private employers being in violation of the Wage and Hour Law. At this point, the Department of Labor has concurred in the use of private employers only for a 90-day period while the matter is under review. PAGENO="0665" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3125 8. Responsibility for approval of Title V projects centralized in Washington Responsibility for a number of decisions has been delegated to the regional offices under the Title V program. Examples of this are the placement with the regional offices of responsibility for review of. arrangements for on-the-job train- ing with private employers and approval of transfers of funds within specified limits from one budgetary item to another. However, the approval of projects has been maintained at the national level because of the problem of implementing national priorities under a declining program. Title V does not operate under a system of allocations of State funds which also makes it less feasible to de- centralize administration. 9. More flewibility needed in providing services aimed at individual needs Several examples are cited of Title V projects helping individuals during the early stages of regular employment and the suggestion is made that such notable illustrations might have been encouraged elsewhere. One of the purposes served by a series of regional seminars which we have conducted is the sharing with other project directors of experience which have been found successful in individual projects. Consultation provided by program development staff at the Washington and regional office level is another means of transmitting such information. Finally, the rating system which is being developed jointly with the Office of Economic Opportunity will provide a mechanism for identifying factors associated with the operation of succesful projects and also for their incorporation of such factors in projects which are less successful but face essentially the same set of outside conditions. The only new suggestion in the Levitan paper which has not already been tried in a Title V project is the one relating to provision of a second-hand car to enable a potential Title V trainee to get to an available job. This suggests other possibilities to meet transportation problems which will be discussed in rela- tion to additional resources needed to move more Title V trainees into jobs. 10. No need for a separate program to serve public assistance clients now that other manpower programs are aimed at serving the disadvantaged While other adult work training and special impact programs such as the "Concentrated Employment Program" provide comprehensive services, they do not give special priority to public assistance recipients. The Title V program, on the other hand, is administered by public welfare agencies which have a special responsibility for this population. Public welfare agencies throughout the country have had long experience in administering a. comprehensive range of supportive and work-training services while similar services are as yet being developed under the new "Concentrated Employment Program." While the broader definition of handicapped permits the vocational rehabili- tation program to serve a larger group of handicapped persons, than formerly, it does not include the able-bodied but undereducated individual who lacks motivation, job skills and work experience, and is beset by a host of personal and family problems, which could not be characterized as "behavioral disorders." The Eastern Kentucky experience when the Title V project had to be curtailed and other manpower programs were instituted is cited as an illustration that Title V is inter-changeable with other Federally-supported manpower programs. Quite the contrary view is brought out in the "Case Study of Leslie, Knott, Letcher, Perry (LKLP) Community Action Council, Eastern Kentucky (Whites- burg, Kentucky)" which was prepared for the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Sub-Committee on Employment, Manpower and Poverty. This report, which was prepared by Community Actioii Associates, Inc., describes the criticism expressed by trainees about the "different income range for differ- ently sponsored programs"; the confusion about the varying eligibility require- ments and the uncertainty because of the short-term nature of the Nelson- Scheuer projects. Anxiety was aroused because of the question as to whether participants under programs other than Title V were entitled to medical benefits under the State's Title XIX program and the food stamp program. 11. Goal of stressing training of male family heads not reached As a goal, the Title V program set a desired minimum of 50 percent of the enrollment to be allocated to male heads of families. This goal was related to the objectives of (1) strengthening family life and (2) demonstrating AFDC- UP in States which have not yet adopted this program. While provision for the latter was dropped from Title V of the Economic Opportunity Act in 1966, it is still intended that the benefits of the program be brought to unemployed PAGENO="0666" 3126 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 fathers never before reached or reachable under the AFDO categorical pro- gram. Projects which do not reach the minimum 50 percent male trainee ratio must submit justification, such as definition of unemployment being used, methods of recruitment utilized by the project, local rate of unemployment-particularly as it relates to needy unemployed male heads of households, number of families receiving general assistance or food stamps, etc. Despite these measures, the ratio of male trainees has declined and probably will continue to do so for the following reasons: a) Improved economic conditions which result in increased employment opportunities for males; b) Preponderance of females in the target population which the Title V program is intended to serve (see pages 4, 5 and 6 of the report transmitted tO Senator Clark by Assistant Secretary for Program Coordination Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, under date of June 6, 1967) ; and c) Increased facilities for child care. Certainly the Title V program cannot be justly criticized on any of these grounds for not reaching the goal of at least 50 percent male trainees. 12. Trend in cliaracteristie.~ of trainees indicates most promising mothers being selected front AEDU rolls rather than unemployed fathers The paper apparently assumes that female heads of families have greater po- tential for employment than males. While AFDC mothers may be slightly better qualified than male heads of families in terms of such characteristics as education and age, their potential for employment is adversely affected by child care prob- lems and the double burden of holding a job and managing a household. This is borne out by the fact that for the 12-month period between January-December 1966. of the 44,595 persons who terminated from Title V projects and were unem- p1oy~ed 19,864 were male and 24,731 were female. 13. Half of the trainees who have left Title V (whether by "graduation" or drop- out) continue on public assistance Of those back on public assistance, 17 percent are employed but receiving sup- plementation of earnings. In many of these cases, care of children has limited a mother to only part-time employment. Earnings are not sufficient to support a large family (see case example-attachment I). Three percent are enrolled in advanced training courses and need public assistance to provide support or to supplement the training allowance. Of the remainder, 30 percent need assistance because they have not found employment for the same reasons that prevented their completing the assignment-namely, lack of child care services, disability or illness, lack of transportation and similar problems. The remaining 50 percent which represents approximately 25 percent of all terminees includes individuals who were dropped by the project, who were enrolled in projects which were termi- nated and who completed the assignment and did not find immediate employment. 14. ~tatcs tempted. to shift unemployed parent cases to Title V to get 100 percent Federal jinancing The paper argues that because the AFDc-UP caseload is decreasing while the isumber of those on AFDC is rising, States are shifting unemployed parent cases to Title V to get 100 percent Federal financing. There is little evidence to support this contention. From March 1966 to April 1967, the number of Group II trainees in the 22 States having the AFDC-UP program increased by only 300. The number of T~P cases in the four States which adopted this program after Title V was estab- lished is shown below: State Became operative Number of UP cases as of April 1967 Arizona Jan. 11,1966 15 Colorado..... - Jan. 1,1966 1,693 Nebraska Oct. 1,1965 69 Wisconsin - Tan. 1,1967 464 2,241 PAGENO="0667" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3127 The two trends in AFDC and AFDC-UP caseloads are explained primarily by changes in social, economic and demographic conditions as well as changes in legislation in recent years. 15. No evidence that Federal officials have policed "maintenance of effort" In fiscal year 1968, the total for assistance, services and administration will, for Group I cases, approximate $38.4 million including $20.7 million in Federal funds and $17.7 million in State and local funds. Handbook Supplement B details the records and reports required to assure fiscal and program accountability (entire Section B-6000) as well as the methods of review and evaluation by local, State, regional and Washington staff. The equiv- alent of eight full-timb auditors in the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare are assigned responsibility to conduct audits of Title V projects. Attached is a list of Title V projects which have been audited to date. (attachment II). 16. Since Title V is located in a welfare setting most of the funds go for main- ten ance. In fiscal year 1968 a.bout one-half of total funds will go for maintenance pay- ments. This compares favorably with the MDTA program which uses 70 percent of its funds for training allowances. The percentage of funds used for maintenance in the Work Experience and Training Program is effected by the amount of non- welfare services received by the Title V program at no cost (over $20 million). Also, the mix of Group I and Group II trainees have an effect on this percentage. Maintenance cost for a Group II trainee is almost five times that for a Group I trainee. This is caused by the maintenance of effort for Group I trainees through the regular public assistance programs. Including maintenance of effort from all sources, 59 percent of total funds will go to maintenance. PAGENO="0668" PAGENO="0669" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS. OF 1967 FRIDAY, JULY 28, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9:15 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Quie, Goodell, and Scherle. Also present: H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; Louise Maxienne Dargans, research assistant; Benjamin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, investigator; Marian Wyman, special assistant; Charles W. Radcliffe, minority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minority research assistant; and W. Phillips Rocke- feller, minority research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. A quorum is present, and the committee will come to order. We have with us this morning Mary Jane Dunn. Come up and let me shake hands with you. I personally am very pleased and it is a great pleasure for me to welcome you here this morning, Mrs. Dunn. I am very proud of Breathitt County, Ky. It happens to be one of the few counties in the United States, if not the only county, that never re- quired the services of a draft board during World War I and Igo back there today and see so many of those old World War I veterans. I think it is impossible to go through that county and up and down those creeks without running into these World War I veterans-there are so many of them-not drawing social security at all because they continued to reside on those little hillside farms, all through the years and made a living, as long as they were able to work; and in the mean- time they became marginal farmers, and, with all this automation tak- ing place in late years, those little hillside farms where they raised the crops have grown up, and are completely unprofitable today. I am delighted to welcome you here. You come from a county and are representing a county with a very low capital income, and very low median family income, and if there is any area in the world that needs assistance it is a county like Breathitt County, Ky. You do not have any areas i.n the Washington area with one-tenth the conditions compared with conditions existing in Breathitt County, Ky. But it has patriotic people, and for that reason it is a great pleasure for me to welcome you here, and I certainly hope we will be able then in the future to do more than has been done in the past for the rural 3129 PAGENO="0670" 3130 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 people. I was completely disturbed when I was down home last week, conversations that I had with some of my relatives, poor people, who grew up in an area of the county next to the Breathitt County, about conversations that they had had with so called Appalachian volunteers, which to my way of thinking was completely unbecoming. I am so proud that we have dedicated people like yourself all through the mountains of the State of Kentucky. You and I well know that we are not going to make a Schenectady, N.Y., out of Breathitt County. Down in my own little, community of Hindman, we have a whole high school, and have two principals down there. I had so many calls last night about the things that were taking place, and it is completely disturbing, in the area. It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you here, and let me say that I am a great supporter of this program. I know about the prob- lems, but they are not insurmountable. Above everything else, we have got to try to pass this bill, and we will all work together in the future to make a better program out of it, as Sargent Shriver's desire is to make a better program out of it. We have a few infiltrationists here and there, there is no doubt in my mind about it, but, by and large, 99 percent of the people in the program are good, and I work with people in every way possible to get any undesirable out of this program, and I work with all of the people on this committee to help improve it. Again let me thank you for your appearance here this morning, and come around and give us the benefit of your views. I did not mean to make a speech, but last night happened to be a night when I had so darned many telephone calls with this unemploy- ment, and everything else, just points up the great need for the poverty program at times like these, and a program that we can improve. I am hopeful that we can get some amendments here that will make it more efficient. Come around. Come around to the microphone here. STATEMENT OF MRS. MARY J~ANE DUNN, DIRECTOR, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT OF THE COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM Mrs. DUNN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, now, Mrs. Dunn. First tell me what part of Breathitt County you come from. I am interested in the type of community action program you have got. Go right ahead. Mrs. DUNN. I live in a hollow now, called Pendell, down by the lake, but I was raised up in Clay Hole, on the barge. In February 1966, OEO funded a program of adult health educa- tion. This was a program where fieldworkers could go into the home and talk to the parents about health hazards, and why should we find this necessary in a day when we have eradicated polio, we have miracle drugs, but Mr. Perkins, we still have children sitting in our classrooms with as many as four types of intestinal parasites. Chairman PERKINS. Will you just talk out, now, so everybody can hear, and give us the whole history? Go ahead. PAGENO="0671" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3131 Mrs. DUNN. Thank you. We are providing our children with good educational opportunities. They get taught in the classroom, but they often go back home to situations that make it impossible for them to apply what they have learned. When we started this program, we had six people who came from the lower income group themselves, and I taught those people to go into the homes and talk about health problems. We have taught everything from how to keep your water supply safe to not putting alcohol on the mantle in the winter because it becomes an explosive. We have talked about sanitary toilets and this is one very important thing, because our streams are being polluted at the rate in 35 years we won't have any pure water, and I find our mountain people, if you just give them a chance, they will listen and they will apply what you tell them. Chairman PERKINS. I understand one of our great problems down there, the departments up here have been too much city born, and know nothing about the rural problems, and I am most hopeful that they have been looking in the direction of rural areas in the last year or two, at least. And there is no way to move those people out of there. All we have got to do is to get water and sanitation, better community facilities and if we can repair those homes to a little degree, to make them sanitary, I think it will be one of the greatest contributions that the Government could make. I personally regret that. the Farmers Home Administra- tion although they have been in favor, have not been able to get an appropriation for these $400 or $500 or $600 for these people on public assistance to winterize their homes, and make them sanitary. But I am most hopeful that we can come up with some kind of a program, at least, or let these people get a little loan from the Farmers Home Administration in some areas in order to make them sanitary. Go ahead. Mrs. DUNN. We have found as many as nine people living in two rooms, sharing two beds, often cooking on an outside fire spot that they have built themselves, and it is hard for any child to learn in school and apply it when they come back home, day after day, to this situation. And I get a little bit tired of hearing people say, "Well, they don't have to live like that," because we don't know, sometimes, the circum- stances that brought them there, and I think instead of pointing a finger we had better start reaching out a hand to them. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mrs. DUNN. It is good to talk about self-help, and pulling yourself up by the bootstraps, but somebody has to provide the bootstrap for you to pull up by. We find our people very eager to apply what we teach them. We have over 300 families now digging holes in the earth and burying their garbage, rather than throwing it into the streams. In 1 year's time, in this program, we reached 1,570 families for a total of 5,790 visits. Sometimes it only takes, two visits to a home before the family will fix all of their health problems; sometimes it takes 10 visits before you can get your point across. And if you go in to talk about screens on windows, and you find the people don't even have a roof over their heads, then it does not make much sense to say you need screens to keep your flies out. PAGENO="0672" 3132 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 First you start with the roof, and you help repair the house and we have done this by just going to our local merchants, buying some tin, and nails, and we have gotten up on the roof and helped do it ourselves. We found one family- Chairman PERKINS. `Who has helped to do it? Has it been the peo- pie on relief down there that has had to do it, or the people on the work experience training program? - Just who has helped to do it? Mrs. DUNN. No, sir, the people on the work experience training pro- gra.m are not allowed to work on private property. Chairman PERKINS. Not even on the homes of people on public as- sistance? Mrs. DUNN. No, sir. They are not. Chairman PERKINS. `Why? Mrs. DUNN. This has been one of our big hindrances. I built a pair of steps myself last April, before we got a man assigned to our pro- gram, because the woman was blind and she was living alone, and she was stepping down on to a plank that had a hole in it, and.I was scared to death she was going to break her neck, so I built the steps myself, because the work experience and training men are not allowed to work on private property. We do have a contract with six of those men to dig garbage pits and to build sanitary toilets for invalids or elderly people. Chairman PERKINS. Are there any of the AV's or VISTA people that can do this kind of work and help the old people in building steps, or waiting on the old people? Is there any of that going on with AV's or VISTA people? Mrs. DUNN. Not to my knowledge. I have invited them to help, but as of this date I have had none. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mrs. DUNN. We have families who have just sat down and given up, because they have gotten so far down that no one will help them. We have mothers who are deserted, often. They are living up in a hollow, they don't know how to get on public assistance and we try to take information to our people, Mr. Perkins. If you have to walk 2 miles out of the hollow, and catch a ride to town, or pay $5 to town to get a free service at the public health department, that free service becomes pretty expensive. If you happen to come on Wednesday, and the shots are to be given on a Tuesday, you have got to go back and come again. If you are coming in to get on the food stamp program. and you don't know you are supposed to bring certain information with you, there is another trip, so we take this information to the people. We go to the head of the hollow, across the swinging bridge, up the mountains. I did find one woman living 2 miles on top of a mountain in a barn, with no facilities at all, a child on each hip, twins, 1 year old, eight children around her. We carried that woman and her belongings off that mountain and put her into another home, and she is now on the food stamp program, she is on public assistance, and she is receiving as much aid as possible. The children next summer will be going to school, in better condition PAGENO="0673" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3133 than they did this year, with their shoes tied on their feet with overall straps. We try to provide the most basic need for the family, and work from there. I am proud to say we have had no trouble getting into these homes. We find our people more than willing to listen to any sug- gestions that will make it a better home for their children, and for themselves. We have had one home reject us in the entire time this program has been in operation. Up until 2 months ago, we had only the health program, and now we are combining community action with our health program. In those 2 months- Chairman PERKINS. You are the director of the local community action program? Mrs. DUNN. I am the director of the community development com- ponent, yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Community development component. Mrs. DUNN. This combines our health and our~ Chairman PERKINS. Who operates the community action program then? Mrs. DUNN. Mr. Roland Sebastian is the executive director of Mid- dletown, Ky. Chairman PERKINS. Executive director; is he cooperative with you in seeing this that these things are accomplished? Mrs. DUNN. Yes, he does. Chairman PERKINS. And do the local people have complete control? I am not worried about the poor people participating in this area. Do your local people have complete control of our community action program? Mrs. DUNN. I met yesterday with two groups of our local people, our policy advisory council, and they were to look at applications and recommend new fieldworkers for the new component. It was strictly their choosing. They went about it very democrati- cally. They decided that older people with obligations should have preferences over young people who already had a job, and I was very pleased with the way they went about choosing these applicants. They meet once a month, and they have members of that council that sat on our Middle Kentucky River board, they attend our board meetings, and they have a voice in everything that we do. Chairman PERKINS. Well before I even hear your statement, I just want to highly compliment you. A lady that would take time out and let me know, volunteer to come to Washington and pay your own expenses. I want you to stand by today, some of the members may put some questions to you. I just wish that you were in charge of four or five counties there, since you have already convinced me that you are a dedicated individual, and want to improve the standard of living of those people, the poor people in that area, and that is the real purpose of the poverty program. You go ahead. Mrs. DUNN. I am dedicated to helping our people. I returned from Texas 4 years ago, because I felt that the mountains needed their own people to help them and so I came back, and since that time I have worked as hard as I know how, and I shall continue to work for as long as I am permitted to, to help our people. 80-084-67-pt. 4-43 PAGENO="0674" 3134 ECONOMIC OPPORTTJ~ITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Give us any other facets of your community action program. Just how do you spend your money down there? Go ahead and tell us. Mrs. DUNN. Right now we are changing over from the health into community action and health combined. These fleidworkers will be going out into the homes, and they will be serving three purposes: to teach health, to act as an information and referral service for the people, and to organize them in such a way that they could come together and do things as a unit, rather than one or two people trying to do everything in the community. And I find that all our people need is a little guidance, and a little help and they have got on this an awfully lot of good old moun- tain wisdom, I think, and initiative, a lot of our people are very talented in many fields, but they have never had it channeled in the right direction. We have got carpenters. We have got people who do all of their own electrical wiring, and repairing. They don't think of calling a repairman. The man of the house does most of the building, when a new room has to go on the home, and they just do these things, not because they have learned them from a book but because they were born with this knowledge. My father has a third grade education and my mother never had a repairman in our house. He wired our house for electricity, and he makes our yard furniture, he can put a car together, he can do just about anything with his hands. So much of what our people know is just part of them, what they have been born with, Mr. Perkins, but they have never had an oppor- tunity to channel it in a profitable manner. No one has ever developed that, and I would like to see some of it developed. Chairman PERKINS. I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. The people down there are imaginative, and have know-how, and they have certain latent abilities where they grasp real quickly. Mrs. DUNN. Yes, they do. Chairman PERKINS. Now, do you have any other aspects of the community action program? Do you feel that your money has been wisely spent in Breathitt County? Mrs. DUNN. Yes I do. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that it would be a mistake to take this program away from the people as it is presently administered, do you? Mrs. DUNN. Mr. Perkins, I just would not even want to think of the results, if it were pulled out at this time, because the people are to the point where they are ready to do things, as a community, as a whole group, and they are raring to go, and now if they are slapped down at this point, I just hate to think what it would do to them. Because you get your hopes built up, you know, and then somebody comes along and knocks you down, and then the next time we are going to have a hard time convincing them that we really mean to help them. Chairman PERKINS. So you feel that it would be wise to keep the Office of Economic Opportunity in its present form, without transfer- ring to any governmental agency. I mean, transferring its functions to the Department of HEW. PAGENO="0675" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3135 Mrs. DUNN. Well, I have found the program very effective as it is. Chairman PERKINS. Do you know how much money has been spent in Breathitt County in the past year? Mrs. DUNN. I know that right now, we have about three-quarters of a million dollars of programs going at this time. Chairman PERKINS. In Breathitt County? Mrs. DUNN. Yes, sir, we have our Neighborhood Youth Corps in- school, out-of-school, and the on-the-job trainmg; the Nelson amend~ ment, Headstart; and our community development component. `Chairman PERKINS. Is this development program effectively reach- ing the poor? Mrs. DUNN. When the Neighborhood Youth Corps out-of-school was funded, we had more applicants than we could handle, and I feel this is one of the best programs that we have had. We have already had some of the youngsters quit to go back to school this year; they have dropped out of the dropout program, to go back to school. Those children have changed from sloppy appearance to neat dress. They know what it is to work all day for a sum of money. They know what it is to get up in the morning and come to work, put in a good day's work, and they are very eager, and I am very pleased with what we have been able to do in the Neighborhood Youth Corps. Chairman PERKINS. How old a lady are you? Mrs. DUNN. They are 16 through 21. Chairman PERKINS. I know, but how old are you? Mrs. DUNN. Thirty-five. I will be 36 August 30. Chairman PERKINS. You have got plenty of good years ahead of you. Did you ever have any particular training in the social work field, or not? Mrs. DUNN. No, sir. I graduated from Berea College and I had a year at the University of Cincinnati, and I have been supervisor of a hospital in Texas. I taught nursing in Germany, and I just love people. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle? Mr. SCHERLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is Mary Jane Dunn, if my sight prevails, at this distance. Is that correct? Mrs. DUNN. That is right, sir. Mr. SCHERLE. You don't mind if I call you Mary Jane? Mrs. DUNN. Oh, nO. Mr. SCHERLE. Mary Jane, would it~ make any difference, as long as the programs were kept in effect, as to who they were regulated by, the Department ~ HEW or OEO? The only thing you are after is results anyway, isn't that true? Mrs. DUNN. That is right, sir. Mr. SCHERLE. Then it would not really make any difference to you under what department they would function? Mrs. DUNN. As long as we have the grant to do the job, that is all we are concerned with. Mr. SCHERLE. I see. Who or how do you solicit the. members of your Neighborhood Youth Corps? Mrs. DUNN. Of course, when this Neighborhood Youth Corps came out, we knew the children that needed i1, because we hare identified the needs of our community through this health program. PAGENO="0676" 3136 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 However, this was talked about in community action programs. The first day that this opened, they had 27 applicants, due to our talking to the people in community action programs, and it was put in the newspaper, on the radio, and by door-to-door contact, and because our heldworkers were going from home to home. Mr. SCIIERLE. Do you have reference now to just this one individual ~county? Mrs. DUNN. The program we have conducted in the past has been in Breatliitt County. I am now covering four counties: Lee, Owsley, Wolfe, and Breathitt. Mr. SCHERLE. And all the members of the Neighborhood Youth Corps have volunteered? You have not sought them out? Mrs. DUNN. They have more volunteers than we can handle. Mr. SCHERLE. And these Neighborhood Youth Corps members, are they school dropouts? Mrs. DUNN. Yes, they are. The out-of-school are. Mr. SCHERLE. And they are paid at what rate? Mrs. DUNN. A dollar and a quarter an hour for 4 days a week, and they go to school a day. Mr. SCHERLE. And they work for whom? Mrs. DUNN. Federal agencies. Mr. SCHERLE. In the Neighborhood Youth Corps, what is the amount of your grant? Mrs. DUNN. I am not the program director of Neighborhood Youth Corps. I have the community development component. Mr. SCHERLE. All right. Mrs. DUNN. But all of these come through our Middle Kentucky River office. Mr. SCHERLE. How many people do you have jurisdiction over? Mrs. DUNN. In all, I have a staff of 23 people, plus myself, after they are all hired. You see we are just in the process of starting a new program. Mr. SCHERLE. This is 23 employees besides yourself? Mrs. DUNN. Yes. Mr. SCHERLE. In four counties? Mrs. DUNN. Yes. Mr. SOHERLE. Aiid what is your responsibility? Mrs. DUNN. Oh. That takes a lot of telling. In each of these counties there will be a coordinator and four fleldworkers, Breathitt County will have five fleldworkers, because we have a larger county. I will see to it, I hope, that those people go into the homes and teach health, act as information and referral services, organize the communities in such a way that the people will have a voice in everything. Mr. SCHERLE. Is this sort of a self-help? Is this what you call your program of self-help? Mrs. DUNN. We are trying to get the people where they are able to help themselves, but some of them must be helped to the point where they can have self-help. Mr. SCHERLE. What do you mean, then, by that? Mrs. DUNN. Well, if you find a family that-I will just give you this mother that I was talking about on this mountainside, with eight children, no income, the father dead, no way to have a fire in the house, having to cook outside, and a snake ran in front of me when I was going to try to find where she was, and the children with no clothing. PAGENO="0677" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3137 She can't help herself. She has no place to turn. Someone has to help her first. Mr. SCHERLE. So what do you do in a situation like this? Mrs. DUNN. We find out first why she has no income, and it so hap- pened that she had moved from another county. Her home had burned, and she had come back to a place that her husband had owned before his death. We took her off that mountain, and we found a place ąor her to live, and we made up enough money to get her food stamps, and she charged her first month's rent. We took the children to a doctor, and we picked up pop bottles, and sold them, and paid that bill, and after she was able to get a check, she paid her rent, and she paid for her food stamps herself. Mr. SCHERLE. Pardon me. A check from where? Mrs. DUNN. Public assistance. Aid to dependent children. Mr. SOHERLE. ADC? Mrs. DUNN. Yes. Mr. ScIJERLE. Flow many of these different situations are you in- volved in, say, in your home county? I presume that is an isolated case? Is that true? Mrs. DUNN. Well- Mr. SCHERLE. I mean, this is not the normal situation, snakes run- fling around the front yard, and things like that. Mrs. DUNN. I could quote you several cases like this, but this is not a high percentage. But I gave you this instance to show you that this woman must have some help before she can help herself. Mr. SCHERLE. In this position, and this responsibility under your jurisdiction, where are the local public health and welfare people, and the Good Will, the Salvation Army? Do these people care? Do these agencies care? Mrs. DUNN. Oh, yes; they care. Mr. SCHERLE. Well is there a possibility you might be overlapping or duplicating them? Mrs. DUNN. No, I would not. Mr. SCHERLE. How do you separate them? Mrs. DUNN. I would like to explain how we avoid that. When our program began, we had an inservice training. I had the heads of all departments come in and talk to our people about their rules and regu- lations. When we find a case like that, we wait, we go immediately and see if anything has been done, so that we don't go and take steps that have already been taken. Then when we bring it to the attention of these public assistance people, they are very cooperative. They go out very often, the very same day we bring it to them, and this woman lives so far back, I don't know when it would have come to their attention. They don't have the staff to go out and look for these things. Mr. SOHERLE. Well, how did you find out? Mrs. DUNN. The school superintendent called me and said the chil- dren were coming to school with their shoes tied on their feet with over- all straps, and would I look into it. Mr. SCHERLE. And they turned to you rather than the welfare, or- Mrs. DUNN. Well, they know that we visit all over the county from home to home, and they know that we will do it immediately. We don't shelve any requests and we do it right then, if at all possible. PAGENO="0678" 3138 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 On the public health department we have had very fine cooperation with them. They have a very limited staff, they have their clinics that they must conduct, and when we find a case such as-I found a child 11 years old, the family said that she was mentally retarded. I worked with the child about 5 minutes, and I thought, "This child can't hear," and then I went to the health department to see what had been done, and when Crippled Children's Commission clinic could see this child, and by working with the health department, the women's club, our local banks, we got this child tested; she is wearing a hearing aid, she is making A plus on her report card now; she has a whole new world open to her. Mr. SCHERLE. In other words, as long as you cooperate with the local community officials, the welfare department, and as long as you get your grant, this program works effectively. As long as you work in such close proximity with these people, if this poverty program were under Opportunity Crusade it would still be very effective, would it not? Mrs. DUNN. Mr. Scherle, if we can just get the money and God will give me the health, we will try to use that money to the best advantage, regardless of where it is coming from. Mr. SCHERLE. And so you feel if the program is carried on as I just mentioned, under the opportunity crusade, and they also, of course, are vitally interested in the work you are doing, this program would then serve its purpose very well, would it not? Mrs. Duxx. I would hope so. Mr. SCHERLE. That is fine. Thank you very much. Mrs. DUNN. I hope I answered you. Mr. SOTIERLE. You did. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you, Mrs. Dunn. You are not up here, in my judgment, to testify as a legal expert, but just as to testify to the effectiveness of the community action program. Is that right? Mrs. DUNN. That is right, sir. I would not be presumptuous enough to untangle all of these legal questions. Chairman PERKINS. I appreciate your testimony here this morning. I just wish all the members of this committee could have heard your eloquent statement. And to my way of thinking, the spirit of coopera- tion which you have expressed is more or less the whole success in the area of our community action program. I have personal experience where we have these so-called rabble rousers and people who go overboard-I may say completely over- board; some of them may even advocate a march on Washington-that we have very ineffective programs in those counties. You being reared in the head of a hollow yourself, I just hope to see the day come when a lady with your true American spirit can be elevated to come into a much greater responsibility and when that day conies eastern Kentucky will be lifted out of poverty, for if we have ladies like yourself assuming the responsibility of leadership, and dedicated enough to stay on and make the sacrifice instead of going and working for the outside world. It just impresses me to see a lady of your caliber come before this committee. Mr. Goodell. Mr. GOODELL. I apologize, Mr. Chairman, for being a little late. PAGENO="0679" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3139 Chairman PERKINS. Prior we were ascertaining the effectiveness of the community action program, in her local community. Mr. GOODELL. Yes. Have you had any experience with the VISTA workers? Mrs. DUNN. We have som~ in our area. Mr. GOODELL. What kind of experience? How do you summarize your reaction to their effectiveness, and what they have been doing? Mrs. DUNN. Are we here to talk, Mr. Chairman, about VISTA? I will try to answer that. I don't like to be put on the spot but we have had VISTA's in our area for quite sometime. And when the Appa- lachian Volunteers came in, I even took the time out to go and visit with them, and talk about what they would find when they go into homes about health hazards. I went to the public health department and got literature of all kinds and took it to them and invited them to join with us in doing some of the manual labor that we cannot provide for our people, and I will have to very truthful with you, because my father would still strap me if I told a lie, as old as I am. I cannot speak well of them. Mr. GODDELL. You are describing actions which you took to try to coordinate their activities with the community action program, so that they could be more helpful, on the basis of it? Mrs. DUNN. They could be very helpful in our area, if they had the correct supervision and if they had the correct attitudes. You know, when I go into a home I don't go in and say, "Well, look here, I am here to help you, and I am going to change your way of life." I go in and I observe then what the people need, and then I offer my services in such a way that I let the people feel they are helping us, as a community action group, rather than us going in and trying to supply all their needs. I never try to get a family to feel, well, we have just come in, now, we are going to take over and take care of all your problems, and the very first step is to make you unhappy with your situation. Mr. G00DELL. I take it that this is basically the approach you feel the VISTA workers have had in your area? Mrs. DUNN. Yes, their attitude has been detrimental to them. I don't know whose fault it is. These are young kids, and maybe they come in to help. I don't know. But it has not worked out that way. Mr. GOODELL. Do you have any idea how many VISTA workers have been in your area? Mrs. DUNN. I have visited their office just this month, and I was told there were 27, in Wolfe County, and annroximately that much in Breathitt County. These are AV's and VISTAs. However when we visit. they move from place to place, and when you visit, they are not home, and I went and asked them to come to our community ac- tion meetings, you know, because they can be a great help, going up and clown the hollows, and telling people, giving them this informa- tion. but I have not found them home. Mr. GOODELL. In other words, you have experienced almost total frustration in trying to get them integrated and coordinated with your community action program? Mrs. DUNN. Yes, we have. At this time, we are attempting to work with them on this new community development program. We have asked them to give what aid they felt they had toward training this PAGENO="0680" 3140 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 staff for this new program, and they have demanded 3 days and 2 weeks of in-service training. Mr. G-OODELL. Is there one individual who is in charge of them down there? What kind of direction do the VISTA workers have in your area? Mrs. DUNN. Very little direction. Very little. Mr. G-OODELL. To whom are they assigned? Mrs. DUNN. They have what they call the field man, and he is sup- posedly over them, and he has some helpers, but we can't get any answers when we ask questions. We get very few answers. How many do we have? Well, right now, I think about-well, where do they live? I believe there is one over on Long Fork and there might be one down-and this is the kind of answers we get. This is very frustrating. I tried to spend my time very wisely. I am up at 5 a.rn. and in bed, if I am lucky, after midnight. We got in here last night on the 4 o'clock flight, and I was up this morning at 7, and I feel that I have got to make the most of my time for my people, and I realize they are just volunteers, but I don't have time to run them down and ask for their help. Mr. GOODELL. Well, are the volunteers pretty much in the two counties that you describe? Mrs. DUNN. Yes, pretty much in Breathitt and Wolfe Counties. Mr. GOODELL. They are both under a single director, the two coun- ties, or are they- Mrs. DUNN. Mr. Goodell, I would like to answer you but we have never been able to find these things out. Mr. 000DELL. Have you tried to contact the director himself, the field man, as you describe him, to see if he could work this out? Mrs. DUNN. I wish I knew how many times so I could give you an exact time, but I just don't have time to run him down and get him away from the pinball machine. I am being very blunt, but I think it is time somebody was blunt, and I will probably get hung but- Mr. GOODELL. Well, I think the committee appreciates your frank- ness, and it is very important that these facts come before the commit- tee, and be aired. There are areas where VISTA workers are doing a good job, where they are supervised and where they have been assigned specific tasks and there are others areas where they are obviously not doing a good job. Certainly the attitude which you have described is an attitude that will predictably produce failure. Mrs. DUNN. Oh, you know, we do welcome help, and just to give you an instance, we l1ave 100 youngsters in our county now from the youth encampment for citizenship and when they first came the exec- utive director asked that I meet with them and speak to these young- sters, and I feel a real burden for young people. I think as adults it is our place. to guide these young people an chance we get, so I met on a Sunday night with them and talked to them, and they have seven workshops, and three of those workshops fit in with our program. Community development, recreation and public health, and I worked closely with the leaders of these workshops, and they live with their services of these young people, and they are now out in our corn- munities working with families. PAGENO="0681" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3141 We have provided the names of these families. We have worked to- gether as groups too, well, again to fix a community center, in one instance, where the people had no place to meet. We took a group of these young people, a group of the commumt,y citizens, a group of the neighborhood youth corps and our staff, and made a community center so we used everybody that comes down, if you come and stay 2 hours, I am liable to work you 1 of those 2 hours. You ask Mr. Alexander. He has been down there with me. Chairman PERKINS. Who is Mr. Alexander? Mrs. DUNN. Mr. Alexander is from the State technical assistance office and he is our analyst for our area. We would be happy to use these young people's services and to work with them, if it could be brought about. Mr. GOODELL. The program that you describe, with reference to the youngsters who live in the area, sounds very much like what some of us have proposed. It is actually in the administration bill this year, as well as in the substitute bill that is being offered, a hometown VISTA. You enlist volunteers to help from the area itself, and give them a designation and give them some sort of general directions. I take it you view that approach favorably, and think it would have some potential. Mrs. DUNN. With proper supervision. I come back to supervision, because I think it is a very necessary element. Mr. GOODELL. Well I don't recall what the administration proposal was in this regard, but in the Opportunity Crusade, it would be under the community action agency, and they would organize and direct it. Does this sound feasible to you? Mrs. DUNN. If I had some young people that I could get out there under my fleidworkers and tell them what to do, we could do a lot. Mr. G00DELL. In some ways, I presume that having people who know the area would be an advantage, wouldn't it? Mrs. DUNN. Very much so; people sell our mountain man short, you know; he is hospitable, because he has been raised that way. I say raised and I know it is reared, but I still say raised. You come and sit down on the porch, and he will talk to you, and if he has beans and corn bread, he will share it with you. He will talk all day, if you want to talk. He would not shoo you off, that would not be polite, but when you went down the path, if you had not been sincere with that man, he would know it. He might say a few things behind your back, or he would say I wonder what that fool wanted, because the mountain man can see right through you, and you must be sincere and this is one of the things that outsiders here very often do not take into account, that when they come into an area, that they must be sincere in their efforts and not just put on a show or go up and whittle all day. because they think that is what the mountain man wants them to do, and rock on the porch. Now when I went to Europe, I did not wait for them to learn Eng- lish so I could talk with them. I went to school at night and learned German, so I could talk to people and because I did not again want to waste 3 years over there making sign language, and I think when you come into an area, you should attempt to know the people. PAGENO="0682" 3142 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I have done this everywhere I have been. I was on the Mexican border for 6 years, and I attempted-I am sure I did not do a very good job, but I tried-to learn the people's ways, and their supersti- tions and their religion, so that I could deal with them far more effectively. Chairman PERKINS. I want to interrupt my colleague to tell him that this girl was raised right at the head of a road in Breathitt County, Ky., and her parents are back there today. She stated her qualifications. I asked her if she was a trained social worker, and she said no, but she has told about her experience of supervision in hospitals, but she decided to go back home to help. Mr. GOODELL. Well, I appreciate your testimony. I think it is helpful to the committee to have this lady on the record, because we are going to consider some possible changes in the entire poverty program, ways we can improve it, and redirect it. There is a difference between helping and meddling, and if you go in the wrong way with voluntary help, particularly from the outside, it can turn into meddling, and do more harm than good. Thank you for your testimony. Mrs. DUNN. It becomes my concern when people come to us and ask us, "\Vhat can we do ?" And I think if you will just ask the people, I know you can't go out and do it., but any time you send somebody in and just ask the people their version of this thing, wha.t is written in the paper, what is writ- ten in the "Vista Vohmteer" is a different story and I read an article the other night. that they had a quilting company open in Breathitt and Wolfe and Lee and as far as I know and I have tried to check this out there is only one woman out of Lee County that is doing any quilt- ing, but the article reads as if the whole entire county of Lee were in- cluded in this, and we have worked very hard in our program but it is becoming evident that we have not tooted our horn. We were so busy trying to get results we did not have time to get publicity, and we have done many good things that have not been writ- ten up but they are there, the results will be seen, I hope, many years from now, when some child is sitting in a classroom free of intestinal parasites, has had all of his shots, and he now knows that you can wash and come to school clean, and you will feel better if you do, and that there is a different way of life from the way they have been accus- tomed to. The other day I had the children in the Neighborhood Youth Corps that are assigned to my program, I had them just write me a little story what they had learned since they-had been assigned to us, and it was amazing what. those children had grasped about. sanitation and education and wanting to go back to school, but I think the most eloquent statement made by any of them was from a. girl from a family of 13 children, and she said I have sure got a fine job. Now I know that girl. She reahize.d that here she had an opportunity, and with her first check, she has got to be helped in the store in select- ing her clothing. PAGENO="0683" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3143 The child had never before in her life had money to buy her own clothing and to me this says a lot, Mr. Perkins. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I am proud that you have brought this grassroots testimony. We have been delighted that you wanted to put in an appearance. It was so sudden that I did not even have you on the regular sched- ule, but any other time in the future that I am lucky to hear you, whether I have got you on the regular schedule or not, you will always be welcome, as long as I am the chairman of this committee. Mrs. DUNN. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. I am delighted that we have got such patriotic people in eastern Kentucky, and to my way of thinking you exemplify the true eastern Kentucky, and I am most hopeful that you can expand your poverty program. I would like to see it expanded. I know in times like these it is going to be reaJ difficult, but above everything else, I am most hopeful that we can continue to have effective community action programs and let me say that the local directors of eastern Kentucky would do well to select a lady like you to put in charge down there. I want that to remain in the record. I thank you. Mrs. DUNN. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Alexander, I understand that you have a statement. Did you want to make a statement? Who are you with, here? STATEMENT OF LYNN FRAZIER, INFORMATION OFFICER, KEN~ TUCKY OEO, AND ALFRED ALEXANDER, ANALYST, STATE TECH~ NICAL ASSISTANCE OFFICE, FRANXFORT, KY. Mr. FRAZIER. Mr. Chairman, I am Lynn Frazier, Mr. Whitehouse's information officer. Our Kentucky OEO director, Albert Whitehouse, was recalled home suddenly last night, due to the serious illness of his wife. We do have Mr. Whitehouse's prepared statement here that can be read. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, the prepared statement will be inserted in the record. (Mr. Whitehouse's prepared statement fo]lows:) STATEMENT OF ALBERT WHITEHOUSE, DIRECTOR, KENTUCKY OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, FRANKFORT, KY. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Albert Whitehouse. Since January 3, 1965, I have been a special assistant to the Governor of Ken- tucky, The ilonorable Edward T. Breathitt, and director of the Kentucky Office of Economic Opportunity. This office is set up under Section 209 of the Economic Opportunity Act and is located in Frankfort, Kentucky. For twenty-three years (1942-1965) I was Director of District 25 and Inter- national Executive Board Member of the United Steelworkers of America. AFL- CIO. For over four years (December 1955 to March 1960),, I was Director of the Industrial Union Department of the AFL-CIO, and, for seventeen years (1941- 1958) I was President of the Kentucky State ClO Council. We in Kentucky fully support the War on Poverty as it was so ably and effusely enunciated by Congress in 1964. PAGENO="0684" 3144 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 We are dedicated, unalterably to this concept of community action and do categorically oppose attempts to destroy community action by the piece-meal parceling out of these action programs to other agencies. The fight can most effectively be waged under the umbrella of community action. We in Kentucky feel that many of the very frustrating restrictions Congress has placed upon the Agency should be loosened. Localities must be given more freedom in deciding their priorities, to pick community action representatives; and to give OEO more coordinating powers; especially at the state level. Quoting from the Courier-Journal Editorial Page of July 23. 1967, 1 believe I may ably reflect the concensus of feeling across the Commonwealth: ". . . It (War on Poverty) should be continued. Many of its innovations are just be- ginning to show results; many of its experiments are beginning to be accepted and w-in local community financing. The saving sparks of imagination and com- passion it has introduced into our glum and stagnant attitudes on relief and welfare are well worth what it has cost and what it still might cost." This endorsement was without qualification or equivocation. Since the inception of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. Kentucky has moved ahead rapidly to mobilize its resources by enlisting the support of its people to fight the War on Poverty. The State of Kentucky is organized into 30 units, 27 multi-county agencies and three single county agencies. (Map attached) Each of these agencies has a Board of Directors of approxiniately 25 members-at least 750 citizens from all walks of life in Kentucky w-ho are voluntary serving in the War on Poverty in their communities. These people are giving their time, talent, `and energy to imple- ment the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964-an act which called for the total mobilization of the human and financial resources of our nation to eliminate poverty in the United States. In Kentucky w-e have mobilized the human resources and created a strong foundation from which to launch an all-out attack on the causes and conditions of poverty in our State. Twenty-five of our CAP Agencies have been funded, have hired their staffs, surveyed the needs of the communities, and developed workable programs and sent them to Washington. Over 30 action programs have been funded and are in operation in the State; many, many others have had to he rejected because of lack of money. In the face of cutbacks in funds, OEO-CAPS have been very in- novative in using local resources, volunteers, etcetera, to keep the program going. Much momentum has been engendered, but this interest and enthusiasm cannot he sustained indefinitely especially among the ranks of the poor. Our troops are in the field-but not even the bravest, most w-illing army in the world can fight a war long without ammunition. Congress must give these Kentucky communities and others like them throughout the nation the money they need. They cannot win a war with BB guns. It is a time of testing in the C'oimgress of the United ~tatcs. There are those sumnier soldiers w-ho are prepared to haul down the banners, fold the tents, and abandon the field of battle. We must not let these voices prevail, lest we leave our one in five poverty-stricken people aban- doned on the battlefield of a war which was never really fought. Community Action Programs are truly democracy in action. Let's keep them that way OEO-CAP, through the innovative Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, gave more opportunity for the development of local initiative and opportunity for self-help than any other single act in the history of Congress. The Act gives money, Federal money, to local communities to spend as they see fit for programs specifically designed by them (the Community Action Agency) which develop human resources and affect or eliminate poverty. It is not a welfare or give-away program. It is an investment program which will pay big dividends, it is the American peoples' adventure in opportunity. This Act is based on the sound theory that when we have all the peonle-the rich, the just "well-to-do" and the poor-working together, they can eliminate the eeuses of poverty in their community, but, of cour~e. the people thus banded together mast have the ammunition-money-to do the job, and this is where Congress has been woefully lacking in its appropriations. Not to provide the necessary money to bring to fruition this truly noble ex- periment is in effect `to admit a lack of faith in our democratic system and the people themselves. We cannot afford to continue the false economy of wasting people in order to save money. Yes, wasting people, human beings made in the image of God Almighty, and thereby due the dignity of that image. PAGENO="0685" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3145 And, I would emphasize that to my way of thinking there can be no human (ligrnty without the privacy and the sanctity of the home and fanilly life, also without a minimum standard of education for everyone. And no more people in iii health or need of medical treatment without having it-and everyone trained for a job and provided one. At the very least in Kentucky we must have money to continue the strong base which has been created, and another half-million dollars to fundthe other five areas for Program Development thus making Kentucky whole or fully covered for effective Community Action endeavors. If tomorrow morning or a month from now we could have an end, praise God, to the Viet Narn war, are the American people ready to take the defense budget and put it to work building a truly great society? What is it that motivates so many of us to accept without question the ex- penditure of billions upon billions of dollars for destruction, or to get ready to destroy. But to cry caution when it is proposed that money be spent to provide for poor people the strength and the ability to lift themselves up? There are already many visible results of the War on Poverty in Kentucky~ Good community action programs are bing operated in Kentucky. In Leslie County, which is eighth from the bottom in per capita income in the United States with a mere $487 per year, a comprehensive health program is in operation reach- ing the 10,941 residents and treating them for conditions found, such as dental needs, eye examinations, mental retardation, tuberculosis, cancer, diabetes, heart trouble, et cetera. This massive effort to raise the health standards of the area has been a true Community Action program mobilizing the resources of the community, including local hospitals, doctors, various State agencies, and work- ers from the ranks of the poor. The Goose Creek Day Care Center at Blackey, in Letcher County, is helping break the cycle of poverty through a combination of Day Care for pre-school children, homemaker services, and casework programs for the culturally and economically deprived. Also, at Blackey is a sewing project conducted by the poor which is turning out clothes for children who otherwise would literally not have clothing to wear to school. These are just a few examples of communities in action in Kentucky. Mrs. Mary Jane Dunn, the Director of one of these action components in Breathitt County, Kentucky, is here with me today to explain how it so suc- cessfully exemplifies the basic precepts of true community action-that of teach- ing the poor how to help themselves. The War on Poverty in Kentucky has many other faces. It is some 50,000 children gaining early schooling and medical check-ups in Head Start programs as a basic beginning toward eliminating poverty. It is some 900 high school students in Upward Bound Programs attending classes at a college because they show promise of being potential college students, but would not have the funds to go. It is also some 33,724 young people in Neighborhood Youth Corps projects earning money while gaining full or part-time experience assuring them they can remain in school and increase their chance of a job later on. And the hundreds of Kentucky boys and girls in Job Corps Centers learning a trade and a new way of life enabling them to get a job upon graduation. These are some of the reasons, numerically, why the War on Poverty is worth every cent of its costs to date and the justification for the continuation and acceleration of this program. The moral responsibility is just as important, in fact, more important; for until we place the cause for most poverty where it belongs not on the shoulders of the poor themselves, but upon our society, we will not have the will to spend the money and do the job necessary to eliminate it from our country. It is a black enigma of our society that 34 million of our people are barely existing in a land of plenty. It is a sin, not of commission, but one of omission. We have failed to find a way to bring these Americans into the mainstream of our affluent society-in fact, we have been so blinded by our affluency, we try in many ways to not even admit their existence. Our proud reputation of having the highest standards of affluent living in the world mean very little for the one in five persons who has never `tasted the smaller luxuries of life, not to mention many of the necessities. PAGENO="0686" 3146 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 America is rich enough and powerful enough to take care of its poor-not in the way of charity, but in dynamic programs to change their very style of life. If the War on Poverty succeeds, even in a generation as some believe it will require, there is an enormous potential for far-reaching changes in all of Amer- ~ican life. The War on Poverty is an investment program, not a relief program. Too many persons, far too many, have not realized the most basic and most promising part of the entire anti-poverty effort, that is that OEO-CAP represents an entirely new and highly sensible approach to the problems of human develop- ment which have persisted, yes, even thrived in our prosperous and expanding economy. The momentum of our economic revolution has dashed aside an entire segment of our society that was the least prepared to cope with this rapidly changing kaleidoscope of progress. OEO-CAP's approach is remedial rather than custodial action for those disadvantaged: rehabilltation instead of relief, dignity and decency rather than dependency and despondency. The War on Poverty will not be won instantly, not in two or three years. nor by edict. In this age of automation, everybody wants and expects quick action-- results now. I call it in instant coffee age-a spoonful of powdered coffee and a dash of hot water and "bingo" its ready! Rebuilding human beings obviously cannot be done so fast. There are two basic approaches to the problem of poverty. The first is allevia- tion Welfare. The aim of this approach is to make poverty bearable for those who are poor. It keeps the poor alive so that relatively speaking, very few people starve to death in our country. But there are millions suffering from malnutri- tion. Alleviative programs make it a little easier to be poor by providing recrea- tion, Christmas baskets and other amenities. Alleviative programs do much good. To argue against them is like arguing against Santa Claus! No one of us would want to curtail any phase of alleviation. The other approach to poverty is elimination. This is the OEO approach. It does not seek to make poverty bearable but to do away with it; not to soften it but to cure it! It recognizes that the only way to do away with poverty is to place power in the hands of the powerless. If a man is illiterate, this approach wants to give him the power of being able to read, if he is sick, this approach wants to give him the power of being healthy. If he cannot obtain justice, this approach wants to give him the power of good legal aid. If he is jobless, this approach wants him to have the power of a job. If he .is voiceless, this approach wants him to have political power. If he is exploited, this approach wants him to have bargaining power. The greatest challenge of all of Community Action is getting and keeping the interested participation of the entire community-the rich, the just well-to-do and the poor-thus making the community whole. A Community Action agency which works and plan with and not for the poor. And, I add with emphasis, a Community Action Agency which is interested in and works to eliminate the causes of poverty with its attendant evils; not one which only alleviates poverty. ~There is a tremendous difference. Yes, that difference is precisely that which separates an old-line bureaucratic ~agency and a new-line agency in the revolutionary mold of BOA 1964, which is 4rying to teach the poor to help themselves, and thereby not only eliminate the ~causes of poverty, but also the OEO Agency and our jobs. The poor people of America are not revolutionary, (yet). All they want is to be given the opportunity to earn and own a piece of affluent America. They must be made healthy, functionally literate, trained for a job, put on one, and kept on one. There are no less than 1,000,000 reasons why the War on Poverty in Kentucky should be waged and won. All these reasons have different details and they pose almost that many different approaches! But stretching all the problems to the utmost simplicity, brings forth one word to cover the entire objective: people. At least 1,000,000 people in poverty in Kentucky. They need your help. I w-ant to thank the Chairman and the Committee for giving me the oppor- tunity to appear and give this testimony on this highly important matter. PAGENO="0687" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3147 ~E~TUCKY C 1~J1~iTY ACT~O~ ~ENCY ~W~EAS Map Furnished By he Kentucky Office Of Economic OpportunIty 213 St. Cloir Street, Fronkfort, Kentucky, Phone: 564-3325 °Not fuodud for prcgrdkn d.nvek~,mvnt Chairman PERKINS. Who is going to talk? Mr. FRAZIER. Mr. Alexander. Chairman PERKINS. Identify yourself. Get that microphone. Proceed. Mr. FRAZIER. He can respond to any questions, any specifics, as far as structure. Chairman PERKINS. If he has a statement for us, you go ahead. Mr. ALEXANDER. Well, Mr. Chairman, I guess the testimony doesn't have to be read. Is this `correct? Chairman PERKINS. How long is that testimony? Mr. ALEXANDER. It is about seven pages. Chairman PERKINS. Can either of you gentlemen summarize the testimony at this point? Mr. ALEXANDER. I can summarize it for you, Mr. `Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead and summarize. The prepared state- ment will be inserted in the record, as prepared. Go ahead. APPALACHIAN REGION I. Mississippi River 2. The Purchase 3. Looser Cuerberlond 4. Pennyrile 5. Hopkins.Muhlenberg 6. H.U.W. 7. Owenshoro Areo 8. Southern Kentucky 9. Rough River 10. South Central.Ky. * 11. Salt River 12. Central Kentucky 13. Lou. & .Jeffe;sonCo. 14. HOST o 15. Eden Shale 16. CAC Ci ncinvo ti Area 17. Tri.Cnonty 18. CALF 19. Blungrass Area *20 Din River 21. West Loon Curnberland 22. East Lake Cuerknrland 23. Upper Ctvnber!and 24. L.K.L.P. 25. Middle Ky. River 26. Ky. River Faothills 27. Lickirg Volley 20. Northeast Ky. 029. Boyd County Courcil 30. Big Sandy PAGENO="0688" 3148 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ALEXANDER. Xes, sir. Since the Kentucky State- Chairman PERKINS. Give your full name to the comimttee. Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes, sir. My name is Alfred Alexander, I am with the Kentucky State Assistance staff, in Frankfort, Ky. I am a field rep- resentative working in eastern Kentucky with community action programs. Since the Kentucky State PA staff was organized in January lOGo, we have been able to organize 30 community action programs, all of which have submitted repeated grants for OEO ftmding under title 204. Twenty-five of the 30 community action agencies have been funded by OEO, and carrying out either grants or conduct administration programs. We in Kentucky fully support the war on poverty, as it was so ably and effusively enunciated by the Congress in 1964. We are dedicated to the concept of community action, and categorically oppose any attempts to destroy the community action by piecemeal parceling out of these action programs to other agencies. The fight can be most effectively waged under the umbrella of community action. We in Kentucky feel that many of the very frustrating restrictions Congress has placed on the agency should be loosened. Localities must be given more freedom in deciding their priorities, to pick community action representatives, and to give OEO more coordinating powers, especially at the State level. Quoting from the Courier-Journal editorial page, July 23, 1967, I believe I may ably reflect the consensus of feeling of the common- wealth: The war on poverty should be continued. Many of its innovations are just be- ginning to show results. Many of its experiments are beginning to be accepted, and win local community financing. The saving sparks of imagination and compas- sion it has introduced into our glum and stagnant attitudes on relief and welfare are well worth what it has cost and what it still might cost. Mr. FRAZIER. You might mention short-term funding and special conditions. Mr. ALEXANDER. Well, to summarize it, Mr. Chairman, I would like to probably speak freely without the notes. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. ALEXANDER. One feels that the community action as within the original intent of the Congress was to give programs to he initiated at the local level. Well, it appears that this has just been reversed. Most of the programs have been, so to speak, canned programs, coming down from the national level, handed to the communities, to tell what the communities should use., and superimpose on their people. This is not real community action. Programs should be developed at the grassroots level, and go up to the top from the local people's ideas, so with the shortage of OEO funds, they came out with priorities, for these priorities don't all necessarily grow with the local people's needs. The priorities in urban areas may not be the priorities of the rural, isolated community in east Kentucky. So we strongly oppose prescribed programs and canned programs. We feel in eastern Kentucky that the programs should be initiated at the local level, developed at the local level, so that the people them- selves feel that they have a part in developing their own destiny. So with the short-term funding that OEO has now begun to use, coupled PAGENO="0689" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~'IENTS OF 1967 3149 with many special conditions, has to my way of thinking lost a lot of the interest of the local people. They feel that the programs have been dictated to them in a regi- menteci fashion, that they don't have much say-so in them. They would like to see these programs be more loosely developed, the local com- munity level, with more freedom and innovation at the local level, and determine what their needs are. Some of the community action agencies in Kentucky have expressed great concern on. the use of short-term funding now that OEO in the region has been doing now, with three agencies in Kentucky, coupled with many special conditions that they feel that they are unjustifiable, can't live with, and feels that it has been very detrimental to the com- munity action concept. \Ve at the State level are very concerned with short-term fundings, we are very concerned with special conditions attached to the grant that are unrealistic. We are dealing with volunteer service people, who serve on boards. They have devoted many hours of their free time, serving as representatives in a community action agency, and any form of special conditions and short-term funding that appears to them to be a dictatorial threat, and the,y oppose this approach to a community action concept. As far as the VISTA's and AV's operation in Kentucky, it is prob- ably to my way of thinking depends on the individual attitude of the VISTA AV himself. Some of them are dedicated individuals. There are also those who are down there just for the lark, irresponsible, with no sense of direc- tion and where they are going. To me, this does more damage to the low-income group of east Kentucky than good, although there are VISTA's and AV's who are dedicated, are doing a good job, and working very effectively with some community action agencies. This, again, depends on personalities, but the CAP directors and personali- ties with the VISTA's and AV's are a good asset, are a good resource in the war on poverty, but we use them as a resource.. And we feel that the real main emphasis, or the real effect of winning the war on poverty must come from a community action agency. And we feel that the VISTA's and AV's should come under the umbrella of the super- vision of the community action agency to be effective in carrying out the war on poverty. There are some conflicts. I know there are conflicts between the VISTA's and AV's with CAP agencies in Kentucky. Some of it is based on personalities. Some of it is based on irresponsibility of the youths in the VISTA and AV program that are-to my way of think- ing, maybe-down there just for the lark. Other CAP agencies, they have been doing a very good job working very effectively with the community action agency group. Chairman PERKINS. One of the most dedicated ladies that I ever ran into happened to be a VISTA worker in the mud creek section of Floyd County. She was an elderly lady. I am hoping somewhere along the line that we can get some others in that category. Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Chairman, I believe this completes our state- inent. If you have any questions. Chairman PERKINS. You appear today in behalf of Al Whitehouse, director of the Kentucky Office of Economic Opportunity. 80-084-67---pt. 4-44 PAGENO="0690" 3150 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ALEXANDER. Yes, sir; that is correct. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I want to thank you for your appearance here this morning. Come around, Frank. Congressman Stubblefield. STATEMENT OP HON. PRANK A. STUBBLEPIELD, A REPRESENTA- TIVE IN CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OP KENTUCKY Mr. STUBBLEFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your kindness in allotting time to Mr. Nace Anderson of Morganfield, Ky., who is here to testify on one facet of the so-called poverty program; namely, the Camp Breckenridge Job Corps. Mr. Anderson lives in Union County, of which Morganfield is the county seat. This, as you well know, is the home of a very good friend of yours, former Senator Clements, and he is most qualified to testify on the Camp Breckenridge Job Corps Center, due to his proximity to that operation. Further qualifications of Mr. Anderson, include his being president. of the largest bank in Morganfield, the Morgan- field National Bank. Chairman PERKINS. Would you talk just a little bit louder? Mr. STUBBLEFIELD. I was just stating what Mr. Anderson's qualifi- cations were. He is president of the largest bank in Morganfield, Ky. He is also a teacher in the largest Bible class in Morganfield; and he ha.s ha.d an opportunity, due to his proximity to the Breckenridge Job Corps Center, to observe this opera.tion since the beginning. It is a real pleasure to present to the committee, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, Mr. Nace Anderson, of Morganfield, Ky. Chairman PERKINS. Well, let me first address my colleague by stating that I am delighted to have Mr. Anderson, the president of the Morganfield National Bank, here with you this morning, but I want to bring out from you, in addition, to the questions that I will ask Mr. Anderson, your views on the operation of the Job Corps in Morgan- field. I can recall back in a number of years ago, when there was much criticism of the Job Corps in Morganfield, Ky., in fact the people would prefer that the Job Corps was outside of the city. But if I read all t.he signs right, there are actually personal witnesses, and after witnessing practically t.he whole comunity come to the Center to witness a graduation of the Job Corps enrollees, I was convinced that at present, the Job Corps is really doing an effective job, and the lack of support has turned to a 100 percent suport of the program in t.he community. Do you care to comment along that line? Mr. STUBBLEFIELD. Yes, I would, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate this opportunity to do so. You are correct in that in the early stages of their operation, under the direction of the Southern Illinois University, the results were not too good; and there was a~ lot of dissatisfaction. I think it goes back to probably the analogy of what the young lady said here, that it was just a lack of direction and know-how, and I think the Southern Illi- nois University had a contract to operate this Job Corp Center for about a year, the first year of operation, and at the expiration of their contract, the Grafiex Corp., a professional management company, took PAGENO="0691" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3151 over the operation of the Breckenridge Job Corps, and they have done a wonderful job down there. I know of your visit there, your recent visit; and we all appreciated your taking the time to go down and observe this operation. The attitude of, or at least, it has been the observation of everyone that I have had any contact with in Union County and the surround- ing counties, that the attitude is completely changed, that they have a very fine staff there, the instructors are all capable people. They have an intense interest in their work; and, as you mentioned, if you were there on graduation day, why, about 6 months prior to your visit, I spent the day out there, on graduation day; and I think there were about 20 graduates on this occasion. I remember talking to one gentle- men who ran a large nursery in Wisconsin, and they do have a very fine nursery training school there. About a year before my visit there, their nurseryman had come down to seek, look it over, and see if he could use some of these graduates. He took two of them at that time, on a trial basis, and he was down there again 6 months later. This time he took the whole graduating class-that is, the ones who graduated in Nursery, from the nursery school-and said they were the best em- ployees that he had in his whole operation. I also observed that Philco has a contract with the electronics school; and on the occasion of my visit there, I think there were six graduates from the electronics school. The Motorola man was on the Job Corps site the day of grad- uation; and although Philco had the contract, Motorola took all the electronics graduates, so that speaks for itself, in that industry is seeking these graduates in their representative industries. Consequently, I am happy to report to you that the operation of this project is a very fine one, and the people of the area who formerly objected to it are now delighted to have it in their community. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Stubblefield. I appreciate your coming here this morning to introduce Mr. Anderson. Come around and take a seat by Mr. Stubblefield, Mr. Anderson. Mr. ANDERSON. Thank you. STATEMENT OF NACE ANDERSON, PRESIDENT, MORGANFIELD NATIONAL BANK, MORGANFIELD, KY. Chairman PERKINS. First of all, I want to try to get your back- ground. This is the first time that I have had the pleasure to shake your hand this morning, and what experiences you have had in the community, whether you were reared there, or what about it. Tell us. Mr. ANDERSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank Mr. Stubblefield for taking this time to come around. As far as my own background is concerned, I am a lifelong resi-. dent of Morganfield. I am 53 years old, with three children, and my background is primarily agriculture, and I am a farmer. I have been in the banking business 8 years. I do make a comforta- ble living, and pay several thousand dollars income tax, and like to see it spent wisely. In my position at the bank, I have talked with many of the person- nel, and many of the staff that is at Camp Breckenridge, and I think PAGENO="0692" 3152 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 in talking with the staff and in talking with these people, you do get to know them, and when you talk to a man about his personal money problems, I think you get a fairly good picture, and very often, of the type of character he is. I was there when Southern Illinois University brou~iht in their people, and I l~a.ve. been there. when C-reflex brought in their people, and so I have been out to the camp many times, and seen their oper- ation. and sat in their classrooms and eaten at their tables, and been to their meetings, and in this way, I have become somewhat familiar with the operation at Breckenridge, and I uimclerstancl that I am here primarily to convey the commumt.y attitude, which is also my own personal attitude, toward the relationship of Camp Brec.kenridge and our community, and the impression that. they have. made upon us. Chairman PERKINs. I didn't hear that last statement. I am sorry. I was talking to one of my colleagues here on another matter. Mr. ANDERsoN. I understand that the reason I am Chairman PERKINS. What was your background? Will you repeat that for me? lYe will straighten the record up and only let it. appear one time. Mr. ANDERSON. I see. Well, I am; a lifelong resident of Union County, in Morganfield, Ky., which is adjacent to Camp Breckenridge. I am 53 years old, married, three children, farm-raised, agricultural background. A farm owner, and still farm, and have been active in tile bank for about 8 ye.ars. In my posit.ion in tile bank, I have opportunities to talk with many of tile incoming staff and staff at both Southern Illinois University and tile staff that Grafiex has. Chairman PERKINS. I think you want to admit here before this committee when the Job Corps camp first started down there in the area that it was unpopula.r in tile community? Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, sir; it was. Chairman PERKINS. Why was it unpopular at that. time? Mr. ANDERSON. Primarily, I think, because Southern Illinois Uni- versity, maybe, had no blueprint, no guides to go by. They were rusll- ing to put it together. Many mistakes were made. These mistakes were qmte evident to tile public in the surrounding community. The type of people they got for personnel were not always, I don't know whether they were undesirable or not, but many of them were unusual-type people that we were not accustomed to seeing in our community. They were the fringe-type people that you might see around universities. However, in their defense, I will say that they did have some very good people, a.nd these fringe people are now gone, a.nd many of these good people are still there, and I got to know many of the-mn through my association with them, conce.rning financial matters and their personal money problems wllich most people have, and I think maybe that this way might be, migllt not be too bad a way, or it might be one criterion by wllich you can judge a. man's character. Chairman PERKINS. In otiler words, the operation under Grafiex has been ilighly approved by the community, and from your experience as a businessman, has the youngster, and particularly since Grafiex took over, benefited amid received the trainmg that would qualify those PAGENO="0693" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3153 youngsters for, get them in a position where they can obtain employ- ment? Have you observed many of them? Give us your views along that line. Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. I think that during the inception and most of the first period, imder Southern Illinois University, it got a black eye, and I think mainly that our people have been glad to see it live. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you think that that was the situation in a lot of Job Corps camps throughout the country, when we tI~rew a lot of money at Shriver and told him to get busy as soon as he possibly could, and put something together, without any specific instructions, and get these Job Corps camps in operation? Mr. ANDERSON. I had read that this is so, but I do not know about any other situation than that at Morganfield, Camp Breckinridge. Many newspaper reports bear out what you say. However, under Graflex, this situation at home, and this is my opinion, and I believe sincerely that it is a great majority of my com- munity's opinion, that this situation has been reversed entirely, and now we can see that the type of people they are getting into their staff members and to do their work is entirely different. These people are interested in their jobs, we see many changes, every day, take place. These are all little things that make for a better run institution. It is run on a businesslike basis, private industry, which I endorse; I think it is doing a good job in this case. I think maybe they learned a lot from the mistakes of the university people, and to their credit, they left a badly bent structure, that needed shoring up in many places, but Grafiex didn't have to tear it down. They started with what they had, and they straightened up the rafters, and patched the roof, and they are building a good house, I think, and I think my community thinks so, and it is pretty hard to fool a whole community. If things are not going good, people know it, and if they are trying, and they are going good, and we see many of these things being cor- rected, just little things, and I could enumerate those, if I were asked to, the little things that make for a better program. I think we don't have the same situation as the previous witness. Our community is not, could not claim to be a poverty area. We are a small county, but we are a fairly wealthy county. We raise corn, wheat, cattle, hogs, soy beans, have mining and have oil. Chairman PERKINS. One of the good farming counties in Kentucky. Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, sir. And, so, we are not dependent on Breckenridge. I think the only reason that the Job Corps is in our community is because the facility was already there. We didn't ask for it. We are now proud it is there. It involves a good many of our people, but if it were not there, why, we would b employed anyway. There is very little unemployment in my community. Anybody wants a job can get one, and he probably could get one if Breckenridge wasn't there. However, there are about 300 people working in various capacities that are from Morganfield, in Union County. There are about 650, maybe, in a radius of-they draw from a radius of 20 to maybe 50 miles. It takes a certain type of person to work out there. I wouldn't want any of the jobs that they have to offer. It takes a person who is~ PAGENO="0694" 3154 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 interested, who is dedicated, and I have heard this word used before this morning, and I think it is true for that type of job. Grafiex, they are limited in the people who are not interested. They are retraining the people who are interested. Chairman PERKINS. That is your observation; the people that are not interested, they are- Mr. ANDERSON. Are soon gone. Chairman PERKINS. They are able to screen them and eliminate them? Mr. ANDERSON. They are soon gone. Chairman PERKINS. The people that are dedicated, they are staying. Mr. ANDERSON. That. is right. And I feel like I know this. Chairman PERKINS. You are making that statement as a business- man. Mr. ANDERSON. I am making that statement as a businessman, from my experience in talking with many of these employees, and many of their staff who come there for jobs, who have stayed there on the jobs, most of which have some sort of financial problem, and I talked with them. I talk about their personal problems, and also, take the op- portunity to talk many times about the problems of Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. Now another question. You have a vocational school in your area; don't you? I want to ask you just as an observation whether, in your judgment, the Job Corps is reaching a type of youngster from the standpoint of basic education, character, and otherwise, that is not now being reached in vocational education. I am just asking you from your ob- servation there, as a businessman on the streets, you know the people throughout the county, know the people that you have got acquainted with in Job Corps, and see those youngsters on the streets there every day. Tell us your observation along that line. Mr. ANDERSON. Job Corps students are bound to be people whom vocational education is not reaching. I don't know what the reason is they are not reaching. Their own volition, or a person has to go to school until he is 16, and after that, why, he can do what he wants. I think the previous testimony gives you some inkling of the type of situation where these students come from. Now, this applies to the mountain people, and in this lady's case, but these people come from everywhere. They come from the ghettos, they come from the rural South, they come from rural everywhere, small towns they are dropouts that are not reached by the vocational program, simply be- cause they are not present. It is there, but they have not taken ad- vantage of it for one reason or another. In my visits to the camp, we see these people walking across campus, and we see them coming in on the buses. I have attended their gradua- tion, and I don't know how they do a.s well as they do with a great many of these people. You can see a big change in them. I am not so sure which is the most important; namely, thinking they learn out there. Maybe how to get along socially, or at least, things that have social effects, are maybe more important than the job that they are training for. The education that they get might also have second importance to this how to go out in the world and get. a job, how to do many things. PAGENO="0695" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3555 The people who go out and see this, who are mostly the people in my community, and many of them do, we are free to go anytime, we are also invited, see this thing, and they can't help but be impressed. I don't like to see my tax dollar wasted, but I am impressed and I am willing to pay for the program that they have at Breckinridge Graflex. I don't know anything about the other programs. I don't know any more than what I have read in the newspaper. I know if half of it is true, there has been a lot of mistakes, and a lot of waste, but I am sold on Graflex programs. Chairman PERKINS. You know if we turned our backs on the type of youngster that you see coming into Morganfleld, Ky., and your record shows 23 percent of the youngsters received in the Job Corps have already drowned out of vocational school, and to my way of thinking, the primary reason is because one of our great problems is obtaining the information and know-how and the special education training in techniques to deal with this youngster at the bottom of the totem pole. Don't you think it would be a grave mistake for the Congress to turn their backs on that type of youngster? Because crime costs so much more. Three times more. To keep a youngster-I mean, where a youngster has been convicted of a felony, to keep him in detention for a year. Don't you think the Congress would make a terrible mistake of turning their backs on this type of youngster, interrjipting the opera- tion of the Job Corps? Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman, I don't know the answer to that question. This situation has been brought to national attention, and once it is done, why, the country feels inclined that we have to do something about it. Here it is. This is one way that it is being taken care of. In my own experience, in my own observation, I think it is worth the price of what is being done at Camp Breckinridge. I don't know whether it is worth the price on all these other programs or not. It may be. It cer- tainly needs to be considered. Chairman PERKINS. The operation of the program, the cost has dropped down to an average annual cost of $5,900 per enrollee in Breckinridge. Mr. ANDERSON. I have seen those figures. Chairman PERKINS. And that is about the average throughout the country. That shows that we have been profiting from mistakes that we have made in the past, where the cost was much higher. But it is my point of view, and I would like to know if you agree, that we are obtaining through this period of demonstration or experimentation cerLain know-how where we can effectively pass it on to other institu- tions, such as secondary, vocational educational institutions, and resi- dential centers, and even to industry. it is my point of view if we threw away this past experience, with- out going on, carrying. on for a greater number of years, I would like to see the Job Corps eliminated. I would like to see it work itself out of a job tomorrow. But realistically, that is not going to happen. Do you agree with me that we should let this program ~o along in the future without being curtailed until we can come up with answers that can take care of these youngsters? PAGENO="0696" 3156 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ANDERSON. I would say of Breckinridge, and I still go back to that, because it is all I know personally- Chairman PERKINS. But you do observe that we are gaining infor- mation and know-how? Mr. ANDERSON. Yes; I do. I think the basic idea., you can take a. person who otherwise might become a drag on society and put him in a productive capacity where he heads in the right dire~'tion. I know we are. learning a lot as we go along with all of these programs. And out of it., I believe. maybe it. might be worth t.he price to take a chance on it, because if you do nothing, it is going to deteriorate, and if you do something, it is like many programs that have some proven good and some have proven bad. I believe in this program based on my knowledge of what is going on at Breckinridge. I don't know any- thing about. the. others. Chairman PERKINS. I'Vell, I `know that I am speaking to a good1 solid, more than likely conservative citizen, and I have appreciated your point of view here about. Government this morning. Mr. ANDERSON. I know private industry. Chairman PERKINS. Especially the job that is being done at Brec.k- inric[ge, in giving suitable training for the type of youngster that you have there. Mr. ANDERSON. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. Axi~~sox. Obviously, private industry is interested in this, and I don't believe it is just for the money that. is in it for them. I think they are interested for the same reasons that you have stated. I believe that they think they can do it. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you, and they have made a state- n'ient. here t.o the effect that from a pecuniary viewpoint, it would he much better for them to go in another direction and invest their funds, because. they just were in this business because they felt that they could make a. contribution to society. I feel they are making that con- tribution. I feel our educational system is going to benefit from this con~ribut.ion. Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. sir, and they are making future customers, too, if they have a productive person who buys services, pays taxes, and so forth. Chairman PERKINS. Your Grafiex man testified. jf I recall his testi- mony-I don't. know. I guess we have had maybe 100 witnesses or more before this committee; I know we have had more than 100- that a. percentage of these youngsters were juvenile offenders when they came in and they have developed the know-how to keep that youngster under supervision and control 7 days a week. Has that been done effectively? Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. I think so. I have seen the inveiitory of their weapons that were taken away from them when they arrived at camp. I have, seen the discinlinarv measures that are put into `effect. I have seen various little things like-after all, they get 16 to 21 is the age spread. When he arrives at camp he is apprehensive usually, he is homesick. For example. they have just put in a buddy system. A buddy system is self-exnlanatcrv. One of the older boys takes over one of the new yoimgev boys ~`tnd this is effective. This keeps him content. If they PAGENO="0697" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3157 can keep him there long enough, through their little rewards they offer for staying or their rewards they offer for shaping up, or the penalties they put in for infractions, they can reorient this person. It is like this situation we just talked about. Many of these people, and I don't know whether they are right or not, they think that these boys have to be jerked out of their environment from which they came and separated from it entirely before they can ever be eligible to see or they can even develop an appreciation for the way normal people live. And so they go on this basis, and they do many little things. I see more and more of this being put into effect and I think it is more and more successful. And without the type of staff they have, which I keep getting back to-the type of people you have working in any organiza- tion has a lot to do with the effectiveness. That applies all the way up to the top of the government. Chairman PERKINS. Our bill continues the present operation of the Job Corps at a cost of $295 million. Another bill pending before the committee proposes to cut back during the next fiscal year the Job Corps from $295 million to $190 million. In other words, cut back the operation of the Job Corps $105 million. But to transfer immediately the operation of the Job Corps to the Office of Education, to be operated as our regular vocational school system is being operated at the present time. I think everybody knows that I am a great believer in vocational education. From your experience down there, I think you qualify in one sense of the word, perhaps, as an expert, and a better expert than many educators would qualify, from your experience, do you feel that it would be detrimental to the welfare of the type of youngster that the Job Corps is presently serving if this other bill became effective and we took the operation of the Job Corps away from its present setup and transferred it to the Office of Education to be operated as vocational schools are presently operated? Go ahead. Mr. ANDERSON. I can't answer your question because I don't know enough about the administrative experience or program on either one of these sides. Chairman PERKINS. Well, you feel it would be a great mistake to take it away from Graflex. Mr. ANDERSON. Yes, I do. I think that Grafiex, and I use that as an example. and if Graflex is a fair example to us, I feel that, and I have noticed this training, that the more liberty they have to run their own program and the less they have to make their final decisions dependent upon OEO, the better off they are and the better they are able to administer their program. I can give one small example. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. ANDERSON. For example, I know one of the people who is called a resident counselor. He is a neighbor of mine, lives down the road, and I talked with him many times. Now a resident counselor lives in the dormitory with about 20 of these fellows. Over him, there is an area counselor and so if he has disciplinary problems, and of course, the disciplinary problems that these people have are normal, they don't know how to act when they come. Now they will dismiss a person if he fails certain tests. If he is a habitual criminal or if he can't get along with these people or if he is a PAGENO="0698" 3158 ECONOMIC OPPORTEXITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 fighter, he won't cooperate in any way, I don't know what all the criteria are, but they will dismiss these people if they won't shape up. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you can't keep them. Mr. ANDERSON. Now, my point is this: That up until recently, before final dismissal could be made, it had to be approved by OEO in Washington. Now, then, the man is dismissed. He can come back to the barracks and stay 24 hours. He has nothing to lose. He might tear up the place, he might beat up somebody, might do many things. That was bad. And I understand just recently that this decision can now be made by Grafiex itself. That is good. It is just one little thing that these people on the spot are able to administer their own program, and the further away they get from the final decision having to be given in Washington, the better off they are. This was one of the big troubles SIll had. Chairman PERKINS. Now, I know that, now, you have gone through the school so many times. Mr. QUIE. Would the gentleman yield on this? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. QuIE. I think it should be pointed out to the witness that under the opportunity crusade, the Job Corps camp would not auto- matically be taken away from Grafiex. This would be up to those in the vocational education administration, just as it is up to OEO right now to determine who would administer these camps. So this was a mistaken impression that was given. Mr. ANDERsON. I don't know who should administer it. He has an opinion. You have one. I don't know. Chairman PERKINS. But you are still of the opinion that G-raflex should administer it instead of the vocational education people at this point, at this time. Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. sir. I am sold on their methods and what they are trying to do and the effort they have made. I don't know who they are responsible to. But they are doing a good job. Chairman PERKINS. That is the point, gentlemen. Mr. Qur~. Would the gentleman yield? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. I yield. Mr. QmE. I would expect, wouldn't you, that people in the voca- tional education administration would have equal competence with yourself in making this same determination? Mit. ANDERSON. I don't know. I only know my own observation. I don't consider myself an expert.. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank you, Mr. Anderson. I think you have been very helpful to the committee, but I think your testimony is far reaching in many respects because it is typical of what has taken place in the Nation. Job Corps camps, many of them, when they were first set up, many mistakes were made, and that was nothing out of the ordinary. We were trying to get the camp in operation at the earliest possible date and any good administrator would make mis- takes, but the rea.l point here involved is the fact that the present director of the Office of Economic Opportunity has taken advantage of those mistakes and the operation is on an efficient basis today. When the mistakes are made today they are being corrected. I think that PAGENO="0699" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3159 is the reason that your testimony is so outstanding. It is typical of just what is taking place in the Job Corps throughout the Nation. Mr. Quie? Mr. QrnE. I have no questions. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mr. Anderson, for your appearance here today. Mr. ANDERSON. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Come forward, Senator Pepper. STATEMENT OF HON. CLAUDE PEPPER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA Mr. PEPPER. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. It gives me a great pleasure to welcome my distinguished colleague before this committee. Mr. PEPPER. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. It is always his custom to come here on matters of great importance to the Nation. Naturally you are one of the out- standing students of Government in the `Congress. You have demon- strated that in so many different ways. It is a pleasure to welcome the gentleman that has taken so much interest before the House Com- mittee on Rules where we get more measures like this. Proceed, `Senator Pepper, in any way you like. Mr. PEPPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of this dis- tinguished committee. It is a great pleasure for me to have the opportunity to speak here today in favor of H.R. 8311, the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967. I have given my continuous sup- port to the programs authorized by this act, and would enthusiastically urge that they be, extended and in, some cases expanded. I would like to commend this committee for their diligent efforts in evaluating the poverty program. In a program so new and so innova- tive in its approach, there is a great danger of improper activities being funded, of mismanagement of funds, and of funds `being used for political purposes. We in Congress must constantly be vigilant in watching for this type of criticism, and must make every effort to see to it that such activities are not funded by the Federal `Government. On the whole, however, I think the antipoverty program's have made an impressive record. It may be a period of years before we can eval- uate their long-term effectiveness. But as we see individuals being trained `so that they may secure permanent employment, as we see little chil'dren in Headstart receiving much-needed medical attention, as we see students able to finish high school because they are enrolled in the Neighborhood Youth Corps-we know that the poverty program is having an immensely important impact. .1 will give my full support to the 1967 amendments. However, there are several changes which I would like to see made in the legislation. I hope this committee will take the suggestions under consideration before the bill is reported out. The first amendment I would suggest is one which would amend section 205 (a) of the Economic Opportunity Act by inserting a sen- tence to the effect that title II funds could be used `for construction of PAGENO="0700" 3160 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 night illumination systems for public recreational areas. This amend- ment would read: Page 50, at the end of line 12, insert the following: Component programs may also include projects for the construction of night illumination systems fer public recreational areas. Such an addit.ion would serve tile purpose of directing OEO to allow funds allocated for summer programs to be spent on erecting the light- ing fixtures so that the recreational programs at the swimming pool, playground, or baseball diamond could be continued into the evening hours. I very much favor the expenditure of funds for summer programs. I have seen how helpful these programs can be in keeping young people occupied and out of trouble. The President, in his message to the Con- gress requesting the appropriation of $75 million for summer pro- grams, specifically mentioned that the funds would be used "to keel) schools, libraries, and playgrounds open, to build swimming pools, and to light basketball courts and baseball diamonds in the evenings." Con- gress acted with dispatch and passed this appropriation, with the understanding that playground lighting was an integral part of the program. And yet, when the community action agency in my home district, in Miami submitted their application for funds for their summer pro- gram. they were told they could not have tile money for providing illumination. The policy of the Office of Economic Opportunity was to provide funds for the operation of recreation programs, insofar as this includes tile payment of salaries of youth workers to supervise tile p1a.ygi~ound or tile swimming pooi at night, but not to construct or operate tile lights. OEO cited legislative restrictions on construction in its programs. I talked to Mr. Shriver personally about this and, Mr. Chairman, he affirmed this understanding of the limitations against this sort of provision in the law. Fortunately, in this case our local authorities were able to work out an arrangement to provide part of the lighting needed. But I think we should remove any doubt that. while we. prohib~t. use of OEO funds for general construction, the Congress does not intend that OEO should be prohibited from assisting in tile provision of lighting equip- ment where this is necessary to permit recreation areas to operate at night. ~We are all too aware this summer of the use of time and energy, for violence, which might. be channeled into the playground. I would strongly urge this committee to conside.r adding a sentence. to the act to specify that it is the intent of Congress that funds may be used for this ~purpose to encourage wherever possible wholesome rec- reation and help reduce restless and lawless activity in our crowded urban centers. Tile second area of concern to me is the matter of nrogram's for senior citizens. One-third of those persons over the age of 65 do not have enough income to escape from being poor. The number of persons ill this category is approximately 5 million. This means that the aged constitute one-seventh of tile poor in this country. A primary emphasis of the programs authorized by the Economic Opportunity Ac.t is to assist young people ni gaining the educatioll and training to enable them to break out of the cole of poverty and become self-supporting adults. Tile Job Corps, the Neighborhood PAGENO="0701" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3161 Youth Corps, Project Headstart, Upward Bound-all of these focus on children and youth. I would not suggest that these programs assist- ing young persons are not of prime importance. They must be con- tinued, indeed expanded. But this concentration on youth tends to let us `forget the sizable group of senior citizens who are experienoing want and deprivation. No one intends to ignore this group. Much has been said about including them in the war on poverty. But the time for talk is over. I think we must come down to some concrete proposals. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I am offering three amendments to H.R. 8311 which will encourage greater attention to older Americans and to the role they can and should have in the Economic Opportunity Act programs. My first proposal would earmark a total of $150 million of the funds appropriated for title II of this act to be used `for programs to assist senior citizens who are poor. This amendment should read: Page 76, after line 12, insert the following: (e) Section 610 of such Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the follow- ing: `Of the funds appropriated to carry out this A!ct `for a fiscal year, not less than $150,000,000 shall be expended on special programu for the elderly poor.' And `redesignate subsections (c), (d), and (e), as (d), (e), and (f) respectively. This figure has not just been pulled out of the air. My reasoning is this. The aged represent one-seventh of the total number of poor Amer- icans; therefore, they should benefit from one-seventh of the programs. The Office of Economic Opportunity has asked for $1,022 million for urban and rural community action programs under title II. The fair share of this amount that should be allocated to programs for senior citizens is approximately $150 million. Chaimmami PERKINS. Just a moment, Mr. Pepper. I want you to sum- marize the last minute what you have submitted there. You read an amendment to the $150 million being earmarked, but I was busy. What did you say after that? And I will follow you then. Mr. PErrEa. ,Just summarize? Chairman PERKINS. No; just the last paragraph. Mr. P1~PpER. I recommended $150 million. This figure has not just been pulled out of the air. Our reasoning is that the aged represent one-seventh of the total number of poor persons; therefore, they should benefit from one-seventh of the programs for the poor. - The Office of Economic Opportunity has asked for $1,022 million for urban and rural community action programs under title II. The fair share of this amount which should be allocated to programs for senior citizens would be about one-seventh of that amount, about $150 million. Chairman PERKINS. I see. Go ahead. Mr. PEPPER. During these hearings, you have heard how success- ful the foster grandparent program has been. This program, which provides employment for the aged poor, demonstrates what can be done. As of March of 1966, 21 foster grandparent projects had been funded. This number has increased to a current level of 49 projects. However, this represents an expenditure of only $5.5 million. Ten mil- lion dollars is planned for funding for fiscal year 1968. I am sure there are other types of programs which could be designed to give senior citizens a chance for part-time work, a chance to earn much needed PAGENO="0702" 3162 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 income, and at the same time perform a necessary task to help others who are in need. Now, this is the second amendment, also in the field of aid to senior citizens. My second amendment reads: Page 76, after line 16, insert the following: (d) Part A of Title VI of such Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following: Use of Volunteer Services of Senior Citizens Sec. 610-2. The Administrator shall encourage all persons charged with carry- ing out programs under this Act to make maximum use in administrative and advisory capacities of the volunteer services of persons who, by reason of having retired from their regular employment, may be considered senior citizens. And redesignate subsections (d) and (e) as (e) and (f), respectively. Chairman PERKINS. Senator Pepper, I agree wholeheartedly with this statement. I met with the Commission of Aged in my office result- ing from a walk that I took over the holidays and seeing that which is being done for our elderly people had just made me sick. We were supposed to have VISTA workers, Appalachian volunteers, but* the people who were unable to get out of their bed were being completely overlooked and were receiving some public assistance. We have this elderly group that we know these people and it would be the greatest thing that we could possibly do to see that their time and mind was occupied in this direction, especially in areas where we will not have any trained nurses any time in the future. I am speaking now of the rural areas. You are more likely addressing yourself to urban areas. I, personally, am going to insist on an amendment of this kind. I think that you are so right where we could so wisely spend some money and we must do something along this~ line. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Chairman, you know how gratified I am to hear you say that. I am advised Mr. Shriver when asked the question testi- fied before the Senate that nothing is being done for senior citizens, there was no program designed, as I understand it, for senior citizens. Mr. Chairman, it is intended to require the maximum use of senior citizens in programs authorized by the Economic Opportunity Act. Section 610 specifies that it is the intent of Congress that whenever feasible the special problems of the elderly poor should be considered in the development, conduct, and administration of programs under this act. I find no fault with this section, but I do have doubts as to whether it has been implemented to the fullest extent possible. I am sure that in many cities, counties, towns, and villages, many of our senior citizens are vitally interested in the war on poverty. Not only are they interested, but many of them have had special experience which could be effectively utilized in the many programs in operation. They have worked as teachers, social workers, businessmen, and law- yers, thereby possessing skills which are in great demand in such programs as Headstart, community action, neighborhood legal serv- ices, and adult education and training. Chairman PERKINS. Let me interrupt and state in your area that is true but in my particular area here these people who are above 65 years of age in a rural area are just more or less withering on the vine, living on a very little income, so many of them are, and we should put those people to work. Mr. PEPPER. They are so eager to work. PAGENO="0703" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3163 * Chairman PERKINS. They are eager and they want to do it and they are dedicated. They are the type of individuals that are dedicated to that community and we should make arrangements for them to par- ticipate as so-called VISTA's or whatever they may be to do something for these elderly people that are being overlooked. Mr. PEPPER. `They will bless you forever, Mr. Chairman, for your wonderful leadership of that. President Johnson, in his January 23 message to the 90th Congress on aid for the aged, requested that the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity "initiate and expand programs to make. a wider range of volun- teer activities available to older citizens." He mentioned such fields as tutors, classroom aides in Heacistart, and greater paiticipation in VISTA. My proposal would require that some specific regulations be drawn up to encourage the community action agencies and others administer- ing antipoverty programs to make greater use of senior citizens. I would suggest that when the current contracts come up for renewal and examination, the Office of Economic Opportunity require that the agency show that it has made an effort to hire qualified senior citizens interested in helping in the w-ar against poverty. By fully utilizing this segment of our population, we will make the war on poverty even more successful, first by securing the services of skilled employees, and second, by involving still another group in the total community effort to eliminate poverty. My third amendment is related to the second, but focused on another aspect of the poverty program. it reads: Page 76, after line 12, insert the following: (c) Section 610 of such Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sentence: "The Director shall take such action as may be neces- sary to insure that in carrying out programs under this Act maximum use is made of the services of persons who, by reason of having retired from regular employment, may be considered senior citizens. And redesignate subsections (c), (d), and (e) as (d), (e) and (f). Chairman PERKINS. Let me interrupt you. What do you think about some language directing VISTA workers to make special efforts to provide services for senior citizens, partic- ularly in isolated rural areas, and implementing the law to the extent that local senior citizens who are qualified may participate? Do you think that would be a good amendment? Mr. PEPPER. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. The reason I say that to you, Mr. Pepper, we have reached the youngsters so well in many areas of my district but when you get out on one of these towns up the creek as I like to go up and down on occasions, many of these elderly people on public assist- ance will say to me, "Well, we hear all about this poverty program and we are discouraged. You know, we are supposed to get medical treat- ment" and the red tape is so much that under the medical program as administered by the Economic Opportunity Act they won't even go in and charge the medicine that they must buy. They pay for it out of the old age assistance check. I ran into three cases of that kind down there in one day and they said to me, "Why can't you help us somewhere along the line?" PAGENO="0704" 3164 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It just points up the fact that we need here just what you are talking about and as chairman of this committee if we don't do something about it,I am going to offer an amendment on the floor of the House because this ]USt must be done; we cannot neglect these people up and down these creeks where our local Appalachian volunteers and VISTA's have completely forgotten about them. It is time for us to put some language in the bill to see that we make special efforts to provide services to senior citizens. I know this par- ticularly in the isolated rural areas, and I think the same is true as you say in your area. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Chairman, I don't think you could do a more com- mendable thing. Chairman PERKINS. It just burns me up to see people who profess to know the area and make great headlines and never touch the real needs in the area. Mr. PEPPER. They don't want to be bothered in many instances, Mr. Chairman, with the senior citizens; they just think they don't want to be bothered with them and yet they are the greatest reservoir of un- tapped resources I believe in the United States. Chairman PERKINS. I agree wholeheartedly. Mr. PEPPER. I happen to be 66 years old; maybe I should not boast about it, but if anybody told me that I was living in a community and retired and I could not do something to help in one of these programs, as we crackers say, I would want to fight them about it. Now, there are two categories. One of them is the group where $200, $250 a month would be a bonanza to them, give them a little income, give them something to do. The other group are people well to do who made a business success, retired from their own business but want to do something because they are good Americans; they want to help their country and they got tired of resting and fishing and doing the recreational things. I have had many of them come to me, bankers and businessmen. One had me to lunch one day across from the bank. He said, "I am one of the boys at the bank; I want to do something. Can't you get me in this OEO program? I have been a successful businessman; I have been healthy." He was a handsome fellow, well dressed. He would gladly serve for $200 a month or nothing, for that matter, but we cannot find a place for him. Chairman PERKINS. One other point that I feel I must press myself to in the rural areas. I have been on housing and I know the Housing Administration, I feel, has done a most worthy job but from the standpoint of rural housing it has been practically nil and these people reside in what we may term huts and just want a little better oppor- tunity to know it is no fault of their own, and I am speaking about these senior citizens. We should utilize these senior citizens who are living on a meager income in my area, many Of them, $40 a month, $45 a month, depth of economic security, never were able to take advantage of the Social Security Act. We should utilize this where they have nowhere to work as a fairly good carpenter and knowing a little something about build- ing, put them under some competent supervisor and get some loans PAGENO="0705" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3165 even though the Government has to subsidize them which would be small, $500 or $1,000, to winterize the home, put a decent roof over their heads. There is nothing in this District of Columbia that will compare with some of these rural shacks that prevail in my district. I am just hopeful that our Government is not going to forget about these people because they are not rioting and rising up against the Government and all these things. We have got to recognize the real needs of the people wherever they are, whether they are in a ghetto in the metropolitan area or in a rural area. It has been my poii~t of view and I have found that I have long supported every piece of legislation to come before the Congress, to help the citizens, to promote the general welfare of the people in those areas, but I likewise feel that the time is long past due that we should do something about these poor people. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Chairman, I want to offer this caution. I think you are going to have to make the language strong in order to get the administrative people to carry out what we have in mind. Thank you very much. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you so much for your appearance. You have been most helpful. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Chairman, may I just add this? The proposal would amend the act to encourage the use of senior citizens as volunteers in administrative and advisory capacities. This would not be a mandatory requirement, but would rather be considered as a guideline for those directing the programs. The focus in this pro- posal would be on making use of the expertise and knowledge of senior citizens in administering programs. There is an added benefit which will accrue from the increased use of senior citizens as volunteers. This is in the lowering of the costs of administering the programs. In an effort such as the Economic Opportunity Act which is specifically designed to eliminate poverty, we are especially conscious of the sums allocated to administer the programs. The ideal is to use as much of the budget as possible for direct assistance to the poor themselves, and not siphon off large amounts for overhead. The use of volunteer help at the administrative level can prove to be of great value by securing talented persons with a com- mitment to the program, who are willing to contribute their time and energy without compensation. I urge your consideration of these four amendments. I hope that they can be added to the proposal now before you. They will add to the effectiveness of the Economic Opportunity Act in its efforts to elimi- nate poverty. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Burkhart. Go ahead and identify yourself for the record. Do you want to introduce the witness here, Mr. Goodell? I am delighted to welcome you here, Mr. Burkhart. I notice you, are president of the College Life Insurance Co. of America, speaking for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. We are always glad to have able witnesses like yourself present. Proceed. 80-084-67-pt. 4-45 PAGENO="0706" 3166 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 STATEMENT OP J~OHN BURK.HART, PRESIDENT OF THE COLLEGE LIFE INSURANCE CO. OP AMERICA, APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE CHAMBER OP COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES; ACCOl~T- PANIED BY RICHARD L. BREAULT, MANAGER OP THE NATIONAL CHAMBER'S COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL RESOURCE DEVELOP- MENT GROUP Mr. BURKHART. Thank you. I have with me, Mr. Richard L. Breault, who is the manager of our national chamber's community and regional resource development group, who is working very closely in this area and who does have a great deal of informationthat deals with what we are talking about. For the past three years, the chamber of commerce has been involved in a study of poverty. The major portion of the study, an intensive inquiry into the nature and causes of poverty, has been the responsi- bility of the task force on economic growth and opportunity. The task force is composed of more than 100 chief executives of the country's largest corporations. It is chaired by Mr. Erwin D. Canharn, editor in chief of the Christian Science Monitor. More than 35 background papers have been commissioned by the task force from authorities on various aspects of poverty. The task force has been advised by at least 150 experts serving on 10 panels. Six field trips have been made to representative parts of the country to get first-hand information. And the task force, through its own staff, has researched the subject. Three reports on poverty have so far been published. The first, en- titled "The Concept of Poverty," attempts to `define poverty more clearly, assesses the dimensions of the poverty problem in the United States, and develops general guidelines for public and private policies and programs to alleviate poverty. The second report, entitled "Poverty: The Sick, Disabled, and Aged," analyzes the relationships between the problem of poverty and conditions of sickness, disability, and old age. It puts forward 28 recommendations aimed at mitigatin~ the economic and social impact of these circumstančes and at improving the quality of life for people who are poor because of these reasons. The third report is entitled "The Disadvantaged Poor: Education and Employment." It analyzes the difficulties faced by those whose contributions to society are minimized because of discrimination, in- sufficient education, inadequate employment opportunities, or some combination of the three. It makes 28 recommendations aimed at alle- viating poverty caused by these factors. Two reports, one on individual and family security, and one on rural and regional poverty, are now in preparation. The reports published to date have been praised `by responsible pub- lic and private individuals of all political persuasions and have been favorably reviewed in leading publications. OTHER CHAMBER ACTIVITIES The national chamber's concern for finding solutions to poverty has not been limited to a study `of the problem of poverty. Additionally, the national chamber commissioned a study of the actual operation of PAGENO="0707" F~CONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3167 three Economic Opportunity Act programs-the Job Corps, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, and Project Headstart. This study, en- titled "Youth and the War on Poverty," was recently released and I will refer to it in more detail shortly. The chamber has also held meetings for local chamber executives to discuss the present and potential involvement of local chambers and businessmen in community action programs aimed at a variety of prob- lems, including poverty. The national chamber has added staff. whose full-time responsibility is to develop programs for business participation in the elimination of poverty. Further, we have added resources to our traditional interest and concern for the improvement of elementary, secondary, and higher education and, particularly, for vocational education, both the institu- tional and on-the-job variety. Through another of its activities-the total community development program-the national chamber is urging businessmen in every com- munity to concern and involve themselves with the broad range of problems-social, economic, political, and cultural-facing most cities and towns, including the problems of low-income people. The national chamber has also taken recommendations of its inde- pendent task force on economic growth and opportunity, evaluated many of them through appropriate committees, and approved a num- ber of them for action and implementation. I would like to offer the committee a list of recommendations in the first three reports of the task force that have become integral parts of national chamber policy. These are now serving as focal pQints for the development of action programs. NATIONAL CHAMBER POVERTY LEGISLATION RECOMMENDATIONS The national chamber has called for continuation, expansion, and improvement of Economic Opportunity Act programs that our anal- yses have shown to be successful, and it has offered constructive criti- cism of programs that it believes are not operating in the best possible manner. The chamber has adopted, as policy, a number of specific recom- mendations affecting OEO programs. These recommendations are based in part on the study to which I just referred, namely, Youth and the War on Poverty. At the outset, the report notes that one of the main obstacles to making any evaluation of the war on poverty programs is the lack of *meaningful data from the Office of Economic Opportunity. You will recall, for instance, that OEO itself had to hire the Lou Harris polling firm to "find" the first 60,000 Job Corps enrollees who, for statistical purposes, were lost. The public receives an abundance of statistics from OEO. However, they are of a general nature and really shed very little light on `the poverty program. For example, OEO tells us that the war on poverty has "touched 3 million poor people". But what does "touched" mean? How many unemployed people have been given training that led to permanent jobs? How many de- prived children have been given a head start in education that can PAGENO="0708" 3168 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 carry them through higher levels of education? How many unemployed parents have been trained for jobs that have taken them and their children off the welfare rolls? Data on all of these and many more questions are sadly lacking. And, what is available suggests that many of the neediest poor have been bypassed by the war on poverty. Because data were unavailable from OEO, a sample of Job Corps graduates and their employers was made part of the chamber study of Youth and the War on Poverty. Detailed results of the survey are to be found in the body of that report. In summary, the findings were these: Although 71 percent of formerly unemployed or underemployed youths have attained employment, entered the military service, or returned to school since leaving the Job Corps, only 28 percent of the graduates are working at jobs for which they were trained. Seventy-four percent of the enrollees are no longer employed in the job in which the Job Corps indicated they were placed. Employers rated the majority of graduates as "poor" or "satisfac- tory" in training, skill level, and work habits. The Job Corps has been doing very little to aid the graduates in placement. Although the sampling in the national chamber's survey of the Job Corps was in no way designed or intended to be scientific, the survey results were remarkably similar to the findings of the Lou Harris poll. The evidence suggests that the Job Corps is failing in its major purpose to lead young people to jobs for which the Job Corps has trained them. This poor implementation unfortunately distorts the concept, raising hopes only to dash them. The concept of the Job Corps is legitimate and laudable. Despite the fact that graduates have not achieved their employment goals, it is interesting to note that generally the Job Corps graduates sur- veyed said the JOb Corps was the best experience of their lives. The chamber believes that a redirection of program administration, reinforced by expanded industry participation, can provide the type of training implicit in the Job Corps concept. The Neighborhood Youth Corps and Headstart are likewise valid in concept and, despite the absence of a significant body of data, there have been some recent studies indicating instances of individual pro- gram success. I could summarize the findings of our study as they pertain to the Neighborhood Youth Corps and the Headstart program. To save time, however, I will let the study, which you now have, speak for itself. Let me, instead, quickly run through the study's recommenda- tions that have been since approved by the national chamber's board of directors. [Reads:] 1. Public schools should be encouraged to improve their ability to teach suc- cessfully the culturally deprived. The improvement of elementary and secondary school curricula and teaching for culturally deprived children could obviate the need for the Job Corps and other expensive remedial programs now conducted outside the public school system. A number of studies of secondary education have pointed out that the school dropout is often the school "force out." Secondary school PAGENO="0709" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3169 curricula, in many cases, has no relation to any meaningful objective for the deprived youth who will have to seek employment as soon as his education is completed. Businessmen can help rectify this, and the national chamber is encouraging its members to do so. 2. Vocational training programs should reflect the needs of and involve as much as possible, private business and industry. Businessmen are uniquely able to advise school boards and adminis- trators about present and predictable future job opportunities-and about the skills and knowledge required to meet them. Advisory com- mittees of business and professional men can keep vocational and tech- nical courses in tune with the economy, often through cooperative work- study programs. Such business education liaison can help assure realistic vocational educational programs and the placement and success of graduates. 3. Changes should be made in the labor laws, labor union and apprenticeship policies and business hiring practices to permit on-the-job training and hiring of young people now often deprived of work experience by unreasonable limitations due to age requirements. School and Job Corps dropouts have difficulty finding jobs or even qualifying for vocational training because of these restrictions. Likewise, the minimum wage should be flexible so as to permit the hiring of young people and the training of young people at an economic wage that reasonably reflects their productivity. As now structured the minimum wage can discourage employers from training and hiring young unskilled people. One of the comments most often volunteered by the Job Corps grad- uates who responded to the study's survey was that they were too young to obtain employment in the fields for which they were trained. Many child labor laws, based on reaction to unfavorable conditions existing 30 years ago, are now archaic and unduly restrictive. Similarly, labor union and apprenticeship policies with respect to the entrance age of employees often bear little relation to the actual ability of youths to perform the desired work. 4. The Job Corps should be transferred from the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity to the Office of Education to be administered in co-ordination with the Vocational Education Act in order to avoid duplication now existing between the two programs. The chamber urges the retention of the Job Corps concept. If the program can be converted to residential vocational skill centers, as provided for in the Vocational Educational Act Amendments of 1963, we feel that there will be a more direct relationship between the train- ing of the youth and later employment. We strongly urge that the provisions of such a transfer continue, and expand, where feasible, the role of industry in training enrollees. The localization of training will afford prospective employers a greater opportunity to see the type of training that is being given and will, therefore, make them more readily accept the graduates. In addition, localization will facilitate a more direct relationship between the type of training offered and the occupational needs of the community. The enrollees will be able to be responsibly integrated into the community environment. The present setup of the Job Corps segregates and stigmatizes the disadvantaged youth. Under our recommendation, it could be anticipated that many Job Corps facilities now in use should be continued. 5. The In-School Neighborhood Youth Corps program should be transferred to the Office of Education to be run in accordance with other existing kinds of PAGENO="0710" 3170 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967 work-study programs. This would avoid duplication and promote better coordina- tion of existing programs. The in-school program has, by the evidence available, reduced the dropout rates by providing underprivileged youths with the extra cash that enables them to stay in school. By operating the program as a direct work-study program, in conjunction with the schools, there will be a closer relationship between the type of occupation the youth is being prepared for and the part-time employment he is able to secure. Examples of programs of this nature which have been success- fully implemented with private funds are numerous and show remark- able success. 6. The Out-of-School Neighborhood Youth Corps should be transferred to the Department of Labor where it could be better conducted so as to provide mean- ingful work experience. Bringing this program closer to existing on-the-job training programs could encourage the development of programs more close~v fittel to current job market needs than is now possible. The present make-work structure of out-of-school programs does little to inculcate good work habits in enrollees, much less job training. The difficulty that many programs have had in recruiting enrollees indicates that more meaningful work-related programs must be devised. In this connection, we would urge the expansion of the concept of on-the-job training in the Neighborhood Youth Corps. 7. The Head Start Program should be transferred to the Office of Education with the provision that it be integrated in the elementary education system as part of an over-all evolution in education practices. Upon transfer to the Office of Education, special attention should be maintained on the objective of giving supportive health services and other forms of special attention to program en- rollees who come from economically and culturally deprived families. Headstart, according to available evidence, is an initial success. However, the chamber study, as well as some other more recent studies, indicates tllat the benefits of Headstart can be quickly negated when the program's special attention is not pursued in the regular school system. By transferring the Headstart to the Office of Education, it is anticipated that the benefits of this special program can be fol-. lowed through in the primary grades and the Office of Education can be infected with the unique aspects that Headstart has introduced. The report, "Youth and the War on Poverty," and recommenda- tions are concerned chiefly with youth training programs. The chamber federation has done much more than make studies and recommend actions at the national level. Local chambers and business members have been actively engaged in local programs that serve the disadvantaged. We want to emphasize that our recommendations would not-and I repeat, would not-abolish the Office of Economic Opportunity. That organization would still be responsible for administering the heart of the Economic Opportunity Act; namely, title 11(a), the community action programs. Although we are aware of some of the serious administrative diffi- culties OEO has encountered in handling the CAP program, we be- lieve that the emphasis of title 11(a) on local involvement and decision- making is in the right direction. PAGENO="0711" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3171 In stressing local involvement, including involvement of the poor, OEO must take every precaution to assure that political involvement is not substituted. There are far too many disturbing stories of the prosti- tution of community action for partisan purposes. To be effective, community action must be removed from the arena of partisan politics. This is an important condition for our recommendation to keep title 11(a) under OEO auspices. We would hope that if OEO can concentrate on the important com- munity action programs in the coming year, these programs can be improved and made more effective. We plan to give these, programs a careful evaluation in the coming year. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you, Mr. Burkhart. I al- ways enjoy hearing the chamber of commerce and to know that we seldom agree on viewpoints. I take it that you are against the Job Corps, lock, stock and barrel. Mr. BURKHART. That is not what our testimony was. Our testimony was that we do feel that it has a very important new concept that has been added to our general programs and that it should be kept alive. Chairman PERKINS. Kept alive? Mr. BURKHART. We feel that it could be better handled under a dif- ferent agency. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, you are strongly supporting the so-called Opportunity Crusade? Mr. BtTRKHART. As a matter of fact, we took this position before the Opportunity Crusade was ever announced. Chairman PERKINS. Do you realize we are reaching a type of young- ster in the Job Corps that has not been reached in our vocational educational institutions today? Mr. BURKHART. I think that is the reason we feel that the identity or the concept should be continued. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, the concept of the know-how and the training experience that we are obtaining from the Job Corps at the present time you feel should be continued. Mr. BIJRKHART. That is right, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Now, I think you will agree with me that through the continuation that our school system, all of it, includ- ing vocational schools and residential centers will tremendously bene- fit from the standpoint of knowing how to train and give basic edu- cation to the youngster that is dropped from the Job Corps today, that is it from the bottom of the ladder. Do you agree with that statement? Mr. BURKHART. If I understood it correctly, yes. We certainly think that that youngster deserves the best training we can give him. I don't think we necessarily agree that he is getting that now. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you think that these centers then should continue for a few years, at least, maybe several years, before the change takes place? Mr. BURKHART. We feel that the center can be integrated into one unified program under the Office of Education. We feel these things are all related. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that.subsequently IBM and Grafiex are not doing as good a job as the vocational educators will do today? PAGENO="0712" 3172 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. BURKHART. Well, we feel that if they felt that it would be better done by the present program that there is nothing contra- dictory in our stand for- Chairman PERKINS. You think it would be better under the present program, but my point of view is there are no results established. We have not reached this youngster except on a real limited degree. Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Chairman, I am delighted to have you make that statement in the record. It has taken us a long while to persuade you of that. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I am talking about what we are now reaching in the Job Corps. Mr. GOODELL. I thought you said we had reached it under the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. I did not say that. I think my statement speaks for itself on that. Go ahead. Mr. BURKHART. I think what we do find in the Job Corps is unfor- tunately what characterizes many Government programs and that is that we really honestly don't know what they are achieving because, as we pointed out in our testimony in more detailed form, which the study would infer, there has really been almost no systematic compre- hensive followup of these Job Corps graduates to find out what is happening to them. Chairman PERKINS. You have got to perfect terminology to my two good friends over here and charged to them that we can so ably use. Talking about the followup, don't you think that the Job Corps has benefited tremendously from its mistakes if any were made and our new senior cost outbreak is being lowered and training for the Job Corps enrollees tremendously improved since the operation com- menced, getting better every year? Mr. BURKIJART. Yes, I think that is a very fair statement. Not bearing on this particular legislation, I think it is a guide. I want to make a comment. Yes; it seems to me that looking at this from a sort of citizen viewpoint that we seem to have widespread agree- ment that the Job Corps initially was much less than outstanding, that it had many administrative breakdowns that were very expensive and so forth. The others think we are sympathetic with the task that was given to Mr. Shriver and the thing I think that is wrong is that so many of these programs we suddenly decide that something has to be done tomorrow and we start off on such a big scale, there is no testing, there is no research and development as we think in those terms. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you, mistakes were made when we inaugurated the program. We just threw money at the Director and said, "Here, get these things started," almost overnight and it is doubtful whether you and I would have done as well. In fact, I know that I could not have started to cope with an undertaking of that kind with no experience. . I am impressed by the fact that we are gaining so much know-how and Sargent Shriver as the Director has so ably taken advantage of that. Do you agree with me on that statement? Mr. BURKHART. I certainly agree that we have learned a great deal from the early mistakes. PAGENO="0713" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3173 Chairman PERKINS. Don't you agree with me that Sargent Shriver is taking advantage of it and bringing the cost of operation down? Mr. BIJRKHART. Yes, I would agree to that. Chairman PERKINs. And the experimenting and demonstration period that is going on I think you feel should be continued? Mr. BIJRKHART. Except that we feel that the program needs to be unified in the sense that I think the OEO in the field of education and things related to it has performed a service in dramatizing and getting publicity. Chairman PERKINS. It has never been dramatized before. Do you agree with that statement? Mr. BURKHART. Yes, I agree with that. Chairman P1~KINs. Don't you think that the OEO has just got on its feet and should continue to make further progress without spinning off these various functions? Mr. BTJRKHART. No. I think as a practical matter the whole rela- tionship of jobs and education and such that we should as early as pos- sible get it under one agency. Chairman PERKINS. If I understand you correctly, you are advo- cating that OEO remain as it is presently constituted without trans- ferring to any other agency? Mr. BnRKIIART. We are not proposing transfer of OEO. Chairman PERKINS. What? Mr. BURKHART. No; that is right. We are not proposing transfer of OEO. Chairman PERKINS. What? Mr. BIIRKHART. No; that is right. We are not proposing that OEO be transferred to certain agencies. We do think certain programs with- in OEO should be transferred. We think that these things that deal with youth and education and vocational training logically belóng in the Office of Education, many parallel programs. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, the innovation that Shriver has made under OEO you feel should continue in the future as presently set up in the law? Mr. BURKIIART. I think that in the community action programs there is a great deal of possibility here that has not yet been realized and undoubtedly innovation will continue to take place. Chairman PERKINS. And with that innovation and with that po- tential possible in the future you feel that OEO should remain as at present, if I understand your statement correctly. Mr. BURKHART. As an independent agency. Chairman PERKINS. As an independent agency? Mr. BURKHART. That is correct. Chairman PERKINS. All right. Mr. QrnE. Mr. Quu~. Mr. Burkhart, in your testimony you say there are two more reports, one on individual family security and one on rural and regional poverty. When do you believe these will be concluded? Mr. BURKHART. Within the next 12 months. Mr. QUIE. I think it would be good if the reports that you list in your `testimony were made a part of the record, Mr. Chairman. In your colloquy with the chairman you talked about Mr. Shriver, general of the command post., reducing the cost of the Job Corps pro- gram. I might add here that it was on congressional insistence that PAGENO="0714" 3174 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 this was done. If we put a limit on what he had with which to ad- minister these camps, I thing the story would have been altogether different this year in terms of the difficult time he had to stay under that limit. So I think Congress can take the credit for putting the pressure on him. Mr. GOODELL. If the gentleman will yield, it was put on over Mr. Shriver's strenuous objection. Mr. Qun~. It certainly was. That is why I think it is necessary for the Congress to look very closely at this program. You mention in your testimony the chamber is engaged in a total community development program. I am only familiar with your pro- gram in Rochester, Minn. Would you elaborate on that and tell us how widespread it is now? Mr. BURKIJART. The last 1 or 2 years, the major interests of the national chamber has been in the field of community programs. We have reorganized our entire committee structure; we have changed many of our past traditional programs in order to give money and staff time and emphasis in the direction that businessmen must as- sume a direct responsible part in the solution of their own community problems. We don't think that this can be swept under the rug or that it can be left to someone else. We think the people that are at hand who know the problem and who also have the leadership ability and the capacity to mobilize the volunteer resources of the community have got to do that. Now, I think anyone who has been watching this is bound to be very conscious of almost a revolution in business thinking so that in city after city now we have many of our top business leaders, supported by people from the companies they are associated with, spending many hours and tackling problems of this kind. So, it is a field that we have not only a passing interest in but I would say it is by far the greatest single major interest at this time. Mr. BREAULT. I would like to comment, Mr. Quie. You mentioned Rochester, Minn. This is an outstanding example, we think, of where a program of this kind has taken hold and moved forward with the local chamber of commerce and coordinating efforts of many other groups working together to try to improve t.he com-~ munity as a whole. It isone of. the examples that we often. cite to other cities as a success. Mr. QurE. Do you have some reports on the activities of these pro- grams that are available now? Mr. BREAULT. We are now working on a new program called the community development clearinghouse program where we are de- veloping case studies of communities across the country of all sizes where success stories of this kind can be told to the benefit of other cities that may want to follow in the same footsteps. We hope that some time this fall we will initiate and publicly launch this community developing clearinghouse program to chambers of commerce across the country providing case study information. Mr. QuIB. Are these community development programs in any other way tied in with the planning money of the 701 Housing Act? PAGENO="0715" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3175 Mr. BREAULT. Very seldom, Mr. Quie, although in some cases it may well be. We do not as an organization counsel one way or the other. This is entirely up to the local chamber of commerce and their business leadership. Mr. QUIE. I note that you make a number of recommendations that programs ought to be transferred from the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity to the traditional agency. Going down through the programs of various titles of OEO, you recommend that the Job Corps be trans- ferred to the Office of Education. Mr. BURKHART. I think we have, as you people know much better than I, a tremendous multiplicity of programs and they have pro- liferated to the point where we don't know how many we have or who is in charge of what. You have in every community a number of parallel and overlapping and duplicating activities, so that is one reason I think that we ought to start in all these so-called Great Society programs, as nearly as possible, start unifying them under some particular agency. That is one side of it. The other side, I think, is that on the educational side to the extent that these things can be interrelated and coordinated-take Headstart. If Ileadstart is an independent operation and it has no direct relation with the school system, I think the evidence already is beginning to be quite clear it is not going to make any very substantial lasting contribution. I think it has to be something that when this Headstart, if you want to call them, graduate at that stage and get into the regular school system, there must be a regular followup to maximize the values that were presumably gained through that early start. Now, the school system was really, completely divorced from it and it seems that this would be a perfect example of something I think in the long run would be a great deal of gain getting it there. Vocational educational programs. I know the chairman has indi- cated that the Job Corps does reach a group that is separate from our conditional vocational education and I think in a sense that they may be two different groups but that does not mean they cannot have within the same school system variations which will accommodate these two groups. It seems to me that you are going to have a much more orderly and systematic and effective program when it is all handled under one system rather than having a half dozen different people all operating programs that essentially have the same mission. Mr. Qum~. Those who make the charge that the transfer of such as the Job Corps or others to traditional agencies would scatter the programs all over the Federal Government could not have been more in error. Actually, the transfer would have consolidated these pro- grams. Mr. BURKHAItT. That is right. The problem now is that every de- partment is doing this thing. We get under various names and you have got now the OEO. We do have a number of education depart- ment programs. We have Labor Department programs and so on down the line and many others that you have to have systematic research on to find out what they are. I don't think that they do any ways near a job of maximum effective- ness because they are dissipated over a wide area; it greatly increases the cost. While the economics might be thought to be of less importance in a measure of this kind, I think in the long run it is very important PAGENO="0716" 3176 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 because these programs just by their duplications, and so forth, become expensive enough that the public feels they are too expensive; we run the risk of having them curtail much too sharply than what they deserve. I think anything we can do to make them more economical, more effective, we are doing the maximum service then of the people we want to reach. Mr. QUIE. Going through the other recommendations for transfer to traditional agencies, it seems to me that you recommended the trans- fer of programs in all titles except title II, and in title II you recom- mend the transfer of Headstart. Mr. BURKHART. That is correct. Mr. QuIE. So that would mean that OEO is to maintain, as you recommend, that you leave only part of it to community action, to Headstart. Mr. BURKHART. That is true. Mr. QUIE. What has been your experience with involvement of the poor? What has been the chamber of commerce reaction as well as that of the commimity? I note that you are in favor of it. Mr. BuRKHART. If I could simply give perhaps an example of my own hometown where I am naturally the most well acquainted, the Indianapolis chamber has had a program now for roughly about 2 years in this field of employment opportunity. We have set up a blue ribbon committee of the local chamber with this responsibility, and I think this illustrates the kind of thing that can be done by local action that really can't be done through governmental action. I don't think, no matter how much money is spent, we have gotten through the chamber the cooperation of personnel and officers, the employment managers of our corporation. Just as one example, we have a screening program. Many of our biggest companies who have the most qualified personnel staffs may well be in a situation where they can't consider the kind of people that are currently available for a job but we have been able to get their cooperation so that we can send these people to them for detailed interviewing and testing and so forth to determine the type of work that they presumably are best fitted for and then with that information we have been able to go to smaller busi- nesses who could profitably utilize that kind of help who do not have the personnel facilities to seek it out themselves and to test and this sort of thing. So, here is a case where we are getting very extensive, very valuable help at no cost at all through the involvement of the local chamber of commerce and we are doing many programs of that kind that I think are most important. I think you will find that this is rapidly becoming a kind of a way of life with better chambers of commerce all the way across the country; they are becoming more and mOre deeply involved in these things which 4 or 5 years ago they were not very conscious of. Mr. QuIE. Since you accept the concept for the programs that OEO is administering under title II, what about the expansion of the utili- zation of the community action concept to other programs adminis- 1ered by other agencies to help people who are poor? Mr. BURKHART. YOu mean turning other things over to OEO? Mr. QuIE. Well, at least, 1oca~tly involving them in the administra- tion at t.he policy level. PAGENO="0717" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3177 Mr. BURKHART. You mean would we think it would be desirable to have all kinds of Federal programs more and more involved at the local level? Is that what you are saying? Mr. QUIE. Yes. Through this involvement of the Corps, I know that our program is administered at the local level finally but most of them don't have the involvement fea'ture. Mr. BURKIJART. I think the local involvement is highly important. I must say I think this concept is a little elusive and I am not quite sure that any two people agree on what we mean by involved in the Corps, and it is one of those phrases that it is a very reassuring thing and yet I am sure if you want different communities you would have widely different notion's of whether they were actually involving the poor and also a lot of different opinions on how successful it was. The basic idea of getting local people who are close to the problem and who have a voice in how the money is spent and can `tell what they think is wrong with not only their own particular community but their own neighborhood seems to me to be very silent. If we could `take a part of the corollary `of this, it is one of the defects I think of so many of the Federal programs. They are determined here in Washington what the problem is and the money is so earmarked and the priorities are established at the local level. It is not spent in the way that is most productive there. They abandon their local priorities because they can- not resist the temptation of the matching grant or whatever it may be to do what `the Federal Government has been doing that is most important. So, I think in all of these things the more the money can come down to the local level without guidance of strings attached and to let the local needs determine the priority, that is true whether it is the State level or the city level. I think many of our programs now are terribly wasteful of the resources we have available for this because they are not directed at the thing which is most important in that particular State. The problem of Indiana is not the same as New York and not the same as your State. We each have things that we need to address our- selves to but the State legislature can't help but match the other funds that are available rather than do what they should do. Mr. QUIE. Have you read the last report on the CED, the local com- munity and State government? Mr. BURKHART. Modernizing; yes. I think that the chamber again is taking an active interest in this problem. rllhat business has been, I think, delinquent in not getting at this sooner. I think many of us in business have in times past had a sort of hysteria-type response to pro- posed Federal actions by saying that this ought to be done at the local level, whether State or community, but we have not faced up to the fact that we didn't provide the kind of governmental machinery at that level that could adequately tackle the problem. It suddenly is now, I think, becoming clear to people that here we have a real opportunity to restructure State governments; most constitutions are outmoded. The money and the staff we give our legislators and the Govern- ment, and so forth, are quite inadequate to the contest that we have been rather glibly saying that they ought to assume. I think this move- ment is picking up tremendous momentum and I would like over the next 10 years to see a great revitilization of the State government and I think it is an interesting thing. To me, it seems as though both the PAGENO="0718" 3178 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1 ~6 7 right and the left, if you want to use those terms, are more and more beginning to feel that the task and the size of government, the amount of money we are spending is simply beyond the capacity of handling here in Washington; it has got to be done at a local level ; but if that is going to be done, we need to have the kind of government that can completely and effectively administer. Certainly, the national chamber is slightly interested in that and is backing it very much. I think the CED report is characteristic of the very rapid business. Mr. Qmi~. In other words, we expect that the local businessmen and the chambers of coimnerce will be supporting modernization of State government and local government where in the past there has been a tendency for them to oppose the State constitutional conventions? Mr. BURKHART. I think there has been a great tendency in the past that we are fearful something might come out of the constitution. They have some vague apprehensions that we are not very happy with the way things are but nobody can tell what we would get if we ever got together in a constitutional convention. I think that has been one side of it. The other side I think, too, is that most States until we have had this recent reapportionment move have been largely dominated by rural areas so we have had a State government situation which was pretty incompatible with city problems. Under most State constitutions, the cities are creatures of the State, and our State would be a perfect example of that because the city of Indianapolis which has some very massive problems that we all recognize and which we have ideas how they should be solved and. how to pay for them, but until recently we could not get the authority from the State legislature to do it. So, I think these are all things that we are very conscious of the deficiencies. I am hopeful that without too much longer delay all of the country will see the movement. Of course, some States have already had constitutional conventions and I would look for many, many more to have them within the next few years. Mr. Quii~. I thank you for your excellent testimony. I think it should be very helpful to us in developing this legislation.. - I yield to my colleague from New York. Mr. GOODELL. I want to thank you, also, Mr. Burkhart, not only for your excellent testimony but for the very high quality studies which the chamber has sponsored in this general area and particularly for the study on youth which has become a part of the record here today. You mentioned earlier as a response to the chairman's question-I am sorry he stepped out for a moment-that the chamber of commerce is not recommending abolition of the Office of Economic Opportunity. It is my understanding, and I would like to hear some comments on it, that the chamber has no official position one way or the other on this particular point; is that correct? Mr. BURKHART. Yes. I am glad you did bring this up because I think I might have improperly stated our position. The only thing that we have really adopted a policy on is reflected in the testimony in these recommendations that we make. The things that we have not recommended we simply are without a position on at this time. PAGENO="0719" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3179 In other words, we have never had a policy position established on the whole concept of the OEO or its direction that it should go or things of that kind. We have taken out these specific things, they have grown through committees and have gone through the policy action by the board. So, insofar as the desirability of other OEO programs, we simply have not taken a stand. Mr. GO0DELL. Then if I understand it correctly, you just have no position on this particular point? Mr. BURKHART. That is correct. Mr. GOODELL. You have a specific position on transfer of Headstart and Neighborhood Youth Corps and transfer of the Job Corps and with the changes that you have outlined in your statement? Mr. BURKHART. That is right. The things we have a change in posi- tion are outlined under those numbered recommendations, and beyond that we have no position. Mr. GOODELL. I think a number of us received a letter recently which indicated that the representatives from the variety of the groups men- tioned in the letter had unanimously opposed the transfer of OEO. Among the organizations mentioned were representatives in the cham- ber of commerce. I take it from your answer that this is not an accurate statement. Mr. BURKHART. No; that was not an accurate statement. The representative, of course, is not a member of the leadership advisory council, so, in the first place, would not have been qualified to vote. Also, that person was not even present when this vote was taken and I think it was a rather misleading thing to put that down there. I don't know whether it was deliberate or unintentional but in any event I think it has since been made clear by a letter from Mr. Arch Booth who is the staff head of the chamber that we have not in any sense taken a position that might be indicated by this letter. Mr. GOODELL. Would you just for the record indicate the date and the name? Mr. BURKHART. Yes. This letter went out under date of June 22, and, as I understand it, perhaps went to most of the Members of Congress. That was sent out by Mr. Ralph Besse, who is the chairman of the Cleveland Electrical Co. It did indicate that the people present had unanimously endorsed the OEO and appended thereto is a long list of people present with their business affiliation, and among those was shown Miss Pat Goldman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. So, there was that implication that the chamber was endorsing this statement since it was presumably unanimous and I am very happy that you have given me the opportunity to clear that up because, certainly, that was not the case. Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Burkhart, there was some discussion earlier of the Job Corps concept. You indicated that you felt transfer of the job Corps vocational education office to the Office of Education would not necessarily, and should not, prevent the running of this type of an institution by business corporations in the contract. Is that your iosition? Mr. BURKHART. Yes. Our position would be that we would imagine that very likely many of the present Job Corps centers as such might well be retained and that it is quite possible that all the present busi- ness firms operating might be maintained. I do think that the value of PAGENO="0720" 3180 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 business management has been rather dramatically exhibited in the Job Corps thing. I think it is very significant that everybody seems to agree on one thing, that the early months of the Job Corps were almost disgraceful. WThile we can be sympathetic in the sense that an awful big assignment was given on short notice. too big a one, I think, as I indicated earlier, I think it is almost absurd to start these programs on such a. big scale when nobody knows what is really going to happen or how it will work or what they want to do. In any event, the improvements have largely come, I think, since business firms were brought into it where they had management capac- ities and experiences that. were very helpful which were very difficult to create out of thin air. You would not expect to start a Sears. Roebuck or General Motors over night just by appropriating $500 million. Nobody would think that was possible; everybody would know that was absurd, but we do that. all the time in the Government and nobody thinks anything about it.. Of course, what we do is actually clump money out and nothing happens. It seems to me that Congress ought to pay a great deal more atten- tion to testing programs and really find out what is happening. I think there is a certain degree of enthusiasm for the Job Corps, yet I think we are honest.. WTe don't really know whether it is accom- plishing anywheres near what. it is to accomplish. We just simply don't have the fa.cts and I think when we spend money on this scale not only from the standpoint that the taxpayer has the right to know what he is getting for his money but the person who has nothing but the society's interest so to speak, would want to know if it was working because if it is not, we ought to try something else. \Ve therefore evaluate. The ones we have started, the tendency is to just keep on going and if nothing is happening we just double the appropriation. It seems to me this is one of the great defects of the Job Corps. The studies indicate, I think, it is about 78 percent of the people that came through it have jobs but I think the record also shows that 56 or 58 percent had jobs before they ever got in so this is not necessarily any sensational thing-it may be; it may not be. lYe don't really have any evidence as to the type of jobs or whether it is the job they were tra.ined for or whether they have a job that is directly related to the training they have. It is honestly not any great feat to get a. job today in most areas because most areas have a. labor shortage. So, the whole thing is that we really have not adequate evaluation we think, and we think this is a real serious defect of many, many Government programs. Mr. GOODELL. I think that point is made very strongly in the cham- ber's study of the Job Corps and Neighborhood Youth Corps and of Head Start. I think also, however, that. having sponsored and urged the concept of residential training for this type of youngster for some time before the war on poverty, I personally feel somewhat betrayed by the mass production procedure that we went through. I think the concept in large part was betrayed because it created so many problems subject to the whole concept. Those problems were not necessarily a. part of the concept. of residential training. PAGENO="0721" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3181 You made a study at the chamber and I think its objectivity is beyond question since among other things the results that you came up with were somewhat more favorable to the Job Corps than the evi- dence which we have from the Harris Polls and professional polls. I believe you mentioned 76 percent had jobs. I think the Harris Poll showed 62 percent had jobs and another percentage were in school. This comes pretty close to your total if you add those in school. Then your study indicated some 58 percent had jobs before they went into the Job Corps. Of course, I am troubled with the fact that in evaluating it we have to rely almost entirely on polls. I think polls are a proper scientific weapon to be used in evaluation, among' others, but when the only way we can find out what has happened to the Job Corps graduates is to have a poll done it is a pretty strong indictment of the follow-through procedures. Mr. BURKHART. If that was a business project, you certainly would want to know what your product was and what happened to it. As a matter of fact, I think the results both of our study and the Harris Poll may be tremendously off base. I think that is probably the most favor- able possible interpretation because the people have been able to find- and more aptly the people that are on the job and the more responsible iart of the graduates who do respond to inquiry. In other words, I think it would be a fair guess that the segment that we did identify was the cream of the crop, relatively, and that if we really had a true example, a cross section-in other words, I think the Harris Poll on this is not at all comparable to the Harris Poll on a political question where they are able to get a perfectly good cross section of the voting public. Here, they have to track these people down, and I am sure the ones that are employed are the ones that are easiest to track down. So, I suspect these figures are rather optimistic. Mr. GO0DELL. I agree with that comment. I might also ask you to comment a little further with reference to the difference of approach between a businessman and an educator in training individuals. I am very much for more involvement of business in this whole activity. I think there are other ways we can give inducements to business to move more aggressively in this area, and I am very pleased to hear your comments along that line. Mr. BTJRKHART. I think this is a very key point and we have not scratched the surface on it. The responsibility lies both at the governmental or educational end and at the business end. I think that the fact that business has not been consulted more is not entirely other people's fault. To some extent, we have not until relatively recently been concerned enough to maybe be quite active in saying that our services are available. Mr. GOODELL. I want to compliment the chamber on the directive. I think they have done an effective job. Mr. BmiKHART. Again if I could use an illustration from home, the State chamber spent 2 or 3 years of very active work on this problem of vocational training. I think every time we look at it you realize that unless we get business involved rather closely, we end up train- ing people for jobs that are not available, and this is a very sensitive area. They need changes from time to time, from community to community. 80-084-67-pt. 4-46 PAGENO="0722" 3182 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 We have some types of jobs that-for example, take two extremes. You take a large company in our area, like we have General Motors that has many large plants. We talk to people like Dr. Ramey. Their needs for people are not for specialized training; they would like to see that the school got them, and they read and write, and they would like to do their own training. On the other hand, you have an extremely small business, perhaps, where it is just impractical for them to run training programs. Yet, when they get a certain number of people, they may not need any more of that kind for 10 years. So this need for vocational education is not a simple thing; it is not just a question of money and intent, but it is a matter of total integration, I think, between the school system and the business envi- romnent to make sure they are being trained at the right time for the right jobs. Also, I think the school systems tend by nature to often extend these training programs much longer than they need to be. They are making them more elaborate. Now that is not only a matter of being more expensive, but it is difficult to get kids to stay in them. We have found that we have many kinds of jobs that, oh, let's say 6 weeks is a very adequate preparation for them, but it gets into the vocational channel and they want to make a 1-year course for it, and this is the kind of thing I think we have to fight. So it is very important I think that we get business involved in the sense that they can temper the educators' enthusiasm for prolonged training, and to some extent, oftentimes a little too much theoretical training causes these people you are trying to reach, who are not very schoolminded to start with-if they were, they would go through the regular channel without assistance. They tend to be doers and not thinkers, if you want to oversimplify it, and they don't want to take 2 years to learn something. The very interesting thing in this regard, incidentally I don't know whether the committee has given any thought to this or not, but the thing that impresses me is the tremendous number of vocational or technical schools now, that are privately run, many of them for profit, which are fully enrolled. Kids go in there and they will pay $500 tuition for a course that they can get for nothing through the public school or through some other vocational program. The reason is that that course has been geared to teaching them something quickly and in terms that they understand, whereas these other programs tend to be again-in other words, a kid would rather pay $500 and get 6 weeks of instruction and get a job than to pay zero and spend 12 months getting it. These are all things, I think, that are of great significance in laying out these programs `and applying where we are going to go. Mr. GOODELL. You talked about the approach of the Federal Gov- ernment simply putting a large amount of money in to try to solve a problem which is very complex and difficult, particularly when we don't have a full understanding of the problem. It is very easy to oversimplify in this area. There is a great deal of current discussion, for instance, about riots. I have before me the testimony of Mayor Cavanagh of Detroit before PAGENO="0723" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3183 the Senate committee on March 15. It is rather tragic irony to read what he said, and I quote: It is a well-known fact that Detroit has avoided civil disorder that has beset our other major cities for the past few summers. This didn't happen by chance. It is the result of careful planning and the implementation of programs made possible through the Economic Opportunity Act. Not only have these programs contributed to an orderly aid in the retention of crime, but they also provided needy teenagers with money for books and clothes so they could return to school. This whole problem of education and poverty and offering of jobs to those who are less fortunate in our society is a very difficult one. We can differ on the best approaches to solving the problem, but it certainly does not help very much in overpromising in some of these programs. The phrase I use is promising an instant tomorrow. There is one other aspect I would like you to talk about, because it is the first time I have seen the chamber's position. Maybe you have taken this position before. It is the first time I have seen you take it, and it is one which I think the chamber could be very helpful in cor- recting. That is the problem of outdated child labor laws in respect to age limitation and unemployment. A good many of these, of course, are State oriented, and that is why I say the chamber may be very helpful in getting some of these changed. Mr. BURKHART. Yes. We have found this is a real problem because I think it is primarily a State law problem. I do think that to the extent you could call attention to it, that the Federal agencies could be aware of it and, well, to any degree that you can help, I think it is very important because we have got a situation where many, many kids could go to work, would be willing to go to work, but where the law won't permit them to. Of course, as was also pointed out in relation to that, I think this minimum wage problem is one that is also directly related which is one the Federal Government can do something about. I say related to that, along with the laws, there is one area of law which you do have the opportunity at the national level, and that is this minimum wage level because there are many of these people that are employable. If you can just take a simple example, many 5-and-lO-cent stores used to have teenage clerks, but when the minimum wage gets so high, they simply do away with them and have self-help and go out past the cashier. I think this is characteristic of many of the problems imposed by legal restrictions. Mr. GOODELL. I appreciate very much your very knowledgeable and perceptive comments. Mr. Burkhart, I think your testimony, studies and the whole approach of the chamber will be very helpful not only to this committee, but the Congress and the American people. Thank you. I have no further questions. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you on your statement. I appreciate it. It is always good to hear from the chamber of commerce. I notice on pages 47 and 48 of the chamber's circular that there is a statistical breakdown of the opinions of employers who have hired former Job Corpsmen. I see that these employers have felt that 4 out PAGENO="0724" 3184 ECONOMIC OPPORT1J~ITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Of 5 Job Corpsmen received from-you go up the colunm or down the column-from satisfactory to excellent training and that almost 3 out of 4 had satisfactory through excellent work habits and atti- tucles. I think that you will agree with me from this survey that the Job Corps is doii~g a good job with youngsters whom we all acknowledge are extremely difficult to reach. That is you statement, is it not? Mr. BURKHART. Yes. On page 47 if we take the total across on skills, the six in the excellent category, 36 good, 76 satisfactory, and 27 poor; so that the very substantial majority of course is in the two bottom grades. Chairman PERKINS. I think that is a remarkable record myself. Mr. B~RKHART. Yes. As I say, I don't think that we would expect that the Job Corps graduate would necessarily be a distinguished early worker. Mr. G00DELL. Mr. Chairman, I think it should be emphasized, if you will yield at this point. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. GOODELL. This statistic, if I understand your study based on Job Corps graduates, is not a figure which should be applied to Job Corps enrollees generally in determination of who have been through and terminated. This is the cream of the crop which you surveyed, it concerns those who went all the way through and were classified by OEO as graduates. Mr. BuRKHART. That is my understanding, yes. Chairman PERKINS. Now you know we don't have too many figures. There have been a lot of complaints about no followthrough and the lack of interest in the Job Corps centers, placement, and so on. To me your statement is most significant, but I would like to know when your study was completed. 1~\Then did these interviews take place on which the survey was made? Mr. BURKHART. This, I think, was in the fall of 1966. Chairman PERKINS. The fall of 1966. Mr. BI~RKIIART. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. How large a number of corpsmen did you use as your rule? Did you use more than you hired? What was the size? Mr. BREATXLT. We used a list that we obtained from the Office of Economic Opportunity. It was all that they were able to give us, and I believe it was between 200 and 300 graduates if I am not mistaken. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I am delighted that you gentlemen came. Thank you again for your appearance. The next witness is Mayor Willie Dawahare, mayor of the city of Hazard, Icy. I am delighted to welcome Mayor Dawahare before this committee. I am delighted that you are taking time out from a busy schedule down home to put in your appearance here in Washington. I know that you have devoted much of your life seeking to help the poor and that under your leadership as mayor of the city of Hazard many programs of value to the poor people have progressed and that you have been a PAGENO="0725" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3185 mayor that has sponsored community projects all through the years. It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you here and welcome your city manager, who is sitting with you, Mr. Townes. I appreciate your appearance here today. I just regret that the time schedule is such that we have to have a noon hour without interruption. We will hear from you at this time, Mayor Dawahare. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM C. DAWAHARE, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF HAZARD, KY.; ACCOMPA~NIED BY PAUL T. TOWNES, CITY MANAGER Mayor DAWAHARE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is William C. Dawahare, but I am known, far and wide to all my friends and acquaintances as "Willie" Dawahare. I am mayor of the city of Hazard, Ky. I am also president of Daw~hare's, Inc., operators of a chain of eight clothing stores in central and south- eastern Kentucky. Hazard, the county seat of Perry County, Ky., is in the heart of Appalachia. Legendarily, some residents of the then new community served under Commodore Oliver Hazard Perry during the Battle of Lake Erie. Understandably, the city and county names commemorate this notable event. Known wherever coal is used, Hazard is the centralizing point of the area in southeastern Kentucky known as the Hazard coalfield. This area accounts for a significant per cent of national coal production. On the north fork of the Kentucky River, it is the largest city, popu- lation 8,200, of a five-county area-Perry, Knott, Breathitt, Leslie- with an estimated 1967 population of 100,000. Regional financial, re- tail shopping, railroad, hospital, educational, and cultural centers are in Hazard. Since coal mining is the chief industry, we have usual problems related to a one-industry area. The Hazard coalfield is currently pro- ducing about the same tonnage as was produced during the peak peri- ods of World War IT, but as coal mining is now one of the most com- pletely mechanized of all industries, this is being done with 90 per- cent less labor. In addition to the large numbers of unemployed workers, eastern Kentucky and the city of Hazard have many other economic and social problems such as narrow, winding roads; high dropout rate among high schoolers; pockets of slum dwellings; inadequate water and sewer services; no firsi -class airport facilities; and frequent flash floods to mention a few. To some degree, these problems are being solved or some effort is being made to ease them. Public housing and urban renewal are eliminating slums, new highways are under construction, a decrease iii the dropout rate, thanks to aid to education, can be expected. The Corps of Engineers are building one dam and studying sites for others, so you can see we are on the upward ladder for better life for our citizens. However, for some reason the people at the bottom of the economic ladder had never been reached until some of the programs of the Office of Economic Opportunity and the Labor De.~ partment were put into operation. PAGENO="0726" 3186 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The Labor Department administers two outstanding programs in our community-the manpower development program and the Neigh- borhood Youth Corps. The manpower development program is ad- ministered on a local level jointly by the division of eeonomic security (unemployment office) and the Hazard Area Vocational School. This program was started in 1962. Currently, the Hazard Area Vocational School has enrolled 600 persons from a four-county area. Various types of training courses have been offered-everything from a short order cook to a bulldozer operator. Eighty percent of all students are successful in attaining full-time, gainful employment. The mine repair training course had 100 percent placement, and we could have used more. This is a program. where an unemployed, head of a household has rep~ained his dignity by becoming a wage earner, and a taxpayer instead of a tax drain. You gentlemen, the members of this committee, are to be congratulated for being the authors of the enabling legislation. Now, let me relate to you another success story. The Neighborhood Youth Corps is, as you well know, administered also by the Department of Labor, through the local community action council. We have 350 youths between ages of 16 and 21 who are dropouts or who have never attended school. They work 32 hours per week for $1.25 an hour. Most enrollees are required to attend some form of educational class. There are four distinct categories. One is remedial education classes, for those who have not completed the ninth grade. Second, we have commercial classes for typing and shorthand. Third, we have G.E.D. classes to prepare enrollees for the G.E.D. high school equivalency test. Fourth, for those who can neither read nor write we have basic elementary classes. We also correct any physi- cal defects found during a physical examination, the first such exam- ination many of the youngsters have ever had. The enrollment period is for 6 months. If a time extension is indi- cated, the enrollment is extended for an additional 6 months. During a 12-month period we have about 800 enrollees. Of these, 10 percent or 80 young people get placed directly into jobs before their 6 months are up; 20 percent or 160 of them continue in some form of training, such as vocational school, nursing, or reenter school; 30 percent or 240 young persons obtain employment afater being in the Neighborhood Youth Corps for 6 or 12 months. The remaining 40 percent, after their enrollment time expires, go to military service, get married, or for various personal reasons do not join the ranks of employed persons. From the foregoing figures you can easily see that 60 percent of the 800 persons or 480 youths of this county have upgraded their living standards at a cost of about $~,000 each to the Federal Government. This is a sum that will be repaid in a short time in the form in income taxes-a tax they never before paid. The Neighborhood Youth Corps has a gta.ff of 17 people. Nine of these staff workers were unemployed before the program started. From this it can be seen that we are reaching the target group-adults who were unemployed. Gentlemen of t.his cOmmittee, I say to you., this is a program where the money is well spent. Multiply our success times the number of projects in the Nation and you have one large success story. PAGENO="0727" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3187 The Office of Economic Opportunity operates 12 different programs through the Leslie, Knott, Letcher, Perry Community Action Coun- cil, Inc., commonly referred to as LKLP. It is organized by a board of directors of 40 persons, 10 from each county, more than one-half of whom are members of the poor, or so-called target group. These 12 programs are carried out by a staff of 685 persons; 67 of these are in the professions, 150 are teachers or clerical, and 368 from the "poor." The 12 projects cost the Federal Government $2.6 million and directly benefit 62,422 persons. This is a cost of $42.50 per person. After you hear a brief description of each of the 12 projects, I think you will agree that the Federal Government is securing a real bargain in cost benefits. The 12 programs are briefly outlined as follows: 1. Conduct and administration. This component has two separate areas of activity. First, it maintains an administrative staff of profes- sionals who do the management, administrative and program develop- ment tasks for the four-county area. Its secondary function is a guidance and referral program. Fifty thousand people are directly benefited from these two areas of activity. 2. Thirteen persons working at the Millstone Sewing Center directly benefit 550 persons by: (1) providing employment for low-income residents; (2) giving useful training in the skills involved in sewing and (3) on a need basis only, providing clothing for many, especially children, who would not have been able to go to school due to lack of clothing. 3. General education and vocational program is designed to work exclusively with out-of-school, NYC enrollees, who function at edu- cational levels ranging from zero through six; 500 youngsters receive direct benefit from two volunteer workers and five staff persons. 4. Headstart. This program provides an educational headstart for children who are preschoolers and members of low-income families; 1,528 preschoolers receive direct benefits; the mothers receive instrtic- tions on homemaking and nutrition. This program receives widest acceptance by the general public and has 100-percent approval of the educators. It is my recommendation `that' I-Ieadstart be given ex- panded funds to accomplish two purposes: (1) Evaluate the results of the current program, as I am sure they will be a pleasant surprise to everyone; and (2) to make Headstart a continuing summer pro- gram that carries the children between first and second and between second and third grades. Perhaps the program could even be expanded to higher income groups with such groups paying fees to send their children to Headstart in areas where there is no public or private preschooling available. Gentlemen, I can honestly say to you that I have never heard one derogatory remark about Headstart. it is a fine program. 5. Leslie County health program. A comprehensive effort to upgrade the health standards of a whole county. This is the only intensive rural health project funded by OEA in the entire nation. If you could see this county, you would instantly agree that it is money well spent. Picture in your mind a county population of 15,000 with a family in- come of $1,836 per year, living either along the main roads or in the small communities extending along innumerable creeks and hollows of narrow, twisting valleys. The rural roads are extremely poor and PAGENO="0728" 3188 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 and it often takes 30 minutes in a jeep to reach a paved road. This same county also has one of the nation's highest birth rates. This one project has done more for the people of I~slie County than any other. 6. Cultural enrichment is a program for 50 college students to earn money during the summer by participating in community organization, recreation, and cultural activities. These students could not continue their education without the aid of summer earnings. We have six other programs recently funded, too new to evaluate. The local unrest so publicized a few years ago has in my opinion been halted by OEO programs. Unemployed and underemployed per- sons now have something to look forward to-someone cares about their well-being and is aiding them to upgrade their standards of living. We have no racial problems, we have had none and expect none. Mr. Chairman, I could elaborate on this if you would want me to. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mayor DAWAHARE. I am a son of an immigrant that came to this country, arid my father could not speak English when lie came here at all. I was brought up in a minority group, so I think that I understand the feelings of most of the minority people. When I was elected mayor, we did have a few problems with our minority group. Some of our Negro people came to me with their problems. I asked all the Negroes in our city to meet in city hail, I said: "I could name your chairman, but I would rather that you named your own spokesman and committee, and w-hen you name this committee, if you have any grievances or any problems, you come to myself and the city commissioners and we will iron them out." This was 6 years ago. They selected their chairman or chairwoman, one I would not have selected, I would have selected someone else, but they selected their own spokesman, and since, we have had no problems. We have worked out a lot of them, but we have had no problems whatsoever, so we expect none really. Chairman PERKINS. You have been abiding by community actions on your own initiative for several years? Mayor DAWAHARE. We certainly have. Chairman PERKINS. Poor and local people, and letting them do their own selecting. Mayor DAWAHARE. We certainly have. As you can understand, our school was the first in the South to integrate. We have never had any problems and we only have 8 percent population Negro, but yet 80 percent of our athletic kings have been from the minority groups, and we have about 20 or 30 of our high school graduates that have scholar- ships that go up into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Some of the greatest athletes in Kentucky came from Hazard High School, and they were given a chance and we have never had any problem. Even one of our Negro students was second highest in his class. So we have really had a wonderful relationship. WTe understand each other's problems and we work together. Chairman PERKINS. I believe you are in the clothing store business. Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes, sir. I will come to that in a few minutes. Chairman PERKINS. Your daddy came over here as an immigrant and could not even speak English? PAGENO="0729" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3189 Mayor DAWAHARE. When my father came to this country-well, I will go ahead. My father was born in Damascus, and he was one of a few Christians. At that time Damascus was ruled by the Turks, and the Turks were persecuting all the Christians. They were Mohammedans or Moslems. My father and a few other boys escaped to Brazil and then went to Mexico. When my father came to New York, he met my mother, and she was working in one of the shirt factories, sweatshops, and they got married on her money that she earned. She had a brother in Norton, Va., and they went to Norton. My father is one of the original pack peddlers that you heard of in eastern Kentucky. Chairman PERKINS. Now, all these programs that you make men- tion of, Neighborhood Youth Corps, the community action, has it been your observation that any one prevented disorder or contributed to the prevention of disorder? Mayor DAWAHARE. They have prevented it before. Chairman PERKINS. At this time give the committee an idea. Mayor DAWAIIARE. Before we had the Neighborhood Youth Corps and some of these other programs, we had what we called the roving pickets. We had dynamiting, we had unrest, we had people that were unemployed. As you know, 90 percent of them were unemployed. We gave jobs to the children from these families. Chairman PERKINS. Are you satisfied with the way that we have reached the bottom of the ladder, the bottom of the totem pole, the youngster that really needs the services that we are attempting to provide in Washington? Mayor DAWAHARE. That is the only way under this program that we have been able to reach them. I have that in my statement that I will go ahead with. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead with it. Mayor DAWAIIARE. In our small city, we also find that when Fed- eral programs are carried out with the full intent of the U.S. Congress, under completely honest circumstances, we have no problem. How- ever, the bureaucratic redtape often stymies a project, the resulting delays cause unrest among the very people the program is intended to benefit. I can give you a firsthand example of this. We have a grossly substandard Negro neighborhood that was cleared via the urban renewal methods and the land purchased by public hous- ing for redevelopment of 30 units of public housing. Public housing has had the project for over a year a.nd a half, but no construction is yet underway. This has caused concern among our people and they, as well as everyone else, can't understand the delays. There are even rumors that the 30 units will never be built because the funds for the project are being spent in Vietnam. It is my frank opinion, Mr. Chairman, that public housing could allocate more funds and have the units constructed as they required them to be designed. Such inexcusable, calloused and arbitrary bureaucratic delays may cause unrest among the to-be-benefited people, regardless of race or origin. I can elaborate on this, that when the bids that come up-we have had bids you know come before that we advertised for the public hou~- ing and the engineers would send the specifications in, public housing would send them back. Now urban renewal works real good, and this PAGENO="0730" 3190 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 is the only criticism I have of public housing. They would send them back and in the meantime the cost of living is going up, the cost of material is going up, and the bids were under the 10 percent, and yet they would refuse or reject them saying it was over what they had allocated in the budget which I think is just a delaying action, I don't know. Our public housing in Hazard is one of the most successful in the United States. As you can see, we have shown a profit every year. Money has been turned back into the treasury. Gentlemen, poverty did not happen overnight, within a few months, or a few years; consequently, it will at least be a few years before concrete, long-lasting effects can be felt in the economic structure. But we must give them time and what you have done a chance. To decrease or do away with poverty programs at this stage would only create increased tensions and problems for the poor-Negro and white. These programs are effective and very, very successful in eastern Kentucky. These programs pump money into the local economy that have effects that perhaps you have not taken into consideration, and this is where my stores and others come in, Mr. Chairman. Personally, I have employed 20 percent more people in my stores. Other sales and service companies have had similar increases. Again I have firsthand knowledge of this because retail stores in our city buy an occupational license. Chairman PERKINS. The impact of these programs has already been felt in Hazard, Ky. Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes. As I say, in my stores we sell even a better grade of clothing, but some other stores and businesses, their employ- ment has increased 50 percent on account of these programs. It has helped. Aceording to our gross sales volume, the city tax amounts to $1 per $1,000 sales. In the past 2 years our city has had a $21,000 in- crease in occupational licenses. As I stated before, they are producing more coal with 10 percent of the manpower they used to use. Chairman PERKINS. You mean 10 percent of the manpower that used to be used in the heyday of the coalfields? Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. How many miners do you hire? How many miners? Mayor DAWAHARE. We used to have-I don't know. It is about between 3,000 and 4,000. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel like to some degree you have arrested the outward migration now? Mayor DAwAHARE. Yes, sir. I will tell you we might not have ar- rested it, but the people who are trained in our vocational school are placed in jobs. They might go to Dayton, Ohio, and get a job or they might go to Detroit or they might go to Cincinnati, but their families still live in Hazard, and money that they make comes back home, and it helps. They still live at home in the mountains or eastern Kentucky, and that has helped our economy, too. On a holiday you can see more Ohio and Indiana cars in eastern Kentucky than you can Kentucky cars. `Chairman PERKINS. I have witnessed that myself driving in. Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes, sir. PAGENO="0731" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3191 Chairman PERKINS. Driving in through Maysville, Montgomery County, and Greenup County, through Portsmouth-in all directions. Mayor DAWAHARE. That is right, and if it had not been for the vocational training that they ~ot in our vocational schools, they would still be a tax burden or on public assistance at home. Now in our town, it is growing, growing. We are opening a new supermarket that did open up last month-one of the chains-a big supermarket. Chairman PERKINS. Which one? Mayor DAWAIIARE. Food Fair. We have a Sears, Roebuck store that is going to open in September, and we have a large new hardware and appliance store that will open up. Continued funding of the poverty program for at least 3 more years is essential if we are to be completely successful in erasing poverty. In closing, I want to thank you for the opportunity of presenting our story of successfully fighting poverty in eastern Kentucky. I shall be happy to try to answer any questions you desire to ask. Mail or communications in any form, telephone or telegraph, directed to Hazard, Ky., will reach me quickly. On any reasonable notice, I can be available to the committee for further discussion. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. I notice you have a statement from Sam L. Luttrell, who I have known since I have been a youngster. What is the purport of that statement? Mayor DAWAHARE. I would like for my city manager to read this statement. Mr. TOWNES (reading): My name is Sam L. Luttrell, but I am known to friends and acquaintances and probably some who may be acquaintances, but not necessarily friends, as "Bud" Luttrell. I am chief of police of Hazard, Perry County, Ky., the town of which i\Iayor Willie Dawahare, who has just preceded me is mayor. A repetition of the conditions and surroundings of the Hazard area would be redundant. I am convinced that the poverty programs, now operative in our area, have done more than anything else that has been done to simplify the task of law enforcement. If these programs are discontinued, it is almost certain that there would be a reversion to the troubles so prevalent a few years ago and much of the progress that we are making will be brought to a standstill. The Neighborhood Youth Corps program and the work in the vocational schools are transferring many of the citizens of our community out of~ idleness and crime to a self-supporting status. I urge that every means of continuing these activities be taken. We have on our police force `and in our fire department several young man who received their early training, notably, through the Neighborhood Youth Crops. An outstanding example started on this program and is now employed as a Kentucky State trooper. All of the foregoing and much of what Mayor Dawahare has pointed out is verified in our current crime report to our board of commissioners. We have not had a major crime in this community during the first 6 months of this year. This contrasts with the comparable period before the beginning of these pro- grams during one of which we had four murders. Break-ins, in fact all phases of crime and delinquency, are greatly reduced. It is not generally appreciated, even by our local citizens, that Hazard has a law enforcement problem out of all proportion to its size. While the official population of Hazard is less than 10,000, we are the business and shopping center for a population of about 100,000. Even so, the foregoing figures and our experi- ence verify our opinion that the amazing crime reduction is certainly in a large way attributable to the ~Federal programs now in operation. This notwith- standing that Perry `County is the only wet county in southeastern Kentucky. Chairman PERKINS. Identify yourself, Mr. Townes. PAGENO="0732" 3192 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. TOWNES. My name is Paul Townes. I am city `manager of the city of Hazard; a native of the city, born and raised there, educated at the LTniversity of Kentucky. `Chairman PERKINS. Mayor Dawahare, do you feel that the way the program is operated-that is, the economic opportunity and the com- munity action programs-as it is presently authorized and presently constituted now, rather than transferring the functions? Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes, sir; I think the way that it is operated in our city, I think it would be `better to keep it as `it is. Chairman PERKINS. Have you ever been able to zero in on the youngster that should have received benefits to the extent that your present community action programs and other youth programs serve the people under the Office of Economic Opportunity? I mean are they more effective under the present act? Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes, sir, I think so, but I believe `if we could include in this program high school graduates, kids that are still between the ages of 16 and 21 that do want to go to college, that don't have an opportunity, I think they are left out. I don't think they should be penalized because they are high school graduates, and they are being penalized. If they are a high school graduate, they don't high qualify for the program. `Chairman PERKINS. Well, they qualify for the out-of-school pro- gram and work-study programs and the loan programs administered by the institutions where they don't have to pay any interest until after they get through college, and then commence to pay interest at the rate of 4 percent. They qualify for those programs, but they do not have-you are talking about a poor youngster that wants to go to college, a graduate of high school. He can now qualify for the out-of-school programs. Mayor DAWAHARE. He did not qualify at Hazard.' Chairman PERKINS. I cannot understand that. Mayor DAWAHARE. That is what I could not understand, but Mr. Stafford said that, and hQ was the director of the Office of Economic Opportunity. `Chairman PERKINs. Maybe it was because of an income limitation or something along that line. Mayor DAWAHARE. No, sir. No, sir, it was not.. These children came from families that were on public assistance. Chairman PERKINS. Well, if it is a cause, then `it may be because of an overlapping regulation. There is nothing in the law where they could take advantage of work-study and various loan programs and a scholarship program. You can take advantage of all three of those programs. That perhaps was the reason. That eliminated that category. The program was really in attendance for dropouts. Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. We have `been trying to legislate to take care of all these various facets of the youngster to make it possible for the youngsters that want to go to college to go to college. That is what we have spent much of our time on in this committee. Mayor DAWAHARE. I would like to give one other success story. \\T0 had a young kid at home that had `been in reform school, in and out, 14 or 15, that nothing would satisfy him. He got on the Neigh- borhood Youth `Corps, we put him in the police department as a radio PAGENO="0733" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3193 operator. He found something that he liked to do, and he loved it, and now he has found himself in society, and I think just saving this one child has been worth the whole program. Chairman PERKINS. Do you have any other suggestions to offer the committee, Mayor Dawahare? I personally want to welcome you. We will invite you back on some future occasion. Mayor DAWAHARE. Yes, sir. On any short notice I will be glad to come back and answer any questions. I am well acquainted with all of our problems, and I certainly do thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much, Mayor, for attending. I am going to recess the committee for about 8 or 10 minutes to take a long-distance call, and I will be right back. (A short recess was taken.) Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. Come around, Mr. Dawson. We have with us this afternoon Commissioner Leslie Dawson of the Department of Economic Security. I am delighted to welcome you here, Mr. Dawson. To my way of thinking, you are one `of the outstanding commissioners in the whole country who has had a great responsibility down there in Kentucky at an early age in life. I make that observation `because the poor people certainly have benefited and all of the people in Kentucky who have made a con- tribution in making Kentucky a better place to live due to your stand on welfare, not only the people of Kentucky but the Nation. It is a great pleasure to welcome you here. I know that you have a prepared statement. Without objection, your prepared statement will be inserted in the record. I notice you are accompanied by two assistants. What are their names? Mr. DAw50N. Mr. Crittenden and Mr. Kelsey. Chairman PERKINS. I am delighted to welcome both of you gentle- men here. You proceed in any manner that you prefer. Underline the most important portions of your statement. I have some questions I would like to ask. We seem to be under pressure here at the present time trying to wind up the hearings. STATEMENT OP COMMISSIONER LESLIE DAWSON, KENTUCKY DE~ PARTMENT OP ECONOMIC SECURITY; ACCOMPANIED BY ROGER CRITTENDEN AND LEONARD KELSEY Mr. DAWSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for those kind words. Naturally, the success that any State administrator can have in any program dealing with poverty today depends largely upon whether it is attacked from a team standpoint or whether or not one attempts to do it on his own. If you try to do it on your own, obviously there is very little that can be accomplished. Probably the big partner in the team, certainly from my agency standpoint, and my agency is one that has both the employment PAGENO="0734" 3194 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 service and the public assistance operation under its jurisdiction- the big partner is the Federal Government. The success that we have had with the programs has come largely from experiences that we have had in Kentucky as well as the benefit of guidance and advice from our counterparts and the experts in the Federal area. I cannot underestimate the fact that, contrary to what popular belief is, the advice and the help that we have received from the Federal Government, the Federal agencies, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Department of Labor specifically, and from the Office of Economic Opportunity, that this help outside of the momentary help has been extremely valuable in setting new courses and developing new ways to attempt to attack the problem of poverty. I shall devote most of my comments this afternoon to title XIX and title V which is in operation in 19 eastern Kentucky counties and has been for the past two and a half years. Chairman PERKINS. You are talking about title XIX of the Social Security Act which the State of Kentucky is taking advantage of? Mr. DAWSON. I am speaking of title V. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Go ahead. Mr. DAWSON. The 1966 amendments to title V bringing together the Department of Labor and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in this program didn't become effective until July 1 of this year, so I am not at this time qualified to make any comments on implementation of these 1966 amendments. Chairman PERKINS. When did it become effective, March or April 1? Mr. DAWSON. The contract on title V ends in December. Chairman PERKINS. You will still be carrying on several programs under title V nearing fiscal 1968 during the next fiscal year; won't you? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir; we certainly will. Chairman PERKINS. I would be terribly disappointed if that were not the case. / Mr. DAWSON. Yes. It is my understanding that those will continue under essentially the same plan and the same jurisdiction. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. DAWSON. One of the important aspects, I think, of this pro- gram is what kind of success it has. We have shown in several instances that where a family receives approximately $250 per month per fam- ily under the title V program, this income paid for family needs such as food, clothing, and other items. To keep children in school and attending regularly has been a remarkable success. These people are also eligible to take advantage of the food stamp program which has been a great deal of assistance in the Appalachian area and all over the State of Kentucky. Chairman PERKINS. I want to agree with that statement. Mr. DAWSON. The important thing, I think, at the present time relative to food stamps is that there be more education into the use of food stamps and that there be more education in the availability of the program for those who are interested. Medical care was furnished to the participants in title V under title XIX of the Social Security Act and this has averaged approxi- mately $40 per family per month. In many instances, we feel like the title XIX program could have been taken advantage of to a greater PAGENO="0735" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3195 extent than what it was, but, nonetheless, no one has had to do without medical care since the passage of title XIX, if it was needed. To reach the ultimate goal in preparing participants for permanent employment, it was long ago determined that more had to be done than merely having a dole system. All men were subject to a program in title V of adult basic education, intensive personal counseling, high school equivalency courses, and a variety of vocational training and public works projects. It is important, I think, that the public understand that this pro- gram is tied at the present time to the services that are available through the employment service. All participants in the program are required to register with the employment service for counseling and job placement upon enrollment in the program. The Kentucky State Employment Service, which I have previously indicated is under the jurisdiction of the Department, provides a coordinating element between the employer and these participants in W.A. & T. who have successfully completed their training or who find themselves eligible or willing and eligible to take employment. I think a pertinent question that most people are interested in is, what has happened to those 9,000 participants who have passed through the program? With regard to the 9,000 participants there has been some 33,600 children of these participant families who have received positive benefits. Some 2,000 of the 9~000 have received pro- jected related employment. About 600 have been referred and transferred to other training programs. About 2,000 became ineligible for reasons such as poor attendance, increase in resources, refusing suitable employment, and the like. Some 600 voluntarily left the project because of disability, illness, or injury and for other reasons unknown. The project at the present time has approximately 3,700 participants. Chairman PERKINS. How many? Mr. DAWSON. 3,700, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. At the present time? Mr. DAWSON. At the present time, Mr. Chairman. That is its present status. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. DAWSON. This is down from the high point of approximately 6,500 in order to conform with the appropriation which was made available for this administration project. Chairman PERKINS. Somewhere along the line in your statement, I am interested to know how the difference between 6,500 and the 3,700 are coming along in these other programs today, in the substitute programs. Do you have any shortcomings anywhere along the line? I hope you will discuss the whole thing. Mr. DAWSON. Indeed, there has been some problem. At the time the appropriation cut was made, we received the helpful hand from the Department of Labor as a result of certain conferences and assistance which was given here in Washington to come to the assistance of this group with additional training projects in the MDTA area, in the PAGENO="0736" 3196 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 area of prevocational training, and, also, in the area of the new Nelsen-Scheuer projects. We have known for a long time the benefit of MDTA in connection with the title V programs primarily because of the large number of people at the present and in the past who have wanted to participate in MDTA. The projects that were established had to be established on the basis of what the need was of those who are being transferred and had to correspond with the educational level of those who were transferred. As a result, some projects were set up which required sixth-grade edu- cation level, others lower, some higher. We have found in almost every instance where a project was established that we did have some screen- ing problems but by and large the problems could be resolved. In many instances, not every school district grades children's report cards alike, and not every school district were these men graded alike, so you knew when you got ready to put them in a class what their educational level was. However, at the present time, it appears, that out of all of those that were transferred into on-going classes that there were only a few that had not proved successful, and in these instances we have put them back into a training situation under title V so t.hat they could continue on with their basic edu.cation. The whole problem stems from lack of basic education as well as from lack of jobs. Chairman PERKINS. You are so right and this, in my judgment, was so hard and so difficult for so many people to understand. You take one of these men 50 to 55 to 60 years of age, with a lack of basic education and try to give him a course in electricity, he is whipped before he commences because of the lack of education. He just cannot read the charts; he cannot understand. That is why it is difficult for so many people who believe that you can train everybody that has a desire to be trained. They cannot visualize the lack of basic education and the complete handicaps that individual faces in obtain- ing successful training. I just take it that you. have some of this existing in Kentucky today from the letters that I have rec,eived. Many of them switched over under new programs; people who, if they undertook to get them, would be discriminated against and not be able to find them homes away from home and are unable to make it in their classes even though we have cOmpetent instructors and they are mixed in with many people, the majority of whom are succeeding in the training. The whole problem is brought about because of the lack of basic education and in trying to get so many of these successfully through the vocational educational training programs. Are you experiencing a lot of that now? Mr. DAwsoN. Yes, sir. I think that fairly well sums it up, Mr. Chairman. There is no question that one educational approach is not the answer. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. DAwsox. There must be a multiple approach and it is pretty obvious that the Nelsen-Scheuer type of project is certainly needed for those who find that they have passed that age limit where they can sum up the vigor to participate in a regular basic education program as such. PAGENO="0737" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3197 Chairman PERKINS. Well, now, I agreed wholeheartedly with you on your approach but what do you feel is the answer before we get too far away from this individual that is just completely unsuitable for training in the vocational institutions because of age or because of lack of ability or because of lack of basic education-leave off the age, because of lack of basic education? Mr. DAWSON. Well, if we eliminate the age factor, then I think that we must continue on with a title V type of project that gives the basic education. Now, along with the work experience, one of the marvelous parts about the title V is that is has a dual role. Possibly a fellow is not as keen in academic activities as another fellow is but he sometimes is a little more adaptable on a pure work situation to the extent that he maintains his respect and his status among his peers in the educational group simply because of his abilities on the work end of it. Chairma.n PERKINS. People are utilizing more or less Nelsen- Scheuer. Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Is it working out well? Mr. DAWSON. The Nelsen-Scheuer projects are not under our juris- diction. However, our contract with them which is continuous indi- cates that they are working very well and that the community action program boards which are supervising these projects are doing a re- sponsible job. Chairman PERKINS. Well, now, employment offices along with your department do the screening for Nelsen-Scheuer, do they not? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Just how do you screen one of those indivi- duals when they have to be laid off? Mr. DAWSON. Well, of course, all of them are registered with the office. Chairman PERKINS. With the employment office? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. all of them are. One of the devices which we try to use is to determine, first of all, whether or not the individual is qualified to go into the highest level of training which would be the MDTA courses or a specific skills course and also whether he is interested in a skills course, as such. It has probably already been determined before we get to that point in the public assistance area as to whether the man is physically and mentally capable of getting into it. If he is not, then there is some other public assistance program that lie would be brought into because we have found in many instances for health reasons and other reasons there were some men who were just not ready to go into a regular work situation. But, after that, if it is determined that he is not eligible because of education or age to go into an MDTA course, we generally then take this group and make them available for interview with the directors of the Nelsen-Scheuer projects so that they can then explain to the men and determine from the responses of the men whether they would like to be in the Nelsen-Scheuer project, and it is from that group that a selection is made. 80-084-67-pt. 4-47 PAGENO="0738" 3198 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. How do you feel we can better serve this group in title V? For a while, we have not been able to take care of all the deserving ones under Nelsen-Scheuer. We are trying at present to put them into MDTA and let the MDTA train them. That has not worked out to well. I am just talking about the unsuitable ones. How do you feel that we should deal with those in the future? You see what I am driving at? Mr. DAWSON. Yes. I am not sure, Mr. Chairman, that we don't have the answers already, as such, but I think that it needs to be expanded, which I think is the most important thing. Chairman PERKINS. Just give me what needs to be expanded. Mr.DAwsoN. I think that increased emphasis in the Nelsen-Scheuer area is important. I believe that we have found and have changed policies in such a manner that we can take care of those adequately who through health reasons or otherwise cannot successfully participate in these programs. They may very well have been successfully able to sit in a classroom for a little while in order to meet the requirements of the title V area but on both sides of this thing, both on the Federal and state level, we have had to do things to adjust our policies to fit the situation. I think properly classifying people so that those who have health problems can be put in proper programs, but addition to that I think that the. biggest need of all is additional emphasis in the MDTA area. At the present time, there are some 20,000 applications pending in the State of Kentucky for MDTA with only 3,000 people in training. Now, this laps over and takes into account Appalachia and the rest of them. Chairman PERKINS. Now, with that brief background from a real- istic viewpoint, isn't it going to be a. long time before you reach the bottom of t.he ladder in the cases under title V? Many of them going into MDTA recently have not suitably adjusted themselves. Would it not be a long, long time before we will effectively reach the so-called hard core at the bottom of the ladder under MDTA? Mr. DAWSON. There is no question about it. However, I am con- vinced that there are two things t.hat have to be done ~in MDTA and maybe more. but at least from our standpoint the entrance standards in MDTA ~ha.ve to be lowered in some instances, courses set up at a lower educational level. Chairman PERKINS. That is one of the problems now in Kentucky, that the courses have not been set. up under the MDTA training pro- grams at. lower educational levels. Mr. DAwsoN. Yes, sir: that is exactly right.. Chairman PERKINS. That is bringing about a considerable dropout from the people who are taking MDTA. courses, the hard core at the vocational schools? Mr. DAwsox. Yes: it. is. NOw, of course, part. of this can be cured by a continuation of the basic education plans. However, it does not answer the problem for that fellow who is in his middle forties who is rapidly approaching that. so-called deadline to age running out on him as to when lie is in a. competitive situation for a. job. For that. reason, it is that. basic group that the. courses need to be geared to at the educational level that they are iiow at. PAGENO="0739" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNJTY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3199 Chairman PERKINS. Before they are discriminated against from an employment viewpoint? Mr. DAWSON. That is right. Now, one of the things that has to always be kept in mind is the tremendous record of placement that the MDTA courses in the voca- tional schools have had, and this is one of the reasons that they are reluctant to adjust courses. Chairman PERKINS. Because it lowers their placement st.a.ndmg and brings that good record up. Mr. DAWSON. It is understandable. Chairman PERKINS. It is understandable. Mr. DAWSON. Aiid they lose contact. In many instances, they fear by doing this with employees who have been there or have had success- ful client relationships with them on getting employees. The placement rate in east Kentucky is approximately 70 percent, between 65 and 70 percent, out of MDTA courses. Chairman PERKINS. That is because they have always selected the cream of the crop? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. DAWSON. The placement elsewhere in Kentucky: In Jefferson County, it is closer to 80 percent. This also emphasizes again `the fact that even in selecting the cream of the crop you see the picture of the problem in education that had existed in Appalachia. But, nontheless, I `think that the combination of trying to find the use of employees, of labor that are trained out of these courses with less stringent require- ments as to basic education would be helpful. Courses such as nurserymen, courses such as maintenance men where there is still a great demand for these types of courses thtvt are needed and can be set up. However, at the present time, in some counties, we run into the problem of facilities being available. We are at that prob- lem right now in several counties in which we have run out of facilities at the present time. Chairman PERKINS. One more question. We have got these people in Kentucky and dropped from title V and picked up under Nelsen-Scheuer here for that group for all intents and purposes who will not `be employed because of their age. Part of the group `that can be successfully trained under MDTA programs of vocational schools elsewhere, we have got a tremendous backlog and are not reaching that group because of the inadequacy of the facilities and `because of the inadequacy of the funds. Furthermore, we have still got a group here that many of them were working under the title V program that are still unemployable by industry for all intents and purposes becanse of their age. Now, just what is your recommendation for that group in your ex- perience down there as head of the Department of Eco~omic Security? Mr. DAWSON. I think in the final analysis, Mr. Chairman, that you will have to fall back in the long run on the regula.r categorical assist- ance programs with some modification in it. There comes a time with certain groups that the most that you can expeet to do to maintain a family relationship `that. is stable. enough that the children of that family can do better than their forebears did. . PAGENO="0740" 3200 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Now, it is not every group that we are going to be able to reach with any one of these new programs. The older individual who is not in Nelsen-Scheuer, who is not in W.E. & T., that is the group that we probably have to try to reach as best we can through programs such as food stamps, programs of our regular public assistance activities. Chairman PERKINS. I am trying to get away from that now, away from public assistance, to give those people hope in life and give them inspiration that they are useful citizens. You know they have been automated out of work and employers presently won't take them be- cause of their age and insurance rates are higher. Aside from the relief aspect of the categorical assistance, what pro- grains do you feel would be most beneficial for this group to meet? Mr. DAWSON. I still stand on what I said earlier, Mr. Chairman, that the Nelsen-Scheuer programs plus a combination of MDTA, aiid revised MDTA is important. Chairman PERKINS. To lower the standard for this group of people who presently cannot succeed with the high standards that vocational schools are maintaining under MDTA programs to keep up the high placement rate. Mr. DAWSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINs. Now, would you recommend that the work ex- perience and training program be expanded in Nelsen-Scheuer? How do you evaluate those programs for your experience, both of them-the older person who in this day and age is discriminated against? Mr. DAWSON. Under the present definitions of the title V program, I don't thiuk that for the older individual it really holds out as much opportunity as the Neisen-Scheuer project does. Chairman PERKINS. You mean for the older individual? Mr. DAwsoN. For the older individual. Chairman PERKINS. For the Nelsen-Scheuer group? Mr. DAWSON. Yes. Now, that depends on a lot of things. it depends on whether or not he has been exposed to any kind of education or not or whether lie has done a.ny kind of work. If the older worker is one who finds himself simply unemployed but has been attached to the work force at various times in the past, he may very ~svell be able to benefit from the title V program in that he has his education brought up to date; he has a work experience record behind him and that either through the title V, the MT. E. & T. program or through some reeducation through MDTA. This is another thing that we have not done much with, reeducation, retrade education, the teaching of a former miner now that he has got older~ how he does some other task around the mine other than the one he originally performed. Basically, I think that the older worker, ~elsen-Scheuer is the. one which looks to me the most helpful. On the other hand, again let me emphasize that you cannot talk about any one of these programs individually. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. DAWSON. There is no way to talk about title V without talking about the outreach, the OEO programs in east Kentucky and the tre- mendous job that many of those have done to try to reach some of PAGENO="0741" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3201 these people to come into the employment office and get them to be interested in MDTA. So, probably the greatest thing that has happened is the addition of the Nelsen-Scheuer think as an adjunct to the title V but it is no substitution of title V under any set of circumstances. The benefits that are derived from title V are great in more ways than just the benefit to the individual in the amount of money that he receives or the kind of training that lie receives. This program is one which for the first time, I think, has given indication to the gen- eral population that these people can earn respect for themselves and that they earn it from their labors. We receive any number of letters from business firms, from bankers, from garage owners, from principal business people who customarily look with askance at the public welfare rolls in east Kentucky, who are now saying with a good deal of serious interest that this program is one which really makes a new picture in the economy in east Ken- tucky and which really causes an individual to have respect for him- self where he did not have it otherwise. I think the only program that we have found that has been available to us that we have not been able to take the maximum amount of ad- vantage of in Appalachia, although we have used it extensively in. urban areas, is the on-the-job training program. The reason that we have not been able to use it extensively is because to use it means that you have to have industry there to take advantage of it. Chairman PERKINS. That is correct. Mr. DAWSON. And it just is not there. We have tried there every device that is available to make use of OJT and have found that it is not a suitable program in east Kentucky. It might be of some interest to the committee of what kind of em- phasis and what kind of activity in Appalachia and in a State with the economic problems which have existed in Kentucky as to whai advantage a program such as Job Corps has had. The State employment service has followed through on about 712 participants who have enrolled in the Job Corps and have had some training. We found that about 50 percent of those who were in Job Corps are now working or are in school or in military service. Of the 356 counted, it is not placed. Some 170 either did not respond to the questionnaires and 31 were not located, et cetera. But I think with the 50 percent placement rate Chairman PERKINS. How much? Mr. DAWSON. Fifty percent of those who were surveyed. Chairman PERKINS. How many did you survey? Mr. DAWSON. About 712, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. That had graduated in Kentucky? Mr. DAWSON. That had come out of Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. That has just come out? Mr. DAWSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Some of them had not graduated? Mr. DAWSON. They were considered as finished; they had enrolled and had either achieved their goal or had been considered graduated. Chairman PERKINS. When did you make this survey, Mr. Dawson? PAGENO="0742" 3202 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. DAWSON. This was completed approximately this year, about- do you have the date? - ChairmanP~nK1Ns. Did you make it about a year or so ago? Is this the first evaluation you made? Mr. DAwsoN. Yes, sir; this is about the first one that we have made. We attempt to try to keep a running account of it but it is very difficult. Actually, it takes a long process and following through on it very often. Chairman PERKINS. You don't know how many are in the armed services in addition to that number, do you? Mr. DAWSON. No, sir. There is a percentage-let's see if I have it here. Chairman PERKINS. Back to schoOl. Mr. DAwS0N. For instance, I will take one particular group here who completed a defined program as such, and this is how it is rated: 157 were placed and 24 went into the military and three went into some other type of school. So, that is about a ratio of 122 to 24; 122 went in jobs, 24 went in the military out of that particular group. Chairman PERKINS. That would bring the percentage up of people `accounted for usefully. Would that be about 60 percent? Mr. DAWSON. It would be something like that. This has been an especially useful tool in eastern Kentucky and particularly in Jefferson Coirnty and Fayette where there is a large minority group. I think in looking at whether, or not these are success- ful job placements- Chairman Perkins. Could the replacement rate be up, considering the ones where the evaluation was made of those that went into indus- t.ry, that went into jobs and military services, and that would bring the figure up to about 70 percent. Is that correct? Mr. Dawson. I think that is right. I don't have that right before us. Chairman Perkins. Give us the total figures again, Mr. Dawson. Mr. DAwsoN. We have approximately 356. It figures out exactly 50 percent of those placed and those not placed because we are including in the 50 percent those 44 approximately who went into the military as such. lYe consider that as a placement as such in the method of record- ing that we had. Chairman PERKINS. Did you find out about the other 50 percent, whether they planned to take useful training or just went home tem- porarily or what? Mr. DAWSON. Part of those may very well have had a successful career some place or developed one. The problem is not being able to arrive at any kind of determination on it, so `you just count those as ones who were not placed as such. `In other words, they are ones you can't locate and can't get any answer from. Chairman PERKINS. The' others' you just did not get an answer from? Mr. DxwsoN. That is right. And under our system of counting we just don't consider them. We have no way of knowing. Chairman PERKINS. They may be out `of the State or they could be anyplace. - Mr. DAWSON. Of the 50 percent considered not placed, 177 did not respond to the mail or questionnaire, 31 moved or could not be located PAGENO="0743" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3203 and 56 they found no :suitable opening~ in the area or they felt' like they were not ready for employment after they got out. Some 91 just unknown totally. I mean there was no way of even directing a mail inquiry. It might be of some interest to state the kind of salaries these people are getting. Those receving jobs, their hourly wage ranged greatly. We found one that even had a job as pipefitter that was drawing some $5 an hour. That goes all the way down to such jobs as a mattress maker at $2.65 an hou~, and welder at $2.52 an hour and any number of them drawing $1.50 to $1.60 per hour. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Dawson. Mr. DAWSON. Mr. Chairman, I think that pretty well concludes our presentation. Chairman PERKINS. I would like to compliment you for coming before this committee. In connection with medical benefits, will you be able to work that out down there for people who are participating under Nelsen-Scheuer, and I suppose some have been cut off and for people who are presently taking MDTA courses and hiring some of these elderly people. Do you think you will be able to work that out? * Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir;' I think we have available to us the basic tools that were modifications which can be made and were adequate financing, we feel we can make considerable progress. But' without question it is going to take a combination of established programs and a combination of emphasis on poverty as such. The OEO type of approach is going to be necessary as well as the regularly established program type approach. This means not only title V but the Labor Department projects also. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that your employment offices are in a better position to screen the youngsters for the Job Corps than any- one else? Mr. DAWSON. I guess it would be a `little presumptive for me to say better than anyone else, Mr. Chairman, but I will say better than some. We have found that there is some success and we feel like it is pretty good success in the employment service screening with OEO and the community action groups doing the outreach in trying to encourage these people to come in, with VISTA participating `i~ this aspect of it. * Chairman PERKINS. Is it your observation that the Job' Corps is presently reaching a different type of youngster particularly lacking in a basic education and that in many instances are problem youngsters than what the vocational schools are presently reaching?, Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. * ` Chairman PERKINS. Would you describe that to the committee? Mr. DAWSON. I found some of my information relative to the ad- vantage that the Job Corps has had for the youngsters comes from the youngsters themselves. I think this may give something of a picture as to why the Employment Service seems to be the place if not better for the screening and recruitment. * ` YOu can go into many offices in the `Employment Service or any youth opportunity centers that are connected with the Employment Service and you will find that these youngsters who are home on leave from Job Corps come back there to talk with people who' recruited them or to tell them. of their experiences. ` PAGENO="0744" 3204 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Then by talking with the people who recruited them you can get a picture of the tremendous change that has been made, change most usually in attitudes, capabilities for getting along with other people,. and so on. Chairman PERKINS. The training that has taken place in the Job *Corps camps at the present time-do you feel it is more suitable than if you were to try to train that same youngster right in the vocational schools or in a residential center? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir, I certainly do. I think he has to have inten- sive type of approach made to the problems that he faces, where voca- tional schools are not geared to do that kind of intensive training. Chairman PERKINS. And we have no residential centers in Kentucky presently to do that type of training? Mr. DAWSON. Vocational schools are just not geared to do that. They can have a counseling service but not the intensive kind. They do not have people who are capable of reaching some of these boys who need to be reached. Chairman PERKINS. What was the figure that you used in your evaluation study of the Job Corps people? Mr. DAWSON. We surveyed a group of about 712. Chairman PERKINS. If I understood your survey, you had about. a 50-percent placement and left of course a 50-percent nonplacernent, but considering the nonplacement, using your figures, however, only 56 out of that 356 or 50 percent, I believe you said, were definitely not placed and the rest you simply did not know about so only 14 percent of that nonplacement group was definitely lmemployed according to your study. Is that correct? That is according to your study. Mr. DAWSON. The figures that you have, Mr. Chairman, are just a~ little bit wrong. Of the 355 that we had we have the 177 that did not respond. Chairman PERKINS. Those are people that you did not know about and you do not know whether they are employed or unemployed. Mr. DAWSON. That is right, we do not know what happened to thern~ Then we have an additional 31. Chairman PERKINS. And an additional 91 that are unknown that could be employed? Mr. DAWSON. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. And only 50 percent that you do not know about? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you for an outstanding statement. I am delighted you have come up here to help us. You have been most helpful. I will now call on Congressman Quie at this time. Mr. Quu~. On the survey that you made down there, which I guess you mentioned in the last part of your statement, Mr. Dawson, do I understand that you made the complete survey available for the record? Mr. DAWSON. Yes; that is correct. Mr. Qum. How are you informed by the Job Corps that a particular individual has completed training and is available for followthrough ~ Mr. DAWSON. This has generally been handled by a series of reports that come through the regional Department of Labor office. Congressman, I could not answer you exactly on the form of the- report in that I have not seen one, personally, myself. The staff handles PAGENO="0745" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3205 that and it came primarily from information that was gleaned from that. Mr. QmE. What do you do in the way of followthrough as soon as you find out a person has left the center? Mr. DAWSON. Help is put into the regulation machinery of job placement. Mr. QUIE. Does that mean he has to come see you before he is assisted? Mr. DAWSON. No; not generally speaking. We follow up on it im- mediately after he gets out of Job Corps. Very often, in metropolitan areas particularly, you don't have to follow up on them. They are there pretty fast, particularly in the youth opportunity centers. I have foimd this has been one of the very remarkable devices that have been used in urban centers and certainly they have been in Kentucky and in Louisville and northern Kentucky. Mr. QUIE. What happened to the 31 that you could not locate. Didn't they come home? Mr. DAWSON. This category is generally the group that did not answer mail, you could not locate a relative who could tell you where they were or what happened to them. This, incidentally, may not totally reflect everything that is known in that the 91 here have not been screened through one other device that we have to screen them, and that is a world of these boys originally came out of public assist- ance homes and the 91 names in this instance have not been run baek through the social worker group to determine whether they would know where these people would be located. Mr. QUIE. Also, I was wondering about the 91. Does the "unknown" mean you do not know the reason why they did not take a job? Mr. DAwsoN. The 91 basically is just totally unknown. We could not locate them in any way, shape, or form. Mr. QUIE. Are they different from the 31? Mr. DAWSON. The 31 moved or could not be located. This means they moved out of the State and you get caught in a crossfire of information between, for instance, if they moved to Ohio they may have very well found jobs but we have not been able to get the information from the Ohio Employment Service or from the Indiana Employment Service. Mr. Qun~. What do you think of the placement of these young peo- ple from the Job Corps? Either only 50 percent are working or are in military and, obviously, some of those who did not respond might be in the same condition. Should not anyone who has finished training or Thas had some training in the Job Corps be able to find some kind of a job? Mr. DAWSON. No, sir; not all the time. They go in with a it against them. To expect the Job Corps to cure all of the problems that are in- volved with these is more than you could really expect. I say that from the experience we have had with title V programs in that the place- ment rate there is good but it is not as spectacular as the MDTA pro- gram, where you start with a boy or man who has considerably more behind him. Jobs Corps participants come from very disadvantaged homes in Kentucky. They have a number of problems to overcome. Sometimes they find that the desire just to go back home after the experience of Thaving been in a Job Corps is more demanding than to go where the PAGENO="0746" 3206 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 job is, which very often is outside of eastern Kentucky or outside of Appalachia. Mr. QrnE. It seems to me that from just the little bit of conversation I have had with people, the problems of the people in the title V pro- gram are much more severe. You get problems of alcoholism and the defeats are much greater at 45 down a.nd out than they are at 17 or 21. Mr. DAwsox. Yes, sir; I think that is true but the one thmg about them generally is that they have become a good deal more skilled, if that is a good word to use, relative to their predicament a.nd their prob- lem than some of these youngsters have. The willingness to adjust to the set of circumstances is not as trau- matic with this older group, even though it may phrase them ni an element it does not cause them to be recalcitrant. With the youth and those going into the Job Corps this very often is the case. Generally the ones I have seen, which I will admit is not a very representative group in that it is not a large number, but you find those who are either ex- tremely shy, those who have a good deal of difficulty in associating either with people their own age and certainly with a prospective employer, and those who are just opposite who are extremely difficult to get along with and find themselves unable to make an approach to an employer or to take supervision. Mr. QmE. In your survey did you determine how many were em- ployed in jobs related to the training which they received in the Job Corps? Mr. DAWSON. No, sir. I do not have any figures on that particular thing. Mr. QmE. How about the breakdown of the number working, the number in school, and the number in military service? Do you have that breakdown? Mr. DAwsox. Our figures do not show specifically if a youth withiii the Job Corps and took electronics if he got a. job in electronics.. We do not have any figures that specifically spell that out. Mr. Q.urs. How about a breakdown of those now working in school. and those in military service? Do you have a breakdown on them? Mr. DAWSON. Of the 356 placed, there are 250 in a job, 13 in school, 44 in the militaa~y, 58 had gone into some other type of training. This could be some Goverminent training program or it could be an industry- financed program. I would say my best guess would be that the largest portion of that 58 went into some type of Government training pro- gram, advanced MDTA course of some kind. Mr. Qui~. You mentioned one became a pipefitter at $5 an hour, a mattress maker and an arc welder at $2 and some cents. Are these the highest paid? What would be the average? Mr. DAWSON. The $5 an hour certainly is an exception. .. As I look through the list here I would say on the average it would run about $1.75 to $1.80 in just looking down the list. There is a good number at $1.40 to $1.75, a, number at $1.80. That is pretty representative, I think. Mr. QmE. On another subject, have you had any experience in any. of your programs with VISTA volunteers or Appalachia volunteers? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir. I think like most groups they have a roTe in these programs. The role is oftentimes not as clearly defined as it should be for the success of the endeavor that the young person who has decided to go into. VISTA needs to have it defined, to the extent PAGENO="0747" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3207 that it very often creates problems that need not be there for him rapidly being able to accomplish what they intended to accomplish. Very often in being properly oriented would be a great help. Mr. QuIE. Which programs of yours have VISTA volunteers and AV's? Mr. DAWSON. AV's work with all of our programs. None of them are directly assigned to our agency but they work directly with .the agency. They have done a very good job in out-reach relative to Job corps. They have done Mr. QuIE. Out-reach relative to the Job Corps? Mr. DAWSON. Yes. For instance, to talk Mr. QUIE. Do you mean in enlisting or enrolling? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, sir, talking to a person as to whether they would be interested in going into Job Corps. Mr. QuIE. Serving, as recruiters? Mr. DAWSON. Yes. This has not been able up to now in the employ- ment services as such. Mr. Quu~. How about the community action agencies. Are they involved in the recruitment or screening? Mr. DAWSON. Yes, they have been involved with the recruitment. It is my understanding that the screening process may very well be assigned or a portion of the screening process may be assigned to them but I have no knowledge as to whether it has been or not. We are still under the impression in Kentucky that the screening process is an employment service function. Mr. QuIE. Have the employment service personnel, the VISTA volunteers and community action agencies received any compensation from OEO? Mr. DAWSON. I am not aware of any compensation over and above what theVISTA volunteer ordinarily receives. Mr.QuIE. What about community action? Mr. DAWSON. I could not answer that ~ I do not know. Mr. QUIE. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Getting back to the breakdown of the figures you used here of 356 that were working. in 250 jobs, that figures out to 71 percent, and 44 in school figures out to another 13, and the 58 in the training programs figures out to 16 percent, and 13 military figures out to .1 percent. I certainly want to thank you for your a~~pearance here, Mr. Dawson. You have been most helpful to the commrnttee. We always appreciate what you have done down there. I think I should make the statement for the record that Mr. Dawson is a young commissioner of economic security, Mr. Quie. Several years ago President Kennedy was dissatifled from the situation in eastern Kentucky as reported in the New York Times, as in other pl'ices, and he decided to make a billion dollars available under a certain demon- stration section of the Social Security Act before we ever had enacted the Economic Opportunity Act. This was back in 1963. Under this~ billion dollars, it took a lot of people, such as the: unemployed parents, so to speak, put them to doing useful work down there. I think it was the forerunner of. title V. When title V came along Mr. Dawson was more conscious of it than any other commissioner of economic security in the United States. He did his darndest to take advantage of the pro- gram to do something for an area of Kentucky that had perhaps the PAGENO="0748" 3208 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 most consistent and worst unemployment of any section of the country. This not only includes my district in t.his number but it includes Tim Lee Carter's district. So I just point out that this is not a partisan matter. This legislation benefits his district as much as mine and it has just as much poverty in Carter County. I am delighted that you could come here today and I thought I should point out the way you took advantage of title V in the first year because of that billion dollars that was made available before we ever enacted a program up here. You perhaps were in a better position than any other commissioner in the Nation to know the good work and take advantage of it. It was a great pleasure for me to welcome you here today and we will certainly have you back some time in the future. Mr. DAWSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It was an honor to be here. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. James C. Dean, in connection with his master of science thesis, did an extensive investigation of participants in the work experience and training program, title V of the Economic Opportunity Act. The thesis was specifically directed to the subject "The Developmental Significance of Expenditures of Participants in the Work Experience and Training Program." I personally feel that this is a vital work and contains much data that will be useful to the committee in the consideration of training programs; and without objection Mr. Dean's letter to me, dated June 15, 1967, and the report of his investigation will be made part of the record at this point. (The letter and document follow:) LEXINGTON, Kr., June 15, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS, Rayburn Building, Washington, D.C. Mr Dic~ii Mx. PERKINS: Please find enclosed a copy of my study, "The Develop- mental Significance of Expenditures of Participants in the Work Experience and Training Program." I have spent the past year doing this study as a part of my Master's Degree program at the University of Kentucky. I believe you may be interested in this study since it was conducted in Clay, Owsley, and Magoffin Counties, Kentucky, and further, since it deals with the expenditures of participants in the Work Experience and Training Program, Title V of the Economic Opportunity Act, which falls within the jurisdiction of the House Committee on Education and Labor. I submit this copy of my study for whatever consideration your committee may give it. Sincerely, JAMES 0. DEAN. TABLE I.1.-19 eastern Kentucky counties in the W.E. & T. program-Their quotas, and number of participants, May 20, 1966 County Quota Participants County Quota Participants Bell 540 528 Jackson 145 149 Breathitt 500 507 Knox 485 430 Floyd Harlan 540 495 547 465 Magoffin Martin 190 215 189 218 Knott 495 494 Menifee - 75 67 Leslie Letcher Perry Pike Clay Elliott 335 365 635 460 330 100 360 360 636 461 321 97 Morgan.. Owsley Wolfe Total 180 150 180 184 150 185 6,365 6,348 N0TE.-The 1st 9 counties entered the program in January 1965, the last 10 in Juno 1965. PAGENO="0749" Number of persons in family Type of requirements by age and shelter requirements 2 3 4orS 6or7 8ormore Personal requirements: Adult Child of age: 12 to 17 9toll 6to8 3 to 5 Under 3 Shelter requirements: 1 Rent or mortgage payments: Rural unfurnished Rural furnished Urban unfurnished Urban furnished No rent or mortgage payments: Rural Urban $37 40 34 29 22 18 19 21 25 29 12 14 $36 39 33 28 21 17 15 17 20 22 9 10 $35 38 32 27 20 17 13 15 17 19 8 9 $33 35 29 24 19 15 13 15 17 19 8 9 $31 32 26 22 17 14 13 15 17 19 8 9 `The allowance for sbelter is obtained by multiplying the appropriate amount in the table by the number of members of the assistance group up to a maximum of 4 (if 4 or more members, multiply by 4). Source: Material supplied by Mr. Ralph Wells. THE DEVELOPMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE OF EXPENDITURES OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING PROGRAM (A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Agriculture at the University of Kentucky) (By James C. Dean) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author of this thesis wishes to acknowledge and to express his gratitude to the numerous people who contributed to this project, particularly to Professor Aubrey J. Brown, Chairman, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky, for his continued encouragement, enthusiasm, and financial support. Appreciation for careful criticism and valuable comments is due to many professors in the Department of Agricultural Economics, especially Professors Robert W. Rudd, K. Ramon Anschel and D. Milton Shuffett. The author is most grateful to the many people who cooperated in securing the data for this undertaking. The Department of Economic Security, Common- wealth of Kentucky, was most helpful, especially Mr. Ralph E. Wells, Super- visor of the Work Experience and Training Program; Mr. Ernest Rall, Director of Public Assistance; and Mr. Roy Butler, Research Statistician. The Computing Center of the University of Kentucky was most generous with their valuable advice and facilities in the preparation of the regression calcula- tions of this study. The author is grateful to Miss Mary Lou Wallace for her diligence and per- severance in the preparation of this manuscript. The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation for the perceptive criti- cisms and sage counsel of his major advisor and thesis director, Professor Eldon D. Smith, and to congratulate him on his masterful carrot and stick strategies. The author wishes to express his gratitude to his wife, Margaret McCoy Dean, whose help with the preparation of the manuscript was invaluable and without whose patience, optimism and understanding, this undertaking would never have reached fruition. Finally, the author wishes to dedicate this thesis to the "Happy Pappies," as they usually, derisively, refer to themselves, the participants in the Work Experi- ence and Training Program, whose candor and cooperation not only made this study possible, but most enjoyable. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3209 TABUc 1.2.-Basic monthly income reqnirements br participants in work experience and training PAGENO="0750" 3210 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 CHAPTER 1.-INTRODUCTION POVERTY AND APPALACHIA "Beauty can be a mask for ugliness. That is what is happening in Appalachia."' The Appalachian Mountain Range stretches northeastward from Alabama to New England. This study was conducted in several counties in the Eastern Ken- tucky portion of the Appalachian Range, in the western section of the Cumber- land Plateau. The colorful historical development of the Southern Appalachian Region-with its famous labor disputes, family feuds, and moonshine whiskey- has been well documented by others and will not be a concern of this study.1 Re- cently, however, Appalachia has become well known for a less colorful attribute, poverty. This has been part of an increased national interest in poverty, greatly influenced by Michael Harrington's The Other America, and perhaps reaching its apothesis with the enactment into law of the Economic Opportunity Act in the summer of 1964. Harrington opened the eyes of the United States, or at least of some influential people, to the plight of the poor whose existence persists amidst the affluence of contemporary America. Appalachia naturally became a focus of concern, for it had a great concentration of poverty-the only regional commission established to combat poverty was for the Appalachian region. Harrington quoted an unidentified journalist's description of contemporary Appalachia: "Whole counties are precariously held together by a flour-and-dried milk paste of surplus foods. The school lunch program provides many children with their only decent meals. Relief has become a way of life for a once proud and aggres- sively independent mountain people. The men who are no longer needed iii the mines and the farmers who cannot compete with the mechanized agriculture of the Midwest have themselves become surplus commodities in the mountains." Table 1.1 presents the percentage distribution of personal income by various sources for the three counties where this study was conducted, approximately 30 per cent of the personal income in these counties comes from transfer payments, including various forms of government anti-poverty measures. Conditions have been so extremely bad in the Appalachian Region that hun- drecls of thousands of men have voted with their feet, and migrated to other, hopefully more promising. places. Total net migration from Eastern Kentucky from 1950 to 1900 was 269,000 people.4 The total population in 1950 was 745,000; net migration from the area equalled 36 per cent of the total population.5 TABLE 1.1.-Percentage distribution of personal income by type for 3 counties in Kentucky, 1963 Wages and salaries Proprietor's income Property income Transfer payments Farm Nonfarm Clay Magoffin Owsley Entire State 51.4 41. 1 25.2 64. 7 6.9 9.2 17. 7 9.6 30.3 10.6 7.9 7. 7 4.3 3.4 3.3 10. ~ 28.2 28. 2 30.6 L 9. 2 Source: John Fulmer, "Development Potential for Kentucky Counties with Related Statistics" (Lexing. ton: Bureau of Business Research, University of Kentucky, 1966), pp. 192-195. 1 Michael Harrington, The Other .4_merica: Poverty in the United States (New Yoric: MacMillan Company, 1062). p. 44. `See especially: Harry Caudill, Night Comes to the Cumberlantis (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1962), and Virgil Parrington Jones, The Hatfields and The 3fcUoys (Chapel Hill: North Carolina University Press, 1954). Harrington, op. cit., p. 45. James S. Brown and George Hillery, Jr., "The Great Migration. 1940-1980." The South era Appalachian Region: A. Survey, ed. Thomas H. Ford (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1962), p. 60. Gordon F. DeJong, The Population of Kentucl:y: Changes in the Number of Inhabitants, 1950-1960, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 675, December 1961, p. 25. PAGENO="0751" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3211 Cyrus Johnson's study of 324 families in the Aid to Families with Dependent (Children and Unemployed Parents (AFDC-UP) Program provides a good de- scription of the plight of the poor Appalachian family~6 The study is particularly relevant because the AFDO-UP Program evolved into the Work Experience and Training Program in several counties in Eastern Kentucky. Johnson found that three fourths of the AFDC-UP families lived in homes * rated as either deteriorating or dilapidated. The median family size was six al- though 25 per cent of the families had more than eight members. Interestingly enough, despite the myth of the extended mountain family, only 10 per cent of the AFDC-UP families reported any extra kin living with them. The median number of years of schooling for heads of households was six, and 2% per cent had completed high school; none had any higher education, and 46 per cent of the men reported not having any full-time employment during the previous year. Policy formulations for the poverty problem in Appalachia are difficult. The area does not seem to offer any, additional grand potential within the contem- porary American economy for the historically important extractive industries, nor for agriculture. Industrialization will proceed slowly, for as Professor Eldon Smith has pointed out: policy framing is constrained by a presumed threat to the interests of the developed economic mainstream. Political invective notwithstanding, welfare programs seem to be more politically palatable and institutionally feasible than a frontal attack on the roots of the depressed areas problem." An example of the "welfare programs" to which Professor Smith alluded is the Work Experience and Training Program which evolved from the AFDC-UP Pro- gram in Eastern Kentucky. The Work Experience and Training Program repre- sents an attempt to improve upon welfare programs by providing education and training for employment for the heads of impoverished households as well as edu- cation, health, and other services to family members. Additionally, a regular monthly income sufficient to meet the family's basic needs is provided. In concept this program represents an investment in "human capital," a term which will be cTi~cussed later. The developmental significance of various kinds of expenditures made by participants in the Work Experience and Training Program will be analyzed in this study. IMPORTANCE OF THIS STUDY It is assumed that there is general agreement with Professor T. W. Schultz's contention that "People generally prefer a society with fewer rather than more families in this state of poverty, and one can straightaway infer the social dis- v.tiiity of poverty." 8 However, widespread poverty involves more than mere so- cial disutility. The one fifth of the families in the United States living in poverty represents a cost to the economy regardless of ethical, charitable, or welfare con- siderations. This cost is most readily seen in the public expenditures for aid to the impoverished. Table 1.2 shows that the total expenditures for Federal, state, and local govern- ments for public aid: that is, public assistance; emergency aid; and value of surplus food; have been increasing in the period from 1955 to 1965, both abso- lutely and as a percentage of the Gross National Product (G.N.P.). These figures *are for direct forms of aid to the impoverished, and do not include public ex- penditures for the more indirect social welfare programs such as education, em- ployment insurance, old age, survivors, and disability insurance. ° Cyrus M. Johnson, Mountain. Families in Poverty, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Publication RS-24, May 1965. Eldon D. Smith, "Restrictions on Policy Alternatives Relating to Underdeveloped Regions of Developed Countries," Journal of Farm Economics, XLVIII, No. 5 (December 1966), p. 1231. 8 T. W. Schultz, "Education and Economic Opportunities. in Depressed Rural Areas: Implications for Research," Problems of Chronically Depressed Rural Areas, A Special Report sponsored by the Agricultural Policy Institute North Carolina State University in cooperation with the Tennessee Valley Authority (Raleigh:. North Carolina State Uni- versity Press, November 1965), p. 46. PAGENO="0752" 3212 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 TABLE l.2.-Federal, State and local government expenditures on public aid, includ-' ing public assistance, emergency aid, and value of surplus food to needy families Year Federal expenditures State and local expenditures Total expenditures GNP Total expenditures as percent of GNP Millions Millions Millions Billions 1955 $1, ~ $l' ~ ~ 003 ~98 0 0. 76 1960 2, 117 1,984 4, 101 503.8 .81 1965 3,585 2, 674 6,259 1 ~6 3 . 93 1 Estimated. Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, A Statistical Abstract of the United States, Washington, D.C., 1966; Federal, State, andl real, and total expenditures, p. 280; GNP, p. 322. The newer Office of Economic Opportunity programs are not included; the expenditures on these are estimated at ~1.2 billion in 1966.° Thus, it may be reason- ably concluded that the social welfare costs of poverty are increasing concom- itantly with the "wearing away" of poverty in the United States. The prolifera- tion of recent publications regarding the increasing costs of public welfare costs attest to this topic's importance as a pubic policy issue.1° The Work Experience and Training Program (WE and T) will be studied as an example of a program whose long-range objective is to diminish the costs of poverty by increasing the future earning power of the participants and children in these families. In the short run, the participants are given a sufficient income to meet their basic needs, as well as free medical care and an emphasis on educa- tion. This study analyses the short-run expenditure decisions and other behaviors of formerly impoverished families who are participants in the WE and T Pro- gram. The focus is on short-nm decision responses which have longer run de- velopmental significance in terms of the individual and his family's welfare and productivity. This study will show the extent to which participants in programs such as WE and T utilized free medical programs, respond to an educational emphasis, as well as how they spend their income and the developmental significance of such expen- ditures. This is quite import-alit when one considers the various proposals such as a guaranteed annual income or a negative income tax, which are currently under study by the Executive Branch of the Federal Government.11 The WE and P Program represents an attempt to use "welfare payments" to do more than allevi- ate deprivation. Its purpose is to motivate toward, and provide means of achiev- ing longer range objectives of economic improvement. Therefore, the program is a laboratory within which to study the effect on economic consumer decisions of these rather unique approaches as compared with pure economic transfers. THE WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING PROGRAM Title V of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 established the Work Experi- ence and Training Program, a federally supported project whose objective was to retrain workers for jobs and thereby reduce poverty and welfare dependency.'5 The Department of Health, Education, and Weifare (HEW) receives funds to operate WE and T from the Office of Economic Opportunity. HEW delegates the administration of the WE and T program to the respective states, who administer it within HEW's guidelines. In Kentucky, the Department of Economic Security, Division of Public Assistance, administers the Work Experience and Training Program. There were about 6,000 participants in the Kentucky WE and T Program when this study was conducted. Nineteen counties were included in the program, ° u.s. Bureau of the Census, Statistical .4.li8tract of the U.S. (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966), p. 293. 10 See for example, Edgar May, The Wasted Ames-icons: The Cost of Our Welfare Dilemma (New York: New American Library, 1966), or Herbert Krosney, Beyond Welfare.~ Poverty in the Supercity (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966). liDs. President (Johnson), Economic Report of the President Together with the Annual lieport of the Council of Economic Advisors (Wasbington U.S. Government Printing Office, January 1067), p. 17. 12 See Appendix I for a complete description of the Work Experience and Training Program. PAGENO="0753" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3213 all of them in Eastern Kentucky. In fiscal 1966, HEW granted $17.5 million to the Kentucky Division of Public Assistance to cover 100 per cent of the costs of the WE and T Program. Unemployed fathers of children less than 18 years of age may apply for adniis- sion to the WE and T Program at the local office of the Department of Economic Security. Once an applicant is accepted, his family's monthly income "needs" are calculated, based upon Division of Public Assistance standards. These income needs vary with the number and ages of children as well as with housing arrange- ments. After the family's need is determined, any income is subtracted, and the resulting amount is the family's monthly income "grant" from Public Assistance, paid at the beginning of each month. There is an upper limit of $250 on Public Assistance payments in Kentucky. Therefore, no matter how many children are in a family, the maximum monthly income would be $250. Thus one would expect to find more "discretionary in- come" among smaller families, especially those with fewer children than needed to qualify for more than the maximum grant. "Discretionary income" refers to the concept of disposable personal income minus what is needed to cover necessities. Moreover, because of the method employed in calculating Public Assistance grants, it is not economically rational for participants to take any additional employment. Any additional income has to be reported, and the amount of the grant is lowered equally. Therefore, any incentive to increase one's income is minimized. Thus, the concept of opportunity cost in terms of income foregone is effectively eliminated from this discussion. The method of payment for Public Assistance is an important public policy issue. President Johnson has recom- mended `that this "100 per cent tax on the earnings of `those on public assistance" be eliminated, and "payment formulas" be enacted which would allow those on public assistance to keep a part of what they earn.13 The family's total monthly grant is divided by the prevailing minimum wage $1.25 in 1966, the time of this study), and the resultant number equals the num- ber of hours the participant has to spend in work experience and training. Work experience is defined as progressive participation in actual work projects, and often takes the form of highway and landscape beautification, road and bridge building, and providing manpower for local government agencies.14 Train- ing includes basic and vocational education as well as other types of preparation for employment or further training. A participant generally spends six hours per week in training and the remainder of his time in work experience. Participant families receive virtually unlimited medical and dental care in addition to caseworker and other related social services. School-age children of participants must be enrolled in school and attend regularly. Since income benefits are received with required work experience and training, it will be useful to examine some of the relevant literature on consumer behavior, studies of the impoverished, and the theory of investment in human capital. STUDIES OF CONSUMER BEHAVIOR Most of the economic studies of consumer behavior have been concerned with some of the following characteristics of the subject: 1. Theories of spending, or saving behavior; 2. Influence of other than income variable on spending and saving; 3. Asset holding determination; 4. Determination of specific expenditures; and 5. Decision processes. Robert Ferber's excellent survey of empirical research on consumer or household behavior provides this classification.15 Ferber's survey, however, specifically ex- cludes "Studies dealing with the purchase behavior of a particular population." 16 Our concern in this study is to analyze the changes in spending pattern asso- ciated with the increases in income received by WE and T participants, a very special population. Thus, these studies are not too relevant. Other facts, such as 13 U.S. President (Johnson), Economic Report of the President Together with the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisors (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 1967), p. 17. 14 Work Erperience and Training Handbook, A mimeographed publication of the Division of Public Assistance, Department of Economic Security, Commonwealth of Kentucky (Frankfort: Division of Public Assistance, 1966). `5 Robert Ferber, "Research on Household Behavior," American Economic Review, Vol. LII (March 1962), p. 19. 16 Ibid., p. 19. 80-084-67-pt. 4---48 PAGENO="0754" :3214 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the consumers' effect on the economy-both sectorially and aggregatively-have received little attention from professional economists and will not be considered ihere. The concern in this study is with the short-run changes in the economic behavior of formerly impoverished consumers who are receiving ostensibly sufficient in- comes to meet their economic needs. As is noted above and in the description of the WE and T Program, the participants receive social services as well, including: basic education or vocational training for the head of the household and an em- phasis on education for the school-age children; work experience and employment counselling; and free medical care for all family members. The effects of these nonincome increments upon consumer behavior will be con- sidered, for they bear directly upon two major aspects of economic behavior, ~consumer expectation and habitual behavior. George Katona characterizes ex- pectations as follows: "If people believe that depression will come and their incomes will decline, their need to accumulate reserves may then retard spending and may especially impede borrowing for the sake of such large purchases as houses or durable goods. Opti- mistic expectations, on the other hand, especially if they are held both with respect to the general economic trend and to one's own income, may accelerate spending." 17 Thus, if the participants think that their participation in the WE and T Pro- gram will lead to a better job, they will not save much, if any. Katona hypothesizes that the same thing will occur if consumers think prices will rise; the converse would hold should there be an expectation that prices will decline.12 Habitual behavior is probably an important force in influencing consumption when there is a decline in income, but not when there is an increase. As Katona comments: "...breaking with past expenditure habits may be difficult when it is necessary to give up habitual satisfactions, but easy when the possibility opens up to satisfy further desires," 19 All WE and T participants probably experience an increase in income. Therefore, we might expect habitual behavior to play a lesser role than price and income expectation. It would seem that almost everyone expects prices to increase, and that participants in the WE and T Program would expect their income to increase as well, if the program were successful. Moreover, a degree of deferred demand probably characterizes the participants in the WE and T Program; that is, the participants have probably foregone some urgent consumption needs such as dental and medical care, essential items of clothing `or home repair, because of a lack of funds. The geographical setting of this study is in Eastern Kentucky, which is part of Appalachia. an area generally regarded as differing culturally from the main- stream of America.20 The idealized type is impulsive regarding consumption; he `He is an impulsive spender, often wasting money that he could well use on necessities for his family; perhaps he buys a very expensive TV set or refrig- erator just to satisfy his whim of the moment, his need to act. He saves little for a rainy day, or for the education of his children, or for projected goals in the future." ~ Therefore, (1) if the WE and P participants think they will get better jobs and that prices will increase; (2) if one assigns a lesser role to habitual behavior; (3) if one assumes some degree of deferred demand by participants; and (4) if one accepts the impulsiveness explicit in Weller's analysis of the traditional. low- income mountaineer type, then it seems reasonable to anticipate that the WE and *T participants will spend nearly all of their incomes. RELATED STUDIES OF IMPOVERISHED CONSUMERS In the past decade, there has been a plethora of material forthcoming on the subject of poverty.20 Nonetheless, there has been relatively little inquiry into how low-income or poor people spend their money. Nancy Brode compared the expenditures of families receiving Aid-to-Dependent- Children grants with the prescribed standards of the Tennessee Department `of 17 George Katona, Psychological Analysis of Economic Behavior (New York: McGraw- HfllBookCo.. Inc., 1963), p. 142. 1Sfl~id., p. 142. 191bjd., p. 143. 20 Jack Weller, Yesterday's People (Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1966). is certainly not a saver: 2'Ibzd., p. 40. 20See bibTiograpi~y in Arthur B. Shostak and William Gomberg feds.). ~ew Perspectives On Poverty (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1965). PAGENO="0755" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3215 Welfare.23 She found that all but one family had insufficient income to nieet the prescribed standards. Amounts greater than the Welfare Department's prescribed standards were spent for housing and nonessentials while not as much was spent for food and clothing as the standards prescribed. There was no apparent ian- provement in nutritional level of family diets. No analysis was made as to what kinds of expenditures might have had more developmental impact upon the families. Helen S. Barney studied the food shopping practices of 24 low--income, female headed families, and compared their practices to those of college seniors major- ing in Home Economics. She found that the low-income women did a better job of getting their money's worth than the college woman.24 Oscar Ornati compiled a rather complete list of the various kinds of lmdgets and budgetary studies undertaken for social and amelioratory purposes as well as a brief treatment of the historical development of rising standards for pov- erty.~ However, no categorization or analysis of types of expenditures were attempted. Emma G. Holmes took preliminary data from the 1960 Census and described the kinds of expenditures low-income families make.26 She found that low-income families spend a greater percentage of their incomes on food, shelter, and medical care, and a smaller percentage on clothing, furnishings and equipment, and other kinds of things than people with higher incomes. Holmes stressed the need for better measures of consumption than mere cash incomes, and suggested that the concept of value of consumption be utilized. Value of consumption would include goods produced for home consumption, inventory changes, and other kinds of con- sumption which are not reflected in a cash income figure. This is a useful concept, hut Holmes did not expand it to consider what kinds of consumption might have developmental significance. However Holmes' cross-sectional analysis provides an unreliable basis for predicting the ways in which low-income people will be- have in the short run, for under changed economic circumstances low-income people would represent different social and environmental, as well as income, groupings. In this study, a cross-sectional analysis will be utilized; however the two groups analyzed will be fairly comparable. Cyrus Johnson conducted a survey of 324 families participating in the pred- ecessor to the WE and T Program, that is, the Aid to Dependent Children and Unemployed Parents (AFDC-UP) ~ It was a purely descriptive study economi- cally, and showed that 46 percent of the unemployed fathers had not had a complete month's employment in the preceding two years. More than one-third of the families reported cash incomes of less than $500 annually, while the median was approximately $700 before the advent of the ADFC-UP Program. No value of consumption was calculated, and none of the expenditures of the cash income were analyzed vis-a-vis their developmental significance. The Pilot Food Stamp Program is administered by the United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, and had replaced the Surplus Commodity Program in all 19 counties where the WE and T Program was operating in Eastern Kentucky. The dual objectives of the Food Stamp Program were to increase the demand for agricultural commodities and to improve the diets of low-income people. Only domestically produced food may be purchased with food stamps. A variable scale is used whereby low-income families can exchange the amount of money they generally spend for food stamps with a higher value.28 The United States Department of Agriculture conducted a survey of participants in the Food Stamp Program in an urban area, Detroit, Michigan, and a rural area, Fayette County, Pennsylvania, in 19G2. It was discovered that food consumption and the nutri- tional quality of diets of participants increased for both urban and rural areas.29 Nancy Brode, "Expenditures of Income of 18 Selected White Families Receiving ADC in Knoxville, Tennessee, April 1960" (unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Home Economics, University of Tennessee, 1963). ~ Helen S. Barney, "Food Shopping Practices of Selected Low-Income Families, Riley Connty, Kansas, 1965," (unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Home Economics, Kansas State University, 1965). 25 Oscar Ornati, Poverty Amid Affluence (New York: The Twentieth Century Fund, [906). ~ Emma G. Holmes, "Spending Patterns of Low-Income Families (1961)," Adult Leudership (May 1965), p. 16. 27 Johnson, op. cit. ~ For a more complete description of the Food Stamp Program, see Appendix II. 29 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Food Consumption and Dietary Levels Under the Pilot Food ~ta~np Program, Detroit, Micizigen and Fayette County, Pennsylvenia (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962). PAGENO="0756" 3216 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AOT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 None of the above studies utilized tile conceptual framework of this study.. However Holmes' emphasis upon better measures of consumption such as the value of consumption concept is well taken. Brode's finding that families in the ADO Program do not increase the nutritional value of their diets coupled with the United States Department of Agriculture's Food Stamp study showing that participants in the Pilot Food Stamp Program do, indeed, improve the nutritional value of their diets suggests that perhaps the WE and T participants will not im- prove their diets unless they participate in the Pilot Food Stamp Program as well. THEORY OP INVESTMENT IN HUMAN CAPITAL Recently, there has been an increasing interest by economists in the economic aspects of health, welfare, and education.3° Much of the initial work has been in terms of assessing the current programs from a national point of view, and has been helpful in bringing together a corpus of material not previously subjected to rigorous economic analysis. Noteworthy for its theoretical corruscations as well as its concise and rather complete analysis is T. W. Schultz's work, The Economic Value of Education. In attempting to expand the conventional notions of capital investment,. Schultz asserts that human beings may justly be considered as a form of capital investment for ". . . the economic capabilities of man are predominantly a produced means of production and that, except for some pure rent (in earning) for differences in inherited abilities, most of the differences in earnings are a consequence of differences in the amounts which have been invested in ~` Specifically, Schultz maintains that schooling is properly regarded as an investment when it increases the students' future earnings.n This concept of human skills as forms of capital is important in this study, for it offers a useful take-off point from which to view programs such as the WE and T Program. Schultz's work has stimulated some promising contributions to the analysis of the investment in human capital.n A major portion of the contributions of in- creased earnings resulting from education is of a deferred nature and depends upon subsequent educational and experience inputs. In the WE and T Program.. only short-run effects can be observed and direct effects on earning capacity are not readily observable because most participants are still in the program. Although not explicitly indebted to Schultz, Ronald W. Conley's recent work, Tue Economics of Vocational Re/i abilitation, presents an analysis of the federal- state rehabilitation program which utilizes the Schultzian framework.c4 Using Public Health Service data for the period 19.59-93. the focus of his analysis is the distinction between costs and returns to the rehabilitated individuals and society in general. Only increased earnings are used to approximate social bene- fits, and dividing by program costs, returns of $1O-$17 per dollar spent by govern-- inents are estimated. The variation stems from different time periods, methods of estimating increased income, and discount rates. The data are rough, the cal- culations tentative; the book represents an important pioneering effort in the* area of investment in human capital. Vocational rehabilitation is often argued for in terms of human compassion or charity; Conley has tried to demonstrate that on purely objective criteria, it is an economically rational public investment. Worth Bateman attempted to apply a cost-benefit analysis to the WE and T program.n However, insufficient data only permitted a very tentative break-even- analysis, that is, an estimate of the point where the costs of the WE and T Pro- gram equal the increased earnings of the participants. If one assumes the partici- pants would receive the same amount of income from public assistance, regardless of the WE and T Program, the incremental cost of the WE and T Program is quite low, for it would include only administrative and work related expenses. This is a questionable assumption, for as Professor Richard Oloward has shown. a large per cent of the population who might qualif~v for public assistance do not 30See especially Herbert B. Kiarman, The Economics of Health (New York: Columbia tiniversity Press, 1965) ; Ruth Gordon, The Economics of Welfare (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965) and Theodore William Schultz, The Economic Value of Education (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965). ~` Schultz, The Economic Value of Education, P. 64. s~ Ibid., p. 10. n Gary S. Becker, Human Ccpital-.4 Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Ref erence to Education (New York: Columbia University Press, 1964). ~ Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1966. ~ worth Bateman, "An Application of Cost-Benefit Analysis to the Work Experience and Training Program," American EcOnomic Review, forthcoming. PAGENO="0757" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3217 receive any.36 However, if one were to assume away incremental public assistance costs, then the WE and T Program would oniy have to contribute about .5 per cent to the discounted future earnings of the participants to break even.37 If all incremental public assistance costs are included, estimated at about $1,000 by Bateman, then the discounted future earnings for a white male, 25 years of age, with 0-7 years of education (approximately $57,000) must only be increased about 2 per cent in order to break even in this context.n However, Bateman'~ entire analysis is severely limited by inadequate data, as he indicates: "Although these data are suggestive of large potential payoff, the fundamental fact remains that such calculations are pure guesswork and the fragmentary pro- gram information which is available permits estimates which are only slightly superior." ~° Despite the shortcomings in their data, both ~onley and Bateman serve to make the important point that probably only a small percentage increase in future earnings is necessary to cover the costs of a program such as vocational iehabilitation or WE and T. Gerald Somers has done the most comprehensive study of government spon- sored pilot retraining programs to date; his primary concern was the employ- ability of trainees as well as the costs and benefits of retraining programs.4° Among Somers findings were: 75 per cent of the trainees found jobs; men bene- ~ltted more than women; age was a handicap for trainees over 55; and men who successfully completed training were more employable, not necessarily in what they were trained in, but because employers used the training p'rogram~ as a screening device. Somers also found that past emp1~yment history was a factor *in that men who had been unemployed for long periods, or were in unskilled jobs, had a particularly difficult time obtaining jobs. Trainees earned more in their new jobs than previously, and paid their share of the training costs in about `four months. Society benefitted from the newly employed workers paying in- creased taxes as well as in diminished unemployment compensation; this took :about a year. `Somers concluded that pilot retraining programs such as those funded by the Manpower Development and Training Act can `be successful in eliminating hard core poverty within a limited range, but beyond that the need would be for atccompanying liberal fiscal policies. OBJECTIVES AND GENERAL HYPOTHESES Central to this study is the concept of developmentally significant expenditures. This concept represents an attempt to amplify such analytical tools as cost- benefit and break-~even analysis, and to view programs such as t'he WE and P Program from a different perspective. As was shown, the paucity of data for the WE and T case renders these more conventional analyses rather fruitless.41 `What is needed is another method of indi'cating some of the potential benefits, `and thus, the concept of `developmentally `significant expenditures is' proffered nnd discussed in Chapter III. The analytic framework of this study is concerned with the kinds of current expenditures the WE and T participants could make which will have a longer-* *run significance vis-a-vis the future development of the family members. Other benefits, such a's thhe impact of the WE and P participants' spending upon local or regional economies, are `beyond the `scope `of the analytic framework of `this :study. `The objectives of, this study are: (1) to `classify the possible kinds' of current expenditures in terms of their potential longer-run developmental significance for all members of the families participating in the WE and T Program; (2) to test hypotheses as to how participants in the WE and T Program spend their incomes within these classes; and (3) to investigate which characteristics, if any, of the participants associated w'ith varying degrees of expenditure within the `different classes. ~ Richard Cloward, "How Rights Can Be Secured," The Nation, XXXIII (March 7, 1966), p. 11. ~ Bateman, op. cit. ~Ibid. ~Ibi4. 40 Gerald Somers, Prospecting in Economics, A Report on Ford Foundation Grants In Economic `Research (New York: Ford Foundation Press, December 1966), p. 15. 4'Bateman, op. cit. ` PAGENO="0758" 3218 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The general hypotheses are: (1) that participants in the WE and T Program will spend more relatively and absolutely than the applicants for the program for the "developmentally significant" class of expenditures; and (2) that partici- pants in the W Eand T Program will spend relatively less than the applicants for the program for the "developmentally related," and "probably not develop- mentally significant" classes of expenditure.~' CHAPTER IL-METHODoLOGY INTRODUCTION A. cross-sectional approach was utilized, comparing the differences in levels of expenditure among various categories by fifty applicants for, and fifty partici- pants in, the Work Experience and Training Program. Data were needed on monthly expenditures; the survey method which depends upon recall was not sufficiently accurate for gathering such data. The absence of existing data on monthly expenditures of participants prior to their inclusion: in the WE and T Program necessitated a cross-sectional approach based upon a comparison of applicants for, and participants in, the WE and T Program. Expenditures were categorized as either: (1) developmentally significant; (2) developmentally related; or (3) probably not developmentally significant. By utilizing a cross-sectional approach, it was possible to compare expenditures of participants in the WE and T Program with those of the applicants for the WE and P Program within these various expenditure categories. These categories reflected the author's judgments regarding those items of expenditure which could, on the basis of present knowledge, be classified as con- tributing, in varying degrees to the future development of the family members to become economically self-sufficient.' Chi square and "t" tests were utilized to test various hypotheses regarding expenditures within these categories. Income elasticities of demand were calm- lateci for various categories of expenditure. Multiple regression analysis was utilized to test if differences in any particular characteristics of the participants were associated with differences in magnitudes of expenditures for various categOries. SAMPLING PROCEDURE Of the 19 counties hi the Work Experience and Training Program in Kentucky in the autumn of 1966, the initial nine entered the program in January 1965. and the latter ten in July 1965.2 The nine counties initially in the program w-ere not included in the sample in order to concentrate upon the expenditures of partici- pants in their first year in the WE and T Program. Most participants in the latter 10 counties.were known to have been in the program less than one year. The pro- gram began in the late summer of 1965, and this survey was done in autumn of 1966. Of these remaining 10 counties, Knox County was excluded because the University of Kentuck-y had aommitted itself to a substantial research undertaking there. From the remaining nine counties, three were randomly chosen: Clay, Magoffin and Owsley. A random sampling of 50 applicants for, and fifty participants in, the WE and T Program was made in these three counties. The sample size was determined by the time and resources avai1a~ble for interviewing. These 50 observations were apportioned among the three counties in proportion to their respective quotas for the WE and T Program which were based upon estimates of the degree of unem- ployment within each county by the Kentucky Department of Economic Security. Clay County had a WE and T quota of 330; Magoffin, 190: and Owsley, 150; there- fore, Clay had 25 paired observations; Magoffin, 14; and Owsley, 11. INTERVIEWING TECHNIQUE Each of the 50 applicants for, and participants in, the WE and P Program was interviewed initialiy in the latter part of September 1966. They were asked to keep a record of expenses for the month of October. Carefully constructed and tested, but simple forms were provided for this purpose. Each- interviewee was gli-en a detailed explanation of the record form and the categories of expenditure. The initial interview averaged a,bout 45 minutes duration. In early November,the ~ The various income classifications are defined in Chapter III. `see Chapter III for further discussion of these categories. 2 See Table 1.1 for a listing of counties where the WE and T Program was operating in 1966. PAGENO="0759" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3219 record~ of expenditures were collected, questionable entries were clarified, and additional inquiries were made. The final interview required about one-half hour on the average. There was a high degree of cooperation among the interviewees. Perhaps it was obsequiousness on the part of the participants because they wished to remain in the program, or perhaps the applicants did not want to jeopardize any chance they might have bad. of getting into the WE and T Program. However, theinter- viewers always informed the respondents that this survey had nothing to do with their status vis-a-vis the WE and T Program. Nonetheless, there were few problems of reticence at answering probing questions a)out personal finances. There were 36 applicants and 36 participants who completed the record of expenditures for October. Eight applicants and 12 participants either lost, mis- placed, or did not keep their records, and the records of seven applicants and four participants were not complete enough to be included in the final tabulations.3 There did not seem to be any characteristics which explained why some families kept good records and others did not keep good records. The author believes that the explanation and presentation in the initial interview was pro)mbly the most important reason for good records being kept, and that those families who did not keep good records did not probably understand, or were not especially sym- pathetic with, the purposes of the survey. ScHEDULE DESCRIPTION There were three parts to the schedule used in this study. The first part was for collecting basic data on the family: number of children; ages; educational attainment; the employment and earnings history of the head; his attitudes towward the WE and T Program; and an inventory of the family's clothing. The geographical location and the number of visits to various health facilities were recorded also. The main corpus of data was concerned with expenditures. Recall was used for annual medical expenditures and visits to health facilities The families kept a record of all expenditures for October this monthi~ record was the second part of the schedule. The third section dealt with food production. for home consumption, the families' credit situation, and contained an inventory of basic consumer durables. (A copy of the schedule is included in Appendix 3.) The amount of food produced for home consumption was ascertained (in the survey) by inquiring as to total quantities preserved in some way for the past year, in addition to the amounts consumed in October of any canned foods, fresh. produce, and all livestock and livestock products.4 EDUCATIONAL DATA Data On school attendance and enrollment wbre collected from the standardized records kept by teachers throughout Kentucky. Data were obtained for the children of both ap~j$icants and participants. Data for January through December 1966 were collected to include all possible seasonal variations in weather- particularly in the winter months when attendance could have, been affected by~ a lack of proper clothing.5 STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES CM Square For differences in the number of participants and applicants making certain~ kinds of expenditures, a chi-square test was used.6 It involves basically a compari- son of observed with expected frequencies. If the differenc?e between these frequencies was great enough to rule out occurrences due to chance at the 0.05 This adds up to 51 applIcants and 52 participants which were the totals interviewed because of aggressive interviewers. Volume measurements were translated into pound measurements with the help of standard equivalents and with the assistance of extension agents. Mr. Wilmer Browning of the University of Kentucky Extension Service was most helpful In this regard, as was Mr. John II. Sanders, Research Assistant at the University of Kentucky who help collect retail prices as well as wholesale produce prices and performed some of the necessary calculations. - . The author wishes to recognize the three County School Superintendents: Mrs. Mallie Bledsoe of Clay County; Mr. Creed Arnett of Magoffin County; and Mr. Pleas Turner of Owsley County for their cooperation in securing these data. George W. Sneclecor. Statistical Methods (Ames: Iowa State College Press, 1956), p. 30. PAGENO="0760" 3220 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 level of probability, then the hypothesis that the samples were taken from the same population was rejected. The formulation for calculation is: x2 - Fa Where Fa is the frequency for applicants and P~ is the frequency for participants. In cases involving one degree of freedom, a correction was made by subtracting 0.05 from the value of the differences of the frequencies.7 STUDENT'S "P" TEST In comparing some kinds of expenditures, the mean expenditure for the ap- plicant group was compared with the mean `expenditure for the participant group. The Student's "t" test was used: ~ fl1 "t" is the quotient of the differences of the mean expenditures divided by the square root of the squared standard deviations of the two samples divided by the sample size.8 If the value of "t" was large enough, the hypothesis that the difference between the means was due to chance was rejected. The 95 per cent confidence level was used in this study. Income Elasticity of Demrand The concept of income `elasticity of demand was used to measure the effect of changes in income upon the expenditures by participants for certain categories of goods. Income elasticity of demand may be defined as the ratio of the per- centage change in expenditure to the percentage change in income, holding `everything else constant: E (EpEa)(Yp+Ya) 9(EvąEa)(Yi)Ya) where: E1 is income elasticity of demand E5 is expenditures by participants E8 is expenditures by applicants Y9 is monthly income by participants Ya is monthly income by applicants Arc elasticites were calculated since incomes were aggregated for the month of October.9 Mv.ltiple Regression Multiple regression will be used in Chapter IV to investigate which character- istics of the participants are associated with changes in expenditures for several categories of expenditures and to what degree they are associated. The participant characteristics were the independent variables, and the categories of expenditure were the dependent variables. The complete specification of all important inde- pendent variables and any interaction between them, as well as the indication of any important degree of curvilinearity is necessary prior to quantifying the relationship. Thus the regression equation: x1=a+f2(x2)+f7(x3)+f4(x4)+ indicated that while any one of the independent variables, x2, x3, x4, . . . changed~ and the remainder were held constant, there. would be an accompanying change in x1, the dependent variable.10 CHAPTER III.-DEvELopMENTArJ~y SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURES AND ACTIVIT~S INTRODUCTION This study was concerned with the developmental significance of certain kinds of expenditures. This is a rather new and unconventional conceptualization of 7Ibld. p. 217. 8 John II. Freund, Modern Elementary Statistics (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice- Hall, 1060), p. 268. George Stigler, The Theory of Price (New York: Macmillan Company, 1952), p. 35. 10 Snedecor, op. cit., p. 413. PAGENO="0761" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3221 consumer expenditures. However, in view of the inadequacy of other modes `of anaysis,1 it seemed relevant `to employ this concept. Since Keynes, economists have divided aggregate income, Y, by source into two components, consumption, C, and investiment, 1.2 Thus, Y=C+I Similarly, aggregate income has been divided by use into consumption and savings, S. Y=O+S Therefore, in this conceptualization savings equal investment. It was not, how- ever, the purpose of this study to dispute this. It is, in fact, a tautology. Rather, as was cited in Schultz and Becker, what is generally classified as consumption may perhaps be better viewed in part as a form of investment.8 Thus the conventional concept of investment would be expanded to include certain expenditures usually regarded as consumption. Expanding upon Schultz, these expenditures would include those likely to increase the future earnings of any family member or consumption unit. This unconventional concept of classi- fying what is normally termed consumption as more properly a probable form of investment was crucial to this undertaking. `A lack of data rendered it impossible to demonstrate that certain expenditures were, in fact, properly termed "developmentally significant." Judgments were made that some categories of expenditures would probably have a beneficial effect upon the future earnings of the participant heads of households, and per- haps more importantly, upon the future earnings of their children. This concept of developmentally significant expenditures was especially useful in considering the `alternative purchases which could have been made by a low-income family as a result of `participation in a program such as the Work Experience and Training Program. Such a family was receiving a higher, steady income as well as: (1) an emphasis on education; (2) free health services; `and (3) various caseworker services. It was postulated in this study that, at low levels of income, the initial acquisition of, or the substitution of, a more serviceable automobile, television set, or any of the items falling within the categories indicated below, would have `the greatest impact upon the future earnings o'f th'e WE and T participant family members, and would therefore have the greatest develop- mental significance. The basis of the judgments of the various expenditures' developmental significance is discussed below for each category of expenditure. In addition to "developmentally significant," two other classifications of ex- penditures were made: "developmentaly related," and "probably not develop- mentally significant" expenditures. Some developmentally related expenditures were complementary with developmentally significant expenditures, but were not necessarily developmentally significant in themselves. Other kinds of ex- penditures were classified `as developmentally related on somewhat `tenuous grounds. That is to say, there did not seem to be any reason to classify them as either developmentally significant, or probably not developmentally significant, and they were not obviously complementary to the developmentally significant class of expenditures. Expenditures termed probably not developmentally significant were those for which the money could have been spent `in either of the first two classes with more developmental significance. A more complete explanation of activity and expenditure classifications is included in the detailed analysis of each. However, for the purposes of general perspective on the analysis to follow, the various categories of activity `and expenditure included in each of the three classifica- tions are presented below in Table 3.1. The "developmentally significant" class of expenditures will be considered in this chapter; the "developmentally related" `and probably not developmentally significant" classes will be considered in Chapters IV and V, respectively. 1Bateman, op. cit. 2Maurice W. Lee, MacroEconomics~ Fluctuations, Growt1~ and ~S!tabiUty (Homewooci, Illinois: Richard D. Irwin, 1963), p. 2!~5. 8 Above, Chapter I. PAGENO="0762" 3222 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 TABLE 3.1.-A ctivity and expenditvre -classifications for applicant and participant families Category Indicated by Developmentally significant expenditures and activities: Health Education Consurner'durables . * Autos Number of visits to physicians and dentistsin past year; number of days spent in hospitals in past 6 months. Percentage of school-age children enrolled in 1966; average number of days present in 1966. Average expenditures under developmentally significant upper limits in past year; average monthlyrepayment of debts for such expenditures. Average expenditures in. past year; average monthly re- Rousing payment of debts for such expenditures. Average expenditures for new housing in past year; aver- age monthly repayment of debts for such expenditures; average expenditures for housing improvements in past year; average monthly expenditure for housing improve- Savings and life insurance Clothing Food stamps Cleaning supplies Developmentally related expenditures: School lunches ments. Average savings; number of families buying life insurance in past year. Average inventories; average monthly expenditures. Average monthly cost. Average monthly expenditure. Do. School supplies Rent and utilities Do. Do. Meals eaten away from home Food expenditures less than the cost of Do. Do. food stamps. Transportation Personal expenses Medicine and drugs Trobably not developmentally significant expenditures: Coffee, tea, cocoa, and tobacco Candy and sweets Food expenditures in excess of food stamp. allotment. Do. Do. Do. . . Do. Do. Do. Consumer durables in excess of develop- mentally significant upper limits. Average monthly repayment of debts for such. COMPARING APPLICANTS AND PARTICIPANTS In order for a comparison of the expenditures and activities of the applicants and participants to be valid, the significant differences between the two groups, which could affect their behavior, should be explicit. Since only applicants who were judged by their respective caseworkers as likely candidates for the WE and `T program were included in the sample. one could reasonably, expect the two groups to be identical in terms of the qualifications for participation. Nonetheless there are degrees within the qualifications for the WE and T Program. For example, a participant must be a father of at least one child less than eighteen years of age, however he may have one child or ten children. Six such aspects: the number and ages of children; total and unpaved mileage to town; and age and educational attainment of the heads of the households were examined. Any -significant differences in any of these characteristics would indicate an element of selectivity in the administration of the WE and P Program. The mean number of children per family was 3.8 for the applicants and 4.1 for the participants~ This was not `a significant difference at the 95 per cent confidence level using the "t" test. Similarly, the. mean age for children was 8.7 years for the applicants and 8.1 years for the participants. This was'not a signifi- cant difference at the 95 per cent confidence level according to the t test performed. . . The mean total mileage to town for both applicants and participants was 9.05 miles; the mean number of unpaved miles to town was 2.0 for the applicants and 2.3 for the participants. The latter.difference was not significant using the "t" test. The mean number of years schooling completed was 5.1 for applicants, and 4.3 for participants at the beginning of the -WE and T Program, and 5.6 years at the time of the survey. This latter figure reflected the WE and T Program's require- ment that participant heads of households attend school had they not completed PAGENO="0763" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3223 eighth grade.4 The difference of the first two figures, 0.8, was not significant at the 95 per cent confidence level using the "t" test. The mean age for heads of households was 36.9 for the applicants, and 42.4 for the participants. The differ- ence, 6.5 years, was found to be significant at the 95 per cent confidence level using the "t" test; Thus it appeared that the WE and T Program was selective with respect to age, and tended to include the older heads of households. It could be conjectured that jobs would be more difficult to obtain for these older men. Moreover, this difference in age might have indicated that some of the public assistance criteria such as alleviation of poverty and deprivation may have spilled over into the administration of the WE and T Program whose slated objective was to provide opportunities for training and work experience. Thus this difference in age may result in an underperformance of the WE and T Program, and therefore in an understatement of its contributions, if analyzed cross-sectifinally, as was done in this study, and if indeed contributions are related to age. Table 3.2 lists the average cash and noncash sources of income for both appli- cants and participants for October 1966. The average monthly income from all sources was $242 for the participants and $146 for the applicants; therefore the participants received an average income 66 per cent greater than did the applicants. In Chapter `IV, the degree of association between such important participant chnracteristics as age, size of family, employment and earnings history, attitudes, and income and the varying levels of expen~Uthre among the developmentally significant classifications will be analyzed. DEVELOPMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURES AND ACTIVITIES introduction ~he general hypothesis was that expenditures for the developmentally signifi- cant categories of expenditure and activity would be proportionately greater for the participants than for the applicants. This meant that there would be a larger percentage of participants reporting such kinds of expenditures and activities, and that the mean expenditure per participant family would be higher, both absolutely and proportionately. Of course this implied that the income elasticity of demand would have been greater than one; arc income elasticities of demand were calculated for the entire class of developmentally significant expenditures as well -as for the two largest categories, consumer durables and automobiles. `TABLE 3.2.-Sources of average monthly income for applicants and participants, October 1966 Source Applicants Participants `Cash: W. E. & T. grant Earnings 0 $71.58 $208.38 3.43 Pensions 6.78 Other Subtotal Noncash: ` 5.58 1.62 83.94 ` `219.51 Free housing and food - Foodstamps Food production for home consumption - - - Subtotal 4.14 39.11 18. 47 * .81 15.38 ` 6. 43 61 ~2 22 6° Total - 145.66 242.13 There were basically two kinds of data utilized in this study, monthly and annual data on expenditures. Annual data was used for `testing the hypotheses regarding health and education. A combination of annual .and monthly data was used to test the hypotheses concerning: consumer durables; automobiles; hous- ing improvements; `and savings and life insurance. Monthly data were used to test hypotheses for clothing, food stamps, and cleaning supplies. The figures for the number of years of schooling completed are equivalent to what are commonly called grades for children; thus a participant who had completed eight years of schooling would have completed elementary school; 12 years would have completed high school, etc. PAGENO="0764" 3224 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Health Expenditures for health services were essentially nonmonetary for WE and~ T participants. lJndoubtedly there were some costs associated with utilizing free medical and dental services; however, from the description of the WE and T Program above, it was inferred that there were no opportunity costs, or income foregone therefrom. It was assumed that visits to the various kinds of health facilities would have a long-run developmental significance for the participants. This was predicted upon Weller's observation that impoverished people in Ap- palachia see little value in preventive medicine or dentistry. Therefore, if the participants made more visits to physicians and dentists than did applicants, it was assumed that they were at least expressing a desire to improve their health~ and that this would have a long-run developmental significance. The hypothesis was that the number of visits to physicians and dentists per participant family would increase as would the number of days spent in the hospitaL If this were not the case, then it would seem that there were other barriers to health care than merely the financial ones. Table 3.3 displays the data on family visits to physicians and dentists, and days spent in hospitals. Of the total of 51 applicant and 52 participant families reporting, 41 applicant and 47 participant families indicated that someone in the family had been to a physician in the previous 12 months. Similarly, 21 appli- cant and 36 participant families reported having some family member visit a dentist in the past year. Sixteen applicant and 27 participant families reported that some member had been admitted to a hospital in the past six months. A chi square analysis showed all these differences to be significant at the 5 per cent probability level. Thus it appeared that the participant families were visiting these various kinds of health facilities more than the applicant families. Despite Caudill's contention,5 that the quality of medicine is low in the Appalachian region, it seemed reasonable to assume that this increased contact with some *~orm of medicine or dentistry would have a desirable impact upon the future development of the recipients. There appeared to be some people who still would not go to a physician or dentist out of fear, habit or due to good health, but the number was less among the participants than among the applicants. Ten applicant and five participant families reported not having anyone visit a physician in the past year. Similarly,. 30 applicant families had not sent anyone to the dentist, while only 15 participant families had not. Thus twice as many applicant as participant families had not been to a dentist in the past year. TABLE 3.3.-Utilization of health services by applicants and participants, September 1965 to September 1966 Number of families reporting at least 1 visit Total number of calls Number of visits per family (days for hospital) Number of families reporting no visits APPLICANTS Physicians Dentists 41 21 16 47 36 fl 422 71 169 793 179 211 10.3 3.4 10.6 16.9 4.9 7.9 10 30 35 5. 15 25 Hospitals 1 (last 6 months) PARTICIPANTS Physicians . Dentists . Hospitals I (last 6 months) 1 Data for hospitals are for number of days spent in hospitals from April to September 1966 and do not Include outpatient services. The number of families who had no member of the household admitted to the hospital in the last six months was 35 in the applicant group and 25 in the participant group. Of course this was more difficult to analyze, for many families did not send anyone to a hospital in a six-month period. The number of days per stay in the hospital was higher (10.6 versus 7.9) among the applicants. This was probably due to the fact that the applicants were not hospitalized unless their condition was fairly serious, and also, several . applicants qualified for free mecli- 5Caudill, op~ aft., p. 295. . PAGENO="0765" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3225 -cal care from the Veteran's Administration. The nearest Veteran's Administra- tion Hospital was in Lexington, approximately 100 miles from most of the fam- ilies interviewed, and one man alone reported a visit of 60 days-more than one third of the total of 169 for the entire group. Three women in the applicant group reported giving birth at home, and two of them reported no prenatal care. Some reticence at appearing to be "taking advantage of the Program" was noted. One family reported going into debt $200 for a hospital bill rather than collecting such a large amount from the WE and T Program, and another family was payisig over $150 per year for hospitalization insurance in order not to have to appear as excessively exploiting medical care benefits. A sizable minority of both the applicants and participants seemed to be in fairly bad health, as is summarized in Table 3.4. At least five children and one head of a household were reported as epileptic. Four applicants and for partici- pants were receiving disability pensions from the Veterans' Administration for injuries sustained while in the Armed Forces. Three active cases of tuberculosis were reported, two by applicants and one by the wife of an applicant. Seven applicants and eight participants reported other forms of disabilities mostly back injuries and lung troubles and several hernias. It was not possible for the interviewers to rate the seriousness of these ailments. However, *the over-all picture is one of some fairly infirm individuals; 36 per cent of the applicant and 36 per cent of the participant heads of households were disabled in some sub- stantial manner. The hypothesis that participants would make more visits to the various health facilities was accepted, although as with education, the increased number of visits per family not as significant as the increased number of families who made visits. TABLE 3.4.-Summary of various infirmities reported by applicants and participants Infirmity Applicants Participants Epilepsy Tuberculosis Disability arising from injury sustained while in the Armed Forces. Back and lung troubles; hernias 2 children 2 heads of households; 1 wife 4 heads of households 7 heads of households 3 children; 1 head of house- hold. 4 heads of households. 8 heads of households. Educ~ition Expenditures for education were somewhat similar to those for health, for while the school system was ostensibly free, there were costs associated with attendance. Such costs would include: school supplies and lunches, clothing, and incidental expenses. As was the case with health expenditures, the WE and T Program's method of calculating a participant family's income needs served to eliminate opportunity costs for income foregone. Thus, one had to disregard much of the Schultzian reasoning concerning the costs of education.6 Jack Weller emphasized that many mountain families were lax in encouraging their children to attend school for a number of noneconomic reasons, such as fear of, and lack of experience with, education, per se.7 Heads of households of families participating in the WE and T Program, and in some cases, their wives, received six hours of instruction per week. Therefore, they would probably have increased contact with educational institutions. In addition, the regulations of the WE and T Program stipulated that all school-age children of participant families had to be enrolled in school. It was assumed in this study that increased school attendance would have a long-run developmental significance.8 The hy- pothesis was that both school enrollment and attendance would increase for the eligible children of the participant families. Attendance records for the calendar year 1966 were examined to test this. If the hypothesis were accepted, it prob- ably would suggest that the heads of the participant families were receiving sufficient income to cover the costs associated with attending school and therefore were complying with the WE and T Program's regulations. Otherwise, it would 6 Schultz, The Economic Value of Education, p. 27. Weller, op. cit., p. 111. 8 Harry Schwartweller and James S. Brown stated that education was a major inte- grating link between Eastern Kentucky and the mainstream of American society in "Edu- cation as a Cultural Bridge between Eastern Kentucky and the Great Society," Rurai Sociology, LIV (December 1962), p. 373. PAGENO="0766" 3226 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 appear that income levels were still insufficient to cover the costs of education, that fear of education was still a real issue, or that education was not valued or recognized as a route for economic improvement. The expenditures for clothing, school supplies and lunches are discussed below. The data on school enrollment and attendance are presented in Tabie 3.5. Since the regulations of the WE and T Program stipulate that participant families have to enroll all school-age children, it was not suprising that the number of children enrolled for the participant families. 96.8 per cent, was indeed higher than for the applicant families, 84.7 per cent. Chi square analysis showed this to be a significant difference at the 5 per cent probability level. Only four children of participant families were not enrolled, and they were older children, aged 14 to 16, and had only completed three or four years of schooling. It seemed that there would have been great social pressures placed upon these children were they forced to enroll at the appropriate grade level. In the absence of any special remedial programs for these older but undereducated students, the future for their education and subsequent employment appears bleak indeed. The children of the applicants who were not enrolled were not quite as old, aged 12 to 16, but the same problem would exist for them, and on a significantly greater scale. TABLE 3.5.-School enrollment and attendance data for applicants and participants, calendar year 1966 Applicants Participants Number Percentage of total Number Percentage of total Enrollment: Enrolled Not enrolled Total Attendance: Number of school days Number of days absent 105 19 84. 7 18.3 121 4 96.8 3.2 124 16, 667 1,101 100.0 6.6 125 19,380 988 100.0 5.1 The difference in the rate of absenteeism, 6.6 percent for the applicant children, and 5.1 percent for the participant children was significant using the "t' test. However, in a typical school year of 170 days, the difference 1.5 percent, would be about tw-o days, and it seems improbable that two days would make a signifi- cant difference pedagogically. While it does indicate that the children of the WE and T participants attend school significantly more statistically than the chil- dren of applicants, whether the difference is significant pedagogically is another matter. The small difference could suggest that the truancy laws were being fairly rigorously enforced for all enrolled students. This would have been a rea- sonable thing for local education administrators to do in order to minimize losses of state aid due to absences. This aid is allocated on the basis of average daily attendance, but capital outlays have to be made on the J~asis of enrollments. Thus a dichotomous situation may have existed; students who were enrolled may have been vigorously encouraged to attend while students who were not en- rolled may not have been strongly encouraged to enroll in order to keep the absentee rate low. The fact that attendance for the children of the applicant families was not greatly different from that of the participant families seemed to indicate that the costs associated with attending schoool were not very great. Additionally, appli- cants for the WE and T Program might have been trying to make a good impres- sion upon local officials in order not to hurt their chances of admission to the WE and T Program. The hypothesis that school attendance would increase was accepted, due to both increased enrollment and attendance. How-ever, the peda- gogically and developmentally significant effect is predominantly one of in- creased enrollment. Consum or Dura bios Consumer durables for this study included: television sets; refrigerators and freezers; stoves: washing machines: radios and phonographs; sewing machines: and all kinds of furniture and household furnishings. The hypothesis was that participants w-ould spend more than applicants for consumer durables and that the difference w-ould be relatively greater than the difference iii income. No hypotheses were made for the different kinds of durables, how-ever, for it was PAGENO="0767" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 3227 anticipated that the data would be insufficient to note significant differences among the various kinds. Therefore the total purchases for consumer durables of all kinds were hypothesized to increase,, and the mean expenditure for partic- ipants was hypothesized to be higher than for applicants and proportionately greater than the income difference. Data for the preceding twelve months were used to test this hypothesis. Additionally, all monthly payments for debts for purchases of consumer durables were included in an analysis of expenditures by applicants and participants for the month of October 1966. While, in general, these expenditures for consumer durables were considered developmentally significant, a developmentally significant upper limit was placed upon several kinds of durables. That is, while the acquisition of a particular durable was considered as developmentally significant, expenditures in excess of an upper price limit were not considered as contributing to the future develop- ment of the family making the purchase. Therefore, a developmentally significant upper limit was set for each of several kinds of consumer durables, based upon an assessment of the prevailing prices (including interest charges for credit sales) in three counties where this study was undertaken. These upper limits represented an attempt to set certain functional minimal requirements for various consumer durai~les, and to exclude any frivolous or unnecessary payments beyond this level. The amounts spent in excess of these developmentally significant upper limits was subtracted from the total amount spent for consumer durables by both applicants and participants in order to test the hypothesis that the participants' mean expenditure would be higher than the applicants' mean expenditures for consumer durables. This excess was included as a "probably not developmentally significant" expenditure in the analysis of monthly expenditures. The various kinds of consumer durables, and the developmentally significant upper limits which were established are discussed below. Table 3.6 displays the data on consumer durable inventories at the time of the survey as well as purchases in the preceding year. Table 3.7 presents the total and mean prices paid, including debt service charges, and the total indebted- ness and monthly payment obligations for various kinds of consumer durables. TABLE 3.6.-Consumer durables inventories and purchases-Data for applicants and participants Item Applicants Participants Total reporting 36 36 Television: Didn't own1 25 10 Own 11 26 Purchased in past year 2 6 13 Spent over $200 1 1 Refrigerator: Didn't own 10 0 Own 26 36 Purchased in past year 2 15 Spent over $200. 0 4 Freezers: Didn't own 35 32 Own 1 4 Purchased in past year 0 3 Spent over $200 0 1 Washing machines: Didn'town 16 7 Own 20 29 Purchased in pastyear 0 7 Spentover$203 0 1 Radio: Didn'town 2 2 Purchased in past year 0 2 Phonograph: Didn't own 36 32 Own 0 4 Purchased in past year . 0 2 Sewing machines: Didn'town 30 26 Own 6 10 Purchased in past year 0 2 Stoves: Purchases in past year_~ 8 23 Spent over $180 0 0 I Inventory as of Oct. 1, 1966. 2 Number of purchases in previous year. PAGENO="0768" 3228 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 There were insufficient data for each kind of consumer durable to use either chi square or Student's "t" tests extensively. However, after brief examination of the expenditures upon each of the various hinds of consumer durables, the total and mean expenditures by both applicants and particpants were analyzed in the summary which follows: Television Sets The purchase of a television set was viewed as a developmentally significant expenditure in this study. Although it is elusive and difficult to measure the impact of television viewing upon members of impoverished families is probably beneficial in the long run. Despite some "intellectual's" concern over the "waste- land" panorama, it is maintained herein that television viewing could help mitigate some of the cultural barriers to economic development which Messrs. Weller and Caudill, in particular, have described as characterizing the impover- ished in Appalachia. If one accepts Weller or Harrington's contention that low- income people are not part of the cultural mainstream of America, then one of the easiest and most available ways of bringing a vibrant part of the mainstream of American Society into Appalachian homes would appear to be via television receivers. For an isolated family, a television offers the opportunity to view what is happening in other parts of the Commonwealth, the Nation, and even, the world. It offers a basis of communication with members of the middle class, and at the minimum, it affords the opportunity to hear noncolloquial English pronuncia- tion and construction. Ideally perhaps, it would show some of the advantages of the nontraditional life outside the mountains, and stimulate the desire to incorpor- ate the better aspects thereof. TABLE 3.7.-Summary of consumer durables expenditures-Data for applicants and participants Durable Total prices paid Mean price paid by those Total indebted- purchasing ness Total over the Payments per develop- month mentally signifi- cant upper limit Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Television $1, 983 Refrigerator 90 Washing machine~ 0 Stoves 811 Others 393 Furniture: Living room -- 0 Kitchen 0 Bedroom 93 Miscellaneous_.j 500 Total 2,870 $1,480 2,142 1, 133 2, 103 447 1, 316 646 1, 150 817 1L234 $164 $114 45 126 0 162 (1) (1) (~) (`) 0 146 0 72 93 1. 196 (1) (~) (bf(~) $542 25 0 590 393 0 0 0 486 2,036 $703 1,035 470 836 88 592 82 566 120 ~492 $63 10 0 15 0 0 0 0 26 114 $64 128 66 105 32 47 16 77 26 561 $150 0 0 0 (1) 0 0 0 (1) 150~ $150 298 10 139 (1) 308 86 125 (1) ~116 1 Not available. The developmentally significant upper limit was $200 which was a fair price for a new portable model television set capable of good reception in the mountains. Thus color television and the larger console models with prices over $200 were not considered any more developmentally significant than less expensive portable models. Twenty-six participant families reported owning television sets at the time of the survey while only 11 applicant families did: 13 of the participants and six of the applicants had purchased television sets in the previous 12 months. Only one applicant and one participant spent more than the arbitrary $200 developmentally significant upper limit. The mean price paid was $114 by participants and $104 by applicants. Thus, while more than twice as many participants as applicants had purchased television sets, their purchases seemed to have been more "prudent" investments in used or lower priced television sets than the applicants. "Prudent" in this context could have meant either cautious and deliberate expenditures, that is, rational behavior, or purchases made with the anticipation of possible loss of WE and T Program benefits, that is, minimizing future liabilities. PAGENO="0769" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3229 * Ref rigerators and Freezers Perhaps the acquisition of a refrigerator or a freezer is easier to justify eco- nomically than a television set, for its benefits are easier to see and measure. The purchase of a fairly modern and capacious refrigerator or freezer could allow an isolated family to buy perishable foods in town at lower prices and less frequent intervals, and thus save on food expenditures and transportation, if sufficiently large purchases were made. It would also allow for the easy and tasty preservation of home produced.foods. An upper limit of $200 was established for both refrigerators and freezers. All of the participants reported owning a refrigerator while 10 of the appli- cants did not. Several, 15, of the participants had purchased a refrigerator in the past year, while only two of the applicants had. The participants paid an average price of $126 and the applicants $45. These low averages represent the purchase of used refrigerators: both of the applicants and nine of the participants pur- chased used refrigerators. Four of the participants exceeded the $200 upper limit. Not many applicants or participants had freezers; only one applicant and four participajits reported owning freezers. Three of the participants had purchased freezers in the past year, and one of the freezers exceeded the $200 upper limit. Washing Machines A washing machine could facilitate the maintenance of a neat and clean appear- ance, and would probably not wear out clothing as readily as hand washing. Thus expenditures on washing machines were regarded as developmentally significant up to $200, the upper limit placed upon such purchases. Twenty applicants and 29 participants reported owning washing maciiines. None of the applicants had purchased a washing machine in the past year while seven of the participants had; one of these was in excess of the $200 developmen- tally significant upper limit. Cooking and Heating Stoves Expenditures for heating stoves were considered developmentally significant for even if the expenditures were for coal stoves, the participant's home would at least have been more comfortable. Even more significant in terms of the future effect upon health would have been the replacement of a coal stove with an automatically regulated system of heating. Similarly with cooking stoves, a new wood burning stove would have been more efficient than an older one, but a gas or electric cooking stove would have been even more efficient. Thus, any kind of expenditure for heating stoves was considered as developmentally significant, for the variety of alternative purchases was so great. However, $180 was estimated as the developmentally significant upper limit for cooking stoves. Sewing Machines The purchase of a sewing machine was regarded as a developmentally signifi- cant expenditure, for the potential savings attainable by sewing clothing for a family were judged to be considerable. No upper limit was placed on sewing machines, for the variety of available models was too great. Six applicants, and 10 participants reported owning sewing machines. None of the applicants and two of the participants had purchased them in the previous twelve months. R~adios and Phonographs Almost everybody reported owning a table or console radio; only two applicants and two participants did not. Two participant families had purchased radios i,n the past twelve months. Conversely, not many people reported having a phono- graph; one of the applicants and only four of the participants. Two of these four phonographs had been purchased in the past twelve months. Radios and phonographs were judged to be quite similar to television sets in terms of bringing contemporary American culture to impoverished Appalachian families. There was no upper limit placed on such purchases. Furniture and Home Fnrnisltings Cyrus Johnson found that among families with a median size of six, the median number of dining room or kitchen chairs was four, and he further states, "The median number of beds per family is three, which presents a possibly even more 80-084 0-67-pt. 4-49 PAGENO="0770" 3230 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 serious problem."" Thus it is apparent that there is a good chance that families may not be able to eat together, but most probably will have to sleep together. Since furniture is not typically the kind of item one trades in or replaces, ~ut rather accumulates, it seems likely that expenditures for both kitchen and bed- room furniture čould have a longer-run developmental significance. The upper limit for a kitchen set, consisting of a table and four chairs is $100 while it is $150 for a bedroom suite. Living room furniture is perhaps not as easy to justify, but from the point of view of improving the comfort and morale of the home, living room furniture was considered developmentally significant. The upper limit is $200 for a couch and chair. Home furnishings included rugs, curtains, and those incidentals necessary to make a house more liveable. No upper limits were set, and any expenditure on such was regarded as developmentally significant. Table 3.8 presents the data on the num,ber of families purchasing various kinds of furniture, and the number of those who exceeded the developmentally signifi- cant upper limits. TABLE 3.8.-Expenditures on various kinds of furniture by applicants and participants Kind of furniture Applicants Participants Total reporting Living room: Purchased in the previous 12 months Expended more than $200 Kitchen: 36 0 0 36 9 2 Purchased In the last 12 months 0 9 Expended more than $100 Bedroom: 0 2 Purchased in the previous 12 months Expended more than $150 Miscellaneous: Purchased in the previous 12 months 1 0 2 12 1 16 The applicant families reported very little expenditure on furniture. Only one reported buying a bedroom suite while two others reported purchases of mis- cellaneous items for the entire house. The total of the expenditures reported was only $593. However, participants reported total expenditures for furniture of $3,824. Nine participant families reported purchasing living room suites, and two were in excess of the $200 upper limit. Nine participant families purchased kitchen sets, consisting of a table and four chairs, and two of these were in excess of the adjudicated $100 upper limit. Twelve participants reported buying bedroom suites, and only one was over the $150 upper limits. Sixteen participants reported ~uying some kind of miscellaneous item of furniture, usually rugs or a eabinet. Twenty-four of the participant families reported purchases of either a bed- room or living room suite, or a kitchen set. Seven additional participant families reported buying at least some miscellaneous furniture. Thus, 31 of the participants reported buying some furniture while only three applicants did. The author observed that families usually did not trade in old furniture, and that this new furniture was probably added to the low inventory levels which were cited pre- viously. Therefore, these expenditures on furniture neither appeared frivolous nor impulsive. In fact, they seemed most developmentally significant, for the direct increment in the family furniture inventory would probably improve upon the situation where the mountain family in the poverty class was forced to sleep together, but could not sit down and eat together.1° Although data are not available with which to test this proposition, the author's observations confirm the impres- sion that this was the case for many of the families applying for the WE anti T Program, and was presumably true for the participants prior to their inclusion in the program. "Johnson, op. cit., p. 9. 10Johnson, op. cit., p. 9. PAGENO="0771" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3231 summary of Ecvpe,ufitureg for Consumer Dwrables The data were summarized above in Table 3.7. The total expenditures for con- sumer dura~bles minus the amounts spent in excess of the developmentally signifi- cant upper limits were $10,118 for participants and $2,720 for applicants. The mean expenditures were $281 for participants and $16 for applicants. While all 36 of the participants reported some kind of expenditure for consumer durables, only 29 of the applicants did. The hypothesis that participants would spend more than applicants was accepted, for a "t" test showed that the difference of the mean expenditures for consumer durables was indeed significant at the 95 per cent confidence level. Moreover, the income eleasticity of demand was 2.33 for participants, and this reflected more than proportional income differential pur- chasing of consumer durables. Additionally, of the $10,118 total expenditures below the developmentally signifi- cant upper limits, the participants owed only $4,492, or about 45 per cent of this adjusted total. The total monthly repayment of this indebtedness was $561, or about $16 per month. Thus, it appeared that the participants, as a group, were fairly cautious consumers who were not extending their inde,btedness over a period of time greater than the useful life of the items they were purchasing, in the case of consumer durables. Automobiles In the Appalachian region, an impoverished family living more than walking distance from town is almost completely dependent upon private transportation. Public transportation, besides the ubiquitous school bus, is virtually nonexistent; perhaps this is explained by the relatively great distances and sparsely located population. Therefore a man seeking employment would be quite dependent upon the opportunities only in his own local area were he not to own an automobile. Moreover, this man and his family would be entirely dependent upon the local country store, which is typically a very expensive source of groceries, for all purchases. Thus the case can be made for considering a car as a developmentally significant expenditure. In the absence of public transportation, and without dependable transporta- tion arrangements with other individuals, a man would have to own a car not only to look for work, but in order to take advantage of employment opportuni- ties in areas outside his immediate community. Even to apply for pensions, wel- fare and food stamps, or for participation in the WE and T Program, a man must go to town, and usually more than once a month in order to comply with bureau- cratic rulings. Economically, a family could probably get more for its dollar by purchasing food and consumer durables in town rather than locally. Perhaps it seems anomalous that the poor should have to have cars; this is part of the paradox of poverty in America, for even the Joads in The Grapes of Wrath drove their old Hudson to California. No upper limits were placed upon automobile purchases, for the market was too complex, and the variability of quality too great. The hypothesis was that the number of participants buying automobiles would be greater than the num- ber of applicants making such purchases, and that the average price paid by participants would be higher, also. Data for the previous year were utilized to test this. Monthly payments for automobiles were included in the analysis of expenditures for the month of October. Table 3.9 summarized the data on automobile ownership, purchases, indebted- ness, and monthly payments. Eleven applicants and 30 participants reported purchases of autos in the 12 months preceding the survey; at the time of the sur- vey, 20 applicants and 33 participants owned cars. All automobile purchases were used, varying in age from fairly new pick-up trucks to a few, rare vintage models. Prices varied from $1,500 to $25, respectively. The applicants' mean price paid was $320, and the participants' $614. This difference, $287, was significant at the 95 per cent confidence level using the "t" test, and therefore the hypothesis that the participants would spend more was accepted. The income elasticity for participants was 2.75, and this reflected an increase in purchases even greater than the income differential between applicants and participants. The participants incurred more indebtedness for auto purchases than did the applicants. At the time of the survey, 22 participants reported an average indebt- PAGENO="0772" 3232 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 edness of $513 while only eight applicants reported an average indebtedness of $380. The total monthly payments for participants were $881, and $140 for applicants, and the average monthly payment for all participants was therefore $24, while it was only $4 for applicants. - TABLE 3.9.-Applicant and participant automobile ownership, purchases, indebtedness and monthly payments Applicants Participants Total reporting Reported now owning a car Reported owning a car Purchased in past year -36 16 20 11 $3, 520 320 3,044 380 140 13 36 3 33 30 $18,438 614 11,306 513 881 29 Total price paid Average price paid1 Totalindebtedness Average indebtedness Payments per month 2 Average payments per month I All averages are based on those reporting purchases, in debt, or making payments. 2 2 applicants and 2 participants reported a total of $250 indebtedness which they were going to repay at the end of the year, and 1 applicant reported no regular repayment schedule. Housing Table 3.10 shows that 11 applicants and 19 participants owned their homes at the time of this survey. Only one applicant and five participants had purchased homes in the previous year. Thus before the inclusion of the participants in the program, there were 10 applicants and 14 participants owning homes; this differ- ence might be understandable in terms of the difference in ages between the two groups, or could have resulted by chance in sampling. People who rent homes are usually not expected to maintain them, and this was the general rule among the families surveyed. However, since rents are so low-, about $17 per month for the participants, the landlords did not make many im- provements in the rented houses, nor even maintain them very well. As indicated in Table 3.10, 14 applicants and 14 participants rented their homes, and 11 ap- plicants and three participants received their homes rent free. The author ob- served that many of the applicants not paying rent at the time of the survey intended to pay rent should they obtain some additional income. That is, the land- lords were giving them free rent, but there was an understanding that if they obtained employment or entered the WE and T Program, they would remain in the house, but pay rent. Once again, as with school lunches and supplies, there were informal institutional arrangements which served to diminish the change in participant's real income when he entered the WE and T Program. TABLE 3.10.-Applicant and participant homeownership, rental arrangement, and improvements Applicants Participants Ownership: Own presentresidence (number) 11 19 Total value owned residences $12, 300 $19,950 Average value I $1, 118 $1, 050 Number purchased in past year 1 5 Total value $500 $4, 950 Average value Total indebtedness $60 $2, 240 Average indebtedness $60 $448 Rental: Rent (number) 14 14 - Average rent per month $14.60 $16.90 Rent free (number) 11 3 Home improvements: Number doing none 34 16 Number doing some 2 20 Total value $270 $2, 642 Average value $135 $132 lAll average values are for only those owning, purchasing, renting, or making some improvements, respectively. PAGENO="0773" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3233 Improvements in housing consisted of new roofs, walls, rooms, porches, and general painting, maintenance, and repair. Such improvements could make a house warmer in the winter, and cleaner and more comfortable generally. There- fore, such improvements were considered as developmentally significant. No upper limits were utilized, for the variability of possible improvements was too great. The hypothesis was that more participants than applicants would make proportionately more improvements on their houses. Monthly expenditures for housing improvements were included in the analysis of expenditures for Octo- ber 1966. As has been indicated above, 19 participants owned houses at the time of this. survey. All 19 participants, plus another one who was getting his house free from his family, made some form of improvement in their homes in the 12 months preceding this survey. The total expenditure was $2,642, and the average for those making improvements was $132. The mean expenditure for the entire participant group was $73. Only two applicants reported a total of $270 for home improvements in the 12 months preceding this survey, and the mean ex- penditure for the applicant group was only $8. The applicants reported a total of $25.52, or an average of $.70 per family in October 1966, while the partici- pants reported a total of $196.56, or an average of $5.46 per family for home improvements. Thus, the hypothesis that more participants than applicants would make home improvements was accepted. The five participants who purchased homes paid a total of $4,950, or an average of $990 per home." Only one applicant reported buying a home; it cost $500. The average monthly repayments for the indebtedness of these purchases, $0 for the applicants and $2.46 for the participants, are included in the analysis. of monthly expenditures. Savings and Life Insurance As the description of the WE and T Program in Appendix I indicates, there was an administratively `determined upper limit of $1,000 for savings of WE and T participants. It was hypothesized in this study th'at some of the WE and T participants would save some of their income. `Savings were classified as develop- -mentally significant, for they represented an attempt by impoverished people to develop contingency funds. However, `at the low levels `of income which the par- ticipants received, and if the hypotheses of this study were correct and the pro- pen~ity to consume was high, it seemed reasonable to hypothesize that few of the participants would save and their savings would be little. That was the hypothesis. Data on the total savings and rate of savings per month by appli- cants and participants were `analyzed. Life insurance premiums were similarly classified as `developmentally signifi- cant, for they represented an attempt to care for a family in an emergency situa- tion. It could also have indicated that life insurance salesmen were actively con'tacting the consumers. The hypothesis was that the number of participants buying life `insurance policies in that past year would be more than the number of applicants. Data on the number of life insurance policies contracted in the pre- ceding year was used to test the hypothesis. As indicated in Table 3.11 below, only one applicant family reported any sav- ings, and its total savings was $100 which was deposited in a savings account. Ten participants reported having total savings of $1,435, or an average of $143.50 for those with savings. Two of the participants had bank accounts: one had a checking and one had a savings account. The average monthly rate of savings was reported as a'bout $3 per month per participant family, and nothing by applicants. The one applicant with savings had not saved anything in the previous year. 11 The participants averaged $990 expenditure for a house. If this were capitalized by dividing the prevailing interest rate, say 12 per cent, into the return from the investment, rent at $15 per month or $180 per year, the result would be $1,500. Therefore, the purchase of a house appears to be a good Investment. PAGENO="0774" 3234 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 TABLE 3.11.-Total and average savings by participants and applicants Applicants Participants Total reporting Reported savings Savings or checking account Total savings Average saving per month 1 1 $100 0 36 10 2 $1,435 3 The data on life insurance are presented in Table 3.12 below. Only two appli- cants and seven participants had any form of life insurance in effect at the time of this survey. Four of the participants had purchased life insurance in the last year while none of the applicants had. Total monthly premiums were $12 for applicants and $28 for participants. TABLE 3.12.-Life insurance coverage and policies purchased in previous year by participants and applicants Applicants Participants Number reporting Did not own anylifeinsurance Didownalifeinsurancepolicy Purchasedinlastyear Total premiums per month 36 34 2 0 36 29 7 4 $12 $28 The hypothesis that there would be more WE and T participants with some form of savings was accepted as was the hypothesis that participants would have bought more life insurance policies in the past year. Ulothing As has been indicated, expenditures for clothing for children in school are one of the costs associated with educating children. Thus the purchases of children's school clothing was considered as developmentally significant. Similarly, the heads of households in the WE and T Program must attend weekly education and training classes, in addition to working on work experience projects. Appropriate clothing for attending such activities would therefore be properly regarded as developmentally significant. The wives' expenditures on clothing would be neces- sary in order to make a good appearance, or at least an acceptable one, to go to town, to the doctor or dentist, or to go shopping. Thus wives' expenditures on clothing were classified as developmentally significant. No upper limits were established for items of clothing, for the data revealed that there were no extreme instances which could have been regarded as at, or near, the range of frivolity (fur coats, great numbers of dress-up shoes, etc.). The hypothesis was that expenditures for clothing for all members of partici- pant families would be absolutely greater than such expenditures by applicants families, and proportionately greater than the income differential between the two groups. Table 3.13 presents the data on various kinds of clothing reported by husbands, wives, and school-age children. All men in both groups reported having at least one change of work clothes, and on the average, the participants reported owning at least one more change than the applicants. Five participants, however, reported not owning a winter coat as did nine applicants. Thirty applicants and 21 participants reported not having a "dress-up" suit or sports coat and trousers combination. This is understandable, for many of the men interviewed reported that they just couldn't bear the thought of wearing a coat and tie. It's difficult to judge whether or not a man should wear a suit when applying for a semi-skilled job. There could exist among supervisors a reluctance to hire anyone dressed too well. On the other hand, it might well make a good impression to wear a conventional suit. All women reported owning at least several everyday dresses, but the women in the WE and T Program reported an average ~of eight such dresses as compared to five for women in the applicant group. Four women in each group indicated not having any "Sunday" dresses, but the participant women indicated an average of 4.1 Sunday dresses as opposed to 2.3 for the w-omen in the applicant group. Many of the women respondents indicated that they were concentrating their purchases on clothing for their children. PAGENO="0775" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3235 TABLE 3.13.-Applicant and participant family member's clothing inventory, October 1966 Number reporting none Number reporting at least 1 Total number reporting Average number of - items reported Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Men: Winter coat Changes of work clothing Dressup suits..... Women: Everyday dresses Sunday dresses... School age girls: School outfits~_ School shoes School age boys: School shirts School pants School shoes 9 0 30 0 4 2 2 0 0 2 5 0 21 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 27 36 6 34 30 54 54 48 48 46 31 36 15 35 31 41 41 49 49 49 36 36 36 34 34 56 56 . 48 48 48 36 36 36 35 35 41 41 49 49 49 0. 9 3. 0 . 2 . 5. 1 2. 3 5. 3 1.2 3.0 2. 5 1. 1 1. 5 4. 2 . 9 8. 1 4. 1 8. 0 1. 7 5. 4 4. 5 1. 3 School-age girls in the participant group were reported, usually by their mothers, as having about eight school outfits on the average, and 1.7 pairs of shoes which they could wear to school. The applicant families' school-age girls indicated fewer school outfits, on the average, 5.3, and 1.2 pairs of sdhool shoes. One appli- cant family, however, reported that two of its girls did not have either clothes or shoes to wear `to school. A~1l school-age boys of participant families were reported as having at least one pair of `school ~hoes as well as at least two shirts and pairs of trousers which could be worn to school. One applicant family reporfed that `two of its boys had neither clothes nor shoes to wear to school. The school~age boys of participant families reported greater quantities .of school clothing than those of applicant families; they averaged 5.4 versus 3.0 shirts; 4.5 versus 2.5 trousers; and 1.3 versus 1.1 pairs of shoes, respectively. It is impossible to take any one item of clothing and make a definitive case for or against its potential clevelopmtrntal significance. The over-all picture, however, of the clothing possessions for both groups gave the strong impression that the participant families had more kinds of basic clothing needed to go to school, work and town. At least a few children could not attend school for a lack of clothing, but this seems to be a minor explanation of the 15 per cent of the applicant children not enrolled in school. TABLE 3.14.-Clothing expenditures of applicant and participant families, October 1966 Father Mother ` Children All family members combined Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Appli- cants Partici- pants Total families reporting Number of families reporting some expenditure Total expenditures Average of those reporting some expenditure Average expenditure for entire group_ 36 7 $81 11. 50 2. 25 36 28 $238 8. 50 6. 62 36 7 $37 5.30 1. 03 36 32 $212 6. 60 5. 89 36 16 $232 14. 50 6. 44 36 32 $482 13. 80 13. 39 , 36 18 $350 (1) 9. 72 36 36 , $932 (1) ~5. 90 `Not available. Table 3.14 shows the bxpenditures in the month of October for both groups for clothing. October was a month when school had begun and winter was approach- ing; therefore, clothing purchases would not have been at a minimum. All 36 of the participant families reported buying some clothing; 28 bought men's clothing: 32 bought women's `Clothing and 35 bought some children's clothing. Only 18 of PAGENO="0776" 3236 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the applicant families reported any clothing purchases: 7 for both men and women's clothing, and 16 reported purchases of children's clothing. Actually there was not a great deal of difference between the average expenditures of those applicants and participants who reported any kind of expenditure. How- ever, all of the participants reported some kind of expenditure, while only 18, or one-half of the applicants reported some kind of expenditure. Thus, the mean expenditure for all kinds of clothing by participants was approximately $26, while it was only about $10 for applicants. The hypothesis that participants would spend more than applicants for clothing was therefore accepted, for the partici- pants spent more than 250 per cent for clothing than did the applicants. The income differential was only 416 per cent. Food Stamps While considerably less than optimum nutritive intake level probably char- acterized impoverished families, it has been shown that merely increasing the income level has little effect upon the nutritive value of food consumption.12 However, the USDA study of the Pilot Food Stamp Program indicated that nutritive levels for families buying food stamps did, indeed, increase.'3 Therefore, it was reasoned in this study that receiving a higher, regular income by virtue of participation in the WE and T Program would not necessarily mean that a family would improve the nutritive level of its diet. On the other hand, buying food stamps, has the effect of increasing real income, and probably indicates an improvement in the nutritive level of the family also. There were no data available on the ex1~ent of participation in the Food Stamp Program by WE and P participants. However, the WE and P Program en- couraged participants to buy food stamps. Thus a comparison of food stamp purchase by applicants and participants was made.'4 The hypothesis was that more participants than applicants would buy food stamps. The purchase of food stamps was classified as a developmentally significant expenditure, for it appeared that the family buying food stamps would increase both its real income and nutritWe level. However, any expenditures beyond the value of the food stamps received by families buying food stamps was classified as "probably not developmentally significant." For families not buying food stamps, the expendi- tures on food up to the cost of food stamps (had they bought them) were classified as "developmentally related" expenditures, and any expenditures beyond the cost of food stamps w'ere classified as "probably not developmentally significant." TABLu 3.15.-Food stamp expenditures by applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Total reporting Numberwhopurchasedfoodstamps Number who did not purchase food stamps Totalpald in cash Average Total received in food stamps Average 36 28 8 $639 $23 $2,047 $73 36 20 16 $1,679 $80 $2, 248 $107 Incremental income in food stamps Average $1,408 $50 $569 $27 I All averages were based only on those buying food stamps. Table 3.15 displays the information on participation in the Pilot Food Stamp Program. As indicated, 28 applicants and 20 participants reported buying food stamps. Thus the hypothesis that more WE and P participants would buy food stamps was rejected. However chi-square analysis revealed that, at the 5 percent probability level, the reverse hypothesis, that less WE and T participants buy food stamps, could not be accepted. Thus while rejecting the initial hypothesis, its converse was not accepted. There appeared to be no real difference. The reason most often given to interviewers for why participants do not buy food stamps is that they do not spend "that much" on food. Some confusion ap- peared to exist; for example, a family of six receiving a monthly grant of $200 from WE and T would have had to pay $68 in cash for $98 in food stamps. The `~ Brode, bc. cit. `-~ USDA, bc. cit. `4For a brief discussion of the Food Stamp Program, see Appendix II. PAGENO="0777" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3237 family would have therefore received an incremental income in food stamps of $30, and the relevant consideration would be whether or not the family spent $68 on food in a month. However, most of the respondents not buying food stamps said that they did not spend $98 (the "that much" to which they referred) on food, and therefore did not pay the $68 (the "that much" which is relevant) for food stamps. From a purely economic point of view, such behavior is not rational and does not serve to maximize their incomes. If a family spent as little as $68 on food per month, it would have been rational to buy the food stamps and utilize them the next month, and not buy food stamps the following month. However, it seemed that most respondents did not fully comprehend the workings of the Food Stamp Program. This is a serious problem with the Food Stamp Program, and has been the subject of much recent contro- versy.15 Moreover, not buying food stamps seemed to depend upon local adminis- tration of the program, for of the eight applicants and 16 participants not buying food stamps, the great majority, six applicants and 1~ participants, lived in one of the three counties wherein this study was conducted. The county was Clay. Cleaning Supplies Laundry and dish detergents, face soap, floor wax, and other such items were included in this category. Cleaning supplies were probably a minor item in the total monthly budgets of applicant and participant families; however, since they could not be purchased with food stamps, they could represent a more than pro- portional amount of family's cash expenditures. It was reasoned that expenditures on cleaning supplies indicated a desire to improve both the appearance and clean- liness of homes and family members, and therefore such expenditures were properly regarded as developmentally significant. The hypothesis was that partic- ipants would spend slightly more on the average than applicants; data on monthly expenditures were used to test this. Thirty-one applicants and 36 participants reported purchases of cleaning sup- plies in October; the total expenditures were $116 and $128, and the average ex- penditures were $3.22 and $3.56, respectively. Thus it appeared that the difference, if any, in expenditures for cleaning supplies was in the number of families report- ing, so there seemed to be no significance which can be attached to this item of expenditure. SUMMARY The participants appeared to be a group of rather thrifty individuals. They took advantage of the free health services offered them, and they sent a significantly higher percentage of their children to school a significantly greater percentage of the time. The income elasticity of demand for parth~ipants for consumer dura- bles was 2.33. Less than 10 percent of their total expenditures for consumer dura- bles was in excess of the adjudged developmentally significant upper limits, and they seemed to buy, usually, used, rather than new, television sets or appliances. The participants bought a great deal more furniture than did the applicants. The Income elasticity of demand for participants for cars was 2.75. While neither developmentally significant limits were placed nor a rating of quality possible, the possession of an automibile probably enabled the participant families to utilize health services, to go shopping in the lower-priced stores in town, and in general, to break down the traditional isolation of the Appalachian family. Table 3.16 depicts the data on the average monthly expenditures by applicants and participants for the various developmentally significant categories. The par- ticipants' average expenditure in October 1966 for the entire class of develop- mentally significant expenditures was $123.50 versus $38.51 by the applicants. The participants thus spent 51 percent of their monthly income ($242 from Table 3.2) for the developmentally significant categories of expenditure while the ap- plicants spent only 26 percent. A "t" test showed that both of these differences were significant at the 95 percent confidence level, and therefore the hypothesis that the participants would spend more than the applicants, both absolutely and proportionately, was accepted. The participants' income elasticity of demand for the total average expenditures for the developmentally significant categories was 2.10, and this reinforced the impression of the participant group as one that was expending most of its current income for items which were properly considered as investments in themselves and their children. 15 Louisville Courier Journal, March 13, 1967, Editorial entitled, "Difficulties with Food Stamps Suggest a Fresh Approach," p. 8. PAGENO="0778" 3238 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 TABLE 3.16.-Average 1 developmentally significant expenditures by applicants and participants by category, October 1966 Category Applicants Participants Consumer durables, payments Automobiles, payments Housing: Payments for purchases Improvements Savings and life insurance Clothing Food stamps Cleaning supplies Total $2.90 3.89 0 .70 .33 9.72 17.75 3.22 $14.03 24.47 2.84 5.46 3.51 25.90 43.73 3.56 38.51 123. 50 `These averages are for the entire groups of 36 applicants and 36 participants. CHAPTER IV.-DEVELOPMENTALLY RELATED EXPENDITURES INTRODUCTION Developmentally related expenditures included: school lunches; school sup- plies; rent and utilities; meals eaten away from home; food expenditures less than the cost of food stamps; transportation; personal expenses; and medicine and drugs. These categories were related, often complementarily, to the develop- mentally significant categories Of ~txpenditure. However, expenditures within these categories were oftern greater for participants while the benefits received were not proportionately greater; this was sometimes the case for school lunches, school supplies, and rent. Nonetheless, these expenditures were related in some fashion to the long-run development of the participant family members, and were thus included in the developmentally related classification. The general hypothesis was that expenditures by participants would be greater than those by applicants for all categories except medicine and drugs. As was the case for consumer durables, it was not possible to test hypotheses for each category. Therefore the average expenditures within each category for October, 1966 were summed, and the total average expenditures by participants was hypothesized to be greater absolutely but not proportionately than that by appli- cants. The category of medicine and drugs was considered separately, for it was hypothesized to be less for participants than applicants. DEVELOPMENTALLY RELATED EXPENDITURES School Lunches One might reasonably expect that if the hypothesis that both school enrollment and attendance would increase were accepted, the expenditures on school lunches would increase proportionately. This would be true were it not for the method of operation of the school lunch program in many counties in Eastern Kentucky. County school systems generally collect 20 or 25 cents for a fairly substantial noon meal. In theory, every child has to pay for his lunch. However, the author has observed that families without much income are often given free lunches for their children, or each pays some small fraction of the cost. Thus, an impoverished family with five children in school might pay nothing, or for one child's lunch, 20 cents per day rather than the one dollar or one dollar and twenty-five cents it was supposed to have paid. Moreover, the author has observed a tendency for schools to require all partici- pants in the WE and T Program to pay for school lunches for all of their children enrolled in school. Therefore, even if the number of children enrolled in school were the same for both applicants and the participants, one would reasonably expect the participants to pay more for school lunches totally. For these reasons, it was hypothesized that participants would spend more than applicants on school lunches. Since this seemed to represent a shifting of the cost of school lunches from the county school board to the WE and T participants, it was not considered a developmentally significant expenditure. However, this * expenditure for school lunches was probably a developmentally related expendi- ture, for it was an inexpensive price for a fairly good meal and WE and T par- ticipants could possibly benefit from the intangible elements of pride, by avoiding the stigma and effects upon morale of obvious welfare recipients. PAGENO="0779" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENI'S OF 1967 3239 The data on monthly expenditures on school lunches and school supplies are summarized below in Table 4.1. TABLE 4.1.-School lunch expenditures by applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Number reporting expenditures Total expenditures reported Average for entire group (36) 19 $172 $4.78 30 $319 $8. 87 The applicants reported spending a total of $172, or a mean of $4.78, for school lunches. Thirteen applicants in all had at least one child enrolled in school and reported that they did not have to pay for their lunches. Eight applicants re- ported that they only had to pay for one lunch although they had more than one child enrolled. However, all participant families with children in school, a total of 30 families, reported that they had to pay for lunches. The total paid was $319; the mean was $8.87 for school lunches in October. Thus, the previous conjecture about expenditures for schooL lunches seemed correct; that is, the participants in the Work Experience and Training Program had to assume the costs of school lunches which otherwise would have been free - to them were they not receiving higher incomes as a result of participation in the Work Experience and Training Program. This had the effect of shifting some of the costs of the school lunch program from the local administration to the federally subsidized WE and T Program, and of diminishing the purchasing power differential between applicants and participants. School supplies - School supplies were* not a great expenditure in dollar values, for most pur- chases were for a nickel or a dime. Moreover, as with school lunches, school sup- plies are often offered for sale in the schools, and children from poor families were often given supplies which children from more affluent families had to buy. Once again, children from WE and T families were considered in the latter group, and thus it was hypothesized that expenditures for school supplies would increase. TABLE 4.2.-Expenditures for school supplies by applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Number reporting expenditures 4 13 Total expenditures reported $4 $62 Average for entire group (36) $0. 11 $1. 72 The data in Table 4.2 indicate that four applicants and 13 participants reported spending $4 and $62 on school supplies in October 1966, an average of $0.11 and $1.72 for the 36 families included in each group. Obviously more participants than applicants reported expenditures. The chance that reporting errors occurred seemed quite likely, since many of the expenditures for school supplies would have been of the order of $.05 for a pencil, or $.10 for a pad of paper. However, these expenditures seemed to represent expenditures analogous to school lunch costs, and another instance of shifting local costs to a federally subsidized program. Rent and Utilities As with school lunches and supplies, the author has observed that many very poor families receive their housing free either because they are sharecroppers or they have a relative or kindly disposed landlord who gives them use of a house gratis. However, when they obtain employment or a regular income, they are ex- pected, and often do, pay rent for the same house that they previously lived in free. If this were true for the participants in the WE and T Program, then one would expect that while the payments for rent increased, the quality of housing would not improve concomitantly. Therefore, the hypothesis was that expendi- tures for rent by participants would be greater than those by applicants. Once again, the intangible satisfactions accruing to paying one's own way are pro~bly involved here, but this expenditure could otily be termed developmentally related. PAGENO="0780" 3240 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Utilities included monthly expenditures for electricity, gas (usually bottled), and coal and wood for heating and cooking. If the hypotheses that participants would buy more consumer durables were accepted, then one might reasonably expect that expenditures for utilities by participants would be greater `than by applicants. That is the hypothesis. However, the amount of utilities used would not be a perfect indicator of the use of the various durables, for one would expect the newer durables to operate more efficiently. Thus, expenditures for utilities were difficult to categorize; the classification as developmentally related seemed more apropos than to include it in either of the other two general classes. Table 4.3 displays the data on the monthly expenditures for rent and utilities by applicants and participants. From Table 4.3 it was observed `that the average expenditure for rent in Octo- ber 1966 was $5.67 for applicants and $6.86 .for participants, and the average expenditure for utilities was $11.41 for applicants and $16.33 for participants. Thus, the total average expenditure for October 19643, for rent and utilities by applicants was $17.08 and $23.19 by participants; this was in accord with the hypothesis. TABLE 4.3.-Expenditures for rent and utilities by applicants and participants October 1966 Applicants Participants Total Average Total Average Rent Utilities: Electricity Gas Coal and stove wood Subtotal, utifities Total $204 155 44 212 411 $5. 67 4.30 1.22 5.89 11.41 $247 191 104 293 588 $6.86 5.30 2.89 8.14 16.33 615 17.08 835 23.19 Meals eaten away from home Although meals eaten away from home would usually be defined as an expendi- ture for food, `they were considered as a separate category in this study. It was assumed that low-income families would eat most of their meals at home, and as has been indicated, the Food Stamp Program provided a gauge of the develop- ment significance of food expenditures. However, `if a man were participating in the WE and T Program, he might not have time `to return home for all meals. Thus meals eaten away from home were adjudged to be developmentally related ex- penditures, and it was hypothesized that the participants would spend more than the applicants for such. Only one applicant reported eating any meals away from home, and the total reported was only $1. However, three participants' families reported that the head of the household regularly ate the noon meal away from home, and their total expenditures for October 1966 were $28. Thus the average expenditure for meals eaten away from home was $03 for the applicants and $.78 for the participants. It was likely that there was some underreporting in this category, but it is, at best, a minor item which is not of great significance for the purposes of this study. Food expenditures less titan the cost of food stamps As was noted in Chapter III, expenditures on food stamps were classified as developmentally significant. However, for those families who did not buy food stamps, the expenditure for food, up to the cost of food stamps had they bought them, was classified as developmentally related. The judgment rendered here was that expenditures on food, regardless of food stamp considerations, were properly considered as related in some way to the long-run development of the family members, but the cost of food stamps was the upper limit for inclu- sion in the developmentally related category. The amount spent for food above the cost of food stamps was classified as probably not developmentally significant, and is discussed below in Chapter V. PAGENO="0781" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3241 There were not significantly more participants than applicants buying food stamps.1 Thus it was hypothesized that the remaining participants' food expendi- tures, less than the cost of food stamps, would be greater than those of remain- ing applicants, since the participant with his higher income level, would probably spend. more for food. The total expenditures for October 1966 for "food were calculated. "Food" expenditures included all food-type items obtainable with food stamps. These expenditures were compared with the cost of food stamps which was calculated utilizing the criteria of the Food Stamp Program. Table 4.4 shows the data for the applicants and participants who did not buy food stamps. There were essentially `two types of families under consideration: those who spent less for food than the cost of food stamps and those who spent more for food than the cost of food stamps. As indicated in Table 4.4, there were no applicants and three participants whose monthly expenditures for food in Oc- tober 1966, were less than the cost of food stamps; the three participant families spent a total of $126 for food. Additionally, there were 8 applicants and 13 partici- pants who spent more on food in October 1966 than they would have had to spend for food stamps. The applicants could have bought food stamps for $334, and the participants for $874, totally. Hence, the total expenditure for food, less than the cost of food stamps~ was $334 for applicants and $1,000 for participants, or an average of $9.28 and $27.28, respectively. Thus the average participant spent about three times as much as the average applicant for food less than the cost of food stamps. TABLu 4.4.-Developmentally related expenditures on food by applicants and participants not buying food stamps, October 1966 Applicants Participants Number of families not buying food stamps Number of families spending less than the cost of food stamps for food Total spent Number of families spending more than the cost of food stamps for food Cost of food stamps had they bought them Total Average 8 0 0 8 $334 $334 $9.28 16 3 $126.00 13 $874 $1,000 $27.28 Transportation Expenditures on transportation included the operating expenses of automobiles, gasoline, oil, and repairs, in addition to any fares paid for taxis or buses. It was `hypothesized that participants would buy more automobiles and the data indicated they did. Since participants have to attend school, `and report reg- ularly for work experience, it was logical to expect that their expenditures for transportation would increase. This was the hypothesis. However, no distinction was made between transportation for educational, recreational or work expe- rience and training purposes. Many trips involve a multiplicity of purposes (joint costs) and allocation of such travel to each purpose would, at best, be arbitrary. In collecting the data no such breakdown was attempted. Thus, one cannot infer with impunity that all transportation expenses were developmentally significant. Therefore, since the proportions of expenditures for these purposes are unknown, transportation expenditures are categorized `as related to development: The information on transportation expenditures by applicants and participants is summarized `below in Table 4.5. TABLB 4.5.-Transportation expenditures for applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Gas, oil and repairs: Total $269.00 $770.40 Average Taxis and rides: 7.47 21.40 Total 36.00 11.00 Average Total average 1.00 .30 8.47 21.70 1 Above, Chapter III. PAGENO="0782" 3242 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Thus, the mean expenditure for gas, oil and repairs was $21.40 by participants and only $7.47 by applicants. This is somewhat understandable in view of the previous finding that 33 participants owned cars as compared to only 20 appli- cants, which meant that about one and one half as many participants as appli- cants were driving cars. Since there was no difference in distance to town,2 the increased expenditures probably represented increased utilization of autos by the participants in fulfilling their obligations to the WE and T Program.3 Personal Expenses Personal expenses included expenditures for: cosmetics, shaving supplies, tooth brushes and tooth paste, sewing supplies, other personal expenses, and miscel- laneous nonfood nondurables. This was rather a "catch-all" category for assorted personal expenses such as lipsticks, drivers' licenses, shotgun shells, and shoe polish. The great potential variety of expenditures, and the anticipated small magnitude mitigated against further categorization or classification. These kinds of expenditures were termed developmentally related, for the increased integra- tion of participant families in educational and training activities necessitated more of this kind of expenditures. The information on personal expenditures is incorporated in Table 4.6 below. TABLE 4.6.-Personal expenditures by applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Total Average Total Average Cosmetics Sewing supplies Recreation Miscellaneous nonfood nondurables Other personal expenses Total $30 0 13 24 9 $0.83 0 .36 .67 .25 $64 18 13 14 29 $1.78 .49 .36 .38 .84 76 2.11 138 3.84 The average personal expenditure by participants, $3.84, was greater than that of applicants, $2.11. Participants reported average expenditures for cosmetics of $1.78 while applicants reported a mean of only $0.83. Since cosmetics included shaving and dental care supplies, the conjecture that participants had to make more social appearances would probably explain their increased expenditure for this category. Very small amounts were reported for sewing supplies, and this was perhaps not as underreported as it might seem. Very few sewing machines reported in the consumer durable inventory,4 and it was observed by the author that wives of the applicant and participant families did not do very much sewing. This was not necessarily economically irrational, for there has been a recent proliferation of secondhand clothing stores in the Appalacian area. These stores sell servicable clothing at quite low prices: $25 for a boy or a man's shirt; $50 for a lady's dress. Thus it seemed that one could not buy the material to sew such items for less, and the lady of an impoverished household would not be sacrificing any income by buying rather than making her family's clothing. Recreation expenses were reported as the same for both groups, $.36 per family for the month of October 1966; all expenditures were for movies. Average miscellaneous nonfood nondurables expenditures were higher for applicants, $67, than for participants, $.38, because some of the applicants reported some items as miscellaneous which should have been included as cosmetics or sewing supplies. `Above, Chapter III. A tentative calculation of the average mileage driven reveals not much excessive motor- ing by particlpasits. If one assumed operating costs of $05 per mile (gasoline at $35 per gallon; 10 miles to the gallon yields a cost of $.03~ per mile; and another $015 per mile for oil, tires, and repairs), then the average expenditure per month by participants, $21.40! $05 yields 434 miles driven. The average participant lived about nine miles from town; thus 20 miles per round trip would yield about the equivalent of 22 trips to town per month. When one considers the obligations of the participants to the WE and T Program, it does not seem that the participants were using their cars for much more than the rather necessary mileage. 4Above, Chapter III. PAGENO="0783" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3243 The average personal expenditure by applicants was $.25 and by participants, $.84. Such diverse, yet probably developmentally related items such as: hunting licenses, drivers' license learning permit for. a wife; dog licenses; and parakeet seed, were included in this subcategory. Medicine and Drugs Monthly expenditures for medicines and drugs should be lower for participants since the WE and T Program will pay for any medicine or drug prescribed by a physician. Therefore, the only expenditures remaining within this category for participants were for patent medicines or first-aid supplies. If the participants visited physicians more than applicants, as was hypothesized, it seemed logical to hypothesize that expenditures by participants for medicines and drugs would be lower than such expenditures by applicant. Data for the month of October were used to test this hypothesis. For October 1966 the applicants reported a mean expenditure of $3 on medicine and drugs while the participants reported a mean expenditure of $1. It appeared that the participants were only buying the minimally required patent medicines either not available, or inconveniently obtained, through the free health services component of the WE and T Program. SUMMARY The average developmentally related expenditures by applicants and partici- pants for the month of October, 1966 are summarized in Table 4.7 below. The average expenditure for developmentally related categories was $44.86 by the applicants and $88.88 by the participants. Using the "t" test, the difference, $44.02, was significant at the 95 per cent confidence level, and thus it seemed that the participants spent more, absolutely, than the applicants for the development- ally related categories. The participants spent 36.8 per cent, and the applicants, 30.8 per cent, of their total monthly income for these developmentally related categories, and this difference 6. per cent, was not significant at the 95 per cent confidence level, using the "t" test. Therefore, the participants did not seem to spend more, proportionately, than the applicants, for the developmentally related categories of expenditure. The hypothesis that the participants would spend more absolutely, but not proportionately, was therefore accepted. The income elasticity of demand for the participants was 1.43 for these developmentally related categories. TABLE 4.7.-Summary of average developmentally related expenditures by applicants and participants, October 1966 Category Applicants Participants School lunches $4. 78 $8.87 School supplies Rent and utilities . 11 17. 08 1.72 23. 19 Meals eaten away from home Food expenditures less than the cost of food stamps Transportation Personal expenses Medicine and drugs Total .03 9.28 8.47 2. 11 3.00 .78 27.28 21.70 3.84 1.00 44.86 88.88 CHAPTER V.-PROBABLY NOT DEVELOPMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURES AN!) SOME OTHER CATEGORIES INTRODUCTION While not wishing to appear puritanical, this study did endeavor to distinguish between. forms of expenditure which were likely to have a long-run developmental significance, those that were related to the developmental process, and those cx- penditures which probably did not have any developmental significance. The fol- lowing four categories of expenditure were included in the probably not developmentally significant class: Coffee, tea, cocoa, and tobacco; Candy and sweets; Food expenditures in excess of food stamp allotments; and Consumer PAGENO="0784" 3244 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 durables in excess of the developmentally significant upper limits. The reasons for their inclusion as probably not developmentally significant are outlined in the discussion of each. There were no hypotheses for the individual categories, but the hypothesis was the average expenditure for the sum of these categories would be greater for par- ticipants than applicants. However, the hypothesis was also that the participants would not spend proportionately more than the applicants for these categories of probably not developmentally significant expenditures. PROBABLY NOT DEVELOPMENTALLY RELATED EXPENDITURES Coffee, Tea, Cocoa and Tobacco Purchases of coffee, tea, cocoa and tobacco could not be made with food stamps, and thus, these items, often called "groceries," had to be purchased with cash. This study was not concerned with the respective nutritional or medical merits of these items. These expenditures were regarded as essentially matters of taste, but were classified as probably not developmentally significant because it was not possible to establish any relation between them and the long-run development of the participant family members. Table 5.1 below present the data on expenditures for coffee, tea, cocoa and to bacco for October 1966. TABLE 5.1.-Expenditures for coffee, tea, cocoa, and tobacco by applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Total Average Total Average Coffee, tea, and cocoa Tobacco Total $67 $1.86 146 4.06 S95 $2. 65 193 5.35 213 5.92 288 8. 00 The average expenditure for coffee, tea, cocoa and tobacco by applicants was $5.92 and by participants was $8.00. There was probably some underreporting, for not all of the applicants and participants reported for coffee. How-ever, the author consumed, or refused invitations to, coffee at almost all of the houses of the families keeping records. Nonetheless, the proportionate differences betw-een the average expenditures by applicants and participants for these categories was small, and probably reflected differences in quality as much as in quantity. Candy and Sweets Candy and sweets included candy, soft drinks, and other assorted "sweets." Such items were obtainable with food stamps. If purchased with food stamps, expenditures for candy and sweets w-ould have been included under the expendi- tures for food stamps, and therefore classified as a developmentally significant expenditure. However, expenditures for candy and sw-eets w-ere considered sep- arately in this section to see their magnitude. Such expenditures were classified rather arbitrarily as probably not developmentally significant, for it seemed that the money expended for such could have been better utilized in other ways. Table 5.2 below summarized the data on applicant and participant expenditures on candy and sweets in October 1966. All but four of the applicants and two of the participants reported some ex- penditure for soft drinks in October. The applicants reported an average expendi- ture of $2.74, and the participants, $4.03, for soft drinks. Tw-o applicants and tw-o participants reported .not spending anything for candy and other sw-eets; the average expenditure by applicants was $2.22, and by participants, $3.01. Thus, the average expenditure for the category of candy and other sw-eets was $4.96 by applicants and $7.04 by participants; as with expenditures on coffee, tea, cocoa and tobacco. the difference in expenditures betw-een applicants and participants was quite small and probably not significant. It appeared that the participants certainly did not spend very much more than the applicants for candy and sweets. PAGENO="0785" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3245 TABLE 5.2.-Expenditures on candy and sweets by applicants and participants, - October 1966 Applicants Participants Total Average Total Average Soft drinks Candy and other sweets Total $99 $2. 74 80 2. 22 $145 $4. 03 108 3.01 179 4.96 253 7.04 Food Expenditures in Excess of Food ~Stamp Allotments Expenditures for food stamps were categorized as developmentally significant; however, any expenditures by families buying food stamps, in excess of the value of food stamps received, were categorized as probably not developmentally significant. By doing such, this study implicitly accepted the Food Stamp Pro- gram's allotments as fairly good indicators of the total expenditures for food necessary to provide a family with an adequate diet. For families not buying food stamps, the total expenditure for food up to the cost of food stamps was classified as a developmentally related expenditure. However, any expenditure in excess of the cost of food stamps was classified as probably not developmen- tally significant, for all of the families were eligible for food stamps. Therefore, any expenditures for food, in excess of the cost of food stamps, would have been made with money which could have been used for other, ostensibly more develop- mentally significant, types of expenditures. Table 5.3 summarizes that data on food expenditures in excess of food stamp allotments. TABLE 5.3-Food expenditures in excess of food stamp allotments by applicants and participants, October 1966 Applicants Participants Total Average Total Average Families buying food stamps: Expenditures greater than value of food stamps received Families not buying food stamps: Expenditures greater than the cost of food stamps, had they bought them - Total $9 215 $0.25 . 5.97 $194 243 $5.39 - 6. 75 224 6.22 437 12. 14 Thus the applicant families buying food stamps spent `a total of $9 more for food than the total value of food stamps received, and the participant families buying food stamps spent a total of $194 in a similar fashion; the averages were $25 and $5.39, respectively. The applicant families not buying food stamps spent a total of $215, or an average of $5.97, more than the cost of food stamps, for food, in October 196G. Likewise, the participants not buying food stamps spent a total of $243, or an average of $6.75, more than the cost of food for food in October 19436. Therefore, the participants appeared to have spent more than the applicants for food expenditures in excess of the food stamp allotment. An interesting observation was that the 16 participant families not buying food stamps spent a total of $243 more than the cost of food stamps for food. If they had bought food stamps, they would Shave saved $15.19 on the average on their monthly food expenditures. Consumer durables in excess of the developmentally significant upper limits As was explained in Chapter III, developmentally significant upper limits were set for consumer durables. The repayment of indebtedness for the portion of consumer durable purchases above the upper limits was classified as probably not developmentally significant. In October 1966, the applicants made payments totalling $15, or averaging, $.42, for indebtedness for consumer durable pur- 80-084 0-67-pt. 4-50 PAGENO="0786" 3246 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 chases above the developmentally significant upper limits; the comparable figures for participants were $56, totally, and $1.56 on the average. SUMMAR~ Table 5.4 displays the data on the probably not developmentally related cate- gories of expenditure by applicants and participants in October 1966. TABLE 5.4-Average expenditures for probably not developmentally significant categories by applicants and participants, October 1966' Category Applicants Participants Coffee, tea, cocoa, and tobacco Candy and sweets Food expenditures in excess of food stamp allotments Consumer durables in excess of developmentally significant upper limits - - Total $5.92 4.96 6.22 .42 $8.00 7.04 12. 14 1.56 17.52 28.74 The average expenditure for the probably not developmentally significant categories was $17.52 for the applicants, and $28.74 for the participants. The difference, $11.22, was significant at the 95 per cent confidence level using the "t" test. Therefore, the first part of the hypothesis, that participants would spend more than applicants, was accepted. However, expenditures for these probably* not developmentally significant categories represented 12 per cent of the total monthly income of the applicants, and 11.88 per cent of the total monthly income of the participants. Thus the participants did not spend proportionately more than the applicants for the probabl~y not developmentally significant categories, The second part of the hypothesis, that the participants would not spend pro- portionately more than the applicants for the probably not developmentally sig- nificant categories, was therefore accepted. The income elasticity of demand for the participants was .99 for the probably not developmentally significant categories. OTHER CATEGORIES Food production for home consumption The foregoing analysis of expenditures did not include the amount of food produced for home consumption. This element could have been useful in explain- ing possible reasons that there w-as not increased participation in the Food Stamp Program. It was hypothesized that the participants w-ould produce less food for home consumption than the applicants. If this hypothesis were accepted, it could have reflected a combination of things, that is, a high marginal preference for leisure relative to income, conflict between WE and T Program obligations and home, food production, or limited opportunities for home food production. Table 5.5 presents the data on food production for home consumption, and shows that 28 applicants and 21 participants reported raising a home vegetable garden while eight applicants and 16 participants reported not raising a garden. Chi square analysis showed this was not a significant difference at the 5 per cent probability level. Moreover, 23 applicants and 12 participants reported that they had canned, frozen, or in some way preserved food while 13 applicants and 25 participants reported that they had not. This was a significant difference at the S per cent probability level according to a chi square analysis. Therefore, it ap- peared that while there was not any significant difference in the number of appli- cants and participants raising gardens, there was, indeed, a significantly greater number of applicants than of participants who had preserved food in some way. The total value of the preserved food w-as $1,240 for applicants and $706 for participants, for the entire year.' It was interesting that the mean value of pre- served foods, for those engaged in preserving, was not significantly different, the mean was $54 for applicants and $59 for participants. The important variable was the number of families engaged in food preservation, and as noted, there were significantly more applicants than participants who preserved some kind of food. 1 ValuatIon procedure explained in Chapter II. PAGENO="0787" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3247 TABLE 5.5.-Food production for home consumption by applicants and participants, 1966 Applicants Participants Had a home vegetable garden Did not have a home vegetable garden Preserved food in some way Did not preserve foodin any way Total annual value of preserved food Mean value of preserved food Total value of October consumption of preserved food Mean value of October consumption of preserved food Produced and consumed some milk, meat, or eggs in October Did not produce and consume any milk, meat, or eggs in October Total value of milk, meat, and eggs produced and consumed in October~ -- Mean value of milk, meat, and eggs produced and consumed in October - - - - Total gross value of food production for home consumption in October Reported expenditures for feed Total net value of food produced for home consumption in October Mean value for entire group 28 8 23 13 21 16 12 25 $1, 240 1 54 336 15 $706 59 121 13 18 18 9 - 28 $376 21 712 47 665 18 $238 26 359 121 238 6 1 Mean values were calculated for those preserving or consuming; that is, the total value was not divided by the total number in the group, but only those reporting such activity, except for the mean for total food production for home consumption for the entire group. Eighteen applicants and nine participants reported producing milk, meat, or eggs in October while 18 applicants and 28 participants reported not producing any. Chi square analysis revealed this to be a significant difference at the 95 per cent probability level. Thus significantly more applicants reported any kind of milk,, meat, or egg production for home consumption in October. The total value of such production was $376 for applicants and $238 for participants, and the mean values for those producing any were $21, and $26, respectively. There was not a significant difference at the 95 per cent confidence level according to the "t" test. Once again, it seemed that the number of people engaged in production was the important aspect of milk, meat and egg production. From the gross values of food production for home consumption in Octojer, $712 for applicants, and $359 for participants, the reported expenditures for feed were subtracted, $47 and $121, respectively. The total net value of food produced for home consumption for October was $665 for the applicants and $238 for the participants. The mean values for the entire group were $18 for the applicants and $6 for the participants. This was a significant difference at the 95 per cent con- fidence level using the "t" test. It was concluded that there was indeed more food produced for home consumption by the applicants than by the participants. There- fore, the hypothesis was accepted. Ecependitures for food Expenditures for food were complexly interwoven throughout the foregoing analysis; and were classified all three possible ways: (1) developmentally signifi- cant; (2) developmentally related; and (3) probably not developmentally signifi- cant. Total expenditures for food, regardless of food stamp considerations, were analyzed ~y the major categorizations utilized in important consumption studies.' The hypothesis was that participant would spend more than applicants, absolutely, but not proportionately, for total food expenditures. Data for the month of Octo- ber 1966 were utilized to test this hypothesis. The mean expenditures for food by applicants and participants are summarized by major categories and important subcategories in Table 5.6. Participants gen- erally reported higher mean expenditures; some interesting exceptions were that applicants spent more for "Fats and Oils" and "Flour and Meal." This would projably help explain why the participants had spent so much more than appli- cants for "Bakery Goods" and "Mixes" and probably indicated that participants had a preference for prepared bakery goods and mixes and prepared fewer bakery goods at home. 2 G. G. Quackenbush and J. D. Shaffer, Collecting Food Purchase Data by Consumer Panel, Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Technical Bulletin 279, August 1960, p.37. PAGENO="0788" 3248 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Participants also spent considerably more on "Fresh Meat," and "Canned Fruits and Vegetables." This is likely explained by the greater quantity of live- stock production and food production for home consumption reported previously ~y the applicants. The participants' mean expenditure for footi, $96.46 was $17.48 greater than the applicants', $78.98, and this difference was significant at the 95 per cent confidence level using the "t" test. Therefore, the hypothesis that participants would spend more for food, absolutely, was accepted. The participants' average expenditure, $96.46 represented 39.9 per cent of their average total income while the applicants' average expenditure, $78.98, represented 54.1 per cent of their average total income. Once again, the hypothesis that the participants would not spend propor- tionately more than the applicants, in this case for total food expenditures, was accepted. TABLE 5.6.-Mean expenditures for food by applicants and participants, October 1966 Milk, cream, icecream, and cheese Fatsandoils Flour, cereal, andbakeryproducts Flour and meal Bakery goods Mixes Cerealsandnoodles Meat, fish, and poultry Fresh Canned Frozen Eggs Sugarandsweets Sugar Candy, cookies, potato chips, and popcorn Fruitsandvegetables Canned Frozen Fresh - Other (dried) - Beverages (soft drinks) Cooking aids Miscellaneous - Mean expenditureper family Difference Applicants Participants 811.30 813. 53 8.56 7.59 14. 18 17. 87 9.32 8.91 3.55 6.86 .54 1.27 .77 - .83 20. 47 25. 64 17.50 21.96 1.78 2.52 1.19 - 1.16 3.11 - 3.09 4.62 5.32 2.40 2.31 2.22 3.01 12.77 15.36 3.70 6.35 .94 .99 7.25 6.73 .88 1.29 2.74 4.03 .67 .79 .56 3.24 78. 98 96. 46 17.48 fndebtediiess The total indebtedness of applicants and participants was examined. It w-as hypothesized that the participants would have more indebtedness than the appli- cants, absolutely, but no more indebtedness, proportionately, to their incomes, than the applicants. It was further hypothesized that the participants would have incurred a greater percentage of their total inde)tedness for the developmentally significant categories of expenditure than the applicants, and a smaller percentage of their total indebtedness for the developmentally related and probably not developmentally significant categories of expenditure. Table 5.7 summarizes the total mean indebtedness for applicants and partici- pants. The total mean indebtedness for the applicants was $339.70 which was 2.3 times the total monthly income of $146 reported in October 1966. The total mean inde~btedness of the participants was $584.54 which was 2.4 times the total monthly income of $242 reported in October 1966. The difference, .1, was not significant using the "t" test, and therefore the initial hypothesis that the participants would have more indebtedness, absolutely but not proportionately to income, than the applicants, was accepted. PAGENO="0789" hCONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3249 TABLE 5.7.-Mean indebtedness of applicants and participants by developmentally significant classes, Oct. 1, 1966 Category Applicants Participants Mean indebtedness Percent of total indebtedness Mean indebtedness Percent of total indebtedness Developmentally significant: Consumer durables Automobiles Housing Clothing Hospitals and medical SubtotaL Developmentally related: Gasoline for autos Coal Subtotal Probably not developmentally significant: Gro- ceries and store bills Other: Finance companies Relatives and former employers Subtotal Total $56.56 84.56 1.66 15.27 36.70 $121.41 305.56 60.54 16. 11 33.51 194.75 57 537. 13 92 6.03 2.64 2.70 1.73 8.67 77:58 3 23 4.43 19.06 7.59 51. 11 24.81 0.00 - 58.70 17 24.81 339. 70 100 585.43 100 For developmentally significant categories, the participants reported $537, or 92 per cent of their total indebtedness; the applicants reported $195, or 57 per cent of their indebtedness. Phi's of course, reflected the over-all consumption pattern; that is, the participants spend far more in proportion to their income than ihe applicants on the developmentally significant categories of expenditures. How- ever, within this, the participants reported a total of $487, or 83 per cent of the mean indebtedness per participant family, for `the three categories: consumer durables; automobiles; and houses. For these same categories, the applictants' mean ~ndebtedness was only $143, or 42 per cent of the mean indebtedness per family. This was an important distinction, for it indicated that the participants were not only incurring debts for developmentally significant purposes, but that their sources of credit were probably of the less expensive kind. Moreover, it was difficult to interpret much about the indebtedness for the clothing and medical categories. The applicants and participants had about the same amount of in- debtedne~s for clothing and medical `bills, absolutely, but proportionately the participants had ]?ess than the applicants. Nonetheless, the participants' indebted- ness for the developmentally significant categories was 92 per cent of their total indebtedness; the applicants' indebtedness was 57 per cent. The difference, 35 per cent was significant at the 95 per cent confidence level, and thereforb the hypothesis that the patricipants would incur a greater percentage of their total indebtedness for the developmentally significant categories was accepted. There was not much indebtednes,s for tlfe developmentally related categories reported by either applicants or participants. The applicants did report that three per cent of their total `indebtedness was for coal and gas while the participants reported only one per cent of their total indebtedness for such items. Groceries and store bills both referred to purchases from local general stores, and probably indicated the payment of higher prices than would have been obtained in local' towns. Applicants reported substantially more indebtedness of this kind, a mean of $77.58 or 23 per cent of their total debts, than did partici- pants, who reported a mean of only $19.06 or 3 per cent of their total debts. These expenditures were classified as probably not developmentally significant, for they probably represented food not bought with food stamps primarily, or items bought for higher prices than they would have been purchased elsewhere. The author observed that, in many cases, one of `the first things a participant did when he entered the WE and T Program was to pay off hi,s debts at the local grocery or general store. These data seemed to confirm this. 3 4 PAGENO="0790" 3250 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Loans from finance companies and from relatives and former employers were not classified according to their developmental significance, for it was impossible to ascertain the use to which the borrowed money was put. The participants had over three times the mean indebtedness to finance companies than did the applicants, $24.81 and $7.59, respectively. Most of the respondents stated that they borrowed money from finance companies, to pay off accumulated bills. The much greater indebtedness of the participants probably indicated their improved credit ratings by virtue of having a regular income. Noire of the participants reported any outstanding debts to relatives or former employers while the appli- cants reported a mean debt of $51.11. From this, it appeared that the participants were not only paying off loans from local stores, but to relatives and former employers as well. From this small cros.s section, there appeai~ed the distinct impression that the participants in the WE and T Program were going into debt for developmentally significant purposes primarily, and that their sources of credit were shifting from local general stores to merchants and banks in towns. The ramifications of these shifts could be great. In addition to the potential impact upon the partici- pant families from having the developmentally significant Wems such as auto- mobiles, television sets, and better clothing, the change in orientation from the local, geographic neighborhood to the nearby town could have great repercussions, not only upon the neighborhood or town, but probably more important, upon the individual participant family members. CHAPTER VI.-OHARACTERISTICS OF PARTICIPANTS ASSOCIATED WITH VARIOUS EXPENDITURES AND ACTIVITIES INTRODUCTION Thirteen characteristics were tested using multiple regression analysis `to see which ones were associated with expenditures among the three classes of expendi- ture: (1) developmentally significant, (2) developmentally related, and (3) prob- ably not developmentally significant. The amounts spent in October 1966 within these classes were the dependent variables in the analysis, in addition to the number of' visits to physicians and dentists for the year preceding the survey. Thus, there were four regression equations obtained; two for the developmentally significant class, and one for each of the remaining classes. The independent variables were selected characteristics of the participant heads of households, and their families. These characteristics were judged as likely to be associated with varying levels of expenditure among the different expenditure classifications. The characteristics were: Participants: X1-age in years X2-Education; number of years of schooling completed before entering the WE and T Program X1--Education; number of years of schooling completed at the time of the survey X4-Number of months in the WE and T Program X5-Attitude toward the WE and T Program; as indicated by one for the least, two for a more, and three for the most positive attitude1 X6-Employment history; as indicated by a zero for no regular job for one year out of the last ten, and one for a regular job for at least one year out of the last ten. X7-Earnings history; the highest annual income in the last ten years Family: X8-Number of children eight years old or less X9-Number of children between the ages of nine and 17 X10-Total number of family members X11-Total distance to town in miles X11-Tedal unpaved mileage to town X11-Total cash income for October With the assistance of the Computing Center of the University of Kentucky, a step-wise multiple regression analysis was undertaken.2 The following results were obtained at the 90 per cent confidence level for the various classes of expenditures. The rather low- level of the r squares indicated that there were perhaps exogenous 1 See Appendix III for the wording of the schedule. Statistical Library for the 7040 Programs and Subroutines (Lexington: University oi Kentucky Computing Center, June 1966), p. 5~). PAGENO="0791" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3251 variables unidentified in this analysis or errors in the reporting of the levels of expenditure within each category. DEVELOPMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURES AND ACTIVITIES Using the total number of visits per family to physicians and dentists in the year preceding the survey as the dependent variable, Y1, the following regression equation was obtained: Y=21.584-0.619X1+2.390X2-0.572X11+0.070X13 (0.245) (0.829) (0.323) (0.050) r2= 0.41 Total F=5.58 n=36 The standard errors of the regression coefficients are presented in parentheses throughout this chapter. X1, the age of the head of the participant household, was negatively associated with the total number of visits to physicians and den- tists per participant family in the year preceding the survey. Therefore, the younger participant heads of households and their families went to physicians and dentists more than the families of older participant heads of households. Participants' level of education before entering the WE and T Program, X2, was positively associated with the total number of visits to physicians and dentists per participant family; and thus the families of participants with more education before entering the WE and P Program went to physicians and dentists more than the families of participants with less education `before they entered the WE and P Program. It was interesting that X8, the number of children less than eight years of age, apparently was not significantly associated with the number of visits to physicians and dentists. It seemed from this analysis that the demand for medical services for themselves and their families was greater among the younger adults participating in the WE and T Program, especially those with more education, or at least more exposure to education. Once again, the value of education was suggested here, for it seemed to help people more fully utilize opportunities for enhanced health for themselves and their families. Total mileage to town, X~, was negatively associated with the total number of visits per family to physicians and dentists; the participant families living closer to town went to physicians and dentists more than those living farther from town. Perhaps this was due to the difficulties of transportation from the more participant family dwellings; however, 33 of the 36 participants had autos, and one would expect that transportation problems would be somewhat minimized. Quite possibly the total mileage to town was a rough index of the isolation of the families, and possibly this isolation has been the cause of their lack of interest in, knowledge of, or skills in acquiring health services. X13, total cash income per family per month was positively associated with the number of visits to physicians and dentists per family. However, since the monthly income grant for WE and T participants was determined approximately in proportion to the number of children in the family, there was high intercor- relation with X13 and X~0, total family members. Thus, the positive associa- tion with X~ was probably in some way correlated with the total family size, and logically one would expect that the more members there w-ere in a family, the more visits to physicians and dentists would be made. The independent variable Y2, in the following equation was the total expenditures in October by participant families for the developmentally significant categories of expenditure minus any- thing spent beyond the developmentally significant upper limit. Y=191.658-0.243X1+17.197X6 (0~856) (5.689) r2=0.28 Total F=6.611 n=36 There was a negative association with X1, age of the head of the participant household, and Y2, developmentally significant expenditures in October. Thus the younger participants spend more than the older participants for the categories of developmentally significant expenditures. This indicated that the younger adults apparently tended to make more expenditures of the kind regarded in this study as investments in themselves and their children. This was understandable in light of the fact that the older participants tended to be more disabled and infirm, and therefore might not have had as affirmative a view of the future for themselves and their children as did the younger participants~ PAGENO="0792" 3252 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 There was a positive association between Y2 and X6, the number of children aged nine to 17 per participant family; this meant that participant families with more children aged nine to 17 spent more money within the developmentally sig- nificant categories than those participants with less children in this age bracket relative to their income level. Thus, the participants seemed to be spending the money needed for the development of their children at the more critical, older ages when the needs for clothing and an acceptable appearance are most important. DEVELOPMENTALLY RELATED EXPENDITURES With Y3. the total expenditures in October 1966, by participants, for the de- velopmentally related categories of expenditure, as the dependent variable, the following regression equation was obtained: Ya=-1.856+O.438 X13 (0.178) r2=0.15 Total F=&075 n=36 There was a positive association with X13, cash income per month; those par- ticipants with higher cash incomes spent more for the developmentally related categories of expenditure than did participants with less cash income per month. Thus, it would seem that the participants with more cash income had more "discretionary income," in the sense of having more money left over after making all necessary expenditures. Since the participants did not buy more food stamps than the applicants, and since their expenditures for food up to the cost of food stamps were included as developmentally related expenditures, there probably was an association between cash income per month, X13, and expenditures for developmentally related categories, Y3. PROBABLY NOT DEVELOPMENTALLY SIGNIFICANT EXPENDITURES Using expenditures by participants in October 1966 for the probably not devel- opmentally significant categories of expenditure, Y4, as the dependent variable, the following regression equation was obtained: Y4=115.530-1.930 X2-4.089 X4-13.006 X~ (1.042) (1.205) (3.994) r2=O.54 Total F=12.448 n=~36 The participants' educational level before entering the WE and T Program, X~, was negatively associated with Y4; thus the participants w-ith less education be- fore entering the WE and T Program apparently spent more for the probably not developmentally significant categories than did the participants with more edu- cation. This tends to reinforce the impression received from the Y1 regression equation that the participants with more education before entering the program utilize the free health services compOnent of the WE and T Program. The number of months the participants had been in the WE and T Programs, X4, was negatively associated with Y4, and this suggested that the participants who had been in the program for shorter periods of time spent more for the probably not developmentally significant categories than did the participants who had been in the program longer. Thus, it would seem that the participants make more developmentally significant expenditures the longer they are in the WE and T Program. However, this is somewhat confusing, for X4 was not significantly asso- ciated with Y2, the developmentally significant categories. There was a negative association between X8, the number of children eight years old and less, and Y4; the participants with more children less than eight years of age apparently spent less for the probably not developmentally significant cate- gories. This probably suggested that the participant families with younger children did not spend as much on candy and sweets as did the participant families with older children. ~ CHAPTER VII.-SUMMABY, LIMITATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY The participants in the Work Experience and Training Program received 66 percent more total monthly income from all sources than did the applicants for PAGENO="0793" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3253 the program. The participants received most of their income from their WE and T grants; 90 percent of their monthly income was in cash. However, the applicants received only 57.8 percent of their total income in cash. The other 42.2 percent of the applicants' income was from buying food stamps, food production for home consumption, free rent, and gifts. These sources of income were all markedly lower for the participants, and helped explain why the income level of the partici- pants was only 66 percent higher than that of the applicants. Additionally the participants were expected to pay for more school lunches and supplies than applicants. Moreover, the participants apparently had to spend more for clothing, transportation, and personal items by virtue of participation in the WE and T Program. Therefore, their actual real income advantage over the applicants was nOt great, and was somewhat overstated by this computation since it reflected in- accurately the difference in consumer purchasing power. The participants spent a significantly greater percentage of their monthly in- comes for the developmentally significant categories than did the applicants, but they did not spend significantly more, or less, than the applicants, for the develop- mentally related, or probably not developmentally significant categories. The participants' income elasticities were 2.10 for the developmentally signifi- cant categories, 1.43 for the developmentally related categories, and .98 for the probably not developmentally significant categories. The participants seemed to be fairly rational in their expenditures. They took advantage of the free health services component of the program and sent their children to school more than did the applicants. The participants spent much more money than applicants on consumer and lower-priced goods. Their income elas- ticity was 2.33 for consumer durables; less than ten per cent of their total con- sumer durables expenditure was judged not to be developmentally significant. More participants than applicants bought autos and the income elasticity was 2.75. The participants spent more than applicants for clothing and cleaning sup- plies. The over-all impression was that of a group of people utilizing an increased income as an opportunity to invest not only in themselves but in the future devel- opment of their children. The total indebtedness of participants was 1.7 times thatof the applicants, but since the participants' total income was 1.66 times greater than the applicants, there was no significant difference, proportionately to income, between the total indebtedness of applicant and participants. An important difference within the total indebtedness was that the participants had 20 per cent of their total in- debtedness for the developmentally significant categories as opposed to 57 per cent of the applicants' indebtedness. The applicants had 23 per cent of their total indebtedness with local stores while the participants bad only 3 per cent. Thus, there seemed to be a shifting of credit by participants from the local and higher priced general stories to the more specialized, often less expensive, stores in town. The participants spent more for food than applicants and the participants' elasticity of demand was 0.40. However, there were not significantly more par- ticipants than applicants buying food stamps. VALIDITY OF HYPOTHESES The general hypothesis that participants would spend more than applicants for the developmentally significant categories was accepted, for the participants: went to various health services more than applicants; had more children enrolled and attending school than applicants; spent more than applicants on consumer durables, automobiles, housing improvements, clothing, and cleaning supplies. The participants also had more savings and life insurance than applicants. The only specific hypothesis which could not be accepted was that more participants than applicants would buy food stamps. The hypothesis that the participants would spend more than the applicants, proportionately to their income differentials, for the developmentally significant categories was accepted. The hypothesis that the participants would not spend more, porportionately to their income differentials, than the applicants for the de- velopmentally related, and probably not developmentally significant, categories, was accepted also. One category of expenditures, medicine and drugs, was hypoth- esized to represent a smaller expenditure by participants than applicants, and the hypothesis was accepted. The subsidiary hypotheses were that participants would: spend more than the applicants on food; have the same indebtedness as the applicants relative to income; and produce less food for home consumption than the applicants. All were accepted. PAGENO="0794" 3254 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 LIMITATIONS The most obvious limitation of this study was the small sample size; only 36 applicants and 36 participants completed the monthly record of expenses. The quality of the data for these 72 families was judged by the author to be fairly good; the applicants accounted for 106 per cent of their cash incomes plus the value of food stamps received while the participants accounted for 99 per cent of their cash incomes plus the value of food stamps received. Another limitation was that while the WE and P Program was administered to a considerable extent at the local level, this study's sample only included three counties, or adminis- trative units. A good example of the variation in local administrations was food stamp utilization; while only 50 per cent of the sample was from Clay County, 90 per cent of the participants and applicants not buying food stamps lived in Clay County. Another limitation of this study was the time of the year when it was con- ducted, that is, October. As was indicated, the income data for applicants was only for this month, which may or may not have been representative for the entire year. The author adjudged the data to be representative; however, this was only a judgment. Also, the data on food production for home consumption only included food which was preserved in some way for future consumption. There- fore, the applicants and participants might have had proportionately different amounts of income from food production for fresh consumption and this effect was not included in this study. A~cross-sectional method was utilized in this study, and this could have seri- ously limited the findings if there were any significant differences between the participants in, and applicants for, the WE and T Program at the time of this study. As was indicated, the participants were significantly older than the appli- cants, and this probably indicated an element of selectivity in the administration of the program. As was shown in Chapter IV, the younger participants apparently made more expenditures for the developmentally significant categories. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS This study has shown that participants in the WE and T Program tend to make developmentally significant uses of the income and opportunities for health services and education provided by the WE and T Program. It was further shown that the younger participants probably made more of the developmentally signifi- cant expenditures as well as making more use of the opportunities for free health care, and that the participants with more education before entering the Program made less porobably not developmentally significant expenditures. The partici~ pants had high income elasticities for the total category called developmentally significant; their income elasticities for consumer durables was 2.33 and 2.75 for autos. Thus, the incremental income received by participants seemed to be spent for the kinds of goods bought in towns, and the structure of their indebtedness verified this. This would. suggest that, if anyone besides the participant families benefits from the WE and T Program, it is the merchants in the towns where the participants trade. The actual difference in monthly income between applicants and participants was $96, and this 11d not include such items as school lunches and supplies which the applicants received free, but for which the participants had to pay. These school lunches and supplies represented in effect, an interagency transfer of funds from the federally supported WE and T Program and the county school boards. However, the county school boards had to cover the additional costs of the children enrolled as a result of participants enrolling 97 per cent of their eligible children while the applicants enrolled only 85 per cent. It was concluded in this study that the participants in the WE and T Program were thrifty consumers who invested much of their income in themselves and the future development of their children. One might find it difficult to recon- cile these conclusions with ~Fack Weller's observation that the ideal-type, low- income, mountaineer: * is an impulsive spender, often wasting money that he could well use on* necessities for his family; perhaps he buys a very expensive TV set or refrigerator just to satisfy his whim of the moment, his need to act. He saves little for a rainy day, or for the education of his children, or for projected goals in the future.1 1 Weller, op. cit., p. 42. PAGENO="0795" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3255 However, Weller was talking about the mountaineer's need for action; he stated that the mountaineer used purchases as an outlet for such need for action. Per- haps the WE and T Program has channelled the mountaineer's need for action into the activities of the Program; if this were true, it would be consistent with the findings of this study, and the WE and T Program would seem well adapted to the cultural setting of Appalachia. While this study has made some promising findings regarding the participants in the WE and T Program, it would be quite difficult to extrapolate and apply these findings to all welfare-type income supplement programs. The WE and T Program evolved as a practical solution to some of the problems encountered with the Aid-to-Fathers-with-Deliendent-Ohildrefl Program in Eastern Ken- tucky. The WE and T Program endeavored not only to provide a regular, and ostensibly sufficient, income for impoverished families, but also to encourage the participants to educate and upgrade the health of their children. The author felt that the strategy of requiring the father to attend school or training, and to work at the work experience component of the Program was especially helpful in changing parental attitudes toward their children and their future. However. whether such a policy would be correct for a family without a male head of household is a completely different matter. Also left unanswered by this study is the question of expenditures by participants in an uthan setting, for all the participants in this study lived in a rural setting. Since there was no control population, the rather encouraging findings of this study cannot, with confidence, .be attributed to the WE and T Program. A population with increased income, but without the WE and T Program's regula- tions, would provide a useful comparative basis for evaluating the contributions associated with the structure of the WE and T Program and that of simple economic transfers. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH This study has raised some important questions; a few of them beyond the traditional purview of agricultural economics. The methodology of this study developed three classifications of expenditures for participants in the Work Experience and Training Program: (1) developmentally significant; (2) devel- opmentally related; and (3) probably not developmentally significant. It would be interesting to see some studies on the economic implications of the possession of basic consumer durables and automobiles on the economic aspiration of chil- dren in impoverished families. The Pilot Food Stamp Program was one of the considerations in this study, and it was shown that participants did not increase their utilization of food stamps. Research on barriers to buying food stamps would be most helpful for policy formulation. This study touched upon the shifting of the WE and T participants' expendi- tures from local, rural, to more urban sources. A useful research undertaking would be an analysis of some of the Appalachian regional economies, and the multiplier effect therein of the WE and T participants' expenditures. Although it is probably still too early in `the chronological development of `the WE and T Program, some long-range research on the earnings of the WE and T participants and their children would be most helpful in evaluating the tenta- tive short-run conclusions of this study. APPENDIXES APPENDIX I WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSES The objective of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 is, "to mobilize the human and financial resources of the Nation to con~bat poverty in the United States".' Title V of the Economic Opportunity Act empowers the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity to `transfer funds to the Department of Health, Educa- 1 U.S. Congress, An Act to Mobilize the Human and Financial Resources of the Nation to Combat Poverty sa the United States, Public Law 88-452, 88th Congress, 2nd Session, 1964, p. 1. PAGENO="0796" 3256 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMEWI'S OF 1967 tion, and Welfare (HEW) to operate experimental or demonstration work- experience programs, "to expand the opportunities for constructive work experi- ence and other needed training available to persons who are unable to support or care for themselves or their families. In carrying out this purpose, the Director shall make maximum use of the programs available under the Manpower De- velopment and Training Act of 1962, as amended, and Vocational Educational Act of 1963." 2 ADMINISTRATION HEW delegates the administration of the Work Experience and Training Program (WE and T) to the respective states who administer it within HEW's guidelines. In Kentucky, the Department of Economic Security, Division of Public Assistance, administers the WE and T Program. The administrative hierarchy is composed of, one program supervisor, several regional supervisors, at least one program supervisor in each county, a case supervisor for each five caseworkers and a caseworker for every 60 participants.3 There were about 6,000 participants in the Kentucky WE and T Program in the autmun of 1966 when this study was conducted. Nineteen counties were included in the program, all in Eastern Kentucky. Each county had a quota or number of participants which was based on the percentage of unemployment in that county according to the Department of Economic Security's records. The WE and T Program began initially in nine counties in January 1965, in May 1965 it was expanded to include ten additional counties, as indicated in Table 1.1. In fiscal 1966, HEW granted $17.5 million to the Kentucky Division of Public Assistance to cover 100 per cent of the costs of the WE and T Program.4 INDIVIDUAL QUALIFICATIONS To qualify f-or the WE and T Program, an individual must meet certain eligibility requirements of the Division of Public Assistance. These include that the applicant must: A. Be the parent of a child or children under 18 years of age. B. Enroll his school-age child or children in school, 0. Be under 65 years of age. D. Meet the definition of unemployed parent, ie., be the father or step- father of a needy child or the male household member occupying a paternal role in the family. Furthermore, he must: 1. Have been without regular full-time employment for 9~Y days prior to the date of application; 2. Be ineligible and not receiving unemployment insurance benefits; 3. Have not been determined to be physically incapacitated; 4. Not have a job lined up for the future; and 5. Have not refused to accept employment or suitable training. E. Be a resident of a county covered by the Program, F. Be ineligible for, and not receiving, any form of public assistance, ex- cept food stamps, G. Be able to benefit from participation in the Program, and H. Be in need, that is, in addition to meeting the above unemployment criteria, the applicant must not have cash on hand, stocks, bonds, savings, or land noncontigous to his homestead whose total value exceeds $1,000. APPLICATION PROCEDURE In order to apply, an individual must submit relevant information about him- self and his family to the local office of the Department of Economic Security. This information is verified through a check with other agencies and a home visit by a caseworker. In addition, he must enter his name on the list of those seeking employment, he must do this every 60 days to remain eligible for, and in, the WE and T program. A chronological listing of the applicants for the WE and T Program is main- tained in each local (county) office. Applicants are processed in this order. 2lbid., p. 20. Descriptive details of the Kentucky Program are mainly from conversations, corre- spondence, and informational materials supplied by Mr. Ralph Wells, supervisor. WE and T Program, Division of Public Assistance, Department of Economic Security, Common- wealth of Kentucky. Ibid., Mr. Ralph Wells. PAGENO="0797" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3257 CALCULATION OF MONTHLY GRANTS The participants monthly income is `determined by his need, as indicated by summing the personal and shelter requirements of the participant and his family members minus any income the family might have. The WE and T Program uses the standards set by the Division of Public Assistance for the Aid to De- pendent Children Program. Personal and shelter requirements vary with the number and age of children, shelter requirements are based on the number of family members as well as rental arrangement and location. The basic monthly requirements, Table 1.2, follows. Several examples will earify this. The smallest possible family in the WE `and T Program would be a father and one child under three years of age. From Table 1.2, we could calculate the family's minimum basic monthly income requirements which follow. Personal Requirements Father $37 Ohild 18 Total Shelter Requirements [Assuming the minimum, rural unfurnished, we would have $19 for each of the two family members, for a total of $38] Two family members $38 Personal requirements 55 Total Thus, $93 would be the family's basic monthly income requirements. If there were any income, it would be subtracted, the balance equals the monthly grant which is paid at the beginning of every month. Farm income is averaged over 12 months, and equals total receipts minus all expenses for which there are receipts. The average monthly grant for WE and T families was about $200 in fiscal 1966. An example of a possible family situation which would approximate this level of need would be: a two-parent family with three children, ages nine, six and two. From Table 1.2 of monthly income requirements, we have: Personal ewpense Father $35 Mother Children: - Nine 32 Six 27 Two 20 Total 149 SHELTER EXPENSE Assuming that the family must pay rent or mortgage payments for a rural unfurnished dwelling, there is $13 for each family member. However, as the table indicates, for four or more members, multiply by four only. Therefore total shelter requirements are $52. Total basic monthly income requirement is $149 and $52 or $201. We can observe from the table that income requirements increase as the ages and number of children increase. However, there is an upper limit of $250 on Public Assistance payments in Kentucky. Thus, no matter how many children were in the family, the maximum monthly income they would receive from WE and T would be $250. One may expect that there will exist among smaller families more "discre- tionary income," especially those with fewer children than needed to qualify for maximum income benefits than among larger families who qualify for more than the maximum. By discretionary income, we refer to the concept of disposable personal income minus what is needed to cover necessities. Moreover, because of the method employed in calculating Public Assistance grants, it will not be economically rational for participants to take any extra, part-time job. Any additional income must be reported and the amount of the monthly grant lowered equally. There, `any incentive to increase one's income PAGENO="0798" 3258 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 is effectively removed. President Tohnson has proposed that this "100 percent on tax on the earnings of those on public assistance" be eliminated, and "payment formulas" be enacted which would allow those on public assistance to keep part of what they earn.5 CALCULATION OF HOURS SPENT IN WORK EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING Work experience is defined for program purposes as progressive participation in actual work projects which will contribute to the participant's employability.6 * When work projects are supervised by local government agencies, they are in- tended to benefit the public. Such projects include highway or landscape beauti- fication programs, road and bridge bui]ding, and providing manpower to local government agencies. Training encompasses: basic adult education; high school equivalency; voca- tional training; and on-~the-job training with private employers. Basic adult education is required of all participants who have not completed the eighth grade, and classes are operated in all counties in the WE and T Program. Local school boards receive funds from Title lI-B of the EOA for this purpose. Participants may elect to go on to high school equivalency or regular high school classes, or they may attend vocational or special training such as Manpower Development and Training Act classes. Vocational `and on-the-job training are full-time activi- ties; however, participants enrolled in such activities may receive time off to attend any educational classes in which they may wish to enroll. Each individual's situation is considered within the context of available training facilities in his county, and assignments made accordingly. Once the participant's grant is calculated, the number of hours he must put into work experience and training combined is obtained by dividing the total monthly grant (basic requirements niinus any income) by the prevailing mini- mum wage. The applicable minimum wage at the time of this study was $1.25 per hour. Thus, the minimum $93 per month grantee would be required to spend 74 hours per month at work experience and training; the maximum hours required, regardless of the size of the monthly grant, is eight hours five days per week. Participants receive all state holidays, but no vacation time. Most educational classes require six hours per week of his time, the remainder is spent in work experience, vocational, or on-the-job training. HEALTH BENEFITS All WE and T participant family members are entitled to the following health coverage without tharge: A. Physicians' services, no limit, B. Hospitalization, 14 days maximum per admission for almost any reason including maternity care, with the possibility of an extension to 21 days per admission, C. Dental care, x-rays, extractions, restorations, stannous fluoride, any other treatments for pain, infection or hemorrhage, D. Drugs, as prescribed by physicians and dentists, E. Ophthalmological or optometrical services as necessary for the father. Coverage `beyond this limit is obtainable upon special request. SOCIAL SERVICES Caseworkers coordinate the participants work experience and training com- ponents in order to best prepare for future employment. A participant may not refuse a bona fide offer of employment at any time. Every effort is made to coordinate the WE and P Program with similar programs such as, Head Start, Job Corps, Vocational Rehabilitation and the Food Stamp Program. The partici- pant is appraised of his rights, privileges, opportunities and responsibilities under these programs. He is encouraged to participate fully in all of them. * APPENDIX II THE PILOT FOOD STAMP PROGRAM The Pilot Food Stamp Program was inaugurated in 1981, and has been ex- panded subsequently. It is administered by the United States Department of ~U.S. President (Johnson), op. cit., p. 17. 6 Work Eaperience and Training Handbook, Section 1010. PAGENO="0799" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3259 Agriculture (USDA). The objectives are to expand the market for agricultural products and to increase the ability of low-income families to buy greater quanti- ties of better quality food. All nineteen counties included n the WE and T Pro- gram were also participating in the Food Stamp Program at the time of this study; all applicants and participants were eligible to buy food stamps. A variable scale is used by which low-income families can exchange the amount o money they supposedly spend on food for food stamps of a higher value in purchasing power. The lower the monetary income, the higher the value of the food stamps received. No distinction is made for ages of family members, only the total number is considered. This is illustrated in Chart 1, which shows the relationship between how much a family must pay for food stamps in cash, and the value of the food stamps received (both on the vertical axis), as it varies with monthly income, the horizontal axis. The relationship is shown for a fam- ily of six members. From Ohart 1, it is apparent that there is an economic incentive to buy food stamps at ~rery low levels of income. However, as income rises, the incentive is dampened. Therefore, one might suspect that, as people entered the WE and T Program and increased their monthly incogies, their economic incentive to buy food stamps would decrease. However, this must be coupled with the stated policy of the WE and T Program to appraise all participants of their oppor- tunities to participate in th~ Food Stamp Program. Food stamps can be used to purchase almost any kind of food. However, several kinds of items commonly regarded as "groceries" are excluded, including soaps and cleaning materials; tobacco; and alcoholic `beverages. Any imported food items are excluded as well. PAGENO="0800" CHART1 FOOD STAMPS: COST AND VALUE RECEIVED AT VARIOUS INCOME LEVELS Dollars per Month 250 C 0 ci ci 150 - ii Income per Month $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 PAGENO="0801" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3261 APPENDIX III SCHEDULE Booklet will be picked up on - Interviewer - No. - CONFIDENTIAL 1. Head of Household - Date ________ Time ________ Address _________________________ County - - Box No. _____ Work Experience and Training: Participant _______: Date Started ________ Applicant ________ Family (Household) Composition: Name Relation to Head Sex Age Education (highest grade completed) Head Male ~`articipant: 1 before ~ Now.~ 2. We'd like to know something about your relatives who are unemployed right now. Can you tell us how many of your brothers, sisters, or married sis- ters' husbands are unemployed right now? (Include retired without pension but not retired with pension.) He ad of Household's Wife's Brothers Single Sisters Married sisters' husbands 80-084 0-67-pt. 4-51 PAGENO="0802" 3. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY OF LAST TEN YEARS BEGINNING WITH LATEST JOB HELD 4. Now I would like to get some idea of the family's clothing. I would like to get information for each member of the family. Would you please give me the names of family members and tell me how many of each different kinds of clothing, if any, they have. Family Members by Name Ad"lt Males Adult Winter coat Changes of f Suits ~eryday or jacket work clothes I dresses Children 2-6 Females~ ~hanges of Sunday everyday dresses cldthes School-~ge Girls School School shoes dresses School-Age School shoes Sch~öl pants Shirts L~,J 0 0 0 0 0 PAGENO="0803" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3263 5. Now we would like to know something about how you think of the Work Experi- ence and Training Program. If you were going to describe it to somebody who didn't know anything about it, what would you tell him, briefly? (Record Verbatim.) (Participants only) As far as you are concerned, what are the main ways that you and your family have benefitted from the WE and T Program? As far as you are concerned, what are the main ways that you or your family expect to benefit from the Program? Anything else? Now which of these statements comes about the closest to the way you feel about it? _______ a. The WE and T Program helps financially, but when it's finished, we won't be any better off than before. ________ b. There is some chance of getting a better job or a steadier one, because of the WE and T Program, but not too much. _______ c. There is a good chance that the WE and T Program will lead to a better or steadier job. Why do you think this way? - PAGENO="0804" 3264 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 6. Have any of your children ever attended any special summer school programs in the past two years? Yes _______ No _______ (If yes) Were these children who attended those who hadn't entered the first grade or those already in school or both? Preschool ____________ Those in School Both (If yes) When did they start? Preschool _____________________ Those in School - What made you decide to send them? _________________________________ 7. Have you ever been a member of: (check, if yes) a labor union? ________ PTA? ____________ a lodge or any kind of social organization? any other organization (s)? (specify) _______________________ 8. Have you been visited by people from a government agency in the last year? Yes ____________ No ______________ ~If yes) Was it: When? WE and T caseworker? __________________ _______ any other welfare worker? ________________ ________ community action worker? ________________ ________ home demonstration agent? ________________ ________ county agent? ____________________________ ________ orwho? ___________________________ _______ PAGENO="0805" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3265 9. Have you gone to see any government official or agency in the last year? Yes _____ No_ (If yes): 10. How far is it to - from here? _______ (county seat) How do you usually get there? - Own car _______ Walk _______ Can get a ride usually ________ Other (specify) - How often do you go there for any reason? ________________ per ________________ (number of times) (time period) How often does your wife go to town for any reason? _________________per - (number of times) (time period) 11. Where do you usually go shopping? (everything) ____________________ (town) Where do you usually go grocery shopping? - (town) Do you buy some of your groceries in supermarkets? Yes - No ______ (If yes) How much of your groceries would you say you bought in supermarkets? ________% Paved - Unpaved mi. (miles) PAGENO="0806" 3266. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 12. How far is it to your: doctor's office? - miles dentist's office? - miles hospital? _____________ miles 13. How many times have you been to the doctor in the last six months? last year? 6 months Total times last year Yourself Wife Children .__________________________ 14. How many times have you been to the dentist in the last six months? last year? 6 months Total times last year Yourself Wife . Children 15. Have you or any member of your family been in the hospital in the last six months? Yes ___________ No ___________ (If yes) Listwho, for how long andwhen. Name Length of stay When PAGENO="0807" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3267 16. Some people try to help out friends or relatives who are not doing too well. Have you helped support or given any money to relatives or friends in the past six months? Yes - No - How much? - 17. Do ~ children who go to school eat lunch there? Yes ________ No _______ (If yes) Do they have to pay for it? Yes - No - How much per day per child? $_______________ Be sure that this is noted in record of expenses next month. 18. As you know, under the regulations of the Work Experience and Training Program, you can save up to $1,000 for two-adult households and $500 for one -adult households. Do you have: a checking account? Yes ________ No ________ a savings account? Yes ________ No ________ Are you saving money for any special purpose? Yes _______ No - (If yes) For what? - How much do you have in total savings? $_ How much do you save in a month? $_____________________ 19. We're interested in knowing what kinds of things you've bought lately. Do you own a car? Yes ________ No ________ (If yes) Year _______ Make _______ Price _______ When did you buy it? ________________ Did you pay cash or buy it on time? Cash ________ Time ________ (If on time) How much do you pay per month? $_____________ About how much do you pay for gas and oil and repairs on the average per month? $________________ Do you have auto insurance? Yes ________ No - (If yes) How much do you pay for it? - per ____________ PAGENO="0808" 3268 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 20. Have you bought any furniture or appliances in the past year? Yes No (If yes) Itemize below. Item Date Purchased Total Cost Monthly Payments Anything else on credit, encyclopedias, anything from a catalogue? Yes No (If yes) Itemize below. Item Date Purchased Total Cost Monthly Payments What other monthly payments do you have to make then? None (or list below) Item Date Purchased Total Cost Monthly Payments I PAGENO="0809" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3269 21. Do you own or rent your house? Own __________ Rent __________ Would you tell us how much you pay for the following items each month? Rent or mortgage payments $___________ Insurance ____________ Electricity ____________ Water $___________ Gas $___________ Taxes $____________ Other ______________ $____________ Total housing cost per month $____________ 22. Have you done any repairs to your house in the past year? Itemize below. What Date Cost About how much on the average do you spend a month for such repairs and maintenance? $_ 23. Do you have any life insurance or burial insurance? Yes ________ No _______ (If yes) Fill in below. Kind (term or endowment) Value of . Policy Pu ~ Date rchased How much do you pay? $~per PAGENO="0810" 3270 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 24. Doyoubuyfoodstamps? Yes ______ No_ (If yes) How much do you pay per month? $ ~~per - (cost) - (value) (If no) Can you buy them? Yes - No ________ (If no) Why not? ________________________________________ 25. What is your total income per month? $_____________ Where does it come from? WE and T grant $_ Earnings $_ Social Security $_ Farming $_____________ Other (specify) $________________ __________________ Total $_______________ (Should equal figure above.) PAGENO="0811" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3271 APPEND]X Ill -Continued CONFIDENTIAL Second Interview Head of Household Address _____________ WE and T: Participant ______________Date ______ Time ____ ________ County ___________ Box No. Date Started _________ Applicant _________ Interviewer No. We will go over the record of expenses and clarify any muddled points and probably use recall on anything not noted. 1. Did you buy anything on credit during the period you were keeping the record? L~ Item ~ pa3i per month 2. Did you raise any poultry, sheep, hogs, or cattle that you killed for your own use this past week? Yes No (If yes) How many (hogs, poultry, sheep or cattle) did you kill? How much did they weigh alive? How much of their feed did you buy? Average FeedPurchased Number Weight (%, weightor value) Hogs . Sheep or lambs Cattle Calves Chickens* Other I *Note: If no weight estimate, note heavy or light bree'd and broilers and mature birds. PAGENO="0812" 3272 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3. Did you have a home vegetable garden? Yes _________ No - Did you freeze, can or preserve in some other way any of these vegetables? Yes - - No _______ (If yes) What vegetables? How much? How? Commodity Quantity How Preserved What vegetables did you grow in addition to these? ________ _______ 4. Of the vegetables from the garden, did you eat any of them during the last week? Yes - No - (If yes) Vegetables When It Came In How Long Did It Last Times/Wk. Eat In addition, did you raise any Irish potatoes or sweet potatoes? Yes No ________ (If yes) About how many bushels or pounds? Irish potatoes __________ (bushels or pounds) Sweet potatoes ___________ (bushels or pounds) 5. (If did not sell milk) Did you have a milk cow to produce milk for your family? Yes ________ No ________ (If yes) How many days of the past week did your cow actually supply your family with all the fresh milk it needed? - days (% Of time) How many quarts per day does your family use when it is avail- able? ________________quarts 6. Do you have any hens producing eggs? Yes ________ No ________ (If yes) About how many eggs did you get last week? ________ Did you eat them all? Yes ___________ No ___________ (If no) How many did you eat? ________ PAGENO="0813" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3273 Additional Questions House: Do you own your home or rent your home or get it free? (circle one) (If own) When did you buy it? __________________ How much land do you own? _________ acres. Tobacco base? __________ acres Are you still making payments on it? Yes ________ No _______ (If yes) How much do you pay per month/year? $_________ month/year How many more payments do you have to make? ___________ How much would you have to pay for a house like this today? $_ (Total indebtedness for house is $_ (If rent) How much rent do you pay? $_ /month. Is any land included? Yes _______No ________ Tobacco base? _______ (If yes) How much would it cost just to rent the house, that is, without the land? _____________ (If free) What do you have to do in order to get this house rent-free? ________ Part of share agreement ________Keep it up for somebody ________ or what?__________________________________________ How much would you have to pay to rent this house if you weren't getting it free? $ /month (only the house, not the farm- land) Car: Are you still making payments on your car? Yes ________ No ________ (If yes) How much per month or year? $ /month/year. How many more payments do you have to make?____________ (Total indebtedness for car is $____________ ~~pecially applicants What was your total income last month? that is October? $___________ How many days ___________@what rate? $_____________ Other Debts: What other monthly payments or what other debts do you have? Include all debts, store debts, hospital bills, doctor bills, loans from loan companies and finance companies, money owed to relatives, anything you owe money on. Item When Total Purchased Cost Monthly Payments Amount still owed Payments_to_be_made or PAGENO="0814" 3274 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Inventory of Consumer Durables Finally, we'd like to know if you have any of the following items. (Place a check mark if they do) Radio - Television ________ Phonograph or Stereo_ Refrigerator _________ Washing Machine ________ Deep Freeze - Sewing Machine - Manuel or Electric PAGENO="0815" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3275 APPENDIX Ill-Continued Name ___________________________ Address - WE and T Applicant - To be picked up on __________________ Participant Dates kept ___________________ to __________________ (one complete month) INSTRUCTIONS FOR KEEPING THIS BOOKLET Everytime you buy something, anything, please write down how much you spent for the item in the box next to the name on the item bought. There are 19 main kinds of purchases in this booklet: Dairy Products and Eggs Beer and Liquor Soft Drinks Canned Goods Bakery Goods Fresh Meat Fish and Chicken Mixes, Prepared Foods Recreation Tobacco Clothing Soaps and Cleaning Supplies School Lunches Car Expenses Frozen Foods Snacks Medicine and Cosmetics Cooking Supplies Fresh Fruits and Vegetables Other Expenses Under eachof these main kinds of purchases, there are several possible items. For example, under Dairy Products there are milk, eggs, canned milk, ice cream, cheese and butter. If you buy some eggs, write down the amount spent in the box next to eggs. If you buy something which is not listed under any main kind, just mark it down under what you think it should be. The most important thing is to mark down every purchase -but only once. Thank you. James C. Dean, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky 40506 PAGENO="0816" 3276 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dairy Products and Egg~ Milk Eggs Canned Milk Ice Cream Cheese -all kinds Butter Other Beer and Liquor Soft Drinks L~ Canned Goods-anything in a can Meats Vegetables Fruits BabyFoods Juice Other Bakery Goods-ready to eat, not mixes Bread Cake Other PAGENO="0817" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3277 Meat Fish and Chicken Hamburger Roast Steak Sowbelly Bacon ~-____ Chops Ham Sausage Hot Dogs Fish chicken Bologna - . Other Mixes, Prepared Foods Cake, frosting & Cookie mixes Pizza Pot Pies T.V. Dinners Other Recreation Movies Shows Fairs Other Tobacco ~ 1 1 1 80-084 O-67-pt. 4-52 PAGENO="0818" 3278 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 clothing-anything for any family member Potato Chips I ::: t Iii Children Soaps and Cleaning Supplies ~ School Lunches-if paid for at school Car Expense ii L Gas Oil Repairs Other Frozen Foods Vegetables Fruits Meats Juice Other Snacks i Candy I I * Cookies - Popcorn Other PAGENO="0819" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3279 Medicine and Cosmetics Medicine and Drugs Toothpaste ` Shaving Supplies Ladies Cosmetics Other I Cooking Supplies Oleomargarine Lard Cooking Oil - Salad Dressing Corn Meal Flour Sugar Salt Pepper Seasonings - Other - - Fresh Vegetables and Fruits-list only purchased items, not from garden Lettuce - Potatoes . Tomatoes . Corn Beans Cabbage Cucumbers - Carrots Bananas Others . PAGENO="0820" 3280 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 PAGENO="0821" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3281 BIBLIOGRAPHY PUBLIC DOCUMENTS U.S. Bureau of the Census. Statistical Abstract of the United States. 1966. U.S. Congress. An Act to Mobilize the Human and Financial Resources of the Nation To Combat Poverty in the United States. Public Law 88-452, 88th Congress, 2nd Session, 1964. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Food Consumption and Dietary Levels Under the Pilot Food Stamp Program, Detroit, Michigan anc~ Fayette County, Pennsylvania. 1962. U.S. President 1963-67 (Johnson). Economic Report of the President Together With the Annual Report of the Economic Advisors. January 1967. BOOKS Becker, Gary S. Human Capital. New York: Columbia University Press. 1964. Oaudil1, Harry. Night Comes to the Unmberlands. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1962. Conley, Ronald W. The Economics of Vocational Rehabilitation.. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1966. Ford, Thomas R. (ed.). The Southern Appalachian Region. Lexington: Univer- sity of Kentucky Press, 1962. Freund, John B. Modern Elementary Statistics. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1960. Gordon, Ruth. The Economics of Welfare. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. Harrington, Michael. The Other American: Poverty in the United States. New York: MacMillan Co., 1962. - Jones, Virgil P. The Hatfields and the McCoys. Ohapel Hill: North Carolina University Press, 1954. Katona, George. Psychological Analysis of Economic Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Co., 1963. Klarman, Herbert E. The Economics of Hea:lth. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. Kronsney, Herbert. Beyond Welfare: Poverty in the Supercity. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966. Lee, Maurice W. MacroEconomics: Fluctuations, Growth and Sksbility. Home- wood, Illinois: Irwin, 1963. May, Edgar. The Wasted Americans. New York: New American Library, 1966. Gmat!, Oscar. Poverty Amid Affluence. New York: The Twentiety Century Fund, 1966. Schultz, Theodore W. The Economic Value of Education. New York: Columbia University Press, 1965. Shostak, Arthur B. and William Gomberg. (ed.). New Perspectives on Poverty. Englewood Oliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1965. Snedecor, George W. Statistical Methods. Ames Iowa: Iowa. State College Press, 156. Stigler, George: The Theory of Price. New York: MacMillan Co., 1952. Weller, Jack. Yesterday's People. Lexington: University of Kentucky Press, 1966. Zerof, Selwyn A. Statistical Library for the 7040 Program~s and Subroutines. Lexington: University of Kentucky Computing Center, June 1966. ARTICLES Bateman, Worth. "An Application of Cost-Benefit Anaiy~ls to the Work Experi- ence and Training Program," American Economic Review. LIII, 1, forth- coming. Oloward, Richard. "How Rights Can Be Secured," The Nation. 33 (March 7~ 1966) 11-15. (editorial) "Difficulties with Food Stamps Suggests a Fresh Approach," Louisville Conner Journal. (March 13, 1967)., 8. Ferber, Robert, "Research on Household Behavior," American Economic Review. LII (March1962), 19-63. Holmes, Emma G. "Spending Patterns of Low-Income Families (1961)," Adult Leadership. (May 1965), 16-34. Schwartzweller, Harry and James S. Brown. "Education as a Cultural Bridge PAGENO="0822" 3282 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Between Eastern Kentucky and the Great Society," Rural ~Sociology. LIV December 1962), 357-373. Smith, Eldon. "Restrictions on Policy Alternatives Relating to Underdeveloped Regions of Developed Countries," Journal of Farm Economics. 48 (Decem- ber 1966), 1227-1231. BULLETINS DeJong, Gordon F. The Popu~ation~ of Keittucky: Changes in the Number of In- habitants, 1950-60. Lexington: Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Bul- letin, No. 675, 1961. Fulmer, John. Development Potential for Kentucky Counties with Related Sta- tistics. Lexington: University of Kentucky Bureau of Business Research, 192- 195. Johnson, Cyrus M. Mountain Families in Poverty. Lexington: Kentucky Agricul- tural Experiment Station Publication RS-24, 1965. Quackenbush, G.G. and J.D. Shaffer. Collecting Food Purchcse Data By Con- sumer Panel. East Lansing: Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station Tech- nical Bulletin 279, August 1960. REPORTS Schultz, T. W. "Education and Economic Opportunities in Depressed Rural Areas: Implications for Research," Problems of Chronically Depressed Rural Areas. Raleigh: North Carolina State University Press, 1965. Somers, Gerald. Prospecting in Economics. A Report on Ford Foundation Grants in Economic Research. New York: Ford Foundation Press, December 1966. UNPUBLISHED MATERIAL Brode, Nancy. "Expenditures of Income of 18 Selected White Families Receiv- ing ADO in Knoxville, Tennessee, April 1900." Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Home Economics, University of Tennessee, 1963. Barney, Helen S. "Food Shopping Practices of Selected Low-Income Families, Riley County, Kansas, 1905." Unpublished Master's thesis, Department of Home Economics, Kansas State University, 1965. OTHER SOURCES Work Eccperien.ce am~i Training Handbook, Department of Economic Security. Frankfort: Division of Public Assistance, 1966. Work Experience and Training Program. Personal interview with Ralph Wells, Supervisor, Division of Public Assistance, Department of Economic Security, Commonwealth of Kentucky. April 5, 1966, June 14, 1966, July 26, 1966, Sep- te~nber 6, 1966. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH The author of this thesis was born in Chicago, Illinois, on December 29, 1940. He attended public and private elementary schools in Chicago, and Searcy, Ar- kansas, and graduated from Carl Schurz High School, Chicago, in January 1958. From September 1958 through June 1961, he attended Deep Springs College in Deep Springs, California. In September, 1961, he enrolled in Cornell University where he received a degree of Bachelor of Science with a major in Agricultural Economics in June 1903. He entered the Peace Corps in September 1963. After four months of training at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and in Puerto Rico, he served as a Peace Corps Volunteer specializing in cooperatives in the Republic of Ecuador, South America, until August 1965. In September 1965, he was employed as a graduate assistant in the Department of Agricultural Economics, and enrolled in the Graduate School of University of Kentucky, pursuing a Master of Science Degree in Agriculture. In June 1967, he was appointed a Foreign Service Officer in the Department of State. Chairman PERKINS. Also without objection, at this point shall be included a newspaper article from the Wall Street Journal of July 3, 1967 entitled "Cutting Relief Rolls-Administration, States Step Up Effort To Put Welfare Clients in Jobs." PAGENO="0823" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3283 (The newspaper article follows:) [From the Wall Street Journal, July 3, 1967] CUTTING RELIEF ROLLS-ADMINISTRATION, STATES STEP U~ EFFORT To PUT WELFARE CLIENTS IN JOBS By Jonathan Spivak JACKSON, Ky.-Ben Miller, a 50-year-old former coal miner, was all but illiter- ate until recently. But now, he proudly tells a visitor, he can "sit down and write a letter." Along with thousands of other jobless, able-bodied adults in remote regions of Appalachia, Mr. Miller lives on public welfare; he receives a $245 monthly grant for his family of nine. But unlike many relief recipients elsewhere, his life is far from idle and aimless. Four days a week, he labors with shovel and wheelbarrow to help widen a dirt and rock road winding into a picturesque hollow, so 22 children living there can get to school more easily. One day a week he struggles to master the three R's in a barren one-room adult education center nearby, decorated only with a picture of Lyndon Johnson and a calendar from the Breathitt County Funeral Home. "HELPING THE NEIGHBORS" For Mr. Miller, this unusual, Federally supported welfare rehabilitation pro- gram, operating in 19 Kentucky counties, provides sustenance, self-respect and at least the prospect of future employment. Says he: "It puts food on the table for the kids. And this way we are helping the neighbors." For 2,500 other east- ern Kentuckians, the endeavor has already meant deliverance from the dole; their training has led to full-time jobs as carpenters' helpers, school janitors, drafts- men, factory workers and the like. Kentucky's crusade, it should be noted, has not cut the relief rolls enough to stem the state's rising welfare costs, which now total about $100 million a year. Nationally, public relief spending has also kept climbing-from a Federal-state- local total of $4.3 billion as recently as 1961 to $6.5 billion last year. Among the reasons: More liberal monthly payments; the extension of eligibility to growing numbers of needy families; the decrease in job opportunities for the unskilled. But many wefare specialists insist that work-training programs offer a long- term solution to the painful cost problem. The aim is to make the nation's public assistance programs a pathway to independence for the poor; now, critics con- tend, the relief system subsidizes and even perpetuates poverty. PROMISING EFFORTS Admittedly, many of the nation's 7.6 million welfare recipients have little hope for self-support-because of advanced age, disability or child-caring responsibili- ties. But Federal officials estimate that several hundred thousand could benefit from work-training programs. As evidence, they point to such promisin.g efforts as these: New York City's Port Authority prepares mothers on welfare for office or cleri- cal work; one-quarter of a recent class of 108 graduates received two or more job offers, and 86 are working. The Clatsop County Community College in Astoria, Ore., tests and trains local welfare recipients for gainful employment. Within two years, the county's welfare caseload decreased 17%, though elsewhere in the state welfare rolls increased. In the past two years, 970 of a group of 1,145 relief receipients in St. Paul, Minn., were trained and placed in full-time jobs. Their earnings averaged twice as much as their previous public assistance grants. In Cleveland's Hough slum, more than 400 mothers oii welfare were given spe- cial permission to supplement their meager monthly checks with outside earn- ings; half gained full-time employment and left the relief rolls. Some other cost-savings endeavors, even more experimental, take a different route. In Chicago, the Cook County welfare agency is seeking to reunite 300 de- serting fathers with their families; so far, 35 couples have been reconciled, and 10 child-bearing unions legalized. In instances where the fathers earn enough, the families will go off welfare. PAGENO="0824" 3284 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 CREATING INCENTIVES Local successes are spurring Washington's interest in rehabilitation possibili- ties. Many lawmakers, conservatives aiid liberals alike, favor expanding welfare training programs and introducing economic incentives for employment of relief recipients. The Johnson Administration has proposed legislation to establish at least one rehabilitation project in every state and let the beneficiaries retain up to $50 a month of outside earnings without a reduction in their relief checks. The influential House Ways and Means Committee, which is now considering these and other welfare proposals, is sympathetic. But the big obstacle is expense. Effective rehabilitation reforms require an immediate increase in spending-for training, extra family seevices and other aid-to achieve the hoped-for ultimate savings. Relief rehabilitation efforts started in 1962 with Federal welfare law amend- ments authorizing work-training projects; since then, the antipoverty program has provided more liberal Federal support. In all, welfare experts estimate, about 130,000 relief recipients are now- getting such aid, and 00,000 have gained full- time jobs as a result of training. But it's difficult to determine whether rehabili- tation efforts or improved economic conditions were really responsible for putting so many welfare clients to work. Certainly there are persistent problems: Welfare clients often need extensive aid to become self-supporting. Many are illiterate, beset by emotional problems and handicapped by police records or alcoholism. Suitable jobs may be unavail- able. Some jobs may be controlled by unsympathetic unions. Employers often shy away from hiring reliefers because of notions about their shiftlessness and irre- sponsibility. Job-placement efforts by U.S. Employment Service offices frequently ignore welfare clients. Shortages of skilled case workers, job counselors and other professional per- sonnel hamper the development of effective training programs. The lack of ade- quate day-care facilities for children of working mothers is a major obstacle. Many of the 900,000 women heading families on relief w-ant to work, it's said, but can't free themselves from their offspring. (Sens. Javits and Kennedy of New York are sponsoring legislation to provide $60 million for day-care centers, and the Federal Welfare Administration intends to substantially in.crease its support for a sort of baby-sitting service in the slums.) Furthermore, certain features of the relief system discourage efforts toward self-sufficiency. A prime example: Local welfare agencies usually deduct any earned amounts from recipients' grants. (But job-training incentives occasionally give welfare clients unintended windfalls. Until Federal officials clarified the rules, some relief recipients in northern New- York State w-ere making as much as $800 a month by retaining their regular welfare grants along with their w-ork payments. TROOPING TO WASHINGTON Now bureaucratic battles in Washington threaten added complications. The Administration has proposed shifting control of most aspects of relief work-train- ing programs from the Federal welfare agency to the Labor Department, in order to permit merger with other manpower projects. Local welfare leaders are troop-f ing to Washington to support their parent organization; they claim that ~efore taking jobs, relief recipients need prolonged preparation by case w-orkers. Labor officials ridicule low job-placement rates in welfare projects-only about 30% compared with 70% in many Labor Department projects and propose to provide more skilled job training. Some officials fear the fracas will lead only to continued wrangling and the dismantling of successful local training projects. "I think welfare training pro- grams would ~e better off in the Post Office," protests one disgruntled combatant. For more insight into progress and problems in welfare work training, look at Kentucky, which operates one of the nation's largest programs. In this state, 3,500 unemployed fathers are now- participating at an annual cost of $12.5 million. About 90% of the men cannot read and write at a fifth-grade level, and almost half are entirely illiterate. Thus, extensive basic education must precede any serious effort to train the men for new- job skills. But, after years in the coal mines, many are too old and exhausted for steady schooling. "Labor would be better for me, for a man my age," contends Chad Haddis, a 55- year-old ex-miner who would rather ~e w-orking than attending the special train- ing class he is taking to learn the rudiments of job-seeking and holding. He is taught how to fill out a tax form, apply for a driver's license and other such simple assignments. PAGENO="0825" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3285 More advanced courses are also offered. At the Breathitt-Sloniker High School here in Jackson, some relief recipients report nightly for training as draftsmen, auto mechanics and electricians. These men must possess `at least an eight-grade education and enough motivation to stick with a year-long course. SEEKING SECURITY Surrounded by disassembled automobile engines, one of these trainees, 39-year- old Carter Miller, explains that he lost his job as a filling-station attend'ant three months ago. As a mechanic, he hopes to gain greater security and more money for his wife and six children. In the next room, Clarence Wooton, a drafting instructor, boasts of the success of his last class. "Thirteen of the fifteen are working in the trade," he says. But most of Kentucky's welfare `manpower, rather than preparing for such jobs, is simply doing unskilled 1a~or on public projects-planting treets, repairing roads, building sidewalks and bridges, maintaining recreation facilities and the like. The work is arduous manual labor. Under the hot summer sun, Ben Miller and his co-workers hack away with shovels at a hillside, progressing only a few feet a day; with earth-moving equipment, miles of road could be constructed daily. Many critics `scoff at Kentucky's program as meaningless make-work, a resur- rection of the WPA of depression days. But state welfare officials disagree." These people are in their forties and fifties. A lot never held a job, and a lot have many characteristics which prevent them from holding a job," says C. Leslie Dawson, state Commissioner of Economic Security. "Many will have to ~e on public pro- grams for a long time. But their children get the services of welfare workers, con- tinue to stay in school and from outside influences receive a different idea of what life is all about." Furthermore, it's argued, Kentucky's poor learn to follow instructions and take responsibility. Some are selected to serve as crew chiefs, and others are forced to measure up or lose their welfare work payments, which average $205 a month- almost double regular assistance grants. "The biggest thing they learn is to work together and take orders," says Frank Davidson, a work-training supervisor. CLEVELAND OPENS DAY-CARE CENTER For a contrast with rural Kentucky, visit welfare officials in Cleveland, who wrestle with work-training problems in the urban slums. The' big need, they insist, is for more day-care facilities to `accommodate the children of mothers on welfare who seek education and jo~s. Cuyahoga County Welfare Director Eugene Burns says hundreds of women could benefit if adequate facilities were available. So far his agency has established seven day-care centers, each accommodating 15 chil- dren, in slum churches; five more centers will open soon. The benefits can be easily observed. At the Antioch Baptist Church, welfare youngsters gobble a noon meal of baked beans, juice, salad and tapioca pudding. Mrs. Corrine Ector, the director, trys to improve manners. "It's the best thing in the world for them. They were definitely not getting the training in the home, even when the mother was there," she `maintains. Cuyahoga County welfare officials say they are finding full-time jobs for 45 wel- fare recipients a month at wages th'at often far exceed their relief checks. The keys to success, it's said, are patience, personal attention to individual cases and lots of job preparation. Of the lB emplOyees of the city of Cleveland's printing and reproduction division, three are former welfare recipients. Other ex-reliefers serve as maintenance men for tbe municipal power and light operation and perform sanitation work for the health department. Others are employed in l)rivate industry at salaries ranging up to $8,000 annually. "I've been in this business for 10 years, and guys I never thought would amount to anything are off relief," declares Carl Riccardo, who helps place the welfare recipients. Chairman PERKINS. I have a letter from the Ort,ho-Vent Shoe Com- pany and I ask permission to iusert it in the record after we hear the next witness. I have another letter from the State of Kansas, State Technical Assistance Division, a progress report., and I will ask permission to have this inserted in the record. PAGENO="0826" 3286 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Quu. I also have a statement from the Ortho-Vent Shoe Com- pany which I would like to have placed in the record. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection that statement will also be placed in the record. I would like to have permission to insert in the record a telegram from Grace Brown. I also have a telegram from the OIC National Conference. Unless there is objection this will be inserted in the record. I have a letter from the Astoria Corporation signed by R. H. Carter. Unless there is objection I will ask the committee to insert that in the record. Mr. Qmn. I would like to make the same request on this. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. You have permission to get all of them together and place them in the record. (The communications referred to follow:) STATE 0FKANSAS, STATE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM, Topeka, Kan~s., July 24, 1967. Congressman CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGBESSMAN PERKINS: Enclosed is a summary-progress report of the activities of our office for the first six months of operation. I think the report might be of interest to you and to your committee. Sincerely yours, ROBERT C. HARDER, TH. D., Coordinator. STATE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE OFFICE PROGRESS REPORT PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE The State Technical Assistance Office operates within the framework of the Office of the Governor and is an integral part of the E'xecutive Department of the state, designed to "establish procedures which will facilitate effective participation of the states in community action programs including, but not limited to, consultation with appropriate state agencies on the development, conduct, and administration of such programs." The present staff of the Kansas State Technical Assistance Office is composed of five members, including the coordinator who is in charge of the entire opera- tion. The remainder of the staff is composed of an office manager, program developer, field representative and secretary. ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND PROGRAM STRUCTURE 1. Office of Economic Opportunity In providing technical assistance from January, 1967 through June, 1967, this office has been instrumental in coordinating federal and state agencies. The Coordinator is Technical Advisor to the Governor in the area of health, welfare, and civil rights. This office initiated the discussions leading to joint memorandums of cooperation between the Department of Public Instruction and Community Action; and the Department of Social Welfare and Community Action. The coordinator, as Chairman of the State Cooperative Area Manpower Coin- mittee, and the program developer, as secretary to the committee, have taken the lead in formulating the state plan for the Cooperative Area Manpower Plan (C.A.M.P.S.) for 1968. They have acted as liaison between agencies and provided assistance to the designated CAMPS area in the assimilation and presentation of the final draft. The purpose of the Cooperative Area Manpower Plan is to inte- grate the planning activities of the several participating agencies (those agencies which are funded for training) into a nianter plan in order to meet the needs of the community's underprivileged and disadvantaged citizens without duplication of services. This will provide the maximum amount of specialized services, testing, PAGENO="0827" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3287 job orientation, training, and/or retraining, and job placement activities on the most efficient and economical basis to assist these citizens to become employable and thus, self-sustaining members of the state work force. Meetings have been held periodically witth th~ Community Action Program Directors over the state to offer guidance and to disseminate information. On-site visits have been made to the Community Action Agencies to give technical assistance and support. Training for the Community Action Boards has been conducted upon invitation. The field representative and the rural development specialist of Farmers Home Administration have made visits to various communities in the state to inform them of funds for housing. Visits have been made to an Indian Reservation and to Migrant Camps to establish better relations and to provide assistance in problem areas. On-site visits have been made to Head Start Programs throughout the state. Visits have been made to various communities who are interested in the development of community action programs. Talks have been made to various civic, religious, and educational groups. The office has developed film catalogues and other informational aids for Community Action Agencies. The coordinator, or representative of the office, has attended meetings with the Technical Assistance Coordinators from Region VI, (Kansas, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming). The staff has att~nded meetings at the Regional Office in Kansas City, Missouri. lifl Health anti welfare-Liaison activity The coordinator serves as the Governor's representative to the State Board of Health and to the State Board of Social Welfare. He is in a position to articulate the basic philosophy of the Office of Economic Opportunity in conjunction with the goals and purposes of the state. The coordinator regularly attends the monthly meetings of the Stafe Board of Health and the State Board of Social Welfare. At these meetings he enters into board discussions so he is in a position to make recommendations and suggestions as to programs in the State of Kansas.~ III. Legislative program The coordinator has been active in the formulation of legislation pertaining to the poor and to the needy. He has had specific responsibility for legislation in the area of health, education, welfare, and civil rights. In this position, he has helped to get Medicaid legislation enacted; he has helped in securing legislation setting up a comprehensive health planning agency; and he has helped in bring- ing about some basic changes in the welfare law so that the coverage is more liberal for the recipients. The Technical Assistance Office helped in securing broader coverage in the Kansas Act against discrimination. The office has also done the background work in the development of a code of fair practices of employment in the State of Kansas. The coordinator helped in the securing of increased aid to elementary and secondary education in Kansas which will provide direct benefits to the educational system within the state. IV. Trouble-shooting The coordinator acts in the capacity of trouble-shooter for the Governor. As a trouble-shooter, he is in a position to give immediate and first-hand attention to various health and welfare problems that arise throughout the stat~e. In this capacity, he is in a position to humanize state government. He is able to express the concern of the Office of the Governor and of the state in particular problems such as labor disputes, health matters, or disaster relief. CONCLUSION It is evident that this office does not operate in a vacuum. It is our feeling that for this office to be effective, it must be involved in as many of the various gov- ernmental activities taking place at the state level as possible. In this way, we are hopeful that we can promote ideas which are beneficial to all state agencies and which give special attention to some of the problems related to the poor aiicl to the needy. This office is also concerned that we be in a position to articulate the Office of Economic Opportunity concept of innovation, coordination, and com- munication throughout the various departments and divisions of state government. PAGENO="0828" 3288 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 [Telegram] LYNDHURST, OHIo, Jnly 26, 1967. Hon. CARL PERKINS, Education and Labor Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.: Please give the Job Corps a chance to function creatively and keep up the good work that has been started. People are important and the best investment in the world in terms of the future of our country. GRACE BROWN. [Telegram] PHILADELPHIA, PA., Jnly 28, 1967. Congressman CARL PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washi~gton, D.C.: I have been following the results of the deliberations hearings dealing with the poverty program closely and although I was unable to accept your invitation to participate in the actual proceedings due to a previous engagement that took me out of the country I feel compelled to make my opinions known. As founder of the Opportunities Industrial Center manpower movement and as chairman of the OIC National Conference which represents 015 units in more than 60 cities across America with thousands and thousands of manpower trainees in OIC schools and installations I wish to go on record as being clearly in support of the work of the office of economic opportunity and to defend without qualifica- tions the importance and the necessity for this independent agency within the Federal Government which speaks for the needs of the American poor and which serves to energize other departments in the Government toward more significant efforts on behalf of the poor. As one who is working intimately and closely with the problem, there is no question in my mind but that the continued existence of OEO is essential to the successful prosecution of the work of the Nation in dealing with problems of poverty. Unquestionably the creative initiating and demonstrated capacity of this agency is indispensible for this cause. Further it will be a tragedy to take from OEO jurisdiction programs initiated and promoted by that agency and even should this be done in any particular instance close coordination and maintenance of cooperatives OEO direction must be insured to preserve the spirit and prior intent of those programs involved. Finally, current disturbances are evidence of need of more OEO programs and more public fund support for OEO methods rather than cutbacks particularly in crucial areas of education and manpower training. For in the alleviation of poverty, the need for education and jobs is the key. I urge your committee, therefore, to overlook and to forgo any partisan political con- siderations in this matter and to support the OEO statute as has been proposed. Please, please do not cut it lack for funds. Let it go. The value of OEO is clear to me conclusively and personally for had there been no OEO then O.I.C. could not have survived. Rev. LEON SULLIVAN Chairman, 0.1. C. National Council. Chairman PERKINS. Our next witness is Mr. Cabell Brand, Presi- dent, Ortho-Vent Shoe Co., Inc., Salem, Va. Unless there is objection, your prepared statement will be inserted in the record. You may proceed in any way you choose. If you can shorten your testimony we would certainly appreciate it. Mr. BRAND. If you put my statement. in the record I am here at your request and I am at your disposal. Chairman PERKINS. I would appreciate a summary. Your statement is in the record. STATEMENT OP CABELL BRAND, P1~ESIDENT, OItTHO-VENT SHOE CO., INC., SALEM, VA. Mr. BRAND. I am a businessman from the southwestern part of Vir- ginia and in addition to my business activities on a volunteer basis I PAGENO="0829" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3289 am president of the local poverty organization which serves the area outlined on this map. There are four counties, one metropolitan area covering about 258,- 000 people. About 2 years ago we established a no-profit corporation with a high amount of business participation and business leadership. Chairman PERKINS. You are down next to me. Mr. Bit&im. Yes, sir. We have had programs going for about 2 years and we published an annual report which is attached to my state- ment and which I furnished to the committees with 50 copies and if it is appropriate it could be inserted in the record and I would be happy to answer any question you have on that. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection it will be inserted in the record. Mr. BRAND. To summarize my basic point, as a result of my 2 years' experience in working with a local community action organiza- tion, I am convinced that the Economic Opportunity Act is a good bill, that it is a good business investment, that it. will pay for itself in the investment of people and if possible the program should be expanded. As far as the issue of the role of the central office of Economic Op- portunity, as I say in my statement, I am firmly opposed to the ths- mantling of OEO and distributing antipoverty programs into other agencies of the Government. In saying this I am not criticizing the other agencies because each with its specialty has been most helpful but the responsibility of OEO is the poor people of this country. Our local community action pro- gram is stronger because of the involvement and the participation of the poor in all of our activities and the poor are encouraged to partici- pate because they are beginning to find out they. hav.e a voice locally and they have a voice in Washington through a Central Agency which is their representation exclusively. I have in my statement, Mr. Chairman, three constructive sugges- tions for changing the Economic Opportunity bill. Chairman PERKINS. Give us those suggestions. Mr. BRAND. The first would be to improve the communication with the people of the United States to let them know what the antipoverty program is all about. Most people don't understand it. They think it is a Washington program when actually it is a loç3al program. If a local Community Action organization is not formed, if it does not identify local needs, their is no program, and if local people are not involved there is no program. The Economic Opportunity Act gives people an opportunity to develop their own programs but this is not understood by the American people. There is a misconception about handouts because in this program as you know there are no handouts. The second suggestion that I have is that the information and evalu- ation techniques and procedures must be expanded. The amount of money we are spending now for the antipoverty program is only a small amount of what will have to be spent later in one form or another when our resources are greater. W must know accurately what we are doing right and what we are doing wrong. This is another reason for central OEO, but more inde- pendent evaluation must be made at the national and the local level. PAGENO="0830" 3290 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The third point is that I feel that administrative procedures and sys- tems in OEO must be strengthened. Both stability and time will help here but certainly encouragement from you will accelerate it. The summary to my statement, just as it says, does sum up my posi- tion and I will read that. The part of the antipoverty program is the local Community Action organization which develops local programs for local people run by local citizens. In simple business terms, the local Community Action organizations need to report to a specialized Federal agency from whom it receives it funds which will guide it, instruct it and help the less knowledgeable workers coordinate all of the various programs available to it. We must work together to solve the problem of poverty which is one of the major problems facing the world today. At this particular time when riots, unrest, high unemployment among the disadvantaged, high dropout rates are before us in glaring headlines, we should do nothing to weaken the forces, at work in this country. We must strengthen them. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with that statement. I have one ques- tion: I would like to ask you whether you feel that the programs that are under the direction of OEO at the present time should be spun off or should remain as is? Mr. BRAND. I think OEO should be strengthened to keep all of the programs that they have and I think they should continue to admin- ister the programs they have. Chairman PERKINS. Do you feel that the local Community Action agencies functioning now under OEO are effectively reaching the poor? Mr. BRA~. I think we are beginning. I think we have made great strides in 2 years but there are worlds of things that need to be done. Chairman PERKINS. If we transferred these functions back to the traditional programs would this be done? Mr. BRAND. I think Head Start needs to be with OEO at the present time. The Office of Education had opportunity for a hundred years to develop programs like this and they are not oriented from my view to do the type of education that Head Start is. Head Start is only partial- ly an education program. The in-home work that is necessary to do to bring this child up to- Chairman PERKINS. I must say I agree wholeheartedly with you and I intend to let you argue now with my colleague, Mr. Quie. Mr. BRAND. Mr. Perkins, I have one comment before you leave. I heard your previous questions about basic education and I think you might be interested to know in our area 18 months ago there was no basic education available to any adult in that area. In other words, if there were an adult beyond the public school age and he could not read or write there was no opportunity for him to go to school to learn to read and write, there was no program. If he had a third grade read- ing level there was no opportunity for him to secure basic education to get to the seventh grade level. Yet all of the vocational training pro- grams that were available in the area required a seventh grade reading level. So in effect until this type of program started this adult did not have a chance. PAGENO="0831" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3291 Chairman PERKINS. Has it redounded to the benefit down there and has it been wisely utilized and has it demonstrated its benefit through- out southwest Virginia? Mr. BRAND. Yes, sir, it certainly has. Mr. QUIE. It is my understanding that you are on the Business Advisory Committee. Mr. BRAND. I was just appointed a few weeks ago. I was not on it last year. Mr. QUIE. How long have you been on it? Mr. BRAND. Two months. Mr. QtTIE. Have you been to any meetings? Mr. BRAND. I have been to one meeting. Mr. QUIE. What is your relationship then directly with the CAP program? I imagine that is the only relationship you had with the poverty program prior to being on the Directors Advisory Committee? Mr. BRAND. Yes, I am president, which is really chairman of the volunteer program of the TAP program. I was asked by Mr. Shriver to serve on the leadership Advisory Council. Why I was elected .1 do not know. Mr. QtrIE. Which programs have you been involved in in developing your TAP program? I notice you have quite a few of them. Mr. BRAND. The annual report, i~ copy of which is attached to my statement, if you would just like to thumb through it, we have an OIC training school. We have Head Start for three years. We have day care schools. We have Neighborhood Youth Corps programs. We have a Neighborhood Development program. We have a Credit Union pro- gram. We have a Legal Aid Society. We have a Half-Way House. We have a Home Maker Service, and so on. Mr. QUIE. Were these directly operated by TAP? Mr. BRAND. Yes. We don't do anything that we can avoid doing. For example, in Head Start the money comes to TAP but with our central staff we subcontract this to the four respective school systems involved which is one of the big advantages of the Community Action program. As I mentioned in my statement, there is a Bedford County School Board, a Rockbridge, a Botetourt County School Board and the Roanoke and Roanoke Valley School Boards-five school districts in- volved in our area-but the Head Start program is funded through TAP and we subcontract to the respective school systems which admin- isters and handles its own work. Mr. QUIE. Are any of the other programs subcontracted? Mr. BRAND. Yes, sir. The Legal Aid Society is run by the Roanoke City Bar. They have a city corporation with a majority of lawyers on the board of directors and this project is turned over to them. In our efforts, Mr. Quie, we do not do anything that any other group is doing and almost every orgańizatión in the area is involved in coordinating our Community Action program so that we have avoided duplication and we have tried to concentrate on the things that were not being done before we came into existence. Mr. QIJIE. What programs are you operating directly that you have not done by subcontracting? Mr. BRAND. The `day care program, the Neighborhood Youth Corps programs, but even there we do not set up our own work projects. We will delegate to the town of Salem, for example, a certain number of PAGENO="0832" 3292 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967* young people who will work for them. They will supervise the work; we will administer the program. Mr. QuIE. In your Opportunity Industrialization Center, how did you get that started? Did the Board itself go out and organize it, that is the TAP Board? Mr. BRAND. WTe initiated it and then the OIC office from Philadel- phia, the Central Board, Reverend Sullivan Missionaries were inter- ested and came to the area. We had a need for a vocational training facility and the initiative came from the TAP Board but it was in response to a community request and a community need. We were one of the eight cities funded with an OIC school. Mr. QULE. How is the OIC funded? Where does the money come from? Mr. BRAND. From Labor, HEW and OEO. I don't know the per- cent breakdown of the three sources. Mr. QuiE. Is there any local money? Mr. BRAND. Yes, sir, the normal share, the major part of which came this year from the physical facility which was provided by the City of Roanoke which is an interesting story. We did not have a physical facility so we took the bottom portion of Victory Stadium, a football field, where we had some nearly 30,000 square feet, the City remodel'~d this and made into a school. So we took unused space and put it into use as a vocational training schooL Mr. QUIE. Has the business community put any dollars in OIC? Mr. BRAND. Almost all of the in-kind consideration that has come in our local TAP area has come from business. We have received almost no money from the Governments involved. The way the business has been done it has been not in cash but in giving us facilities and equipment. For example, the TAP headquarters itself is in an old building plus a new building which is owned by the Bank of Virginia and which was lent to us on a rent-free basis. Mr. QUIE. How about the poor people themselves? Have they con- tributed any cash to the program? Mr. ~ A little bit in the OIC program but nothing significant. Mr. QuIR. About how much? Mr. BRAND. I don't know, but they have a policy in the OIC which incidentally is also a separate board of directors under the OIC board of directors and they have a policy of trying to accumulate a small savings program, nickels and dimes from the poor. They have had this campaign and it. is a few thousand dollars. Mr. QUJE. I think they accumulated $105,000 in Philadelphia when they started. Mr. BRAND. I know-, and on a share basis that might be equal to our 258,000 populition area. Mr. QUTE. Would you supply for the record the amount of money the poor people contributed? Mr. BRAND. I will be glad to. Mr. QUIE. Who serves on the board of directors of OIC? Mr. BRAND. Business is well represented, the poor are well repre- sented, educators are represented. I w-ill be glad to supply that for the record. Mr. QLTIE. Would you supply that for the record and indicate whom each one represents and how- they are selected? PAGENO="0833" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3293 How many people are on this board of directors of TAP? Do you know the number or do I have to count them? Mr. BRAND. Thirty-five. It has been expanded two or three times. I think it is approximately 35 members on the board. Mr. QUTE. It says at the bottom over one-third of the board of directors directly represent the people serving on TAP programs. How many, exactly? Mr. BRAND. At least one-third. Mr. QUn~. it says over one-third. Do you know how far that is over? Mr. BRAND. One over, I believe. Mr. Qun~. How are the representatives of the poor selected? Mr. BRAND. The representatives of the poor are selected by the neighborhood organizations of each. In other words, a neighborhood which is poor is defined and this neighborhood selects its own repre- sentatives. Mr. QUIE. How many neighborhoods do you have? Mr. BRAND. I will be glad to let you know that, too. Mr. QUIE. Also how many are selected from each neighborhood. Mr. BRAND. One representative from each neighborhood. Mr. QUIE. This then would indicate you have- Mr. BRAND. Twelve or 14 neighborhoods but I can give you the precise number. Mr. QtTIE. Do you have neighborhoods in the rural areas? Mr. BRAND. We divide it that way. It is a large area, sparcely popu- lated. For example, Botetourt County with its population distribution is one area. Mr. QUIE. Indicate how each of these people was selected in the neighborhoods of the Center or in the City and how they were selected in the rural area. WThom do the other people on the Board represent? Mr. BRAND. The municipal and city governments are represented. Mr. QUIE. Each of the municipal governments select a person to represent them? Mr. BRAND. Initially they did but the successors to the board of directors are elected by the board so we do not have to go back to the City of IRoanoke and say elect a new one when his term expires. Mr. QUIE. DO you mean the board members elected the board mem- bers? Mr. BRAND. Yes, sir. Mr. QUIE. It is sort of self-perpetuating? Mr. BRAND. Except the charter prohibits that because you can't serve but two terms. Mr. Qun~. But they can select who succeeds the other side. How long is the term? Mr. BRAND. One year. Mr. Qrni. So the Board can decide who comes on it? Mr. BRAND. Would you like to have a copy of that charter? Mr. QuIE. That would be good. Mr. BRAND. It is a very good charter. Twill include that. Mr. QuTE. Could you also indicate who is to be represented? You might want to do that for the record. You say that the Government is represented. That means that you would elect somebody from the Government, I would assume. 80-084-67-pt. 4-53 PAGENO="0834" 3294 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. BRAND. That is right. For example, the City Manager is on the board The Bar Association is rep.resented, the Medical Association is represented, the labor unions are represented. Mr. Quu~. And you select the representative for each of these groups? Mr. BR~rn. We ask them to tell us who they want. and then an actual election is made by the Board, but we ask the Labor unions to give us their recommendation and help us select. Mr. QumE. This.is the way you operate with every group other than the representatives of the Board, is that right? Mr. BRAND. That is right. The board of directors does not have the opportunity of rejecting a representative of the poOr who has been properly elected by their neighborhood. Mr. QUIE. When did you first get one-third representation on the board? Mr. BRAND. From the very beginning. Mr. QuIE. Were these poor people? Mr. BRAND. Excuse me, in the very beginning, I believe the original requirement was 25 percent and from the very beginning we had 25 percent representation on the board. We later voluntarily increased this to one-third because we felt benefited from the participation of the poor. Mr. Qmr~. How often does the boa.rd meet? Mr. BRAND. Once a month and then special meetings as required. Mr. QuIE. Does the entire board meet rather than an executive committee? Mr. BRAND. The entire board meets and we have to have a quorum or else we can't do any business. Mr. QUIE. You mentioned previously that 350 people were em- ployed by TAP. Mr. BRAND. Yes, sir. Mr. QUIE. These are the peo~Ie directly employed by TAP? Mr. BRAND. This will not include the Head Start teachers by the school system. Mr. Quu~. How much money have you received in this last year? is that in your testimony anywhere? Mr; BRAND. The 1960 TAP financial statement is on the inside back cover of this report if you would like to look at it. It is 2.8 million dollars. Administrative cost of about 10 percent, which, as I said in my testimony, is a lower cost than ~I am able to do in my business. Mr. Q.uiE..Lower cost than that? Mr. BRAND. A lower cost than I am able to do in myb usiness as the., cost of admimstr~tion Mr. QuIE. How do you account for that? Do people give freely of~ their time? : *~. `~ Mr BR&~D We have a large number of volunteers `~nd we ha~ e been pretty tough on them bec'~use this is public money Mr. QuIE. So the 350 are the ones who are employed plus the i-olun- teei s How m~ n~ ~ olunteers do von have in the program ~ Mr BR ~ D You h'u e to define a volunteer We have hundreds of people who gn e some time but we `ilso h'tve a few people who are full time or h'tlf time ~ olunteeis Every week the'~ give half of their time Mr. Qmr~. Do you have this broken down to a full-time equivalent or do you just list them and the various times they spend? PAGENO="0835" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3295 Mr. BRAND. No, sir. As you know, on the in-kind contribution, you are only able to count a person if he gives at least half his time full time and we count those and we do not count the others. Mr. QUTE. What kind of evaluation have you made of these pro- grams now? Mr. BRAND. We have an information evaluation staff that we try real hard to evaluate. We have also contracted with the University Research Corporation and this was one of their pilot projects and they have been evaluating our programs. Our board of directors from the business community, a part of our directors meeting each month analyzes one program each month and reports of the competent officials in that particular program reports to us and we evaluate, and we have a hard working board. It is not just a board of directors. We get out into the field and we try to do our own evaluation. We are trying real hard, Congressman Quie, to make these people productive and embark on a program led by the business community to accomplish this. We think it is good business to take these people who are unproductive and do whatever is required ~o put them to work. Mr. QUIE. Have you had any outside evaluators look over your program? Mr. BRAND. No, sir, only from the Central OEO. Mr. QuIE. To what extent have you gone out and evaluated other programs throughout the country outside of Roanoke? Mr. BRAND. Do you mean me personally? Mr. QUJE. Yes, sir. Mr. BRAND. I spent three days in Watts in February to study tile Chamber of Commerce initiated program which they did involving the business community which is tile type of thing that we are interested in. I visited their trade schools and two OIC schools before we even came up with our remodeling plans and did that. Our executive director has visited almost every successful CAP program in th~ east, so to answer your question we have tried to learn from every place that we know where to go. Mr. QuIE. Will you be serving on the advisory board to help on some of the other programs? Mr. BRAND. Yes, sir. I am committed to do that~. Mr. QUIE. How much time will that be? Mr. BRAND. I am expected to give a day a month or a day eqiiiva- lent. I am now giving about 25 percent of my time to this program. Incidentally, I was just asked last week to serve on the United States Chamber of Commerce Board to study the guaranteed annual wage which basically I am opposed to. Mr. QuJE. I am glad to have you studying it then. In your testimony you suggested that the OEO remain intact and continue administering. Were you in favor of transferring three of the programs out of OEO? Mr. BRAND. I, am in favor of strengthening OEO. It is a business proposition, Congressman. You need to report in business to the organization from whom you receive your funds and instructions. Mr. QuIE. In other words, adult education, work study and small loans should be back inOEO. PAGENO="0836" 3296 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. BRAND. If OEO is going to fund them and since the heart of the program in our area at least is the family, we are trying to break the cycle of poverty with the family. We take a child and put it in Head Start or a child m the day care program which gives us an oppor- tunity to work with the big brothers and sisters or the mother if there is no man or the father if he is not working. In the Community Action program you want to be able to have a positive program for each member of that family so that you will get that family out of the cycle of poverty and make every adult in that family productive. So if the community Action program is good and if this is its func- tion, it seems to me that it should report to a coordinating agency in Washington who develops the programs and supervises these pro- grams. It is a normal business chain of command. Mr. QUIE. Are you saying that work study and adult education and the small business loan program ought to be back in OEO? Mr. BRAND. I think that with the basic adult education, and this needs to be defined, but once it is de.flned as I understand it it should now be in the Office of Education. It should be delegated to the school systems. The answer to your question is no, they should not back to OEO at this point. But it was proper that the Community Action pro- gram initiate this and get it started and when they can turn loose of it, when it is in the interest of the community to turn it loose then they can do it so they can be involved in something else. Mr. QUIE. Do you think they are ready to turn loose of Head Start? Mr. BRAND. No, because this is a. different type of program and this is because of the in-home work that the school system is not equipped to do. Mr. Qun~. Is the school system equipped to handle the basic adult education program? Mr. BRAND. As I mentioned to Mr. Perkins before he left, until 18 months ago there was no basic education in the Roanoke Valley by the school system. Our local Community Action organization exerted the pressure and we got it started and now we have one and they are run- ning it and this is good. But we also have a basic education program for lower levels as part of the OIC program because they still do not have a little course. Mr. QUIE. Do you think it was wise for OEO to delegate the follow- through program to the Office of Education? Mr. BRAND. I am not qualified to comment on that. I really don't know about that. Mr. QUIR. Do you think that OEO ought to coordinate more than its own program? There is $30 billion plus or minus expended by the Federal Government to help people get out of poverty outside of EOEO. Mr. BRAND. I understand. I think they should be involved. Mr. QmE. And should be the coordinating agency? Mr. BRAND. You have to define coordinating again. OEO prepared a book which was the first time that I have seen such a publication, telling the local Community Action organizations every Federal pro- gram that was available. The we sat down with them with our staffs to see what other pro grams and other agencies of the government would be available to PAGENO="0837" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3297 help us, even though they didn't have any responsibility for it, but ~they channeled us to these programs and we have a couple of them. This in a sense is a type of coordination. They really don't have any responsibility for this. Mr. QUIE. That is preparing the catalog and I guess anybody could have prepared the catalog. Mr. BRAND~ Right, but it was never done before. Mr. QUID. They chose to do it, but you talk of the OEO being the command post. Mr. BRAND. Right, for the poor. Mr. QUID. Some people have referred to the Department of Defense which coordinates all of the military effort. Do you feel that they should have that same role and coordinate all of the efforts to help people come out of poverty? Mr. BRAND. I don't want to make a blanket statement like that. I think generally speaking this is the direction that the Congress should go. I think that a basic new approach to our welfare program must be taken. I am not an expert. I am just a businessman, but from what I have seen there is not enough rehabilitation in our welfare program, for example, and I think there is a function for a central representative of the poor to help in this area. Mr. QUTE. In business you are both a processor and a retailer? Mr. BRAND. We sell only retail. We design and sell only through re- tail stores. We have 100,000 house salesmen who sell in every State and every district in the United States. Mr. QrnE. You do not manufacture? Mr. BRAND. We do not manufacture at all. Mr. Qrn~. Do you think it is possible for a manufacturer who sells at wholesale to also have his retail outlets in competition with his cus- tomers without running into trouble? Mr. BRAND. Every, almost every shoe manufacturer in the United States does this. International Shoe Company sells shoes wholesale and they have their own retail stores and they will be in competition with them. Mr. QUID. Maybe that is why t;he shoe companies have so much trouble. Mr. BRAND. I think you will find this situation in almost any indus- try, such as the furniture industry. Mr. QIJIE. I know some industries that run into trouble with that. You say most of the shoe manufacturers are doing that. Those are all the questions I have. I don't see any other members here to ask any questions. We are waiting for one to come back. Mr. BRAND. I gave you a shoe analogy beginning at the bottom of page 6 which is a business analogy of how I would relate the central OEO to the shoe industry. I don't think the analogy of wholesale and retail comparison is the problem.. Mr. QUIE. Thank you very much. (Mr. Brand's prepared statement and 2 letters follow:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF CABELL BRAND, PRESIDENT, ORTHO-VENT SHOE Co., SAu~M, VA. It is a privilege for me to appear before this distinguished committee, to make a brief statement and answer any questions you have concerning the. operation of our community action program in a multi-county southern area. I wrote the PAGENO="0838" 3298 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman of your Committee, Congressman Perkins, on July 7, 1967 and have sent copies of this letter to each member of your committee. I hope this letter can be made a part of this racord, so I will not repeat views already expressed. Two years ago, the City of Roanoke and the counties of Roanoke and Botetourt established a coordinated community action program for the whle Roanoke Valley. This was later expanded to include Bedford and Rockbridge counties. The area is shown on this map and includes a total population of about 258,000 people, with one metropolitan area, the City of Roanoke, but including large, sparsely popu- lated rural areas. We established a non-profit corporation covering this entire area with a Board of Directors from all segments of our society and with a large businessman parti- cipation. Our organization is called TAP, Total Action Against Poverty in the Roanoke Valley. I am very enthusiastic about the programs we have underway and the progress we are making. The community is responsive and enthusiastic. This is reflected by the favorable press and editorial coveraga and the cooperation of everyone involved. Attached to our original funding application were endorsements from over 100 local groups, including all the governments involved at that time, every business and manufacturing association, every Chamber of Commerce, the local Bar Associations, the medical societies, the professional welfare organization, each school board and school superintendent, most church groups and so on. Most of our local funds have been provided in-kind by business, churches and govern- mental units. The Economic Opportunity Act has provided hope and positive self-help pro- grams for the disadvantaged poor who were neglected for so long. As a business- man, I heartily support the Economic Opportunity Act which allowed all of this to come about and hope that it will be expanded as much as possible. I con- gratulate you and the entire Congress for having the foresight to pass this con- structive bill. I will not go into the details of the specific programs we have underway in Roanoke, as they are reported in the Annual Report, which I have attached to this statement. However, I will be happy to answer any questions about that. While we are working hard, many of us as volunteers, our jo~ is just begin- ning. OEO at the national level has provided us with the guidance, suggested techniques and programs, and actually got us started. There is an interesting point in our organization. The Bedford County Board of Supervisors is opposed to the Anti-Poverty Program and has refused to partici- pate. Yet our community action organization extends to the people in Bedford County and with whose support we have been able to conduct Headstart, a day care program and Neighborhood Development. This is one of the best reasons why an independent community action organization is vital to the success at the local level of any Anti-Poverty Program. Without it, the existing agencies would have their hands tied. One example of the effectiveness of a multi-area community action organization is the way Headstart was handled in our area. We coordinated Headstart with four separate school administrations and in effect, delegated to each school system which ran their own program. I am firmly opposed to dismantling the Office of Economic Opportunity and dis- bursing the Anti-Poverty Progrhms into other agencies of the government. In saying this. I am not critizing the other agencies, because each with its specialty, has been most helpful. But the specialty of OEO is the poor people of this country. Our local ~ornmunity action program is stronger because of the involvement and the participation of the poor in all of our activities. And the poor are encouraged to participate because they are beginning to find out they have a voice, locally and in Washington-through a central agency which is their representative exclusively. In my opinion, OEO should be strengthened, not weakened. It should continue to be an independent agency. It should continue to be the agency which operates as opposed to one which merely coordinates. Certainly, for the time being, it should continue to operate all of its current programs. To my knowledge, no other agency of the government has had much experience in attacking the poverty problem except OEO. The LaJor Department has man- power training programs, but prior to OEO, had no experience in developing special programs for the hard core poverty population. HEW has had experience in health, educational and welfare programs, but has badvery little experience in developing special programs for the poverty families. We must remember that 12 years of public schooling have been available to all American people. We would have very little poverty in the United States if PAGENO="0839" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3299 everyone had finished high school. Yet in the Roanoke Valley, we still have a 40% dropout rate. Why is this? There are, of course, many reasons, ~ut the key to the dropout problem is to provide in-home and neighborhood work with the families on an individual basis, to motivate the parents and the child to continue the child's education. OEO and our local community action program is developing such techniques with success. Our school system is not set up to do this kind of in-home work. To attempt to delegate the responsibility for breaking the cycle of poverty to the existing organi- zations will dilute greatly this effort. In fact, they have had this opportunity for several generations and failed. Over 20% of the American population is still in poverty. As you see from our chart, the Roanoke Valley is typical of the national statistics. While 20% is a large figure, it is still a minority of our population. It's natural that HEW with its educational and training programs will concentrate on the majority of our people. We need a special organization such as OEO to develop specific programs for this minority. It is making progress and it can solve the problem in another 10 or 15 years, if given the opportunity. I am confident that you, that the Congress of the United States, want to develop the best possible program for the families living in poverty. Until three years ago, there was no program, no specialized facility, or department. Now there is, ~ut the work is just beginning. Don't dis- mantle it. Improve it. A criticism which I have heard about OEO is that it is inefficient. I am sure that its administrative system and procedures can be improved. But from my experi- ence, OEO is efficient and effective. I am informed that OEO has a total admin- istrative cost, including personnel, facilities and everything related to the central bureau of just 3%. Our local TAP administrative cost is about 10%. This is less than our administrative cost in our shoe business. In my visits with other Anti- Poverty Programs in other cities, I have seen no evidence of waste, overlap or misappropriation. The inexperienced person often underestimates the complication and difficulty in setting up a new organization. Our shoe business has existed for 40 years and we find new inefficiencies every day. In our local community action organization, we had tremendous problems putting together a staff and developing our systems and procedures. There were no experts in poverty to hire-certainly not at salaries we could afford. I personally interviewed 30 qualified educators for the top three posts. We could not offer more money-only less. We could not offer security-only a one year contract. No fringe benefits. Only an opportunity to help people. This problem went on down the line. It was a new organization. There Were no established operating procedures, no systems. We have been through five business managers and three bookkeeping systems in 21 months. Yet we are functioning and making progress. In fact, one benefit in not having qualified people available, we have trained many of the disadvantaged and hired them in productive jobs. OEO has had the same problems except more so. They have had to start every- thing from scratch. I don't know how many community action organizations like ours they have helped organize from scratch, but many I am sure. They have developed many novel programs to help the poor such as Headstart, Job Corps, Community Development, Neighborhood Youth Corps, Upward Bound, Legal Aid, Foster Grandparents, etc. All of these programs are new. The existing federal agencies have helped, but OEO has initiated them, coordinated them. And OEO will initiate many more if it is left intact and has the opportunity. As you know, the heart of the Anti-Poverty Program is at the local level with the community action organization. Here business and industry are involved and are participating even more as programs are expanded. Local efforts need to be strengthened and the local participation broadened. But you would not strengthen the local community effort by having its programs handled by three or four different federal agencies. This would complicate the coordination and encourage more duplication. At the local level, we are working with people, with families. For example, if a young child from a poverty family is in Headstart or a day cai~e program, we have an opportunity to work with each member of this family-an older child to keep in school, a parent to train for work and get off welfare or whatever `this family's problems are. And, of course, we could do much more if there were more money. Our community action organization functions as a business and works with all local agencies. We have been encouraged by OEO and carefully directed by PAGENO="0840" 3300 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 their competent staff. Since the majority of our funds come through OEO. they have some control to see that we do not duplicate or overlap other programs. In functioning as a business, it's important to be required to report to the authority responsible. Coordinating without authority is not practical. Recently, I spent an afternoon at the Chamber of Commerce of the United States, of which we are a member, talking to their research people and economists on their views of the poverty program. Three weeks ago, I joined 40 other busi- ness executives at a "think" session at Airlee, where political, social and economic problems were discussed with Chamber executives and with many of the outstanding leaders of our country. With my letter to you of July 7, I attached a copy of my letter to Mr. Arch Booth, head of the United States Chamber which included a point by point comment on the Chamber's recommenda- tions towards the poverty legislation. I hope that this will be helpful to you, and if you choose, make a part of this record. I have three suggestions for improving the effectiveness of OEO and the * War on Poverty: (1) Improve the communication with the people in the United States to let them know what the Anti-Poverty Program is. Most people do not under- stand it. They think it is a federally administered program from Washington. However, it is a local program. If a local community action organization is not formed to identify local needs, there is no program. If local people do not take an interest and do not run it, there is no program. The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 gives local communities an opportunity to develop their own tailor-made programs for their own local people. But this is not understood. There is a misconception about handouts. Recently, a distinguished Senator said to me, "If the poverty program is continued, I want to see that the money goes to people who need it the most". My reply to him was that no money in this program goes to people directly. Ninety percent of all the money which is expended for the poverty program in the Roanoke Valley is used for education and training and for motivating the poor to help themselves-to become productive, participating members of society. This means that the money is spent for teachers salaries, schools, neighborhood development and other related costs. People who nebd help are being given the opportunity to take advantage of the opportunities which have accumulated over the decades to make up the American dream. The answer to the poverty problem is very simple: do what is required to get people who ai~e in poverty into society and into a job. There are no handouts. The public doesn't under- stand this, but they must. (2) Information and evaluation techniques and procedures must be improved and expanded. The amount of money we are spending now for the Anti-Poverty Program is only a small amount of what will have to be spent later, in one form or another, when our available resources are greater. We must know accurately what we are doing right and what we are doing wrong. This is another reason for a central ODO. But more inde- pendent evaluation must be made both at the national and local level. (3) Administrative procedures and systems in OEO must be strengthened. Both stability and time will help here, but encouragembet from you will certainly accelerate it. Let me conclude by giving you a business analogy to the central OEO problem. As you know, I am in the shoe business. Our company sells shoes through direct house-to-house salesmen. We have over 100,000 full and part-time repre- sentatives in every state and every district in the United States. If we had been assigned the project of developing a shoe program for the natives of some under-developed island, who never before had worn shoes, we would have many problems such as design, supply, marketing, but primarily a motivational program in convincing these people they should wear shoes. Suppose we had worked on this problem for two years. Suppose we knew we were being successful to some extent, making some progress and even making a profit. This does not say that we would have made as much money as possible or that the program could not be improved, or some other shoe company could not have done a better job. But with two years experience, it is unlikely that some other company without any experience could start from scratch and do a better job. In fact, the odds would be that they would start two years behind, having to learn again what we had learned in our two years experience. A more positive way to accelerate market- ing of shoes to these people would be for all interested organizations to advise PAGENO="0841" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3301 us and help us improve our program. But certainly, not replace our responsibility for it. I invite you to visit our local program and urge you to study the program in your area to see for yourself the effectiveness of what is being done locally to upgrade the poverty families. I do not `be1ie~e that any Congressman would vote to discontinue the present work if he knew the facts-unless the vote would be political in nature. Billy Graham has expressed the hope that the poverty program can be kept out of politics. I am confident this can be done. In summary, the heart of the Anti-Poverty Program is the local community action organization which deVelops local' programs for local people, run by local citizens. In simple business terms, the local community action organizations need to report to a specialized federal agency, from whom it receives its funds, which will guide it, instruct it, and help the less knowledgeable local workers coordinate all of the various programs available to it. We must work together to solve the problem of poverty which is the major problem facing the world today. At this particular time, when riots, unrest, high unemployment among the disadvantaged, high dropout rates, are before us in glaring headlines, we should do nothing to weaken the forces at work in this country to solve these fundamental issues. We should figure out ways of strengthening them. ORTHO-VENT SHOE Co., INC., Los Angeles, Calif~, July 7, 1967. Congressman CARL PERKINS, Cli airm an, Education and Labor Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: You will soon begin your hearings on the poverty program. For the past two years, I have been intimately involved in the develop- ment and leadership of the local Roanoke Valley poverty program and would like to give you the benefit of what experience I have had to help you evaluate this program. Two years ago, the City of Roanoke and the counties of Roanoke and Botetourt, later added by Bedford County, got together and established a coordinated com- munity action program for the whole Roanoke Valley. This is a non-profit corpora- tion with a Board of Directors from all segments of our society and with a large businessman participation. Our organization is called TAP, Total' Action Against Poverty in the Roanoke Valley. I am enclosing a copy of our Annual Report published last month. I am firmly opposed to the dismantling of the Office of Economic Opportunity and in breaking up the program to be handled by other agencies `of the govern- ment. I have been intimately involved in this program for nearly two years and have had experience in working with OEO and the other agencies of the govern- ment which do handle portions of the poverty programs. Our Congressman, Dick Poff, said to me in a recent letter, "I believe the work can be more effective and money can be spent more wisely if the operation is decentralized and each segment of the total program is handled by the depart- ments and agencies of the government which have had eccperienee in the particular field involved". My reply was as follows: No agency of the government has had any experience in solving the poverty problem except OEO. The Labor Department has manpower training programs, but has no experience in developing special programs for the hard core poverty population. HEW has had experience in health programs, educational programs and welfare programs, but has not had any experience in developing special programs for the poverty families. The proof of this statement is the fact that 12 years of public schooling has been available to all American people. Yet in Roanoke Valley, we still have a 40% dropout rate. Why do we have this dropout rate. The answer to this question is being sought by OEO and special programs have been developed by OEO to solve or help solve the dropout problem. Progress is being made. HEW, for example, is experienced in dealing with conventional organizations in our community such as the welfare departments, the health department and the school boards and school systems. The key to the dropout problem is to provide in-home and neighborhood work with the families on an individual basis to motivate the parents and the child both to continue the child's education. OEO PAGENO="0842" 3302 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 and our local community action program is developing such techniques with great success. Our school system is not set up to do any kind of in-home work. To at- tempt to delegate the responsibility for breaking the cycle of poverty to the existing organizations is folly, because they have had this opportunity for several generations and it failed. From my knowledge of federal programs and there are very few of them which I am in favor of, the Office of Economic Opportunity is the most efficient. It has a total administrative cost, including personnel, facilities and everything related to the central bureau, of just 3%. The novel programs which this 3% separate organization has created such as Headstart, Job Corps, Neighborhood Development, Neighborhood Youth Corps, SERVE, Upward Bound, Legal Aid, Foster Grandparents and many others shows the benefit of having a central orga- nization coordinating all special poverty programs. All of these programs are new. The existing federal agencies did not conceive of a single one of them. OEO ini- tiated them all. And they will initiate many more if they are left intact and have the opportunity. About 25% of the American population is still in poverty. While this is a large figure, it is still a minority of our population. It's natural that HEW with its educational and training programs will concentrate on the majority of our people. We need a special organization such as OEO to develop specific programs for this minority. It is making progress and it can solve the problem in another 10 or 15 years, if given the opportunity. If the Congress of the United States dismantles OEO and says. in effect, it's not important, then the Congress must bear the responsibility for the conse- que~ces. I am sure I would lose interest as would many other dedicated local workers. In a recent letter to me from Senator Harry Byrd, Jr., he said, "If the poverty program is continued, I want to see that the money goes to people who need it the most". My reply to him poiiited out that no money in this program goes to people. Ninety percent of all the money which is expended for the poverty pro- gram in the Roanoke Valley is used for education and training. This means that the money is spent for teachers salaries, schools and other related costs to edu- cation. The peojile who need the help are receiving help in the form of schooling so that they can qualify for a job and get to work. The answer to the poverty problem is very simply to do what is required to get people who are in poverty into society and into a job. Since the definition of poverty is a family of four who earns less than $34000, the obvious way to cure the problem is see that these people get jobs which pay them more than $3,000. That is exactly w-hat we are trying to do. There is no w-elfare or other handouts in this program. OEO has done a mag- nificent job in developing the new concepts pointed out above and they are work- ing. In the Roanoke Valley, we have a 40% dropout rate. Imagine 40% of our seventh grade students do not graduate from high school. Yet many of our indus- tries will not accept an application from a non-high school graduate. We are try- ing hard to develop programs and motivational techniques to keep these chil- dren in school and to train adults beyond the public school age for better jobs. I urge you to visit our local program and see for yourself the effectiveness of what we are trying to do locally in this area to upgrade 25% of our people. I do not believe that any Congressman would vote to discontinue the present work if they knew the facts-unless the vote would be political in nature. And in the words of Billy Graham, I certainly hope that the poverty problem can be kept out of politics. Last Friday, I spent the afternoon at the Chamber of Commerce of the United States talking to their research people and economists on their views of the poverty program. Three weeks ago, I joined 40 other business executives at a think session at Airlee, where political, social and economic problems were dis- cussed with Chamber executives and with many of the outstanding leaders of our country. I am enclosing a copy of my letter to Mr. Arch Booth, head of the United States Chamber and a point by point comment on their recommendations towards the poverty legislation. I hope that this will be helpful to you. If there is anything further that we can do in our area to help bring the facts before Congress, please do not hesitate to call on me. Sincerely, OAB1rr~L BRAND, President. PAGENO="0843" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3303 ORTHO-VENT SHOE Co., Ixc. LosAngeles, Calij., Jnly 5, 1D67. Mr. ARCH BooTH, Chamber of Commerce of the United states, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. BOOTH: I am embarrassed at writing you another long letter, but this is another vital subject I would like to discuss with you; namely, the Chamber's position and testimony on the poverty program. I have read the testimony of June 9 before the Senate Sub-committee and your research publications given to me last Friday. I think it is commendable that the Chamber has attempted to research this complicated subject and help inform your members. As I pointed out in my letter of July 3, for the past two years, I have served as President of our local anti-poverty program, TAP, and have had first- hand experience with many of the points in your research. I hope it is proper for me to express to you my opinions, hoping they will be useful in preparing your coming testimony before the House Education Committee on the poverty legislation. I am pleased that the Chamber recognizes the value of the education and de- velopment programs which have been started, and does not recommend discon- tinuing any of them. You have pointed out some deficiencies in the programs. Certainly no one questions that improvements can be made. But I feel the Chamber's policy has overlooked the single most vital issue at stake here. The most important aspect of the War on Poverty is the development of a com- munity action organization at the local level. This has created an opportunity for businessmen to get involved at the local level with local programs to solve local needs. It is not understood that the poverty program is a local program, and that the federal government really is not involved at the local level other than to provide funds for these locally conceived activities. It is my opinion that the National Chamber should encourage thhe strength- ening of community action organizations and encourage increased businessman's participation at the local level. This could be a vital part of your total community development program, which I understand, the Chamber is now concentrating on. In Roanoke Valley, for example, our Community Action Program, while de- voting most of its energies to the disadvantaged 25% of our population which is not productive, we are expanding our interest to coordinate all vocational training programs and promote increased business sponsored programs. The new OEO funding of the North Carolina vocational training project in coopera- tion with N.A.M. is an excellent example of what can be done. It is important that the community action projects be funded and report to OEO. You have not suggested otherwise, even though the Republican sponsored "Crusade" would eliminate OEO. The community action organizations should con- tinue to report to OEO on most of the programs which they implement and cer- tainly all of the programs related to the poverty section of the population. This is particularly true of Headstart which was conceived by OEO and is being im- proved by the creative staff of OEO. It should not be relegated to the Office of Education. They previously had the opportunity to develop programs of this type, but did nothing. They do not have the staff or orientation to develop or super- vise the supportive functions of a program like Headstart, particularly in-home work so vital to its success. In fact, Headstart is only partially an educational program. It gets children together, encourages group activities, feeds them, works with `the parents, encourages their participation with other children and the family's participation in society and as a by-product, gives the children a little education. Its main function is to prepare th'ese children for their educational experience. Some of the same arguments could `be used in having Neighborhood Youth programsunder the complete supervision of OE'O. The basic point, however, from the Chamber's point of'view is that businessmen are involved in community action programs and need to be more involved. The Chamber should promote this in all messages to the business community. And in any business operation, if these community action organizations are to be funded by OEO, they need' to report to OEO to make their expenditures more efficient and effective. Rather, therefore, than reducing the scope of OEO and taking programs away from it, I would suggest enlarging it, improving its creative ability which has done such a magnificent job in helping develop programs such as Headstart, Neighborhood Youth Corps, Upward Bound, SERVE, the corn- PAGENO="0844" 3304 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 munity action concept, Job Corps, New Careers, Day Care Programs, OIC, many novel vocational training programs, and so on. The work of OEO is just beginning. Its administration, as well as every pro- gram, can be improved. The chamber can help, with its research and construc- tive suggestions. But don't recommend that this new organization, OEO, have less influence in poverty programs when its work is just beginning and when it can be such a valuable tool to the business community. Let me give you a simple business analogy of the work that OEO has done for the disadvantaged poverty families. If our company, in the shoe business, had developed a shoe program for a group of natives in an under-developed country who never before had worn shoes, we would have had many supply problems, but primarily a motivational program in convincing these people that they should wear shoes. After two years of this program, suppose that we knew we had been successful, to some extent, were making progress and were making a profit. This does not say that we had made the maximum profit or that our pro- gram could not improve or that perhaps some other shoe company could even have done a better job. But with the two years experience, it is unlikely that another shoe company without any experience in this new shoe program could do any better job. In fact. the odds would be that they would start two years behind, having to learn everything that we had learned in the two year period. A more positive way to accelerate this worthwhile endeavor would be to make every suggestion possible to our company for improving our work. but not relieve us of the responsibility for any part of it. In fact, make us totally responsible for all phases of it. In an effort to be precise and constructive, I have attached a point-by-point comment on your summary of recommendations (page 1) in your "Youth and the War on Poverty" pamphlet. I invite you, any of your staff and members to visit us in the Roanoke Valley and see for yourself what is being done here. Too often, research work is done without the benefit of firsthand field experience. In addition, I would be happy to participate with you in any discussions on this subject, particularly between now and your next testimony before Congress. Sincerely, CABELL BRAND. President. COMMENTS ON OHAMBEn OF COMMERCE PUBLICATION, "YoUTH AND THE WAR ON POVERTY" (Refer to Page 3, Snrn~nary of Recommendations) The Job Corps 1. Evidence suggests that the Job Corps is failing to lead to jobs for which it has trained youth-one of its major purposes. 2. Although 76% of formerly unemployed, or unemployed youths have at- tained employment since leaving the Job Corps. 3. Only 28% of the graduates are working at jobs for which they were trained. 4. ~`4% of the enrollees are no longer employed in the job in which the Job Corps indicated they were placed. The fact that the Job Corps is failing to lead to jobs for which it is training its youth is of relative unimportance. The same is true of nearly all educational institutions. In our industrial society, most workers are retrained every five years. What is important is that 76% of Job Corps enrollees have obtained em- ployment after leaving Job Corps and these are the youngsters who have failed in or have been failed by all other institutions of our society. 5. Employers rate the majority of the graduates' training, skill level and work habits as only "poor" or "satisfactory". It is not surprising, nor alarming, that employers rate the majority of the graduates performance as only "poor" or "satisfactory". Nine months, the average length of stay of an enrollee, is a very short period of time in which to redirect and retrain heretofore unemployable or unemployed persons. Only long range training programs will produce "excellent" work habits. This is an area in which business and industry might work with Job Corps and produce a really dynamic follow-up. 6. OEO can supply gross statistics about programs, but detailed statistics and information regarding cost, educational increment and enrollee placement are imprecise, or non-existent. This is, I am fairly certain, a just criticism. The cost of quantitative and qualitative analysis and evaluation is extremely high. TAP has been pushing PAGENO="0845" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3305 OEO to make this investment since we started and feel it is one of the keys to winning the Poverty War. The public must be made aware of the need for pure research and funds must be found somewhere to pay for it. 7. The Job Corps is doing very little to aid the graduates in job placement. It is our understanding that the Job Corps and OEO work writh the States in recruitment and placement. This report indicates that something different needs to be tried. It is also my understanding that OEO is placing job counselors with state employment services in the hope of diminishing these problems. I know in the early months (1965) the number applicants so far outnumbered the capacity of the facilities that the applicants became disillusioned and disinterested. This has been corrected, I believe, but I still hear from WICS and other sources that the women often have too long a waiting period. Industry could probably help a great deal in working out placement problems. 8. An enrollee's age is often a barrier to employment. I do not have any information on this. 9. More than $486,000,000 has been spent on 60,000 enrollees who have already left the Job Corps and who, for the purpose of evaluation, are lost. Business leaders should be the first to understand the necessity for investing in research and evaluation and certainly in identifying results. I agree whole- heartily with everything the Ch~mber has recommended on this subject. 10. The majority of the enrollees describe the Job Oorps as the best experience of their life. If the majority of the enrollees describe Job Corps as the best experience of their lives, surely this says something about the way it is being administered. I don't see anything in this report which has convinced me that it would be beneficial to the program to transfer it to the Office of Education. The Neighborhood Youth Corps 1. The Neighborhood Youth Corps has provided a conventional work-relief program with few, if any, frills. I agree, but they completely overlooked what I consider to be the most im- portant benefit of N.Y~C. This is that the youngsters, most for the first time in their lives, have an opportunity to develop personal relationships with "career type" people. This can open up the hope and possibility that they can, indeed, enter and be successful in careers, which they otherwise assumed were closed to them. 2. Vocational education training, necessary for the enrollees' to secure mean- ingful jobs, has been minimal in the Neighborhood Youth Corps. This is not really the purpose of N.Y.C. and was never intended to be, as far as I know. This appears to be a misunderstanding on the part of the Chamber. 3. Neither the Labor Department nor the Office of Economic Opportunity maintain regular follow-up records of past enrollees. One of the weaknesses in the lack of evaluation. 4. A number of sponsors of in-school and summer Neighborhood Youth Corps programs reported a noticeable decline in school drop-out rates, which they attribute to the Youth Corps. Everyone is certainly glad to hear this. 5. There are many instances where the Neighborhood Youth Corps is credited with adecline in the juvenile delinquency rate. We believe this is probably true, and the longer we work with these young people, the more convinced we are that the old saying about juvenile delinquency being adult delinquency is truth. We give lipservice to this, but few adults be- have as if they really belive it. When someone shows an interest In these kids, it is rather humbling experience to see how readily they respond. 6. The Neighborhood Youth Corps indicates that only 38.2% of the out-of- school enrollees return to s~1($ol, receive additional training, or are employed after the prOgram is completed. I assume you developed these records for your report indicates follow-up records haven't been maintained with any degree of accuracy. Remember that these youngsters are the hard-core dropouts, usually not even draftable. More planning has to be done on placement, however. All `in all, your &i'dings Show that N.T.C. is successfl3l. I don't understand tire recommendation that N.Y.C. be passed to the Department of Labor. While funded through QEO, all applications are processed by Labor and all programs are administered by Labor. The OEO funding goes through Labor, but this set-up gives OEO the chance to review a CAP's total effort and share of the funds. PAGENO="0846" 3306 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Head Start 1. All observers agree that Head Start has demonstrated the ability to advance rapidly the enrollee so that he can start his school experience on at least an equal footing with children from more advantaged homes. We would agree with all of the observers on this point. 2. There is considerable evidence to suggest that all of the benefits of the Head Start program are not retained when the child enters the regular school system. Undoubtedly, what happens to the youngsters in the regular school system is of prime importance in determining the ultimate success of the program. But it is here, in the regular school system, that the program fails. Since the follow- up in the public schools has already been entrusted to the Office of Education, it would be unrealistic to suggest that this now be placed under the direction of ODO. My question is, why take a successful program, such as Head Start, and place it under an agency which in the past has demonstrated no capability in dealing with the problems of the poor? 3. The training programs for Head Start teachers have not been successful. We cannot speak for all training programs for Head Start teachers. However, the programs with which we have been involved, both the ones OEO has con- tracted with Universities and the ones we have held under their guidelines, have been extremely successful. Their chief area of success has been in daring to use new methods and in "training out" some of the traditional attitudes and methods of teachers which are proving to be detrimental to early childhood development, not only of poor children, but of all children. I would have to see further evidence to believe this criticism. In summary, I believe the Office of Economic Opportunity's most important reason for being is that the visible agency of the poor and has in a very short time demonstrated that changes can occur on a local level which other groups and agencies have only talked about for a long time. If TAP (our local Roanoke Valley community action organization) says to the poor, and the middle class of the Roanoke Valley, that someone cares, then OEO says this on a national level. If programs are assigned to the various established federal agencies, then it is reasonable to assume that the next step is to do the same on the local levels. We would very soon be right back to where we were before 1965. The problem is not that OEO is a failure but that too little money has been spent and too little time has elapsed for the elimination of this overwhelming na- tional-and world-problem. If we don't spend more money one way, however, we shall certainly be forced to spend It another. If these programs are funded piecemeal by the various agencies, 1 suspect what will result is more duplication, rather than less. The way it is presently, one office (OEO Regional) is constantly aware of the total effort in the Roanoke Valley and helps us to keep an eye on the overall effort and need. With all of its lack of organization, evaluation, and funds, OEO has demonstrated an ability to reach people, to understand them, their problems and dreams, and to give them a feeling of belonging to something and being somebody. This is the basic, most important aspect of the poverty problem. What is the record of the other agencies before the advent of OEO? We invite the Chamber of Commerce, Congressmen, businessmen, and all interested persons to visit the Roanoke Valley and see first-hand the progress which is being made. Mr. QuirE. We will now take the Interreligious Committee Against Poverty, Rev. Larold Schulz, chairman, Antipoverty Task Force, National Council of Churches of Christ; Rabbi Richard Hirsch, di- rector, Religious Action Center; and George I-i. Haithcock, director of field service, National Catholic Community Service. STATEMENTS OF REV. LAROLD SCHULZ, CHAIRMAN, ANTIPOVERTY TASK FORCE, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES OP CHRIST; RABBI RICHARD HIRSCH, DIRECTOR, RELIGIOUS ACTION CEN- TER; AND GEORGEL. HAITRCOCK, DIRECTOR OF FIELD SERVICE, NATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICE Reverend ScHuLz. I am Larold Schulz, and on my left is Rabbi Richard Hirsch, and on my right, Mr. George L. Haithcock. PAGENO="0847" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3307 I think in the interest of time we will submit our statement and ask that it be placed in the record, since you have it before you. (The statement follows:) PREPARED STATEMENT OF REV. LAROLD SCHULZ, CHAIRMAN, ANTIPOVERTY TASK FORCE, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES OF CHRIST; RABBI RICHARD HIRSCH, DIRECTOR, RELIGIOUS ACTION CENTER; AND GEORGE L. HAITHCOCK, DIRECTOR OF FIELD SERVICE, NATIONAL CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICE Mr. Chairman: We appear before YOU today as representatives of the Inter- religious Committee Against Poverty. The organization which we represent was formed in January 1966 through the joint efforts of United States Catholic Con- ference (formerly the National Catholic Welfare Conference) ; the Synagogue Council of America and cooperating Jewish organizations; and the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA. The Interreligious Committee Against Poverty w~is formed for the purpose of rallying the full weight of major Jewish, Roman Catholic and Protestant groups in the war against poverty in all sections of the United States. The Committee was established in recognition of the fact that the problem of poverty and its solution has been the concern of Judaism and Christianity through the ages. Deeply embedded in the religious heritage of each participating group are moral imperatives calling for the elimination of poverty. Today as we appear before you our country is in the midst of deep crises. The events of recent weeks have at once underscored tragic realities of poverty and powerlessness even as they have made clear the need for immediate action which will wipe out the conditions which have created the unrest. Because of our mutual concern regarding the present situation, the Interreligious Committee Against Poverty formulated the following message to the President of the United States yesterday: Dear Mr. President: We deplore the rioting which has resulted in the loss of human life and the destruction of property. However, it is vital that our nation respond to the deeper causes as well as to the symptoms of this ago- nizing unrest. America must not be diverted from fulfilling its promise. We reaffirm the philosophy and sound principles embodied in the "Great Society" programs. We hold that the minimum economic goal of the United States must be adequate food, clothing, housing, medical care, education and social security for every individual and family. We condemn not only the violence, but the economic and social conditions which are the seedbeds of violence. We recognize, as you have stated pre- viously, that victory over poverty will take time, hard work, money, and perseverance. Poverty is a complex problem. There are no instant cures and no single set of remedies that can be a total answer. However, let us begin now by strongly supporting and expanding the Eco- nomic Opportunity Act. Let us quickly pass other legislation now before the 90th Congress designed to ameliorate social and economic injustice. Let us seek full and adequate funding for these programs. Let us undertake immedi- ate comprehensive action by government, with the assistance of the private sector, to move toward those goals which are desired by all compassionate and clear-thinking citizens. Let us dedicate ourselves to the creation of that equi- table society which is the only real answer to social unrest and injustice. Recently the Interreligious Committee Against Poverty (ICAP) published the attached pamphlet entitled Poverty. This pamphlet was distributed throughout the constituei~cy of the. Interreligious Committee as well as to leaders of govern- ment, including all members of Congress. In the statement are these words: "It is God's will that the dignity of each human person shall be respected and affirmed. Involuntary poverty, especially in a society of affluence under- mines ~human dignity. To sanction or allow the continuation of such indignity is to diminish man's stature and to desecrate the image of God." As one of the theological foundations of our concern, we further note thnt: "God wills that the human community be characterized by justice and corn- passion. The poverty of one impoverishes all. The perpetuation of poverty in an economy of abundance violates man's responsibility both to compassion and to justice. It is evil in the sight of God." PAGENO="0848" 3308 ECONOMIC OPPORflJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 We hold that poverty is no longer forced upon us by the fact of scarcity. The Interreligious Committee declares: "that the minimum economic goal of the United States must be adequate food, clothing, housing, medical care, education, and social security for every individual and family. The achievement of this goal requires vigorous and positive action, both by all levels of government and by a multitude of pri- vate groups and individuals serving according to their abilities and oppor- tunities." We of the Interreligious Committee have been pleased by the vigorous begin- ning by the Office of Economic Opportunity in meeting its responsibility to eradi- cate poverty among the poor of this country. We whole heartedly subscribeto the findings and declarations of purpose of the Congress of the United States as stated in Section Two of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1944: "It is, therefore, the policy of the United States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in this nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the opportunity to work, and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity." We have been impressed not only by the stated goal, but by the initial steps taken toward the achievement of that goal. The multiplicity of programs, reach- ing all age groups and the vast diversity of needs among the poor, have been not only conceived but rapidly put into action. While fully supporting the objectives of the Economic Opportunity Act and while acknowledging that an honest and sincere start has been made to eliminate poverty in our nation, we recognize that some of the hopes which were raised by the passage of this legislation could not be fulfilled, and thereby, frustration and criticism of the Office of Economic Op- portunity have been created. Much of this criticism is not realistic. Although we can understand and sympathize with those who show impatience, we are con- cerned, that the results of criticism and impatience be constructive. We believe that criticism should lead to greater progress rather than less effort. It has been unfortunate, and a setback to the war on poverty, that many programs have had to be curtailed or eliminated because of the lack of funds. These funding cutbacks have undermined programs, lowered the morale of staff, and in general, created antagonism among the poor. We believe that the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, as amended, has resulted in the building of solid foundations from which further gains in the elimination of poverty can be realized. The programs under this Act made possible by the policy of our government and legislation passed by the Congress, are to be seen across the country. The community action agencies out of which come many of the programs for the elimination of poverty represents the "launching pad" from which new thrusts must come if poverty is to be eliminated. In many communities across the country religious groups are cooperating in programs made possible by the Economic Opportunity Act. We have firsthand knowledge of the effectiveness of many programs. We have seen first hand the ability of poor people, when given a chance, to take leadership roles in developing their own programs. We are pleased by positive results of Headstart, Upward Bound, Legal Services, VISTA, and the Job Corps. We are confident that the present structure of the OEO provides the necessary focus under which the above mentioned programs, as well as others, can best be carried out. The Office of Economic Opportunity should be the single agency of government charged with coordination and ongoing comprehensive assessment of all anti-poverty programs within the federal government. It is imperative, from our view, that the mandate to the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity to be responsible for all anti-poverty programs must be fully implemented. In other words, the OEO should be the one agency of the federal government which carries the basic responsibility for our national effort to eliminate poverty. One of the major reasons for our belief that the OEO should continue to func- tion as it has in the past is that it provides a champion for the poor and it i~ much more likely to attempt new and innovative programs than older established agencies. We have been Impressed by the Headstart programs and their involve- ment of the poor in leadership capacity. We are convinced that efforts toward self-determination in community action programs have been very effective in a number of areas. We have seen the re~u1ts of innovation and experimentation which have provided positive programs toward the elimination of poverty. We support M~e excellent achievements of the Job Corps in attempting to deal with almost impossible problems. PAGENO="0849" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1 9 6 7 3309 We believe that the principle and strategy undergirding the Economic Oppor- tunity programs which is based on the maximum feasible participation of the poor is the most important single aspect of the entire program. It is this element which distinguishes the Economic Opportunity Act from all other poverty pro- grams, for it is this element which removes the present endeavor from the ex- tending of charity to the extension of democracy. It is this element which recog- nizes the humanness of the poor, a recognition desperately needed in the face of the dehumanizing affects of poverty. We feel that the continuing success of the OEO programs depends upon the recognition that much of the program niust be innovative, and that we must build on what we learn through experimentation. It is essential that we encourage pilot demonstration projects. We can abandon those projects which do not show promise; we can expand those projects which prove successful. We do this with- out question in the physical sciences; we certainly should be able to do it in finding the answers to human and social distress. For this reason we believe that the aspect of Title II regarding the conduct of research and demonstrations, should be expanded and that this aspect of the program should receive adequate funding. Another element which is crucial in the OEO program is the utilization and in tegration of two types of personnel: (1) skilled professional people-educators, social workers, city planners, and others, to administer the programs; and (2) the poor themselves to be employed in tasks which, with professional guidance, they are qualified to perform. It will be difficult to attract people with the necessary technical competence, creativity and vision to administer the programs if there are salary limitations placed upon professional personnel. The competition for these qualified people is great, and the OEO programs and Community Action programs need the best persons available to assure the success of the program. We are opposed to the salary limitations placed upon employees as specified in Title II, Section 244 of the proposed amendments. At `the same time, salaries should be placed at a realistic level related to the job to be performed and the competence of the person to be employed. The Act, as Amended in 1966, `requires that organizations participating as spon- sors in OEO-funded programs contribute 20% of the cost after June'30, 1967. The Proposed Amendments maintain this requirement. While recognizing that this provision also authorizes the Director of OEO to finance assistance in excess of 80%, we feel that many organizations which contribute valuable projects and serv- ices, and have a great potential for helping the poor, will be inhibited from doing so by virtue of the 20% required of them. This is particularly `true of the volun- tary non-profit organizations which raise their funds through voluntary contribu- tions. Above all, this requirement will severely handicap the efforts of the poor themselves, who seek to establish real grass roots organizations to fight poverty. We are sure that experience will demonstrate that those private organizations, which are as essential as the tax-supported organizations, will be the least able to comply with this 20% contribution towards the total cost of the program. We question the broad generalizations contained in Section 103 (a), on screen- ing and selection, which can be arbitrarily interpreted, and which tend `to discrimi- nate against a particular group of individuals who may stand to'benefit most from the opportunity to participate in the Job Corps program. We endorse Section 111, Community Participation, which provides that'the Di- rector shall encourage and cooperate in activities designed to establish mutually beneficial relationships between Job Corps Centers and `surrounding or nearby communities. We would hope that through this provision the ty'pes of programs ~which have been developed by civilian communities and nearby military installa- tions would be developed for `the Job Corps enrollee. We pledge to seek the co- operation of our constituencies in carrying out the laudable objectives of this section of the proposed Bill. We also endorse Section 112, Placethent and Followthrough, whereby the Director of OEO `shall provide or arrange for necessary services to assist enrollees to secure suitable employment or further training opportunities, to return to school or to pursue their education, or to undertake some other activity having a career potential. We are pleased to note that already an effort is under way through.Joint Action in Community Service, Inc., to assist the Job Corps graduate to secure the necessary services from public and voluntary agencies in getting a satisfactory initial and continuing adjustment in `hi's community. We believe one of the requirements of Section 221 (c), namely, "to resolve all issues of cooperation and possible duplication prior to its (application for 80-084-67-pt. 4-54 PAGENO="0850" 3310 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 assistance) submission" is unworkable and that this requirement should be eliminated. We are pleased to note under Special Programs and Assistance, Section 222 (a) (1), recognition of the fact that Project Head Start includes comprehensive health, nutritional, social and other services as well as educational services, and that it encourages the participation of parents of such children and promotes the effective use of parent services. In any extension of Head Start, such as the Head Start Followthrough, we feel it should embody the same philosophy and same services. We support continuation of the Head Start program under the auspices of OEO. We support Part C-Supplemental Programs and Activities-Section 232, providing for research and pilot programs, but we recommend that the language be changed to provide that a minimum of 10% of the sums appropriated may be used for the purposes of research and pilot programs. We are particularly pleased that the legislation recognizes and continues the Office of Economic Opportunity as the central agency waging the war against poverty. We are in common agreement on these views and recommendations; the Catholic participants in the committee, however, wish to emphasize a special concern which is not shared by the Protestant and Jewish participants. The proposals before the committee in part will authorize family planning programs. The Catholic opposition to such program components has been presented to the Congress on several occasions before. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity of presenting the views of the Interreligious Committee Against Poverty to your committee. Reverend ScirvLz. We would like to read a telegram which the Interreligious Committee Against Poverty has sent Mr. Johnson re- garding the situation our country has been in the last several weeks. Dear Mr. President: We deplore the rioting which has resulted in the loss of human life and the destruction of property. However, it is vital that our nation respond to the deeper causes as well as to the symptoms of this agonizing unrest. America must not be diverted from fulfilling its promise. We reaffirm the philosophy and sound principles embodies in the "Great Society" programs. We hold that the minimum economic goal of the United States must be adequate food, clothing, housing, medical care, education and social security for every individual and family. We condemn not only the violence, but the economic and social conditions which are the seedbeds of violence. We recognize, as you have stated previously, that victory over poverty will take time, hard work, money, and perseverance. Poverty is a complex problem. There are no instant cures and no single set of remedies that can be a total answer. However, let us begin now by strongly supporting and expanding the Economic Opportunity Act. Let us quickly pass other legislation now before the 90th Congress designed to ameliorate social and economic injustice. Let us seek full and adequate funding for these programs. Let us undertake immediate compre- hensive action by government, with the assistance of the private sector, to move toward those goals which are desired by all compassionate and clear- thinking citizens. Let us dedicate ourselves to the creation of that equitable society which is the only real answer to social unrest and injustice. Mr. QUiE. I thank you for reading that telegram into the record. The events that have occurred recently surely are in the minds of all Americans. Because of the concern that some of us have that in some way the desire to prevent rioting and the statements that are made on this seem to indict the entire Negro race. Congressman Goodell of New York and I prepared a statement today which I think it would be good to place in the record at this point: We are gravely concerned over the events which are occurring across the nation. Screaming headlines daily relate details of riots, burning, looting and destruction. We are deeply distressed over the violence and destruction, as well as the tragic loss of life and the injuries sustained by thousands of our fellow citizens. PAGENO="0851" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3311 Beyond this aspect, we are deeply concerned over the anti-Negro sentiment which could develop from this summer of violence and rioting. We urgently plead that the American people and the Congress not blanket the Negroes as a race. We must not generalize the blame for the riots on the people as a whole in the community. Whether the agitators are from inside the communities or come from without, the fact remains that only an infinitesti- mal number of Negroes are involved in the rioting, looting and destruction. The vast majority of Negroes, like Americans everywhere, deplore and resent the wanton destruction to which their communities were subject in recent days. They prefer change that is rational and orderly. They deplore, as we do, the resort to arson, sniping and looting. The example set by responsible Negroes is the clearest possible reminder of the obligation of every American not to indulge in false allegations or rumors or recriminations about the responsibility for riots. It is equally a pointed reminder that we cannot afford to forget those of our citizens who have been ~victimized by violence. Many who have little indeed have lost that little. They are the victims of a meaningless and self-defeating destruction, as some of our noted Negro leaders have recently stated. It is the residents of the rampaged areas who pay for the breakdown in transportation, who lose jobs, services and homes. For the most part, they are the dead and injured. It is the Negroes in these gutted and looted areas ~who will do most of the paying. We have confidence in Negro ~itizens. They are no different from white citizens ~in their desire for a good life for themselves and their families. Negroes recogińze that they have a stake in their communities. They are against destruction for any purpose. The vast majority of Negro citizens are constantly making efforts to upgrade and strengthen their home communities. We must not allow the tremendous effort being made by the great majority of Negroes in these tragic communities to be overshadowed and forgotten because of a few irresponsible militants. The irresponsible must give way to the responsible. Only then can we get on with the task of providing opportunity for a fuller life for all our citizens. I thought it was important that people speak out in support of these people. Rabbi Hirsch, would you like to make some comments now? Rabbi I{mscn. Except to follow up on the last thought of your own statement and that of Mr. Goodell's. I cornend you for it. Being a Rabbi, I am very much impressed by homiletics and I like the phrase "the irresponsible must give way to the responsible." I would apply that, however, not only to the Negro community but to the white community as well. The thing that has disturbed me as a result of these riots has been that unfortunately the focus of Congress for the most part as well as the focus of the Nation as a whole, for the most * part, has been on the riots and not on the things that society must do. I think that in a way it has been the society that has been irresponsible and I think what we represent is a plea to our Congress which is the manifestation of the good values of our society to help our society become more responsible. During the last couple of weeks in Congress we have been hearing a great deal of talk about what I call the three R's of the last 2 weeks. We have talked about riots, rats, and rights. I think it is time we recognize a fourth right which is reflected in Congress and that is ruts. I think our society is in* pretty much of a rut and the great promise that was held out to the Negro community in the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 act, in the Economic Opportunity Act, and the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act-this great promise and the moral passion which accompanied have now given appearance of dissipating. PAGENO="0852" 3312 ECONOMIC OPPORT1IJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I think we have lost a great deal of momentum, and I think Con- gress reflects this loss of momentum, and to a certain extent without in any way condoning the violence, I think that the violence is a mani- festation of that loss of momentum. I personally have been very disturbed by the fact that neither the Congress nor, frankly, even the good voices, including our religious groups, have been so evident in the last year calling for the type of legislative action specifically that our society needs if it is to become a responsible society. Mr. QuIL. How do you account for the fact that the religious leaders evidently have muted their voices in the last year, since you speak for these groups yourselves? We have had a civil rights bill up here last year which included open housing. I felt very strongly about it and supported even the strongest version of open housing and still today would vote for such a bill, but yet it seems the voices are very quiet, not only in the Congress but the Executive. Rabbi Hinsen. I agree with you. I don't even speak for my own group. I am giving you my own interpretation now. I think what has happened is that the issues have become much more complex. It was the issue of voting rights and of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which was highlighted by title II of the public accommodations phase. of it. Those issues were much more clear cut moral issues. Once we have passed that legislation and you get to the point where you recognize that the real problem of fulfilling these rights lies in the economic a.rea more so than what heretofore had been considered the civil rights area in the narrow connotation of the term-once you get to that point t.hen you .get into a much more complex issue. Then it is no longer the South where it is easy to talk about somebody else's problems and to help decide what you should do about somebody else's problems. Then it is also the North and your backyard. It is easier to walk the 1~ minutes as some of us did across the bridge in Seima than it is to build the bridge which requires 15 years between the races. I think there is no one group in society t.hat is to blame. I think our total society has now lost the momentum that we had, and I think it is deeply disturbing. I don't think that t.his present Congress has been too helpful. You might say that Congress is, in turn, a reflection of the people, which is, in turn, a reflection of what religious groups do and I would agree with you. I am not placing blame. All I am saving it is a great tragedy, you might call it the great American tragedy that society has not kept its promise. To get back to the specific discussion this afternoon and now before your committee, the issue of the Office of Economic Opportunity, why we feel. so strongly that this program must be continued and must be expanded even be.yond .the limits which ha.ve been determined by the administration, because we feel that this is a symbolic step as much as a practical step and that any attempt to detract from the program or to break the program up-which some of you gentlemen have be.en contemplating-we understand and appreciate your intentions, but we feelthat any attempt to weaken, which will result in the weakening of the poverty program, will have the effect of only bringing about greater hopelessness and frustration. That is why we feel so strongly about~ this particular program. Mr. GooDELI~. Would the gentleman yield there? Mr. Qu~. Yes, I yield. PAGENO="0853" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3313 Mr. GOODELL. I think it can be emphasized that responsible people can differ on the best way for setting up realistic programs which will help people help themselves and help those who can not help them- selves. But it seems to me that one of the problems we have in society today is that these people are tired of symbols and they want some pro- grams that have a practical effect which they can see and feel. Many of the programs we have today have mainly broken new frontiers but they need to be improved. It bothers me a great deal that we always apparently have to paint these things in `a black and white terms. If someone makes a suggestion `for major changes with a view to improvement it is almost a paranoic defense. The administration and others come forward and say "You are going to destroy the program, destroy the symbol and everyone will feel we are abandoning it." There are those in Congress who want to abandon it and kill it. Some of us who do not want to abandon it resent these allegations when we offer `a program that will get $3.5 billion committed to this program, about half of it Federal money and `a very large amount of private money through the inducements which we have devised along with new suggestions for getting more State and local money. It does not seem to me that it is a valid statement to say that our proposals would be destroying the war on poverty. Reverend SCHULZ. I would like to speak in answer to that., sir. I feel very strongly that the proposals which you have put forth in opportu- nity crusade would have merit, given a society of people who were as concerned about dealing with this problem as you are. But society is not that. way. Those of us who have been deeply involved in poverty pro- grams across this country see many, many places where the suggestions which you have made in this proposed bill just could not possibly be worked out to the benefit of the people who are really poor. I would be the first to say there are a lot of places in this country where the poor have not benefited from the program that now exists and that is something we have to deal with. Mr. GOODELL. Which aspects are you specifically talking about? Which `aspects are not being utilized? Reverend SCHULZ. I `think that any time we turn over direction of' programs to help poor people, minority group people, powerless people to State agencies or local `agencies for their development of a program in terms of the type of control Mr. GOODELL. Most of ours do not. We have programs to induce the States to `begin to come in. We have bonus proposals for States which are willing to and can get additional money for matching it at the State level. The community action program does not go through States. It re- mains a Federal to local program. This is where most of your innova- tion is. The Head start program d'oes not go to States. It goes to the Office of Education through a broadly representative new board `at the State level broadly representative of public, private, public health and welfare `and community action agencies `and then to the community action agency, not to the school system. It is handled once again under contract. I would like to know which' program you `are' talking `about. The industry-labor program is given to the Labor Department. A very nice generality which is being repeated. I am afraid some of you h'ave seen the generality without looking `at `the depth of what we are referring to. ` PAGENO="0854" 3314 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Reverend SCHULZ. I can be specific. I can name chapter and verse of Federal agency programs given over to State governments that are- not run for the effective use of powerless people. Mr. G0ODELL. Which of our proposals are you unhappy with? Is it because they will give this over to the States? Reverend SCHULZ. Let's take the program in terms of job training~ for labor programs. I think that any program that develops along the lines of maintaining the control for recruiting the individuals and placing individuals in the hands of either Labor Department com- pletely, although I know it is there now under the present guidelines of the present act, or in terms of their followup services, and so on, is a program that is going to be very difficult to measure in success for poor people. Let me explain this. One of the problems that the Job Corps has had has been the great level of antagonism placed toward it by people in areas because they did not understand what it was all about. They did not realize that young people with antisocial behavior in order to begin to develop something new had to have that monkey taken off of their back and moved out of the situation and moved away. Your proposals which suggest that this is not the way it should be operated I reject because I know that the best part of the Job Corps is in fact the initial removing of the individual from the type of en- vironmental situation in which he finds Mmself, take him away so he can start over again in a new situation. Mr. GOODELL. As a matter of fact, you stated rather categorically I think that there is a very large area of disagreement- in this situation. But our program is flexible. It talks about community training facili- ties to the extent possible. But it leaves it open and it can go a- greater distance if this decision is made and it is in the best interests of the youngster. We reject the the idea that it is absolutely necessary in all of the cases to assign them to a distant training facility. We have lots of experts who have indicated the advantages of being in the community area, maybe 20 or 30 miles away. Reverend SCHULZ. Where are they going to find a job in eastern Kentucky? Mr. GOODELL. We think t-here should be more flexibility. As a matter of fact, whether we transfer the Job Corps or not, your thesis is not going to hold apparently because OEO is now moving toward this.. They have conceded that they think the Job Corps enrollees should be taken from a limited regiOn or area- a.nd not sent these long distances. As I understand it, that is their new policy. Reverend SoHvLz. I think probably it could work as long as their residential centers developed also. Mr. GOODELL. Our proposal is not to eliminate residential centers.. I doubt that a Job Corps center in eastern Kentucky or a good many other places in the country would be very viable. This decision as to the area where it will be sustainable, has to he made in the State or the regior. We are not sa.y~ng in our legislation specifically where these should be located. As a matter of fact, we feel many of the Job Corps camps a-re poorly located. So we ha.ve the flexi-- bility for voca.tionai education people, the State people, and the private corporations if they are involved to make some changes here and make- their own decisions. PAGENO="0855" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3315 Reverend SCHULZ. Most State public education agencies have done a lousy job with any type of vocational education. `The whole trend of this type of movement, those States which in the past have tried to deal with some of these problems will continue to deal with these prob- lems probably effectively and maybe Ohio and Minnesota are two of those States, but there are many States- Mr. GOODELL. I am from New York. Reverend SCHULZ. I am from New York. We have 900,000 func- tional illiterate people in New York State. We keep that down but we still have one of the best education systems in the country. What about a State that does not have the teaching resources, does not have the money or the tax base. They can~t do this. Mr. GOODELL. I wouldn't go back and forth with the dialog. We could argue this all day and all night. I fully agree with you that many States have been deficient in their approach to education and I would include New York in this because no State has achieved per- fection by a long shot. There are many new innovations that take a while to get into a school system. The point that I want to get across, however, in our proposal is not just to hand all of this over to the State school system or to the existing agencies at the local level. We even provide for a bypass of those States in those localities that are not doing the job. I just want to be sure that on the record there is full understanding of just what our proposal ei~tails. Rabbi HIRSCH. What is your proposal exactly, Mr. Goodell, in con- nection with the Office of Economic Opportunity itself? Mr. GOODELL. Our proposal would transfer the Office of Economic' Opportunity, the Community Action phase and the VISTA phase into a new division of the HEW with an Assistant Secretary at its head. This, presumably, would be called Community Development, Commu- nity Action, or whatever else. MTe would strengthen the requirements for involvement of the poor at the local level in the Community Action agency and in the neighborhood boards. We would put in a number of guidelines. It would be administered from HEW directly to the Com- munity Action board established under the present law at the local level. The State would not be involved. In addi:tion there would be $100 million for what we call a bonus program to match any State money if a State wants to put more into community action than is available in our total appropriation. We would completely unearmark the Community Action funds. There would be no earmarking for narcotics or legal services or all of' the other things down the line. This would be a matter for the local Community Action agency to determine to set its priority, to try to~ get coordination which we feel is sadly lacking. In the present program we would set up a new Council of Economic Opportunity Advisers in the Office of the President. They would be' advisers to the President. It would be three men comparable in stature' and pay to the present Council of Economic Advisers. We would give them an ample amount of money and they would be charting the `course' of the war on poverty, completing the data and information needed,, doing the research and contracting for the research which is needed. This would give it a very high level in Government, right on the side of the President, recommending to the President and Congress ways of PAGENO="0856" 3316 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 coordinating the existing programs, strengthening those that deserve strengthening, and eliminating those that deserve elimination. That is basically what we would do with OEO. Rabbi HIRSOn. I was familiar with the broad outlines of it and I appreciate your refreshing our memory on it. To get back to my comment which originally stimulated your comment about the symbolic significance. Neither our groups indi- vidually nor our groups collectively in the Interreligious Commit- tee Against Poverty have taken any specific positions on specified dele- gations of authority. When I talked about symbolic significance, I think we have taken a position on that; namely, that we think there is great virtue and great advantage in the fact that there is an agency that can be more or less called the headquarters of the war on poverty. The thing that we are concerned about in connection with your pro- posals is to transfer this agency which has, despite the many problems and in some instances the legitimate criticism of the agency, has never- theless drawn to the public attention the fact that there is such a phenomenon as poverty in our society and has also stimulated discus- sion and in some instances many fine programs to ameliorate that poverty. To take that agency and transfer it and make it a subdivision of an existing agency, we feel, would be to diminish the significance of the agency. That is the part that I was referring to earlier. Mr. GOODELL. What function do you think the. Health, Education, and Welfare Department has? If I had to sum up the problems of pov- `ert.y I would sum them up in Health, Education, and Welfare. One of the reasons we want to transfer this to that agency is not only to give it the coordination with existing programs in this field but also to begin t.o induce into those existing programs, spending anywhere from $45 to $50 billion, depending on how you set your standards in poverty- oriented programs, this concept of the involvement of people them- selves into those existing programs. If we can't begin to transform the approach of HEW where we are spending all of this money, most of it coming out of HEW, we feel we are going to fail. So let's start doing that and let's make HEW the ]~eadquarters for this. Mr. HAITHCOCK. I think that is one reason our contention is against the dismantling of the OEO. You have had an experience here of inno- ~vation and experimentation that you are saying you are going to now apply and put a program into an established agency. That is our con- tention of keeping OEO intact because of that basic innovation and experimentation and demonstration it has been so successful that has contributed to the development of Headstart. Without that preliminary demonstration and research which was. attributable to OEO and the impetus that was given through OEO it would not have been possible. It had not happened before in the educational or health agencies. Mr. G00DELL. That is a good, valid point that we have had some innovation in OEO that we did not have in these particular areas be- fore. But let me say that this is not conclusive at all in terms of what these agencies can do. We have had multiple examples, of innovation in existing agencies when the President and Congress have requested and given them the charter and the direction to do this. PAGENO="0857" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3317 You can't blame the Office of Education for never having a Head- ~tart program because Congress never passed a program for preschool- ers. Mr. Quie and I have been urging it since 1961. We never had a pre- school program with appropriations so the Office of Education did not have this option. You can't blame the vocational educational people for not having a Job Corps. Again Mr. Quie and I suggested in 1961 that this be done. We finally got an experimental one in the Juvemle Delin- quency Act because of the sympathy of Mrs. Green on that subcommit- tee. However, it was never funded. So you can't blame these agencies because Congress never gave them the authority and direction and money to set up the program. Mr. HAITHCOCK. It is just that it did not come about until OEO was established. Mr. GOODELL. The question we have between us really is, was the creation of OEO incumbent upon the proposal of these programs and necessary to their success. I don't think it was. Mr. HAITHCOCK. You had the flexibility and freewheeling nature to operate in this administration which contributed to it. Mr. GOODELL. There is an honest difference of opinion here, but I do think it is a little unfair to condemn, across-the-board, existing agencies since Congress and the American people never gave them the authority or money to do anything in these areas before. Reverend `SCHULZ. I would like to speak to this because I think this is at the heart of the whole bit, from what I gather from the conver- sationgoingon. The whole heart of the matter is: What about the man at t:he local level: What about the poor man who is going to receive these pro- grams? What does he think about HEW, or the Department of Labor? That is the real question. How does he get affected by this program?' Where can he go to relate to this program ~-and so on. Let's take the title V programs. I really wish Mr. Perkins were still here; although we have heard about title V programs this afternoon I have some real questions ~hout the operation of this program. I know there are some differences from HEW in the room and the concern I would raise about the program i's administration, and it `is because HEW does not have the staff to `do the jo'b. The way title V programs have been `administered in many parts of the country leave much t'o be desired. They `become `almost less than welfare in the worse sense of that word, in the sense that you hand out doles. Yet in the same areas where title V programs are being administered there are CAP agencies `which are in a sense the ear of the poor. There' are places where the poor `people c'an come and gripe about these' programs and `have a part in determining `them. In one area for in- stance, in eastern Kentuc'ky, where title V programs are being admin- istered, t'here was quite a groundswell of people who' were concerned about the fa'ct that "although they recognized-and they deeply recog- nized-they had to have this money to live, they had to have it an'd the' conditions made it impossible for them to do anything different than to receive these funds, that they weren't getting the type program they *wanted. When we worked this through going through the vast bu- reaucracy of HEW and it is difficult to get through that vast bu- reaucracy, even for a professional, in the sense that I am `a `professional, and found out they couldn't keep their hands on this `because they `did PAGENO="0858" 3318 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 not have sufficient staff. If that had been administered through CAP, I think these people would have felt they were more a part of this program. Mr. QUIE. It was interesting to me that I find the bureaucracy in OEO much more difficult to cut through than HEW. We have just an impossible time. Take, for instance, a program in my district where the Indian Bureau had been funding transportation for Indian chil- dren. They told them in May 1966 they were going to quit funding it because the money is available through OEO or the Office of Educa- tion. So they put in a request in August 1966 to OEO but they never got the money, they were only dragging along. They were finally funded after I took it up here on the record, just about a week and a half ago. This has happened over and over again-fantastic--and our records are just replete with that fouled up chaos in the Office of Economic Opportunity. Mr. GOODELL. I might say you wouldn't get many defenders of the bureaucracy in HEW, but you will get fewer defenders in Congress for OEO. We can't get answers from them. One moment they indicate you are going to get so much money and then it is changed. They do it by telephone. They don't have an administrative procedure that anybody can understand. There is conflict within the agency. They are still doing crash programs on an idea that confuses innovation with spontaneous spending and this has us in Congress really worked up. You talk about symbolism. If we are. to have the amount of money go- ing to help the poor, that I think we would agree is going to be even- tually necessary, we must have an agency administering this program which has the confidence of Congress and the American people, not just a symbol to the poor that it is going to stand up and fight for ~them. That agency at the moment, and it is going to take a long while to resuscitate their image, is not OEO. Rabbi HIRSCH. That is the heart of the issue and let me address myself to that. I think it is true that any institution sooner or later develops bureaucratic mannerisms, including our religious institu- tions, I will submit. It is also true as you have maintained that if Congress and the Nation had the will, we could perform the same job under any rubric whether it is a new a.gency or an existing agency. I think the thing that disturbs me, and I think I can say "us," you have indicated that the poverty program is not in good shape in terms of the moral support that it has from the public at large. If I were convinced that the pro- gram that you gentlemen have formulated would, in effect, launch a ~broad, new comprehensive offensive against poverty, which offensive would be able to gather the support of the American people, then I think there is something to talk about. But, if as it is, being interpreted in many quarters and maybe par- tially it is the fault of those who do the interpreting, and maybe it is partially due to the fault of those who do not want to hear. I am willing to concede, as you indicated earlier, that there are both political and practical problems involved in that; but when your program is pre- sented, it is interpreted in many quarters as being a way of cutting up the agency, diminishing its suggestion and, in effect, cutting down on the war against poverty. I know that is a problem we have to fight :about. PAGENO="0859" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3319 Mr. GOODELL. I agree with you. That is why I took the trouble to :go into the details of what we are suggesting. I am optimistic enough to think that you might lean possibly in favor of the opportunity crusade or at least you would go away knowing that it will not do what in oversimplified terms the administration wants the people to think it will do. It will not just eliminate OEO period, and hand everything over to the existing agencies, period. * Throughout the opportunity crusade are some new innovative ideas and programs, requirements to induce the concept of the involvement of the poor into these programs, requirements to begin to integrate facilities so you don't have boys and girls going to Job Corps camps labeled as misfits, and rejects; proposals that will get effort at com- munity levels and an opportunity to give people a continuum when they go into these facilities, from testing and screening to the training and placement at the end instead of dropping them when they get out of the Job Corps camp. Coming back to the original discussion of Job Corps, this is the reason that we feel the community training facility and this concept are so important. As long as you take youngsters and send them great distances away when most of them want to return-85 percent by the statistics go back to the original area-you are going to have this hiatus when they get out. You have to refer them to somebody. There is a tremendous dropout here that is extremely serious. There is no continuum. They have not been planned for in that community and there is no agency that has the responsibility for it. Mr. HAITHC0cK. To the point that there is no agency, perhaps you *are familiar with the organization which recently went into business with a contract of OEO-Joint Action Community Service. They are now operating and there people being referred to JACS and people are bringing in its organization community groups, a broad ~amut of com- munity groups and representation on a local level, volunteers. Mr. GOODELL. I am familiar with JACS and I commend the religious groups for working and cooperating and trying to help fill this void but again it is an improvised approach that is not going to do the job. It will help. Everybody who can get into this will help but you need to set up in the structure a continuum so you have your business groups and labor groups and all of your community groups and local officials and educators involved in the process at the community level. Mr. HAITHC0CK. I think JACS structure would include bringing in business groups and the chambers of commerce and the mayors and the church groups and councils of social agencies and representatives from virtually every segment. Mr. GOODELL. I concede, theoretically that in 2 years you can set up a structure along these lines and if it really takes off it would begin to fill this void effectively. But even then you are going to be laboring under the awkward difficulty of having youngsters coming from Job Corps centers far distant whom you don't know, whom you have not interviewed or tested who have graduated or terminated and are referred to you. Then you have to pick them up at that point and begin to understand them, look over their qualifications, and then begin to find a place for them. If it is a community facility, in the first 2 or* 3 months you have made sure that they are going to meet the job opportunities in the areas where they have some interest, and where PAGENO="0860" 3320 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 they are getting skill training. Throughout the period they are there,. they can be interviewed and tested and when they get out of that `facility the job can be ready. When it is that kind of a community effort, it seems to me, the structure is set up to be much more efficient and effective and you never, at any stage, drop this youngster who should not be dropped. Mr. HAITHCOOK. That is right; he should not be dropped and that is the mechanics of the JACS administration. His name moves along lines of channel communication and he is not dropped from the time he leaves the Job Corps until he gets home. Mr. GOODELL. You have emphasized channels of communication, and~ that is not enough. You can make a very good theoretical case right now on paper that there are channels of communication for these `youngsters. When they terminate a Job Corps center there is a com- munication. It goes to the regional office of OEO-the regional office has the responsibility for following up. Mr. HAITHCOCK. There is a JACS man in that OEO office. Mr. GOODELL. I will keep an open mind that JACS may be able to fill this void in the future but we have now ha'd the Job Corps over 2 years and you can not contend that this has been done effectively up to this point. Mr. HAITHCOCK. We have just been in business a few months. Reverend SCHULZ. I would rather not get hung up on JACS. I hap- pen to be secretary of the board of directors of JACS. We felt that there was a problem with the program `but, frankly, why can't you deal with it in the concept of the rest of the program?' Why do you have to have a whole new act? We have felt, and I think Rabbi Hirsch will agree, that this aspect that you are talking about should have been written into the legislation but the Members of Congress saw fit not to do it. Mr. GOODELL. A lot of us were talking about this in 1964 and have been talking about it since. It is only a changed situation in Congress, and I don't mean to be cynical about it, but it is only the' changed situation in Congress that now dictates that they listen a little more to some of the criticisms and suggestion of a constructive nature that are being made. This has been a very serious deficiency of the Job Corps. You ask why we need a whole new program. Our program is to transfer lock, stock, and barrel the administration of the Job Corps to the Office of Education with full authority in the Office of Education for the next 3 years to keep all of these facilities open with 100 percent Federal funding and to begin to work out a transition where they do move toward community training centers with residential facilities for the Job Corps-type youngsters. It provides a transition period. It provides' for the continuation of those Job Corps centers which in the opinion of the vocational educa- tional people are deserving of continuation. It is not a complete new act. It is to begin to move in this direction and some time as President Kennedy put it in 1961, let us begin. Rabbi Hrr~scu. Just `to summarize this part. of the discussion, I am afraid some people will interj~ret the passage~of your program as being, let usstart ending, and that I think is a great danger, and' that is where the symbolism comes in. PAGENO="0861" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3321 Mr. GOODELL. I will be the first to concede to you that some people will interpret it that way because the lines are being drawn that way by those who have a great deal more of a platform with which to speak to the American people. They want it drawn as an either-or proposition, either you are in favor of doing something for the poor or you are against doing something for the poor. You are either going to continue OEO or you are going to destroy and undermine the program. They don't want a debate about new ideas. Reverend SCHULZ. What are the poor saying? Mr. GOODELL. The majority of the poor are very unhappy with OEO. Reverend SCJIITLZ. Then you and I don't talk to the same poor. Poor people are cynical about the Federal Government's involvement and lack of commitment, the failure of the Federal Government to set the proper priorities, the Federal Government's involvement in Vietnam. They are cynical `about a lot of these thing but most of the poor people with whom I have had conversations and it is all over the United States have been very, very hopeful and they still are about the programs being run through the agencies under OEO. Mr. GOODELL. Congress is rather skilled at phrasing questionnaires. Perhaps we could draw up one which would ask such things as "Are you happy with the programs under OEO ?" I think a very large number of them would say no. If you ask them a question which I think would be fairer in the whole contention, "Do you think we might get better action in the whole approach to Gov- ernment here if we began to make changes in the welfare program?", most of them would attack this program strenuously.' If you began to make changes in the whole educational structure, if you began to give the poor themselves a voice in these programs and infuse this concept and transfer `that program of OEO `into IE[EW and begin to change HEW, I think you might very well get a very positive answer from a great many of them. Most of the poor are getting it in the former terms and are not under- standing in those terms. Reverend SCHULZ. I think most of the poor would feel their expe- rience with other governmental agencies outside of OEO h'as been very poor. They are against Government itself because in some way it represents the power structure of which we are a part. Mr. GOODELL. You have made a statement with which I agree. I think most of them feel their experience with existing agencies is worse than with OEO. There is, no question about that, but the debate really we are talking about here is what is the best way of redirecting this program and improving it and beginning to change the existing programs with which not only are t.hey unhappy but with which many of us are unhappy. Reverend SCHULZ. I don't think an Assistant Secretary in HEW is going to do it. Mr. GOODELL. I don't think OEO is going to do it. Reverend SCHULZ. We have seen lots of signs that they are moving very rapidly. Rabbi HIRSCH. The difficulty I find with your proposal, you are presenting this proposal as what might be considered a severe critic of OEO yet you are projecting the proposal ma mannerthat youwant the OEO which you have just c~rit~ized and which you~ have iust transferred toa different"status in another agency. PAGENO="0862" 3322 ECONOMIC OPPORTLTNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 You want that new agency or that new status and that criticized by you now to work miracles over this tremendous bureaucracy when the very opposite is liable to happen. Taking whatever approach the. OEO has had, and I know that you do ascribe certain positive aspects to the program, taking that approach and putting it into an agency is going to undermine its iimova.tion because of the very reasons for which it was put in there t.o begin with; namely, that it was being criticized. Mr. G-0ODELL. Of course, I would not accept that description you. give. I believe I am a very severe critic of OEO and I think the critic.- isms I have made in each inst.anc.e have been documented by facts. I have not cited rumors and newspaper stories and things until we have checked them out. I think the facts we have accumulated over this 3-year period make a very good case for a severe criticism of OEO. Also, I have always personally believed, long before the war on poverty, in a preschool program, we didn't call it lleadstart, in a Job Corps type of thing, in residential skill training for these youngsters in their teens who have to be removed from the environment. I have. believed in involvement of the people to be served, and from the very outset of the war on poverty criticized the community action phase of the program because it did not have a specific requirement that there be a minimum involvement of those to be served. All of these things should be said in balance to what you said about. my being a severe critic of OEO, the administration of OEO. the administrative concept of an OEO, and the fact that we charged them with something which I think it was impossible for them to implement.. We asked them to coordinate existing agencies of Government without any authority to do it, except to call t.he various people together in the Cabinet. There is hardly-in fact I don't think there is a single Cabinet head . of a department, who does not have similar authority in these areas of social concern. The Secretary of Labor has the authority from the President to call together all of the heads of agencies affected by his programs. HEWT~ HUD, Labor, each one. The question is how do you coordinate and how do you get this new direction of programs tha.t will begin to have an impact. Well, we could discuss it for the entire afternoon. If you gentle- men have any further comments please make them, any further items that have not been brought up. You can have the last word with me. Rabbi H~SCH. I would like to make one comment and that is since you have set the record straight and talked about the things you approve we also ought to set the record straight so you know we do not consider ourselves 100-percent supporters of everything OEO has done. As a matter. of fact, some of us have been among. the severe critics on some specific issues. . Mr. GooDEI~I~. We ~an both be severecritics though. .... . Rabbi Blinsoii. The one thing. that is essential. and important . and what I would like to leave with you is that all of us feel it is important to maintain some kind of mOmentumon the idea that America is deter- mined to.eradiäate poverty. We are not experts on exactly how that should be done but we dOn't believe that transferring a. function to anot.her:a.gency is necessarily the way to do it. PAGENO="0863" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3323 If that transfer were to be accompanied by the infusion of $10 billion for example, a year, which would be a symbolic gOsture. That would symbolize a brandnew attack, a more comprehensive attack. If it were to be accompanied by some important significant new pro- posals, if it were to be accompanied by the passage of rent supplement, of antirat legislation and a host of other things, improvements of social security amendments- Mr. GOODELL. Let me question you on that. You have raised another point. Under the present community action program, rat eradication functions are eligible fOr funds from OEO. Any local community action program can have a rat eradication program with funds 100 percent from OEO if that is the local priority. I am very much for rat eradication. They have programs in many of our biggest cities that were started under the community action pro- gram. I do get concerned that when we have a problem and it is a very serious problem, and I deplore the fact that it was ridiculed and laughted at on the House floor but I get concerned that as a solution somehow we jump to the magic of bringing in a bill, setting up a new program, a new subagency to administer it and specific categorical grants so we can apply for a rat eradication program there. Why can't this be handled by local community action agencies who set the priorities and decide that rats are a serious problem to our people. Why cannot the local poor in the slums say that is one of our highest priorities? Why do you need a new categorical program with only $20 million in it which is totally inadequate to do the job? It just gives the impression you are going to do something when you are not. This again con- tributes to the cycle of cynicism, frustration and resignation of the poor themselves. Rabbi HIRSCH. I don't know the answer to that. I am not that much of an expert On rats or On the legislation. I think it can be done under the local community action program. I was in the middle of proper oration and you cut me off but I wanted to indicate that the passage of the adnlinistration's proposed legislation is not nearly enough. It certainly is not adequate to do the jOb. It is not even symbolic, I would say. Mr. GOODELL. You say if we go to the $3.6 billion. Rabbi HIRSCH. We talk in this testimony about $3.6 billion. I don't think that means too muOh, frankly, if it is notaccOmpanied by a whole host of other ačts, and I don't see too, much prospect for those OthOr acts. Yesterday the President called for prayer this Sunday; Well, we believe in prayer, those of us here. I just told a few of the fellows out~ide earlier that my first~ r~actionwheai J heard- that call was to remind myself of the story in Exodus whei e the children of Israel leave Egypt and they come to the Red Sea and Moses looks up to God `tnd he calls on God to help and asks for s'th ation God turns to him `md says "Whyfom e cryest thou to Me ~ Speak unto the children of Isi ael that they go forw'trd' Mr GOODELL Isn't that the point where God opened the Red Se'm for them and they went forward ~ Rabbi HIRSCH According to legend God~ opened it only aftei they had gone up to their nostrils so we have to take the first step and I PAGENO="0864" 3324 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 don't think we have even gotten our feet wet, to continue the analogy and to continue the metaphor. I think it is about time we started moving forward in to those wastes. Mr. GOODELL. I would agree we must move to the point where we get something higher. The President has moved to a billion dollars. He said we are not taking money away from the war on poverty because of the war in Vietnam. We are not sacrificing programs for the poor because of the war in Vietnam and this has been repeated by a great many others. I think the fact is without any question that when we are spending $30 billion a year in Vietnam with the fiscal situation the way it is, you are not going to appropriate $3, $4, $10 billion for a war on poverty. But I will give you another fact from my judgment that you would not increase to that level in this Congress today if there were no war in Vietnam, if the money were given to OEO. This is the point I think that has to be understood by some of those who want an escala- tion of the war on poverty when the time comes when we do have the money. It has to be escalated through `agencies `in which Congress and the American people have some confidence. It cannot be escalated by just handing it back to the same sort of programs. Some of us are trying to provide the transition that we feel is necessary here to permit that. Reverend SCHULZ. We appreciate your candor, Mr. Goodell. I think the thing that I would like to leave is if we think about this in really honest psychological terms, in terms of the psychological effect that all of this has on people and so on, we have to realize that most poor people understand the political implications of what is going on in the Congress vis-a-vis programs designed to assist them, and even if they don't understand the implications they know enough to know that if you rock the boat too much you might fall out and with things as they are, even though they are not as good as they might be, it might be better than they will be, `and when the Government itself is asking for $2.6 billion, this sounds better than $134 billion even though I admit you have said this could be expanded or doubled. Mr. GOODELL. It is $2.06 billion. Reverend SCHULZ. I feel very strongly about two things. Many of the poor, and obviously we have not talked to the same people, even though they have problems with Federal bureaucracies and so on know there is a relationship between their problems and the field staff of OEO, CAP agencies, district people and so on. They have never had that feeling with any other Federal agency. `People in the South never even knew, many of the poor people, knew there were extension services there, but now they know there are some poverty people in the South where they have allowed it to operate. I think with all of the feeling of depression and frustration and so on, I think it ~s important that we not turn this aside for political reasons. We have to move ahead. I don't think we have given it enough of a chance. I think there is real hope here. I would be the first one to admit there have to be changes and there is documented evidence in writing. Mr. GOODELL. Why do you say the changes are for political reasons Reverend Sommz. I think it is rather obious. PAGENO="0865" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3325 Mr. GOODELL. I think you had better elaborate. That is a rather serious charge. You are saying that it is based on a political motive ;and I think you are usin.g it in a bad sense when you say "political reasons." Reverend SCHULZ. Expediency, and so Ofl. Mr. GOODELL. You are charging us with expediency. Reverend SCHULZ. I am saying the mood of the Congress at this time in history to most disinherited people is interpreted as a mood of political expediency. Mr. 000DELL. I don't understand that. How is the mood interpreted to be politically expedient? Reverend SCHULZ. Don~t take this personally. I am not referring to you. I am talking abou~t the Congress. Mr. 000DELL. I will accept that it is not personal and I appreciate that it is not personal. However, I think it is quite a serious allegation to charge the Congress itself at this stage with political expediency. Tha.t is even stronger than charging for political reasons. Reverend SCHULZ. Seriously now, people don't want their taxes raised, people are concerned about w~ho might move in next door. Mr. G00DELL. Are you using political expediency in the sense that Congress is going to make these changes because the people want them made? Reverend SCHULZ. I guess actually what I am charging the Con- gress with is the point at many times and I believe this is true of the poverty program they are reacting to the strong feeling. tha~t has come up from the people who sit in the pews of our churches and synagogues across the country who are our constituency and yours and because of political concerns they have in their relationships are not tüing a moral stand on some of the issues. Mr. GOODELL. I have faith in `the political process and I don't think that a Congressman or Senator should automatically respond to every whim and wish of the most vocal part of his electorate but I think the general feeling of the greater percentage of the electorate is a good guideline. The best evidence we have is the polls and the contacts we have with people back home. I don't think it is political expediency when two-thirds of the people feel we should have a war on poverty. This is the best poll evidence we have. But a like two-thirds of the people feel that this administration's war on poverty is a bad one, and that it is not being administered effectively. Reverend SCHULZ. It depends on what poll you read. Mr. GOODELL. This is a factor that, I will agree, all the Members of Congress are responding to, but I think it is not based on just total ignorance and there are a few intelligent, knowledgeable people who know better. We have pretty solid documentation of the poor administration of this program. Reverend SCHULZ. I have pretty solid documentation that the serv- ices are good, such as the legal services in New York. . Mr. GOODELL. I think the legal services program, after a shaky start has been well administered, largely because in that instance-and this is an interesting irony in itself-they consulted and chose a director from the American Bar Association and worked through the American SO-084--GT-pt. 4-55 PAGENO="0866" 3326 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Bar Association and the local bar associations to set up the program. They administered it throughout with the complete coordination and cooperation of an existing institution of which I am a member and which, if you choose, represents the establishment. No organization is more of the establishment than the American Bar Association and yet this program has been very effectively administered. Mr. }IAITHc0CK. I would like to conclude with the thanks and appre- ciation for the time you have given us and for your particulation of your position on these matters. Let us just not dismantle OEO yet. Mr. GOODELL. Let's at least leave in good spirit, understanding the good intentions on both sides with reference to the proposals that are being made. Even if you can't buy the idea of eliminating OEO at this time, I hope you will give some support and attention to, and discuss some of the other innovative proposals we make in the oppor- tunity crusade that are largely ignored because of major controversy on whether to eliminate OEO or not. I thank you for your testimony. Your dialog has been most provoca- tive and helpful to the committee. Mr. QUIE. In listening to my colleague and his excellent questioning of the witnesses I think the exchange which has occurred here has been very fruitful. I would like to make the point that it seems to me outside of the sym- bol that you are making a plea for that you recognize the need of com- munity action involvement of the people who are to be helped by these programs. I gather there is a strong desire to expand this to the $30 billion the Government uses to help people in poverty outside of OEO. Of course, action in the future could affect that. I would like to have you think every way in which this transfer and this infecting of the existing agencies can occur. This is one of the main features that we have recommended this change to bring that about. I see from last year and the apparent attitude this year that more and more programs would be earmarked giving less and less discretion to the local community and that if all the community action agencies have is enough money to hire staff, they are not going to be very ef- fective as an organization and we would like to see them be much more than that. I think the real genius of the war on poverty has been this recognition that something has been lacking in these programs of the poor and that is the lack of involvement of the poor. So Congressman Goodell and I have long been strong advocates of this as we have seen it function. Reverend SclruLz. We support this maximum feasible participation in our testimony. Mr. QrnE. I hope you will look for ways that this can be included in other programs of the Federal Government. I thank you for appearing before us and I hope we have not caused you to cancel any airplane reservations. Our next witness is Mr. Blue Carstenson of the National Farmers Union. It is a pleasure to have you before us. We have a statement of some size which, in going over it, I think is excellent testimony. Do you want to make this a part of the record and ad lib, particularly if you ad lib faster than you can read. Mr. CARSTENSON. I would appreciate not having to read it at this late late hour. I would like to hit just a few of the high points. PAGENO="0867" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3327 (Mr. Carstenson's statement and statement of Tony T. Dechant, president of National Farmers UniOn follow:) TESTIMONY OF NATIONAL FARMERS UNION, BLUE A. CARSTENSON, ASSISTANT LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR The National Farmers Union has been more deeply involved in the War on Poverty than any other rural organization. It was our former President, James Patton, who led the delegation to President Johnson and urged him to declare that war which he did, right there and then. The National Farmers Union and our state Farmers Union organizations have invested large amounts of time and money in the War on Poverty. We have lob- bied and worked hard at the local, state and federal levels for all types of OEO programs. We have tried our "darndest" to help make this program effective in rural areas. In four of our states, we have undertaken Neighborhood Youth Corps programs which have been well received, well run and are reaching young people from low income families who need the help, encouragment and income from this type of program. We have in-school Neighborhood Youth Corps programs in northern Wisconsin, and southern and central Indiana; and we have out-of-school and in- school Neighborhood Youth Corps programs in parts of Arkansas and Illinois except Cook County and several other urban areas in Illinois. These programs have been helping the young people from families who live in hardcore poverty. In Illinois, our Neighborhood Youth Corps program is helping young people who have been referred to the programfrom the youth authority. We have had wonder- ful results in giving these young people, who have been in serious trouble, a second chance. In Arkansas, which is our oldest Neighborhood Youth Corps program, we have already been able to see the results of our work with young people going on to college, business or vocational schools, jobs or into the armed forces. We have been devoting additional time and energy now to counseling and job placement. One case in Arkansas, which just happened, gives an example of what impact this program can have. A young girl who came from a very poor family said she had felt that she wanted to drop out of school, although she had no plans on what to do. With counseling she was encouraged to reach for her dream. She is now enrolled in a Presbyterian Seminary with the aid of a part-time job, a loan which will enable her to work to become a Missionary and church worker. These young people have worked hard, and we feel that because of the attitude of our staff and our farm organization about work, our young people have not been criticized for loafing on the job. They have helped schools, hospitals, local com- munity agencies, local Government programs and projects. We have hundreds of local user agencies and schools and they are satisfied with our operation. While we have been harassed by some OEO officials who feel that local Community Action Agencies should have these programs, the Neighborhood Youth Corps pro- gram staff, Labor Department and local officials and Community Action Agency leaders have supported us all the way. We are proud of our record of our Neigh- borhood Youth Corps program. The National Farmers Union has sponsored the National Green Thun~b program which is operating in seven states-Arkansas, Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Virginia and Wisconsin. We are proud of our Green Thumb record and the complimentary things which members of Congress have said about Green Thumb. Presdent Lyndon B. Johnson said "Hundreds of older unemployed and retired farmers and rural workers have gained in income and in dignity, while contribu- ting to the~safety and beautification of state highways, schools, parks and rural towns through projects like Operation Green Thumb. They have assisted their disadvantaged neighbors to improve their homes and have added their skills to enhance neighboring communities. "I hwce asked the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity in cooperation with the ~ecretariës of Labor and Agriculture, to eapand this activity and to develop new ways to provide meaningful public service opportunities for the elderly in rural areas." Mrs. Lady Bird Johnson said "There are many older farmers who through no fault of their own have suffered adversity. Unfitted for other work, they face deprivation and poverty in their declining years. What an opportunity is presented here to provide them with useful employment for which they are fully qualified and, at the same time, to beautify our highways for the benefit of all our people." PAGENO="0868" 332S ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It has been said that National Farmers Union in antI-CAA, ~ut those who say this are unaware of the thousands and thousands of hours of staff time and the time which National Farmers Union has invested in trying to aid leadership in Community Action Agencies. Working cooperatively with the University of Wis- ~consin, we launched (with an OEO grant) the first training program for Corn- ~nunity Action Leaders and they have spent much time and energy to see that about SO percent of these men, who were trained actually organized GAAs or ~became involved in Community Action Programs. We have and are working closely ~with Community Action Agencies, especially in Illinois, Minnesota, South and North Dakota, Indiana, Montana, Oregon, Iowa and a number. of other states. Many of our local leaders serve as members of CAA Boards. Because of this involvement and the effort we have given to the program, we feel obligated to the Congress to be critical. The following is a statement which was discussed at length )y our Policy Committee, our National Farmers Union Board, our Green Thumb Board and Advisory Committee, and by the Delegates. This position is not taken lightly and this has been done with prior discussions with a wide range of OEO officials and others involved in the War on Poverty. "We commend our Farmers Union leadership for helping to carry out effec- tive War on Poverty Programs in rural areas, including the Green Thumb and Neighborhood Youth Corps programs. However, most war on poverty programs of the Federal Government with few exceptions do not give equi- table attention to the problem of poverty in rural areas where nearly half of the poverty exists. "Farmers Union is deeply disappointed in the failure of the Community Action Programs to reach rural poverty with quality programs and with an equita~ble share of programs. Those Community Action Agencies in rural America have been inadequately supported, inadequately aided with good technical assistance and often misdirected despite the voluntary efforts of tens of thousands of persons. We call for the reorganization of Community Action Programs in rural America so that they may better serve rural areas. They have raised hopes but have failed to deliver. "Whenever posible, beautification efforts should employ low-income per- sons to enable our limited government resources to do double duty. Farmers Union's experience in the Green Thuru~b project shows the use of low-income farmers in beautification projects as effective and desirable as a public policy. We urge the expansion of the Green Thumb and job development programs. We support the Neighborhood Youth Corps program. We support the revision of the public welfare system replacing much of public welfare with part-time and full-time community service work programs. This is a preferred way to bring low-income families out of poverty. Those remaining, who are una~ble to work (sick, disabled, young, and the very old), should be able to live without hardship and with dignity." Unfortunately, we seem to act as if rural America would disappear into urban America. Since 1920, rural America has remained at about the same population level despite the vast influx into the cities. At the present rate of our migration, rural America can continue to supply the cities for many, many. years and gen- erations ahead without reducing its own total population. During this decade, rural America can supply a net surplus of 44% in population. For every 100 males who retire, die, or are disabled in the lajior force in rural areas, 177 new young men will be entering the labor force. Ignoring rural poverty or supply hundreds in the form of food stamps is not the answer. We believe in the food stamp pro- gram and have done more than any one else to pass and expand this program, but it is not the solution. Rural America has been the great generator of America, generating the talent, the brains, the leadership, the illiterates, and the J)Overty stricken who have moved into urjan America in ever growing numbers during the past century. For the past twothirds of this century, we have shipped people to the metro- politan areas which have become less and less attractive places to live-traffic, crime, riots, air pollution, water pollution and noise. It is no wonder most Ameri- cans would rather live in rural areas and smaller communities as shown by a variety of opinion polls. With foot-loose industries and modern communication and transportation, rural America should during the last third of the Twentieth Century move ahead to not only keep its young folks, but also attract the best of the urban population who want to escape the cities. We need to. make it possible for most faniily farmers to continue farming and other farm youths and adults to remain in their communities. We are already creating a new way of life many rural areas, and we need to look at the best of this life and develop and encourage it. We don't have to force everyone to live in metropolitan areas surrounded by PAGENO="0869" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3329 factory or industry. We should allow people to live in pleasant surroundings spread out over the land. Today, in the modern rural industry, according to a USDA study of selected rural industries, three out of ten of the workers live on farms and from ten to thirty percent more live in open rural areas which are not farms. Up to one-fourth of the workers continued farming. For the past thirty years from twenty to forty percent of total farm family income has come from non-farm jobs, depending on the farm prices. We iieed a diversified rural community with a sound agricultural base, Riots and poverty Poverty is an underlying factor in these riots, but Farmers Union has never promoted the Economic Opportunity Act as an anti-riot first aid. This under esti- mates the power, the hate, the intensity and the factors involved in these riots. The War on Poverty is a human act which should raise the quality of life for human beings and hence improve the lives of all of us and strengthen our nation. Those who have said give money to the War on Poverty, and we will go into the ghettos and prevent or stop riots are wrong and must be doing some soul searching. We are deeply saddened by these riots but not surprised. These riots ar our first national riots. The social psychologists will rewrite their textbooks. Classically the contagion of riots was spread from person to person. This riot was spread by television. `The interviews and the action pictures burned through the nation awaiting only small, meaningless, or normally ineffective action to trigger off the riot which was already in the hearts and minds of both whites and blacks. The tensions were already present in our cities. The Detroit Metropolitan Study interviews from theh University of Michigan found greatly increased fear among the white population in Detroit. Community organizers working in Detroit told of tension and hostility on the increase in what later became the riot areas. There is little doubt that those militants who cried on "Black Power," get the whitey police" and "overthrow the white power structure", aggravated the situa- tion. The organized groups stimulated and used the situation. Such wide spread mania and irrational acts can not be explained simply by an arrest of a single driver, a very poorly planned and badly executed raid on a well known old "blind pig" operation, or a speech by a bitter young man. Othere cities needed no excuse but simply erupted in irrational acts of hate toward the community and society. What is the reason? The acts of any one single person or group is inadequate. Black Power groups are led by disjointed angry amibtious young men incapable of organizing anything as massive as the Detroit riot. There is an explanation for the Detroit riot. About 20 years ago, Detroit had been filling up with poor, white, young hill folk from Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia, Alabama, Mssouri and Arkansas. They canie after the grinding poverty of the rural farms and mines in the thirties seeking jobs and a better life. They left in large numbers leaving their families there, and we in Green Thumb, CASA, and Farmers Union find the old folks in these areas now in their 60's, 70's and SO's living in poverty. These young people piled into the over-flowing slums. Their dress and language was the target for discrimination. They found overcrow-ding, rats, loan sharks, police mistakes and prejudice. They were up-rooted arid put into the slums to work at good paying jobs in the factories. There wa.s not vast unemployment, yet they rioted taking it out on the Negroes as the scapegoats. They were irrational, wild and frenzied. Now a quarter of a century later, the young, poor rural Negroes from Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, and Mississippi have escaped the grinding poverty of the rural delta farms. They have been swarming in to the slums over a period of 5 to 10 years; just as the white hill folk had done before. `Their poverty in the rural areas was deeply aggravated by the terror and fire of the Ku-Klux-Klan. the white citizen councils and years of discrimination. The young adults left their families, the old and the very young to face this poverty and discriminaton and terror. The scars of hostility, bitterness and even guilt for leaving their relatives and. friends behind have been added to the turmoil, squalor, crime, rats, police mis- takes, overcrowding, pollution, prejudice and other social ills of the Detroit slums. In Detroit unemployment is very low. City official are sympathetic and are working hard for people. Community organization is intense in poverty areas. Schools are community orientated. Unions are progressive. Companies pay well and have good management policies. Yet the riot still happened. The hostility,. the turnmoil and the aggression still came out as if it had been pent up for years- which it had. PAGENO="0870" 3330 ECONOMIC OPPORTtXITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In both situations the basic facts are the same. Rural young people in grinding poverty are forced or are escaping to the city slums and the jobs. They are stacked deep in the slums marked by their language and looks. They were ill prepared and ill-educated for urban slum life. The anger and the numbers build up, and some really insignificant incident explodes this inflammable situation. We have blindly accepted the unplanned and unaided immigration from grinding rural poverty and the resulting social ills. It is a costly and inhuman way to treat rural poverty. It is cheaper to treat rural poverty in rural America. rather than wait until families break under it and move to urban slums and wait like time bombs until a match is lit. It is often too late to prevent this poverty in the slums and ghettos. STEPS TO PREVENT AND ELIMINATE RURAL POVERTY Inercasing net farm income Much of the rural poverty is generated by people being forced out of farming. Today farm income is at a very low point-74% of parity. With this kind of farm price, we are driving more and more farmers and farm workers from the land. We as a nation will regret this deeply within a relatively few years when world starvation becomes common place. Meanwhile, we drive the poor farmers and farm workers from the land and into the cities which helps to create the riots and the congestion problems of our urban areas. There is a relationship between low farm price and urban overcrowding and problems, and if we are not going to send another 200,000 rural people heading fr the slums before next summer's riot time. We must do something about farm prices. Fall finding of the 1965 farm act would be the biggest step in preventing rural poverty. Doing something about farm prices is not enough for most farm familie.s in poverty. The family farm which is well equipped and with enough land is as effi- cient as the corporate farm and in many cases more efficient. One of the prime difficulties that most family farmers, including the southern Negro farmer, can not obtain sufficient credit to buy the land or get the equipment, and can not arrange the marketing system so that he can compete with the corporate farm and the large farm empires. Many low income farm families need more and lower interest credit if they are to work their way out of poverty. We have supported the encouragement of farm co-operatives as recommended by the u.S. Food Marketing Commission. We support the SWAFCO Co-op, which has been funded by the Office of Economic Opportunity, and we urge that farm co-operatives for low income farmers of all types be aided. We also realize that low income farmers will need much more credit than is currently available. We have testified dozens of times this year on the need for this credit. It now appears that we are moving into an even worse tight money and high interest rate situation. While most urban borrowers found money easier and cheaper to get this past few months, the farmer has continued to have a high interest-tight money situation and it is going to get worse. The rougher it gets the more poverty level farm operations we will have in this country. To keep up with the need for new equipment and land, the average farmer needs about 10% more credit each year. One of the chief reasons that a majority of the Spanish surname and Mexican-Americans citizens in this country have moved from the farm to the small town and urban area during the past two decades is the lack of credit. The lack of credit and high interest rates have forced many southern share- croppers and small farmers out of farming. The cost of higher interest rates and tight money is staggering. This is one of the chief generators of rural poverty. The Farmers Home Administration farm operating loans need to be expanded. The Economic Opportunity loans need to he expanded and the size of the loans increased. This program has in general been well run and is reaching very low income people and has been used for small farm cooperatives. Increase Federal aid to education - Property and sales taxes are regressiv'e taxes In rural areas. The modern corporate and technological wealth is not located (or taxable) in most local rural communities or rural states. At lease ~4 of the income for the public schools should come from the Federal income and corporate tax sources. Only this type of effort can equalize the schooling level where in 1960 the average urbanite had 11.1 years af schooling, the rural non-farm 9.5 years, and the rural 8.8 years of schooling. This should include major increase.s in vocational and adult education. PAGENO="0871" ECONOMIc OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3331 Too few of our rural school systems yet have the special service to help equalize opportunities for the handicapped, retarded or disadvantaged child. Only when iural schools are as attractne as urban schools can we hope to attract and keep the best of our young families housing and cornniu~niity facilities in rural development With nearly half of the substandard housing in rural areas, there is no doubt in our mind that we must double the efforts in rural housing, areas. Almost half of the substandard ho.using in America is in rural areas, yet. for every 25 houses built in urban. America with federally aided program's only one was built in rural America. We ask that Farmers Home Administration's farm home loan appropriations. be doubled in the next two years. Congress should act to re-establish .the USDA- FHA direct loan fund increasing it by $200 million to supplement'the mortgage insurance program to serve as a yardstick on the co,st of such credit. National Farmers Union urges Congress to enact a program under FHA-USDA for an experimental demonstration housing program in rural areas to see what can be done to revitalize rural housing. We commend OEO for initiating its first experimental efforts in rural housing. Gongress should provide a nbw program of `direct loans combined with grants and restore' the appropriation's for a direct grant' ("Sec. 504) to low income families of up to $1500 per family household to provide emergency repairs for homes that have deteriorated to the point of being undesirable for habitation. We urge Congress to amend the Housing Act to' provide that only new farm ho'me,s on the immediate lot (not to exceed one acre) would be encumbered in home mOrtgages under the Farmers Home Administration. We urge greater emphasis on senior citizens' housing programs in Farmers Home Administration because under current construction rates, we' are losing groun'd in the effort to have older, low-income people live in safe, sound and adequate housing. We support $40 million for rent supplementation programs and that this be extended to include cooperative `and non-profit rural housing. for families and individuals as provided in the 1966 Housing Act, Title 5. Aid should be given to encourage more non-profit and cooperative housing in rural areas. .We urge expansion of the Aiken-Poage Water and Sewage program under FHA both in ~rriount and to include community facilities such as police, transportation, fire `facilities, street lighting facilities and community centers. Appropriate housing should be available in their own rural areas. `We have lost tens of thou- sands of rural schools that served as community meeting halls and new com- munity meeting room facilities will have to be developed. We urge serious congressional consideration of all proposals for public, cooper- ative, and private efforts to aid `self-help housing. health and social services P'oor health services in rural areas means poor heal'th, more disability and more dependents. We have all recognized the lack of adequate' medical services in low rural areas. The costs are staggering. On each index of health, rural people stand lower than their urban-counter part. One of the results is that rural working people have 14% more dependents th.an do their urban cousins who work rural areas receiving proportionally less of community health and mental health serv- ices. Part of this is our inability to .attract skilled medical persons into rural area's. But much of it is because of a lack of grantsmenship both with the Federal Government and w'i'th the great charitable foundations of America, and because of th'e greater cost of operating health and social service programs in rural areas, because of the distances involved and our hundreds `of rural farm counties which lack drugs today. In our own Green Thumb and Community A'ctivities for Senior Arkansans (CASA) programs, we have found an incredible lack of basic health and social services in some of our rural counties. The average older low income person interviewed by CASA was paying $20.00 a month for drugs. We regret the House Appropriations Committee action cut out the proposed new rural health program of the public health service. `,We also w.ant to report that our experience in the Direct Drug Service `shows that the further you are in some metropolitan areas, the higher the .cost of drugs. This Direct Drug Service is our own private war on poverty and high drug cost. Safety Rural areas have a higher accident and injury ra'te than urban areas which is an important concern for rural development and anti-poverty effoI'ts. The PAGENO="0872" 3332 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 fatal accident rate of rural roads is "35% greater than is for the highway and~ injury accidents which happen twice as often on these rural country roads". Since 1962, the rural death rate has been on the increase; the death rate increase is 10% since 1961 to 1964. There are many factors contributing to these accIdents, but let us suggest only one step that might be taken which could substantially reduce highway accidents. The Tennessee Highway Department found that only 10% of their 400.000 road signs were adequate. Iowa found that 66,000 of 100,700 road signs on primary rural highways needed to be replaced because they were inadequate. If our rural community could be encouraged to replace some of their low income people to rebuild and replace road signs, it can greatly reduce accidents and deaths in rural areas. Our rural roads are today the most unsafe roads in America and are our majority of draw-backs in rural development. The annual rate of bed-disabling injuries per 1,000 persons per year (1960 figures) is: Rural farm 87 Rural nonfarm 73 Urban 60 The rate of workdays lost (per 100 "usually working" people) due to motor vehicle accidents (1960 figures) is: Rural farm population 138. 0 Rural nonfarm population 55.2 Urban population 39.3' The average number of days per year per person of restricted activity due to illness or injury in 1957-59 was: Days Farm workers 17' All occupation groups 12 The percent of the population with chronic limitation of activity due to illness or injury in 1957-59 was: Percent Rural farm population 12.4 Rural nonfarin population 9. 5 Urban population 9. 7' The number of deaths from machinery on farms is 11/2 times the number of deaths involving machinery in industrial places. Among the major industries, only mining and extractive industries and construction have higher death rates from accidents than agriculture. More consideration of these facts should be given in rural anti-poverty planning. Transport atiom We have lost many of the rural bus lines. Freeways have ended many bus. stops from many rural communities. The small town taxi has been "done in" by' high insurance rates. This leaves the young and old stranded in many rural areas.. Experiments are needed to develop new forms of transportation for rural areas. Community p1an~ning If we are to avoid the traffic congestion, smog, water pollution, blight, and the other mistakes of metropolitan areas, we need area planning which metro- politan areas have only now begun to develop. We need area wide comprehensive planning and zoning and industrial development. Local government should be aided through both technical assistance and vehicles for inter-governmental cooperation. Georgia rural development districts are a good example of some of the poten- tial for this kind of rural equivalent to the metropolitan planning council. We support, as a part of the Target Program of the National Farmers Union. the Rural Community Development District Program. Without the ways and means for local governments to cooperate and to get technical help they will not serve the needs of their communities. Most rural communities do not have `the need' for nor the finances to support the technical know-how. the grantsmanship talent, nor even the library resources required to aid a part-time public official in rural areas. We testified recently before the Senate Housing Subcommittee on this issue and urged that flexibility be given to the composition to allow for representation' by the OAA, RAD and TAP groups. PAGENO="0873" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3333 With a rural community development district with an overall development plan ~it should be possible to eliminate the need for each local rural community to ~develop its own costly "Comprehensive Plan" to qualify for various Department of Housing and Urban Development grants. In our 1967 Farmers Union Convention Resolutions, we say "to bring farm communities up to par economically requires recapitalization: expanded credit and Federal assistance, emphasizing the whole package of community facilities and services available with the help of rural development programs in coopera- tion with Federal, state and local agencies-schools, hospitals, housing, better access roads, highways, electric power and telephones. We urge enactment of ~the proposed Community Development District program to provide needed plan- fling grants to strengthen the ability of rural areas to make use of these services where efforts are not being made. Through the cooperation of all concerned, re- capitalization can help bring growth and new hope to replace stagnation and apathy." Employment During the past few years we have seen much greater interest in the state employment services for aiding rural areas. We have seen some improvement in the number of MDTA, OJT and the job development efforts in rural areas. Rural areas are still very slow to see the need for the Employment Service, but the need in perhaps greater than for areas where there are many large business which have their own personnel staffs. Many farm people and others in rural areas have more skills than are readily appareiit. We have found this true on our Green Thumb program. Some older farmers have had a wider range of skills than even we estimated. Community work service programs such as the Neighborhood Youth Corps, the Green Thumb and other Nelson and Scheuer Amendment programs are very popular in most rural areas and are probably the most successful rural programs developed thus far in the War. on Poverty. Programs in which low income people are employed to develop the community and community services do double-duty in rural developments. Co7nnw~nity services The fastest growing area of employment in urban areas is that of services both public and personal services. If a rural community bad, in addition to the basically good agricultural situation, all the variety of services-~both public and private-the economy of that town would be good. If rural communities employed adequate personnel for their schools, library, social services, employment services, and lOcal government personnel it would have a major positive impact on the community and its economy. In many cases the additional dollars of federal and state revenues and the new business and peopie these services would attract over the long haul would more than compen- sate for the initial cost of the community. `Credit One of the most desperate needs is the need for more credit for rural areas. In general, interest rates for loans are 2% higher in rural areas than in urban areas The tight money situation has not abated in rural areas. Farmers partic- iilar have been hard hit by the lack of credit. An important step for rural devel- opment would be the doubling of the FHA loan program. SPECIFIC DISCUSSION OF THE ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT OF 1967 Job Corps This program, in our opinion, has definitely improved during the past year. I think they heard what members of this committee and Congress were hearing, and the agency has improved its operations. I do feel that closer cooperation with vocational education is desirable. However, unless the entire OEO is moved to HEW, we would oppose moving the Job Corps there by itself. We believe, `as do members of the Job Corps staff, that the next big job is to follow-up with the job corps members after they leave the facility. I am happy to see that they are moving in this direction. Work programs Ncqihborhood Youth Corps. We believe that the Neighborhood Youth Corps is being very well administered and the new directions which have been given are. excellent. We know that the Department of Labor is very much aware of `what `they have and are handling grants in a responsible, and we might add, PAGENO="0874" 3334 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 financially strict manner. Their tough line on income ceilings is perhaps a little too lenient. Their financial control over grants is better than any of the agencies in the social field. This past year they have put increased emphasis on counselling and job de- velopment, which is essential. The administration has been flexible enough to meet local conditions. Perhaps the single most glaring error in the Quie BIll is the suggestion that part of the Neighborhood Youth Corps program should be transferred to the O~ce of Education. In addition to the serious program. dif- ficulties and problems such a transfer would entail, the fact is it would almost double the administrative costs. At the present time, in most cases, the in-school and out-of-school programs and the drop-out programs are all handled by the same administrative staff. The Quie Bill would call for transfer of some of this program from the Labor Department to the Office of Education where a duplic-ate structure would have to be created. The cost of actually transferring an agency not only rims into the millions of dollars but can disjoint and discourage many good staff members and good working relaitonships. It would eliminate over half of the present sponsors and with no assurance of improved program. There is every evidence that it would reduce rural participation as many of the rural schools are still too small to carry out good programs themselves. We believe that the Neighborhood Youth Corps should be a work experience to assist the individual in continuing school, including college if desirable, and of equal importance in getting a good job when he compeltes high school or other schooling opportunities. We see the greater need to coordinate the Neighborhood Youth Corps with the job counseling and development programs. We strongly oppose the transfer of any part of NYC programs to the Office of Education as poor programing and a waste of public funds. Adult Work Programs. Our Green Thumb program has been the pilot pro- gram for these adult work programs and we are proud that our Green Thumb program has yet to have its first bad press story since we opened our offices and hired the first man. We are proud of our bi-partisan support and support by all the Governors in the seven states in which we operate. We are proud that we have acted as a demonstration program which has been copied by hundreds of Community Action Agencies. We are especially proud of the fine work that our Green Thumb worker trainees are doing. Before this Committee considers re-shuffling the various parts of the Office of Economic. Opportunity, we can tell you from first-hand experience that it is a costly, painful, agonizing, and rough process from the agencies, sponsoring groups, and for the Congressmen and Senators. In the case of transferring the Nelson-Scheuer and Kennedy-Javits programs it was worth the effort as the Labor Department is better equipped administratively and operationally to handle these programs than is OEO. We would strongly urge that since these programs have already been transferred over to the Department of Labor that the Nelson and Scheuer programs (Mainstream) be officially transferred over to Title I for clearer and cleaner administrative lines. Coordination with the other employment programs is most essential, even more essential than coordination with other community action programs, if you want results. We would urge that the Labor Department be encouraged to strengthen its CAMP committee for coordination of all manpower programs, and that these adult work programs should be even more closely linked with other manpower programs. The Labor Department should be free to select its sponsors and to evaluate them. We are pleased with the strict financial control than OEO and CAP had over the programs. While their application forms are a little too com- plex for some rural community action groups, it will give much tighter control and understanding than OEO has had. Last year we supported a major increase in the adult work programs. We con- tinue to urge greated emphasis upon adult work programs not only as solid ways to eliminate poverty and help people toward employment in the private sector, but also because it improves the quality of living in our communities, especially in low income areas of our communities and increases essential services. While we would not like to see rioters receive a reward for rioting, we believe that many of the innocent victims of these senseless riots could be helped out by employing them to clean up the riot areas. Many of the poor. old people living in our central cities will be even further impoverished by being burnt out. They should be employed immediately to help rebuild these areas. The Nelson Amendment program has been the most popular among the rural community action agencies. I have yet to find a rural community action agency director who directly or indirectly did not already have an application for a PAGENO="0875" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3335 Nelson or Scheuer Amendment program approved, pending, or in process of development. This has been without ~a great deal of OEO promotion. Those pro- grams which have been without much technical assistance from OEO during the past year until the time of the transfer have done remarkably well. We are proud to have pioneered this program and hope that you will continue and expand these programs both through community action agencies, public agencies, state agencies, and private non-profit organizations. rThe slides which we are presenting to this Committee shows more vividly than words the nature of our Green Thumb program. Community Action. We have not been happy with some of the administration and policies of OEO. Most of this Committee is aware of our feelings and of the examples of these problems. We can share the views of many of you for the need for improving these policies and practices. However, we would suggest that a tearing apart of OEO is not the solution. We oppose the abolition of OEO. If it is desirable to put OEO closer to existing agencies to cut interagency warfare and improve administration, it could be possible to move the entire OEO to the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, for example, keeping it as an Office of Economic Opportunity with the same status as the U.S. Office of Educa- tion of the Social Security Administration. If this were done as a compromise between those who would like to see a closer tie with existing agencies and those who do not want to. break up the OEO, we would recommend that the over-all di- rector of the War on Poverty should be a new Under-Secretary of HEW with broader powers to help build cooperation with other agencies involved in the War on Poverty. There is precedence in the Department of Commerce for where they have more than one Under-Secretary. We hope that this Committee will do its level best to arrive at an agreement before it sends this bill to the floor. "The poor" should not be fought over for partisan reasons, but needs the careful attention of every member of this Com- mittee. Revision is needed and every effort should be made to get agreement on as much as possible before the Bill is reported. We have discussed the matter with many of you and know that many of the criticisms reflect honest need for changes to improve the program. Last year we supported the efforts of this Committee's desires to secure a place for the independent agency outside of the Community Action Agencies, its effort to emphasize employment and de-emphasize certain activities and give more direction to programming. We think that there have been improvements in the War on Poverty and that most OEO and OAA officials have risen to the challenge of the recent riots and efforts to curtail them. We believe that a major new effort is needed in rural anti-poverty programs in order to prevent the immigration of rural people. We urge OEO to work closer with the Economic Development Agency, Rural Development Services, FHA of the Department of Agriculture and the Manpower programs in developing ways that rural people do not have to leave their community or at least their region or state to find employment. If they do leave that they be better prepared than they are now. Cooperation is a two way street. We urge that a Deputy Director of OEO be provided to OEO and that simultaneously he should also have a position in the Department of Agriculture. The rural anti-poverty efforts of CAP should be better coordinated with the Technical Action Panels, Rural Conservation and Develop- ment and Rural Area Development efforts. Greater use should be made of area wide rural programs and single purpose groups. More such public and private groups should be encouraged to get into the program. We also urge increased emphasis upon programs for the older poor. In conclusion, we believe there is room for improvements and these should be made to increase cooperation with other agencies and improve administration. We do not support breaking up OEO to achieve this end, but rather by relying upon the good members of this Committee to hammer out agreements before this bill is reported to the House. Farm Home Administration Opportunity Loans. In the states where we are organized and have had a chance to see this program work, we are deeply im- pressed by the good that it is doing. We support a major increase in this program and urge that the size of the individual loan be increased. We are also pleased with the migrant program and its results, Vista. We support the idea of a home town Vista and believe that the directions of the administration's staff and Congressman Quie's bill in this regard are not far apart. We appreciate the opportunity to appear before this Committee. PAGENO="0876" PERSONAL INCOME OF FARM POPULATION $ PER CAPITA 1S4LO 1,500 Total, all source~s1 / A1 - // FROM NON FARM SOURCES* 1,000 / / / _____ 500 ~o'~ FARM ~OLJRC t:x1 cn 0 U ________ 1960 1961 ~962 1963 1964 1965 1966 INC~.UOES SOIJACES SUCH ~1 WAGES AND SALARIES RROM NOJPA RN EMPLOYMENT, NONFARM 6USINESS AND PROFESSIONAL INCOME, DIVIDENDS, INTEREST AND ROYALTIES, U.S. DEPARIMENTOF AGRICULTURE NFG, EQS46O~.66I7I ECONOMIC RES(APCP.4S(~ViC( PAGENO="0877" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3337 FARM INCOME RISES SHARPLY Higher livestock prices and a thriving grain market have resulted in sharply rising farm income through 1965 and early 1966. An increase in realized net in- come per farm from 1964 to 1965 was reported for farms in every sales category. For the large farms, which account for the bulk of farm income, this has meant increased prosperity. For the small farms, which account for the bulk of the farm population, this has meant some relief from near-poverty conditions. In spite of the tremendous boost, the per-capita income of the farm population is still a third lower than that of the nonfarm population. Realized net farm income during January-June 1966 was estimated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as just over $16 billion (seasonally adjusted annual rate). Aside from the $17.1 billion reported for 1947, realized net income has never exceeded $16 billion in any previous year on record. Realized gross farm income in the first half of 1966 was around $48.5 billion (seasonally adjusted annual rate), substantially higher than in the same period a year earlier. Pro- duction expenses through June this year were reported at an annual rate of $32.2 billion, seasonally adjusted, compared with $30.4 billion in the first half of 1965. Farmers were paying higher prices and increasing purchases of some of the more important production items. Farm wage rates were up about 7 percent, but the number of hired hands through the first six months of this year was reported to be down about 9 percent from the corresponding 1965 period. U. 5. ULSPAI1TUENT OF AGRICULTURE CHART I There are several million older low income people living in rural America who, through no fault of their own, cannot continue to farm or find employment. Having poor job prospects and often living in rural pockets of poverty, these older farmers face years of deprivation and poverty for themselves and their wives. Project Green Thumb seeks to use the skills of older and retired low income farmers in growing things to beautify the highways. Green Thumbers have planted 600,000 trees, built 35 new parks, reconditioned 60 more older parks, established several hundred new rest areas, cleared hun- dreds of miles of highway right-of-way, assisted in many state, county, city and rural beautification efforts. PRICES RECEIVED ~Y FARMERS AND RETAIL FOOD PRICES 1947-49 AVERAGE, ANNUAL 1950 TO 1966 AND ESTIMATED 1967 INDEX `53 `55 `57 `59 `61 `63 `65 `67 THUMBNAIL SKETCH OF PROJECT GREEN THUMB PAGENO="0878" 3338 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT MUNDMEN1~S OF 1967~ The program, operating in seven states, Arkansas, Indiana, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon Virginia and Wisconsin, employed a maximum of 800 worker- trainees and had wide-scaled community, state and congressional acceptance despite the challenge of employing a group of men given up by most programs as hopeless. The average age has been 67 and the average income before the project was $900.00 a year. Heavy in-kind contributions come from state and community sources. "To many of them," says Tony T. Dechant, President of Green Thumb and Farmers Union, "this means the difference between staying in their own homes and leading their own productive lives or being dependent on the state of their children." All the men who are hired by the project must pass physicial examinations~ They work bard and as one foreman expressed it, "there's no goofing off. My main problem is to keep those old fellows from working too hard." The problem of the older retired worker in rural areas of the country has been a cause of grave concern to President Johnson who, in a communication to the Senate in March, 1967, said, "Hundreds of older unemployed and retired farmers and rural workers have gained in income and dignity while contributing to the safety and beautification of state highways, schools, parks and rural towns through projects as Green Thumb. I have asked the Director of the Office of 1~conomic Opportunity in cooperation with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Labor to expand this activity and to develop new ways to provide meaningful public service opportunities to the elderly in rural areas." Evaluations have shown the Green Thumb program is effective in aiding these men who are in deep poverty and prolonged unemployment to regain dignity and purpose in life and escape from the depths of poverty. It is a pioneer effort to show the abilities and potentials of older and retired low income farmers as employable workers. Green Thi~rnb Board: Tony Dechant, Pres., Edwin Christianson, Vice Pres., E. W. Smith, Leonard Kenfield, Ben H. Radcliffe, Gilbert Rohde, George W. Stone, Jay I. Naman and Charles F. Brannan. Greea T1ii~rnb Yational Office: 1012 14th Street, N.W., Suite 1200-628-9774. Blue A. Carstenson, Asst. to the President, George E. Meagher, Associate Direc- tor, Samuel Lipetz, Assistant Director for Administration. State Green TJuirnl Directors and State Offices Lewis J. Johnson, Jr.-Box 4241, Asher Ave. Station, Little Rock, Arkansas (501) FR 2-1453 Wayne Vance-Tliird & Chestnut Streets, Vehslage Bldg., Rooms 9 & 10, Sey- mour, md. (812) 522-7930 Percy Hagen-P.O. Box 310. Wadena, Minnesota (218) 631-1761 Joseph Kenny-Trenton Trust Bldg., Room 1202, Trenton, New Jersey (609) 393-8958 Russell Steen-2l5 Front Street, N.E., Salem, Oregon (503) 585-2433 John Kmosena-Neillsv~~ Court House, Neillsville, Wisconsin (715) 743- 3036 State OEO Office, 10 S. 10th Street, Room 302, Richmond, Virginia Co~rxmNITY AcTIvrrIEs von SENIoR ARKANSAS PROJECT AiDs RURAL ELDERLY An Arkansas Farmers Union project is playing good neighbor to elderly people in need who have no one else to care for them. The pilot program known as CASA-CommU11~~Y Action for Senior Arkansalls-is being conducted in six Arkansas counties, financed by the Administration on Aging (HEW). Rod Jones, Director for Arkansas Farmers Union CASA Program, made a report illustrated with colored slides at the Annual Conference of States Execu- tives on Aging sponsored by the Administration of Aging (HEW) at the Wash- ington Hilton, June 19th. CASA helps aged and needy residents in Conway, Izard, Lonoke, Prairie Sharpe and Stone counties to spend their declining days in a little more comfort. Two or three senior citizens are employed as interviewers and aides in each county. They work three days a week and receive $1.40 an hour. Their job is to find people in out-of-theway rural places who are in need of help and to give them the aid they need. Since last November, when the program got underwaY, 2,500 persons ranging in age from 65 to 104 have been interviewed or helped by the CASA workers. The average age of the people living in need is 73 and their incomes average less than $950 yearly. PAGENO="0879" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3339 For `more than half Social Security is their only income, about a quarter of them are on Welfare and some are on both Welfare and Social Security. The CASA workers have found that nearly 60 percent are in poor health; 36 percent live in substandard housing without electricity or plumbing. Old people who haven't seen another human being for weeks at a time have been visited. Rod Jones cites the case of an elderly man who couldn't walk iecause of muscular distrophy, but managed `to get around in an old wheel chair. His wife was ill, too. OASA workers had `a `telephone installed so that he might summon help. One family, all mentally deficient, was found living in a house minus windows with chickens roosting in the bedroom and kitchen. OASA workers have made minor repairs to many of the homes; have arranged transportation to doctors and medical centers for elderly who needed treatment. Some families have been found living in indescribable filth. Retardation. senility, ill health are a triple threat to the forgotten elderly living in rural pockets of poverty. "But", says Jones, "many of the people we have found have never been to a hospital or nursing home and do not want to go. Some of them have never seen a doctor. "But with the help of CASA workers who can render domestic services, give a little nursing care and clean up the houses so th'at they are fit to be lived in, the majority of these people can remain in their own homes and not be moved to nursing homes. STATEMENT OF TONY T. DECHA~tT, PRESIDENT NATIONAL FARMERS UNION The Farmers Union does not believe that the Economic Opportunity Act is anti-riot first aid. Anti-poverty efforts can help to restore economic well being to our rural areas. The farm family should be able to rem'ain in their rural community and make a decent living instead `of being forced into the overcrowded metropolitan areas. It is doubtful that the Detroit riot could have been prevented merely by giving money to anti-poverty efforts in Detroit. Detroit is a city with a very low unemployment rate. City officials `are sympathetic and are working hard for the people. Community organization is intense in poverty areas. Schools are community oriented. Unions `are progressive. Companies pay well, yet the riot happened. We in the Farmers Union believe riots will continue to occur in the urban areas so long as rural America continues to supply the cities with people. The rural poor become the urban poor. Rural young people in grinding poverty are being forced `to the city slums to look for jobs. Many lack training to get good jobs. They are stacked deep in the slums marked by their language and looks. They were ill prepared and ill educated for urban slum life. We will continue to have riots in the cities until we can adequately treat rural poverty. Once the fire is lighted, all efforts must be extended to pu't it out, but it would be infinitely cheaper to remove the fuel `before the fire starts. Major pro- grams of training and work opportunity combined with rural development efforts could slow the mass migration to the urban slums. Today our minds are filled with riot stopping. If we really mean to stop riots, let us look for riot `prevention. Riot prevention can be found in rural America. Mr. CARSTENSON. I would call attention to the statement of our na- tional president, Tony Dechant, who has spoken out on the matter relat- ing to the riots and how we `have to look at really truly preventing riots. We have a position which the Farmers LTnion Convention took after quite serious consideration by many committees including the ~poiicy committees and the delegates and the board and quite a long discussion and it is concurred in by the advisory board. That is on page 2. We will skip on to page 4, which this past week I was out at the IJni- versity of Michigan. I used to be on the staff of the extension service there, and working in the small areas and small towns but also working in Detroit. In the course of my work there I worked with many of the professors who have been studying Detroit, working with staff members who have at that time and since worked in community development PAGENO="0880" 3340 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 work in Detroit, worked with the schools, worked with social agencies~. now working under title I of the Higher Education Act in the Detroit area, and these comments concerning the genesis of the riots are based on my own experience working in Detroit and the experience of these professors and staff members of the University, some of the sociology department professors and others on the basis of our experience in looking at the Detroit situation. Mr. QUIE. On page 2you mention programs for reaching rural popu-- lations. Have you heard the testimony of Director Shriver stating some 38 percent-I don't recall the exact amount-I think he said 38 percent this coming year will be devoted to rural poverty. Are you aware of 37 percent going into rural areas and what kind of quality is there in the' programs that have been operating? Mr. CARSTENSON. A similar statement was made before the subeom-- mit-tee before it got involved in other matters by Mr. Harding and I followed the OEO presentation. I did challenge it at that time and I have had discussions with them since that time. At this time they do not know precisely what percentage of this current situation they are in right now, they don't know what proportion of the programs are going to rural. They say this is a projection and in about a month they will come up with more realistic statistics on what has actually happened:. They have always predicted more than they have been able to do in rural areas. It has been increasing and I think part of the comments and classic things we have said from time to time about the lack of programs has spurred them on to do a little more, especially the last few months in the rural areas. I don't believe that they will be able to achieve the 28 percent, I be~ lieve it is, that they have projected for this past year or the 38 percent, you say- Mr. QUIE. Thirty-two percent they said in this past fiscal year and: 36 percent for this next fiscal year. Mr. CARSTENSON. I talked with a statistician over there and it is'- projected. Mr. QUTE. You don't think they are actually going to have done this in the last third? Mr. CARSTENSON. Apparently when we have a- serious problem in our urban areas, more of the funds go into the urban programs. Also the definition of rural is different. Their definition is different: from the Census Bureau or FITA. They have a definition of predomi- nantly rural rather than rural. If you were to compare their definition' with what is predominantly rural counties and chop up the percentage- of poor in there it would probably be up around 60 percent or so, so they- are using a different definition of rural than does the Census Bureau or- others. I think the statistics reflect what is their goal. I wonder if they are~ going to make this goal this past year `and they said they would not know until another month from now. Even then I urged that they make a much clearer definition when they use this statistic as to what they mean by rural and also give corn-- parable data as to how many poor are in those counties. Mr. QmE. What do you think of dividing the community action pro- gram so we allocate amounts for u'rban and rural programs so the rural' get their proportionate share. PAGENO="0881" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3341 Mr. CARSTENSON. I think the language in your bill is very excellent. I have not seen anyone else's language in any program or law that I think would give a more equitable distribution of programs and I certainly commend you for that incentive, creative language. It is very good. Mr. QUID. I thought that language was limited to OEO from the testimony we have had. Mr. GOODELL. For that we will be on a cloud for awhile. Mr. QUID. At the bottom of page 2 you say "often misdirected in spite of voluntary efforts." What do you mean by that? Mr. CARSTENSON. Again, this was passed in March and by the very taking of this position we ha!ve been successful particularly in certain regional offices, for example, the Chicago regional office about which I am sure you are well aware, the regional staff is going off in all direc- tions and making life pretty miserable for the rural CAP directors and I am familiar with many of them in Minnesota, and they have problems getting the programs going because of the misdirection and despite the statements coming out of the regional office. I think the new regional director is making some progress. I am seeing some improvement even more than there has been in the past 2 or 3 months but there has been a lot of misinformation and misdirec- tion coming out prepared by regional staffs where they have gone around and said things when they were not well enough informed about OEO policy or particular legislation. Mr. QUIE. I yield to my colleague, Mr. Goodell. Mr. CAR5TENSON. I would like to make one comment before you have to leave. In the course of my testimony I did not want to indicate in any way at the bottom of page 12 that I was referring to your bill as tearing apart OEO is not the solution. I agree that many people have not read your bill and Mr. Goodell's bill and I don't think this is referring to them. I do feel that much more serious and direct reading carefully of the things in the bill is very essential to all of the members of the committee, and I would hope instead of just fireworks at this time we can get an agreement in the committee, taking some of the points you have made, and, in turn, per- haps on the other hand taking some of the points that the committee has made, and I would suggest perhaps that one possibility might be to leave OEO intact by transferring it over to HEW and, as I indicate here, a possibility of an Under Secretary rather than an Assistant Secretary and see if this might not be a way, one, to keep this image of OEO whole, yet bring it into proximity for this transfusion to other agencies in HEW and elsewhere and get better administration. So taking the points you have made in your bill and the points of the democratic side of the aisle would beconsidered. Mr. QUID. Let me say in the beginning you have not made the mis- take so many others have made in assuming that the propaganda charges are correct. You have read the opportunity crusade and the first time you talked to me thout it I realized you knew what you were talking about and you realized what we are attempting to do. Also, your suggestion of an Under Secretary, I think, is an excellent one. I `think we will see, when we make changes based on testimony, that this is one that we are going to make. I just want to say I appreciate the constructive way in whicE 80-084-67-Pt. 4-56 PAGENO="0882" 3342 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 you have approached the problem of poverty, the legislation that is being proposed to give us the tools to bring more and more people out of poverty in the country and also your dedication to the rural part of America. Thank you very much. Go ahead and review your testimony and Mr. Goodell will have some questions. Mr. CARSTENSON. I wanted to show you some pictures of Wabasha but that can wait until another time. Mr. Qm~. I am going to Wabasha right now. Mr. GOODELL. You may proced, Mr. Carstenson. Mr. CARSTENSON. I would like to comment specifically on the bill starting on page 11. Again I think the point of keeping the war on poverty together but transferring the thing over to HEW would then brii~g it into proximity with the vocational education. In 1959 I worked on the problem in the Office of Education as a member of the staff of the Office of Education relating to the older worker and trying to get vocational education in gear and I worked on the White Conference on Aging in the same area. Later I worked in the Office of the Secretary trying to get vocational education geared up for MDTA. I know that it is not perfect, but I th ink that much can be gained by having these two programs under the same general HEW unThrella and I think having them under the same umbrella would be helpful to both; vocational education and the Job Corps program. I like the idea of the smaller facility and I think this is to be encour- aged and commenced; the idea you andMr. Quie advanced in your bill. I would like to concentrate a good deal on the work programs be- cause this is where we have had direct work experience. `I don't know whether you have received a copy of our report on the Neighborhood Youth Corps. Mr. 000DELL. Would you like it in the record? Mr. CARSTENSEN. It is long for the record but I may wish to use it. I think most of the other members of the committee have received it. We run a series of Neighborhood Youth Corps programs under con- tract. These are State farmers unions offices and we `have had many wonderful compliments from local school officials and from others. We do feel `that it would be `a shame to break up the two programs because of the ad'ditional cost of administration. Most Neighborhood Youth Corps programs both in school and out of school and dropout programs are run by the `same administrative team at the local or State level, wherever the administrative level is. If it were split over into the Office of Education, in our judgment it would pret.ty well double the `administrative costs, and I think this would be a detriment to the program. Also, these are work-oriented, work-experience kinds of things that will hopefully lead the yoirngster into a future job. I don't think that pulling back in education is going to help. The thing with the relation- ships with the schools we have a whole host of tes~imony, and I have talked to the educators and, `being an educator myself, being able to communicate in the language, they indicate it is a very satisfactory way to operate the program. Frankly~ besides being a. waste of administrative money, I think it just would not improve the program to any great degree. PAGENO="0883" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3343 Mr. GOODELL. I think you make' a valid point. I am not sure I am persuaded entirely for a variety of reasons. In that connection, `the in- school program is primarily a program to give youngsters work and income to keep them in school. In most areas, from my observation this has not been tied as closely to `the long-term job prospečts for these youngsters as the specific objective of giving them something to do with money that will help them stay in school. Secondly, because the inschool program is limited to public employ- ment or nonprofit private employment, a good portion of jobs are provided by the schools themselves, the educators themselves, or the govermnental agencies. I have no particular quarrel with having both the out o'f school and the inschool programs administered by the same people if we make no other changes, but I would like in this connection to ask your com- ment on the coordinate program which we suggest in the opportunity crusade. It would be a new position in a local secondary school, a man or woman whose responsibility and charge would he to find employment for this same type of youngster in areas in public and private non- profit and profitmaking groups on a part-time basis to help keep them in school? Mr. CARSTENSON. I would like to `comment on that because I think this is the other part of it. We still have many non-consolidated-school systems, secondary as `well `as elemenatry schools `and we are concerned particularly here with the secondary schools. It has been our experience if you are really going to spread these programs out into the rural areas, and particularly in some areas where you have only a few youngsters in a particular school who are in need, unless you are going to concentrate everything in the highly depressed areas-if you are really going to reach out `and rea'ch youngsters who happen to `be in sinall pockets of `pOverty in counties, you are going to have to have a program that will blend out there and you wouldn't have enough work to justify a good counselor `and a good worker in a school system. Mr. GOODELL. I think that is a very valid point. You do `have and have h'ad going on for some time a national trend toward consolidation that is really inevitable if you are going to provide the proper education. There are many rural areas which have consolidated secondary `schools. We get' into the problem of the definition of rural areas here but many o'f the predominantly rural areas would have this. Maybe you have some suggestion as to a complementary program that would not only reach the urban area under the type of program I have been describing `but also reach these outposts. Do you have a suggestion `that perhaps we could have a community action employee or someone else in a rural area who has that charge? Mr. CARSTENSON. One of.the things we have found and this will vary in the areas in the ways things are set up and developed, but in many areas it is more efficient not to run these through community action programs but to run them on a;* broader basis just for sheer efficiency and economy. We have a feeling in many rural areas where you have many different school systems, ~and so on, you are going to have a flexible pattern. PAGENO="0884" 3344 ECONOMIC OPPORTtXITT ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Many times you will have someone in the community action agency who can work with kids on this kind of basis and in other places you wouldn't have such people. The same is true in job development work. Rather than saying we shouid have a job developer in a school or a job developer in the coin- mumty action agency, I would rather leave this more fluid and just emphasize that we need more counselors and people who can help on the job development problem with these youngsters and allow the pattern to evolve as it is needed in each area. I think you also see, for example, kids will be in the inschool program and in the summer they will be in the summer program and some will drop out and you can pull them back in. You should have a program that generally brings the whole works and carries along with it a counselor. Mr. GOODELL. One of the problems here is, that you get into lots of administrative problems unless there is some local agency bearing the responsibility for putting up enough money. Then they must con- tinue to feel this is worth the cost to them and begin to move to provide additional funds for expenses as necessity for them has been demonstrated. I think we could add flexibility by giving discretion where it would prove to be inadequate otherwise or was not going to reach youngsters in this category, that they were free to work this out with any other agency that would provide the service on a 50-50 basis. Perhaps it would be a city government, perhaps it would be a county government; perhaps it would be some other kind, maybe even a private, nonprofit agency. Mr. CARSThNSOX. One of the things I wanted to say about counselor and the 50-50 basis, for one thing, it would rule out in most cases any- body except an accepted credential teacher counselor. This is not neces- sarily something that a teacher with credentials must do. I think there are areas of job development and job counseling which do not require them. Mr. 000DELL. We did consider that and I think it is a very valid point. I get very flustered about having to have certified teachers do everything when the.re are many types of work that could be per- formed without technical credentials. We did consider doing it through the community action agency but again we wanted to get it tied into the school system and we wanted to get them to move to take the re- ponsibility in this area. I think it is a very valid point and we could give some further thoughts as to how to work that. in. It is possible by deleting the requirement they have credentials. In some States or in many States they could qualify for employment. Obviously they can employ people in the school system who are not certified, such as janitors and other types of people, custodial types. Maybe we could work it out so that in most States there would be a classification not at the custodial level but still free of certification requirements. Mr. CARSTENSON. It would be very difficult. I have a doctorate in education, taught in a school of education, and I really think in this whole amendment that the relationship with the school and the need for counseling and so forth is something that should be emphasized in the report but I think basically as it stands now and it is improving, PAGENO="0885" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3345 and one thing I want to say is I have worked with programs now both under, OEO, administration, aging, various parts of HEW, with labor, and the administration of the program by labor has been better in terms of them knowing actually what was going out there, where every dime is being spent and this kind of tight control than in any other program that I have seen in the Federal Government. To me this has been quite remarkable that they could get this kind of tight control on it and have a good deal of flexibility. Mr. G00DELL. Are you suggesting that perhaps Labor should ad- minister this coordinator type program? For whom would you have this coordinator work? Mr. CARSTENSON. A year ago we began to see this in the Arkansas Farmers Union. We saw the need for more counseling on job develop- ment, and we came forward to the Labor Department for a proposal for increased staff for counseling. Frankly, at first they were wondering do we really have such a wonderful ratio, using less than 1 percent on administrative costs, and can we really afford it in terms of having additional counselors. We did try it out and it has been very successful and is being adopted in that region. I think from what Jack Howard and some of the others have said that the push is on to try to move this in general, to have the counselors actually built into your agency. Now in some cases- Mr. GOODELL. Are you talking about the local employment agency? Mr. CARSTENSON. The local or regional sponsor of the Neighborhood Youth Corps or camp wherever it might be. Do you know in the Roa- noke area about which a man earlier today testified it is within the tamp and they are moving in the same direction, I think, of more effort and energy or counseling and I think it is improving. I know the real weakness in the early game was recognized by the agency and they are putting more budget into counseling. Mr. GOODELL. I take it that you agree that when `a counselor, is available, to do this type of work there are a number of jobs in the private area that could be found and youngsters connected to them on a part-time basis? Mr. CARSTENSON. Yes, and we also feel you need to have a `tie-in with the OJT program. We have done this in Arkansas having an OJT pro- gram connected right with it. This is helpful in making the next step. A lot more can be done in this area and I think it could be done with the existing legislation that pei~haps needs a push by Congress to em- phasize and make sure we do have counselors there in every program. Mr. GOODELL. Since it `is in the related field, do you have any general comments about the industry youth corps proposal. Mr. CARSTENSON. To me in a sense this is what we have been trying to do in the OJT program `and there are a lot `of similarities. I know what the man from Kentucky wh'o spoke earlier today said', there are not very many of the OJT type programs in rural areas. Perhaps something like this is needed. We haire been able to work with the O~TT program but perhaps a new one is needed to really push it ahead. All I know is that we have been able to do it in Arkansas but whether or not it can be done in other places, I don't know. I do know that there are more jobs out here and if we can work out some PAGENO="0886" 3346 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 things like reports on the opportunity crusade or OJT-and there are many with similarities Mr. GOODELL. It is our concept they would be meshed together. An employer could use OJT to pay for equipment and costs and overhead costs. OJT pres~ently does not permit the payment for any portions of wages. The industry youth corps would make money available to pay up to a quarter of the wage. In addition it has proved to be appropriate to the OJT type of thing. The problem with OJT nationally, and I would be interested in your comment, has been that the very large companies generally are not participating. By that I mean more than 100 employees. That your employers- maybe 30 to 50, who have participated have had under 100 employees- but very small employers have not participated: Apparently, smaller employers are not participating for the same reason the very large employers are not. They bear the supervision and cost themselves, and the smaller employers don't want to get into the applications and forms and reviews. When you get down to eight or 10 employees it is under- standable that the paperwork becomes a more burdensome thing to them. Mr. OARSTENSON. I think the small contractor-if he has to go to some distance to a sponsor-he does have a problem. In Arkansas, it is kind of unique. Mr. CARSTENSON. It is a Federal OJT contract to the Arkansas Farm- ers Union although the State is involved but it is a. Federal contract. We are trying to do an outreach job into rural areas. We are also considering doing something in the area which has never been tried before and we hope that our board is given approval but we have not gotten around to doing some of the work necessary to get the application processed of seeing what can be done also on the farm on-the-j oh training. As far as we know this has. never been done and also older worker training. I agree the large industries have not been going into it as much as they should. The more we can do in this area, the kinds of things you have proposed and more OPIT and being more experimental in this area, there are a lot more jobs out there than are now being filled. I would like to urge then that the present Neighborhood Youth Corps programs be used more for the younger boys and girls and that the in- dustry ought to be more focused on the older teenager or young adult and this would be a good emphasis. I think there would be perhaps less criticism of possible exploitation. Mr. GOODELL. Apparently in your contract and program, the farm- ers union has experienced more flexibility than OJT programs nation- ally. We are seeking this industry youth corps and administrative structure that will give the flexibility in structure which you ap- parently accomplished. You are almost unique in this respect. Our concept has a community action board administering it and super- vising it and negotiating with the employers involved. The decisions and details can be made at the local level rather than an application going into the Federal level. PAGENO="0887" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3347 You will note we make specific reference to trying to reach the farm- ers in this areti. Do you feel there is a potential for farm employment for these youngsters with perhaps an inducement of a quarter. of the wage paid and a simplified form working directly with the poor? Do you think you could get farmers to do some of this? Mr. CARSTENSON. I think there are some areas where this could be done. With farmers, I think we see more hope in OJT moving in this direction. There is an opportunityfor young people to go into farming. I will have to take that back. There is a need but the biggest hope is in terms of the 45-on-up farmer who has gone out of farming and who can no longer farm because he does not have the credit or the land or cannot work 10 hours a day 7 days a week ~or 12 hours a day 7 days a week, to come into a number two spot in a dairy farm. We have many of the farmers in Appalachia for example who are desperately needed say in Pennsylvania or in some of the dairy farms in northern New York who have had the experience with cattle and with a refresher course and with some training could do an awfully good job in `that sort of thing. Mr. GOODELL. In other words, farmers changing from one coin- modity of production to another? Mr. CARSTENSON. That is right. I would also like to urge again this year as we did last year-in fact I think we were the only one to urge a major expansion-continued expansion in the work opportunity area. The `administration last year opposed this idea but I think the response we have `seen from rural community `action agencies has been overwhelming. I don't know of any community action agency, rural community ac- tion agency where one did not already have one or had one in the mak- ing or was trying to get one through the bureaucracy or was lobbying with their Congressman to get a, Nelson-Scheuer type program. I know we `are going to need a major program in. these riot- torn areas `to try to rebuild some `of these areas `and to take care `of the plight of t'he victims of these riot areas-th'e people who have been burned out and lost their jobs because `of th'e riot. I think we are going to have to increase the opportunity for work. I don't think there is any real difference `between the title V programs and `the programs under Nelson-Scheuer. Both are needed. We. have found very little overlap because people who are on welfare don't want to go on the Nelson program because they have `to lose part of the welfare and it is difficult to work this out. They can do much better on the work experience. On the other hand, most of our rural people don't want to go on welfare for any reason. We have had some even though we had op- portunities in the work experience program, just because of the rela- tionship to welfare just did not want to go on it. So I think we need both of these `program going on, they are serving a purpose and working reasonable well. On this whole business of work, there is a chart in the back `of the statement which shows the proportion of nonfarm income `for farm families. ` It is increasing at a faster level than is our `farm income and it is the only thing that is keeping many of our small farmers in business. In fact, for many of them it is the nonfarm jobs of the wives or part- PAGENO="0888" 3348 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 time work, selling insurance, or working in the local factory, or the son working that is actually subsidizing the farm because of our local income at the present time. So the development of rural jobs in rural areas for farm families is very important. We are going to do everything we can to increase farm income but also `to help out we are going to need to do that. I am going to comment on one or two things on page 11 and I have one correction on page 12. For the record, in the second paragraph, relating to the Neighborhood Youth Corps, in the third sentence it says "The tough line of the Neighborhood Youth Corps on income ceilings in perhaps too lenient." Actually it is too tough. It is not lenient enough. They have bent over backward to the letter of the law in terms of the exact dollar amount perhaps a little too much. I guess if we are going to err we ought to err on the conservative side but I did want to call it to your attention to change the record. On the business of cooperation with the existing agencies is a two- way street. It reminded me a little bit about sometimes the efforts of cooperation in the war on poverty have been like the person who wants everybody else to cooperate while the individual who wants to do the coordinating is actually doing the cooperating and that is the coopera- tion that has been anticipated and has been too often occurring in the war on poverty. I think something more needs to be done to bring the various agen- *cies together to work together. We have had just n little too much attacking of other existing agen- cies. Sure they need to be moved and creative idea.s need to come about, but quite often if you attack too hard you freeze the chance for real good cooperation in communication, and I think that something needs to be done at the top level to build this better coordination. Mr. GOODELL. You were referring to the tax bite. OEO personnel and OEO supporters in existing agencies and vice versa-is that what you are referring to? Mr. CARSTENSON. Yes. I forget that we put the basic education `bill into the Economic Opportunity Act over the objection of OEO and then we had to take it back out over the thjection of OEO. The pro- gram was basically run by the schools and the image and ideas were' basically created back in the Office of Education years ago. There just has not been the legislation up to this time, and we ocr- `tainly felt good that there has been such broad support for basic adult education, and so on. Mr. GOODELL. `I take it then that you agree that there can be, and often is, innovation in existing agencies if they have `the funds and the authority to do it? Mr. CARSTENSON. Last week we testified before the Banking and Currency Committee of the Senate-and I heard the enthusiasts of OEO attack the Farmers Home Administration for not being flexible, but they have not gone through the legislation to see how narrowly defined the legislation limits the Farmers Home Administration and they are at the maximum of their legal authority. We pleaded for some experimental programs. There are no experi- mental programs in the Farmers Home Administration. There is no real flexibility and if we expect innovation in some of these agencies, PAGENO="0889" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3349 we are going to have to give them some more flexibility to do creative type programing. On the other hand, I know we never had a Green Thumb or a Foster Grandparents program or many of these other types of programs it we had not really had OEO as a creative storm center and I think this indicates it has been very good and it adds to the creativity. Mr. GOODELL. I think your statement is one with which I agree as far as criticism of existing agencies. The fad today, the "in" thing to do is to come in and say these agen- cies have never solved the problem that have been present for years and years and that it has only been since OEO has been created that this has been done and tried. Your point with reference to `basic education I think is a good illustration. Your other point with reference to FHA was a very pertinent one because you can't criticize the Farmers Home Administration for not having a program that reached the marginal farmer when Congress did not give FHA the authority and the President did not propose that they have the authority to do it. The same thing incidentally is true of the Small Business Adminis- tration. They do have the basic authority put into the poverty law. Interestingly enough in the SBA experience they found they were get- ting the job done much better by utilizing the SBA administrative structure in reaching the small marginal business than they were in setting up small business development centers. `So they have now~ shifted back and put it into that agency. I think we have to be aware of the potential for these existing agen- cies to experiment and move out and innovate if we just give them the authority. Mr. CARSTENSON. On the matter of transfer, we were rather deeply involved as Congressman Quie knOws and as other members of the committee know we are involved in this whole business of transfer. It is a very costly matter both emotionally, and financially to transfer these programs. Once a program has been transferred, you have to be real careful about transferring back. I have already talked with Congressman Quie about the fact that in his bill he would turn around and reverse the process. We just transferred the Nelson arnendments-Shriver transferred them to Secretary WTirtz and now it looks like the way the Quie-Goodell bill is written it will transfer it back because there is no clear delineation. I do feel again the adminstrative processes that have been developed are quite good in the Bureau of Public Works programs. I think once it has been transferred, I don't think you ought to turn around and come back again because it is very costly and since the Bureau of Pub- lic Works programs is doing a much better job-last year the Office of Economic Opportunity for some almost 6 months had nobody who was assigned the responsibility really of gathering together what was happening on the Nelson amendment program. They realy didn't know what they had. That was one of the problems in the transfer. OEO just was not aware of which programs they had, and so forth. Now they have a pretty good idea of what programs they have and. how to operate and they are beginning to do a thorough job of analysis PAGENO="0890" 3350 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDME~PS OF 1967 of it. The whole administrative control is much better. They know much better what is actually being spent on these programs, than we had over in OEO. I would strongly suggest they be left there. I know that Senator Nelson for one is hoping that they can be-~-as with the Kennedy-~Javits thing-be left in title I and be earmarked in the whole Nelson-Ken- ne.dy-Javits complex there as one whole work program of this nature. I have seen pictures of the Green Thumb program that I would like to show you perhaps after the committee adjourns. The Green Thumb program has been one of the most publicly accepted programs that have come down the pike. Senator Javits and Governor Rockefeller have been working with us to try to get a Green Thumb establishment in New York State. We hope that we can sometime during this coming year. Congress- man Quie has been working along with Senators Mondale, and Mc- Carthy, a.nd Representative. Langen, and others to expand the pro- gram in Minnesota. It has been very popular. In fact I just picked up the newspaper clippings we received in today's mail and you get the local county press which has been absolutely fabulous. We. have never had a bad press story in any one of our seven States since we opened our doors to start operation, which is almost an ailtime effort. The other program I include in here is the project KASA, which is actually an Older Americans Act project but it is being considered by OEO for possible funding. There have been a lot of concerns about this. This is a program of employing older men, retired-the elderly. poor-to actually go out and do something to he1p them, if necessary to make emergency repairs, get them to a. doctor, get them to where they can get groceries or whatever needs to be done immediately. Sometimes it is cleaning up. Sometimes it is just a friendly visit or other kinds of things. Sometimes it is a referral. You can use older people in this kind of work as we have demonstrated here. In this case I think the creative work was done under the Older Americans Act and then we have a couple of community action agen- cies that are picking up and adopting this program and the creativists moved the other way. Mr. GOODELL. What is that program? Mr. CARSTENSON. This is our own version of a. rural project. We have found under the medicare alert program, when you found problems of difficulty in many of these rural areas you had no place to refer the problems. In one county, for example, in Newton County, Ark., there are about 6,000 of which 2,500 are older peonle. There is no doctor, there is no industry, there is no factory or railroad. There is one paved highway. There are still areas where the mail is delivered by horseback. In fact there is one valley you can't get in by horseback. You have to floa.t down the river-it is back in a hollow. There is just no place to refer the people that you find. So what do ~OU do? You have to do certain things right on the spot to try to help and then to meet the emergency situations and all this and work up the case and sometimes then by doing this you can call to the attention of the State agency or the employment security office which is off a ways or the mental health clinic which is four or five counties away and things of this sort. PAGENO="0891" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS `OF 1967 3351 There are very few places to refer people in these rural communities. This has worked in southern Indiana where we have worked with CAP, and: in western Iowa, and it hasworked very well in these rural ~igencies where de do not have the agencies. We have done an awful lot of work with and through and for community action agencies. We~ have spent a lot of our manpower resources, time, money, and everything `else in building niany of these camps. We believe in the community action concept, we also believe there is a roll for the independently funded operations, particularly in rural areas. We have done a great deal to try to build these community agencies. Mr. G-00DELL. Do you have any further comments or observations to make? Mr. CARSTENSON.' No, sir. Mr GO0DFLL Let me `isk `~ ou about one fui ther point w hich h'is not been mentioned in this present'ition You might h'i~ e noted in the Opportunity Crusade the pro~Os~d' `fOr' a `new three-man council to begin to concentr tte on the compilation of d'tta, the correhtion of d'Lt'1 to cI `ii t the course foi the future, `tnd to m'ike iecomrnend'i tio~is io the Piesident `mci the Congress foi ch'rnges in piogr'ims that affect the poor, for reorganization, and coordinatio~r Of programs. Do you have any general comment about that? Mr. CARSTENSON. I am not quite sold on the way it is put together in your bill specifically. I know there has to be something this way. The way you put the question I think I would have to answer that there has to be more. This commission has to be of a little broader nature. I don't want to be too partis~an one way or the other but you might take a look at the Nelson-Mondale bill which has a little broader focus of some `of the social concerns, and I think giving it a~ little broader notion than poverty might be advisable to coordinate or be the equivalent of a social advisor-I don't have the exact right phrase- I know more coordination has to be done, more planning of a broader nature has to be `clone. I am not sure. frankly, that the thing that. you propose there is quite the answer. I am not opposed to it. I can't give you anything specific as better.' Mr. GOODELL. If I understand you correctly you feel that there is a need for something in this area but you are not sure that the pre- ciseJ.y defined jurisdiction charter in our bill is the right one? Mr. CARSTENSON. That is right. Mr. G-OODELL. T'here are other proposals. You mentioned one which has a broader scope. It is our feeling that the general area of poverty `oriented programs is broad in scope and we want it just as broad as it can be within that single objective. This would be an agency whose primary charge would be the programs that are affecting the poor. You could have a council of social advisers that would have a broader scone. The danger there is, that they would overlap with the Council of Economic Advisers and they would overlap with a variety of other agencies and would not focus enough on what we think is' a higher priority item, which is the poverty program. Mr. CARSTENSON. You have touched on the very matters that concern us relating to the other proposal. Maybe a marriage somewhere in be- tween might be a possible way. We know there has to be something more. There should be a very' direct concern about the more serious problem, the poverty problems. PAGENO="0892" 3352 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 We have concerns about both of them. Something might be worked out. Mr. GO0DELL. If you have further suggestions or language prior to the time that the committee meets to mark up the bill, you might advance them to the coimnittee or to us and we can give them some consideration. Our minds are open in this area. It is a new kind of approach~ a new proposal. I think I would give to what you are describing-the same comment you give to what is in the bill. I am not persuaded either at this stage and perhaps you can delineate a little more before we got to the markup stage. Mr. OARSTENS0N. I will be delighted to try. Mr. GOODELL. Do you have any other final comments? Your testimony has been very helpful and I only regret that there were not more members of the committee present to hear you to profit by it, but it will be in the record and I am sure it will be helpful to them when we are considering the details of the legislation later on. Thank you very much. The committee is now recessed until 8:30 Monday morning. (Whereupon, at 6:05 p.m. the committee reces~d, to reconvene at 8:30 a.m., Monday, July 31, 1967.) PAGENO="0893" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 NONDAY, JULY 31, 1967 HotrsE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITPEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Wa~shington, D.C. The conunittee met at 8 :55 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Thompson, Holland, Pu- cinski, Daniels, Brademas, Ayres, Quie, Goodell, Bell, Erlenborn, Scherle, Dellenback, Esch, Gardner, and Steiger. Also present: H. D. Reed, general counsel; Robert E. McCord, senior specialist; Louise Maxienne Dargans, research assistant; Benjamin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, investi- gator; Marian Wyman, special assistant; Charles W. Radcliffe, mi- nority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minority research assistant; and W. Phillips Rocke- feller, minority research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you here this morning, Dr. Parkinson. I know the committee is interested in ascertaining your views. Come around. and take a seat here. Let me welcome you, Dr. Parkinson. As one of the leading vocational educators in America, I know the committee will be interested in hear- ing from you. Go ahead. STATEMENT OP ~+EOROE A. PARKINSON, DIRECTOR, MILWAUKEE VOCATIONAL TECKNICAL & ADULT SCItOOLS Dr. PARKINSON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I appreciate the priv- ilege of having been invited to speak to you. I have a very brief state- ment by way of establishing the background for the comments which may succeed, and after this brief statement I would be very `happy to answer questions, if I may. I am Dr. George A. Parkinson, director of the Milwaukee Voca- tional and Technical Adult Schools. These schools have worked closely with the disadvantaged people of the Milwaukee metropolitan area, the majority of whom are Negroes living in the core of the city, but this also includes a large group of Spanish-speaking Americans who live in a focal point on the south side of the city, a miscellaneous group of Appalachian whites, American Indians, and a large segment of 3353 PAGENO="0894" 3354 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 foreign-born Americans who are learning to acculturate themselves to our way of life. With special reference to the. great majority of these who are, as I have said, disadvantaged, we are currently operating a number of programs, in which the Negroes predominate. A continuation school, or dropout school, in which we have approxi- mately 650 students. Slightly less than half of these are Negroes. I would like to add that approximately 500 of the 650 are currently on parole from various clisciplrna.ry institutions. We are also operating basic education programs; that is, literacy programs through eighth grade completion~ in which the great maj or- ity of our students are Negroes. Some of these courses are operated independently; that is, independently of other programs. Also some of them are under Office of Economic Opportunity programs, and some of them are related to, and a part of, our manpower retraining pro- grams. In all of our programs we recognize the need for education a.nd training in an employable skill. That is the business we are in, train- ing people for jobs. But we have found that with these groups of people, the problem is not this simple. The problem is not simple at all. It has become increasingly true that the uneniployed people in our com- munity have related problems, including the need for additional lit- eracy training; that is, they cannot read and write, or do simple arithmetic, or they may be people who have had emotional problems, or, in many instances, simply lack understanding for the need for those qualities and habits which will make them an acceptable em- ployee in entry jobs, and things like that. They have to have, their haircuts and keep themselves clean. They need to learn to get along with other people, both Negro and white. In some cases they need to be taught not. to discriminate because of religious background or training. We have a great many people, ac- tually three kinds-Protestants, Catholics, and some Mohammedans and other religions, so they have to be taught to get along with the workers and supervisors they will meet in the shops. All of these things have been developed as part of our educational training pro- grams, and in a large measure they constitute the same problems met in the other great industrial and metropolitan areas in the United States. Among other things t.hese people need to be taught, and are taught that you cannot legislate competence and success. These must be earned, and in our programs we help them to achieve them. When they do achieve a job and start getting paychecks regularly. this is the greatest. single impetus to self-respect and morale that they can get. Among our younger students; that is, those below 22 years of a~e who are in what we call the youth or yommg adult group, we recognize that the lack of coherent family life and the lack of family guidance, both from precept and example, are important factors. In fact. we learn that the teacher sometimes becomes the father or mother image to the student. . All of this involves, of course, a careful analysis of the individual problems of each student., and a program which is understood by the teacher as well as the. student which helped him in the solution of these problems. PAGENO="0895" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3355 Currently Our programs for disadvantaged youth involve: Automobile mechanics, clerk and general office training at various levels, machine operator training (male and female), power sewing machine operators (male and female), welders, certified laboratory as- sistants (male and female), clothing alteration women, cooks and countermen, industrial electricians, janitors or custodial workers, me- chanical draftsmen, small engine repair, waitresses, gas engine repair maintenance, nurses aides, special programs for older workers (for ex- ample, teaching them to take the examination for postal employees), machine molders, sales clerks, and `a host of students who are slotted into our various regular programs, of which we have approximately 1,500 different classes, courses-that is, not programs-but 132 programs. In addition to this, all of those who lack basic education are given an opportunity to at least acquire functional literacy; that is, reading and comprehension at the sixth grade level, and the use of simple arithmetic in actual operational practice, in these programs. This, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, is a brief statement of back- ground against which I hope to address myself, to any questions you may ask. Chairman PERKINS. I know you are operating one of the outstanding vocational and teclmical training centers in America. Do you find that as a general rule, before disadvantaged youth suc- ceed in a vocational school, that they must be functionally literate, so to speak, or at least acquire functional literacy determined here through the sixth grade? Dr. PARKINSON. The answer to your question is, "Absolutely yes." An individual has to be brought up to functional literacy or he can't be taught a skill. In fact, he can't become a real person in society unless he has this degree of competence. Chairman PERKINS. What is the' educational level for admittance to your institution, not considering the ~isad~~antaged? Dr. PARKINSON. We have a complex of six schools, Mr. Chairman, and in our adult school we can take people who are not functionally ii- literate, but who are absolutely illiterate, and we move them from there up. On the other end of the scale, we operate an accredite.d junior college level institute. Chairman PERKINS. I want you to explain that to the committee. I know you operate various schools. Dr. PARKINSON. We can take a person, and do take many of them, who can't sign their own name, cannot read or write, and we take'them through a program we call "eighth grade completion," and some of them start at the first, second, or third grade' level of competence or reading ability. `Chairman PERKINS. A disadvantaged youngster of that type, how long does it take you to get him that high before `you commence to give him other training? Dr. PARKINSON. That is a difficult question to answer because we are an open admission. school, and the variety of competence and the level at which they enter varies so widely. You can indicate that in certain of our education classes, where we have a group that actually operates at the second and third grade PAGENO="0896" 3356 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 level, and a group at the fourth and sixth grade levels, and a group within 10 months we can qualify them for an eighth grade diploma, and we give them that. Then we can train them for entry jobs in certain skills and in some cases, you never succeed. This isn't magic. This is work. We have a high degree of success. We feel we accomplish our objective with about TO to 75 percent of the people that come to us. Chairman PERKINs. I believe you must have an excellent placement rate in your technical schools. I am talking about the youngsters with the high school education, or those who started to college and dropped out and are maybe furthering their education. What is that placement rate? It is very high? Dr. PARKINSON. Well, a year ago last June we graduated about 750 students, and every student except one had a job before he walked across the stage and got his diploma. This year we were about 98 per- cent of placement. Chairman PERKINS. You are talking about the ones with a high school education? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes, sir. These are the ones in an accredited 2-year junior college operation. Our functional literacy courses, and our manpower training courses, our placement runs about 70 to 85 percent, and of those about 75 to 85 percent will be working at that type of job 2 years later. They won't be working necessarily at the same job, but at that same operational level, so we claim success. I think that is what we are talking about. Can they get a job and hold a job? Can they keep making money? We can claim success in about 65 to 75 percent of the people who finish the program. Chairman PERKINS. As an educator and from your training and experience, I take it that, as you stated, this was not a simple problem, to put it in your own language, when you undertake to deal with a disadvantaged youngster because of this lack of basic education. He does not understand simple arithmetic, and the chances are he may have an emotional problem, and this type of youngster does not know how to get along with people, and he has not had the family guidance that he should have received. This type of youngster, to get him up to functional literacy, how long on the average does it take you? Dr. PARKINSON. We can do an awful lot with the majority of them in about a year. Chairman PERKINS. In about a year? Dr.. PARKINSON. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. Then after about a year, you will commence to give that youngster vocational training? Dr. PARKINSON. That is correct. Chairman PERKINS. Then it would take another year or 2 years? Dr. PARKINSON. If you can get him that far, you can train him for an entry job in approximately 12months. Chairman PERKINS. Twelve months. Dr. PARKINSON. And when I say an "entry job," I mean a job where he will be employable and employed, and he will be doing the job properly when he goes on the job. PAGENO="0897" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3357 Chairman PEIuiINS. Now, Dr. Parkinson, you have obtained a lot of know-how, and I want to ask you whether you have special educa- tional courses and special training for this disadvantaged youngster in your institution. You do, if I understand the situation correctly. Dr. PARKINSON. May I ask-I'm not quite sure what you mean. Are you talking about `the special educational procedures for the stu- dent or the training of the teachers? Chairman PERKINS. The training of the teachers and the training of the disadvantaged. Dr. PARKINSON. You have to do both. In the first place, the selection of teachers and the training of them after you get them is the most difficult pr9blem that we have. The reason is this: These kids, the public schools have already failed or you wouldn't have the problem in the first place. Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Dr. PARKINSON. If you are training people for jobs; the first thing you have to do is hire teachers who can do that job themselves, sO you have a choice of taking skilled workers and making teachers out of, them or taking teachers and trying to make skilled workers out of them, and this you can't do, Mr. Chairman. So in our skilled areas, we take a person with 3 years' training, and equate him on the pay scale with a grade weight from a bachelor's degree, and we give 10 credits, of inservice training, to work them into the teacher skills they have to have. Then we require a continued training from then on until they reach a master's level, or are 55 yeais old, as long as they are in the school, so this training of teachers- Chairman PERKINS. Excuse me. One concluding question. As you know, the Job Corps by and large has, a lot of juvenile of- fenders and a lot of functionally illiterate youngsters, with all of the characteristics that you have described, `and I am asking you whether in your judgment we should continue the operation of Job Corps in order to obtain the necessary information, that I feel we are obtaining-and you may disagree-for a few years at least, and with the know-how that we are accomplishing, and pass it along to other educational insti- tutitions in America, elementary, secondary, vocational, and perhaps to industry? It has been my view that at this stage of the game, that Job Corps and our vocational schools complement each other. Do you agree with that line of reasoning? , Dr. PARKINSON. In a sense, yes. I am going to talk out of both sides of my mouth. `Chairman PERKINS. All right. Dr. PARIUN50N. I haven't been running a Job Corps camp. I speak as an outsider. Many of the people they have hired to run this are ama- teürs, and this is a highly skilled operation. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you. Dr. PARKINSON. Second, financially, and this is part of the nature of the beast, they have spent more money than I think you have to spend to attain the object. In Wisconsin I understand they spent be~ tween $12,000 and $tT,000 a yea.r for `equivalent full-time students- Chairman PERKINS. That is the first year of operation? Dr. PARKINSON. That's right, and they have improved that. I will~ tell you where I think the Job Corps has a real virtue, and this is this: There are some of these young people who live in the central cores of 80-084-67-pt. 4-57 PAGENO="0898" 3358 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the cities, in disadvantaged, broken homes, or where there is emotional tension, who cannot be properly trained unless they are taken out of that enviromnent, and I think that is the unique virtue of the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. You do not maintain that kind of residential center is no good? Dr. PARKINSON. Oh, no, we do not. The Job Corps spends, even after they economized and cut it down to $9,000 or $10,000 a year, but it may be that in this area where you have to take the kid out of the local en- viroument to make it work, the Job Corps has a unique virtue. Chairman PERKINS. And this is still cheaper than if you have to put him in an institution? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. If a man is on public assistance with two or three kids, you are spending $4,500 a year on him. If you can teach him to earn $4,000 a year, you have come out with $8,500. So I have talked out of both sides of my mouth. Mr. Qun~. Dr. Parkinson, I welcome you here to the committee. It is nice to see you again. I know it will be of benefit to us to have an individual who is so knowledgeable in operating a vocational school. One of the controversies we have here, at least between the chairman and myself, is the central issue that vocational education can handle these youngsters who are now going into the Job Corps. What kind of problem boys and girls go to your continuation school, or what do you call it, "dropout school school"? Dr. PARKINSON. That is continuation school. Mr. QmE. I know you have a high percentage of young people who have been on parole, and in a scrap with the law, and generally in social difficulties that they have been into. What is your experience with that? Dr. PARKINSON. As I mentioned to the chairman a while ago, out of 650 students we have at the present time, 500 were on parole this past year. To give you a thumbnail sketch, if I may take just a moment, these people come in from homes where there has been tension, broken homes. Second, they have a high hostility. They resent even people trying to help them. They have a low self-evaluation. They think of them- selves as dirt. They don't amount to much-they think that. Third, they lack a literacy competence to get a job in this society. This is the thumbnail sketch of these people. The thing that we can do, we have various techniques we have developed-group guidance for example, group therapy. This is a regular part of the program. It isn't something special. The literacy education goes along with it. Then we try to reach for a place where we can start training them for a job, but the thing we are not able to do, and which was in some proposed legislation which didn't material- ize, the development of residential schools, where you can take them out of their home environment, separate them from that, and you can work with them better. If they go back home, and the old man is a drunken bum, he says, "What do you need to go to school for? I only went to the third grade, and look at me." PAGENO="0899" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3359 This is not fiction. Whether you could do this better with the Job Corps or a residential school, I can't answer that, because I don't know. We find that we are able to do something with about 65 percent of the students who come to us. The other 35 percent, perhaps, we are not touching. Mr. QUIR. If we expanded the present authority, or at least funded the present authority, would you make application for a residential school? Dr. PARKINSON. I have discussed that with my board, and they have authorized me to make such an application. Mr. QUIE. If you did, would this be the same type of an individual who is presently going to the Job Corps? Dr. PARKINSON. In the main, I think yes. Mr. QrnE. How would he differ from the ones that are presently in your continuation school, which is a day school? Would they tend to be the 35 percent? Dr. PARKINSON. They are generally the same type of people, except the residential school would not be a penal institution. In the first place, this is kind of important. This is not a penal institution. It's got to be a place where there is an opportunity to help those people who are deterred from development because of their family situations, not because they have had trouble with the law, or because they are functionally illiterate, but the social background is the difference between the two. We get both kinds now. I feel that we do not reach some of them. I anticipate we could reach the great majority of those in a resi- dential school, and as I say, maybe you are reaching those in the Job Corps. I have never run a Job Corps camp, and I don't know. Mr. QIJIE. Have you made an estimate of the cost of the residential school? Have you gone that far in your application? Dr. PARKINSON. I think it would run us between $3,500 and $4,000 per equivalent full-time student per year. That is a thumbnail thing, and that has not been refined, Congressman, because until you sit down and actually develop your cost sheets, you can't tell. But I made a preliminary estimate for our board. Chairman PERKINS. If the gentleman will yield, did that figure of $3,500 to $4,000 take into consideration capital outlay expenditures? Dr. PARKINSON. No, sir. That is operational costs. Chairman PERKINS. To take into consideration capital outlay, say for a period of 10 years, at what would you estimate the cost? Dr. PARKINSON. I suppose you would have to add in the neighbor- hood of $1,500 or $2,000 per year per student to amortize your capital outlay. Of course, I think you may amortize it over 10 years. Our first building, which is still in excellent use, was built about 1917. We just spent $3 million remodeling it. This is a difficult piestion, Congressman. That which I am giving you is just a thumbnail guess. Chairman PERKINS. We understand that. That is about all anybody can give. Mr. Qur~. We are talking about a program that you could run for $2,500 or $3,000 less than the Job Corps? Dr. PARKINSON. I think we can. Mr. ~ That ought to be of some consideration to the Congress and this committee, if that is possible. PAGENO="0900" 3360 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS' OF 19 67 In your continuation school, what is the ratio of male and female? Dr. PA1~xINsoN. About 40 percent female and 60 percent male. Mr. QUIE. If you go into a residential school, would this be for female and male also? Dr. PARKINSON. I think it should be, and I think it properly can be, but you are going to have problems. This is not going to be an easy thing to do. Mr. QtJIE. You figure about 65 percent of those who come to the con- tinuation school will finally finish, and therefore, do you call that 65 percent a success rate, or is there a percentage of the 65 percent whom you are not able to place on jobs when they finish? Dr. PARKINSON. Many of the 65 percent will not be qualified for jobs because we don't have them long enough. You see, we don't get them until they are 16. In the continuation school, they are not required to stay after 18 by law. Many of them go out like a rabbit in a briar patch. Many of those will come back in the fall into our adult schools and so forth. Our sucčess is measured by two things: One, the number of people who get jobs when they leave our school, and add to that the people who return for further training, and that is an increasingly large per- cent. It isn't as large as we would like, but it is a significant percent. Mr. QUIE. For those who complete their training in your continua- t:ion school, what percentage is placed in a job in the area for which they were trained? Dr. PARKINSON. The great majority of them are placed in a job for the area in which they are trained, or an allied area. If we train a mau to be a food service operator, a fry cook, or something like that, they almost always obtain a job in the food service business. If you train a man to be a alterations man of a bushel man in cloth- ing alterations, we can place most of those, though we can't place them in the high-class tailoring institutions. We place them in a allied job in the great majority of cases. Mr. QUIE. Of those going to MDTA, what percentage receives, or' secures, jobs in the area in which they are trained? Dr. PARKINSON. About 80 percent of those who complete, and we follow those up, and we find out that of the 80 percent who are placed in entry jobs in the area for which they are trained, a year later about 80 or 85 percent of those are still working in that area, though not necessarily at that same job. Mr. QUIR. What would be a case in the followup a year later in the continuation school? Dr. PARKINSON. Those kids stay working. They shift jobs, and oc- casionally they shift areas. For example, they may develop a situation in a company where the company will train them for a different job. They have shown the ability to be a proper employee, and they train with the company. The great majority continue working where they are placed once. Mr. Q~IE. How do you define a graduate from your continuation school? Dr. PARKINSON! Does he go from your school to a job, or into a training program-fact that he may or may not get a piece of paper has little to do with it. Mr. QUIR. Do you call a dropout anybody who enters your school and leaves after 1 day, or do you have a period of days ~ ` PAGENO="0901" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3361 Dr. PARKINSON. YOU are asking me to define what is a dropout from our school. This is a person who terminates for any reason whatsoever before the end of his program. Mr. QUIR. No matter how long he has been there? Dr. PARKINSON. That's right. Mr. QUIR. What kind of program do you require the people from the continuation school to go through before they start their voca- tional training? Dr. PAR1cINsON. First, there is a diagnostic stage in which we an- alyze their problems, they get psychological testing, they get inter- views and counseling, and they go through a diagnostic quarter in which they get the beginning of their group guidance, group therapy, and at the end of that time the students and parents and teachers meet. School is out for 2 days. They meet and decide the area in which the student is going to work as long as he is with us. That is the first stage. The reason for that for us, originally in this school a kid would be moved from the automobile shop to the cabinet shop to the foundry, because the teachers didn't like him. This sets the kid. This gives him a status. He is going to work in a certain field, and it is up to the teacher to see that he moves along in that field, you see. After that has been determined, he goes into a preliminary- Mr. QUIE. How long a period is that? Dr. PARKINSON. That is 12 weeks for everybody. After that, he goes into a preliminary training period where he is trained-again, he continues in his group guidance and group therapy, his personality orientation. He is trained in the employable arts, what we call pre-employment training. He is taught to be on time, and comb his hair. He has to wear decent clothes so he is respectable. These things he is taught, and he is given an exploratory trainmg in the field for which we are going to ultimately train him for a job. That is phase 2. That usually runs from one to two quarters. Then you can really put him in the shop and start training him for employment. Mr. QUIE. What do you do if a person has, say, a literacy equiv- alancy of less than sixth grade, or one who has more? Dr. PARKINSON. If he has more than that, he will go rather promptly into job training, but if it is below the sixth grade, lie must obtain a functional literacy before he goes into job training. We have to bring him up to that. We call it eighth-grade completion. Actually, it may be second- or third- or fourth-grade completion when he starts. Eighth-grade completion means he must be able to read at the sixth- grade level. Mr. QUIE. How long does it take to bring a person up to com- petency? Dr. PARKINSON. That is the same question the chairman asked me, and it varies widely. If a person is absolutely illiterate, you may work with him up to 18 to 20 months. On the other hand, if he is bright and catches on quickly, you may be able to bring him up to this level in a matter of 3 or 4 months. It is a question of achievement; not how long it takes. We keep working with them until they get there. You have to. PAGENO="0902" 3362 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Qtm~. What percentage of your students in the continuation school has less than a six-grade equivalency? Dr. PARKINSON. I am sorry. I can't give you that percentage, be- cause we have two groups there, you see. \~\Te have in the continuation school quite a lot of them below that level, but in our economic oppor- tunity programs, which are not in the continuation school; they are separate; these are older people, beyond the age of 18, you have a much higher percent. of functionally illiterates. Many of them are migrants who have come into the community from various places, but the percentage is higher. Most of the drop- outs dropped out of the public and parochial schools in the Milwaukee area, and they can usually read and comprehend around the third- or fourth-grade level, and their problems are not necessarily illiteracy, but emotional or sociological, and other types. You are talking about a. complex problem, and I am sorry I am eva- sive., but as Churchill's son said in the House of Commons, "I intended to be that way." You mentioned you have a conference between the student and the family. Dr. PARKINSON. That's right. Mr. QUIE. To what extent do you work with the family up to that time? Dr. PARKINSON. All the time. This is a. very important part of our work. Mr. QUTE. How do you do it? Dr. PARKINSON. First., the tea.cher has contact with the family, and then we have guidance people in our school who become-I almost sa.id acceptable to the family, and that is wha.t it amounts to-who knows the family, and the mother and father can feel, when asked, that they can come in and discuss the problems with them. But please remember this. At. least one parent, both if possible, and the student must apply to come t.o our school. You can't be sentenced to this school. You understand that. At the end of the time, we expect the student and the family to partic- ipate in the decisions for that kid, and this, I think, is very important. At least. they all understand it. Mrs. GREEN. `Would you yield for a couple of questions? Mr. Q,uiE. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. Are you discussing residential schools here? Dr. PARKINSON. No. `We did discuss residential schools a. little bit before, and their relationship to the Job Corps camps. Mr. Qum. To what extent do you use people from the welfare de- partment and build on what they are doing with the family? Dr. PARKINSON. We establish very close contact with them. Of course, you hare a problem there. You have three or four welfare people working on the same family, and this c.reates complications sometimes, but we have a. very close relationship to the welfare de- partment and to the children's court, which is involved here, and we are part of the pattern. Mr. QrnE. If you had a. residential school, do you think you would utilize it for the 35 percent who don't seem to assimilate your program and drop out, or are there additional people in the Milwaukee area who would utilize it-I mean, additional people in the area. who coimnute to the da.y school? PAGENO="0903" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3363 Dr. PARKINSON. I think many of them would go in there, and many of the people we don't reach could be reached better out of their fain- ily environment. So I think half of our dropouts ought to be in a resi- dential school. That half is a scarcely educated guess. It might be more than that. But we work at these people hard. It is the hard-rock cases we don't get, the 35 percent. Some of them should be, and some of the others should be. How many, I can't tell. Mr. QITIE. Also, if you had a residential school, would you serve a larger area than the one you are now serving? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes, as I understand it, and this has been agreed to by our board. We would be a school where students from this whole section of the country would be eligible to attend. I think that our board would expect that the community of residents would pay the costs to the city of Milwaukee. Actually, maybe the entire cost would `be borne by the Federal Government. If it is, that school would be open to anybody in that part of the country. Mr. QUrE. What proportion is borne by the local community? I know you can work out arrangements within the State of Wisconsin, but what about the students from northern Illinois? Dr. PARKINSON. I think it would be the same problem. We com- pute the cost, and the community of residents would defray the addi- tional expense. Beyond that, it is defrayed by the Federal Govern- ment, and it wouldn't make any difference to. us whether they came from Illinois, or Sheboygan, Congressman Steiger. Mr. QUIE. It wouldn't cause any more difficulty- Dr. PARKINSON. I don't see any problems. Mr. QTTIE. If you had a residential school, would this still serve just the dropout who is 16 or 17 years of age, or would it also serve an older age? Dr. PARKINSON. We `anticipate, and `again it `depends on how you folks write the law, we would anticipate what is called the youth group, `below 22 years of `age, or maybe you could make it `below `21. But we do feel strongly that the school `should not `take children "below the age of 16, because you h'ave not only education problems, but you have social problem's and a lot of other stuff. You `can't do everything. If you take the age group 16 to 22, I think that is a problem that you can handle. Mr. QUIE. T'h'ank you, `and I will yiel'd back for 5 minutes. `Chairman PERKINS. You can `take all the time you want and stay as late tonight as you `want. Mrs. GREEN. I am sorry I was not aware that we were `beginning at 8 :30 this morning and I was late. When you were discussing the costs, you said $1,500 to $2,000. Was that for `a residential? Dr. PARKINSON. No, you sort of misunderstood. The question at that point was, "How much additional `cost per year would you have to add to `amortize the `capital expendi'ture `of the construction `and capital expenses of the school ?" and that was $1,500 to $2,000. I anticipated the operational cost would run you between $3,500 and $4,000 for equivalent full-time `student per year. This is a rough guess. It is based on current `teachers' salaries `an'd expenses and so on. Mrs. GREEN. This would `be for `a resident `students? PAGENO="0904" 3364 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. PAiuiINsoN. Yes. In a lone residential school, it was $835 to $836, so the figure I gave you- Mr. GOODELL. That is based on the full amortization of the capital expenditure over a 10-year l)eriod? Dr. PARKINSON. The chairman laid down the ground rules on that, and we are used to doing it in 20 years, and that kind of threw me. Mr. GOODELL. I want to clarify that. I believe they amortized over a 20-year period in the Job Corps, a.nd it is not very fair to ask ques- tions based over a. 10-year period. I take it this would cut in half the annual cost of amortization if they were using a 20-year period. Dr. PARKINSON. Now, wait a minute. Your maintenance costs have to be figured in there. If you amortize your initial cost, that is one prob- len-i. But the maintenance and remodeling from time to time, then that will increase your unit cost. I would rather, if you will permit, not give you a specific figure more than I have already given you, because that would be subject to refine- ment even, with a closer study. Let me illustrate. In public schools in Milwaukee, they arepaying $22 a square foot for construction. In our continuation school, which we commissioned last year, the cost. was about $13 per square foot.. It is clean, neat, maintainable, functional-it isn't luxurious or lush, but it works and it is nice. The speed of amortization of a $13-per-square-foot building will be faster tha.n a $22-per-square-foot building, so these are variables that enter into the problem, and it is a little difficult to give you a sort of an off-the-cuff figure. Mr. GOODELL. I understand. I thank the lady for yielding. AU I wanted to do was get clear in the record that the figure of $1,500 to $2,000 for amortization was for a 10-year period. It would be reduced substantially if it were over a. 20-year period. Dr. PARKINSON. Well, it would be reduced some, and I do feel that. a ~0-year period is more rea.listic. Chairman PERKINS. You have the maintenance problem more there. Dr. PARKINSON. Yes, that is true. Mr. GOODELL. I got it down to half the cost you got in answer to your question. Chairman PERKINS. I t.hink the cost for an enrollee in the Job Corps, at the start of your statement, I think it. was $10,000 or $12,000 that you were taking into consideration as being. the annual cost? Dr. PARKINSON. I think the cost we have in Wisconsin was the first year. The second year was pretty high. It got. down to about $9,500 or ~10,000 the second year. This is pure hearsay. I was not involved in the operation. Mrs. GREEN. As I understand now, your present cost for running a day vocational school is $835? Dr. PARKINSON. That is the cost annually for operations for an equivalent full-time student. We have a formula that relates every- thing to equivalent full-time students. Mrs. GREEN. How does that compare, in your judgment, to the other good vocational and technical schools? Dr. PARKINSON. Much lower than many of them. Mrs. GREEN. What would you estimate the cost range t.o be? PAGENO="0905" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 `3365 Dr. PARKINSON. I would hesitate to do that, because in the smaller schools your unit costs go up. Even in the city of Milwaukee, I think our sc.hoo~ is the third from the bottom in unit costs in Wisconsin. I think it is the question of the efficiency with which you run a plant, are your teachers teaching full time, do you plan your program so that you can keep decent-sized classes, Or are you doing tight organiza- tion-there are many factors. I wouldn't want to make a guess on that. Mrs. GREEN. I heard you say one of your requirements for entrance is application by the parent- Dr. PARKINSON. That is correct. Mrs. GREEN. What other entrance requirements would you have? Dr. PARKINSON. That is all. Mrs. GREEN. There isno test? Dr. PARKINSoN. We are an open admission school. This is part of `the magic of it.. WTe don't select students. As soon as you start select- ing students, you are automatically excluding the people who need the help worst. Mrs. GREEN. Have you made a study of the average grade level in your school? Dr. PARKINSON. No, I haven't personnally. I know our guidance people have, but I am not able to give that.. If you will formulate your question and mail it to me, I can get the answer. MIS. GREEN. I was trying `to find out if it compared about with the Job corps. Dr. PARKINSON. Every student who comes into the continuation school, he has to be 16 years old, and they may be a sophomore or junior in high school technically, and they still can't read above the fourth-grade level. The grade level is not significant. It is the literacy level that is important, and this is determined individually. Mrs. GREEN. I heard you say you would not recommend taking youngsters under 16. Dr. `PARKINSON. That is correct.. Mrs. GREEN. What would you do for youngsters who decide they are going to drop out of school when they are 14, and they have nothing but an academic course? Dr. PARKINSON. I think that is the problem of the public and parochial schools at that. level. I don't think it is the function of the vocational schools, which is trying to train people for employment below the profe'ssional level. I don't think our school can do everything. I think they have to .define their area of competence `and then work at it. I `think the public and parochial schools must have the responsibility of training people up `to the 16th year. In `the first place, a 14-year-old kid can't get a job. You know that. You have t:o be 16 years old in our State to get a work permit. to start with, so you can't `talk `about employability of people under 16, and this is `the golden thread that runs through our whole operation. That is employability and `social confidence above the 16th year and below of professional level. Mrs. GREEN. You said that you' would be unable to make any judgment as to whether the residential school or the Job C~orps would be the better? PAGENO="0906" 3366 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. P~xINsoN. No I didn't say that. What I said was this: I said that we are educating people for employment at a cost a fraction of that of the Job Corps. We have in general the same type of people, except that there are students who ought to be removed from their home environment when you start to work on them, and it may be that that is where the competence and special function of the Job Corps is. This is what I said. Mrs. GREEN. Well~~ Dr. P~uixINsoN. That is a little different. Well, OK. Mrs. GREEN. Let me ask you this, then: Would it make good sense to you to try from the Federal standpoint, to try both of these? If I understand your views, there simply is not enough evidence to indicate that the Job Corps is the one and only way to handle these youngsters, and therefore we might experiment~ more and have some residential skill schools, and at the same time maintain some of the Job Corps centers- Dr. PARKINSON. I don't think you ought to discontinue the Job Corps until you know you can do it better some other way. I think it ought to be maintained until you can do it better. But I do think, if I can suggest, that there ought to be three or four residential schools started in the United States in various situations and again see whether or not this could be done better than the Job Corps, or do they overlap, or does the Job Corps do it better. I don't think anybody knows at this point.. Mrs. GREEN. That is exactly what I was suggesting, that we don't have a center that will enable us to say, "This is the. way to do it." Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Goodell. Mr. GOODELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your testimony and I have been following along. Let me emphasize that neither I nor Mr. Quie nor anyone on t.his side, as far as I know, are opposing, or would discontinue the Job Corps. We have upward of $150 million Federal taxpayer money invested in capital fa.cilities in these camps. It. is our view that. we should transfer the Job Corps from OEO over to the Federal agencies. There would be a 3-year transition period in which they could develop some of the residential centers and retain the Job Corps camps in this period which they feel are appropriate. You indicated that you have how many students in your continua- tion school? Dr. PARKINSON. 650 this past year. Mr. GOODELL. What was the 500 figure? Dr. PARKINSON. 500 were on payroll, but a check indicated that 500 out of the 650 were on payroll. Mr. GOODELL. That is the group you are speaking about on the var- ions placement figures? Dr. PARKINSON. That and another group. We have the continuation school, 16 to 18. We have the younger group of the MDTA and the OEO programs, which are actually 18 to 22, so we are working with both groups, and as far as we are concerned, the problem is pretty much the same. Mr. GOODELL. What is the dropout rate in the continuation school, the percentage of those who start with you? PAGENO="0907" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 ~367 Dr. PARKINSON. There is no dropout rate. They must stay in there until they are 18 years old or else go back to tl'ie public and parochial schools, and the dropout rate is practically zero, because under State law they are required to attend school until they are 18. The dropout rate was mainly the 18- to 22-year-old group. Mr. GOODELL. In other words, have you a compulsory attendance law in Wisconsin until 18? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes, sir. Mr. GOODELL. But they may transfer to your school at their own request? Dr. PARKINSON. And with the consent of the parents. Mr. GOODELL. How about the dropout, just over 18? Dr. PARKINSON. We were completing 70 to 85 percent, a 70 to 85 percent completion, and of that figure, about 85 percent of them are working a year later at a similar job. Mr. GOODELL. This compares to people who are similar to the Job Corps enrollee? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. Mr. GOODELL. I think for the record we ought to make it clear that in the Job Corps we are talking about a one-third dropout rate in the first 3 months, a second third the next 3 months while only one- third go beyond the 6-month period in the Job Corps. And the statis- tics which we have indicate, that unless they go beyond 4 months they are no better off as far as a job or going back to school is concerned. Chairman PERKINS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. GOODELL. Do you want me to yield? Chairman PERKINS. You don't think that statement considered all the facts- Mr. GOODELL. The gentleman has been trying to disqualify the Harris polls ever since it was presented by the Job Corps people. I am quoting from the Harris poll. I am not giving opinions. This is the only evidence we have to go on. 1 myself bewail the fact that the only evidence we have with reference to Job Corps placement and the Job Corps enrollees is the ex post facto poll which was done by a pro- fessional surveying organization, but that is all we have to go on be- cause they have.let all other data~ get lost. Chairman PERKINS. I think Mr. Harris himself will explain that. Mr. G00DELL. I understand, and I am pleased to know he is coining to develop that point further. Your school takes ~people who are residents of the Milwaukee area. They have to be within the commuting distance? Dr. PARKINSON. Oh, no. In our dropout school they must be resi- dents of Milwaukee, but in the MDTA programs and OEO programs, they come from all over the State. Mr. 000DELL. In other words, they come and get the subsistence allowance that is available under MDTA, they live in the commmiity. Dr. PARKINSON. They obviously live in the community while they are training. We take them, though, from anywhere in the State. Mr. GOODELL. Do you feel that residential school planning would have any problems with taking youngsters from the Milwaukee area through a residential facility? PAGENO="0908" 3368 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. PARKINSON. No. I think the question which needs to be decided in the case of a candidate for a residential school is this: Will he profit from being taken out of his home environment and being put into the enlironment of a residential school. And whether his residence is in Milwaukee, or Chicago or someplace else, I think is not germane to the problem. Mr. GOODELL. You see no problem? Dr. PARKINSON. There are going to be problems, but I do not think that is one of them. Mr. GOODELL. I say, Mr. Parkinson, that I agree with this. I agree with the concept of residential facilities for those in need of a change of environment in order to respond to education and training, and I also say that your testimony has been a pretty strong contradiction of the frequent testimony we have had before this committee indicating that Yocational education is not doing anything but taking the cream of the crop. It would appear to me that with your open enrollment policy it would be obvious that with the kind of youngster you are talking about, you are taking far from the cream of the crop in those areas. Do you see a.ny advantage of having an integrated facility in terms of the level of training being offered by that institution? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. Let me give a specific example: For example, we have high school graduates who come in the institute of technology. That is also an open admission school. They cannot carry the level of work so we suggest a transfer to the adult school, where they can follow a parallel program at a lower level, and a larger percent of them really do transfer, they do complete, they do get jobs and they go ahead. So you provide them with a level of instruction which is within their ability to achieve. Mr. GOODELL. In other words, you have a fluidity here where they can move from one level to another depending upon the results of the scores, and so forth? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. Incidentally, the mother will tell the neighbor, "My son is going to MIT," even though he has changed the program. It is a status thing, and it has its value, I think. Mr. GOODELL. You have the exact antithesis of the track system in your school, such as the A level throughout which the students are con- fined in their school career. Dr. PARKINSON. You can't kid the student. You can't put him in a program that he cannot accomplish. He has already failed at that, and you must not kid the employer. If you tell him the student is able to do thus-and-so, and he can't, then you can't continue to sell your students. Mr. GOODELL. What sort of ties do you have in the business-labor ~omrnunity in the Milwaukee area. in terms of placement in your schools? Dr. PARKINSON. We have three kinds. First, our board consists of two members of organized labor, two members of the management, and the superintendent of schools. That constitutes the board. So there is a tie-in there. `We have 51 graduate advisory committees which we have one-third management, one-third organized labor, and PAGENO="0909" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS* OF 1967 3369 one-third our ow-n school people who sit down around the table and hammer out the curriculums. Than we have a placement services which works with the personnel services of business and industry in the placement of these. students. Mr. GOODELL. At what point does the placement process begin in your school? Dr. PARKINSON. When he comes close enough to the completion of a program of training that we feel he stands a chance of making the grade. Then we start working getting him into a job. Mr. GOODELL. You don't wait until he is graduated ? * Dr. PARKINSON. Yoli can't. Most of them have the job set before they are complete. Mr. GOODELL. In other words, several months prior to his graduation, you are working on his placement? Dr. PARKINSON. I think 3 to 4 months would be a maximum-less than a semester. Mr. GOODELL. This becomes very important, does it not, particularly with your lower level school- Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. The confidence of the employers is very impor- taut. if the employer has a part-time job, this kid will w-ork for him on a part-time basis and he knows he develops a certain amount of depend- ence and competence, and when the kid graduates, he hires him. Mr. GOODELL. So you have a program whereby youngsters may be doing part-time work with their ultimate employer? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. So far we have not given school credit for this Part-time employment, but we are thinking seriously of starting that this fall. Mr. GOODELL. You are a~vare, of course, that in the Job Corps there is no placement process except in very exceptional circumstances for nongraduate terminees. . . * Dr. PARKINSON. I understand. Mr. GOODELL. This is one of the reasons I feel very strongly about the. concept of which you are talking. This dropout. is a veryserious factor in the Job Corps. In the first place, they usually come from a. great distance away, and they go back to their home community, and try to get placement, usually by paperw-ork, a paper referred to the re- gional office and a paper referred to the local employment, office. That is the extent of the placement operation for these Job Corps terminations. . * At the stage, we are apparently relying on getting volunteer groups working in the community to pick them up and help them get place- inents. * . * At the end, only a ~small portion get it. . * Do you believe that this entire process, acceptance, counseling, train- ing and placement, can b~st be handled by a community training fa- cility comparable to what you have described here? Dr. PARKINSON. Well, of course, your question i~ a leading ques- tion. Ontheother hand, I think we have the best w~y of doing it. Ob- ~ iously, I think that, or I w ouldn't be in this busmess But I didn t come here, gentlemen, as an expert on the Job Corps I `tm not I have never run one I know it from the outside, ~tnd from what I read in the p'ipers So I am not competent to speak regarding the Job Corps. PAGENO="0910" 3370 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I did indicate that I thought the Job Corps, at least in the begin- ning, was too expensive. On the other hand, I did also indicate that there are certain types of people that need to be t.akn out of their home environment. Beyond that, I would feel I should not comment on the Job Corps. It is none of my business, and I don't know it. Mr. GOODELL. I understand that. We have listened to a lot of testi- mony on the Job Corps, and they inevitably bring in the comparisons, and what you have said is so dramatically better than anything we have heard from the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. The witness didn't say that. Mr. GOODELL. No; this is my comment, and you didn't ask the wit- ness to comment on it. He is testifying as an expert on his experience; what he has done in the Milwaukee school. Do you have any health program with these youngsters? What do you do with the youngster who cOmes in who needs medical attention or psychiatric attention? Dr. PARKINSON. We send them to the department of public wel- `fare-wait a minute. You have asked two questions, and I am going to give you two answers. If the student needs medical attention, he is referred to the depart- ment of welfare. We give emergency service through a school doctor and a nurse. Dental care is the same way, we do not give dental care, but psycho- logical service, particularly as related to employment, we provide, but if they need deep therapy, if they are a psychotic case, then again we go to the department of mental `health of the county. We don't give that. Mr. GOODELL. Do you have a good relationship with the local wel- fare people on this? Dr. PARKINSON. It is important, it is essential. Mr. GOODELL. You do have one? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. As a matter of fact, we were involved with them before there was an MDTA or an economic community pro- gram. We were getting them placed before the Federal Government ever thought of this thing. Mr. GOODELL. What are your observations of the referrals when they need medical and psychiatric help? Dr. PARKINSON. We find they are good. Mr. GOODELL. Do you normally get the service you expect? Dr. PARKINSON. Yes. Our relationship is very close. The department of public welfare is extremely well staffed and well organized. They do have a heavy load. Obviously, you know that, but when you say "Do you have frustrations," my God, man, you have frustrations in everything you do. Mr. GOODELL. I don't want to be in a position of leading you to an answer, so I ask you in a negative way so I won't be accused of leading you. I want you to give me an honest appraisal of how it works. Dr. PARKINSON. It works in our opinion very well. Mr. GOODELL. The record will show I didn't lead you there. Dr. PARKINSON. May I make a brief comment there, Mr. Chairman? Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. PAGENO="0911" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3371 Dr. PARKINSON. We feel the school should realize all the existing facilities of the community and not try to duplicate them all. I think that is the philosophy. You have a library service and a museum. We use those as part of our program. You should use what is available and not replace them with a separate structure, power structure, of your own. Mr. 000DELL. And the money made available in the Vocational Education Act and MDTA or the poverty program, you have made a decision to do this- Dr. PARKINSON. My board has authorized me to make application when and if funds are available. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Esch. Mr. ESCII. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger? Mr. STErnER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Parkinson, welcome. Dr. PARKINSON. It is nice to meet you. I know your father very well, and I have a farm up in your con- stituency where I spend my weekends. Chairman PERKINS. I hope you are making money on that farm. Dr. PARKINSON. I am raising trees. Mr. STEIGER. It is a particular pleasure to have you here. Your testimony has been excellent. I think your ears may have burned a little when Cynthia Parsons, the education editor for the Christian Science Monitor was here. She said the Milwaukee school is the finest in the world. Dr. PARKINSON. I think she is very conservative. [Laughter.] Mr. STEIGER. When I asked her why, she said in two words, the director. Let me go to a question asked by Congressman Quie. You indicated there are 35 percent who are not now completing the program suc- cessfully. Do I understand you to say that you thought a residential center might well serve those 35 percent in a more effective way than the present school, the day school? Dr. PARKINSON. I said that, and I added one thing, Congressman, and I said that I thought many of the students we do reach might properly be served better by a residential schooL This is speculating. What percent, I don't know. Mr. STEIGER. I think the word you used was "virtue," the virtue of the Job Corps was that it did get a disadvantaged child out of the family and social environment and therefore might make him more able to learn. The same concept would be a large part of the residential school. Dr. PARKINSON. It would be the essential part. Mr. STEIGER. Let's look at Milwaukee. By virtue of the board au- thorization, to allow you to apply for a residential center if funds become available, where would you put a center? Dr. PARKINSON. We had thought about getting part of the Bong air- base. It would have to be outside Milwaukee. I think it has to be close enough to a metropolitan area to provide certain recreational activity, say, over the weekends, and holidays. You can't put it out in the middle of the prairie. I think you have to find a balance between the two. PAGENO="0912" 3372 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. STEIGER. Thank you for that. I would agree completely. How much of the time now does your student spend on basic educational courses in the continuation school? Dr. PARKINSON. It depends on the student. In the first place, I am not sure what you mean. When we talk about basic education, we mean literacy education. Mr. STEIGER. That is what I mean. Dr. PARKINSON. I don't mean general education, such as history and so on. In the basic education, the amount of the time the school spends may vary from 100 percent down to 35 or 40 percent, depending on the ability and the competence of the student himself. You cannot answer that question defensively. Mr. STEIGER. For how long a. period of time? Dr. PARKINSON. Until he can read at the sixth grade level or better, and that may be from a few weeks to a year and some people, a few of them, just never quite make it, so we must be realistic about it.. Mr. STEIGER. In the educational courses you offer, do you attempt to relate the educational courses to the prospective job training course that might be available for the student? Dr. PARKINSON. The answer to your question is "Yes," and we call this preeinploymeiit training. This is obviously a part of any program. Second is our exploratory shops and courses which give him a variety of experience which help him make a final adjustment for his train- ing and employment at a later date. VSTe do both. Mr. STEIGER. I am very grateful for the fact you can come here today. I share, you know, the Pride which the State of Wisconsin has in your institution and in the job ou personally do. I think you are representative of the kind of vocational education that we should have more of in this country. I think you lead the way and point toward the kind of system that I think we are going to eventually have to come to, frankly, in the not too `distant future if we are going to head off some of the problems that we have. One other question which you may not wish to comment on: One of the concerns that I have, and let us point, to the Job Corps, ~p~- cifically, is the fact that we create~a. system outside of the vocational system, which in large measure, it seems to me, denies to vocational education an ability to build its own strength through residential schools as well as delays the development of a comprehensive voca- tional school system which will reach a far greater number of young people. Dr. PARKINSON. I am going to comment on that, because some time ago, in a discussion in this city, I was asked the questionwhat would I do if I were vocational director of the camp. What would I do? And I said I would close it., and I meant that for this reason, and that is, that if you can train 10 students in a school like mine, where you can train one student, maybe, in the Job Corps, for the same money, the need is so great in your great metropolitan areas that I think it is foolish to waste the money on the other side. On the other hand, as I have tried to' be fair this morning, I think that the great magic-if there is any magic in the Job Corps-is the fact they caimot take students out of their home environment. Chairman PERKINS. This is the type `of youngster who is not now being reached by anybody. PAGENO="0913" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3373 Dr. PARKINSON. I think that is true to a large majority. It is an ambivalent situation, Congressman Steiger, and I am trying to be honest and fair about it. Mr. STErnER. I appreciate your honesty, but the point you raise is a good point. If the cost per Job Corps enrollee for a year is $6,900, which is what they say now is the cost, as compared to what you said- Dr. PARKINSON. $835 per student. Mr. STEIGER (Continuing). The $835 for your school, you are then multiplying the number of students that can be reached and yet servic- ing in your institution the same kind of people. As a matter of fact, I think today the Job Corps is going away from parollees because of some of the criticism that has been raised, but you have 500 out of 650 who are parollees that yOu are servicing. Certainly, they are among the most disadvantaged. Dr. PARKINSON. You can't get more disadvantaged than that, I'll tell you. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you. (The following letter and enclosures were subsequently received for the record:) MILWAUKEE VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL AND ADULT SCHOOLS, Milwaukee, TVis., August 1, 1967. Re Residential Vocational School. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Lab or, house Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: It was a pleasure to appear before your corn- mittee yesterday morning in Washington and discuss the problems related to vocational and technical education and basic education. During our discussion the question of the function of a residential vocational school was brought up and, as you may remember, I am strongly in favor of this, particularly since I feel that the pro~ilern before us is a permanent one and merits a long-time permanent solution. Enclosed you will find a copy of the action of our Board authorizing me to make application for funds for such a residential school if and when the Congress sees fit to fund at least the pilot schools. Also you will find enclosed a copy of our "letter of intent" to make such application which was written last year, and action of the Milwaukee Board of School Directors approving our intent. Sincerely, GEORGE PARKINSON. JULY 18, 1900. Dr. WALTER M. ARNOLD, Director, Dii,ision of T7ocational and Technical Education, U.S. Office of Education, Washington, D.C. DEAR DR. ARNOLD: I am writing you regarding our interest in a residential voca- tional school, if and when these are funded by the Federal Government. It was very nice to see you at the hearing last Thursday morning, and I am sorry we did not have a chance to chat afterwards. I was impressed at the hear- ing by the interest of the committee in the residential school. Enclosed you will find two actions; one by the Milwaukee Board of Vocational and Adult Education, and a concurring action by the Milwaukee Board of. School Directors, which indicates a high degree of interest in this possibility. This letter is primarily to have on file in your office as an indication of our interest at some time as it will be appropriate. Sincerely, GEORGE PARKINSON, Director. 80-084-07-pt. 4-58 PAGENO="0914" 3374 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 REGULAR MONTHLY MEETING OF THE LOCAL BOARD OF VOCATIONAL AND ADULT EDUCATION WILL BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 1966, AT 2:30 P.M., IN THE OFFICE OF THE MILWAUKEE VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL AND ADULT SCHOOLS. ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Roll Call 2. Consideration of bids and awarding of contracts 3. Reading of the proceedings of the previous meeting 4. Bills 5. Salaries 6. Director's Report REPORT MILWAUKEE, WIS., April 13, 196G. LOCAL BOARD OF VOCATIONAL AND ADULT EDUCATION, Milwaukee, Wi~. GENTLEMEN: Personnel Report and Recommendations-Supplement I; Finan- cial Statement-Supplement II; Action Items: 1. Jurisdiction of Local 587-APSCME for clerk-stenographers in the central stenographic services. Local 587-AFSCME has requested jurisdiction for the Clerk-Stenographers, Classes I, II, and III, employed in the Central Stenographic Services. A check of our records indicates that they have a majority of the membership of this group in Local 587. It is recommended that this request for jurisdiction be granted without election. 2. Residential Vocational School-Supplement III. It is recommended that the Administration be authorized to prepare and submit to the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare a request for a preliminary grant for the plan- ning and architectural services for such a school, and that we be authorized subsequently to make application for an actual construction and operation grant. (Passed Unanimously) 3. Public Comment on Action Items (Note: members of `the public who speak are asked to do so with reasonable brevity, and reasonable slowness, so that their comments may be taken down by the recorder.) Information items: 1. Progress Report on Science Center Addition Project No. Wis. 3-0090 (Con- tinuing Education Center) as of March 31, 1966. CmtTmED COPY OF RESOLUTION By Directors Thomas Brennan, Walter B. Gerken, and Milan Potter: Resolved, That the Milwaukee Board of School Directors support the Milwaukee Vocational School Prustees and Director in their request for funds from the federal government for the construction and operation of a residential vocational school, under the Vocational and Educational Act of 1963. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of School Directors of the City of Milwaukee on July 5, 1966. A. A. XINT0N, ~eoretary-Basiness Manager. JULY 12, 1966. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Thompson? Mr. THOMPSON. I have no questions. I just arrived. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Holland? Mr. HOLLAND. I have no questions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Pucinski? Mr. PUCINSKI. I have no questions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Danie's? Any questions? Mr. DANIELS. No. Chairman PERKINS. While we are waiting for Lou Harris to come before the committee, and he is on his way to the committee- Mr. PUGINSKI. Mr. Chairman, as long as we have time, I would like to ask one question. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I was going to call on another witness for a minute. I think we can call a gentleman named Brailey Odan, PAGENO="0915" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3375 president of the Orange County Economic Country Inc., Orlando, Fla. He sent a telegram in here. He does not have a prepared statement, and I told Mr. Goodell we would not call hith until later in the day, but inasmuch as Mr. Harris is not here, I want you to prepare this. Let me thank you, Dr. Parkinson, for your appearance before this committee. We know the quality of the institution you operate, and we are all proud of it. It speaks well of you. Dr. PARKINSON. It is a pleasure to appear before you, and I have tried to be as accurate and as far as I can. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Harris, it is a great pleasure for us to wel- come you here. The surveys that you made bearing on the evaluation of the Job Corps placements and other data disclosed by the survey has brought about considerable discussion before this committee ever since we initiated the hearings. We are delighted to welcome you here, and I regret that I was unable to give you earlier notice than last night at midnight, but we are glad that you are here because much of the data, as I understand, happens to be outdated, in my judgment, because the Job Corps had many shortcomings during the first year of operation, and the Di- rector has taken advantage of the mistakes that were made, and it is a much more efficient operation today than it was a year ago. We are glad to have you before this committee. Identify yourself for the record. I understand you have a prepared statement, and you can proceed in any manner you prefer. STATEMENT OP LOUIS HARRIS, PRESIDENT, LOUIS HARRIS & ASSOCIATES,. INC. Mr. HARRIS. I am Louis Harris, president of Louis Harris and Associates, Inc., One Rockefeller Plaza, New York, an international research organization with facilities in each State of the Union. We have also done work abroad. May I read the statement, Mr. Chairman? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, go ahead and read the statement. Do you have copies of the statement? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir; I believe they are being handed out now, or should be. My purpose in appearing before this committee today is to discuss some of the findings of the four studies our firm has conducted for the Job Corps over the past 7 months. I believe all four studies have been submitted to this committee. The four surveys are "A Study of Job Corps `No Shows,'" "A Study of Job Corps Nongraduate Termina- tions," "A Study of August 1966 Terminations from the Job Corps," and "A Study of November 1966 Terminations from the Job Corps." Let me emphasize at the outset these facts: In no way do I come here as an advocate or opponent of the Job Corps. Our task as professionals is to obtain the facts of what hap- pened or did not happen to Job Corps applicants, "no shows," "dis- charges," those who are asked to leave the center, "dropouts," those who according to the Job Corps and its specifications simply had not completed the work, and the graduates. PAGENO="0916" 3376 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT - AMENDMENTS OF 1967 We tried to survey all of these as objectively and definitively as our research would allow. As objective, professional social scientists, we have avoided sweep- ing generalizations, such as that the Job Corps is "good" or "bad." Others might draw judgments from our data, and I gather by the committee hearings some have already. We. avoid such geiieralities, however, because our task is to report, not to sit in judgment. That is the task of those vested with the responsibility of running the Job Corps, the OEO, and the Congress itself. In the course of our studies, our primary purpose was to turn up areas of both strengths and weaknesses in the Job Corps program and to report them factually and without reservations or qualifica- tiOns other than those inherent in the results themselves. For the only way in which the Job Corps can be made more effective-at least in my view-is to look at the facts without sugarcoating, to capitalize on its strengths, and to find amelioratives for its weaknesses. Our reports are an accurate reflection of the Job Corps as it existed in 1966, not necessarily as it is today. In fact, if the Job Corps were the same today as in 1966, we would find this condition discouraging for it would mean that our studies had not been used to their full potential. The basic purpose of any applied research is that the results be a.pplied into action. It is our understanding that changes have been made as a result of these research efforts. Among them are these: Job Corps screeners have been instructed to give recruits a much clearer picture of the Job Corps on initial contact; the orientation program has been changed to try to make it more effective; the Job Corps behavior code has been tight- ened; discharge authority at the centers ha,s been facilitated to move faster to enforce discipline; efforts have been instituted to obtain greater minority representation on center staffs to alleviate prob- lems of racial tension; an effort is being made to improve the feed- back to corpsmen on how they a.re doing while at the centers; the time between the initial screening and assignment has been shortened; and new- corpsmen have been assigned to centers nearer their homes. All of these stemmed directly or indirectly, as I understand it, from the results of our reports. Having said this, however, I want to emphasize that we cannot to- day document that solid progress has been made in any or all of these areas. We hope that ftiture research of a practical and operational na- ture will measure rather precisely just what progress has been made in what has been called, the new Job Corps. The point is that such research can uncover problem areas, point to potential courses of action, and then establish the effect of such action when taken. I might add that this kind of social inventorying is sorely needed for the efforts of governmental and private sectors on many levels. Our job has been to find out what has happened to these young peo- pie out of their total experience with the Job Corps. We have tried to seek out a true-cross-section of them, find the level of gravity on which they can communicate to us, and then systematically probe. them on their past, present, and hope for their future. They are our only source of. basic information. We are reflecting what comes out the other end. Obviously, their answers in some cases will be impressionistic and not necessarily entirely accurate. PAGENO="0917" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3377 We are sure we have talked with representative cross-sections of each group surveyed. We are sure our questioning was penetrating and in depth. We are sure we obtained a full reading on their impres- sions of what the Job Corps did or did not do to or for them. Obviously, more precise figures on their hourly wages could have come from their employers, as could the length of their job tenure, their hours of work, and the precise definition of the job they are en- gaged in, or the degree to which they are demonstrating skills learned in the Job Corps. Yet a major part of the purpose of the Job Corps, as we understand it, is to help s1i~ape these young people as total human beings who can function positively and contribute usefully to society. Much of whether or not this function is fulfilled depends on what has and is going on inside them as people. Here, by use of this method of survey research, we can obtain as insightful and as sound a reading as by any method now available. In fact., what happened to those young people as human beings may in the long run go much further toward determining the real long-term effectiveness of the Job Corps than whether immediately t.heir hourly wages are going up 20,40, or 80 cents an hour or whether they are among the upper third or second third as engine mechanics today. `Within these limits, there are some findings which ought to be restated from our reports: Among those who were accepted in the ,Job Corps, those who never showed up at a center, are the ones called the "no shows." The key reasons were that t.hey found a job, they lost interest in the rat.her long period between acceptance and assignment, t.hey were needed at. home, they didn't want to go so far away from home, and they had heard bad things about the Job Corps. Among the so-called dropouts, the main reasons for their not com- pleting their tour in the Job Corps were too many fights, lack of proper training, homesickness, and racial friction, especially whites with Negroes. Among the August and November 1966 terminees, we found that the longer a corpsman stayed in, the more positive his experience, the higher he became, in his own estimate, in the Job Corps. The longer he stayed in, the more useful he felt his training was, but even those who were in less than 90 days had a more positive experi- ence than those who never showed up for the Job Corps in the first place. A majority of those who went through the centers thought the training helpful. Perhaps more important, a majority of those who went through the centers felt better off as people now than they did before they arrived. Currently, increases in rates of pay are higher for gradu.ates than for dropouts, higher for dropouts than for discharges, and even higher for discharges than those who never went to the Job Corps at all. Having said and reported all of this positive news, it would be the height~ of folly and plain nonsense to conclude t.herefore that all was great in the Job Corps and that the millenium had been reached in finding the perfect way to rescue, refurbish, and regenerate these most deprived young people. . . Clearly, all that has been made is a beginning-and . all we have measured is the 1966 beginning in what has been called the old Job PAGENO="0918" 3378 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Corps. Unfortunately, measures were not made comparable to those in 1965 and 1966, so comparisons are not even possible to see if the trend in late 1966 was up or down. In our measurements, we are at the be- ginning as well. Often I fear that single readings in a point in time are taken as a reflection of what the quality of life is or the impact of a program is for all time. If I might, I would like to conclude by reporting on an analysis we did of the four studies in terms of the success and failure patterns of Job Corps men, as they emerged from the facts: From our studies of Job Corps terminations-graduates, dropouts, and discharges-we have extracted certain key factors which help to explain the relative success or failure of an individual in the Job Corps. As a measure of success we used length of stay-the more successful corpsman is the who stays longer. Not only is his ad- justment in the center better, but he is more likely to find his Job Corps experience useful. After leaving the center he is more likely to have a stable job and higher earnings than the corpsman who stays for a shorter period of time. Now we have a series of elements here which contribute to what we call success pattern and failure pattern in terms of where they end up after the Job Corps. No. 1. The older ones are more successful, the younger ones are less successful. No. 2. Those highly motivated to join, expressmg a direct interest. in the Job Corps are more successful. Having nothing better to do, falling back on the Job Corps because of lack of other alternatives, tends to contribute to failure. No. 3. Eagerness of first time away from home. Willingness to be away from home for the first time and the freshness of a new experience contribute to success. Having nothing better to do, expressing a secondary interest in the Job Corps, falling back on it because of a lack of other alternatives contribute to failure. Been around-travel and new places have no particular attraction; the youth is jaded from past experience. No. 4, hungry for skill training-sees the Job Corps as a means for providing skills that may open up a. good job and possible career opportunities. Just another experience-will accept job training but approaches it with some indifference, less interest in career develop- ment. No. 5. If they regularly attend religious services, this tends to be a tipoff that they are likely to be a. success. If they never attended re- ligious services, it is a tipoff that they are likely to be a failure. No. 6. If they had serious trouble in school, or likely to have had trouble with authority while in school, this is on the failure side. No. 7. Next, eager to get away from home. This is on the success side. Interested in leaving the home environment and striking out on his own. This indivithial is more likely to move away from home after the Job Corps. No. 8. Priority to school over economic pressure-more likely to finish high school. Priority to school over economic pressure, this is on the positive side. It is an interesting one. They are more likely to finish high school. If they did not finish they are more likely to leave because PAGENO="0919" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT* AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3379 they did not find school particularly stimulating or worthwhile. The fact is that school failed in stimulating them. If they say economic pressures are more important than school, they are more likely not to have finished school and to have left because economic needs were considered more pressing than the need to finish school. No. 9. Not failing in school, schoolwork is not too difficult to handle. This is on the success side. On the negative side, failing in school, found subjects in school diffi- cult, reading often even a problem. No. 10. Out of work but want job training. Being out of work and untrained is recognized as a serious problem. The failure pattern can take or leave work in job training. Unemployment and lack of job skills are not felt to be harsh handicaps to future growth. No. 11. Can live with different race-racial prejudice is a muted factor in this group's background and will not deter them from suc- cess in the Job Corps. You take those elements, and we translate these into more general psychological factors which help to explan the success or failure of the corpsmen, and we get these generalizations which are psychological, but I believe are critical. 1. Desire for independence. To be one's own. One dominant mark of the successful corpsman is his willingness and eagerness to be on his own, to try to make it by~ himself away from the stultifying home environment. 2. Unspoiled provincial. The success approaches the Job Corps with a sense of freshness. For him, it is a new experience and his past, how- ever, depressing, has not made him indifferent or blase toward the op- portunity it offers. 3. Respect for organized society-society has not been good to him but he has not lost touch with its values, nor fought its established institu- tions. Work and career development are goals he feels are worth striv- ing for. 4. Recognition of low plight. The successful corpsman is likely to be well aware of his real situation but feel that it is not necessarily perma- nent and that there is a different and better life. 5. Desire for upwa.rd adjustment and change. The combination of the above factors leads to a strong desire for upward adjustment. This youth means to exploit to the fullest any opportunity to im- prove his situation and will take full advantage of the Job Corps. Now we turn to the failure pattern. 1. Crutch of dependence-protected by dependence. The relative security of home, the protection it affords keeps these individuals from becoming independent and able to accept the new and more hopeful opportunities which the Job Corps offers. 2. The cool facade-having "been around" and having turned bitter from past disappointments, there develops an indifferent, blase attitude toward the world, a cool facade that hides his discouragement and insecurity. 3. Rejection of organized society. The sense of failure has turned him against society. He is likely to have left school and rejects, through indifference, the goals society would have him support. 4. Taking low plight for granted. The. failure knows but one way of life, that of poverty and hopelessness. Hedoes not see that he may PAGENO="0920" 3380 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 have a choice. His environment has beaten . him down to the poiiit where he feels it is useless to try and rise above his low state. 5. Floating along the bottom and resisting change. With little hope for the fut.ure, this group must be pressured to accept change,, but pres- sured gently, for their willingness' to `submit to their present position is a measure not only. of their hostility toward society, but of their fear of change. As a researcher, as a citizen, I cannot esca.pe the consequence of my work. Nor will facts or knowledge alone accomplish the task. But we are all so very much at the beginnings of comprehension and yet the explosion of the present must be. contained with the tools and weapons at our command. I cannot imagine a. higher purpose than this matter which your committee is engaged in. It has now become a cen- .trai. if not the central question, of all of our times for the rest. of our lives. These profiles, I should suggest, go beyond simply a measure of po- tential successes and failure in the Job Corps. The failure pattern, if allowed to continue without remedia.l care in society at large, can lead to catastrophic consequences for this Nation. The profile we have just seen of t.he "failure" of young people I be- lieve would check out precisely with that group in the ghettos of our cities who a.re the fodder fOr the tragic riots we have witnessed in the past 6 weeks which indeed were exploding last night and this morning in ~`filwaukee, Portland, and other cities of our Nation. The success patterns show us what must be done to young people so that they are not candidates for the future armies of future insurrec- tions and riots. The cost to this country of not recognizing the need to take drastic ac- t.ion in the case of the "failures" can be seen in the burnt out shells along 12th Street in Detroit a.nd Springfield Avenue in Newark. Dollar esti- mates for all of the damage of these past weeks of rioting runs in some estimates to ~5OO miflion or more. To allow t.he "failure" pattern to proliferate is to allow our civiliza- tion to go hell-bent, to greater infernos of destruction. To turn the "failures" into "successes" can now mean the difference in the survival of American society. Obviously, the implications of these findings goes well beyond the Job Corps and its fate this year or next. But I would suggest that the urgency for action in the area of deprived young people is great, for the t~onsediuences of inaction are grim. What. all of us do now will be sorely judged for generations to come. Thank you. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you, Mr. Harris. I thnk we will operate on the 5-mimite rule. Tn tho administration there is a proposal that we will spend $295 million in the Job Corps this ear. and the other propo~a.l proposes to cut; back the expenditure to $109 million in the next fiscal year. I wonder from your study would you be able to state whether, if we did cut back, that. we would allow the failure pattern that you have now pointed out so well, to proliferate a.nd become much worse in the future. . Would you state that from the study that you have made? Should we continue the funding of Job Corps `at the . present. level?. ` PAGENO="0921" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3381 Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, may I say this? I am not an authority on the budget of the Job Corps, and when you say the difference between $295 and $109 million, I believe the only thing I can read into that is that it has been suggested that less money be spent on the Job Corps. The only answer I can give to that is quite nonspecific as far as the Job Corps is concerned. I think you can say quite generally that, if this Government of ours is not to spend more on these prob- lems, then either a way must be found for the private sector to spend more money or we must suffer the consequences; if we cut what the Government will do, or the private sector will do, the consequences are apt to be drastic. This is an opinion I don't mind expressing. We have reached crisis proportions in terms of young people. Not a. majority of them, but a minority of them, who have really gone beyond the pale, beyond the bounds of organized and normal society. I know we have developed wholly new methods of reaching these people which we neve.r had before. They can be reached. They can be reached physically. When you do reach them, I think one of the gratifying experiences we have had is that they will talk, and talk very freely. They are not incommunicable. But if they are left alone, then we can only expect the worst. Chairman PERKINS. From your observation and from your studies, and t.he social inventorying you talked about, has the Director taken advantage of those studies and put those in operation and now we have a more efficient Job Corps? Mr. HARRIS. Let me answer it this way, Mr. Chairman, by saying that I think the present Director of the Job Corps has taken t.he results of these studies, and what I would say applies even to private industry, who have done a lot of this, or in other areas, other sectors, I would say that he is taking these results very positively and, to my knowledge, has tried to do something about them. I can't say decisively how effective what he has done has been, because, quite frankly, I think these changes have been done in the last 6 months or so-that is my impression-and I think, again, the results of this will not. be evident until we see 6 months or so after the latest crop of graduates have finished. But certainly I will say this. I am impressed by the fact that not a single. harsh fact. that may have emerged from .these studies has been shied away from. To the con- trary, it seems to me they have welcomed as pointing up areas that. need rectifying and change and improvement.. That, to me. is a rather healthy sign. Chairman PERKINS. Let's just assume that your four studies were being made at the present time, the study of the Job Corps nongradu- ate terminations, the study of the terminations from t.he Job Corps, and instead of being made in various months in 1966, do you feel that the results today, if your studies were current, would be much dif- ferent? , Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, I would be less than professional if I speculated on them. I have to go by fact, and 1 cannot even presume to say that they would show a great deal of difference. Generally, well, when changes were made, some of them have a positive note, and positive notes probably emerged, but I cannot. say that decisively. . . . PAGENO="0922" 3382 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It would be gross speculation, contrary to what my professional judgment must be. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Green. Mrs. GREEN. I read your four studies, and felt they did a valid job, and certainly should offer some constructive alternatives. Are you now, or have you conducted other studies for OEO, or are these four the only ones? Mr. HARRIS. No, rna'am, these are the only studies we have con- ducted for OEO. Mrs. GREEN. Have you conducted other studies on the Job Corps besides these four that would be available to this committee? Mr. HARRIS. No, these are the four we have conducted. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie? Mr. Qure. Mr. Harris, are you conducting any studies now other than those four under contract with OEO? Mr. }L~nnis. Not at the moment; no, we are not. Mr. QmE. So these four studies- Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, I think there are plans to do other studies in the future. For example, among the August termination group, I think we plan to go back and see what they look like a year later. We saw what they looked like 6 months later. And we are trying to go back a year later and then 12 months after that, so we can see in time what happens to these young people. If I might point this out, I think that one of the things that ought to be measured here is not only what is the immediate impact upon termination of the Job Corps, but what happens to them over a period of time. The impact of training, the impact of what they have learned in terms of character building and other such elements don't necessarily show themselves in a single point in time, a month, 2 months, 3 months, 6 months after graduation. There can be, as a matter of fact, events and circumstances in many people's experiences which come out even years later. We would hope, by studying them over a period of time that we find out a more full picture of what indeed was the effect of this Job Corps experience in their lives. Mr. Qure. Do you expect to make a study of the 1967 terminations? Mr. HARRIS. 1966. Mr. Qure. Well, you did 1966. Mr. HARRIS. Well, tomorrow begins the year after they have been terminated. I think the plan, as I understand it, is to go on and take several successive graduating groups. For example, the November terminees, which are surveyed, we sur- veyed them in May, 6 months later. I think the plan is to go back a year after the first interview and survey them and then 12 months later. So we can see, if you take the November group, if you take the February 1967 group, if you take the May 1967 group, if you did this on a quarterly basis over time, you would see if there are improvements in both the short- and long-term impact of the Job Corps program. So I think we will be in a position to do this. Mr. Qure. Going through your pages of analysis of what make a success and what make a failure- Mr. HARRIS. Yes? PAGENO="0923" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 3383 Mr. Quii~. You have 11 points on comparison of the person and 5 points on psychological success and failure. By reading that, I come to the conclusion that if a young person is well adjusted before he goes into the Job Corps, he has a good chance of being a success. If he is poorly adjusted, there is less likelihood for success. Doesn't that say thatif these young people are successful before they enter, they will be successful when they come out, and if they are a failure before, they will be so when they come out? Mr. HARRIs. Congressman, I am not sure I agree. Almost by defini- tion, very few of those in the Job Corps are successes before they come into the Job Corps. The curious thing, I think, is that by circumstances in many cases, and probably almost all beyond their control-let's fac~e it, they are the bitter end, bottom run of society. The interesting thing is that despite this experience some are- some can have that kernal or light of hope within them. This seems to me to have been very important. I wouldn't certainly ever say that the ones who succeed were suc- cesses before they come there. I think the fact of the matter is that there are things in them which the Job Corps can bring out. Just take item No. 2, unspoiled provincial. This is quite surprising to me; particularly I was struck that young Negroes out of the ghettoes from the large cities, you get them in the conservation centers, and it is like a whole new world opening up. They literally are like young hicks from the city, if you want to put it that way. It is a curious thing. They react terribly well to this. This is a whole new world, and exciting kind of thing. It gives them a view of life that they never had before. Now I wouldn't say that is success or failure in terms of before they got there. This is a state of mind. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Thompson? Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Harris, I, too, as I would suspect most mem- bers of the committee, have had an opportunity to review the four studies which were given to us. Your report of trainees that left the Job Coriis centers in August of 1966, only 23 percent say that they used their training in their work. Do you consider this a failure and, if so, what lies behind that failure? Mr. HARRIS. Well, Congressman, let me say that I have seen this in the press, and I gathered from the hearings here that a great deal has been made of the fact that somewhere around one in four of these corpsmen say they are using the job skills that they have learned in the centers. Let me say that actually we found about 23 percent who said that they are using the training they received on their present job. This runs considerably higher, up to 35 percent, I believe, among the people who are graduates, and 42 percent among those who stayed over 6 months. That is an appreciable difference. The real question, it seems to me, and in making a judgment about this, I might suggest the committee has to decide what is par for the course, is what is the level which is fair to say any program should give people. PAGENO="0924" 3384 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The only figures that I have seen are a study connected with the Ford Foundation of, I believe, 100 vocational schools and 100 general high schools. It showed that 30 percent were. using their `skills upon termination. If so, then the Job Corps figures, where 35 percent of the graduates and 42 percent of those who are in there 6 months' or more are using these trainees are `higher. Now, having said that, I would certaiiily feel very remiss if I said that that therefore proves the Job Corps has been an enormous success, a greater success than vocational education schools and so on. I think the fact of the matter is that all through any organization greater effort must be made to train better and have this training applied better, and if the Job Corps were to take those figures as a measure that all is wonderful and no improvement is needed, I think they would be, sorely remiss. But it seems to me that the 23-percent. figure, or the 35-percent figure, is not too far out of line. If I might add, Congressman, there is another figure. We asked them about how much satisfaction they had with the training, and I believe the figure there was 56 percent of all terminees, 71 percent of the completers, and 75 percent of the corpsmen in training over 6 months felt better off now compared with before the Job Corps, and 65 percent of all terminees, 76 percent of all completers, and 82 percent of those in training over 6 months felt the training was helpful. That is what they said. Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Weeks, who originally wrote a book on the sur- vey, showed that for every victory there were six defeats, and that there were more dropouts-I didn't read this in your survey. Mr. HARRIS. I can look this up, Congressman, but usually figures stick right in my mind, and I would say that. this is not true. I would say that, in fact, as I remember it., 38 percent of the dropouts were unemployed at the time we interviewed them as against 41 percent before. Mr. THOMPSON. Another witness stated that the results of their survey-this was the chamber of commerce-and yours, were both off base because those youngsters who were unemployed were the hardest to reach, and therefore you most likely reached those who were employed. Would you care to comment on that? Mr. HARRIS. That just isn't true. The fact of the matter is, and I think the Bureau of the Census can bear this out in the regular unem- ployment surveys they conduct. The quickest people to reach, the easiest people to reach are the unemployed. There is a perfectly good reason for this. The unemployed have less mobility. They haven't the means to go beyond their own neighborhood, so they are in and around their homes. Since they don't work, they are at home a great deal more. If they are not at home, they are in the block at one place or another. We have always found this, and one of the things we `try to take precautions on is trying not to have an oversample of unemployed. ` . . Aiiyone who has ever walked through a low-income neighborhood is always struck by the `fact that men who are unemployed are sitting around on the street. They are always sitting in their `front parlors at 2 o'clock in the afternoon or 11 in the morning. PAGENO="0925" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3385 So the unemployed are easier to get rather than harder to get. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Goodell? Mr. GOODELL. Do you want to complete your statement? Mr. HARRIS. I was going to say that my feeling would be that if anything, we probably overestimated the number of the Job Corps terminees who have been unemployed rather than underestimated it. We have good reason to believe that. Mr. GOODELL. The gentleman from New Jersey asked a question which he said has been reported. I think your studies bear out the statements that he quoted with reference to the experience of Job Corps enrollees who did not complete the training. In your first report on page 10, and this is pre-Job Corps activity, we find that 56 percent of them were working prior to going into Job Corps, and that 12 percent of them were. in school, 56 percent working and 12 percent in school. Then on page 56 of your report stating what they are doing now, from the followup after they had completed their experience in the Job Corps, 56. percent were working and 10 percent were in school. On page 57, you conclude, and I quote: Overall, there is no reported change in the number currently employed com- pared to their pre-Job Corps status. The number in school has dropped slightly. Unemployment has increased slightly. Group by group there are some slight variations in this pattern. This is from your initial survey of total Job Corps terminations, I believe, in August of 1966, presented in January of 1967. Is that not correct? Mr. HAmus. What page are you reading on? Mr. GOODELL. I cited the pages, page 10 and then pages 56 and 57 in the first study. Mr. HARRIs. May I comment on that, Congressman? Mr. GOODELJJ. Yes. Mr. HARRIS. We found, on page 15, of study 1709, March 1967, the study of August terminations, we have "what wereyou doing just before joining the Job Corps?" We learned something subsequent to doing this, and as a matter of fact, we didn't change the data at all when they submitted to the com- mittee. The fact of the matter is we changed the way we asked this by dint of the fact we learned a great deal. We asked "what were you doing before you joined the Job Corps?" And we found that the number who said "working" was 58 percent. The fact of the matter is that this was not tight questioning. I say not "tight questioning," because. what we have found was, when we went back and inquired further of them, we found that what they meant by before they joined the Job Corps would be anything from 3 to 6 months before. We found that in the iiext study. You can see the effect, which I think is a much better measure. We asked them what they were doing-this, I believe, is in the fourth report, May 1967, continuing study of Job Corps terminations, wave 2. If you go to page-I have it for you here- Mr. GOODELL. I have those. Mr. HARRIS. At page 9 you will see that the figure went down to 44 percent. We have reason to believe 44 percent is a much more accurate PAGENO="0926" 3386 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 figure, because what we did was pin them down with a series of ques- tions. "What were you doing in the week, a month, 2 months," and so on, "before you went into the Job Corps?" In fact, what you find when you look at post-Job Corps experience, on page 16 of that same report, you take "what did you do immediately after the Job Corps?" 53 percent were working and then you say "what are you doing now?" That is on page 20-here it is, current status, working, 58 percent. The fact of the matter is that that is what they were doing as of that moment. If you go to page 18 in volume 4 and look at the number of jobs since leaving the Job Corps for waves 1 and 2 combined, you see that 13 percent said "none," which meant that 87 percent of terminees held a job at one point or another since leaving the Job Corps. How do you explain this? Well, you can explain it in some ways.. These young people are probably more susceptible to job change t.han any other group in our society. Mr. GOODELL. You flipped back and forth, but what you cited was your No. 4 report, which was completed in May of 1967. You say that these figures are more accurate, than the first report because you, by your questioning methods in terms of whether they had a job or not, have been able to clarify that point. Mr. HAJmIs. Yes. Mr. GOODELL. Just for the record, I would point out what you did show in your May 1967 report. If I am correct, with respect to grad- uates, those labeled as graduates of the Job Corps, "what were you doing just before joining the Job Corps ?"-44 percent were working. After graduating, 53 percent were working. So it went from 44 per- cent working to 53 percent working after they graduated from t.he Job Corps. "In school," among those who ultimately graduated from the Job Corps, 10 percent were in school just before going into the Job Corps. After graduating, 8 percent were in school. So your totals for graduates are 44 percent working, .10 percent in school before they went in, 53 percent working and 8 percent in school after they graduated. That is an accurate figure, in your opinion, the best that you can get now by your questioning methods? Mr. HARRIs. I think you dropped a line on that, Congressman. It was 47 percent among the graduates working and 53 percent if you read across, but that is a small point. Mr. GOODELL. I took the total. So it was 47 percent working before and 53 percent working after graduation. Mr. Ohairman, I ask unanimous consent to clarify the dropouts. Chairman PERRINs. Without exception. Mr. GooDELL. In connection with the dropouts, and it is the next section down on page 9 of this report, there were 41 percent working just before joining the Job Corps and 52 percent working after they got out of the Job Corps. Ten percent were in school, and 9 percent in school after the Jo~ Corps. Do you have any comment on those? Those are correct figures in context? PAGENO="0927" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3387 Mr. HARRIS. You are taking pages 9 and 21? Mr. GOODELL. Nine and 16. Mr. HARRIs. You think- Mr. GOODELL. I am using figures of those just before ~oming the Job Corps. Mr. HARRIS. Yes; I was looking at page 21, which is current status, which would be a more direct comparison. Page 21, if I might suggest, Congressman, would be a better basis of comparison. `Where were they before they joined the Job Corps and where are they today, or at the time of this study, and there the comparable figures for graduates was 47 percent working before as against 65 percent now. Mr. PUCINSKI. What page are you on now? Mr. HARRIS. Page 20 of the fourth report. So this is over a 33-percent increase in employment. Mr. GOODELL. And the 10 percent in school dropped to 8 percent in school? Mr. HARRIS. The number in school dropped from 10 percent to 8 percent. The unemployed dropped `from 42 to 27. That is a drop of about 40 percent in unemployment. Mr. GOODELL. I thank the Chairman. I would like to come back to this. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Holland, any questions? Mr. HOLLAND. No questions. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Pucinski? Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Harris, Mayor `Cavanagh of Detroit said yes- terday that, of our 5,200 young people in Detroit who were involved in various `activities such as Neighborhood Youth Corps, only three of them had been arrested during all of the 6 or 7 or 8 days of riots and turmoil in that city. What would it take, in your judgment, to make a study along those lines in all of the cities in which we have had disorders, to as- certain what percentage of the people involved in poverty programs were `also engaged in this rioting? Mayor Cavanagh said that the number of participants would have been higher if it hadn't been for the antipoverty activities they were involved in, and he, of course, found great satisfaction in the fact that, out of 5,200, only three were arrested. As a professional in making surveys and studies of this type, how bi'g a job would this be? Do you know? Mr. HARRIS. Well, part of the problem is that it would seem that there have been a rather large number of communities, and the number seem's to grow every day. I would say that it is possible, through the sample technique, to `go into these areas. We have an initial study in the field now that is being done `for my newspaper column, on riot areas, to see what some of the impact has been. We did not ask any questions `about those involved in the poverty program, but you certainly could find this out. Again, just as the unemployed are the easiest to reach, so are the low-income people the most free to speak. They are the easiest to interview in the sense that they will talk very frankly about all sorts of things, unwed mothers and people involved in stealing, all sorts of things. They are very open about it. So I think you could find this out. PAGENO="0928" 3388 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. PUCINsKI. As a sociologist who has gained nationwide reputa- tion for reporting and evaluating things, would YOU care to coniment on that figure-5,200 people involved in antipoverty program- and only three of those involved in arrests? Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, if it is accurate, it is an impressive figure. It would indicate that those people exercised a good deal more restraint, and perhaps exposure to the program helped them exercise restraint.. That is a clear impression from it. Whether there are any other mitigating circumstances, I can't tell without finding out. ~`Ir. PUCIXSKI. I have studied your four volumes here and they are an impressive amount of work, but I wonder if you could direct my attention to what you consider the most significant table in these reports that would show clearly whether or not the Job Corps program is working. Is there one table in this material that would give that story? Mr.. HARRIS. Well, Congressman, .1 think you can draw conclusions froni a number of tables. One of the reasons I hesitate is that a part, of our discipline I feel very deeply. about . is that you never take a single number and place all your reliance on that. You, rather, want- good questioning, good studying. You take things from. many dif- ferent. sides, look at them and then you begin to get a pattern. I would hate to point to a table and say, "This is it." It is the strength of the pattern in which you have, your reliance and your competence. You can take the hourly pay rate figures on page 28, which would certainly indicate that graduates~ receive a higher pay than dropouts. or discharges. You can compare that, if you will, to-let's see the no shows study 1704, and if you look there at tile figures on current pay, and you look at those on page 50 of that report, the second half of 1906, those would be tile no shows 6 months after leaving the Job Corps, and that is the group you have to compare with this. You find their increase was only 14 cents. I made some notes on this. Y~oii have this kind of situation, where afl the terminations show a median 23 cent increase, and those who didn't. get there at~ all showed a 14 cent increase. That is almost double tile increase in pay for the Job Corps people, so that is good evidence. . Mr. PUCINSKI. Perhaps I can help you' zero in on some of these charts. There have been statements made by `witnesses before, this committee that people who never went to Job Corps are better `off in terms of jobs and wages than those who went and dropped off before 6 months. Isthis a fact? " ` They hive cited your tables. Is that true? Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, the fact of the matter is, you have to go to page 56 of this February report, study 1704, to get the answer, because overall, I think what might mislead people who perhaps just gave a cursory reading to that table, is net difference, plus a 25 cent increment in their pay. However, you have to go down to the last breakdown called screen- ing, first halt of 1965, second half of 1965, 1966. Those screened in the first half of 1965 had a 42 cent increase, those in the second half of 1965 had a 30-cent increase and those in 1966 a l4Tcent increase. PAGENO="0929" ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3389 You must remember that this no-show study was done among people whose contact with the Job Corps may have been 12 months or more prior. You would have to compare the group that we surveyed 6 months after their "no-show"-in other words, you have to compare no-shows 6 months later with terminees 6 months later. When you do this, you find that the pay increase was almost half. Mr. PUCINSKI. For the record, where is this information? Mr. HARRIS. You can see it on page 56 of study 1706. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Erlenborn? Mr. ERLENBORN. Well- Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman yield? I would say to my colleague that the quotation which I have used and Mr. Harris has clarified in his fourth study may refine this somewhat. It is on page 57 of the first study, in which they say that overall there is no reported change. in the number currently employed compared with their .pre-Job Corps experience, and the number rn school has dropped slightly. In terms of employment or being in school- Mr. PUCINSKI. What page are you on? Mr. GOODELL. Page 57. I don't want to take the time of the gentle- man from Illinois, but just to clarify that, I think that in the testi- mony in respect to the second wave study he did, we could find figures on them. I thank the gentleman. Mr. ERLENBORN. The Chairman was giving figures for the Job Corps under the administration bill, I think $295 million, and an alter- native proposal of $190 million. I think you very wisely did not draw a conclusion from that as to the quality of the effort under the two programs. As a professional, I think you realize that there are other factors involved rather than just comparing dollars-isn't that right? Mr. HARRIS. Let me put it this way, Congressman. I would be less than frank if I said I was an authority on congressional appropria- tions. Mr. ERLENBORN. There is a tendency for people to equate the value of a program with dollars that are appropriated, and I think you would agree that you can't make those simple conclusions properly. Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, let me say this. If we haven't seen by now the negative costs to society in terms of burning, destruction, these horrible negative, costs that were incurred by lack of action, let's say, or by not doing enough, it seems to me that perhaps society in general ought to spend more in order to try to avoid this. I think tha~t proposition I can address myself to. Mr. ERLENBORN. Let me expand on the question by putting some other factors in there. If the Job Corps was spending $13,000 per enrollee annually and appropriating $495 million, or if the Job Corps was spending $6,500 per enrollee with the same dollar amount appropri~ted, you could have- Chairman PERKINS. Let me say to the gentleman that h6 ought to state his question fairly. The average cost per enrollee is down to $6,500. Mr. ERLENBORN. I don't know that that figure is correct, but if it is down to $5,900, the end product is the same. 80-084-67-pt. 4-59 PAGENO="0930" 3390 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. HAmus. Well, it is fairly feasible that you can cut the amount spent and do a better job; yes. I imagine you also reach the point of no return, though, at some point. In other words, that can't go to infinity. The logical conclusion would be that you spend nothing and do the best job possible, if you go on with that. Mr. ERLENBORN. I would agree with you on that. The figure we are talking about is seed money that mobilizes private resources, a total more than the $295 million. That $190 million may have a more valuable contribution. Wouldn't you agree? Mr. HARias. Congressman, I have no way of judging it. I have to admit that I am ignorant about the appropriation side of this. I have no idea what the $295 million really is made up of. I have not seen what the $190 million proposal consists of. Mr. ERLENBORN. Let me- Mr. HARRIS. If I might-I am not ducking at all, but I just feel that it is not in my area of competence to be a judge of, you know, what the budgetary mix should be. Mr. ERLENBORN. I am not asking you to do that. I am saying you can- not compare $295 million of a program that is totally funded with $190 million that is only partially funded with Federal funds and those Federal funds are used as seed money for the private sector. You cannot make a comparison just by the dollar amount, can you? You have to take into consideration the other factors? Mr. HAiuus. It seems to me, Congressman, you must look at the sub- stance of any program in terms of not only what it is set up to do, but what it is doing, and determine-I think as a citizen I can say as a taxpayer, I would feel a lot better if there were more evaluations done-not necessarily of the kind we have done-but what happens to Federal programs. We do a great deal of work in the private sector for many large corporations, and while I know some corporations that perhaps aren't too good at this, they generally do a better job than the Government in evaluating what they are spending, not only their money but the pro~ grams they are in. I would say in general one of the areas of criticism. I would have of the Federal Government is that far too little has been done on finding the impact of what these programs are engaged in. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Daniels. Mr. DANIELS. Having made four studies over the past 7 months, have you noticed any basic differences between the successes and fail- ures between the women's Job Corps and the men's Job Corps? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, we do analyze women. One of the problems we have, Cdngressman, with the women is that they tend to get married more than men. That in itself is not perhaps encumbrance in terms of job, but it is the women, not the men, who create the children. As soon as they have the children it tends to put them off the job market. So, in other words, I am suggesting it is not fair to take just the women's performance in jobs and so on and compare them pro rata across the board with men. They are also trained as you know for a great many different kinds of occupations and even more than that, as a matter of fact, one of the salutary things that did seem to come out here was that the women PAGENO="0931" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3391 seemed to respond to the whole area of hygiene, care of themselves and care of families, and things that are perhaps a little less directly con- cerned with job training. Of course, ~I am sure a lot of women might like to say being a housewife is just as much as being gainfully em- ployed. I would say that the pattern of women is quite different from that of men. Mr. DANIELS. Do you think you would need more time to make a more basic conclusion on the question of the success of both programs? Mr. HARRIS. I think the thing I would be most interested in seeing, I think over a period of time a certain number of these women neces- sarily have to be expected to go out of the job market. A certain number, however, will stay. I would guess I would be most interested in the women 12 to 18 months later when they sort of embarked on a career as against what they did when they first caine out. I do not know the purpose of it, but I note under the law the Job Corps is required to have 22 percent of the enrollees as women, which is a good thing. Mr. DANIELS. Forty-seven cents per hour, drop out 20 cents per hour and those that never went into the job Corps, no-shows by 25 cents per hour. Here again it looks like the youngster who never went into the Job Corps does better than the one who dropped out. How do you account for that? Mr. HARRIS. That is the question that was just asked before. The fact is you cannot take the figures on those who were the terminees, the August and November groups, as comparable to the study we did on the no-shows for the reason that we went back to determine the ter- minee's status 6 months after they left the Job Corps. We went back to the so-called no-shows, those that never arrived but were accepted, went back to them on an average of 12 months after so that there was twice as much time elapsed. Therefore, what you have to do is compare comparable groups. When you compare the no-shows who are out 6 months, by that I mean 6 months after their point of contact with the Job Corps, 6 months later what happened to them you get a 14-cent increase in their wage rates as compared with a much higher 23 cent increase for the terminees. Mr. DANIELS. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. PUCINSKI. I believe the Chairman made a statement earlier that the average cost per trainee was $5,900, but that includes the capital investment. Chairman PERKINS. That was the average cost per enrollee at Breckinridge. Mr. PUCIN5KI. But that includes the pro rata investment so that figures is going to keep, coming down as the capital investment is amortised. `Chairman PERKINS. That does, but there they `are in a military institution. Mr. PUCINSKI. I think they spent a couple of million dollars im- proving the camp. Mr. SCHERLE. Mr. Chairman, I have `to disagree with my good friend from Illinois because I have recent figures from the Job Corps in PAGENO="0932" 3392 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Omaha, Nebr., and with the number they have there at the present time, it does not miss $7,000 too far. This program has been in effect for a sufficient amount of time that the initial cost has already been covered. This is a 2-year contract. The capital investment is finished. This is the new current 2-year program. Mr. PucINs~. What was the original cost to build the camp? Mr. SoHREI~. This is a hotel. Mrs. G~r~N. Would the gentleman yield to me? Mr. SOHERLE. Yes, I yield. `Mrs. GREEN. I don't know any figure that is $5,900 for an average enrollee. In 1965 it was $8,900 for boys and $8,400 for girls and some of these went as high as $13,000 for operating expenses with no capi- tal outlay. These latest figures 1 have from the OEO themselves is they hope to get the operating costs down to $6,950 for this next year. Mr. PucINsKI. All these figures are very interesting but suppose we used one figure. There are 41,000 youngsters~ enrolled in Job Corps programs throughout the country and we have budgeted $190 million for that program which, in my mathematics, comes out to about $4,600 und that includes a $30 stipend that the trainee gets a month plus the $50 put away for `his family when he graduates. I think that figure probably comes closer to the ~realistic figure. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Shriver will be testifying at 2 p.m. and we will straighten it all out. Mr. SOHERLE. Many Congressmen send out surveys to their con- stituents. The average Congressman perhaps represents about 400,000 people in each congressional district, and propably sends out 100,000 or more questionnaires to his constituents. Now, can you tell me as an expert in polls and surveys whether this would be a more accurate summation of the feelings of the people than a random selection such as you use. Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, at the risk of suggesting that Congress- men perhaps are sending out a lot of mail which is not very effective, I would say very flatly that studies have been made on congressional surveys done through the mail and your problem is that you have no control over the response rate. That is, you have no control when you send out a mailing to your constituents that each component group in your constituency will respond proportionate to the degree to which it exists. I can tell you that in a mail survey such as this you will get a re~- sponse heavily weighted by the degree to which people are educated. In other words, the better educated will respond and the less well `edu- cated will not respond. As a. consequence your results are more likely to represent what the people who are affluent think rather than what people who are not affluent think. In this sense I think most surveys such as this have a bias in them and they are not representative. I `have to state that `to you in all candor. Mr. THoMPsoN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. SOHERLE. I do not believe I have too much time, but I will yield if I may continue. Mr. THOMPSON. I ask unanimous consent the gentleman have I ~tdditional minute. PAGENO="0933" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3393 Chairman PERKINS. WithOut objection it is so ordered. Mr. THOMPSON~ Having worked in a small way in the polling indus- try and one `of the éenters being in Princeton in my district and hav- ing observed a great number of congressional questionnaires, they are almost `completely unscientific interests, and despite the best inter- ests, in a sense the questions are loaded'. Although they have a great value I doubt that they are very scientif- ically accurate. Mr. HARRIs. Congressman, may I suggest something and I hope this does not come out of the Congressman's time. It has always oc- curred to me that I could see great value to these `congressional sur- veys if you did them on a different basis. I would pay less attention to the percentage of returns that you get if you ask the people to sign their questionnaires. I believe all questionnaires now are sent out unsigned. If you ask people to sign them, then frankly, I can see a very good dialog between Congressmen and their constituents in terms of why you don't agree with their point of view as individuals and so on. It would seem to me this would be a very highly useful thing in the survey field rather than taking a stab in the dark and hoping you get a representative cross section answering you and perhaps even be misled in terms of what you c,onstituency believes. Mr. SCHERLE. Do you also feel that people who have taken a firm position of being against something would be more inclined to answer a questionnaire than those who are for something. Mr. HARRIS. The people who will answer will "tend psychologically to be those most for something or those most against something. You can get very misled by the vocal proponents and opponents of any measure. What they leave out is the broad, quiet, often silent middle m our society or the people who, don't write letter to Congressmen particularly, the people who don't get up in arms, who don't march in picket lines, who don't scream at public figures. But these are the people who probably make up the majority of our electorate. Mr. SCHERLE. I feel quite certain the Congressman in writing his constituents and sending them a questionnaire does get a good cross section of the people he deals with provided he knows his district well. Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, I no longer do polls for candidates. I gave `all of that up in 1963, but I would say `for a while, from about 1956 to 1963, I actually ran quite a business for a number of Con- gressmen, Senators, governors, even majors and men running for the Presidency who felt that even though they thought perhaps they lmew their districts it didn't hurt to go out and really find it out for sure. As often as not they found out things somewhat different from what they thought they knew. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Brademas. Mr. BRADEMAS. 1 ,have just a couple of observations on your ex- tremely interesting testimony and you might make any additional comments you care to. One has to do with the statement that you make on page 4 of your testimony in which you say what happened to these young people a's human beings may in the long run go much further, toward de- termmmg the real long-term effectiveness of the Job Corps. PAGENO="0934" 3394 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 A good deal of our questioning of you has been in terms of cost effectiveness and I think that is the way it should be. We do have to assure responsible spending of public money and I for one feel we must do more in evaluating effectiveness of this program and other programs rather than less. At the same time, it seems to me it would be unfortunate if we couched all of our judgment in pure cost; effectiveness terms, because, especially with respect to the Job Corps as the point has been made repeatedly in these hearings, we are not talking simply about the question of providing vocational training but in most instances of rebuilding almost from the ground up entire human beings. Do you have ~ny further comment on that? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, Congressman, I feel this very strongly. If I may indulge myself personally for a moment; I was trained as an economist and I did not particularly study political science or sociol- ogy. Some people may feel strongly about that, as I have ended up in the field of political science and sociology; but I don't know of any particular way in which one trains himself to become a Member of Congress. There are many areas of our society where I don't think people would look with scorn on occupations where it is really your training as a generalist. That is academically speak- ing. That is more important than the specific trade that you learn. I think in the end the degree to which you learn to use your mind, the degree to which you learn to concentrate on a job at hand, the degree to which you have character as a human being and the degree to which you have consideration, a sense of decency and knowing how to get along with people on the job, these things are apart from what I gather sometimes has been made of whether a fellow brushed his teeth, combed his hair, shaved his whiskers, and so on. These things can be just as vital, a whole gamut of them, as whether he has learned to be a good machine tool operator. I don't say that we, therefore, don't seek-you see the problem you get into, people say therefore, you don't have to train people. Quite clearly you want to train people as best you humanly can. The more skill t.hey have the better off they will be; but to say simply the development of this skill on a one-to-one basis is a measurement of what they are and what they will be for all time is ~vastly an oversimplification, it seems to me, as to what people are and how they get ahead in the world. What you are as a person,~in the long pull, will make the difference in how well you do in your work and not particularly whether you have been given the enormous advantage of specialized knowledge. I find that specialized knowledge tends to be dated or even evaporate in time unless you constantly update it by use. You can train someone today in a skill, but unless he has used it 6, 9, 12 months later, and in fact has learned to apply the skill better, that training does nt mean a great deal. Mr. BRADEMAS. Let me touch on one other point. Mr. Chairman, and ask for Mr. Harris' comment and then I will yield. I was back in my district this weekend where we had some troubles in my hometown in Indiana and some of the troubles involved young people there, just as has been the pattern in other cities in our country. I was very much struck by the profiles that you set forth here of suc- cess and failure in the Job Corps, even before I came to page 11 of PAGENO="0935" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3395 your statement, to quote you, you say, "The profile of the `failure' young people, I believe, would check out closely with precisely that group in the ghettoes of our cities who are the fodder for the tragic riots we have witnessed in the past 6 weeks. The success patterns show us what must be done to young people so that they are not candidates for the future armies of future insurrections and riots." It would seem to me, one of the most significant conclusions to be derived from all of your surveys with respect to the Job Corps is that you may well have developed some generalized conclusions which I should have thought would be most valuable for President Johnson's recently appointed Commission of inquiry into these riots and the problems of our great urban areas because I noticed the President asked, in looking at the questions of Commission members, why one resides in one community and not in another and so on. Among many of the Negro people in the community, with whom I talked, they had little communication with the young people. They didn't know what they were thinking, or doing. Some of the kinds of points that are set forth in your generalizations dovetail completely with what I got in my own area and I would hope that you would see if you can't make a copy of these documents and get them to Governor Kerner and Mayor Lindsay. Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, I would be delighted. To me one of the great tragedies of these recent and on-going events is that we are all outsiders looking in. We see the violence, we can get pictures of it, and we can get moving pictures of it. The difficulty is that we don't seem to know these people as people. If we did know them, perhaps we could understand why they can be led to such senseless and irresponsible action. If we simply judge and, in effect, are hung by the consequences of what they do without really knowing who they are or what they are like, it seems to me, we will just keep lighting a fuse in our society for a bomb that is going off already and can go off even more drastically. Explosions can always happen more easily when you fool around with dynamite with a blindfold on, than if you fool around with it with your eyes wide open. I would be as surprised as anyone else walking around really quite blind in this area. Mr. knu~s. I want to compliment you for the thoroughness in which you go into this work. It is most important to find out not only what motivated people but through that motivation as you pointed out over the years you can come up with solutions. I well recall the survey you did for my opponent. Mr. HARRIS. I remember that very well. I will never forget it. Mr. AYRES. It was very helpful so I speak with great experience on the authenticity of your facts. Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Congressman, would you tell the story about that? If I might, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Ayres got hold of that survey and he took it very seriously and he used it better than his opponent did. He did not get hold of it from me, but he used it much better than his opponent and won even more handily than the survey indicates. Mr. BRADEMAS. Did you bill him? Mr. HARRIS. We didn't bill him, but he later sent his regards. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback. PAGENO="0936" 3396 EQONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Harris, we appreciate your appearing before us as a witness. We welcome the kill and the expertise you really do bring to the committee. In looking through this report that you have given us this morning and in listening and reading it, do I read correctly that you measure success, this balancing off of success and failure, as you use the length of time in a site or center as a correlated measure of it, and really you are looking for such factors as adjustment to the center and stable job and high earnings and these you look on as the indicia of success? Mr. H~nis. There is no doubt if you can keep a kid in the center 6 months or more you have a much better chance of his doing very well. Mr. DELLENBACK. What you are saying is the stable earnings and the higher success of the program is the goal? Mr. lL~ms. Yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. As far as the Job Corps area is concerned. Cleanli- ness, social training, social graces, you are visualizing these trainings in these areas as incidental supplements to the things you look on as suc- cess, namely, stable job and higher earnings? Mr. HARRIS. Those are the tangible measures we use. `We know from other work when someone is motivated and this often happens when they learned a skill or are beginning to learn it and get excited-all learning is a very exciting thing-or even more important it happens when they have grown to have respect for themselves as human beings. Then kids will clean their fingernails, brush their hair, brush their teeth. In other words, it seems to me you cannot isolate them. They are part of the same pattern. In social psychology many people speak of the principle of "the more the more". We see it in such a shibboleth as "Ask a busy man to get something done." The fact of the matter is, it is absolutely true that a person who is activated mentally, is likely to be activated mentally in more than one area. If you want to put it another way, somehow as these kids stay longer in the Job Corps they get awakened right down the line, so the measures we use, which I think are fair, are~ stability of employment, wages earned, increment of increase. I hope in the future we will be able to see 12 months or 18 months after they leave the Job Corps that they will even do better. Mr. DELLENBACK. These will still be the criteria to which you are going to look because you see these as the essential goals of the pro- gram? Mr. HARRIS. These are the easier measures to use. Mr. DELLENBACK. Some of the other things are self-reinforcing. Mr. HARRIS. As Congressman Brademas points out, the other ele- ments may be more important but these are harder to measure, harder to put your finger on. `When a person learns to improve his character and learns to improve himself as an individual you can feel it, but it is very difficult to pin it down. Mr. DELLENBACK. But these are the things that you use as your measuring sticks. Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you made any other studies of different types of programs intended to turn the pattern of failure into a pattern of success outside of the Job Corps? Mr. HARRIs. Yes, sir. PAGENO="0937" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3397 Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you studied it for other groups? Mr. HAmus. IFor industry, yes, sir. We have done this in a number of places in industry, as a matter of fact. Mr. DELLENBACK. Where you look at programs that are comparable to the Job Corps? Mr. HARRIS. No. You see, one of the marks of industry today is that large numbers of people such as these Job Corps young people are to- tally missed. Industry does not hire a lot of them. So I would say the work we have done in this area and other places has been quite a cut above what the Job Corps does. Mr. DELLENBACK. You mean so far as the group that is involved? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, you are dealing with people, young people who have been bouncing along the bottom of society. There are not very many endeavors in our society to do anything about this group. Mr. DELLENBACK. Have you made any studies of groups that are at all comparable where you had to hit those quite as far down the ladder- Mr. HARRIS. In terms of performance of the job? Mr. DELLENBACK. In terms of the success of the program aimed at making success out of failure. Have you had any studies made by your organization for industry or anybody else which were aimed at at- tempting to find out whether or not a program aimed at turning fail- ures into successes had really proven effective? Mr. HARRIS. Congressman, I would say these did not deal with young people at as low a level of society as this. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Chairman, without- Mr. HARRIS. Might I just restate that and say that about 8 years ago we did a study for the Carnegie Corp. of Americans serving overseas. We took such elements as capabilities of understanding people of another country as against going native, let us say, and looked at the degree to which this contributed to job success or failure. So that has been done but these were by and large people with quite a lot of education. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't think we can fairly ask Mr. Harris to turn over any results to us if he has a contract with some other employer- Mr. HARRIS. The Carnegie study was published. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would it be possible for you to give us some list of what other types of studies you have made so that we may deter- mine whether or not we can either go to you or the employer to get the results of these for help in connection with our studies here? Mr. HARRIS. I would feel somewhat remiss `and I realize Congress has the power to obtain these, but I would feel it would be a breach of `confidentiality to take some of these we have done for industry. Mr. DELLENBACK. We are not asking for the results. Mr. HARRIS. They were done for internal use, but again the Carnegie study was published so that is a survey that could be obtained. Mr. DELLENBACK. Could you give us the names of any studies if you have made any as such, that were aimed at determining whether pro- grams of training instituted by private enterprise, a special type of training, would turn a failure into a success? Mr. HARRIS. I would be delighted to search the literature on this and help on this. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Steiger. PAGENO="0938" 3398 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 6~7 Mr. STEIGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Perhaps I missed an earlier question, Mr. Harris. Has OEO come back to you to contract for an up-to-date study on the Job Corps ~ Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir; I answered that earlier and said we plan to go back to the August and November terminecs, 18 months after termination and then 12 months later. I believe plans are also underway to go back to the 1967 terminees in order to see if indeed compared to what the results were for 1966, 1~67 results are an improvement in terms of performance. Mr. STEIGER. Thank you. You touched briefly as I recall in response to a question on this whole area of how we measure results. I wonder if you would expand on that just a little. One of the problems that I think Congress has in attempting to assess a given program or set of programs is the kind of analysis that is made available to us. I am impressed, for example. with the job that you have done and I think one of the reasons that I am is because this is not an in-shop operation. From your own back- ground and experience in the scientific polling operation, do you think there is greater `benefit to be derived from an outside analysis versus an in-shop analysis in terms of `being able to accurately judge? Mr. hARRIs. I think there are various forms of checks that can be made, some inside the Government and some outside. I think it would be invidious and self-serving on my part to say those made inside are worthless and those done outside are great. I think you can find out through social security sources, through efforts to trace down each terminee in terms of where he goes for employment. I gather that the Job Corps-I am not familiar with the details of this-has some volunteer church groups that are willing to go out and contact a number of these terminees. I can address myself properly to saying what I think outside sources can do because that is what I spent my life on. One great advantage, in effect, is not being beholden to a client. We have no qualms about bringing in bad news of any kind. I always like to say I can hold up big stacks of statistics and say don't blame me, blame the people who are represented by these figures. So I can speak with candor and that is an advantage. The disadvantage, and we always like to tell our clients this, is that we will never know your business better than you know it. That is why to `be perfectly frank if I was asked about budget matters I would be really foolish not from a tactical standpoint but out of shear ignorance to comment on the size of t.he appropriation for the Job Corps. I don't `have the foggiest notion of what the dollar amount should be, so I would not know in effect your business or the Job Corps' busi- ness better than they do. But we have gone out and traced down Job Corps terminees. I would like to pay some tribute to our people who have gone to great pains traveling 200 miles or more to trace down some of these Job Corps people. We do know them quite well and we know the data in these studies better than any of you will and I feel a deep obligation that we should take that data and say "Here are the implications." Whether this makes people administering the program or you gentlemen of the Congress happy or not, these are the facts and I wish that we could PAGENO="0939" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3399 have more of that kind of self-critical evaluation on the part of Gov- ernment agencies. I believe in that very much. Mr. STEIGER. I share your belief and appreciate the fact that it is and frankly much better to have the kind of candor by which we can then make some kind of hopefully realistic and reasonable value judgment. I was interested in the fact that based on your past experience, the first study versus the fourth study, you have done some changes in order to tighten the questions and in order to try to find the best possible ways of getting the correct answers. I would assume, Mr. Harris, simply based on your own last statement that what you are trying to say to the committee is that to the best extent possible, the work that you have done in those four studies represents as com- plete and as accurate a cross section of sampling as it is possible to procure; is that correct? Mr. HAmus. Yes, sir; within the reasonable budgetary limitations. In other words, in any study you could go out and do a census. For example, in the first study we interviewed 1,161 out of 3,860 dropouts. We could have done all 3,860 but the cost would probably have been five times the cost for the 1,161 interviews and the results would not have been more than 3-5 percentage points different. By use of the sampling teclmique you can get essentially the same results without the expenditure necessary in going to every last one. Out of 3,860, the last 200 I can guarantee you will be dreadfully expensive to get to because when you have a volunteer society as we do there are always a number of people who are not dead but just plain disappear. It is just murder to find them. Mr. Ariu~s. Would the gentleman yield? Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. Anms. Mr. Harris, is there anything in the file to determine whether or not the Job Corps graduate who is placed in employment and gets a much greater job than he would have had he not gone to the Job Corps but had just gotten a job on his own? Mr. hARRIS. Congressman, as a matter of fact, to the contrary there are indications that those who never got to the Job Corps-the kind of jobs they get iiumediately are very much dead end types, not very productive jobs. If anything, there seems to be a delay in their getting into the mainstream of the job market, though, someof them do. Those are 18 months away from their Job Corps contact. You have a substan- tially higher rate of pay increase, but I would deal with that with some caution because as these kids get older they could automatically get better jobs. In other words, when a 17-year-old gets to be 19 or 20 his wage rates will go up. This will happen to anyone. Here I think we have a major part of the latent unemployed if something is not done for the unskilled, to a degree indigent, who add to the relief and wel- f are rolls. Most important of all, the great urgency here is that these may be the people who have roamed our streets and created enormous damage recently and probably will do more unless something is done to help them. There has been a lot of talk about keeping them in their homes and sending them to school on a residential basis. Jam frank to say I think one of the salutary effects of the Job Corps is having them removed PAGENO="0940" 3400 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 from their environment for a period of time. This, I think, can shake them loose from perhaps very dilatory influences in their lives. Mr. An~s. Are there any figures available, Mr. Harris, as to how many of them return to their former employers? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, if my memory serves me, I believe about 80 per- cent go back to the same neighborhoods and they are the ones who do not do as well as those who are back in their own hometown but have struck out on their own-getting their own apartments, for ex- ample. That is a sign of good independence. It does not mean they have to cut off from their family at all but it means somehow they are not living off the family anymore. This is a healthy thing. Mr. GOODELL. You have quoted from your study here that 85 percent return to the same home. Is this to the same city as distinguished from the same neighborhood? Mr. HARRIS. It is the same home, I believe. Mr. GOODELL. There is quite an important distinction. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. Quiz. Going back to the questions I was pursuing, Mr. Harris, you have listed the qualifications of the young men, the patterns. I imagine that in different young people you saw differences of these patterns which are called success patterns and they may have some failure patterns along with them. But if a youth is over 18, highly motivated to join,~ for the first time away from home, hungry for skill training, eager to get away from home, priority given to school over economic pressures, not failing in school, out of work and wanting job training and can live with a different race then it is pretty likely that he would be a success in most any venture. Wouldn't that be true, that you arereally dealing with a person there who is poor and prob- ably is from an area where job opportunities are not great, and if you had a brush with all of those patterns there would be little doubt that there would be success. Wouldn't that be true? Mr. HARRIS. I would say that the success pattern colunm represents what has been aroused in these people, what can be aroused by the Job Corps or other experience. In other words, if you can get someone hungry for skill training, if you can somehow get him to attend relig- ious services on a regular basis, if you can get him to want job training, if you can somehow persuade him that there are advantages and not disadvantages in getting along with other races, then what you have is the prototype of what the failures can be converted into. In other words, there are always two ways in which you can read data. You can say these are the elements that contribute to their success. These were obviously in them all the time; therefore, not a great deal has been done. I would say this, Congressman, and I have seen it in some instances, people who did not have these motivations, who have been the opposite of this, can have them instilled in them. Religious training is a perfect illustration. We have seen failing students who have dropped out of programs. I know the one at Yale University has been very successful. They take dropouts from all over the country and make them successes 9 years later. I implore you, when we say failure patterns, don't write these people off completely. Mr. QuTE. If the Job Corps is going to perform a service, it should take the people who would fall into the failure pattern. You say they PAGENO="0941" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3401 came in with nothing better to do, never attended religious services, had serious trouble while in school, wanted to hang around home, eco- nomic pressures are more important than school, failing in school, can't leave for training; want racial separation. If a person could fall under all 11 of these he would be the most hardcore of all of them. It is like working with multiple handicaps, they are easier to work with than the person who is blind and deaf or a person who is even more handicapped. So you have multiple handicaps that you are dealing with. In your polls and evaluations in the future it seems to me what we need to know what programs would help to correct this failure pattern and as a result you end up with a success pattern. Mr. ILutuis. If I might suggest this, Congressman, you point up very well indeed what is both the problem and the potential and the chal- lenge to the Job Corps in taking these failures and making them into successes. If I had to define what are the next gaps that the Job Corps should seek to close it would be precisely in these areas. I would look on it this way: What I hope I make clear is the people that were successes were not necessarily predetermined to be successes- Mr. QuIR. You don't believe in predestination? Mr. HARRIS. It is difficult to proceed on the bettering of human kind if you assume it is all predestined and you are what you are and nothing you do helps. I don't believe we operate that way. Self- improvement is still a mighty important part of our voluntary society. Mr. QuIE. I wanted to"say whether a person is listed as a proponent or opponent of the Job Corps, and there is a new Job Corps now, I think we are all trying to find a mechanism or means of bringing people who now fit into the failure pattern into the success pattern. If we can do it the least expensive way-in a day school-we would like to find out those who fit into that category We know some need to ch'inge thefr environment and should get into a i~esidence center to do tins. Did you make a determination of how many fit into the success pattern and how many fit into the failure pattern and the degrees in each area? Mr. HARRIS. If my memory serves, the success pattern would be about 3-10 and the failure pattern might be a third higher. They would be of comparable size. Mr. QUTE. Three and 10 fit in the success pattern and four and 10. Mr. HARRIS. These are just . approximations. Mr. 000DELL. This is when. they go in. Mr. HARRIS. There is a book that I have not read in which somebody showed me an excerpt saying there were six failures for every success. I don't think anything we have done has shown that. Mr. QUTE. Christopher Weeks' book shows something comparable. Mr. HARRIS. I don't know if he has seen these studies and I don't know where he got. these figures but if ~yoü take the dropouts and compare them with the graduates you would never get over two to one and more likely three to two Mr. QuIE. Christopher Weeks administered a portion of the OEO program and when Sargent Shriver was up. here testifying he had Chris Weeks~ at his~ right hand giving him the answers. Mr. HARRIS. I don't know Mr. Weeks; I did see a statement con- PAGENO="0942" 3402 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF .1967 cerning the surveys, and in that respect he was inaccurate. I can't draw any judgment about the rest of his observations. They may be perfectly fine. Mr. GOODELL. I would like to clarify this one-third, one-third, one- third ratio. Are you referring to the number of enrollees who enter the Job Corps in saying that essentially one out of three fits into the success pattern and one out of three into the failure pattern and one out of three is mixed? Mr. H~nRIs. I was thinking of page 6 of study 1709, where you have the 32 percent who are graduates. Actually, in terms of time-I was looking for that breakdown there-you have a figure that sticks in my. mind of about 29 percent for those who stay for the longest period. If you go to page 4 of the 1729 you can see 35 percent graduate. If you look at the length of time in the Job Corps, I think this is the key. The longer they can keep them, you Imow, up to a reason- able period, the more likely their success will be. Mr. GOODELL. The statistic that we used- Mr. H~&imis. There is no doubt that if you lose them in the first month or two it is a casualty. I would consider it a defeat if you lose them in the first month or two. 1 would consider it even a greater defeat if you have those who do not show up at all. Mr. .GOODELL. In answer to Mr. Quie, you answered the question that one out of three fits into the success pattern which you have described in your testimony today and one out of three fits into the failure pattern and one out of three fits into apparently a mixlure of the two. What I am driving for here is one out of three what? Were you referring to enrollees when they come in? Mr. HARRIS. If you go to page 14 of study 1729, if you look at the bottom table there, waves one and two combined-that is the skinnier report here Mr. GOODELL. Page what? Mr. H~nRIs. Page 14. If you look there you will see the total of all August and November terminees, less than 3. months, 33 percent. Now, I think that is as handy a simple reference as any if you want to say what is the failure group. By their not staying over 3 months, the Job Corps lost a great op- portunity to do a great deal with them. Even that group does better than the group who never showed at all. So there is some advantage but we are talking, I assume, about success and failure on a relative basis here. In other words, I would say the Job Corps is remiss~ every time it cannot keep one of these young people beyond 3 months. Mr. GOODELL. These figures are a value judgment. We have had some witnesses who are rather experienced in their fields say they feel 6 months is the turning point. Regardless of where we set the line between success and failure, it is not a black and white line even then. Mr. HAmus That is right. Mr. 000DELL. But the figures you are citing here are showing that 33 percent of the total enrollees stay less than 3 months and PAGENO="0943" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3403 41 percent between 3 and 6 months, a total of 74 percent staying less than 6 months and more than 6 months, 26 percent. That is what you are referring to. In other words, when you are referring to the success pattern and `failure pattern, you were refer- ring to the results after the Job Corps experience. You were not referring to the pattern of the enrollees before coming into the Job Corps? Mr. JiAmils. We are' talking about the relative relationship that was experienced after the JOb Corps as compared to before. Mr. GOODELL. To pinpoint the question, you have given the relative part after Job Corps experience. Do you have any comment about the breakdown of success versus failure pattern of enrollees before Job Corps? Mr. HARRIS. No, because only the dynamics were measured here. The variable we are measuring is exposure to Job Corps. Mr. GOODELL. You can't compare a success-or-failure pattern' after Job Corps with the success' or failure before Job Corps. Mr. HARRIS. Congressman Pucinski suggested this morning you could take participation in riots as a good measure. We call it an inde- pendent variable against what you are going to measure. Mr. GOODELL. I very strongly resisted the notion- accurate scien- tific guideline success-or-failure pattern should be accepted above par- ticipation in riots. I think that in the breakdown of success patterns, you will find a great number of them overwhelmingly in th~e .success pattern who for one reason or another got involved in riots.' Mr. HARRIS. You feel there are? Mr. GOODELL. I would assume there are. We have had indications in Buffalo, N.Y. Of those arrested in Buffalo, N.Y., more than 50 percent had jobs. If they had a job I don't think they are in a failure pattern com- pletely. There may be elements of that. There may be very strongly motivating, factors. Mr. HARRIS. If I may express the opinion, I would say when you have a young person who throws a gasoline bomb or who tries to shoot a fireman while he is trying to put out a fire, I think this is the most abject failure we can have. Mr. 000DELL. You have jmnped from, participation in riots to two examples of extremes. Mr. HARRIS. Or looting a store. Mr. GOODELL. If you want to include all participation involving criminal conduct we can talk about that. I believe the indications we have, and we should have more, are that a sizable number in these communities who participated in riots to the degree of being arrested, in the act of doing something, breaking the law, had jobs. I don't mean to get into the question here. You have not studied this apparently and I have not either. I have read the reports, but I don't accept this arbitrarily in view of the reports as a guideline for the success-or-failure pattern. Mr. HARRIS. Do I understand, then, you are suggesting that because someone has a higher increment of wage increase or he has more PAGENO="0944" 3404 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 employment, more steady employment, a more stable life in measurable terms, that that should not be taken as a measure of success? Mr. GOODELL. No, I think the factors you have outlined here are parts of the success pattern but if you want to substitute a simplistic notion, involvement of riots, as a standard of whether you have a suc- cess pattern or failure, I would resist this. Mr. HARRIS. I was about to say it seems to me a desirable objective to try to persuade as many young people in this country as possible not to riot because rioting, in my judgment-and I know there are others who disagree-is wholly destructive. Therefore, if you can prevent young people from participating in a destructive activity, then we have no quarrel with that. Mr. G00DELL. Outside of the most militant I don't think anyone would disagree that it is desirable to dissuade young people from par- ticipating in riots. Mr. HARRIs. The point is if you can take some of these young people whO fit the pattern, it would not only be salutary to get them off the streets but it would save us a whale of a lot of money in terms of potential destruction. * Mr. GOODELL. What about the success pattern and failure pattern of enrollees at the time they came into the Job Corps, so we can by the same objective standards compare the success pattern and the failure pattern after their Job Corps experience, however long. You have the figures, if I understand you correctly- Mr. hARms. Congressman, you would have to design your study. somewhat differently. In order to measure success or failure or change, which is what we are really talking about, change of any kind, you have to change from something to something else as the result of experience. It would be rather expensive to do. You wOuld have to take a sizable sample. I suppose you could take it from high school records- but suppose you took high school records, and looked at those who had a pattern of behavior, success or failure, call.it what you will, and then. you measure what they did in the job market following their schooling prior to the time they came to the Job Corps, I suppose then you could get a similar measure. That would have to be the design of it. You can't do it retrospec- tively. If you just ask people to tell you about their whole past and give you an evaluation, the further back you go in the past, the more colored their memory is. We always remember the good things about ourselves and unfor- tunately tend to remember the evil about others. Mr. GOODELL. As I study your survey, the closest I come to are the figures with reference to pre-Job Corps data contrasted with post-Job Corps jobs and school. * Those are two arbitrary measures, but meaningful measures, I think all of us would agree, and you have those two for us to look at. I think we also can agree that it gives you a biased look if you cite only one of the statistics without the other. Mr. HARRIS. I don't follow you. Mr. GOODELL. It is not just a fair statement to say that 65 percent ~f th~ Job Corps terminations or graduates get jobs without pointing PAGENO="0945" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 34O5~ out that 47 percent of them had a job according to your refined sta-- tistics when they went in. Mr. HARRIS. I agree with that. Mr. 000DELL. The success rate there becomes 18 percent- Mr. HARRIS. It is about a 45-percent increase. Mr. GOODELL. You are applying it to the number that had jobs be- fore but you increased the number who had jobs by 18 percent rathei~ than increasing the number of jobs by 65 percent. Mr. HARRIS. It would be wrong to say 65 percent had jobs today. It would be equally wrong to say there has been an increase of 18 percent. It means that 18 on 47-I could do it on the slide rule if you like-in rough terms it is about a 40-percent increase in employment. That seems to be the fair way to say it. Mr. GOODELL. They are not necessarily the same people. That is the point. Mr. HARRIS. We see some turnover in the tables, that is true. Mr. GOODELL. Forty-seven percent had a job when they went inand 65 percent had a job when they got out. Mr. HARRIS. Actually, 87 percent held a job at one point or another since they got out of the Job Corps. Mr. GOODELL. Then we can cite the figure that 53 percent got a job immediately. Mr. HARRIS. Weare measuring at a single point in time and it seems to me the gross figures 47-65 are very fair, much better, let's say, than the 47 and 87. Mr. GOODELL. Is 47 percent the number who had jobs when they went in? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Mr. GOODELL. Is it not a fairer figure then if. you are going to take 65 percent as the number who had jobs later to take the number who had jobs within 6 months prior to going in? You have chosen an arbitrary moment when they went into the Job Corps for your 47 percent and although they may have had a jc~b a week or two before, they are not in that 47 percent. Mr. HARRIS. You are getting into this problem of how far back you can go retrospectively. You can ask a person if he has worked and if he is 17 years old he may not have worked for a whole year but he will say, "Of course, I have worked," because that year telescopes in time so he tends to think it is only a few months since he was working, expending energy, getting paid for it, and since it felt pretty good he says he worked. You see, we are trying to pin down what was the status of these young people prior to their Job Corps experience and then what has been their experience since. To be perfectly frank about it, Congressman, I think the real effects of the Job Corps will come when we go back a year later, 18 months. later. They do better 6 months later. One. of the things I would like-I did say in my statement and I would like to reiterate-it is a terrible misstatement to assume that measurements are locked in for all time in one period of time, one point in time. 8O-084--67-pt. 4-60 PAGENO="0946" 3406 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 This is like taking a single frame of a moving picture and saying that is the whole picture when in truth it is the sweep and the movement especially over time that makes the difference. Mr. GOODELL. I could not agree with you more but you must apply that same standard to those who did not have Job Corps experience. It is a mistake to say that 47 percent of those who had no job when they went into the Job Corps would have remained unemployed with- out Job Corps experience. They are becoming older, and a certain number of them might have gotten a job when they got into the older range and you have to compare this again with the general statistics of population moving from that age group. Mr. H~uuus. If we knew a way to do this, the way to do it would be to have interviewed these Job Corps people before they went into the Job Corps, while they are in the Job Corps and after they have left the Job Corps. This is rather difficult and very expensive because you would ob- viously have to interview-I think somebody estimated a million two hundred thousand eligible for the Job Corps potentially and they get, what, all of 75,000. So you would have to interview about 15 times the number who actually went to the Job Corps. It would be a very difficult task. I don't mean to make it sound impossible but I would say it is very costly to get this on an accurate basis. Mr. GooDEn~. The best evidence we have, and maybe you have evi- dence to the contrary, is that at any level of skill, education, you will find an increase in the percentage of jobs when you move from the 17- to 18-year-old group, from the 18- to the 19-year-old group, from the 19- to 20-year-old group. The older they get the larger percentage you have who get jobs. There may be some year variations in there but that is the trend. What I am saying to you is that if we take 17-year-olds who go into the Job Corps and compare them to 19-year-olds who get out of the Job Corps, you must adjust in here for the number of employed which would have increased because they gained 2 years in age. Mr. HARRIS. The exciting part of the research we are engaged in is that we will be able to take 17-year-olds and not compare them with 19-year-olds but we will be able to. take 17-year-olds who have been dropouts, meaning they left in say 1 or 2 months in the Job Corps, 17-year-olds who were discharged, the kick-outs and 17-year-olds who were in the Job Corps for say 6 months or more. Mr. GOODELL. This will be valuable. Mr. H~&mmis. We can then compare the 17-year-olds when they get to be 18 and when they get to be 19. For the Job Corps to really have done an effective job, and what I think the Job Corps should say is they are willing to bet their life on if they have the capability of doing this job, by the time these 17-year- olds who have been in the Job Corps 6 months or more reach the age of 18 or 19, they should be appreciably ahead of those who dropped out and cerainly ahead of those who never showed up at all. It seems to me that is a fairer measure. Mr. GOODELL. Sure, but it is not a measure of success in comparing PAGENO="0947" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3407 the Job Corps to other various programs that we might utilize, to compare the Job Corps versus nothing. You can say this is a measure of success. But we can't compare it to Job Corps versus a variety of other approaches that are being suggested in this Congress that might give you a higher success rate. Mr. HAmus. Congressman, here we do have statistical tests to show the degree to which the difference has been due to just the Job Corps experience alone. Mr. GOODELL. You misinterpret my question. I am saying you have no statistical basis, and it is an obvious fact, as to how the proposal made in the Opportunity Crusade would work out with percentages, whether it would be worked out to a higher percentage or lower percentage. Mr. ILtiuns. We don't know this. We know 6 months later there are signs that the Job Corps has had some effect. Mr. G00DELL. You don't have one single scintilla of evidence as to what would happen to a youngster if he went into the Opportunity Crusade as distinguished from the Job Corps. That is what I am saying because we do not have the Opportunity Crusade. That is what we are arguing about in Congress. It is not between the Job Corps and nothing. It is the Job Corps and proposals that we have before us which would improve the Job Corps and do a better job. You will find most of us on this side believing in the residential training. We are proposing ways of improving it. I did not mean to belabor the point except I have not been able to achieve these im- provements yet. Chairman PERKINS. Before you answer, might I comment that as I have understood the situation all the way along, so much credence was being placed in this report by my friends on the minority, I am de- lighted that you have come here to explain this report. Mr. GOODELL. If I understand Mr. Harris' testimony, it is to affirm the results of his study, the accuracy of his study. Is that not correct? Mr. H~umis. Yes, sir. Mr. GOODELL. So you stand on the results of this study and you think it is an accurate breakdown? Chairman PERKINS. It was a misinterpretation in issue. Mr. GOODELL. You will have to be more specific on the misinterpre- tations and you can specify those for the record. Mr. HARRIS. The only one I can recall as a misinterpretation is that of Mr. `Weeks in a couple of statements-I would say misin- terpretation is a strong word. It is a matter really of trying to see positively what might be done. Another greatly pertinent question if I might suggest it to the committee, is to ask Mr. Kelly and the others the degree to which they feel they have acted and are acting to elimi- nate some of the weaknesses of the Job Corps. It seems to me that that is eminently reasonable. Congressman Goodell, when you say there are no measurements of what might happen with the Opportunity Crusade, you are abso- lutely right. One of the things that is difficult to do in our work and we are often asked to do it and I must say rarely want to do it and rarely do it because you get into trouble when you try, is to project what would happen if something became reality. PAGENO="0948" 3408 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 It is easier to analyze what is a reality. It is very difficult to take nonreality and project it into the future. Mr. GOODELL. I would just like for the record to ask a question with reference to the number who returned home. This is a point that wilt be cited from your report. On page 60 of your third report, 1709- Mr. IL&i~RIs. Yes; I was looking at that after you spoke here. Mr. GOODELL. You show 85 percent returned to same'home and you break that down to pre-Job Corps home, 69 percent; same neighbor- hood, 11 percent; different neighborhood, same town, 11 percent; then. different town, city, or rural area, 9 percent. That does not add up to 100. How do we break those down? Is the' 69 the same actual dwelling? Mr. HARRIS. Two percent were indeterminate and that adds to 98 percent. Mr. GOODELL. Your 69, 11, 11, and 9 adds to 100 but I don't under- stand the 85 to the same home summarized from your other three or four breakdowns-the 69 percent seems to be thOse who went back to~ the same dwelling; is that correct? Mr. HARRIS. As I read this, 85 percent returned to the same home,. in most cases the same domicile. The other figures represent where they are currently living. Mr. 000DELL. Eleven percent went to the same neighborhood and the 69- Mr. HARRIS. That would make it 80. Mr. GOODELL. Different neighborhoods but same town, so it is ac- curate to say 91 percent went back to the same town? Mr. HARRIS. I don't have the codebook here but I can get that for you if you like so we can see what went into that 85 percent. Mr. GOOD~LL. They are nOt adding up and it would seem to me in the same town would be approximately 85 percent. Mr. . HARRIS. Approximately 80 percent are living in the same neighborhood. The curious thing is that. among the graduates, how- ever, the figure was lower than for any other group. Those who stayed in the Job Corps a longer period of time went back to the same neighborhood less than any other group. This would be indeed indicative of t.he fact that these were more successful and these tend to leave their homes. They have the independence and con- fidence to leave their homes. Mr~ GOODELL. It is a small increment but it is true. Mr. HARRIS. Of those in the Job Corps less than 3 months 77 per- cent are now living in their pre-Job Corps homes; of those in more than 6 months, only 62 percent are living in their pre-Job Corps homes. Mr. GOODELL. Comparing the dropouts and graduates on the top line, you have 90 percent of the graduates and 92 percent of the drop- outs going back to their same home or same town, 90 percent of the graduates, 92 percent of the dropouts. You have a 4 percent difference in the ones going back to the same home. I think that is significant. There is a 4 percent difference in those. who went back to the same neighborhood and I think that is significant. PAGENO="0949" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3409 Mr. HARRIS. I don't think it is right to combine the difFerent neighborhoods and the same towns into that. I think the key is pre- Job Corps home compared with not living in your pre-Job Corps `home. I think that is the bi~ shift. I certainly feel that it would be. I don't blame a person living in Rochester, Syracuse for not wanting to go back to his home town. What we find is that people are healthier, if you will, if they strike `out on their own in their home town and not depend on mom and pop `back home with all of the festering problems. Mr. GOODELL. I am not disputing your point. I think it is very valid; i: don't want to make an argument where we do have an agreement. I just want to clarify for the record what your findings were. Your findings were talking about the home being important and `which ones go back to the pre-Job Corps home. You show 67 percent of the graduates going back to the pre-Job Corps homes and 71 per- cent of the dropouts so there is a 4 percent difference in the number who go back to the same home. In terms of those who go back to the same neighborhood you show that of the graduates 8 percent do, not `in the same home but same neighborhood, 12 percent of the dropouts not in the same home but same neighborhood. I am just trying to clarify what the perčentage difference is between these two. Mr. HARRIS. It is when you get `over to different neighborhoods, same `town and so on that you get a difference. Mr. GOODELL. Is it an accurate statement to say that based upon your survey that nine out of ten of the Job Corps enrollees `who have Job Corps experience want to go back to' the same home town? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Mr. GOODELL. Ninety percent of the graduates and 90 percent of the dropouts? Mr. HARRIS. You can't say they want to but they do. Mr. AYRRs. I am glad you clarified that. I have one observation to make. In your opinion, is it not important to the Job Corps graduate when `he determines where he wants to go as to the type of home, not the community but the type of `home that `he `came from before he got to the Corps? Mr. HARRIS. Most of these young people came from rather dismal homes. That is part of the i~ea:son they were what they `were. Mr. Ayiu~s. So `if they have been inspired they don't want to go back `and get into that same rut. Mr. HARRIS. To them the home whether it is infested with rats or Toaches or peeling plaster or `holes in the floor, bad plumbing and so on, is not something terribly agreeable to go back to. ` Mr. AYRES. So you almost have to take' into consideration `from `whence they came to determine what percentage are' going back `and who are motivated `by some other reason and don't want to go `back to the same surroundings. ` Mr. HARRIS. Yes; sir; and I don't want to suggest that the way to get all of these young people in good shape is never to have them go home. `and never see their parents again. PAGENO="0950" 3410 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I would say their desire to break out of the miseries they have been raised in is a measure of their ability and capability to make some- thing of themselves. Mr. Arm~s. Have you, through your surveys in depth, come up with any figures which show there is a higher or lower percentage of drop- outs among Negro enrollees than white enrollees of have you broken it down? Mr. HARRIS. As my memory serves me, we have a relatively higher dropout rate among the whites. One of the interesting situations is that we do have a slight indication that Negro graduates do better than white graduates, which certainly is interesting because this would tend to disprove the claim of some people that Negroes have been so emasculated and beaten down over the years that even if givell an opportunity they wouldn't do anything. This tends to show that if you give them the opportunity they will run with it. This I think is very, very encouraging. It belies quite frankly some of the statements made by some Negro leaders, so-called leaders, that when you have beaten them down this much you can't get them to come into the mainstream of society. This shows very definitely that you can indeed. I think this is a tremendous lesson. Mr. GOODELL. If the gentleman will yield, I think there is an inter- esting aspect in terms of discrimination or lack of discrimination as a factor in their success. I don't say that discrimination is not a factor but if the Negro graduate does somewhat better, it would indicate they are overcoming a substantial effect of the discrimination. Would you agree with that? Mr. H~&nms. I don't know if it is relevant to this conimittee, but there has been a study of the degree to which Negroes who serve in the Armed Forces do much better after termination. That is another type of exposure we could get a measure on. Mr. GOODELL. Just to complete what Mr. Harris brought out here.~ It seemed to me the urban enrollee dropped out less often than the rurals. Mr. }L&m~rs. The urban center enrollee, I believe. Mr. GOODELL. It was a higher percentage. Mr. HARRIs. You may be right. Do you mean those from the urban areas? Mr. GOODELL. From rural areas there was a higher percentage of drop outs. Mr. HARRIS. Part of the problem, I think, is getting a handle on what specific training the rural Job Corpsmen can learn that they feel has applicability when they go back to their areas. This is a very difficult problem. I have surveyed by foot through east- ern Kentucky many times and also West Virginia, and these are areas where you have this problem of what do I do when I get back home. Mr. GOODELL. You did not compare in your studies anywhere the rural Job Corps centers and urban Job Corps center enrollees. Mr. HARRIS We did. Mr. GOODELL. If you had breakdowns it would be helpful. Mr. H~ms. Let me say that we have all of this on cards, we have them in computers, and you can get a variety of breakdowns within the limits of our capability. PAGENO="0951" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3411 There are no secrets as far as we are concerned in any of this. It is all on cards and you can break it down in any way you choose. Mr. GOODELL. Thank you very much for your testimony. Chairman Pi~mrn~s. I have a few questions to direct to you as a sociologist. You have made mention of the fact that a higher per- centage of these youngsters go back home after they get through the course of study in the Job Corps. Do you feel that they lose any of the experience that they have gained by going back home and in many instances have not been able to obtain? Mr. HARRIS. To go away from home and then come back home and find that things have not changed at all is probably as disheartening and disillusioning an experience as anyone can have. I think all of us without exception want in our hearts to go home and be treated better than we were when we left home. Somehow we would like people to recognize that we are improved people for our experience away from home. In many ways going home is the most difficult of all the experiences. I think part of the problem is falling into the old ways when one goes back home-you do find that the mother, father, `brothers, sisters, neighbors, treat you the same as before. I ceretainly could not make much of a case for separating people from their families. I don't think it is desirable. On the other `hand getting that modicum of independence built into them so that they can spring loose, set up their own establishment, apartment, room, or whatever it is, and go home on the weekends would be a very desirable thing, but by the same token people just don't like to become expatriots. They don't like just to go away from home and never come back, either. Our homes are part of all of us and we cannot deny it. It is some balance in there that is the critical element. I don't know if that answers your question. Chairman PERKINS. I would like to have your views. I take it that you have mentioned the success and failures here in the Job Corps if you know of `any other institutions where we have some situations like you describe in your failure pattern-and we could add on to that the lack of basic education, adding to it those who have emotional pr~blems and can't get along with people, and so on-if you know of any other training institutions that perform the service to this type of youngster like the Jc~b Corps is now doing-do you see what I mean? Mr. HARRIS. One thing, that does come to mind, Mr. Chairman, and I am certainly not, an expert on this-I think in New York they have `special schools for backward children, not retarded in the sen'se that they are mentally retarded but that they come from handicapped homes or deprived homes, call it what you will. I think they have done some very significant studies which show those things which should be done to them in their education that sort of puts some `meat on the bones and those things which should not. I thmk this is the sort of thing which would be very helpful to the Job Corps. Of course, those studies are probably dealing with younger students for the most part. I think all we can get here in the way of PAGENO="0952" 3412 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 experience would be very helpful. I say if anything, all of us have missed this and not paid too much attention to this problem. Chairman PERKINS. Just assume we have a juvenile offender and he is enrolled in the Job Corps and his character is being molded, the capacity to learn; do you feel those qualities are of sufficient im- portance aside from the employment factor to keep the Job Corps in operation? Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Chairman, you have touched upon something that .1 do feel keenly about as a sociologist and as a citizen. I think we have to have a very careful reexamination of all govern- mental programs, not just the Job Corps, but local and State pro- grains, too, of what we do with these kids that have been criminal. Chairman PERKINS. I agree with you. Mr. HARRIS. I think it is fair to say the Job Corps would like to screen out these criminals. Chairman PERKINS. You know the schools today are not handling this type of youngster. Mr. HARRIS. That is the trouble. Everybody wants to show such a good record by avoiding all the tough cases that therefore the tough eases just wander free and then they cause all of the damage. Chairman PERKINS. That has been the difficulty with our vocational institutions today. They have a high placement record. They want to retain that high placement record and they want everything that is just perfect and normal for them to do so and we have overlooked the problem youngster in this country. Do you agree with that statement? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir, absolutely. I feel it is almost as though we wished these youngsters would go out of sight so that we could not see them. I think it is the Government's responsibility to see that programs are developed-local, State, and Federal-to do something with them other than just letting them run free on the streets. I feel that as deeply as anything. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you think as a sociologist that our greatest period of learning lays ahead insofar as dealing with this problem youngster that lacks basic education and that we should continue for the period of time with this experimentation, if you want to use that terminology where we are obtaining valuable information that we can pass along to our other school systems and industry by keeping the Job Corps in operation in the future. I am just asking you that question now as a sociologist, and with- out even cutting it back on expenditures. Mr. HARRIS. Let me say that that does not come out of our surveys that we have done for the Job Corps necessarily, we not only don't have the benchmarks to know what can be done but we have let pass out of existence it seems to me something-I will put it this way: If you can say on balance the net effect has been positive, that is a gain. I would be very worried about wiping out something that you think on balance is positive, particularly when we see what happens from lack of action. Chairman PERxn~S. At this period in American history that we are going through at present, you would be most reluctant if you PAGENO="0953" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3413: were in a position to make a judgment to cut the Job Corps program back to any degree? I am just asking you that as a sociologist. Mr. HARRIS. I think we are in the position of being caught with. less, not with more. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ayres? Mr. AYRES. In view of the fact of the proven capabilities of Mr.. Harris' organization, and in view of the fact that the executive branch has spent thousands of dollars on surveys, I think we might break prec- edent and utilize the Harris service in the legislative branch. Perhaps as a good starting point we might find out what is going to happen in the country with the students who cannot carry a load and are placed in categories in schools and thus become dropouts. I would be very much interested in you authorizing or suggesting that this committee hire the services of Mr. Harris to determine what is going to happen if the track system is abandoned. Chairman PERKINS. I know my colleague from Ohio will bring that up before the committee some time for a general discussion. Mr. Harris, just an elementary proposition-our schools in this country are not set up today to handle the type .of problem child that the Job Corps is dealing with; is that correct? Mr. HARRIS. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Were you going to say something else? Mr. HARRIS. As Congressman Ayres said, I would be delighted to do it. Not only with the legislative but with the judicial as well. Some- how the arms of government do not seem to be able to generate their own objective facts which are so critical to evaluation. I think the judicial, of all the branches-we are in legislative chambers here-gets into some terrible troubles debating matters of fact when indeed facts should be a factor, not a matter of opinion. I think it is a terrible kind of encumbrance to operate under. Asser- tion then takes the place of fact. We should accept fact and we can have all of the arguments, debates, and disagreements over what we do about those facts. If we don't agree what the facts are we will be hit by the blind side every Monday morning, I fear, for a long time to come. Mr. AmES. As you pointed out, I think many of .these congressional questionnaires which go out are misinterpreted because, as you said, number one, you don't know where it is being returned from, and number two, the segments of our society are more inclined to answer questionnaires but they are all registered voters. So you could say 60 percent of the people in my district feel this way because you have a certain percentage of returns but you may have only heard from those who agree with your position so therefore you are inclined to agree this sho~u1d be done. Mr. HARRIS. We all tend to agree with those results that feed our preconceived notions. It is hard the other way. Chairman PERKINS. I think we all agree that we do not have resi- dential centers in operation in this country at this time to do this type of training for the youngsters that are now in the Job Corps. Am I correct on that? PAGENO="0954" 3414 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. HARRIS. I am not an authority on that, Mr. Chairman, but it is my impression that we do not have them. Chairman PERKINS. Until we get the facilities constructed, it would just point up hOw grave the error would be if we undertook to cut back on the Job Corps. Is that correct? Mr. HAiuus. Mr. Chairman, I might say if you leave aside just the Job Corps as such because I don't want to appear here just as a special pleader for the Job Corps, but it would seem to me if you included the Job Corps and a lot of other things, private things, local, State, and national, it is apparent we have a paucity of facilities not an over- abundance of facilities. I think this is the critical point. I don't see how anyone can say that America for all of our wealth and affluence and growth and develqpment has done the job of taking care of the basic psychic needs just to be an independent, self-respecting human being of many of our people. This is true, and I think it is one of the gaping holes for all of the claims that we have about our country. Chairman PERKINS. From the standpoint of the lack of evaluation, you have made mention of the fact that many of the governmental agencies do not evaluate their success and failures to the extent they should be evaluated. You pointed out that applies not only to the Job Corps but you feel that the office of Economic Opportunity is taking advantage of the shortcomings as much so as any other infant agency that you know of. Mr. HARRIS. I gather that advice today did do something. I don't want to open a can of worms on this, but I would say if it is the Depart- ment of Agriculture or the Department of Labor or the Department of State, even DOD, which is modernized a great deal, I still have a feel- ing that the Government is somewhat notorious by its undertaking rather vast programs and then leaving to chance what their real impact is. There are lots of claims around campaign time pro and con about these things but I am afraid they are subject to the vagaries of extreme partisanship. One thing I might say which I don't mean as a reflection at all on anyone here or the Congress as a whole but I must say, from my own experience that men in elective offices are extraordinarily sensitive about where they stand themselves, and for the life of me, I think in terms of their own individuality this ought to be translated more into the programs they generate. Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for your appearance here, Mr. Harris. I know the committee appreciate your appearance. You have been most helpful in making some definite clarifications which have been most outstanding during the course of these hearings. The committee will recess until 2 p.m. (Whereupon, at 1:15 the committee was recessed to reconvene at 2 p.m. the same day.) AFTERNOON SESSION Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you back before the committee again, Sargent Shriver. PAGENO="0955" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3415 We have been running along here for several weeks. One of the prin- ~cipa1 targets has been your operation of the Job Corps. We are de- lighted that you are back with us again. I know the Members will have several questions. This morning we had a most interesting witness, Mr. Lou Harris. In the course of your remarks, you may tell us whether you or any of your corps of workers ever undertook to suppress this Harris report, whether you have benefitted from the Harris report. I notice you have a prepared statement. You may proceed in any way that you prefer. STATEMENT OP SARGENT SHRIVER, DIRECTOR, OYFICE OP ECONOMIC OPPORTUI~ITY Mr. SHRIVER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and Members of the committee. Five months ago this committee was presented with a tightened and strengthened version of the Economic Opportunity Act proposed by this administration for fiscal year 1968. Two months later a substitute bill was introduced by certain Mem- bers of this committee. In your consideration of antipoverty legislation you have held more than 6 weeks of hearings and listened to more than 100 witnesses-the :great majority of them from outside Government, and many of them from both national political parties. I am glad to have this opportunity to sum up the record as it looks to me. The first question at which you have taken a long, hard look is this: Should there be an Office of Econom~c Opportunity? Of the 97 pub- lic witnesses who have appeared before you, 64 have addressed them- selves to this question in their testimony. Of these, oniy one called for the elimination of OEO, the inde- pendent agency the Congress established to hear and serve the needs ~of the poor. As compared to this solitary witness, here are some of the witnesses who voiced a strong appeal for the continuation of OEO: Mitchell Ginsberg, distinguished scholar and commissioner of wel- fare of New York City-speaking for the National Association of Social Workers. Andrew Biemiller, legislative director of the AFL-CIO, speaking for 14 million American working men and women. Monsignor Corcoran, executive secretary of the National Confer- ence of Catholic Charities, speaking for millions of fellow Americans. Rabbi Richard Hirsch, director of the Religious Action Center, speaking on behalf of the Interreligious Committee Against Poverty, a coordinating body of all religious groups in America. Mrs. Bruce Benson, vice president of the League of Women Voters, speaking on behalf of thousands of informed and active women across America. Miss Dorothy Height, president of the National Council of Negro Women, representing tens of thousands of women long active in the struggle against poverty. PAGENO="0956" 3416 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Joseph Barr, mayor of Pittsburgh, and president of the United States Conference of Mayors, speaking for the chief executives of the Nation's 600 largest cities. Whitney Young, director of the National Urban League, distin- guished. civil rights leader. Arthur FlenMning, president of the University of Oregon, former Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, and representing the National Council of Churches. Clarence Mitchell, Washington representative of the NAACP,. speaking for half a million members of that organization. William Gossett, president-elect bf the American Bar Association,. thousands of whose members have already been helpful in the War on Poverty. Richard Boone, director of the Citizen's Crusade Against Poverty,. a coalition of over 100 national organizations in every walk of Amer- ican life. Mrs. Fred Harris, speaking technically only for herself, but in effect, speaking for millions of Americans on Indian reservations, in migrant labor streams, and in rural America. She is the wife of Senator Fred Harris from the State of Oklahoma. I could go on and on.. The 4,000. pages of testimony already in your record are replete with the names of others-business~ leaders, health experts, conserva- tionists, veterans, religious leaders, women-the whole spectnim of American society-speaking with one voice. "We need the OEO"-as it is or strengthened. Another major issue that came before this committee was whether or not Job Corps should be converted into a vocational education program under the Office of Education. Those in our country most familiar with Job Corps said: It should not. The Secretary of Labor said: "No." Top officials of HEW said: "No." Dean William Perimutter of the State College of New York said G. C. Whitaker, board chairman of Graflex, said: "No." Dr. Spencer Smith of the Citizen's Committee on Natural Resources,. said: "No." These were some of the witnesses who saw the value of Job Corps.. They want it kept a part of OEO to serve-in cooperation with American business-the hardest hit of the poor. Just today, the Director of the Job Corps received a letter from the Governor of Indiana which I should like to quote: DEAR Mn. KELLY: The State of Indiana thanks the United States Job Corps for the work done by 108 of its men from Camp Atterberry in helping clear the dead alewife fish from the Indiana Shores of Lake Michigan. The men worked for two and one-half days in Michigan City, Beverly Shores, Gary, East Chicago, and Whiting. They worked hard despite the unpleasantness of their task and their deportment was excellent. These communities, especially Beverly Shores, could not have met this hazard to the public health without the helping hand from the Job Corpsmen. Again, we thank you and the men of the Camp Atterberry Corps Center. Sincerely yours, ROGERT D. BRANIGIN, Governor of Indiana. PAGENO="0957" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3417 Another big issue concerned Headstart. Should it also be trans- ferred to the Office of Education? Here too, the record is clear. While some educators, testifying on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act have said that Headstart should be transferred- those who are experts on the subject of poverty say, "No." Headstart is more than an educational program. It affects the total life and culture of the child-his health, his parents, behavior, environ- ment, diet and outlook. The entire program is directly related to the community action effort. Your witnesses agreed that Headstart should remain a part of OEO. Another question concerned the earmarking of funds. No witness nor any Member of Congress suggested that local community initia- tive be limited by the earmarking of funds. To the contrary, all wit- nesses speaking on the issue strongly urged that there be no earmarking of community action funds. Every witness who commented on local share, urged a return to the 90-10 Federal-local matching requirement, rather than an increase in the share required by local communities. This testimony runs con- trary to the proposal of the Opportunity Crusade that even greater funds be demanded from the local communities. OEO is sometimes accused of spending too much-but the witnesses who appeared here seem to be saying exactly the opposite: OEO is not spending nearly enough. Whitney Young said we should spend at least $10 billion per year. AFL-CIO said spend more money. The Citizen's Crusade Against Poverty said spend more. Clarence Mitchell of the NAACP said spend more. The representatives of America's bar associations-not just the American Bar Association but the National Bar Association, the Trial Lawyers Association, the National Legal Aid and Public De- fenders Association, Republicans as well as Democrats-urged the Legal Services Program spend three times as much as now. Educators said: "Double Upward Bound." Mayors asked for twice as many Neighborhood Youth Corps enrollees. The Governor of Alaska, for one, urged us to double VISTA. And, following the recent trouble in Detroit, Governor Romney sent an urgent telegram requesting 200 additional VISTA volunteers. I am happy to tell you that by 5 p.m. of the day the Governor sent the telegram, 35 VISTA volunteers arrived. Forty-six arriveil Satur- day; 50 arrived Sunday; 55 more will be there today; 2 will arrive tomorrow, and 57 more on Wednesday. This is a poverty program in action where it is needed. And it is needed everywhere. That's the record. You heard it. I heard it. The American public has heard it. No one can conclude from the testimony that OEO is not doing its jobs. Its performance is known and its record is clear. On the other hand, what witness or `what group has spoken on behalf of the proposed Opportunity Crusade ~ No one said, let's try something else. No witness has explained why the substitute bill'would provide a better program. Where were the witnesses who thought OEO should be dismantled PAGENO="0958" 3418 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 196 ~ and destroyed? Only the U.S. Chamber of Commerce thought Job Corps and Jlieadstart should be shifted. But, not even the Chamber of Commerce said that OEO should be eliminated. Who came here to say OEO should be given less money? No one. The record is clear. OEO has been given bipartisan support to speak and work on behalf of America's poor. It has been given bipartisan support for the President's request to a $2.06 billion approporiation. Now it is our urgent responsibility to let the poor of urban and rural America know that it is not a question of how long it `will take to defeat poverty, but how soon. Since you began your hearing, American streets have become Amer. ican battlegrounds. Instead of guns and butter, it seems now to be guns and guns. Let me make my position unmistakably clear. When I became Director of OEO, I took an oath-a simple oath to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I consider those who would mock our laws, shatter our peace, burn our homes, and kill our people to be enemies of our country. To pro- mote, encourage, tolerate, or excuse violence is against every inten- tion I have had, against every action I have taken since I caine to Washingtonin 1961. After the riots began, voices of reason and order swiftly announced: "We will not tolerate violence. We will not permit lawlessness." And they are right. But there are voices that say, "WTe cannot, as. a Nation, tolerate the conditions tknt produce violence and lawlessness." And they are right, too. The programs of the war on poverty and the countless people. who have volunteered or are employed to carry them out are squarely on the side of law and order. Yet, we have seen cynical attempts to create doubt and fear about the role of the war on poverty in the ~ftermath of violence and disorder. Such attempts are unworthy of any public official or private citizen.. And they cannot be permitted to stay the hand or weaken the resolve of Congress in passing that legislation most needed to eliminate dis- content and eradicate the causes of violence and disorder. Let there be no mistake about it. RiOts that barnstorm the country in June, July, and August are not just quaint happenings. Beneath the surface of America's cities is a.n explosive store of discontent waiting for a random spark to ignite it. Ten years ago James Conant `wrote a book on slums and schools in `which he coined a phrase "social dynamite." At that time he described what was in store for all of us if `we fail to do something about the social dynamite and the slums. Today, finally, many Americans are beginning to recognize that he~ was not using merely a metaphor to explain the situation. He was talking about the truth-social dynamite. This social dynamite comes from discontent with joblessness, dis- content with inhuman housing, discontent with money-hungry land- lords and merchants, discontent `with the raw differences between PAGENO="0959" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3419 justice, health, and convenience for the poor and the rest of America. These are the combustibles that fire up a riot. But even if there were no riots, even if every impoverished section of America remained quiet and uncomplaining, the conditions are wrong. They are wrong socially, politically, and morally. And they just must be corrected-wherever they exist. Through the Economic Opportunity legislation, you have provided a variety of mechanisms in the best traditions of America to right these wrongs. The 4,000 pages of testimony accumulated in these hearings provide ample evidence they are working. But what about these charges that employees of antipoverty pro- grams have been involved in stimulating, encouraging, and partici- pating in acts of violence? We have canvassed the cities and have found that these allegations are simply not true. To the contrary. In most every one of the 1,050 communities where community action exists, there is ample evidence that the CAA is calming fears and frustrations: bridging the communications gap between the poor and the rest of the community, providing the op- portunities that put people to work, giving them training and educa- tion, and showing them that health and justice exist for them right where they live. These efforts are recognized across the Nation. The Honorable Harold M. Tollesfson, mayor of Tacoma, Wash., and the president of the National League of Cities said: We are distributed at recent charges. . . that the anti-poverty program has been responsible for stirring up unrest. The anti-poverty program in city after city has been responsible for just the opposite of that. Because of the riots and the problems they reflect, Cardinal O'Boyle of Washington yesterday called for the development of a stronger antipoverty program "whatever the cost." Last Friday, John Lindsay, the Republican mayor of New. York, defended the antipoverty program strongly when asked if the arrest of four young participants reflected the failure of the program. It is not the failure of the program, he said. Since July 1, we have recruited 35,000 youngsters . . . in the Neighborhood Youth Corps. If you only recruit youngsters who never had a problem or never will have a problem, then the program is a failure. Let me back up these comments with additional facts. In the 27 cities that have had riots this summer, there are 12,128 persons who are direct employees of OEO-funded agencies. Most of them are neighborhood workers, health aids, clerical staff, commu- ity organizers, and live in or near the ghetto neighborhoods in which the riots occurred. In these 27 cities, a total of 6,733 persons were arrested. In the same 27 cities, six of the 12,128. paid poverty workers were arrested. To date, none of the six has come to trial andnone has been convicted. A second chart shows in 27 cities, the total estimated damage to buildings in the ghettos is $273,652,800. OEO pays the rent on 491 facilities in these 27 cities. These are local neighborhood centers, sub- centers, outreach centers, from which the war on poverty attempts PAGENO="0960" :3420 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~NTS OF 1967 *to reach the poor and to help them to help themselves-491 such facili- ties-not a single one of all of these facilities was burned. Not a single one was looted. And the total damage was confined to a few broken plate glass windows. Why? Because like buildings display- ing the Red Cross in time of war, the people recognized that~ these facilities were among the fewpiaces where they could ftnd refuge and aid. In Detroit alone, 3,783 persons were arrested. There are 1,547 paid antipoverty workers in that city but not a single one is under arrest. The bottom chart there which you can see shows the central part of the city of Detroit. The crosshatched area is the area of Detroit where there were riots. The red dots show the locations of the facilities being rented by OEO as centers for the war against poverty. All but one of those as you can see is right in the heart of the riot area. This chart shows where the centers were located. It shows where the riots have taken place, and it illustrates how it is almost a miracle that those buildings in the middle of the riot remained untouched or uuharmed except to the extent of $840-in Detroit to the extentof $150 and to the extent of $840 for the 27 cities `~sthere riots have occurred across the country in the last few weeks. Let me give you a rundown on cities and a handful of the stories of individual and group heroism that surfaced during these riots. These are the stories that largely have yet to make the national iheadlines. In Detroit, all the centers on this map continued their operations during the entire period of the riot. In the first 2 nights of the riot, These two centers, Western and SOutheastern, were open all night. All the centers were open until 8 p.m. during the night of the holo- caust, and they began closing t.heir doors an hour earlier only when the curfew was established. This is a photograph, a blowup of the substation at 8906 12th Street in Detroit, an area where some of the worst damage was inflicted. This substation, an OEO poverty center, suffered only One broken window- pane. This is the Eastern Community Action Center. You can perhaps see the sign on it at the opposite.end of the photograph. You can see the demolition all over the street. You can also see that the Community action center was untouched. This is another picture in the middle of the riot area, of Detroit. You wouldn't think it was an antipoverty center because it says on the building: "Formosa Garden Chop Sucy Carryout Service", but this is a center that we lease right in the middle and that line of poor peo- ple, both black and white, are waiting for food and medical supplies distributed through the war on poverty. That center, an antipoverty center in the middle of the riot area, was not damaged. Of a total of 1,547 paid antipoverty workers in these and other centers in the city, 1,165 live in or in close proximity to the riot area. In the early stages of the outbursts, these men and women worked continuously, trying to calm the unruly crowds. Toward the end of the riot and even now, neighborhood workers and community orga- PAGENO="0961" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3421 nizers circulated through the area and tried to find out what help was needed in the way of food, clothing, and shelter for the victims burned out. These workers were put into action by the CAP director, Phil Rut- ledge, who was assigned by t.he mayor to head a special con~mittee coordinating the efforts of private and public agencies to aid the vic- tims of the riot.. The four main centers-and they are the biggest red dots on the chart-have been used as food distribution centers for the city of Detroit, even now as this committee meets. In Newark, on the first night of the riot, members of the Com- munity Action staff attempted to disperse the crowd in front of a police station, but were unsuccessful. Throughout the riot, many of the CAP staff continued to get people off the streets. During the worst days and nights, 30 Neighborhood Youth Corps police cadets worked 12-hour shifts. Four were at the 4th precinct which was rushed three times by rioters. The cadets manned the communication system, took over the desk duties, and freed patrolmen for antiriot duties. "They were magnificent," said Newark Police Commissioner Dom- inick A. Spina. Two hundred New York City enrollees working for the Housing Authority `aided in. everything from emergency food distribution to loading and unloading trucks. To the best of our knowledge none of the 2,560 New York City en- rollees is known to have been involved in the rioting or looting, despite the fact that they were right in the middle of the worst hysteria and mob psychology and violence. In Grand Rapids, a week ~ago today, the Community Action agency in that city ordered a task force of street workers into the riot area to help the police. The task force consisted of 16 summer antipoverty workers. It was expanded the next night to 50 summer antipoverty workers. The whites in the group worked in the downtown area and the Negroes moved about the southeast side, telling folks to calm down. Members of the group received police identification cards and some were issued bullhorns. On the second night of rioting, two of them received shotgun wounds during the performance of their duties. The Gra.nd Rapids press described them as a "group of young Negroes bent on trying tO keep Grand Rapids cool." Capt. Francis Pierce, head of the police riot squad, said "They are doing a beautiful job and believe me we appreciate it." The task force of street workers is a $20,000 component of Grand Rapids $49,000 emergency summer program. In Toledo some 25 neighborhood center Outreach workers main- tained the only communication with teenage rioters on Monday and Tuesday nights. Neighborhood poverty centers manned all-night telephones to take complaints and grievances, suggesting every time that they should be resolved in conversation rather than in conflict, in mediation rather than with Molotov cocktails. In city after city, the poverty workers have tried to prevent, not 80-084 0-67--pt. 4-6i PAGENO="0962" 3422 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 cause, riots. When riots did occur, they were working next to the police and national guard to bring an end to the lawlessness. In Elizabeth, N.J., for example, the director of the community action agency, after a night of high tension and some violence, convened a meeting of responsible adult leaders of the Negro community, helped them get up a list of requests, and acted as spokesman for the com- munity in presenting these requests to the mayor. The mayor agreed to most of the requests, which were concerned solely with actions to keep tensions down, including designation of a group of men from the community to tour the streets, talk to young- sters, and help keep the area calm. They wore special identifying insignia bearing the legend "Peace Keeper" which had been selected by the mayor. So far, this band of "Peace Keepers" sometimes walking the streets until the eary morning hours, has proved effective in sparing Elizabeth the agony of a riot. Last weekend, I received a telegram which sunimarizes the effective- ness of the poverty workers. The telegram is from the mayor of Newark, Hugh J. Addonizio: Let there be no mistake about my position in regard to the national antipoverty program. I support the program and all it has done to bring hope to many includ- ing thousands in my own city. Any suggestion or interpretation of remarks attributed to me which suggest I am opposed to antipoverty programs are wrong.. . . There is no mayor anywhere in America who can say he wants the elimination of the anti-poverty program... programs such as our Legal Services Project, Head Start, the Neighborhood Youth Corps, our year-round pre-school and our summer recreation programs are now all indispensable parts of our community's life. Newark and all our cities would be worse without these programs. Whenever manmade tragedy strikes, it is popular to look for a scapegoat. But the time has come for action-not recrimination. I suggest we adopt the position most eloquently stated by Senator Thruston Morton who said last MTednesday: I deplore the irresponsibility of seeking to place blame for a national tragedy. Our time of troubles will not be remedied by blatant accusations and pious political posturing. It is time also for the sense of urgent priorities which led Senator Morton to his recommendation that funds immediately be put into our cities to give jdbs to the jobless and hope to the hopeless. Mayor Cavanagh l1as just sent me this telegram which arrived last night and I would like to quote from it: Employees and enrollees in the Detroit Community Action Program have been very helpful in minimizing the effects of the riot. No known employee of either the CAA or its delegate agencies have been involved in the riot. Only three enrollees out of almost 5,000 in the Neighborhood Youth Corps, youth service corps, and other antipoverty efforts, have been accused of involve- ment in the rioting and looting. Had it not been for the effectiveness of the antipoverty program in providing needed services and building bridges of communication in the community the riot might have been worse. I urge immediate passage of the pending 1967 Economic Opportunity Act Amendments in order to expand badly-needed programs. Signed JERoME P. CAVANAGH, Mayor. I would also like to call your attention to another chart which is over there against the wall. I have been talking up to now about the PAGENO="0963" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3423 number of employees who worked directly for an antipoverty agency like a neighborhood center which is a direct component, let us say, of the OEO. This chart takes a number of cities and gives an idea of the total number of people who a:re funded directly or even indirectly by OEO, people, for example, who work for the YMCA Streets Program in Chicago, people who work in some group attempting to deal with young gangs of people, workers who are working with private agencies and who are right in the middle of the ghettos, right in the middle of where the riots are. Now, it has occurred when one of these young people gets picked up for doing something which somebody thinks is wrong, they are immediately identified or frequently they are identified in the news- paper as an antipoverty worker a:s if they were our direct employees. In many cases they are not, they are indirect employees because the agency for which they work is financed by us, but to give you an idea of the magnitude, just in those cities there which is 10 cities, there were 30,000 such people right in the middle of the riot area. Four workers out of the 30,000 were arrested and charged with something. This does not mean a:nything was proven but they were arrested. Twenty-two participants-that might be somebody like a Neighbor- hood Youth Corps youngster, a participant in an antipoverty pro- gram, 18 of whom as you see were in Cincinnati. The facts that I have presented prove that OEO offers alternatives to violence; tha:t OEO has taught the poor to build up, not tear down; that once the riots began, OEO smothered, not fanned, the flames. Who, then, is responsible for the riots? I mean ultimate respon- sibility, not merely who shot the first gun or looted the first store. I believe that all America is responsible. All of us here in this room. We are all actors in this American tragedy. We are in trouble because too many Americans prefer not to know each other. Not to care about each other. As Governor Romney said just re- cently, "Most white people do not know any Negroes. Most Negroes do not know any white people." This terrible isolation is what breeds distrust and hatred. I am not saying Americans must all become friendly with each other or that privacy is evil. I'm just saying that the ignorance of our fellow citizen's needs destroys more than it protects. Our country is destroyed when the man in the suburban house in Chevy Chase does not know about the man in the ghetto house in Cardozo. Our country is destroyed when the affluent know more about the Beverly Hillbillies than the destitute poor in the Appalachian hollows in Kentucky or West Virginia. Our country is destroyed when the scourage of rat bites on the bodies than a human being a few blocks over on First Avenue. Our country is destroyed when we are softhearted about sending slum kids to summer camp but then softheaded about job training programs for their unemployed fathers. Our country is destroyed when the scourge of rat bites on the bodies of poor children is treated as a laughing matter and funds are denied which could put an end to this infestation. PAGENO="0964" 3424 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In Chicago, an OEO program has demonstrated that ra:ts can be eradicated on a city-wide basis. Yet, we refuse to extend our knowl- edge to benefit the poor of every city. Our country is destroyed in a thousand ways day by day by acts repeated like these. It is foolish to think the country can go on like this. More and more the poor who are cut off from American life are repeating the sentiment of Churchill when someone tried to ignore Britain. Churchill said: "We will not be dealt with as part of a blob." And we in America cannot treat the poor as a blob. Their needs must be met in the same manner and speed that the appetites of the affluent are satisfied. The need for jobs. The need for education. The need for decent housing. The need for health. The need for justice. There must be a total elimination of poverty. Right now, OEO funding in Detroit represents only 14 percent of the need that this city has expressed. In Hartford, we are spending only 6 percent of that city's needs. New York gets 10 percent of its need. Atlanta gets 21 percent. But we cannot use lack of money as an excuse for lack of effort. What we don't have in financial resources we must make up in human resources. The administration bill calls for a massive effort to create an army of volUnteers for the war on poverty to supplement the 375,000 Amer- icans who, this year alone~ joined with us in the battle. But, in addition, to this citizens volunteer corps, why can't the suc- cessful businessmen in our cities devote a few hours a week to work- ing with the struggling businessmen in the slums? Why can't a Catholic or Protestant parish in a suburban area adopt. a church in the inner city? Why can't our country clubs allow poor children to sw-un in the pool on Mondays when the clubs are closed? Why can't architects devote some of their time working with the poor to build new communities? OEO has funded just such a program in New York. It is a pro- gram called ARCH. With adequate funding, every community in America could have a program of this same type. In short, why can't all Americans begin to use the alternative of democracy-because without democracy, there is no alternative. In conclusions, I want to say a word about ghettos. Right away we think of a city slum. But there is another kind of ghetto-an interior ghetto of the mind where we seal off parts of democracy that don't suit us, where we box off our obligations to justice and shut out our commitments to fairness. This ghetto of the mind is no less stinking and rotten than the ghetto of the city. Right n~w, all of us have ghettos to get out of. The soonei~ we be- gin, the sooner this country can become what its founders meant it to be. In truth, the war on poverty is not being fought for the ioor. It is PAGENO="0965" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3425 for all Americans-because all Americans stand to gain by it. Not just with peace in our cities, but also peace in our hearts. Five years ago a young and valiant President, spea.king on the steps of the Capitol of the United States, spoke these words: To those peoples in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help them- selves, for whatever period is required-not because the communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. What President Kennedy, 5 years ago, pledged to the poor and destitute beyond the shores of America, we must now, both pledge and give to those who live in the ghettos of our cities and the blighted areas of rural America. We must do it "not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right." That completes my prepared testimony, Mr. Chairman. Mr. SHRIv~. Mr. Chaiman, I have here a telegram I think might be of some interest to the committee. It is from the Detroit, Mich., OEO office. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, the telegram will be in- serted in the record at this point. (The telegram referred to follows:) [Telegram] JULY 31, 1967. To: SARGENT SHRIVEn. Last Friday afternoon, July 29, at 5:00 p.m., the VISTA headquarters re- ceived a telegram from Governor George Romney approving the assignment of 200 VISTA Volunteers to assist in Detroit's rehabilitation efforts. The Vol- iinteers were requested by the Governor to work with the Mayor's Committee for Human Resources Development in Detroit. VISTA staff members were on the ground in Detroit in a matter of hours. Because of the necessity for the closest coordination with Cyrus Vance's staff, the Mayor's office and Bill Canon of the Bureau of the Budget, I personally went to Detroit `to supervise the operation. Soon after Governor Romney's request for Volunteers, the first Volunteers were in Detroit. Additional contingents will arrive in the city over the' next three days. The schedule of their arrival for emergency duty is as follows: Friday VISTAs already in Detroit 32 Saturday VISTA Volunteers 45 Sunday VISTA Volunteers 20 Monday VISTA Volunteers 55 Tuesday VISTA Volunteers 48 Wednesday VISTA Associates 15 Volunteer total 215 Volunteers are being lodged in the Tuller and Strathmore Hotels near the target areas. They are being `moved immediately into special VISTA briefing sessions on the purpose of VISTA's mission in Detroit and `on the special discipline and curfews required in light of the disturbances. All Volunteers are also receiving a Special three-hour `briefing by the Mayor's Committee on the immediate problems and needs in target areas and on services available. VISTA Volunteers are moving out and going to work. They are helping to reinforce CAP neighborhood staffs in the four Administrative Centers and * eighteen Local Subcenters. They are being sent to the city's major emergency receiving hospital, Detroit General, to supplement overtaxed and exhausted PAGENO="0966" 3426 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 staffs. They are moving into the Neighborhood Legal Services headquarters and the City Prosecutor's office in police headquarters to assist in interviewing and processing that week's staggering 4,000 arrests. (Normally, felony arrests in Detroit run around 8,000 a year.) Their goal is both to relieve massive clerical and legal problems and to facilitate release on bond of citizens so that they can return to their jobs and families. VISTA Volunteers are manning an emergency rat control project and working out of Archdiocese Headstart Centers locating children absent since the riots began. And, VISTA Volunteers are boarding donated dump trucks for clean-up campaigns. During the crisis itself, VISTA Volunteers already in Detroit repeatedly ex- posed themselves to sniper fire in order to assist refugees, report disasters and help direct relief agencies to areas of greatest need. Others performed small and sometimes men'ial tasks that took some of the burden off overworked local staff. The Volunteers are being supervised by 20 VISTA staff members from the VISTA office and VISTA Regional Training Centers. Their work is at all times being closely coordinated with Mr. Vance's office and with the Mayor's Com- mittee for Human Resources Development. One of the most important efforts now is to put the community in a position to help rebuild itself. To further this `objective, VISTA is launching a campaign to recruit ghetto residents to serve as VISTA Associates. On Wednesday, the first fifteen VISTA Associates will be -selected. Additional Associates will be added in the coming days. VISTA regards the recruitment of local people to carry on work begun on an emergency basis by VISTAs themselves as a high priority endeavor. BILL GROOK, Assistant Directov T~LSTA. Chairman PERKINS. WThile we are at this stage of placing docu- ments into our record, I have here four letters written to me recently. The first three are in answer to my telegram requesting the views of these men concerning the amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act. They are from Don K. Price, dean of Harvard's School of Govei~nment; Stephen K. Bailey, dean of The Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs of the Syracuse University; and Ber- nard L. G-ladieux, a partner in the management consultant firm of Knight & Gladieux of New York City, respectively. The fourth letter is from a fellow Congressman out of New York, Leonard Farbstein of the 19th District, in which he sites his views on the same subject of the amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act with specific reference to the reincorporation of section 206 (b) which is of particular interest to him. Without objection, it is so ordered that these letters be made a part of our hearing record at this point. (The letters follow:) HARVARD UNIVERSITY, JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY SCHOOL OF GOvERNMENT, Cambridge, Mass., July 27, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Education and Labor Committee, U.s. House 01 Representatives. Ra~/- burn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR Mn. PERKINS: I am writing in reply to your telegram of July 24. asking my opinion regarding the proposal to transfer the activities of the Office of Economic Opportunity to the several Executive departments w-ith related func- tions. For the typical governmental activities, the arguments against having operat- ing programs in the Executive Office of the President, and in favor of assigning programs to the permanent departments, are of course valid. On the other hand, I believe that programs of an emergency nature may from PAGENO="0967" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3427 time to time require administrative arrangements that provide for more initiative and flexible executive direction than can be provided by the regularly established personnel and procedures. Some of the programs during the Depression period and the Second World War were cases in point. It seems to me that the current situation, as the events in some of our major cities during the past few weeks suggest, similarly requires exceptional treatment. While I do not pretend to have studied this particular administrative problem closely, and hence cannot express a detailed professional opinion on it, I have followed it generally and with great interest. If I were a member of Congress, I would, under the present circumstances, rote to extend and strengthen the role of the OEO, and oppose any move to abolish it or curtail its functions. Yours sincerely, DON I(. PRICE, Dean. SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY, THE MAXWELL SCHOOL OF CITIZENSHIP AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS, Syracuse, N.Y., July 28, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Waähington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: This letter is in response to your telegram of July 21, 1967, on the subject of the appropriate administrative arrangements in the Executive Branch for the Anti-Poverty Programs. I wish it were possible to set forth a series of immutable principles of public administration which could govern specific organizational dilemmas of the kind which you have posed. Alas, there are none. Like law, public administration is redolent with conflicting precedents and precepts. Traditional academic defini- tions of terms like "staff," "line," "span of control," "coordination," "hierarchy," "unity of command," are inherently ambiguous. Their utility is deeply contextual. Their application to a given situation is inevitably conditioned by prior assump- tions of purposes to be served of existing political and administrative reality, and of the probably consequences of changing what presently exists. Those who would scotch OEO on the grounds that it violates principles of good administration are as guilty of rationalization and speciousness as those who would defend it on the grounds of a priori administrative principles. Each side may think it is talking about principles of administration. In realty it is talking politics, even though administrative consequences are involved. My strong preference would be to leave OEO where it is-at least for the time being. My judgment stems from the assumption that the reason OEO was placed initially in the Executive office of the President was that that is where the Presi- dent and the Congress believed it belonged. My hunch is that their appraisal of reality in 1964 was something as follows: (1) Federal anti-poverty programs have been around in one form or an- other at least since the New Deal. They are lodged in a score of federal de- partments and agencies, notably HEW, HUD, Labor, Agriculture, Commerce, and Interior. (2) These programs have been fragmented, and whatever their segmental successes, they have failed to accomplish the basic goal of abolishing intract- able pockets of poverty in the United States. (3) It is almost impossible for one line department or agency to accept direction and coordination by another line department or agency at the same level of command. (4) Coordination of programs across departmental lines by informal or formal interagency committees is cumbersome at best, and, where long- standing and deep programmatic eommittments exist within participating agencies, interagency committees often manufacture and exacerbate rather `than temper and de-fuse administrative tensions. (5) A total "war on poverty" needs a top staff which can operate through many traditional or stepped up programs in existing departments and agencies, but which can relate these several activities to an overarching objective. (6) `Such a top staff, for reasons suggested in (3) and (4) above, cannot PAGENO="0968" 3428 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT. AMENDMENTS OF 1967 function effectively within an existing department or agency, nor can it develop a meaningful role as a new agency at simply an equivalent hier- archial level. (7) On the organization chart of the Executive Branch, the only box above Departments and Agencies and below the President is the Executive Office of the President- a congeries of staff offices and assistants. (8) But assigning OEO to EOP with a staff function only would be tantamount to making an already overburdened President the only effective line officer for the Anti-Poverty Program as a whole. (9) Giving OEO line responsibility of its own, and additional funding responsibilities for programs carried out through traditional departments and agencies, is the only way to insure OEO sufficient status and power to give it a chance of success in the implementation and coordination of an over all anti-poverty strategy. (10) Therefore, the principle of using EOP for Presidential staff func- tions only will in this ease be violated in the interest of achieving an over- arching goal in a field dominated by traditional, complex, multi-departmental jurisdictions and vested interests. If these were in fact the considerations which led the President and the Con- gress to establish OEO in the Executive Office of the President, I see nothing in the present or~ in the immediate future to suggest that this initial reasoning was wrong or that its subsequent effects should be rescinded. The conditions operating in 19G4 are still with us. To redistribute OEO functions to old line departments and agencies would be to cure diseases of the extremities by lopping off the head. This makes no sense to me: If anything, OEO needs more power rather than less. The problems of inter-departmental program coordination are real and they are difficult. But surely they are not solved by reducing ~r abolishing the only in- struments of central perspective and influence which the Executive Branch possesses. it is possible that a first rate study and analysis of the Executive Office of the President is needed, and that the name, title, and functions of OEO should be adjusted to conform to a new pattern of administrative organization within EOP. (Why, for example, should the Office of the Secretary of Defense be so much better equipped with staff and with cross-cutting Assistant Secretaries than the Executive Office of the President of the United States?) But to abolish OEO and to scatter its functions among cabinet departments and independent agencies would be .to turn the "war on poverty" into a series of unrelated and potentially chaotic skirmishes. The administrative diseases of the modern nation-states are not cured by a reversion to feudalism. Thrust and creativity and energy are not promoted by assigning new and bold tasks to already preoccupied officials in traditional agencies. Coordinating the Great Society programs is a troublesome problem. I would only argue that it is not to be accomplished by dismantling the few coordinating and innovating mechanisms which presently exist. I cannot refrain from one postscript. This letter is being written after a week of ghetto riots throughout the nation. Rioting is simply one of the ugly faces of poverty and discrimination. Some Congressmen seem satisfied with cries for law and order. But law and order are the effects as well as the causes of domestic tranquility. There are four basic cures for urban riots: environmental decency, education, employment, and the dignity that comes from a sense of at least a minimum income combined with a sense of equal rights and equal opportunity. As I understand it, the administration's anti-poverty and compensatory edu- cation programs are aimed at most of these basic issues. I am convinced that the nation needs to do m.ore-especially in guaranteeing a minimum income paid without the indignity of welfare investigations. But it seems to me ironical in the extreme that Congress should he consider- ing the administrative dismantling of OEO at this particular moment of natural pathology. With warm personal regards. Sincerely, STEPHEN K. BAILEY, Dean and President, American Society for Public Administration. PAGENO="0969" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3429 KNIGHT & GLADIEUX, MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS, New York, N.Y., July 28, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Cha1rman~, Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Washington, DXI. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PERKINS: Your telegram of July 21st requesting my views concerning amendments to the Economic Opportunity Act poses an exceedingly difflcu1t~and urgent issue, the resolution of which may be of central importance to the future viability of the program. The issue of whether more effective ad- ministration will be produced by abandoning the OEO as a leadership entity and dispersing its functions among HEW, Labor and other existing agencies is highly complex and not susceptible of facile decision. Nevertheless, a firm deci- sion is critical at this time in order that the program may advance with confi- dence and dispatch. The question of optimum structural arrangements for the anti-poverty pro- gram has been a matter of interest and observation on my part since enactment of the original legislation. I know the agencies involved and am close friends of many of the principal Federal officials concerned. However, most of my in- sights arise from associations with voluntary private agencies which are par- ticipating in the program. First of all, I am a member of the Board of Directors of the National Social Welfare Assembly, which played an active role in support of the original anti-poverty legislation and which maintains a continuing review of its policies and progress. Also, I was an incorporator and am still a member of the Board of Directors of Training Resources for Youth Incorporated, which is administering a vocational training and educational program for dropout youths in the Bedford-Stuyvesant area of New York City under a $4.5 million grant financed by OEO, HEW and the Department of Labor. Finally, I am a Vice President of the YMCA. of Greater New York, which participates in a number of OEO programs as a voluntary agency. All these asspciations have afforded me an appreciation of the need as well as the complexities of current efforts to reduce poverty. There is no absolute or unequivocal solution to the problem of anti-poverty organisation. Nevertheless, on balance, after careful consideration of the alterna- tives, 1 come to the conviction that it would be a mirtake to eliminate OEO as the coordinating and directing center of this great effort. Let me say quickly that iii the opinion of many qualified observers OEO has not been a model of administra- tive efficiency. OEO has lacked some of the conventional organizational and man agement practices which are the hallmark of a well-run agency, even though there has been evidence of tangible improvement in recent months. Furthermore, OEO has not always been effective in its coordinative role partly at least because of jurisdictional obstacles inherent in the huge Federal establishment. More im- portant, however, is the fact that OEO attacked the problems of launching `a massive program with vigor and imagination and must be given full credit for resourcefulness and a capacity for dramatizing `this crucial effort. In my~ judgment, there is cl~ar and manifest need for a central planning, co- ordina:ting and energizing force in this necessarily diffuse program; and this to me is the overriding concern in reaching a decision as to the feasibility of complete operational dispersion. OEO now lends thrust, drive, focus and a point of overall surveillance to the program. Without such, the anti-poverty program would be in danger of dilution, fragmentation and wasteful competition for funds and clientele participation. The fact that OEO does not have and cannot be accorded binding directive powers vis-a-vis the full spectrum of Federal policies and programs affecting poverty in no way lessens the requirement for an independent arm of the Execu- tive Branch which is actively involved in a leadership role. It may well have to exercise its formal coordinating authorities with pragmatic restraint and dis- crimination. But I am confident this will produce a better overall result than the tenuous `and detached role of the proposed Council of Economic Opportunity Advisers contemplated by HR. 10682. Thus, as long as it is national policy to give special emphasis to this critical purpose, so long will it be necessary to have a strong central catalyst where needs, funds and programs are given an overall PAGENO="0970" 3430 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 perspective and where there is broad capacity to innovate, evaluate, monitOr, and, when necessary, administer. Furthermore, in addition to these administrative considerations, I fear the elimination of OEO would be regarded by the country generally and by the dis- advantaged particularly as a manifestation of waning interest and threatened program reduction. OEO has legitimately and effectively served as the principal voice of the poor in the councils of government. Thus, a strong OEO is essential not only for reasons of concentrated emphasis toward a discrete objective but is also highly useful as the visible symbol of a great national uplift effort. While I have no reservations concerning the essentiality of OEO in the im- mediate years ahead (time may well change this), it is an open question as to how far OEO should be operational in the sense that it conducts some programs through its own facilities and resources. It can be argued that such a center should not place itself in a competitive posture vis-a-vis other agencies and other programs, but should be cast primarily in the transcendent role of planning, policy, and exercising surveillance over the total effort. In my judgment, programs should be periodically spun off from OEO following a period of precedent opera- tion and delegated to suitable executive agencies for administration But such delegation or assignment of functions and programs should be essen- tially in the discretion of OEO as to timing and extent and should be subject to its continuing oversight to assure conformity with basic anti-poverty policies and emphases. I am specifically opposed to the mandated assignments stipulated in the substitute bill sponsored by Congressmen Quic, Goodell and others. In summary, the interaction and inherent substantive relationship between all components of the anti-poverty program make a central focus operating within the framework of the Executive Office of the President a prerequisite of good administration by bringing unity and coherence to the nation's strategy against poverty. I, therefore, urge that OEO be retained essentially in its current status under legislative amendments now- being considered. Sincerely yours, BERNARD L. GLADIEUX. JULY 24, 1967. Hon. CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman, (Jommittee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. CHAIa~rAN: I wish to make known to you and to the Members of the Committee on Education and Labor my profound interest in reincorporating section 206(b) of the Economic Opportunity Act into the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1967. Section 206(b) authorizes the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity to operate a small loan program for persons in low-income families, to meet immediate and urgent family needs. It allows the OEO to loan up to $300 to mdi- vidualsat a low interest rate of two per cent per annum. This program is not a social welfare handout. Loans are expected to be repaid with interest, but on terms commensurate with a person's ability to make payments. I believe it is a program which protects the self-respect of the individual, yet allows him an avenue of relief in time of urgent need. In early 1966, a transit strike occurred in New York City. The estimated daily business loss totaled $100 million. Included in this figure were millions of dollars of lost wages to workers who could not work or get to work through no fault of their own. Businessmen affected by the strike found relief through such govern- ment agencies as the Small Business Administration. However, individuals of low-income with little savings and often faced with loan payments, had no means of obtaining loans to see them through this period of temporary unem- ployment. Although serving as the initial impetus for this small loan legislation, this incident in New- York represents only one type of situation which can plague low- income citizens. Natural disasters, civil disorders, and personal emergencies can disrupt their lives. I believe this emergency small loan program provides these citizens with a much needed avenue of assistance. PAGENO="0971" ECONO~[IC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3431 This program was enacted as part of last year's poverty program with $8 million being `appropriated `by the Oongress'. So far, about one-third of this money has been spent. The reason why more mOney was not spent was because QEO was slow in implementing the program. It was only in the last two months of fiscal 1967, that requests were processed by OEO. Almost $2.6 million was funded in this very short period of time. I believe it would be wise to include this small loan program in this year's poverty legislation in order to itssure that the money is used for what it is intended, and to meet the rising demand for pro- gram funds from local communities all over the country. Small loans to individuals to purchase tools, for transportation fare, to buy work clothing, and to obtain and hold jobs, can have a far-reaching impact on the lives of poor families. It has `already reached migrant workers in California whose incomes have been disrupted by floods. It has provided poor tenant families in Mississippi and other Southern states with the means to buy food stamps. It has begun to reach the urban poor in areas like New York City, St. Louis and D~etroit. In my own district, the 19th Congressional District of New York, two loans have recently been made to local agencies: a $150,000 grant to Mobilization for Youth, and a $94,000 grant to the New York Community Development Agency for the Lower West Side `Community Agency. These specific programs await only the signature of the Governor of the State of New York before loan assistance to poor people in the heart of New York City will be available. Mr. Chairman, as head of the distinguished Committee on Education and Labor, I would appreciate your support in seeing this provision incorporated into the Act of 1967. It is a sound program, worthy of the Committee's careful con- sideration. With kind regards, I am Sincerely yours, Hon. LEONARD FARBSTEIN, Member of Congress. Chairman PERKINS. Let me compliment you, Sargent Shriver, on such an outstanding statement. I personally feel that all of us talk about the poverty workers precipitating in riots has been unduly ex- aggerated and I would just hate to think of just what may have taken place, had it not been for the poverty workers serving as a stabilizing factor. I would like to ask you the annual cost of the Job Corps enrollees at the present time. Mr. STIRIVER. The average annual cost is $6,950 per enrollee. I would like to ask Mr. Kelly, the Director of the Job Corps, to come up here to this table and give you answers to such additional questions as you or other members of the committee may have about the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. First tell us whether you ever attempted to supervise the report of the Harris Organization, whether the facts that were 1)olnted up, the shortcomings of the Harris Survey, if you undertook to put those into operation and make them a more effective operation. Mr. SHRIVER. To the best of my knowledge, I certainly never at- tempted to suppress the Harris reports. The Harris report-and I don't think that any member of my staff in the Job Corps or else- where ever attempts to suppress the results of the Harris Surve~v. As I understand it from the Job Corps, and Mr. Kelly runs the Job Corps-I don't follow every day-to-day or hour-to-hour decision-as I understand it, the purpose of employing Mr. Harris' company was to find out what the weaknesses were in the Job `Corps operations and the PAGENO="0972" 3432 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 basis of the facts which were discovered then to improve the day-to- day, month-to-month operation. I think that what Mr. Kelly and his associates have done is to try to utilize those reports to improve their operation. Bill, the question was twofold. Has somebody or anybody in the OEO attempted to suppress these reports, and what have you done with them? Mr. KELLY. No. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, m February righ:t after the first Harris survey was delivered to OEO, a copy of that survey was made available to a reporter here in Washington, and that can be verified, by Mr. Herbert Cramer, who is the Director of Public Affairs for the OEO, because he is the gentleman who made that copy available to not only one reporter but to a number of re- porters who came in and asked for it. So we made no attempt to sup- press it. One of the problems we had was that we had a limited number of copies. We did say to some people if you want to see the Harris survey you should come to our office, our library and you can read it there rather than reordering or spending the money that it would take to reprint a number of copies. We did, however, at the request of this com- mittee -~ Chairman PERKINS. Give us an idea about the changes that have taken place in the operation since this survey. Mr. K~y. We have a chart which we call the New Job Corps. The first Harris survey was why the dropout. That was the question that was asked. Why did we have youngsters drop out of the Job Corps? The kids that were queried, some of them had dropped out in 1955 and some had dropped out in 1956 and some of the reasons they gave for dropping out was that they were homesick, that there had been some fighting in the Job Corps, that there were too many Negroes in the Job Corps, and that they couldn't get the kind of training that they wanted. As a result of the first Harris Survey we came out with a new orien- tation program so that the youngsters who were to be screened for the Job Corps got a truer picture of what the Job Corps was all about. As a matter of fact, we even provided our screeners in the employment service pictures of the Job Corps Centers. We also tightened up dis- cipline in the Job Corps. I issued a code of corpsmen behavior which I believe we inserted in the record the last time we were up here. We a'lso developed and published a. code of staff behavior that we did have up to that point in time. We came out with a screening manual that I think was-here are the two codes of behavior. If we have not put them in the record, with you permission I think it would be well if we could. Chairman PERKINS. Without obje~tion they will be included. (The documents follow:) PAGENO="0973" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3433 Job Corps PAGENO="0974" 3434 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Job Corps flehavjor and Appearance Code Every job has rules on how you should look and act. JOb Corps aleo has such rules. This booklet telle you what they are. By following Job Corps rules you learn to follow the rules of the job you will go to~ after Job Corps. Manners and Appearance Members of the Job Corps are ex- pected to be honest and considerate of others on and off the center, The way you act may decide whether you get or keep a job. The way you look helps people decide what you and Job Corps are like. Travel Note: WHEN YOU CO TO YOUR CENTER Sometimes things go wrong when people travel. If you have any trouble while traveling between your hQme and your Job Corps Center, find the nearest telephone, dial Operator and say: "I want to place a collect call to The number is get in ble is and he will help you. Screener's name " When you Address tell him what your trou- tion~s is The person to see at your center if you have any ques- 4 PAGENO="0975" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3435 THEY AND WE EXPECT THAT YOU WILL: 1. be polite 2. not swear or use dirty words 3. avoid being loud and rowdy ~. be neat, clean, and properly dressed according to center rules 5. Keep hair neat and present- able IN ADDITION: 1. Men must not wear hats or any head coverings in build- ings except when required 2. Men must shave regularly 3. Women must not wear rollers in public areas Attendance and Schedules Members of the Job Corps are ex- pected to behave at the center. as they would on a job. Regular attendance and being on time are needed to hold any job. YOU MUST ATTEND ON TIME: 1. classes 2. work assignments 3. vocational training J~. medical appointments 5. scheduled meetings 6~ fire drills PAGENO="0976" 3436 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 IN ADDITION IT IS EXPECTED THAT: 1. You have permission before leaving the center 2. Your leave or pass is like a vacation from a job, so you will return on time 3. You will obey your center's rules on "lights out" and bed- time 4. You will get out of bed at the required time, and stay up 5. You will carry your identifica- tion as required by the center I r Care of Property Members of the Job Corps are ex- pected to take care of all clothing, equipment, and property. You will have to do this to keep any job. * . .~iot damage property IT IS EXPECTED THAT YOU WILL: 1. Keep assigned living areas and storage places neat, clean, and ready for inspection at any time 2. not damage property 3. not take or use someone else's property with- out permission 4. return borrowed books, tools, and other equipment on time and in good condition 8 PAGENO="0977" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967. 3437 Observing Special Rules Members of the Job Corps are required to follow special rules which are made for their safety and health, and for the smooth operation of the center. YOU MUST NOT: 1. smokein bed 2. have or drink alcoholic beverages at the center 3. hitchhike ~4. drive a vehicle without proper authorization 5. gamble 6. turn in a false fire alarm ~tohitcMtiktng... Obeying Local, State and Federal Laws Almost all members of the Job Corps are citizens of the United States. You have the same rights as any other citizen. You ak~o must obey the same laws as any other citizen. These laws are made to help you. If you break the laws, you may be arrested, fined or jailed. FOR EXAMPLE, IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO: 1. cause physical harm to any other person 2. have or conceal guns, knives or other weapons 3. have, use or supply narcotics ~. supply alcoholic beverages to anyone under age 5. force another to do anything against his will 6. commit a sex offense /0 80-084 0-67--pt. 4-62 PAGENO="0978" 3438 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Only if you follow the Job Corps Behavior and Appearance Code can you be rewarded with in- creased pay, promotions, and extra privileges. Failure to follow these rules may result in loss of pay and promotion, or in discharge from the Job Corps. PAGENO="0979" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3439 ~`age 1ö~4 Line 6 ~enate 7/~i167 Staff Code PAGENO="0980" 3440 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The following establishes standards for Job Corps staff members. The purpose of these standards is to help staff members be effective models for Corpsmembers. These standards emphasize that the way a staff member looks and acts has an important influence on Corps- members. These standards are the minimum required, and do not replace Center regulations, or Civil Service regulations. V Director Job Corps Appearance and Conduct Many Job Corpsmembers come to Job Corps with habits of appearance and conduct that are not acceptable on a job. Job Corps must give them new habits. There are two effective means for accomplishing this goal: example and reins forcement. When a staff member sets a good example, he helps Corpsmembers learn to dress, look, and act in ways that will help them be successful on the job. To set a good example of dress and behavior, Job Corps staff members must meet the same standards that industry requires for compa- rable situations and activities. Where center regulations do not explicitly define dress re- quirements, each staff member is expected to exercise good sense while keeping in mind that an example is being set for Corpsmembers. In no case is bizarre or slovenly dress to be justi- fied on the basis of comfort or informality. 1. Clothes should always be neat and clean. 2. Women's hair styles should be conserv- ative and their make-up moderate. 3. When a staff member wears a beard, he should do so with the knowledge that PAGENO="0981" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3441 his example may be followed by Corps- members and this imitation may reduce a Corpsmember's chance of employ- ment. Staff members must: 1. be particularly careful to come to work on time and to be punctual in meeting their daily schedules, 2. not use vulgar or obscene language, 3. know and comply with regulations on accountability and care of center prop- erty. In addition to being learned by example, posi- tive attitudes and appropriate behavior are also learned through reinforcement. Young people entering this program expect certain rules and regulations. More important, they are in need of structure and a sense of security which comes with the knowledge that the adult staff is able to maintain social control and discipline. Although Job Corps is a volunteer program, there are specific responsibilities and obliga- tions which Corpsmembers must fulfill. The staff must make clear to the Corpsmembers that certain behaviors are not only desirable, but are, in fact, required of all Job Corps men and women. The Job Corps Behavior and Appearance Code, JCH 342.1, is precise in defining what we ex- pect of youth in this program. It is the duty of each staff member to reinforce these behavior and dress requirements. Corpsmembers are required to: 1. report on time for all assignments, 2. attend all educational classes unless there is a valid medical reason, 3. obtain permission to leave Center grounds, 4. maintain personal appearance and be- havior on and off the center which reflects pride both in the individual and in being part of the Job Corps. PAGENO="0982" 3442 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Staff-Corpsmember Relationships Staff-Corpsmember relationships are funda- mentally teacher-student relationships with the important added ingredient of personal con- cern. Spontaneous, honest back-and-forth personal communication and relationships are essential. However- 1. Staff members should not discuss inter- personal staff problems in the presence of Corpsmembers, nor may they date Corpsrnembers. 2. Staff members should keep the respect of Corpsmembers by maintaining a serious workmanlike attitude and by avoiding becoming "One of the boys." 3. Corpsmembers should be encouraged to address staff members. 4. Visits of Corpsmembers to homes of staff members should be governed by center regulations. 5. Staff members should always address Corpsmembers with respect, and main- tain the necessary personal touch by clearly showing interest and regard for Corpsmembers' problems and aspira- tions. The fact that Job Corps is a full-time residen- tial program and that many of these youth come from families which lacked wholesome adult supervision, means that the center staff has a total responsibility for the health, welfare, education and safety of the Corpsmembers. This responsibility includes supervision of the youngster both on and off the center. Staff members can use both rewards and disci- plinary measures to favorably influence the be- havior of Corpsmembers. However, rewards should predominate. Good performance can be reinforced by passes, promotions, living allowance increases, and by commendations-simply by telling Corpsmem- bers that they are doing well. PAGENO="0983" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3443 When it is necessary to change unsatisfactory behavior, staff members should use the diciplin- ary measures of restriction, suspension of privileges, demotion, reprimand, or fines, only after positive efforts to produce improved be- havior have failed. Community Relations The success of a center and of Job Corps in general depends to a great extent upon com- munity acceptance and understanding of the Job Corps program. Staff members are encour- aged to help this acceptance and understanding. This can be done by participating in community activities in their non-duty times, by being careful about conduct and appearance in the community, and by telling community members about Job Corps' aims and accomplishments. This can also be done by taking personal re- sponsibility for the conduct of Corpsmembers when they are in the community. When taking personal responsibility, staff members will be considered in the performance of their duty. PAGENO="0984" 3444 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Kri4j,4y. The second Harris Survey was on the no-show. We found 30 percent of the kids who volunteered to go into the Job Corps, when the time came for them to get on a train or bus to go to the Job Corps Center they didn't show up and they got the titles of being no-shows. We found that one of the reasons why there were no-shows was that some of them got jobs. We found some of them lost interest and, as I recall, this was one of the principal interests why they didn't show up to get their bus ticket. We found out that, they said t.hey heard bad things about the Job Corps and that is the reason they didn't want to go. We did a numberS of things t.here. I mentioned the behavior code. We also shortened the time between screening and issuing of tickets. It had been, as I recall, about five and a half weeks, and we got it down to about two and a half weeks so we were not in the position of their being well motivated but our dragging our feet. so long that they lost interest and wouldn't come. That was the Harris survey No. 2. The Harris Nos. 3 and 4 were aimed at trying to find out from the youngsters and from some of their employers what they thought a.bout the Job Corps and we found out that most of the youngsters, and I think Mr. Harris must have covered this *this morning, most of the youngsters said they thought they were better off as a result of having been in the Job Corps, that many of them that had dropped out indicated a desire to return to the Job Corps. So in kind of summation, Mr. Chairman, we have not tried to suppress the Harris report. Let me say that the Harris report on balance, we paid for it, all of the Harris reports cost as a matter of fact about $142,000. We paid for them. They were an attempt on the part of the Job Corps to find out something about it before it had developed and completely developed the data system. We are going to use this kind of survey much less in this fiscal year and probably by late winter or early spring we will not !be using the survey technique at all because we will have a data system that will be complete enough so that we don't have to take these samples. Chairman PERKINS. Are you making plans to evaluate your progress with Job Corps enrollees? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, sir; we are. Mr. GOTLEIB. As of March 1 of this year the Job Corps evaluation allow-s us to measure and show the individual progress of each corps- man on a n'ionthly basis, his math gains, his reading, social develop- mnent, attendance in classes, participation in extracurricular activities. In addition to that it allows us to follow these youngsters on 6-, 12-, 18-month bases once they leave the Job Corps. Chairman PERKINS. Give us the progress from a. monetary viewpomt. How much has the cost been brought down during the past year? Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman yield first? Chairman PERKINS. I yield. Mr. GOODELL. I think the record should show that the charge of the Harris survey being suppressed did not derive, as far as I am aware, from this side of the committee. I think it was made vocal by Mr. Chris- topher `Weeks, the former Job Corps Director who said it w-as being suppressed. I w-ould only say for the record that many of us have at- PAGENO="0985" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3445 tempted to procure the Harris Surveys since the initial newspaper story broke-when did you say it was, March or February? Mr. KELLY. I think it was February. That is my recollection. That is when the Harris Survey was provided to a couple of newsmen. Mr. GOODELL. Since that time we have been requesting it so we could look it over, and we finally got it when Mr. Shriver appeared before this committee. None of the members of the committee, to my knowl- edge, had a copy of it before. That was the issue before the commit- tee, not a charge of suppression. Mr. KELLY. I don't think I said anything that indicated that you fellows on your side of the aisle had indicated it was suppressed. Mr. GOODELL. The word suppress is a little bit strong. All I can say is it was not available to us for 3 or 4 months. Mr. KELLY. I think the word comes out in Mr. Weeks' book, the rec- ord should be clear that Mr. Weeks has not worked for the Job Corps in about 21 months so he had been gone for a year at the time that the Harris Survey was delivered to the Job Corps. Mr. 000DELL. I have no knowledge of why Mr. Weeks chose that. word or the basis for his allegation. Mr. KELLY. He never talked to me about it. He and I never had a discussion about it. Again he has not worked for the Job Corps for about 21 months. Herbert Cramer, who just came up and whispered in my ear, pointed out there was a press release by OEO apparently in February at the time of the delivery of t.he first Harris Survey in which the survey was summarized so that I guess we also went to the street in terms of telling the newspapers with our own press release what the Harris Survey showed. Chairman PERKINS. Get back to the cost figure now. Mr. KELLY. If you look at page 40, if you still have your books, volume 1 of the Jobs Corps presentation you will see that based on the congressional definition that the cost on an average of those centers that were in operation more than 9 months from January to June 1966 was $8,470; that July 1966 to May 1967 it went to $6,950; and that we are talking about a financial plan that calls for $6,700 per enrollee per man year in this current 1968 fiscal year. In volume 2 is the complete detail. Let me turn at random here to the State of Indiana and we have a Job Corps center there, 106 youngsters in it and during the period from July 1, 1966 to May 1, 1967, the cost of running that center per man year was $5,186. The total cost for that period was $466,279, so we can give you those figures. Every Job Corps center-here is Atterbury. The cost of run- ning Atterbury during that period was $7,829. It was more expensive; the reason being we had a switch in contractors out there and we stopped input for a period of time until we got that place straightened out.. It had not been very well run previous to the Westinghouse Corp. taking it over. Chairman PERKINS. On an annual basis per enrollee, as I recall their statement it was $9,000 per enrollee, and they anticipated in the next year or so they may get down to $4,200 per enrollee. Do you expect. anything like that to take place in the future? Mr. KELLY. I think they are mighty optimistic if they think they PAGENO="0986" 3446 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 can get down to $4,900 without having an impact on the quality of the program. And again that was a center where we changed contractors.. The previous contractor did not do a very good job there. During the period again July 1 to May 1, 1967, they were running at the rate of $7,737 per man-year, but as I recall the contract that was re- negotiated calls for operating costs around $5,900 during 1968, so I think the $5,900 figure is an accurate reflection of what they are plan- ning and what we have agreed to do. Chairman PERKINS. We have very few residential centers in this country. What is your knowledge of the residential center and what would it cost to get a residential center into operation? Mr. KELLY. To get one into operat.ion? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. KELLY. It is difficult for me to say, Mr. Chairman. When you start out from scratch of course, depending upon the size of the center, depending upon what you are going to teach in the center, depending upon its location, you either have to create it or you have to rehabilitate something else you are going to turn into that center. Depending upon the size, of course, will dictate and to a large extent what your facility creation costs and what your rehabilitation costs are. I suppose we spend anywhere in terms of looking at conservation centers from $250,000 in a 100-man conservation facility for the crea- tion facility to $3.5 million to $4 million for creation of facilities and rehabilitation at a 3,000-man urban Job Corps center. We could give you some analysis of that, Mr. Chairman, but right off the top of my head I am afraid I am not being very helpful. Mr. GOODELL. Would you eitl1er now or subsequently give us the figure of the total amount of costs that have gone into the capital investment in your Job Corps centers? This is total from the beginning to right now? Mr. KELLY. Let me give it to you for the record. I think it. is $140 million for total capital costs. It is $140,912,310 and that is broken down as follows: Men's urban construction and obligation $27,863,000; accountable equipment ran to $13,347,000, for a total of $41,210,000. Women's urban constructipn and rehabilitation, we spent $8,791,000. On accountable equipment $4,623,000, for a total of $13,314,000. On State conservation centers, the State-related centers, we have spent on construction and rehabilitation $1,628,968. On accountable equipment, $547,465, for a total of $2,176,333. On the Federal conservation centers, $66,071,803 for construction and rehabilitation, $18,041,174 for accountable equipment for a total of $84,111,977. So that the total on construction and rehabilitation is $104,354,771, equipment $36,557,539, for a grand total of $140,912,310. That was through April 1, 1967. Mr. SHRIVER. Could I make an additional comment on that? You will notice that the amount of money spent. for the conservation is much larger than for the men's centers or the women's centers and that the accountable equipment for them is much larger. That is because actually they use a lot of equipment in the work of doing conserva- tion. That point has been brought out here occasionally. But. against this $84 million-in other~words, $84 million out of $140 million was PAGENO="0987" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3447 for the conservation centers. Against that we are never permitted to set off the amount of value that those conservation centers add to the Federal properties or the State properties of the United States. That actual value, according to the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior, is $2 million. Although we have a high cost for getting those centers into operation, $84 million, more than half of the total, they are returning all the time a substantial return on the investment in these first two and a half years. According to these other departments it is $26 million. Mr. KELLY. This may have been put in the record during our last meeting here. It is on page 71. There are such things as picnic tables, fireplaces, trees and `shrubs pianted-13,881 acres. So they have done a great deal and I am told the $26 million, by Agriculture and Interior as of 30th of June, it jumped to about $30 million that they have added. Mr. QUIE. On the figures that Grafiex gave to us on July 20, 1967, they use for 1967 $6,950 per enrollee and for 1967-1968 $6,700, and for a 9-month average length of `stay $5,025. Mr. KELLY. I am familiar with the figures they reported and audited. That is for fiscal year 1967 through the first of May, their own center costs were runing $6,250 `but we have to add to that the enrollee's pay and allowances and we have to add to that an enrollee travel also, which amounts to about $1,450, so that you have to `add to the $6,250 the other costs :~f maintaining that enrollee. That does not go through their books, Congressman Quie, so `that brings it up to $5,737. Mr. SHRIVER. In that statement, Congressman Quie, were they leaving the impression that those were their actual costs `there or was that a target or what was it? Mr. QUIR. That is the figure they gave us, c'ost per corpsman per year. Mr. KELLY. That is probably `the cost on their center- Mr. SITRIvER. His point is it. is exactly the ~arne as `the overall costs and therefore the conclusion would `be possible that either two things, either they were quoting the overall costs as if those were their costs. Mr. QUIE. That is what it seems to me. He adds that this includes ap- proximately $1,500 per year paid directly to the corpsman by OEO but it comes out. to the average cost you used `for your overall. Mr. KELLY. They may be projecting their costs into t'his fiscal year. We have negotiated con'tracts at the rate of between $6,500 and $6,900 operating cost's for `this next. year. Th'at was one of the techniques we used to get ourselves in the position of coming down. That is what th'ey may have been projecting. I have not seen their figures. I will examme them and provide any additonal record for this record. Is that all right? Mr. QUIE. Yes, sir. Mrs. GREEN. I `think the record would show Grafiex said these were projected costs and they were `basing these costs on figures put out `by the Office of Economic Opportunity. I would ask are those figures projected costs? Mr. KELLY. The figures I was quoting on the Grafiex Center- Mrs. GREEN. I mean the $6,950. Mr. KELLY. We think we are going to better that. We are saying PAGENO="0988" 3448 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 $6,'lSO we think but $6,950 is the experience to the first of May, and it was the experience now through the 30th of June. Mrs. GREEN. One other question on the Job Corps and then I would like to go on to other things. On the Harris report, just a point of procedure, I guess. If I under- stood you correctly, you said after the Harris reports were issued that you called in one reporter to make them available. Is this the evidence to show that you were not suppressing them? I do think it was difficult to get them because I had difficulties. Mr. KELLY. I didn't call the reporter in myself. Our Office of Public Affairs in the OEO had gotten a number of queries from various re- porters about the fact that t.here was in existence a Harris survey. - They called in at. least one reporter and maybe two, and I know every- one, and said yes, there is a Harris survey and here is a copy of it. In addition to that, they put out a press release which provided to the press some information, not entirely, but some information on what was contained, the salient points that were contained within that Harris survey. That was done in February which was just about the time that the Harris survey was delivered. As a matter of fact, I think that one reporter had the Harris survey before-had completed reading it. because I was reading it at iiight at home. I must admit there were some people who asked for the Har- ris survey and some members of this committee asked for it and we did not provide it. and I am sorry. The reason is we had a limited number of copies. It was almost a Book-of-the-Month Club selection in Feb- ruary and March and I did say to some people if you want to see it please come down here and read it. That. was a mistake. For that I apologize because you people should have had the first right to have seen that survey. Mrs. GREEN. I apprecia.te that. It seems if you can produce enough of the 2-inch thick volumes and everyone has it, it is not quite a valid argument to say you could make them available to each member of the coimnittee. Mr. Q.UIE. Mr. Christopher Weeks says on page `238 of his book "The Job Corps attempted unsuccessfully to suppress the results of the Harris survey." It showed that more than half of the dropouts- Mrs. GREEN. I would say at the same time. while the report is made available, I would hope it. could be made available to the members of the press in my State of Oregon as well as to a chosen one or two. It would help the people of Oregon understand the problems a little better. Mr. KELLY. Let me say, Mrs. Green, and other members of the committee, anything you want out. of the Job Corps please call me and I will see that you get it. Mr. QUIE. That is the new ,Job Corps. Mrs. GREEN. The Job Corps does have a. different face since Mr. Kelly has come in. On the general statement of Mr. Shriver, I think a very eloquent statement and so much of what you have sa.id I agree with 100 percent. .1 would certainly agree tha.t we need to spend more on education and we need to spend more on housing and on the war on poverty if we mean business. I don't know why the American people did not heed PAGENO="0989" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3449 the words of Conant long before this in terms of social dynamite that was ready to explode in our American cities. I think it is tragic that this Congress voted down the bill for rat extermination. I could talk at some length on that and I don't agree with the priorities which we set as a. Congress or as a Nation, the administration, I would place the NASA space programs, the super- sonic airliner, as a much lower priority than priorities on education and poverty programs. There would be some specific points on that on which I would differ with you. On page 7 you have made a couple of statements that I think might be based although not necessarily-there have been various reports in the press about cynical attempts to create doubt and fear in the role on poverty and the aftermath of violence and disorder. There was an executive session of this committee a week ago and I think one reporter perhaps was called in on that unfortunately, by either another member of the committee, or a staff person and the impression was given and I think very erroneously that members of the committee might be interested in exploiting the situation. So lest you view any doubts about the intent of this committee at that time in the executive session last Tuesday, if the gentleman from Ohio is here, and I hope he will not object to my reading some of the minutes of the executive session and since it was executive the reporter who wrote the article had no way of knowing firsthand what went on in this session and I have asked the chairman for permission to read these para- graphs. Mr. PUCIN5KI. Point of order, Mr. Chairman. I have no objection to this procedure, but we do have committee rules and regulations about what transpires in executive session. If the committee wants to change those rules it is all right with me. Mr. AYRES. Would the gentleman yield? Mrs. GREEN. I did go to the chairman and ask for permission since an erroneous report was issued. I asked permission to read a couple of comments. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio. Mr. AYRES. I think the gentlewoman from Oregon is very much in order because someone on this committee broke the rule. Chairman PERKINS. I have already ruled that she can read the article. Mr. AYRES. Let's let the gentleman from Illinois withdraw his statement then. Mr. PuCIN5KI. There are committee rules- Mrs. GREEN. If I have the floor- Mr. PUCINSKI. I would not withdraw that statement. I will abide by committee rules and the gentleman knows what committee rules are in executive session. Mr. AYRES. The gentleman knows someone on this committee, and it was not the chairman, broke the rules so we have to clarify the rules that somebody broke. I agree with Mr. Kelly if we are going to have a press conference, let's have a press conference and give it to everyone. Mrs. GREEN. It would be difficult for any columnist not in attendance to know what happens. PAGENO="0990" 3450 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 (`Mr. Ayres moved that the committee instruct the staff through the chairman to make an immediate investigation of the involvement of poverty workers in Newark and that Mayor Addonizio be invited to testify before an executive session of the full committee at an early date. Mrs. Green suggested that Mr. Ayres might want to include an invitation to Mr. Timothy Still, president, United Com- munity Corp. in Newark in his motion since Mr. Still could balance the testimony by presenting the other side.) Mrs. GREEN. The two points I would like to make are, one, that it was to be in executive session because I don't think anyone on the com- mittee wanted any Roman holiday or any open hearing where the flames might, be fanned, and, secondly, I think the committee was in- terested in having a very balanced presentation and not to take ad- vantage of an explosive situation. Mr. Shriver, in your statement, you certainly have given facts and figures in terms of the number of arrested. I think there is still concern on the part of some of the committees. I have the concern since I talked to people in Portland and there were very minor riots, disturb-. ances there last night, minor at least compared to other places, con- cerned not over the number of poverty workers that might have been arrested. It seems to me this evades the charges that have been made or an answer to the charges because the charges have been in terms of in- irolvement. Do you think it would be wise before we go to the floor with this and those of us, and I am one of those, who do not want to see the poverty program eliminated, though I would make some changes, to really have a study of the involvement so that we could also present the facts as they are either by this committee or by your office. And is your office making a study of the involvement of the poverty workers, as Mayor Addonizio and others `have charged, in addition to just arrest which you cite? Mr. SHElVER. First of all, let me say we have made such a study and we continue to make .them at all times, frankly, long before t.his and any time anyone is ctharged-and it turned out to be true in a couple of cases-but very seldom something improper was being done by an official or a person connected in some way to an antipovery program. Wherever we have had a case of that sort brought to our attention `since we started we inspected it and we have acted in all of the cases where we have any power to act-where we had power to act and where the evidence showed that we should act. Involvement is sort of a broad, abstract word in any situation and it is difficult to pin it down in some places. But let me give you an illustra- tion which I think is on the point you are talking about. Tip in Rochester earlier this past week the city manager of Rochester issued a statement that some officials connected with an antipovery agency had said things which he felt were unwise, and which he thought. should not have been said which he thought created tension. This was interpreted by some people as meaning that they were inciting `a riot. In fact, the headline in one newspaper said these statements were in- flammatory. We looked into that case. Obviously we are very much interested in it. What actually `happened there is as follows: It turns out that a Negro was hurt or wounded in a fight with a po- liceman. The Negro community there got very much aroused about. it.. The director of the community action up there, a man by t.he name of PAGENO="0991" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3451 Greenberg, seeing that pressure was building up, the next day called a meeting of the Community Action Agency Board of Directors. To that meeting were not only invited the Community Action Board of Directors but the deputy city manager, since the city manager was out of town, and the chief of police and possibly some others. In that meet- ing some points were resolved. There were about four which were to be transmitted to the city manager. One was, for example, that the policeman who shot the man be tried for having shot him, et cetera. The contention was, and still was, and was carried out that these four resolutions would be taken to the city manager when he got back. That actually was done. At this meeting a couple of people got up and said things-I don't know what they actually said-this is an outrageous situation, or some- thing like that. These were people in the meeting. The city manager apparently thought that the mere fact that some people in this meeting got up and let off some steam might say was inflammatory. The people in the Community Action Agency feit and I think most people in Rochester felt, that in fact that it was a very fortunate thing, a forum, if you will, where this kind of statement could be made rather than being suppressed-not suppressed in that sense-but no place to make it and worse things happen. The actual letter was taken to the city manager, he received it, some things were being done about it, and the city manager sub- sequently pointed out that his complaint was only with respect to an individual who was not even a poverty worker. Now if you are talking about people like that who are involved, somebody on the board of directors or somebody on a neighborhood council who is involved, and if you feel that there should be some sort of a statement in the legislation to calm them down, if you will, I would be perfectly hapjy to see something in there along that line if it could be written without infringing on someone's freedom of speech. Mrs. GREEN. I have been interested in your detailed record of arrests but I wondered if you were making a detailed study not an off-the-cuff remark made by someone, but did you make a study ahead of time of the involvement of poverty workers in action that would fan the flames that would increase the tension and would invite people to riot? Are you making this kind of study? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. Are you doing it in Newark and Detroit as well as the study you have made on the actual arrests? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes. We are doing it with respect to Newark. I don't think we are doing it with Detroit where anyone has suggested that anyone has done such a thing, but we are doing it in Newark and we do it wherever anybody suggests that somebody did do something, an overt act that contributed. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ayres, I recognize you for 5 minutes. Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Shriver, just pursuing this point for continuity in the record, I agree with your statement that it is very complicated and difficult to tell all about involvement and inciting a riot. An individual may be working to stem a riot who is involved with a PAGENO="0992" 3452 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 crowd and yet give the ap~earance of contributing to the riot. I think my concern in this connection, to follow Mrs. Green's comments, is that we had an allegation, I think a telegram sent to you and a copy to us, from the chief of police in Newark. You, within a short period of time, as I recall reading in the paper, issued a denial that this was true. Mr. Smnv~. That is correct. Mr. GooDr~L. It was my understanding that no investigator of OEO contacted the mayor or the police chief on the basis of their informa- tion. The denial was issued from Washington, sort of clipped off fast: "No, it is not true." I presume you contacted some of the poverty people in Newark but until last week there had been no investigators from OEO in Newark looking into the charges made by the mayor and the chief of police. This raises the whole question of credibility gap in here. You deny it first and investigate afterward. I have no idea if the charges are true or not but this committee would like to rely on your denials when you make them, and know that you have made an investigation. Mr. SHRIVER. I could not agree with you more but if the facts were as you described them- Mr. GooDEr~L. I would like to know what the facts are. As I under- stood it, the mayor and police chief had not been contacted until last week by any OEO investigators concerning these charges. Your denial certainly p~receded that. Mr. SHRIv1~. There were investigators up there when this telegram was sent back in May, I think it was. We investigated it then. We could find nothing to substantiate the charges which were in the telegram. At that time we asked whether there was any additional informa- tion not in the telegram which would help us substantiate either those charges or lead us to other situations that needed action. We didn't get any such suggestions. I found out also that the same telegram that was sent to us was sent to the State of New Jersey to the Governor's office-in the State of New Jersey-that the Governor of New Jersey caused an investigation to be made at the same time, that is, back in May. The investigation was made by the New Jersey State authorities independent of any investigation we made. In fact, I didn't know they were making one until later. The results of the State investigation sub- stantiated the results of our own investigation; namely, that there seemed to be no proof, no indication that the alleged use of a sound truck which is what was involved in that particular case, had anything to do with a riot in Newark. Subsequently, after the State investigation and our investigation, we have once again sent investigators into the city. I announced last Friday, I guess it was, that in response to the request of Timothy Still, of the community action director, who said they had wanted an investi- gation made to clear the matter, which was the phrase he had, in response to his request and the request of Congressman Rodino and Minish, and the mayor, we established a community actiOn evaluation team, which we do regularly all over the country; and that team of community action people both from within our own Office and out- side our own Office will review the whole situation in Newark all over PAGENO="0993" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3453 again. So in response to your question we did investigate it back in May. The State of New Jei~sey investigated back in May. We have the results of their investigation, our own investigation, and we didn't have any proof of these things and we are now reinvestigating it. Mr. GOODELL. I appreciate the fact that you may have investigated a telegram received in May. But I was not referring to any allegations made in May. I was referring to the allegations made by the mayor and chief of police after rioting in Newark broke out and your denial was published subsequent to that, a denial that the poverty workers were involved in rioting. Mr. SHRIVER. The first allegation we got of public notice was a tele- gram in May. Mr. GOODELL. I don't know about that. It seems there were public al- legations made after the rioting broke out in Newark and your denial came subsequent to them. Mr. SHRIVER. What was said was that back in May we had been warned in advance that activities by some people connected to the antipoverty program in Newark were responsible for germinating the riot. That is what was said after the riots started. It was said that we should have known better because we had a month's notice, say 2 months' notice. Mr. `GoODELL. Mayor Addonizio's charges in the telegram were cer- tainly broader than those made during or after the riots and the re- quest for an OEO investigation. Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Chairman, could we haye some regular order? If we have a time rule we ought to be fair to all members o1~ the sub- committee. Mr. GOODELL. I am sure Mr. Ayres has not consumed his full 10 min- utes. He yielded to me and I want to get it clarified for Mr. Shriver's benefit. Mr. BRADEMAS. I though the chairman said 5 minutes being al- lotted to each member of the committee. Mr. GOODELL. The chairman communicated to us that we would have the 10-minute rule. Mr. BRADEMAS. The chairman did not communicate that to us. Chairman PERKINS. I tried to communicate through Congressman Quie that it would be 5 minutes later but that no one would be cut off afterward. Apparently the communication did not get down here. .1 recognize the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. PUCIN5KI. I am glad you made the statement you did. At the height of the riot in Newark the story appeared that this police chief made some complaints to you in May. I am not aware of any report coming out of Newark that there were any OEO employees involved in the actual rioting at the time of the rioting in Newark. The report was about a letter that had been sent to you in May, is that correct? Mr. SHRIVER. That is what I was trying to say a minute ago. Mr. PUOINSKI. I am glad you clarified the record. I would like to congratulate you for your excellent statement. I would like to con- gratulate you `for your making it clear that as the Director of the OEO for the United States for programs in 1,005 communities, that you certainly condemn and denounce in the strongest terms, the rioters and looters. 80-084 0-67-pt. 4-63 PAGENO="0994" 3454 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I think that you reflect the spirit of this committee, Congress, the Government, the President in denouncing the rioters and looters in the strongest terms, but yóü have given us a program which can get~ to the root causes which make some people the easy targets for the agitators such as Stokeley Carmichael. Now that the Pre,sident has appointed a commission to study the causes and make some recommendations, I think that this committee representing the legislative branch of government has an excellent opportunity to make some real contributions. You have cited an im- pressive list of people who are close to the problem who want to stay with this program. If we were to accept the suggestion made by the gentleman from Minnesota and New York for the substitute opportunity crusade, how long might you think it would take to implement a whole new series of guidelines and instructions and directives and how long would there be a vacuum before the program, assuming it was a successful program, could reach the point of success that you are now reaching after 21/2 years of perfecting the present law? We all know that there were shortcomings in the program when we first passed this in 1964 and it took us a long time to perfect the guidelines and perfect procedures. Many mistakes were made along the way. You have acknowledged those mistakes before the committee. But it seems to me if the testi- mony of these mayors and all of these other people is correct, you are operating rather efficiently at this time. Would you have to rewrite all of your guidelines or at least a sub- stantial amount of them-would the agency that would inherit your respoilsibilities under the opportunity crusade have to start all over again and create a long delay in getting this very needed help down to these communities? Mr. SHRIVER. I am sorry, I don't really know. I think that the changes that have been suggested are ministerial changes. I think I am doing justice here-I don't want to do any injustice-when it has been said, as it has been back and forth here several times, wouldn't the opportunity crusade change that? Congressman Goodell has been very articulate in saying we are not going to change the Job Corps, we are just going to have it put into a different department and they will evaluate it and modify it over a~ period of time as they see fit but, that in fact, we are not going to close down any Job Corps centers, we are going to continue to operate, we are just going to improve it as we go along, so, theoretically, on that theory, a piece of paper would just go to a different guy. Mr. PUOINSKI. You have no assurance and we have no assurance- as a matter of fact, the contrary would be true. I would think when a different agency took over a program they would want to hand down their own guidelines and procedures and their own rules and regula- tions, and what I worry about is at this particular time when this help is so urgently needed in these communities I am afraid of a gap, of a vacuum that may create more cha.os and turmoil than we are seeing already. For that reason I would hope my colleagues would not press their insistence on rewriting this. I would hope they would join us and work together not as Democrats and Republicans but as Members of Congress who see a serious problem in America. PAGENO="0995" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3455 If there are minor shortcomings let's correct them. Basically I think the program is working well. Would it not create a long vacuum in the shiftover, in the retooling of the whole program ~ Mr. SHRIVER. My point has been from the beginning, and it is more emphasized now than at the beginning, that the situation is a~ crisis situation and it is not timely, I don't think short of some showing of fantastic competence or that the programs have not been working, which has not been shown, I don't think it is timely to make a change ~Lt this stage of the game. How long it would take bureaucracy to fool around that-you would know more about that than I do. I just work in our place. Mr. QmE. I yield briefly to my colleague from New York. Mr. GOODELL. I won't belabor this. What we are proposing is q~uite drastically different from what the Job `Corps is. We recognize ~14O million has gone to the Job Corps. Basically what we are saying is that we would work toward this different kind of residential facility over a transition period during which you would retain the present J~b Corps. You just wouldn't stop everything and aba~idon it. You would provide for an orderly, smooth transition. Mr. SHRIVER. Maybe it is just me they want to get rid of. As one of my colleagues said, if tha't is the easier. way, that might be the easiest thing to do. Mr. AYRES. Mr. Shriver; this denial that Newark had poverty workers involved-and having talked with Mayor Addonizio myself I know that he is anxious to come before the conunittee. I think he should have the opportunity to respond to these charges in executive session. But I am quite certain that the mayor, of course, as was re- ported unf actually in the paper, wants to tell us a few things, and not just the charge he made that poverty workers were involved. I think in view of the fact that we have spent billions of dollars trying to eliminate the pockets of poverty and in many areas where the most money has been sent the riots are the biggest. We should listen to the chief officers of the police department, because every one of these riots has started from an arrest. We should also hear from the mayors of these cities. To me this is the most serious problem that this country has faced up to on a domestic basis in 100 years. Mr. Chairman, I am just advising now that tomorrow morning be- fore we go into session I will renew my request, at the request of the mayor of Newark that he be heard by this committee in executive ses- sion, not only on this matter but on any other things that he might want to tell us. Chairman PETtKINS. Let me make the observation that I have a tele- gram from, the mayor of Newark practically identical to the tele- gram sent Sargent. Shriver and he `has never made a request to appear before this committee to my. personal knowledge, not to the commit- tee, not to the majority, and it is a pecular thing that he would make the request to you, being a Democrat, and not to the committee. Mr. AYRES. He prdb'wbly felt closer to me, Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. The telegram puts him wholeheartedly in favor of the program all the way. I will read the telegram if there is any question about it. PAGENO="0996" 3456 KCONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Amii~s. The point is, he has some things to tell us in executive session and he has told me personally on the phone in a conversation that he would like to come down and have the opportunity to testify. I think that as a mayor and former colleague he is certainly entitled to that privilege. Mr. SHRIVER. May I make one comment, please? Ohairman PERKINS. Go ahead, please. Mr. SHRIVER. If any Member of the Congress or mayor or private citizen has information about individual people that they can sub- stantiate that such and such a person did something wrong, we want that information and wherever that kind of information has been given to us we have acted I think pretty fast. I am not saying we are perfect because we are not, and we certamly cannot police a~ll of these things perfectly all over the country all the time but when facts come to us about a.n individual we have an interest that is equai to. yours, I think, maybe it is even more of an interest on our part to get rid of any foul ball, odd ball, or any kind of balls that are in the program. Mr. DANIELS. Two of our colleagues now serving 2 years in the House, Congressman Rodino and Congressman Joseph Minish, come from congressional districts representing parts of the ci.ty of Newark. Is it not true, Sargent Shriver, last Friday morning pursuant to the request of Mayor Addonizio at least one of those Congressmen con- ferred with you pursuant to the Newark situation? Mr. SHIuv~it. That is right. Mr. DANIELS. Was any representation made to you at that time that the poverty workers in the city of Newark invited or were directly involved in the riot that took place? Mr. SHRIVER. No, the only think that has been said to me is similar to what I tried to describe to Mrs. Green a few minutes ago. In a particular meeting somebody might have said something which some- body else was thought too hysterical or too inflammatory and maybe with the mayor there he might have felt there was some mechanism for separating out, so OEO was not responsible for what some mem- ber of a neighborhood of directors, a nonpaid person who wasn't in any way connected with the program, except that he was on a neigh- borhood board that that fellow says something today the mayor thinks, we get blamed for it. He felt there should be some way to separate out employees from these kinds of peripheral people, neighborhood advisors and so on, who sometimes say things that he thinks are not justified. There are other people who say just the opposite of what this per- son did was beneficial rather than harmful. Mr. DANIELS. To your knowledge was any statement made by Mayor Addonizio, any member of the official family of the city of Newark, critical of the antipoverty program and recommending its dissolution? Mr. SHRIVER. No, there was none. Not only did both of those Con- gressmen speak to me but I have spoken two or three times to the mayor and it was in response to their request and Timothy Stills' request, head of the community action agency up there, that we inaugurated this extra community action inspection which I announced last Friday. We did that because they asked us to do it.. We did it last Friday and PAGENO="0997" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3457 that will go forward immediately and in the announcement we said we hope to have a report; from this investigation within 30 days. Mr. DANIEI4s. On the contrary, is it not true Mayor Addonizio in his praise for the work that has been done and is being done presently in the city of Newark on the commuthty action program? Mr. SHRIVJDR. The mayor is 100 percent for the program individually and collectively. He does say something like the man in Rochester says, that he thinks that some individual people, three or four people may have said something which he thinks they should not have said but in no case, at least has he shown to us, does he claim what they said actually caused a riot. For example, I will tell you about this use-well, maybe you don't want to hear about it. Mr. DANIELS. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. PUCIN5KI. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have beeh making a great deal of noise the last couple of years about get- ting maximum involvement of the people in the community on these action boards. They want them elected and they want various other things. Should it then come as a great surprise to them that somewhere along the line in that you are. going to get some people over whom you have no authority. They are not paid employees. They are not paid employees of the OEO but members of a board. If they do these irresponsible things I think they should be condemned. I think they should be censured in the, strongest terms but I don't know that we should be blaming you for something somebody in Newark said over which you have no control. Mr. SHRIvER. That was the mayor's point. Mr. QUIE. If Mayor Addonizio is such a great friend of the pro- gram, then why is it so dangerous to bring him down before this com- mittee to ask him some questions to find out about the suggestion ~ I don't understand the furors of the Democrats. If you brought him down here all of a sudden it would damage the entire program and probably the end of the show of the war on poverty. I don't under- stand that. Mr. DANIELS. I might say to the gentleman that this committee does have two investigators who were sent up to Newark to interview the mayor, Mr. Stills `and all other parties that may shed some light on the situation. I think it would be appropriate for this committee to await the report of these investigators and then if the committee feels it is necessary to proceed further, then we can take the appropriate action. Mr. Q1JIE. That is a different `approach than the constant fear that you hear about if Mayor Addonizio ever arrived. Mr. DANIELS. I think it is mostly in your own minds. Chairman PERKINS. The time o~ the gentleman has expired. Mr. Goodell, let me answer my colleague- Mr. GOODELL. Am I going to get 5 minutes also? Chairman PERKINS. Any witness you bring in here will be heard. Mr. GOODELL. Well, I think maybe, as so often happens on the 5- minute rule, we get ourselves on some issue that, although important in itself, is not basic to your presentation of the poverty program. We are all very concerned about the riots in this country, and I am PAGENO="0998" 3458 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 one of those who does not endorse the simplistic explanation of the riots. I recognize that in many areas, poverty workers, along with all other citizens of the area interested in preserving peace have worked very hard in stifling the riots. There are questions at times about people involved in the poverty program, not inciting people to riot, but rubbing raw situations in the community over a long period of time. I know the allegation has been made that this has been going on for 2 months, 7 days a week, with poverty workers involved in this, so although poverty workers might not be exciting people directly to riot, if they are rubbing all the nerves raw, and creating circumstances for riots to break out, we would be concerned about it. I think we should be given the facts on it. Many a child has lit a match and seen a holocaust go up and stood back and gasped at what happened. He didn't intend for it to happen. There is another aspect of this which concerns me. You talked about social dynamite, which I agree it is, and you talk a.bout discontent, wihch I agree exists. The discontent is many sided. I am, for instance, very much aware of the discontent with an inade- quate program, and discontent over big money going to social planners and the people not seeing it themselves-discontent, big sales jobs, with few results. All of these things are not particularly calculated to preserve the peace in a community. There is a coincidence, and I don~t believe there is a casual relation obviously, but we have had riots breaking out in this country in the last 3 years. It happens to be coincidental with the war on poverty, and in this period, as the President said the other night, we have put more money into social action programs and into our urban areas than in any other 3-year period in our history. These things concern us. I am one of those who refuses to say we should stop doing anything. Obviously these are symbols of failure, but I don't think it is adequate to say we should pour more money into the same old ways of solving things. Money is not going to solve it without new directions. Let me ask you this. We~ have had a great deal of discussion about rat eradication. Under the Public Health Service, the Public Health Act of 1966, there was $62.5 million, which was a program for which applications would be received for rat eradication. This point was brought out by Congressman Henry Reuss, when he opposed the rat eradication bill on the floor of the House a few weeks ago. He said, "Why do we need another grant-in-aid program?" Do we really solve more by having two or three Federal agencies fund these things than we would if we put enough money into a single program in the Federal Government? I ask you this question, is it not true that rat eradication is one of the programs eligible for community action funds? Mr. SHRIVER. The only rat eradication program in America is in Chicago-excuse me a second. We put about $2.5 million into it. We did not use community action unearmarked funds. We used the 207 money, demonstration money, because it was the only money we could utilize, the only money we could get our hands on. It is true if a city wanted not to have the head start program or PAGENO="0999" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 3459 the legal services program, I suppose they could say that those pro- grams are less important than a rat eradication program. Mr. GOODELL. My concern is this. You believe in unearmarked funds, and I do, too. I think the locül community should set its priorities. Any community today may set up priorities as they wish for rat eradication, and make application under the community action program, or the demonstration program, and get money 100 percent funded from the Federal Government, 90: 10- Mr. SHElvER. It's 80: 20. Mr. GOODELL. It may be 80: 20 in Chicago now. I won't quibble over that. They are available, are they not? Mr. SHRIVER. The answer is yes, but there are so many competing requests for that community action money. Mr. GOODELL. Now, you see, you bother me. Mr. SHRIVER. I'm not bothering you at all; I hope. Many communi- ties of the United States would like to have money under a different law. It is not under our law, that bill. Mr. GOODELL. I know that. Mr. SHElvER. OK; so it is not in competition. They would not then be in competition with their community action money. Mr. GOODELL. Why should we set up a separate administ.rative struc- ture and cost? Why shouldn't we have the administration of the community action program now, and this is what bothers me, is that you seem to be advocating earmarking of money. If we can do it, earmark $50 million out of community action program- Mr. SHRIVER. That is exactly what I was not saying. Mrs. GREEN. I would ask the gentleman's consent that I be given another minute for the purpose of a correction. If I recall correctly, Henry Reuss preferred that this be under the-he voted for the bill. Mr. GOODELL. He voted for the rule, but- Mrs. GREEN. It was my understanding that he. made his position clear that he would have preferred it under that, but he certainly was supporting that bill that day. Mr. GOODELL. You may be right, and he didn't get a chance to debate it, because we voted down the rule. Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SHRIviut. I would just like to say-and excuse me if I may be imposing, Mr. Chairman-that there were 37 riots on demonstrations in the United States before- Mr. GOODELL. How far back are you going, the Revolution and the Boston Tea Party? Mr. SHRIVER.. 1961, 1962, 1963, and 1964. There was an earlier re- mark that there seemed to be something incidental between riots and OEO. Mr. GOODELL. There is- Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent that the Uniform Time Act of 1966 be made applicable to thi~ com- mittee. Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. BRADEMAS. I would ask unanimous consent that I may have such as my colleague from New York had. PAGENO="1000" 3460 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, take 7 minutes. [Laughter.] Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Chairman, I must say, as I sat here listening to some of the questioning here this afternoon, and I addressed my re- marks to Mr. Shriver in the form of a rhetorical question, perhaps, would he not agree that it is rather strange that we should have pre- occupied ourselves with the questioning this last couple of hours, I guess. I find very little that has been said that is significant in terms of the fact that this country faces a major domestic crisis in the great urban areas of our country, and one would have thought we were meeting in some vacuum or on some other planet. I recall taking a look, and playing once more a record I had made after Carl Sandburg's extraordinary address to a joint session of Con- gress in 1959 on Abraham Lincoln's 150th birthday anniversary and he quoted, "I shall do nothing through malice. What I deal with is too vast for malice." I miss any sense of passion or vastness about the problem that faces this country, and I do wish that we would perhaps give ourselves a little more to the problem, and if I speak critically of our committee, I speak critically of myself, I may say; so I am not addressing myself to any particular colleague on this committee. I do wish we would give ourselves perhaps in some measure the problem of how we can strengthen and make more effective these pro- grams you administer, which are aimed at the basis of the riots, rather than with who sent what telegram to whom and what day. I wonder, Mr. Shriver, if you could comment on this overall ques- tion of the impact of the overall poverty program on the riots and the disturbances that we have seen in some of our cities, both large and small. I am talking about, at the moment, money. I certainly agree with what my colleague and friend from New York, Mr. Goodell, said, that money alone won't solve the problem, but that is kind of a straw argument, because I don't think anybody argues it will. But in terms of getting at the terribly difficult. prdblems we face in our urban areas, the kind of budget request that has been suggested by the President for your agency, can you give us any comment w~hat you think we ought to be spending through OEO to make the kind of impact that rationally, prudently, we ought to be-I should not say be spending, but investing-in the poverty program? Mr. SHRIVER. First of all, Congressman Bradernas, let me say that I subscribe completely to what you just said, namely, that the urgency of the matter is tremendous, and that every mayor in America that I know- of wants action out of all of us, the bureaucracy and the Con- gress, as fast as possible. So far as I know, secondly, there aren't any mayors that I know of, and very few Governors frankly that I know of, who don't support the OEO programs as they are. Now, I would be the first to agree, and some of them, I assume, would agree that all these programs can be improved. You hate seen what happened to the Job Corps in 1 year. It is vastly improved. So we are going to try to improve everything we are doing all of the time, but the defects such as they are in our program as they now exist seem to me to be very small in terms of money. I would say that the poor of PAGENO="1001" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3461 America, the people of America, are calling for immediate action in support of at least what we are asking for, the $2.06 billion that the President has asked us to come up here and ask you to give us. Now, some people have said that by asking for 25 percent more than what we got last time, that we are just being foolish, that Con- gress won't give us 25 percent more. I don't agree with that. I think Congress will give us 25 percent more. I have every confidence, despite everything that has been written in the papers or other places, that when the Congress sees, as they must now see, the tremendous needs for these programs, with all their weaknesses as well as their strengths, that Congress will act. That is what I said in my statement. None of these programs can afford to be cut. You h.ave had black and white, Catholic, Protestant., and Jew, and rich people and poor people, and professional people and amateur people. Who else do you have to have come? My belief is that America is waiting for us to do something. Now, the programs we have got., you had five Republicans here from the Bar Association saying they need three times what the President is asking for. Therefore, my belief is what we are asking for is the minimum amount of money. I said the same thing last year when we asked for $1.75 billion. I said in the Senate, "This is the absolute minimum," and then when they cut the budget, I said last fall that the consequences of this cut, even though it is a 7-percent cut, the cut will be great and grave. God knows it has been. I think the time for discussing these things is over, and we ought to get out of here and go to work. Mr. BRADEMAS. I thoroughly endorse what you said, Mr. Shriver. I quoted Lincoln once at you, and I. will quote another sentei~ce out of that same address of Sandburg's, where he said, "Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. We will be remembered in spite of ourselves." Well, I hope this is a Congress that is remenlbered as responding intelligently and constructively to this problem. Can you give us any comments, since this has been a subject of discussion among the com- mittee members today? Can you tell us what steps you took after the riots began, to insure a proper conduct on the part of the community action programs across the country? Mr. SHRIVER. Since there is so much talk about riots, let's recall that the previous Congress amended the law last year and put in a so-called antiriot provision, and it is in the law. Under that law last year, we issued instructions to all the community action agencies all across the country, emphasizing the importance for themselves as organizations and thei.r employees as individuals to stay out of programs that would be inflammatory or would get somebody else excited. Judgments on what is impor.tant are hard to make in the beginning. It's easy to second-guess about it. You can say in this place, in retro- spect, "This fellow shouldn't have done that." We have no cases that I know of where someone is shown to be doing maliciously something like t.hat. We have admonished them over and over again in dispatches, and just 10 days or 2 weeks ago, I sent out PAGENO="1002" 3462 ECONOMIC OPPORTuNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 another dispatch on this subject, and I have it here, as a matter of fact. I will read three sentences out of it: There will be absolute insistence that every OEO employee and every employee of OEO grantees scrupulously avoid and resist participation by OEO-funded resources in any activities that threaten public order in any community. I shall insist upon immediate and full penalties for any individuals found guilty of wrong behavior in this connection. Furthermore, I shall insist on withholding of funds from any grantee or delegate agencies which is shown to be encourag- ingor Chairman PERKINS. The time is up. Mr. Bell? Mr. BELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. * Mr. Shriver, I want to commend you for a very fine statement. There are not many areas where I find great disagreement with the general thrust of your ideas. However, I may have some differences. wa~ in Watts attending hearings about 4 days before the Watts riot occurred. We were in Wnill Rogers Park and the place was thickly packed. There were over a thousand people there, and they were very, very concerned at that time about the Poverty Act, and about the things that they were not receiving, things that they expected, were hoping for, but with no action by that time. They weren't essentially blaming you or your organization, perhaps, as much as they were blaming the local organization. My question concerns your communications with your own people; inasmuch as riots happen to be a major problem today. What sort of communica- tions do you maintain between your people as to riots. Did you have a pretty good idea that the Watts riot was going to take place? Did you have any idea of the problems that existed there at that time? Mr. SHRIVER. I personally had no idea there was going to be a riot in Watts. Mr. BELL. Did you have an understanding of the discontent that existed there because of the poverty program? Mr. SHRIVER. I had the understanding that this discontent had existed in Watts a long time. When people thought there was going to be a war on poverty, people thought somebody from Washington was going to come out, let's say you, a.nd hand out $10 bills for them. The concept from the beginning was that it was going to hand out job tra.ining and so on. Some people were disappointed that all the chance they got was to go to work. I have been asked, "When is the money going to arrive?" I had a woman in Omaha in a rally say, "When am I going to get furniture for my house, and shoes for my kids?" I have been going around the country trying to explain that we are not in a handout program. We are trying to give people a chance to become independent of us, the government-the Los Angeles govern- ment or the National Government. So there is a difference between what we are attempting to do, and what some people thought was going to happen. It is true they are still concerned in `Watts, they are concerned in `Washington, in Jersey City, in South Bend-not that we haven't handed money out, but even the programs that are running, job training programs, or legal services programs, that those programs are not big enough and they are right. PAGENO="1003" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3463 They are not big enough. I tried to testify earlier here today that in Detroit we are meeting maybe 14 percent of what we know we can do now without any new program, without any new brilliant ideas by anybody. We can do that now. I am not saying it is perfect, or that it will stop riots. We didn't start an agency as an antiriot agency. But we know we can do these things now. I say, "Let's do them," and then, as we are doing them, let's find other things we need to do. Mr. BELL. The point I was making is that there seemed to be a breakdown of communications between you and the local government and so forth- Mr. SHRIVER. When you were there in the summer of 1965 we had been in business 6 months. There was no question about it, and there still is in some places a misunderstanding of the nature of this effort, that it is not a money or clothing or food distribution effort. It is an effort to help people to help themselves. It is a complicated idea, but because everybody didn't understand it in the first 6 months is not to me a fault of the program. What we need to do is to-the one way you lick poverty is to have the poor lick it themselves. Mr. BELL. On page 4 of your statement, Mr. Shriver, you talked about Headstart as more than an educational program, one that affects the total life of the child, his envir9nment, and so forth. I wanted to point out to you that the education programs under the Commissioner of Education do many of the things right now that Headstart does. So, if it changed, it would not affect the program one iota. Mr. SHRIVER. It does affect it, if I may say so. It is a rather com- plicated thing. I just want to say I disagree with that. Chairman PERKINS. Mrs. Mink? Mrs. MINK. I want to add my word of commendation to you, Mr. Shriver, and your staff, for not only your dedicated services and studies with this committee and Congress, to continue the work that began, but also for the very fine statement that you provided the committee today. I deplore personally the efforts being made throughout the country and even here in the Congress to place the blame for t.he disorders that we have witnessed over the last few weeks on this program. If anything, I `think the program deserves a great deal of commendation and praise for what it has been able to accomplish over these few years with the limited amounts of money that we have been able to appropriate. I think one of the great regrets that I have in the 21/2 years that I have served here is the inability to fund the program to the extent that I feel it needs to be if it is really to begin to do the work to help solve the problems of our poor people throughout the country. To place the blame on those who are working in this field for the riots, I think, is a grave travesty on the truth and facts of the situations. The poverty program is seeking to find the root causes of discontent in our urban communities, and I think your administration and those PAGENO="1004" 3464 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 who work with you have sought th8ir earnest best to try to help these people. I think one of the difficulties that we had in the last year as we adjourned the 89th Congress was the sad task of going back to our communities and explaining to our constituents that instead of more money and more programs to help the poor, that we had to report back serious cutbacks in the kinds of programs that they wanted, and so I express again grave concern that perhaps because of the riots and the need for new programs to help curb these situations in our big cities, that we perhaps are again going to have to meet the argu- ment of earmarking funds, limited as they are already, on funds in separate areas, such as rat eradication. I think as one studies the conditions that lead to the riots in the big cities, one has to come to the conclusion that in many of these situations it is the inability of the poor in these communities to understand what motivates police officers and the police authorities in the actions that they must take in order to preserve law and order in their communities. As we have watched the development of the Legal Services program, I wonder, Mr. Shriver, if you could tell this committee, perhaps if we are able not to just meet the funds request that you are seeking in this Congress, but increase it. what kinds of programs you might be able to suggest to us and to this Congress that could better improve the adult relationship of these people in the communities with the police authorities so that these kinds of conditions can be avoided. Mr. Smavi~n. Well, as you know, Mrs. Mink, we are not authorized to recommend new programs to the Congress just off the top of our heads- Mrs. MINK. That is one of the saddest outcomes of the history of this program, because I can't think of newer, better, and innovative programs that have come out of your leadership-Headstart, Green Thumb, Upward-Bound, and all of the other programs- Mr. STIRIvER. So far, in reading the newspapers, I haven't seen any suggestion made for any program anywhere by anybody yet that we haven't already made. It is also a fact that in the Department of Justice under the Attorney General's leadership that a comprehensive effort is being made to have seminars, for example, an institute for the benefit of local police, work- ing through various police academies and chief of police associations and so on. Mrs. MINK. But aren't these more oriented toward riot control and to try to equip police authorities to better control riots- Mr. SHRIVER. I don't know enough to make a comment on that. One thing that has developed indigenously in the war against poverty is what is called police corps cadets. I have seen them in operation in Detroit last summer. You heard me describe one in Grand Rapids, where 50 kids were sort of depu- tized-not officially-but in a sense deputized as junior policemen. We have that all over the country, and I think that that is an indication of something that is very good. For example, in the early days of the war against poverty, when we had enough money to be rather bold, when something came along like an idea like Headstart or Upward-Bound, I was able to sit. there and PAGENO="1005" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3465 say, "OK, we have $75 million for that," and I didn't have to ask anybody. It was because of that fluid situation that we were able to exploit openings. It was a little bit like I used to say when General Patton broke out of that impasse there in Europe, when he broke free he could push everything behind him. He exploited the opportunity. But we haven't been able to do that to the extent we should have, because we didn't have the money to exploit the openings. There are dozens of them right now in the existing programs. One that is very obvious to me is this one. If we had a lot of fluid money, I would bet a lot of money-my deputy here from the Internal Revenue Service says I am a plunger, maybe too much of a plunger-but I would put a lot of money on the junior cadets, say 14-, 15-year-old kiçls. If they were brought into the police forces all over the country, I think it would be good. My friend, Bill Kelly, handed me the telegram from the chief of police in San Francisco which says to Mr. Kelly: We wish to express our appreciation to you for the cooperation received from the Park Jc~b Corps this weekend hecause of the difficulti~s this city has experi- enced the last week, as well as in the past. Tom 3. Cahill. What he is talking about is that the kids did the work for the police department there. I know in Chicago one of the best things they are doing now is, poor people residing in the neighborhood, they were getting to work in every precinct in Chicago. Mr. PIIOINSKI. You mean police precincts? Mr. SHRIVER. Police precincts. [Laughter.] That shows you how nonpolitical I am. [Laughter.] If we could do this all over America, and it could be done between now and the fall, you could have 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 kids like this. It isn't difficult to do. The kids want to do it. Mrs. MINK. Do you have any States in your department which might reveal whether any of our Neighborhood Youth Corps young- sters are being given experience, say, in working with the police au- thorities and giving them a feeling that the police department is part of them, part of their community? Mr. SHRIVER. That's what actually happened. That is actually what is happening, and I think one of the advan- tages of the war on poverty is that you can see that. You can see that Mayor Lindsay does it in New York. I also know that it is being done in Tampa, in Youngstown, Ohio, and I know it has been done in 10 other places. It isn't that we are so bright at all, but that that informa- tion comes to us automatically, and when we see it, you have to be stupid not to understand that that is general and anything that is gen- eral hke that, that is catching on. There you have got it. It isn't that I say somebody was brilliant and thought it up. It is the 10 guys around the country who are doing it without getting instruc- tions from Washington. Mrs. MINK. What would happen with all the innovative programs that are administered this way if the Neighborhood Youth Corps were transferred to the Department of Labor? Mr. SHRIVER. The Neighborhood Youth Corps is working under a PAGENO="1006" 3466 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 delegation now, as we call it. It has now, we think, become more en- twined with community action than ever before, and the delegation is working out very well. I think that the-whether or not it should be transferred, you might say altogether sometime in the future is still one of those iffy questions that nobody has a firm answer to. All I am trying to testify to is that it is working very well now. Nobody in the field really cares about all this stuff back here. What they are interested in is whether we got some more Neighborhood Youth Corps kids out there, and what I am trying to say is, why don't we go ahead and do it the way we are doing it? Not because it is per- fect, but because it is pretty good, and we can meet the demand at the point of action. You see, we have 16 centers right in the center of the ghetto in De- troit. I say, let's get them better and let's get them in there. We don't have to have an administrative folderol in Washington. They are not interested in that in Detroit.. They want to go. It is like being in a straitjacket awaiting orders to march. Mr. BRADEMAS. Last Friday afternoon, out in Southwood, md., I drove around those parts of my city which had been a scene of some disturbances earlier in the w-eek, and I talked with a number of leaders, particularly in predominantly Negro neighborhoods, people who had been working in the fields of housing and youth work, and everywhere I went, I found that there was a. request for more support for the poverty program rather than less, and I found nobody complaining about the administrative mechanisms which seem so much to occupy us here in Washington. I talked with the mayor of my city, who happens to be a Republican. He is a supporter of the poverty program. He has never up to now sug- gested to me-he may now-that he found that there is some difficult problem with the administrative mechanism with the war on poverty, and I want to echo the question of the gentlelady from Hawaii, and reiterate that I think we would be on more sure footing if we give at- tention to the matter of substance and somewhat less attention to the administrative mechanism when we discuss this program except in those areas. Mr. SHRIVER. I hate to be talking about Chicago, except that I know it is Congresman Pucinski's city-when they got the temporary swim- ming pools in Chicago, what they did, they took the swimming pools and put them right next to the fire stations. What happened was, then they took the firemen on their day off and gave them the job of super- vising the swimming pool. They did two things right away. First of all, you have got a mature, responsible person to supervise the pool, which is always a problem in opening up these temporary pools, health standards and so forth. Second, you have a person in the city government, a fireman, who immediately began to be identified with these kids in a different way than an object of repression. Being a fireman, they kept the swimming pool full. It. is the only city that I know which had the ordinary commonsense to put the swim- ming pools next to a. fire station. . If you could do that in all these cities, it would be a big thing for the PAGENO="1007" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3467 fire department, and the city and the kids. The people who do it on their day off don't complain, because they get a little extra money. It is such .a simple thing. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle? Mr. SCHERLE. Mr. Shriver, to put things back into proper per- spective, I doubt very seriously that if one is not in complete agree- ment with the goals that are set forth under the OEO that they are not interested in the poor. This is wrong. It is in the administration that we are primarily interested in ef- fective improvements. We are trying to eliminate waste and put these programs under already existing agencies. I don't think anyone would doubt that the programs, as they exist today, under Opportunity Crusade, would make any changes other than the elimination of some high-priced personnel. As mentioned earlier, one problem, and I think you mentioned it, too, is that in regard to the riots, these people have been led down the primrose path, perhaps by the administration, perhaps by the Con- gress, to expect something that could not be delivered. All this started during the present administration and you can check the record on this. Don't you think that perhaps these people were led to believe that solutions to their problems were just over the hill, were available yesterday, and in their anticipation and frus- tration, that the riots and demonstrations today are a product of resentment? Would you go along with that? Mr. SHRIVER. No, I don't, Congressman. Mr. SCHERLE. What do you feel is behind these riots and demon- strations? In the last Congress I doubt if there was any Great Society legislation that wasn't passed and everything made available. How- ever, we are now talking about the present Congress, and nothing we do in this session of Congress could help alleviate the present situation. Now, what has been the problem concerning these unfortunate people? They were unjustly led to believe that utopia was here. We all knew that time would be necessary to help solve this problem. Mr. SITRIvER. First of all, as I mentioned a minute ago, there were a number of riots before the 89th Congress and before the OEO legis- lation was brought up. The second point is that I think there are many things this Con- gress can do, this Congress right now. I think in a sense today Congress has an unrivaled opportunity, because what may have been difference of opinion before about whether something of a vast scale was needed, I don't see how there could be much difference of opinion now that the problem is a very important, if not the most important domestic problem in the United States. Mr. SCIIERLE. We agree, but you are asking this Congress to do iiothing more thaii one word, money, and a contmuation of what already exists. Mr. SHRIVER. No, sir. I am not. I am asking the Congress to expand the programs that exist, and the mayors of America- Mr. SCHERLE. But you are asking us. to expand in an area that al- ready exists. If this is true, and it must be, because you said there is 110 program anybody could mention that you doh't already have, and I can agree with that. PAGENO="1008" 3468 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. SHRIVER. I didn't say that. I said that we hadn't in times past suggested- Mr. SCHERLE. You haven't left any project out. Mr. SHRIVER. There is quite a bit. Mr. SCHERLE. If this were true, what else could have been financed to prevent the riots that have already taken place? I understand that `both the poverty program and the rat eradication program in Detroit was one of the `best. The American people are asking the question, "What's necessary? What more do we have to do?" Mr. SHRIVER. I tried to answer that a little while ago when I pointed out that, although the antipoverty effort in Detroit was a good one, it in fact only reached 14 percent of what the city of Detroit-not a Washington bureaucrat, but what the city of Detroit said they needed to have from our agency. Let me just make it clear. This had nothing to do with what they felt was needed in the area of housing, or nothing to do with what Mrs. Mink was talking about in police community relations. Those issues like that were totally separate from what they said they needed from us. Mr. SCHERLE. This is my point, and nothing but time can cure this. Mr. SIIRIVER. Many things besides time can cure it. Mr. SCHERLE. It is my understanding that many people in the adult phase of life who have spent all the time they can afford to spend in a classroom, still ask for an opportunity. This can only `be arrived at by rehabilitation or retraining, each takes ti'me. The youngsters you can educate, this takes time but even education for the disadvantaged, this is still a matter of time. Now, what more `beyond what `Congress has already made available can we provide other than the element of time? Mr. SHRIVER. Let me give you an example of what could be done. The mayor of New York and the mayor of Detroit used this as an example. They said when they opened up their job training programs in Detroit I think they had 2,000 slots for job training. In the first week they had 6,000 people apply for the training. Now, when you say what could be done now more than time? Now we cOuld have 6,000 slots rather than 2,000 slots, and therefore those 4,000 men could be trained now rather than wait 2 or 3 years for the training. Mr. SCHERLE. Mr. Shriver, we have heard excuses from your own men here this afternoon about why things weren't done earlier. In fact, we heard that we couldn't have this book given to us. Let me read you an article: The Government has issued a new book, 701 pages in length, weighing 3 lbs. and 4 oz. It lists 458 Federal assistance programs administered by Government agencies. Copies were sent to members of Oongress with a letter from Mr. Shriver * * * Chairman PERKINS. Don't read that. Put it in the record. Mr. SCHERLE. It is more fun reading it, Mr. Chairman. Mr. SHRIVER. We all know about that. That is the compendium of Federal programs, and it turned out to be almost as popular as the Harris report. [Laughter.] Mr. SOHERLE. With the poverty program, it takes time, and that's all. Mr. SHRIVER. Could I just say, Mr. Chairman, that some people felt PAGENO="1009" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3469 the Declaration of Independence was an incendiary document that raised false hopes, and the Constitution of the United States when it was written, that it raised false hopes that never would be fulfilled. Mr. SCHERLE. And it took time. Mr. SHRIVER. We are still trying to fulfill some- Mr. SCHERLE. You are asking for time. Mr. SHRIVER. I don't want time. The poor don't want time. Mr. SCHERLE. If you can explain to mc Mr. SHRIVER. I can explain it.. Whether you would understand it is another question. I don't know. Mr. SCHERLE. It would be understood. Mr. SHRIVER. We have been trying. Mr. SOHERLE. Time is what you are going to get. Mr. SHRIVER. I am afraid you are right. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Meeds? Mr. MEEDS. I would like to compliment you on what I consider a very good statement, and the thing that impressed me was that it was not a defense, but a challenge to all Americans, and I think this is something we need very badly. I had the qpportunity just yesterday in my own congressional dis- trict in Washington to attend a conference of Western Washington Indians, and they were at this conference discussing mutual problems, and the Federal Government with these problems. The classic answer that had been given in the past, and I think perhaps the most eloquent defense and the most eloquent statement in favor of the Office of Economic Opportunity and its CAP programs and Indian programs was made by a young Indian girl who was work- ing in one of these, and who was well educated and articulated very well, but who had taken pride in her work. In differentiating the approaches that had been made by the older agencies and the one that was being made by CAP programs, she said, "On the old programs, we haven't been reached, we haven't been touched, we haven't been moved." And then she said, "The CAP pro- grams, the programs that we are working with ourselves, they are reaching us, touching us, and moving us." And 1 thought this was a moving comment on what is taking place in the Indian reservation in my area. I would like to ask you some specific questions about the Job Corps, if Irnay. Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, sir. Mr. MEEDS. We heard last year that the attendance to Job Corps classes was very poor, and in maily cases the Job Corps men would stay in bed and would not get up and go to class, and that there was no way of telling their attendance. Could I have an answer to this question? Mr. KELLY. Yes, Congressman, you are quite correct. We had some Job Corps youngsters last year who would not get out of bed and we had some permissive attitudes on the part. of some of the staff about that. Let me say in terms of attendance now, we just finished a survey on rates of absenteeism over the first 6 months of this year, and in men centers, it averaged 3.7 percent., and that was down dramatically from 12 to 15 percent last year. 80-084 0-67-pt. 4-64 PAGENO="1010" 3470 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 In women's centers, absenteeism from class-this is unauthorized absenteeism, I might add, was 3.5 percent. In the conservation center- this is really interesting-0.9 of 1 percent absenteeism, and in our demonstration centers, like the Capitol project here in Washington, it was running 1.3 percent, so that the overall average of the Job Corps was 2.5 percent, men's and women's conservation. Mr. MEED5. To what do you attribute this rather phenomenal success? Mr. KF.LLY. I think that we have done in the last year is, I think we have made it very clear if you are going to be in the Job Corps, you are going to obey the rules, and we issued this code of enrollee conduct. We have also jacked up our staffs, and let me say we fired some people, and I had to unfortunately fire a director Friday of last week, because there was still a high degree of permissiveness in his center, and when I saw the absentee rate and the fact that the youngsters weren't doing what they were supposed to do, I fired him. The name of the game is people. The people who come into the Job Corps can't be told it is a country club or a finishing school. If you don't want to work, you ought to get out. It is a voluntary program. If you volunteer to get in, it strikes me you ought to do what you are told. Mr. MEEDS. Another problem that has been concerning me-half of my district is rural, and I have heard, and perhaps `there is some validity to it, and I would like to check it with you, that there is diffi- culty in recruiting `and setting up proper recruitment programs for rural youth as opposed to city and urban youth. Mr. KELLY. You are quite correct.. Mr. MEIi~s. And that the groups in the city are working much better. Mr. KELLY. You are correct. The overall Job Corps, with 41,000 people in it, in terms of males, 19 percent are from rural America., and females, 5 percent are from rural America. We have not done a good job of recruiting in rural America. Mr. MELDS. What will be done to recruit more from rural America? Mr. KDLLY. We entered into an agreement with the AFL-CIO and their Appalachian Council. They are recruiting for us in Appalachia. They promised to deliver 10,000 youngsters in fiscal 1968 from rural America into the Job Corps. We also have `an agreement with .the Department of Agriculture, the Conservation Service, and `they are working through-what do they call it-the extension `agents, in terms of trying to identify young- sters in rural America who need this program, and the Agriculture Department said that `they will deliver some 4,000 youngsters in fiscal year 1968 from rural America. Now, those are the two specialized efforts we are making. I think they are both working fairly well, although in `the case of the AFL- ClO, we have been in operation. with them, I think, since March, and not `all of `the precincts have been heard from in .terms of their success. We will know a lot better, say, by the end of this summer. Mr. Miw~us. In the higher concentration areas, where there are more people, most of your recruitment efforts are going on through employ- ment offices? Mr. KELLY. That's right. PAGENO="1011" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3471 Mr. MEEDS. Have you conceived of the idea, perhaps, of working with employment offices and sending people out from your own pro- grams in recruiting? It is easy enough if they come in, but don't you have to, to get to rural America, go out and see them? Mr. KELLY. One of the things we try in the conservation center pro- gram is that we had a number of centers in the Rocky Mountain region do recruitment right from the center within that State, within a couple of hundred mile radius, and it worked fairly well. It wasn't the greatest thing we have ever done, but it did work fairly well. I think if we can have the AFL-CIO Appalachian Council suc- ceed, that we will try to replicate that in other areas of the country. Mr. MEED5. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman MEED5. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Shriver, Mr. Levine, Mr. Harding, Mr. Gottlieb and Mr. Kelly, we welcome you all back again, and you all have spoken, I think, very eloquently today of the constructive work and constructive record of poverty workers as far as arrests are con- cerned, and the constructive work that the Community Action agency people have performed in these recent outbreaks. Let me just add a word on this. I spent 3 or 4 hours last Friday night on the streets of one of our major cities, walking with some of your people, and I was completely favorably impressed by the man- ner in which in that city at that time these people from quite high up the echelon down to the fellow who was out there all the time on the street, were making a real effort to stop trouble and not to create it. Against that one laboratory experiment, I don't seek to generalize, but I commend the people in the city of New York for what they were doing that night and what they are doing right now. This problem is a complex one, and I agree we can't tolerate law- lessness and violence, but neither can we reward it, and our task here in the Congress is, as the people's voice and their lawmakers, to pick out a path and walk a path between the extremes. We `have to pick out the underlying causes, and we must be, as best we can, from the role we play, about the task we' have in curing t'he underlying problem. `One of my colleagues was earlier quoting from Mr. Lincoln. There is an old Arabian proverb, "Don't confuse the intensity of the thirst with the quality of the drink."~ America. has an intense thirst and in my opinion there isn't any- thing thinking Americans can do except agree about the fact of that intense thirst. But our concern as Members of Congress is to look at it and al'so look at the quality of the drink. I think that means we must analyze the nature of that thirst, and we must look at the effectiveness of the drink in slaking that thirst, and determine how better and more effectively we can do it, however good the drink we have been drinking. After 6 weeks of hearings before this committee, and I have prob- ably been at it as many hours a.s almost any other member of the com- mittee, I think the drink is better than I feared it `would be when I be- gan the study, and I think in many, many ways it is an excellent drink. Unfortunately, time is short, and without giving you a chance to PAGENO="1012" 3472 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 more eloquently dwell on the problems, may I ask you a couple of brief questions, Mr. Shriver? You quoted a number of people in your testimony who feel that OEO is not spending nearly enough money. Do you agree? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes. That is why the President asked for a 25-percent increase. `We are requesting $2.06 billion. Mr. DELLENBACK. How much more than the $2.06 billion could OEO responsively spend for fiscal 1968? Mr. SHRIVER. Let me just say if we could get $2.06 billion and go to work, I would be happy, and so would the poor people Mr. DELLENBACK. What if a number of us in Congress looking at the problem become convinced we ought to go further than $2.06 billion and said we ought to go to ~ amount? How far should we go? Mr. SHRIVEn. I am sure you are aware, Mr. Congressman, I am not authorized to make any suggestion of any sum of money beyond the amount which the President has requested. Mr. DELLENBACK. The thing that strikes me is, we look at this prob- lem, and if we really accept the lesson of Detroit, we are not playing with superficialities. We are talking about something that is deep and basic and fundamental, and we have just scratched the surface of what ourproblem may very well truthfully be. We are not in a position to move around with little additions here and there. If some of us really feel that is something we should make major moves on, my question is, are we really talking through this instrumentality of OEO of being only able to go so far this year? The people you quoted talked about doubling and tripling and in- creasing amounts for specific programs in much more than a 25-percent basis. Is that sound? Can we soundly go that far? Mr. SHRIVER. Well, as I said just a minute ago, Congressman, I can only testify on behalf of what we have been authorized to request. That is No.1. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't mean to put you in a box. Mr. SHElVER. No. 2, the Congressmen have to consider not only what we are asking for, OEO, but what has been requested imder the Edu- cation Act., or rent supplements, what has been requested by a number of these bills, which is, of course, what the President is trying to do. Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes, and without talking about any of those specific bills, I think that it is important that America realize ~througli the reporting of the news media, if there is ever any misunderstanding on this, that this isn't the only thing Congress is doing in its attempt to attack poverty. It has moved into welfare, and education. We have wrestled here for hours with the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and we talk about vocational education. We are attacking the same prob- lem, but one of the proper tools is the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity-at least this is the answer given to us by a great many witnesses. Mr. PuCINSKI. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes. Mr. PuCIN5KI. I appreciate the fact that maybe you can get an answer to his question. PAGENO="1013" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3473 Your answer is on page 17 of his statement, where we are funding the small percentages of the needs Detroit, Atlanta- Mr. DELLENBACK. What I am really saying, and this becomes a dialog that we ought to carry on in executive committee, really, if this instrumentality is one we ought to retain just as is, the question in my mind then is: Are we talking about a 25-percent increase, or 50- percent increases, or more? Mrs. `GREEN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. DELLENBACK. Yes. Mrs. GREEN. May I ask how much you requested from the Budget Bureau originally? (The information follows:) Office of Economic Opportunity, budget data [Dollars in millions] Fiscal year 1967 appro- priation Fiscal year 1968 request to BOB Fiscal year 1968 Presi- dent's budget Job Corps 211 330.0 295 National work training programs NYC 2d supplemental appropriation Work experience 326 47 ioo 829.0 (1) 321 70 Kennedy-Javits and Nelsen/Scheuer .. Community Action program: Iieadstart 98 - 351 (1) 349.0 258 472 Other CAP 424.85 767.0 550 2d supplemental appropriation VISTA 24 26 37.0 31 Small business development centers Migrants Rural loans 2.6 33 24 100.0 25.0 27 20 Information and research 44.2 G.D. & A 15 18.8 16 Other Total 1.05 1,687.5 2,500.0 2,060 1 In national work training program estimate. Mr. SHRIvr~it. Again, Mrs. Green, I am sorry. You know I am not permitted to discuss the figures we turned into the Bureau of the Budget. On the executive side- Mrs. GREEN. We do get these figures from the other departments who appear before this committee. They don't volunteer the informa- tion, but in response to a specific question, they do tell us how much they requested from the Budget Bureau. Mr. SHElVER. I will ask the Budget Bureau if I can give you the figures, and if they tell me I can, I will be happy to. It isn't that I don't want to give them. Mrs. GREEN. May I ask if it is considerably more than the $2.06 billion? Mr. SHElVER. I am not at liberty to discuss it more with you. I am sorry. [Laughter.] Chairman PERKINS. Mr. O'Hara. Mr. O~HAL&. I am sorry I wasn't here to hear your statement, but I have had an opportunity to read it, and I wish to commend you. Your characterization of the role of people working in poverty- related programs is in accordance with my understanding. Certainly PAGENO="1014" 3474 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 with respect to the disturbances in Detroit and other Michigan com- munities, I am personally aware of the fact that poverty workers played an important role in an attempt to bring these disturbances under control. I wish to thank your agency and your delegate agencies for the role they have played in these very unfortunate occurrences. I would like to say this about the comment made by the gentleman from Oregon. If the gentleman from Oregon reached the conclusion, and I would be very pleased if he did so, that your program should receive more than has been requested, I would hope that he would first turn his powers of persuasion upon his Republican colleagues. They are the ones who propose a much smaller authorization through their so-called Opportunity Crusade. Mr. DELLENBACK. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. O'HARA. When the gentleman from Oregon has assured me those on the Republican side are ready to come- Mr. DELLENBACK. Would you yield? I am regretful we come back to this political badinage. Our concern here as members of this committee was to wrestle with the underlying problem, and I don't think we need to get off into committee repartee as to what side stands this way and what side stands this way. I think we will find a great many issues and pros and cons on both sides of the aisle and I am regretful we need to talk about what one party stands for. I stand as one individual, and I assume you do the same. Mr. O'HARA. I appreciate the way in which the gentleman from Oregon approaches this, but if we were to discuss at this hearing, before these people and before the representatives of the press, what we ought to do in addition to the requests made by the administratiaon, I thmk we would be fooling the people into believing the situation is a good deal different from what it is. You know, as well as I, the question is not how much over those recommendations this Congress will go, but how near can we come to the recommendations. That is the real problem, and I don't think that wrestling with some imaginary problem about what we might do contributes to the discussion. Mr. DELLENBACK. If the gentleman will yield one step further. What- ever comes out of this committee, will it be based on what you think the floor will pass, or ~hat you think ought to be in the bill? Mr. O'Ehi~. It will be based on what is the best thing we can do, given the attitude of the Members of this Congress and the way they will vote, and I think we will have a. tough fight just keeping the pro- gram the way it has been recommended, and I look forward to fighting with the gentleman in that effort. Mr. Shriver, I would like to ask just a couple of questions with regard to the Job Corps. It has been charged that the Job Corps suffers from not being closely affiliated with the public school systems. It has been charged that the Job Corps is actually in some competition with the schools because it is stealing teachers away from the schools. It has been suggested that the residential nature of the Job Corps hinders its effectiveness because it isolates the members of the Job Corps from contact with a cross section of the commimity. PAGENO="1015" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3475 I would like to have your comment, if I could, on these several charges that have been made with respect to the Job Corps program. Mr. KELLY. Congressman O'Hara, let me take those one at a time. First of all, we don't think that your youngsters are isolated in the Job Corps. We think the youngster that lives in Harlem and has never gotten to 42d Street, for instance is isolated. We have brought our youngsters into contact with a community that they have never been involved with before. We have brought them in contact with the police in a different relationship than they have ever had before. We have brought them into contact with educators in a different re- lationship than they ever had before. One of the things that was very interesting to me last week, I was listening to a recording that was made by a group of girls at the Charleston, W. Va. Job Corps center, and the one word that kept re- curring in their conversation was "care." On's young lady said, "When I was in high school my teacher didn't care. The people here care." One said, "My father and mother never care, but people here care, my counselor cares about what is happening to me." So we would deny that the Job Corps has isolated anybody. We have opened up a new vista for these youngsters. Secondly, we have been involved with professional educators. We have had a contract with NEA in which thesystems have had teachers at the centers. The AEA tells us they have learned a great deal with the disadvantaged, and they-are going to work in the schools that are predominantly going to work trying to educate the disadvantaged. There `is an accrual of benefit because of this opportunity. We have had intern programs to train student teachers. We have a pilot train- ing program in State College, Pa., and we have had othei~ programs that are of that nature. As a matter of fact, we have a women's center that is located right on the campus of the Michigan University. These young girls live right in dormitories, so they haven't been isolated. What a magnificent opportunity to be involved in a university having come from a ghetto. That is not isolation, that is a new vista, a new opening, and a new opportunity, and that is what the Job Corps is all about. Dave Gottlieber, here on my left, is a real professional, Ph. D., and he is an eminent sociologist having written books on adolescence. I would like him to say a few words on that. Mr. GOTTLIEBER. The truth of the matter is that for the first time in their lives these youngsters are getting exposure to a lot of people. They are having an opportunity to get out of the ghetto. I think our relationships with the educational communities have been extraordinary. In addition to the relationships we now have with the educational communities, we have Job Corpsmen learning some- thing about teaching, and they are working in Clearfield, N.Y., as teacher aids, and a variety of other relationships that I think are extremely positive. Mr. KELLY. You had some figures oii Job Corps teachers. I think it is interesting to then note, Congressman, that we have 2,621 people PAGENO="1016" 3476 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 involved in teaching in the Job Corps. Fifty percent came from the public schools, actually 57 percent. Eight percent came from private schools. Nine percent caine from Government, military, or industry, and somebody has said, you know, that we have raided the public school system. I don't think we have. I don't think that in the enormous job that the public schools are faced with, and I am personally supportive of the public school system in this country, I don't think we have trained teachers to any significant degree. I think what we are doing is handling some of the most urgent problems in education. Mr. O'H~A. Let me say something further on that question: There is some feedback, evidently. You have spoken of men going back to the regular school system, supposedly with their skills enhanced after Job Corps experience. Are any of the teachers whO have been working for you returning to teach in the public school systems? Mr. KELLY. The arrangement that we had with the NEA, the ar- rangement was that once they spent a year in our conservation centers teaching that they would go back to their public school system, and that has occurred, and it continues, that program continues. We have more teachers in the program this fall through the offices of NEA. I can't tell you off the top of my head what our attrition has been among teachers. I can get that, but I don't know how many teachers we have lost, or whether they have gone to the public school system. Again getting back to the basis of stigma and isolation, as I men- tioned, a youth from Harlem who has never been to 42nd Street is isolated. A youth who works in the field in California for 50 cents an hour is isolated. A youth from Oregon who has rotted teeth is stigmatized. A youngster who cannot compete in school with his peers is stig- matized. I knew kids that were like that. We had a class that was called the opportunity class in grammar school, and this is back in the 30's, and that class had about 30 students in it. Those youngsters were stigmatized, and they had to put them in a special class, than was being-and this was being stigmatized, whereas in our program, our kids participate. We have student governments at everyone of our centers. They are learning about citizenship. They are in constant contact with adults who care. They live in a healthy environment, and they didn't come out of one. We put in the record early on a book which contained a lot of in- formation about our community relations, and we have some wonder- ful things that have been said by chiefs of police and mayors and so on, and the reason why they say that they participated with these kids. Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Shriver, I intend to support your program fully. Chairman PERKINs. Mr. Gardner? Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield for a minute? I think there is quite a lot of good in the Job Corps, but I am amazed at your method of procedure. I am delighted that you have this prepared on the ques- tion about youngsters who are isolated. I am pleased at that. Do you expect to convince me that a youth from Oregon from- with rotten teeth-is stigmatized as one of the reasons I support Job Corps? PAGENO="1017" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3477 It seems to me you could get a hell of a lot better proof that the- Mr. KELLY. I didn't say there are a lot of Oregon kids stigma- tized- Mrs. GREEN. If somebody in Kentucky has rotten teeth, he is stig- matized. My daughter has to- Mr. GARDNER. I am concerned with the stigmatism. I want to bring up something that Mrs. Green brought up. I share the concern of every- one. I was quite impressed with parts of Mr. Shriver's testimony to- day, but I was not impressed at all by the way you try to whitewash the political activities of OEO. Let's go back to Newark, N.J. I went to Newark. I had the oppor- tunity of spending 4~/2 hours with the police director of the city of Newark, and may I say for the record he is not very thrilled with the performance of OEO funded programs in the city of Newark. I think it would speak well of this committee if we have this gentle- man come down and have the other side of the story. We have been sitting here for 6 weeks hearing your side of the story. Chairman PERKINS. Get him here tomorrow and we will hear him. Mr. GARDNER. I will call him tonight and try to get him down here. Chairman PERKINS. We will hear him. Mr. GARDNER. You have pushed aside very lightly, and I will read for the record, on -May 25, which was exactly prior to the riots breaking out in Newark, the police director sent you an urgent telegram in which he said, "Acceleration of this kind of practice by this antipoverty agency will undoubtedly lead to riots and anarchy in our city." This to me from a person in his position would certainly warrant immediate attention. It took you 3 weeks to answer this telegram. When I talked to him he was completely down on the poverty program, and on you, Mr. Shriver, because of the complete lack of interest you had shown him. You sent him a letter, and he said your vehicles had been used to agitate against the planning board, and you denied this. You said they were being used to carry chairs. I have an affidavit from the police lieutenant who followed this vehicle all day long, asking for people to come out at a mass rally that night. The same thing happened at Durham, N.C. I have checked into this- Chairman PERKINS. Let me say this to the gentleman. Let's not argue but just put the question to the witness and let him answer. If you want to make a speech, go ahead. Mr. GARDNER. May I say, we have been hearing speeches for 6 weeks in praise of Mr. Shriver. It is almost like a mutual admiration society, and when any criticism is brought up, it seems to rub people wrong, but I think they- Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, and criticize t.he program, but put your question. Mr. GARDNER. I am criticizing it now, but in Newark, N.J., and I think in answering Mr. Daniel's remarks-he very casually said re- marks were made by people who drifted around the program, but were not employees. We have sw-orn testimony from the poverty employees from Newark, PAGENO="1018" 3478 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 and had your investigators taken time to visit with Mr. Spina, the police chief, they would have found the same thing. Mrs. Green made a very important point. No, your people are not involved in the actual riots. You went to great lengths to present these figures of the number of arrests. The number of arrests of the total people involved was almost nil. The important thing is that you people are agitating the poor sec- tions of our cities, Newark for a prime example, and Durham, N.C., to go out and demonstrate against the authorized authority in that city, and what happens, it gets out of hand. This happened in Newark, N.J. Now, again, I go back at what I asked you several weeks ago when you were before this committee. Don't you think that the political activity on the part of OEO is a very dangerous thing, and in fact I think hurts the poverty program in general. You went to great lengths in your testimony today to defend the poverty program against political charges. If you have no political activities in your agencies, you wouldn't have to defend it. Do you think it serves the interests of the Nation after what hap- pened in Durham, N.C., using your vehicles to a mass meeting, and as a result the National Guard was called out? Do you think that it serves the interests of the people to be involved in political activity? Mr. SiinIvER. I would like you to think, though I don't think I am going to get you to think that I am as interested in these questions as you are- Mr. GARDNER. I believe that, but there are many things going on that you can't get your finger on because you have 1,050 of these going on throughout the United States. Mr. SmUvER. The last Congress was interested in that, and that is why they put into the bill last year the provision about antiriots and why it was amended to cover from the Hatch Act the overall employees and so on. I also admit that I have on a number of occasions, as I have today, `that we can't police every minute everywhere in the United States, but we do have the benefit that the newspapers are watching these things very clearly, as you are, and all your friends are, so by and large I think it is fair to say that there has been a minimum of any kind of political activity in these programs around the country, certainly noth- ing to do with partisan political politics. Let me say one other thing, please. There is a' qualitative difference, I believe, between the charge which some people seem to make that OEO employees were actually creating riots or inciting people to riots. There is a difference between that issue and politics. Now what I was addressing myself to in these charts was not the issue of politics that you are so concerned about. I was trying to ad- dress myself to the issue of whether or not OEO employees, the direct ones or indirect ones, were actually contributing to inflaming people in riots, or participating in riots. I am not saying you made that charge, don't misunderstand me, but it did appear some places that some people thought that. PAGENO="1019" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3479 Mr. GARDNER. May I still say, I think this was the case, the first part of it, that they helped in the city of Newark to incite the situa- tion that later developed. Mr. SHRIVER. All right. What I am trying to get at- Mr. GARDNER. Here is a statement made by one of your employees on June 27 before a Board of Education Committee-he makes state- ments that blood will be running in the streets, if certain things are not met, and this was only dealing with the employment of a secretary with the Board of Education, and yet I call statements like "blood running in the streets" and saying, "If you don't take a certain action tonight we will see a holocaust." Mr. PUCIN5KI. Would the gentleman yield for a question? Mr. GARDNER. Yes. Mr. PUCIN5KI. Was this person working for a public agency, or with a private agency? Mr. GARDNER. This was a community action agency in the city of Newark. Chairman PERKINS. Hired by local people. Mr. GARDNER. Paid for by OEO. They were hired by the officials of this Community Action Program in the city of Newark. Chairman PERKINS. I think you ought to give the gentleman's name. Mr. GARDNER. His name is Mr. Harry Wheeler, and this is his testimony that I received in the Newark Police Department. Mr. PIJCINSKI. May I get one point clear. Was this person you are talking about hired by an agency that is managed or controlled by some Government agency in Newark or is this a private citizen? Mr. GARDNER. It is a CAP agency in Newark. Chairman PERKINS. They are the agency who did the employing of this individual. Mr. GARDNER. That is correct. Chairman PERKINS. That is the responsibility, I take it, of the local people. That is all in their hands, Mr. Shriver, to hire and fire local personnel to direct CAP? Mr. SHRIVER. That is correct.. It is also true that if somebody can show us, under the directives that I have issued, that somebody is actually inciting people to vio- lence, that I have taken over to myself the power, you might say- somebody said I didn't have it, so I took it-to suspend people on my own motion if I had the facts in front of me. I have suspended a number of people on my own motion on the basis of facts produced for us by the investigation department. This case that Congressman Gardner speaks about here now, what this man said, it at least seems to me to be both a possible case of en- trapping people to riot. It could also be a case of merely predicting what in that person's judgment was going to happen. Sometimes when somebody says, "If you don't do something, this is going to happen," the person to whom you say that feels what you are doing is trying to get it to happen, whereas in fact all you are predicting is what would happen. Let me give you an example, Congressman Scherle: There is no use shaking your hand. Mr. SCHERLE. You are pretty naive. PAGENO="1020" 3480 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. SHRIVER. Thank you. I a.m glad I am. If I had the other atti- tude, maybe I wouldn't even be able to help here. But it is possible to have people predict something and have people say, "What you are trying to do is causing a riot." We have VISTA volunteers, who are by and large decent American youngsters, to go in a moderate way to a city council, or even a local po- litical leader, and say, "Listen, you know there is real trouble down here in this place. If you don't do something about it, there is going to be a very good chance something will blow up." The guy to whom it is said says, "That guy is threatening me." He isn't actually threatening him. He is trying to say what is going to happen. It depends a great deal on the way a person reacts. I sat as the president of a board of education in Chicago for i~ time, who said a lot of things inflammatory- Mr. GARDNER. Were they Government employees ~ Mr. SmuvER. Yes, sir. I have had union organizers in a board of education meeting say they would close every school in Chicago, they wouldn't give anybody any lunch. "We will throw everybody out of school, we will close the school system up." I could have taken the attitude that these guys were trying to close the school system up. I think they were bargaining very aggressively. I am not saying they were right or wrong, but somebody could have said they were inciting the employees to a strike. Again, I am not trying to condone this case in particular, don't mis- understand me. We have, as I testified here earlier, we have had inspec- tors up in Newark and so has the State of New Jersey, up, at any rate, until recently the inspections made by the State people in New Jersey, who are not connected with us at all, corroborated what we had learned earlier. Now, maybe they were wrong. I am not saying they were wrong or that we weren't wrong. What I am saying is that it was also an honest difference of opinion that these statements were not made for the purpose of creating a riot. Mr. GARDNER. I could probably go along with your line of thinking had not the same situation developed numerous times in Newark prior to its development on the date of the riot. We have a copy of a. handbill passed out throughout these areas in Newark. It says, "Stop police brutality. Come out and join us at the mass rally tonight at 7:30." The rally was held in front of the fourth precinct. Here is a police memorandum that identifies seven ~UU workers who were protesting and involved in this thing. What I am saying, Mr. Shriver, is that. t.here cannot be so much smoke and not be fire there. These people turn up repeatedly at every demonstration prior to the major riots. These are people who were in positions of leadership in the poverty areas. Chairman PERKINS. Let Mr. Shriver respond. Mr. SHRIVER. All I want to say is that we have done everything we know how to do administratively to prevent anybody directly or in- directly being financed by us from inciting people to riot or partici- pating in riots. PAGENO="1021" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3481 If Congress feels what we have done is not adequate, then I think it is up to Congress to modify the law. We have done everything we know how, anything that the General Counsel has suggested that was constitutional, I have done all I know how to operate an inspection department., and the inspector here is a very distinguished American and an able one, and we have done our best working with the mayors and the community action people, and we have done all we know what to do-in truth, with a thousand community action agencies running across t.he country, and with thousands of employees, direct and in- direct, there have been very, very, very few incidents of the type to which you refer. Have there been any? Yes, there have been some. But where we got the facts we moved as fast as we could. We have to move constitution- ally, too. Mr. GARDNER. May I say, I think you have given the ideal solution. I think Congress should act. Mr. SHRIVER. Fine. Mr. PtXCINSKI. It would be my hope that the charges made by the gentleman from North Carolina would be checked out. I believe we have staff members down in Newark and I hope this information could be turned over to them for full information. We should know exactly who these people are, who they are working for, and what role they have played in this. Mr. GARDNER. May I say, we have testimony from several people- several of them- Mr. SHRIVEn. Actually, we have that information already. Sometimes it happens in political life. Let's say you are in office and I want to get your job. Sometimes it isn't. a. riot but a couple of guys fighting over a job. Mr. PUCINSKI. I am very much interested in this, because we have seen in the riots that t.he first charges made are charges of police bru- tality. The first thing they do is get people worked up against the police and their alleged brutality, and I think we ought to appreciate the difficult job the police have. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. O'Hara. Mr. O'HARA. I think the gentleman from North Carolina has brought up an interesting point on which I can throw some light. The gentle- man who made the prediction of blood on the streets may have come from Detroit, because that was a popular expression there atone time. In 1952 the largest newspaper in Detroit predicted there would be "blood in t.he streets" if the Democratic candidate, Blair Moody, were elected on the next day. . . Whatever else I might think of its opinion in that matter, I don't think the newspaper was trying to incite the people of Detroit to riot and I never even made that accusation, as angry as I was. I think we ought to look at the current problem with a little bit of perspective. I would like t.o direct to the chairman a parliamentary inquiry: Did I understand the chairman to say to the gentleman from North Caro- lina that if he wanted to bring some witnesses from Newark to testify on the involvement of poverty workers in the civil disturbances in Newark that. the chairman would hear them tomorrow? Chairman PERKINS. I made this statement. PAGENO="1022" 3482 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. O'HAI~. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call your attention to the fact that this committee adopted a resolution at its last regular meeting in which we agreed to send staff investigators to Newark and other places where disturbances had occurred, and obtain reports from those staff investigators before any witnesses were called to testify on these matters. I would request the chairman would review the minutes of that committee, and see if they- Chairman PERKINS. That is my recollection, but I have never denied the minority a single witness they have presented to the committee, and the hearing will be concluded tomorrow or the next day, and at this late hour, if the minority wanted to call a witness that would have a bearing upon any Hatch Act provision, or any other provision in the bill, I would not deny the minority, and I would suspend the res- olution that was adopted here, unless the committee on its own made the decision. Now let me entertain your views, Sargent Shriver. There are several more questions to be propounded. I know I have several questions. Do you want to run it on here tonight, or do you want to come back tomorrow morning? Mr. SHRIvER. I will suit your convenience, Mr. Chairman, and the other members of the committee. We are here, and we are more than willing to stay. If it is more convenient to come back tomorrow, we will come back tomorrow. It is up to all of you. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Chairman, if everything else is equal, I am pre- pared to continue going. We have the witnesses here. We have the ma- terial. These people want to get on with the job. Bringing them down for a hearing like this means they have lost a whole day at a time when I think the whole country, as Mr. Shriver says, wants the program moving. Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Chairman. Chairman PERKINS. Yes? Mr. GOODELL. This entails a decision as to how late you want to go. I think we have run 2 or 3 hours, and I don't we ought to impose on anybody here for that length of time. Mr. PUCINSKI. Why don't we try 6 o'clock and see what happens? Mr. 000DELL. I hope your decision, Mr. Chairman-I was not here when the decision was made, but your decision to call anybody from Newark would be for an executive session or something that would be- Ohairman PERKINS. I made no decision along that line. I responded to Mr. Gardner. I said that I had not denied the minority of any witness, and would note that this testimony had a bearing on this legislation. Mrs. GREEN. I think, Mr. Chairman, the record ought to show that the motion was made and adopted by the committee. It seems to me that if we look at it carefully, that such a mandate- nobody is going to be able to carry it out to investigate in any of the cities in the LTnited States and report back to the chairman immedi- ately, and it would seem to me that when allegations are made, that they-that we would be in a better position when the bill is taken PAGENO="1023" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3483 before the House to present the true facts in regard to these allegations in Newark or any other place, than it would be to go to the floor of the House, than it would be to have allegations or charges made, and then have members say we are sorry we didn't investigate that. So, I would point out first, that by action of the committee in execu- tive session, the chairman was not precluded from hearing any wit- nesses that the chairman decided to invite, and second, it was abun- dantly clear from all of the discussion in the executive session. a week ago that any such invitation to witnesses would be in an executive session also, in a closed hearing, for the very purpose of trying to find out both sides, both of who may or who had made accusations, and `the head `of the poverty agency who had denied the accusations, to hear from both of them, so this committee would be in a position when we go to the floor whether these allegations are true or not true. I am sorry there is this position to really not find out what happened on the part of the members. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. `Chairman? Chairman PERKINS. Yes? Mr. PUOINSKI. I would agree with `the lady. That is why I said originally the gentleman from North Carolina has brought before the committee some significant material, and we have the resolution in- structing our staff to look at these things, and that is why I suggested our staff be notified immediately of this. I presume they would have a chance to look into this, and if mi- `nority counsel wants to join them, I `have no objection. I agree that when we go to the floor with this bill,. we ough't to have all the information, and not leave out any facts that would obscure the basic purpose, the success of this program. I feel the staff ought to clearly investigate the material brought forward by the gentleman from North'Carolina. Let's have all the facts. `Chairman PERKINS. We would let the public get the impression that the antipoverty workers in this country were responsible for the riots, if we commenced to call witnesses in here. It would be additional to the unfounded presumption that our poverty program was not working in America, and I think we would do the program unjust and undue harm by calling witnesses in here insofar as riots are concerned, and I think that the committee took the right step in directing that the staff gather information and that we will share that information, the ma~ority,'the minority, together, compare notes with Sargent `Shriver, and if we can improve the legislation in any way as a result of the investigations, naturally we will write something in the act. But if the minority, on their own initiative, and I think the charges are to a great degree political-I say that unhesitatingly, and it is for that reason that I offer the minority a chance within the next day or two to bring witnesses in here-if they want to on their own initiative. I don't think they will be able to bring any witnesses in here-they may find some isolated incident where somebody has gone overboard and made statements that they. should not have made, but by. and large, to my way of thinking; the poverty program has kept down riots in America and has made great contributions in that area. I don't think we ought to becloud the picture by somebody, or some few people that have violated the law, because in each branch of the Gov- PAGENO="1024" 3484 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 ernment we have someone who violates the law, not only the legisla- tive, the executive, the judicial, all the branches of the Government. So because of the timing-and let the opposition tie on to a program that has worked very effectively in keeping down riots, and try to turn the thing around in the wrong direction, I think is very harmful and it is for that reason that I don't think-this thing is so broad, we need a bipartisan investigation, as bipartisan as could come about, and to say here that Sargent Shriver or some member on this committee is trying to keep down that type of investigation, I think we may do harm to a bipartisan investigation by making flimsy charges without merit, and if anybody on this committee wants to bring a witness, I have stated my views. Unless the committee directs me otherwise, I think the witness they bring in should bear on better legislation instead of trying to make politics out of such a grave and important matter in this country, but I would not foreclose the opportunity on the minority; if they want to bring in a witness here, we will hear that witness, whoever that witness may be. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Chairman? What is the procedure now for ques- tioning the witness? Chairman PERKINS. It can continue so far as I know. Mr. Quu. I am ready to ask questions. Chairman PERKINS. I am going to call on Mrs. Green. The 5-minute rule; we will go on again. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Shriver, I am not sure I understood what you said a minute ago, that with regard to policemen you would bring in 13- and 14- and 15-year-olds and train them as what? Mr. SHRIVER. What I was trying to describe was a program that was under the community action in the city of Detroit. What they did there is this: They get kids-let's say, teenage, 13, 14, 15, 16-and they bring them in and call them the junior police cadet corps, some phrase like that. * In the mornings, they muster them at the police station-I saw them actually being mustered-about 50 kids, each morning, let's say at 9 or 8 a:.m. They give them a little uniform, a sort of crash helmet- excuse rile- Mrs. GREEN. I think it is clarified. I was afraid the statement might be misunderstood. At another point you said you had people supervising the pools. Mr. SHRIVER. That was in Chicago, and it was firemen. Mrs. GREEN. The way I understood you, you were going to bring in 13- and 14- and 15-year-olds as assistant policemen. Let me turn to Hleadstart. Would you tell me the difference between the Headstart program as it is operated under the Office of Economic Opportunity and the preschool programs that are operated under titles I and III of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act? Mr. SHIUVER. Right behind me is sitting Joe Sugarman who runs the lleadstart program. Perhaps it would be better to get more detailed information from him than from me. May I ask him to answer it? Mr. StTGARMAN. Mrs. Green, what is absolutely possible under title I and what is legally possible under the Headstart program are the same. PAGENO="1025" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3485 What actually happens under title I tends to be significantly differ- ent. It tends to be significantly different in the sense that the normal title I program, or the typical title I program, first of all, limits itself only to the educational component of the Headstart program, and in that it provides generally a staff averaging one staff member per 25 children, where it is typically- Mrs. GREEN. Why is this? Mr. SUGARMAN. Because local educational authorities have hoped with the choice that they have under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to spread the money to more children. Mrs. GREEN. Is it true they don't have the amount of money, that the amount of money that we give to the schools, for instance, in a preschool, which you say is legally identical to Headstart, that they have about $250 per child, and that we have, if I understand it, about S1,100 for Headstart per year for a 9-month program? Mr. SUGARMAN. That is correct, yes; but the difference there is, that the 250 is on top- Mr. SHRIVER. The difference is that the 250 is on top of the amount spent for average daily attendance-it depends on what the local school board spends-on top of which goes the 250. Mr. SIJGARMAN. And it is possible by concentrating funds that the school system can expend tha.t 250. The other features, if I may continue, Mrs. Green, that the school system does not have typically is a medical program, and-a program for parents-a social service program, and a nutritional program, as part of their Headstart operation. Mrs. GREEN. Have you examined these so that you can say on the basis of persona.l knowledge, because I happen to know a lot of pre- school programs, and they do concern themselves with the medical care of the child and with guidance and counseling people. Mr. SUGARMAN. I depend basically for my knowledge on the Office of Education and the people who had-who administer title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. On the basis of information they give me, I think those are probably not typical programs you have seen. As you know, that act is very permissive in nature, aiid there are variations between systems. Mrs. GREEN. You feel my personal observation is not typical? IV~r. SUGARMAN. My feeling, yes. Mrs. GREEN. How do you account for the fact that educators across the country have testified in favor of transferring the Headstart. to the Office of Education, so that we could have these programs handling the same youngsters? Mr. SUGARMAN. I think there are many school administrators who see this only as an education program and therefore one which logi- cally belongs in a function that is an educational organization. Second, I think that a number of school administrators- Mrs. GREEN. Excuse me. What do educators think ? Mr. SUGARMAN. I will testify that they think education is a more cognitive and typical concept, typical of what one would find in a kindergarten program today, where there are specific learning objec- tives for all children in the class, rather than a program of individual- ized development interested in taking an individual child and trying to develop him in the ways that are most appropriate to his need. SO-084-67-pt. 4-65 PAGENO="1026" 3486 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Now it is true that many educators would not voluntarily come to this objective, but have been forced to it by the necessity of financial limitations. Mrs. GREEN. I must say I disagree heartily with your definition of what public schools are doing in public school work. It is at the same age level as Headstart, and I disagree heartily. I have watched them, and I have seen them in many, many places, and they did it long before OEO got started. Mr. SHRIVER. Could I say something on that ? It is my understand- ing that the Director of Headstart Followthrough in the Office of Edu- cation, this new program-Dr. Egberg is his name-that he subscribes to the concept that Headstart ought to stay where it is even though he is responsible for the Headstart Followthrough program. Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Shriver, isn't it a fact that even if there were private differences of opinion, and I happen to know because I have talked to a lot of people in departments and agencies who have told me privately differently, but isn't it true that every person who is part of the administration has to publicly say it is undesirable to transfer Headstart- Mr. SHRIvRE. I wish that would happen when some people- Mrs. GREEN. Do you think that even though they privately held this view they could publicly say this? Mr. SHRIVER. It has happened many times in the Oongress in my lifetime. Dr. Egbert, I don't think he is in the Government yet, so he is not in this straitjacket that you think exists. Mrs. GREEN. I am surprised at the straitjacket, and you don't think it exists when I ask you how much you requested from the Budget Bureau? Mr. SnRIv~. I am-I agree that is a document that we produce for the President. I believe there is no question a.bout the fact that I am not authorized to testify about that. That is correct. If I can get the figure released, I will get it released. We did release it, Mrs. Green, last year and the year before, to the Appropriations Committee. The chairman of the Subcommittee on Appropriations did get the figures, and they are in the record of the Appropriations Committee for the previous years. All I am saying is that I don't have the right under the system in the executive branch to discuss those figures without permission. I will try to get them. Mrs. GREEN. May I say that people very high up in the poverty agencies were not permitted to come up here and say they are not per- mitted to come up. Mr. SHElVER. I suppose there are some who are not permitted to testify about lots of things. There are some of them who probably want to testify that the shoe not be transferred and they can't come. I don't want everybody to testify from OEO, otherwise we would be here for 6 months. Mr. QUIE. I think this is becoming quite, clouded. I think it is an administrative position that Headstart should not be transferred to the Department of Education. and anybody would endanger his future in an agency if lie testified differently. I think this is recog- nized by people in the Government and I don't think this is useful. PAGENO="1027" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3487 Maybe it is because I am impatient in having to wait all this time to ask questions this afternoon. I have quite a number of questions to ask about the whole progTam of OEO and the way you administer it. When I went home this week- end, I ran across a friend of mine who has been involved in some of these programs. He asked me a number of questions about the neighborhood health program and the Center. I thought perhaps this evening, since the time is limited, that I could go through these first. I heard of a few of the health centers, and-it looks like somebody is going to do some work around here-how many Neighborhood Health Centers are there now in operation in `the United States? Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Chairman, I presume you have a whole series of questions to ask. I am wondering if it would not be a kind of cour- tesy to Mr. Shriver to give him 5 minutes. He has been here since 2 o'clock this afternoon. I am going to stay and listen to my colleague's questions, but I think he needs a breather. Mr. SHRIVER. I don't need any break, to tell you the truth. If some- body else wants one, that is fine. Chairman PERKINS. Why don't we run along here a couple of hours and get through tonight? Mr. PUCINSKI. Yes, but we should have a 5-minute recess. Mr. Qurn. Let me go on with the questions. Mr. SHRIVER. This is Dr. Joseph English, sir. Mr. QUIE. Dr. English, how many of the Neighborhood Health Centers are in operation? Dr. ENGLISH. As of this moment, there are eight in operation? Mr. Qurn. Where are those eight? Dr. ENGLISH. Well, there is one in Columbia Point, two in New York City- Mr. QUIE. Mr. Chairman, are we losing the general of the group? Chairman PERKINS. No, we are not losing the general. He is just going to answer a question, I presume. Go ahead. Mr. Qun~. I have some questions for him, too, about the programs. I have to get through some of the technical aspects. Dr. ENGLISH. There is one operating in the city of Boston, two in the city of Denver, two in the city of Chicago, and there are a total of 41 which are now funded through the country. Mr. Qrn~. And sometime in the next year if you receive the ap- propriations will they be in operation? Dr. ENGLISH. Yes, sir, the ones appropriated are out of fiscal year 1967 funds. Mr. QUIE. Beyond that how many do you plan for this coming fiscal. year? Dr. ENGLISH. That will depend on what the appropriations are that are .to `be given to us in fiscal 1968, when we know the total amount of money that is available to OEO and then have a chance to assess that against the estimate in the President's budget, fiscal 1968, is $60 million for Neighborhood Health Centers. Mr. Quin. Those that are funded and presently in operation, how many of them are giving free drugs to the Neighborhood Health Center? . Dr. ENGLISH. Almost all of the ones that are in operation that I am aware of would be providing drugs as a part of the care there. PAGENO="1028" 3488 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Quru. Mr. Chairman, I would suggest we meet in the morning and get Sargent Shriver. Chairman PERKINs. He will be right back. Mr. QuIR. How many of the health centers have the patients who go to a retail outlet and how many provide t.he services free in the health center? Dr. ENGLISH. I could check that out to be absolutely sure, Mr. Con- gressman, but all of tile Centers functioning now provide drugs at tile Center at the time of treatment. Mr. QuJE. So there are not any where you use tile title 19 system of social security for tile acquisition of drugs. Dr. ENGLISH. In all of the Centers, would you ask the grantee to be asked that all Federal funds are incorporated for services even includ- ing title 19? They would be reimbursable for all services under title 19, including drugs. Mr. QuJE. So they would secure their drugs for the Center, and then the Center would be reimbursed? Dr. ENGLISH. That would be one possible arrangement by which it could happen. Mr. QuJE. That is the arrangement. Dr. ENGLISH. Yes; that would be the plan of the program in that area in most of the Centers functioning now. Mr. QuJE. Do you have figures on the number of people who do re- ceive funds under title 19, and those who are not eligible, sir? Dr. ENGLISH. We could submit that to you for the record. We could tell you that Centers are receiving reimbursement from title 19, yes, sir. Mr. QUTE. How does the income requirement for the non-title-i9 patients compare with the earnings of the title 19- Dr. ENGLISH. In many States that have implemented title 19, so far just people who were on various kinds of the categorical assistance have been switched to title 19. There are many other indigent people who require health services that would not yet be covered yet to the extent to which the State has implemented title 19, so if they met the poverty criteria in that community, they would be eligible for the serv- ices, and that would vary greatly in the various parts of the country. Mr. QuiE. What is the availability of free drugs in the health centers? Dr. ENGLISH. If they qualify for general medical care from the Center, they would also qualify for all tile range of services there, in- c-ludmg the drugs. Mr. Quu. I understand in some of the Centers you do not limit them to rncon~e but rather limit them to the area in which they live, and they can get free medical benefits- Dr. ENGLISH. Well, the area in which the free programs are under- way have such high concentrations of poverty that nearly all the people there would qualify for the services by the poverty criteria. In our guidelines if 80 percent would be eligible under the poverty indices, the only question for eligibility is: Are you from the neighbor- hood? Mr. QuIR. What has happened to the drugstores that have been in operation in those neighborhoods which have a center at the present time? PAGENO="1029" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3439 Dr. ENGLISH. There has been some concern on the part of many of the drugstores in the areas where the centers start that they will suffer some Toss of services because of the pharmacies that are set up in the communities where neighborhood health centers are beginning. It is for these reasons that we urge the neighborhood health people who are a part of the plan as well as the physicians to consult with the local pharmacist to deal with that problem and consider how they can best contribute to the program starting in the community. Mr. QUIE. If all the residents of the area where 80 percent or more qualified can receive free drugs from the neighborhood center, what is there left for the drugstore to do after that? Under title 19, 1 understand they can secure their drugs from a private vendor, and they would be reimbursed for those, as long as- Chairman PERKINS. Would the gentleman yield for a point of in- formation? Mr. QUIE. Yes. Chairman PERKINS. It is my understanding that under title 19 of the Social Security Act that there is a partnership between the State and the Federal Government, bearing on the ability of the resources of the State. For instance in my area, the State of Kentucky, then is may be on a 75/25 basis. In the areas where you have the Neighbor- hood Centers, and furnish drugs, is the State participating and pay- ing their share of the cost along with the Federal Government where you are furnishing the drugs? Dr. ENGLISH. Yes, sir; as soon as the State has implemented the program in the way you have discussed, they would reimburse the Center for the services given, and that would include a State share of the cost. Mr. QuIE. That only occurs for those who qualify for title 19 ben- efits. The State does not participate in any way in the. payment of services for any of the other figures: Is that right? Dr. ENGLISH. That is correct, sir; because in many States of the country they have great difficulty in even providing the 25 percent that was mentioned by the chairman, and so this is a gradual implementa- tion of title 19, and it is very different, for example, in New York City as compared to Kentucky, Alabama, Mississippi, or other States of the Union where i.t is more difficult to get the local share that the State provides. Mr. QUIE. As you expand these neighborhood health centers, could we say, then, that the private drugstore owners-that it is very likely their business is going to be reduced substantially in the future, and it will undoubtedly endanger the future of quite of number of them? Dr. ENGLISH. Well, sir, that issue, you see-the guidelines that we distribute to a community that is thinking about doing this talks about comprehensive care and reducing the barnes. It is comprehensive care. One of the things that our doctors tell us is that it is very important at thetime they see a patient to be sure the drugs are available to tha.t patient at the time the doctor writes the prescription. So the drugs are there for the patients to take with them, and they can be instructed on how to use the drugs, et cetera. Any way a local community wishes to set it up so that that kind of PAGENO="1030" 3490 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 comprehensive care is provided-what we are concerned about is if the care is comprehensive. If the drugstore, for example, were right across the street from the center, and were easily available to the people being seen at the center, there is no reason the. people COUldll't; go there for their drugs. But if the drugstore was a long way off, and there was some concern about that kind of problem, then it is possible that the community might invite the drugstore to set up a branch within the health center. So there are a. number of options that could be considered by com- munities that are beginning such programs. Mr. QU]IE. But at the present time none of them has made arrange- ments for a private vendor of drugs. They all dispense them within the Centers. Is that what you said? :Dr. ENGLISH. I didn't hear the question, sir. Mr. QuIE. I say, so far, all these neighborhood health centers have not made arrangements for a private vendor to furnish the drugs, but provide them within the center. Is that what you told me? Dr. ENGLISH. Yes; that is correct, though that would not be true of many of the new programs that were funded this year. There are some variations on that approach in some of the new programs I recall, and in at least one or two of them it is my recollection that pharma- ceutical services were sufficiently proximate to where the centers were going to be, that it would be worked out with a pharmacy. Mr. SHRIVER. This issue came up in Watts, where the drugstore man near the center was worried he was going to be put out of business, and he. is on the board of trustees. He is not out of business at all. The big worry is that somebody is going to give away something somebody is handling, and that is not happening. Mr. Qu~. Wouldn't somebody give away drugs that somebody else is selling in the center? Mr. SHRIVEn. If the drugstore is 5 miles away- Mr. Quu~. What if it is not 5 miles away? Mr. SHRIVER. Then it will be incorporated in the center. It has been taken care of in Watts, and it will be. taken care of elsewhere.. Dr. ENGLISH. That level of concern was felt by all the local prac- titioners in the area, including the pharmacies, and the Watts Phar- maceutical Association is represented together with a local physician, and they have a chance to come to grips with how total comprehensive care will be provided and they are represented as well as everyone else who has an interest in this. Mr. PUCINSKI. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. QrnE. Yes. Mr. PuCINsKI. I am not sure you are driving at this, but you are talking about people on poverty and to a great extent on public wel- fare, so if the center has drugs it can give away, what is wrong with that? If somebody has to pay for them, it is the taxpayer who has to pay for them. Mr. QUIE. Under title 19, the beneficiary can purchase the drugs from a private vendor. Mr. PUCINSKI. Who pays the beneficiary? You and I. Mr. Qmi~. The taxpayer. Mr. PUOINSKI. If OEO could negotiate some other procedure and PAGENO="1031" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3491 make those drugs available, I don't see why that should be a horrible thing. Mr. QUIE. If this expands to the cities, where I have heard that there is an area where people live in poverty, that the private businesses go out and-whenever there are 80 percent or more in poverty, that means the other 20, 19, 18 percent who are not in poverty also can receive free drugs. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Shriver has stated that these people for the most part are in the planning stages, that these programs are not put together here in Washington. They are put together by local com- munities, in the communities which know the local problems and who work at the local solutions and those local businessmen then sit in on those boards. Is this correct, or am I mistaken? Mr. SHRIVER. What Congressman Quie wants is what a lot of other people have said. They want to have assurance that no doctor or dentist or druggist is going to be injured by the arrival of this program. Mr. QUIE. Or put out of business. Mr. SHRIVER. Or put out of business. So far that hasn't happened. We have had this problem come up. The Watts case was a good case, there were eight doctors out there in what was called the John Bruce society, and it worked out. It has been handled at the local level, the doctors, druggists, and dentists got together at the center and solved it. It differs from place to place. Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield? In response to Mr. Pucinski's question, you said the local people made the decisions. In the program you outlined with respect to Portland a few weeks ago, where you make provisions that a thousand poor families will be selected and total hospital and medical care will be provided for them, wasn't that decision made here in Washington, that this would be a program that you would put into operation in Portland? Dr. ENGLISH. That was a proposal from that community, though, Mrs. Green, that it be done in that way, in an already-existing health care system. In other words, that was an extension of the Kaiser- Mrs. GREEN. Prior to the application, but the people in Portland were not involved in any other way except the application, which you approved of. Isn't that correct? Dr. ENGLISH. The community action program in Portland par- ticipated in that program, so that to that extent the community was involved. Mrs. GREEN. Before your approval of the program? Dr. ENGLISIr. Yes, ma'am; that is my recollection. Mr. SHRIVER. Actually, that wasn't so important. It was a mis- take-the guidelines says that the local community action group must participate. In those cases where something went wrong, we heard about it pretty fast, and you might say backtracked and came back in again, having made the contacts in the community to make sure that it did represent the community attitudes. So if it isn't done that way, it is wrong; it was a mistake. Maybe it was a mistake. I don't know. PAGENO="1032" 3492 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Quie. What about eyeglasses? Do you furnish them free at the centers like you do in drugs? Dr. ENGLISH. If that were necessary in a given center, the peopie doing the program would ask for that kind of authority from us. If that was important in the giving of care, and we wo~iicl certainly in- clude that in what could be provided by the center; yes. Mr. QuIE. How do you pay for eyeglasses now? Dr. ExGi~IsIi. The center itself would pay out of OEO funds fcr eyeglasses if, for example, title 19 or some other source of support for poor people were not available. Mr. Qun~. So the present neighborhood health centers that are in operation, OEO pays for them, but they go to a private concern to secure them. Dr. ENGLISH. I would have to check that out. There are many varia- tions. I think what you say is true in many of them. Mr. QITIE. What about dentures? That would be another example. Dr. ENGLISH. Yes, sir; it would be the same thing. We would try to provide that care right at the center as a part of the dental program. Mr. QUIE. So they would receive their dentures from a dentist who was hired by the center and not be able to go to a private dentist. Is that right? Dr. ENGLISH. That would be true in many programs. There are other programs that I caii think of where they in effect do go to a pri- vate dentist for that service because of the situation in the particular local community. The other thing I would want to emphasize, Mr. Congressman, is that in a target area where a person has help for title 19, it is their choice where they go. They may go to a private practitioner, or to a center, or get the drugs at the center pharmacy, or if they choose to go to a pharmacy outside where, under title 19, they would be eligible for this kind of help, they could do that. Mr. QUTE. That is the title 19, but the remainder do not have that choice, do they? Dr. ENGLISH. If there are no other types of programs that would help a medically indigent person other than the center, that would be the only place they would receive care. Mr. QulE. Isn't that the only place the beneficiaries who are not title 1$ beneficiaries can receive their drugs? They would not be reim- bursed for those that were purchased at the private vendor? Dr. ENGLISH. A person who was eligible for title 19 and caine to the medical center for care could receive free drugs there, and the title 19 reimbursement would be to the center. Mr. QUIE. You do not permit this for the patients who are not title 19 beneficiaries? Dr. ENGLISH. I see your question. I cannot tell you the practice on the operating centers in that. We will be glad to check it. Mr. PUCIXSKI. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. QITIE. Yes. Mr. PUCINSKI. Regardless of what the practice is, it is one that is established by the local community. You don't set the criteria. A local community comes to you with a grant request, and they spell out the procedure and the mechanics for carrying out the medical health center under the poverty program, and the local advisory board-the local PAGENO="1033" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3493 medical people, pharmaceutical people, the optometrists, dentists-are the people who put together the package and come to you, and what- ever forms or procedures are spelled out are procedures that have been determined by the local committee commensurate with its abilities. Isn't that true? Dr. ENGLIsh. Yes, sir; that is correct. Mr. QUIE. I think there is a concern, however, of the people who are present vendors that they are paying taxes to fund this program and that the result is that it puts them out of business. They have a good reason to be upset about it. I know that any other business-if a group of people receive 90 per- cent funding from the Federal Government and the end result will put private enterprise out of business, I would think we would take a very serious look at this. Mr. PUCINSKI. Would the gentleman, if he has any evidence of that-I would like to see it, because if what you are saying is true, certainly we want to change it. However, I would like to see some evi- dence that when these programs are put together at the local level with the local community participating and drawing up the mechanics that private enterprise is being either put out of business or is experiencing any severe competition. The gentleman has stated repeatedly-the witness has stated repeatedly-that in every instance where a program like this is put together, the local businessmen are consulted and they participate in establishing the procedures under which people want to take advantage of the medical center. The procedures under which they can take advantage of these things-it seems to me the local merchants, the local professional peo- ple are adequately protected. If the gentleman has any evidence to the contrary, I would like to see it. Mr. QUIE. Let me ask another question. *Were all the dentists in Massachusetts and Denver, Cob., consulted with, and did they approve of dispensing drugs free? Dr. ENGLISH. The program in Denver was one of the first that got underway, and that was done under 205 funds, and it is possible that under one of the very first of these programs there wasn't the kind of consultation that our guidelines urge with private pharma- cutical, medical, and dental societies. The legislation actually calls upon us now to urge-that was reinforced in section 211 last year, and I must say that we have set up liaison now with the national groups that represent all of these interests, so they are able to communicate to us any such situation where consultation is not held, and then we can assist, and we do try to be helpful in that way. Mr. SHRIVER. Didn't you mean it was under 207 funds? Dr. ENGLISH. Denver was 205 funds. This was the one center that began under 205. If you wanted to put into the law an amendement that said that we had to do what we are doing; fine. That has been done many times before in our law. I must say, Mr. Congressman, that when a program begins in a community, particularly if it has some Federal support, PAGENO="1034" 3494 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 there is this kind of concern. There has been with physicians and dentists and pharmacists, because one of the things they begin to dis- cover that there are 350,000 people in Watts, and the center that we have is going to be able to serve 30,000 of them, you see, and title XIX, hopefully, is going to be financially helpful to all the people who live there. As the center begins and heighten, the local doctors and the local dentists and doctors usually experience an increase. I know of very few instances where the development of a neighborhood health cen- ter has resulted in less work for the physicians in the total community as well as the relatively few served by the community itself. Mr. QUIE. What would you do in a neighborhood where there were more than 80 percent of the people for a person who has people sub- stantially higher than the po~rerty level receiving benefits, what would you do about it? Mr. SHRIVER. I think the answer is that the doctors in Denver think what you say is correct, and in Denver because it was the first one that went into operation, and the consultation that is not the guidelines now were not carried out. Why? Because we were doing an experiment, so I think their worry out there was a legitimate worry based on the local situation in Denver, but Joe English is trying to say, I think, that the communities have to respond to it now. that is, in the last 6 months, under which 90 percent of the existing programs have been financed, require this type of local involvement that lie has been describing, and under them we haven't had any complaint that I know about, have we? Dr. ENGLISH. Last week, we met with 21 representatives of the National Association of Retail Druggists in order to set up a more effective liaison between our office and the national office here in `Wash- ington, so if they heard of a community, for example, where the local druggists were not participating- Mr. SHRIVEn. Let me say one final thing: It is not our objective to put anybody out of business or even hurt anybody's business. Most of the people, with whom we are working, do not patronize these stores or doctors now because they don't have the money to do it. Dr. ENGLISH. OK, sir. Part of the problem when you listen to the people in communities, who are involved in starting centers that they describe, is that when they are sick and they come to a, health center for health, one of the first things they are given is a form, a very coin- plicated determination of eligibility. `When you are sick that is not exactly the way the people in the communities where our programs are being developed want to be greeted. They want to be helped. That is why we say in the area you describe where 85 percent of the people are qualified the only question they are asked about eligibility is, are you from the neighborhood, and if they are, they get help. In that 1~nd of situation what our guidelines recommend is that sometime in the course of the year everyone in the target area perhaps when they are coming in for preventive health services but in the. course of the program here are asked to sign a simple statement of income that insures to us that they are well within the poverty criteria that make them eligible for that service. PAGENO="1035" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3495 We leave it then to the program itself and to theneighborhood people there to work out precisely how that works. They suggest it to us and we have a chance to review it and particularly at the time of refunding to be sure there are no abuses. Our experience in the operating centers right now is that the neigh- borhoods are most concerned about this. They are actually tougher than the doctors are because they are concerned that the people who really need this kind of help get it. I think the best monitor we are going to have in most communities is not just the physicians but the neighbor- hood people themselves who would be concerned if anyone of high level income would be getting such services free. Mr. QUIE. Do you suggest we use the same poverty line nationally or can they adjust it up and down? Dr. ENGLISH. \~Te urge in our guidelines to use the poverty figures. Mr. QUIE. You urge them but don't require them. Dr. ENGLISH. In some areas, they want to use the same eligibility as title XIX which is a little broader ihan our poverty indicia. If they wish to do that we will go along with whatever the states medical def- inition of medical indigency. Mr. QUIE. Have you placed in the record at any other time the guide- lines that are used for the health centers? Dr. ENGLISH. No, sir; we have not but we would be glad to do that. Mr. SHElVER. They are awfully long. It is a book. Mr. QUIE. How "bookish" is it? Dr. ENGLISH. It is about 40 or 50 pages. Mr. SHElVER. It does not make any difference to us because we have copies of it. Dr. QUIE. Have you got it broken down? Mr. SIIRIVER. That is the broken down version of it. Mr. QUIE. If the 40- or 50-page one is brol~en down, I wonder how capable the people at the community are. Mr. SHRIVER. Maybe you are interested in the part that deals with the eligibility of people for service in the center. That is a relatively small part. Mr. QUIE. That is what I am talking about. Dr. ENGLISh. We could submit that part and an appendix that ex- plains it further. (The requested information follows:) [Excerpt from booklet, "Guidelines-Comprehensive Health Services Programs," February 1967] G. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA No eligibility determination should be made at the time of need or request for service, beyond verifying that the patient resides in the area being served by the center. Eligibility criteria must be established and eligibility determinations made in such a way as to be consistent with the objective of eliminating financial, ad- ministrative and other barriers to needed health services. The center should determine as soon as possible (1) whether the individual meets the programs' criteria for free care (which must be established in accordance with OEO stand- ards set forth in Appendix F), and (2) what other agencies may be responsible for paying for services to the patient. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Shriver, throughout this testimony today we have gone into many aspects of this program but I am intrigued by this one statement on page 17 whereyou say that right now OEO is funding PAGENO="1036" 3496 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 in Detroit representing only 14 percent of the need of this city and in Hartford we are spending 6 percent, New York 10 percent, Atlanta 21 percent. In my judgement this is probably the most significant statement you have made. It indicates to us how far we have to go to give these cities what they need. Am I correct in reading this statement that these requests have been made by the cities? These programs are being submitted by the local governments, by the local administrators? These are not standards that you have estab- lished, are they? These are programs of need that have been developed by the local community? Am I correct in this ? Mr. SHRIvEn. That is correct. The only qualification I want to add is that the local community, generally speaking, has asked for even more than these figltres would reveal. In other words, 14 percent of Detroit's need is what both they have asked for and after we went over what they asked for and cut it down somewhat we agreed to. In fact, they asked for more than this. Mr. PUCIXsKI. You iire talking about the local people who have surveyed the needs of their con~rnimity and have come to you with a series of programs and proposals and grant applications and have said to you, "These are the things that we need to cure the problems of poverty in our area and all of the things that go with it," including the rioting, and. what not. We have been talking for nearly 5 hours about the various aspects of the program but I am impressed by the fact that it is the local people who have surveyed their needs. These are the people who know most what their community needs. This is not some bureaucracy in Washington making this decision. These are the local people. The fact is that you are able to fund only 14 percent of these needs that have been ascertained by the local people in Detroit and that you have been able to fund only 6 percent of the needs spelled out by the people of Hartford. I was wondering how big a job it would be for you to give us a table on all 1,050 of the communities that are knocking on your door for help and what percentage of their needs are you meeting? It seems to be this is the story that should be told to this Congress. There are a. lot of fellows around here who should know a lot of these programs. But I am impressed when the mayor of a city comes to you and says, "Mr. Shriver, these are the things I need." He knows what he needs. I don't know what he needs but he knows what he needs. I would like to see how much of this mark we are hitting with this program. Now, could we get that? I think this would probably open the eyes of Congress more than anything else you could say around here because these are programs being planned by their people, not by the Federal bureaucracy, but by the local people in these communities. Could we get such a table? Mr. SHRIVEn. Let me say we could give a good, calculated estimate which would cover all of them. Some of them have very fine perfected figures, especially the bigger cities with more sophisticated apparatus there for getting all of that material. In those cases you might say it would be 10-percent accurate but PAGENO="1037" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3497 when you get down to the rural areas some of the figures would be more of a guess, so the figures would not be absolutely provable as a precise amount but we could come close. In places like Detroit, Chicago, and places like that we could come to it right on the nose. Mr. PUCINSKI. As we listen to the debate develop here on this pov- erty program, our colleagues on the other side would have you believe that somehow this is a big Federal program with the Federal Govern- ment injecting itself into community after community and just run- ning the whole program. It seems to me that, if I read your state- ment correctly, what you are doing is trying to respond to the requests being made by the local governments. They administer these programs. They are the ones who originate the programs and manage and administrate them. Mr. SHRIVER. Your basic approach is accurate. We are not saying to, say, Minneapolis that it has to have some one thing or another, but we try to respond to what they say they need. Among some 20 places there are small places like Pueblo, Cob.- now, we could supply that right now. I think the important issue here is twofold, one the issue that you brought up. I think it is very impor- tant and I agree. The second issue is this: Sometimes some people say that you have invested, let's say, $20 million in the ghetto area of Detroit and yet there was a riot. Obviously the $20 million must have been misspent or ineffective; otherwise, there would not have been a riot. I think, in addition to that kind of approach, one has to stop and reflect for a minute on what the genuine need would be for the down- town area of Detroit, let's say, as compared to what we were able to put in. I think that the mayor of Detroit or the mayor of any big city, and I don't care what city and I don't care of what party he is a member, to come in here and tell you just what we have been able to do with the programs we have does not begin to touch what he wanted from the programs we have. Mr. PUCINSKI. That is the important thing. Mr. SHRIVER. $20 million is a lot of money, but $20 million is very little money when you consider the aggregate of the needs of those central cities just for our programs, regardless of other people's pro- grams. I must say sometimes you read about the fire on the aircraft carrier, the Forresta7. I said it cost $70 million. The legal services program even expanded for next year is only a $47 million for all of the needs of justice for all of the poor a.nd you cannot help but feel sometimes it is a tragedy that sometimes we lose $70 million out there and over and above the loss there is a tragedy that that amount of money could be so profitably used for the poor. Chairman PERKINS. Let's talk about the health program for assist- ance under title XIX. Mr. QUIE. Mr. Chairman, before you go into that, I would like to ask one question along the lines of questions raised by Mr. Pucinski. How much would it have been necessary to spend in Detroit to have Prevented to riot? Mr. SHRIvER. I don't know that. I suppose the best person to answer that is the mayor of Detroit. Mr. QUIE. Or Rap Brown. Mr. PucINsKI. That is not a fair statement. Rap Brown is an idiot who should be sent to Maryland to stahd trial and I hope he gets the PAGENO="1038" 3498 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 maximum of 20 years. I think we could get a measure, Mr. Shriver, of needs from the mayor of Detroit, and I think the thing that ought to worry the members of the Michigan delegation and all of us in Con- gress is that you only have been able to fund 14 percent of the programs that the people in Detroit say are needed. They have come here with a program and they have said this is what we need. You have only been able to fund 14 percent. The people in Chicago have come to you and have said this is what you need and I don't know the percentage you have been able to fund in Chicago. But it seems to me the significance of your statement on page 17 is that it does give us a measure, at least some measure, of the needs of these local people. The more I listen to this debate, the more I am persuaded by the fact that this program does give local communities a chance to survey their own needs. If you can give us the figures for the 1,050 communities, I think a lot of Members in Congress will have their eyes opened on their par- ticular districts. I think it would be important for Members to see what is happen- ing in their own communities and their own areas, and what little percentage of these needs we are matching with programs now. Mr. GARDNER. If the gentleman would yield for a moment I would like to explore your point for a moment. I think it is a very valid and good one. It is my understanding in many, many cases and you have 1,050 throughout the United States, a mayor has little or no say-so as far as funding by OEO. We hear quite a bit about the local people being in charge but in Durham, N.C. for example. there are very few local l)eople involved in the actual operation, paid employees. Most of them are outside who have come into Durham. In talking with people in Newark we found exactly the same thing. We found very few people in the higher echelon in the program who were from Newark and who were familiar with the problems there. Isn't this stretching it a little bit* to say that the local people have complete control over the mayors. I don't know what the situation is in Detroit but this would not be true in some areas with which I am familiar. Mr. STIRIVER. I think the faet is Congressman, on the board of direc- tors, of the local community action agency all of the people are loca.l people. For example, in Newark all of the people on the community action agency of Newark, are residents of Newark. They are Newarkites, and they are all Newark people. They go and employ people from wherever they wish. We don't say to the people in Newark, or Durham, or Wash- ington, D.C. that the only people that those citizens on the board of directors can employ have to be people from Washington, D.C. Mr. GARDNER. Who makes the request, the board of directors or the mayor's office? Mr. PuCIN5KI. Who does it in Durham? Mr. SHElVER. In the case of Durham, it is the community action agency of Durham. Frankly, I don't know if the mayor is on that or not. Mr. G~umDmn~n. He is not. Mr. SIUUVER. He can be on it. In the legislation we brought up to PAGENO="1039" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3499 you 5 months ago there is a provision in the legislation which we have asked you to approve, which specifically states that the mayor or his representative must be, unless they take themselves off voluntarily. Frankly, Congressman, many mayors did take themselves off volun- tarily at the beginning, one to get it off of the area of riot discussion. The mayor of New Orleans decided he did not want to be on. Art Naftallon, the mayor of Minneapolis, decided he wanted the health and welfare council of Minneapolis to be the community action agency. Let me repeat. We did not require him to make that decision. This was a local decision. Some mayors now say they wish they had decided a different way 2 years ago. In order to make it possible for that to come about, if they wanted to change their mind and get on, we proposed in the law you have pending in front of you, an amendment which would require the mayor or his representative to be on, if they want to be on, so the problem you are worried about in Durham under the law, under the proposed law, would be eliminated. Mr. GARDNER. What has been the rate of turnover among board mem- bers of your community action program? Do you have any figures? Mr. SHRIVER. Offhand I don't have any figures but I would suspect there has been substantial turnover in 2 or 3 years. That is not peculiar, however, to local community action agencies. There is turnover on most local boards whether they are a local con- servation board or a local board of education. You have to remember too, all of these communit.y action agencies boards were new 21/2 years ago and we found that a lot of people who originally said, "Yes, I want to serve on here," when they found out they had to put in a lot more work than they wanted to, got off and different people got on. Mr. GARDNER. Were there any people dissatisfied with the program who resigned? Mr. SHRIVER. Certainly, but that does not mean they were right. Mr. GARDNER. It does not mean they were wrong, either. Mr. SITRIvER. No, that is correct. No one could say all local school boards are perfect. You have elections all over the country and you have frequent arguments whether they are good or bad or indifferent, and whether they are teaching about the Government, or the U.N., or what have you. I think there has been considerable turnov~er and I think it is be- cause of the reasons I am trying to describe. One thing is that Congressman Quie put an amendment on the bill last year which many people think was a very good amendment. Under that rule we had to have every community action agency with at least one-third of the people poor, that is, residents of the area. Mr. GARDNER. Did you think this was a good rule? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, I had no objection. Mr. PUCINSKI. Some charges have been brought here which are go- ing to be clearly investigated-at least I hope they will be investi- gated. As you know, I have never been a great devotee of that theory. I think these programs ought to be run by responsible people in the community. Our good friend over here put that one-third rule in. He invited trouble. He is now fighting and criticizing the program be- cause he did get people into the program that Mr. Shriver has no con- trol over, that the local government authorities have no control over, and nobody has any control over. So today they are flexing their PAGENO="1040" 3500 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 muscle and the very thing I predicted would happen, I suspect, may be happening in many areas. I think maybe the gentleman from Minneapolis may want to take another look. I am happy to see the amendment being offered now- the mayor of a city ought to be on this program. He is the man who has to go before the electorate every 3 or 4 years and account for his stewardship. I trust local officials. I might tell the gentleman I would bet of these 1,050 communities with which we are dealing as much as 60 or 70 per- cent of these local governments are Republican controlled. So, I am not making any great appeal on a partisan government bases, but I happen to trust local officials. These are men who have to go before the electorate every 2 or 4 years and they must put their record before the voters and get re- elected. Mr. GARDNER. May I commend the gentleman from Illinois. He sounds like a Republican. Mr. PUCINsKI. That one-third rule was forced through. They bit their nose to spite their face. They came in here and thought they were going to hurt the big cities so they came in with this one-third doctrine of theirs and they got it through the Congress and now we have come full cycle. Now they are complaining and they are trying to blame the OEO and blame Mr. Shriver and a lot of other people for things which are hap- pening over which they have no control. Mr. QtrIE. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. PucINs~I. Sure, I yield. Mr. QuiE. The gentleman is putting words in my mouth when he says I am criticizing it and when he says I came up with a second con- clusion that it is poor. I think involvement of the user population is really a Republican philosophy. I want the government as close to home as possible. Mr. PucINsKI. Ask yourself how many of your people voted for the poverty program in 1964, how many of your people voted for the amendments, and how many of your people will vote for this time. Don't tell me about your philosophy. Mr. Qun~. We supported the amendment the last time. Mr. SHRIVEn. The only reason why I brought it up, Congressman Gardner, a part of the turnover this past year is occasioned in many cases by, let's say they were 25 percent poverty representation. In those places somebody had to get off in order to bring the proportion up or poor people had to be added. I am not trying to make a big deal out of it but there are factors involved other than dissatisfaction. Mr. GARDNER. I would be interested in knowing the percentage. Mr. SHRIVEn. We will try to find out what it is. Mr. QuIE. If the poor truly select their own representatives, we would be interested in knowing what it was in the future. Mr. SmuvEn. I wrote you a letter this morning in reply to your letter about two places. It was straightened out beforehand. Mr. Quru. Do you mean they gave wrong information? Mr. SHElVER. I don't remember the letter in detail but it is in your office. If the board selects the members rather than the poor selecting the poor, they are satisfied with the selection. PAGENO="1041" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3501 We put out a memorandum explaining what we thought were four or five alternative ways in which the representatives of the poor could be chosen legitimately and democratically in keeping with the intent of your amendment. That was issued sometime ago. There were about five different ways. The places that you were concerned about chose one way that maybe you don't like-I don't know-but it was not an illegal or immoral or duplicitous arrangement and people under that scheme are chosen to the extent of 33 or 35 percent. If the Congress wants to modify the law to say they must be chosen in one way that is your prerogative. We feel there are alternative ways and the alternatives that we outlined are on the record. Mr. PucINsKI. If my colleague will yield-they keep talking about the poor but tell us how you want these people to be chosen, do you want them elected? Do you want them selected at the townhall meet- ings? How do you want them selected? They always run for cover and say we don't want to tell anybody how to do it and then they come back and criticize saying we have the wrong people on the board. Sometimes it is very hard to keep up with just what the devil they want. Mr. Quiii. Is it acceptable for the people of the poor in the neigh- borhood to only dominate representatives and then the board them- selves actually do the selecting or the mayor actually do the selecting? Is that acceptable under your guidelines? Mr. SHRIVER. We have said that a convention method rather than a direct balloting system would be agreeable provided that in a neigh- borhood all of the organizations and people in the neighborhood were genuinely re'ached by advertising, word of mouth, meetings and so on. So we do require and we try to police it to be sure that is actually done so if all of the residents of the area have really been genuinely informed, and if then in a series of conventions or gathers if they then nominate all people who are poor and all of whom live in that area and they have 30 nominees for 10 openings, we have a rule that it was not a violation of them being residents of the area-your amend- ment-if 10 out of the 30 were chosen by the mayor or the board itself because all of them had to be residents of the area to begin with and they were all nominated by people from the area. Therefore, none could be construed to be chosen from above. They were nominated from below and somebody chose out of the 30. I am not trying to claim it is perfect but we were looking for alternative ways and it seems to n'ie that it is not undemocratic. Mr. QUIE. I think it is. I think the poor should be able to select their representatives and the rest of the people should be required to serve with them. Mr. SHRIVEn. What we have is a matter of public record. If some- body does not like what we have done they can say it is illegal or change it. All I am trying to say is we are not trying to do it wronp. One of the things I have learned in this job is a terrific appreciation for the variety, the differences among communities across this country in all ways, about how city government, county government and all that works. It is just not a monolith anywhere; they are all different. We have tried to be responsive to those differences and we have tried to avoid 80-084-67----pt. 4-66 PAGENO="1042" 3502 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 sitting here in Washington and saying everybody has to do it our way. That is why we have five or six different ways. Mr. Quii~. One of the things people have objections to is that other people affluent in the neighborhood can't take their right of representa- tion away from them. As long as there is some money involved we should put out guidelines protecting this. Mr. SHRIVER. We have put out guidelines. You can obviously change the guidelines if you feel they are wrong. I take it, Congressman Gardner and Congressman Pucinski, may feel they should go the other way. Mr. QuiR. I may have some boards who prefer to be self-perpetuat- ing. Mr. SHRIVER. Under the bill pending before you for about 5 months it is spelled out they can't be self-perpetuating. They have to be staggered terms. That is all in the bill. Roughly, the bill before you represents an honest attempt to deal with these problems that we are now discussing here. I honestly believe if you enact that bill you would find lots of the things you worried about would disappear. Mr. PUCINSKI. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. Qrn~. Yes, I yield. Mr. PUCINSKI. The concept I have advocated ever since this pro- gram was started is that you have an elected official who must come before the electorate and account for his stewardship. Either he has done a good job or a bad job and if he does a bad job he gets defeated. My colleagues have discussed this one-third rule not out of conviction but of spite that they were going to hurt somebody in the big cities. Actually what they have done is create a great deal of unnecessary dissention in communities. Mr. QuTE. This is the smokescreen you throw up when you want to deny some people have a right in their own program. Mr. PUCINSKI. I don't want to deny anybody a right of anything but I think whenever public funds are concerned there ought to be. an accounting. The basis of this Republic is the ballot box and I think the voters have a right to come and say you have done a good job or bad job. I am amazed to see my great colleague who holds himself as a de- fender of t.he public does not want to go the route of the ballot box in the spending of huge sums of taxpayers' money. They are coming and going and they can't quite make up their minds on the program. Mr. Qu~. There have, been mistakes in a number of programs that have been financed by the Federal Goveriirnent. Housing is a good ex- ample. The people who were to be. involved were not involved in rais- ing and planning t.heir own expectations. To me this is a failing. As I have looked at the poverty program, the one thing that I felt that stood out as an ingenious device that I be- lieved in and as I have seen it operate, even though there has been controversy about it and I believe in it, and that is the participation by the poor. I have always felt the director should have the statutory backing. That is the reason for my amendment to make sure there was one-third representation of t.he poor. You have not found me critical of that in the past and until it has proven to be a failure, I shall not change my opimon. PAGENO="1043" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3503 Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Shriver, I take it from your statement that you do not have any neighborhood health centers in any, States that have failed to take advantage of title XIX of the Social Security Act. Am I correct? Dr. ENGLISH. No, Mr. Chairman, but we have centers where title XIX has not been implemented. Mr. SHRIVER. The answer is we do have them in States where title XIX has been implemented. Chairman PERKINS. Would you supply that information for the record. Dr. ENGLISH. Mississippi would be one, Mr. Chairman. Mr. SHRIVEn. How about Alabama? Did you see Governor Wallace OK'd our neighborhood health center for Alabama in advance? Mr. PUCINSKI. That must have been cause for good celebration in your shop. Chairman PERKINS. Let's talk about eligibility a little. Who are the beneficiaries other than the various categories set out under title XIX that are eligible for assistance and for the States participating? Do you have the local people who make the determination or just who makes the determination about other groups of the poor who will re- ceive assistance other than the specific various categories of public assistance? Dr. ENGLISH. The guidelines advised the local community that is beginning a program like this that anyone in the area who would be eligible for help from the poverty program would fit within the poverty indicia in effect applicable to that area would be eligible for medical care at that center. That would mean in a State that has implemei~ted title XIX some people being taken care of at that center would be reimbursed and there would be many others that would not be covered by title XIX but we could pay the total cost of their care. Chairman PERKINS. Your operating costs would cover the costs of the others? Dr. ENGLISH. Yes, sir. Mr. QUIE. You do, however, have an income level higher than either your poverty guidelines under other programs or title XIX income levels; isn't that right? Take for instance Denver. I keep hearing about a pretty high in- come group of people who are receiving the medical benefits at the health center. It seems to me there was some rebuttal saying 65 per- cent of the people are below the poverty line which means 35 percent are above the poverty line. Dr. ENGLISH. Denver is a good example, Mr. Congressman, because in the area where the Denver center is operating-and we could get this completely for the record-SO percent of the people meet the cri- teria for poverty as defined in the guidelines. We have talked to Dr. Johnson repeatedly about this issue. There is a simple eligibility de- termination made in the course of a family's contact with that center during the year that assures that there is no exception to the fact that they are within the poverty criteria, but we are not aware of any abuse of that on the basis of our site visits and examination of that program operation. Mr. QrnE. Do you use the $3,000 income with graduations up and be- low for that? PAGENO="1044" 3504 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Dr. ENGLISH. They would have the eligibility guidelines which we would be glad to submit for the record. For exami?le, in a family of six people it would be $4,000 for a year total family income. Mr. Quii~. This is Denver? Dr. ENGLISH. As far as I know I could check that out for you but I think these are the criteria used at that center. Mr. QUIE. The information that is printed in the press shows there is considerably higher than that. Of course, that does not mean it is true. Dr. ENGLISH. We would rather check it with Dr. Johnson for you. Mr. QmE. Would you supply that for the record please? (The information follows:) 303T#Ly rRCX- 0 DENVER DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HOSPITALS) MAXIMUM FAMILY INCOME FOR ELIGIBILITY TO RECEIVE BENEFITS UNDER CHILDRENS BUREAU (HEW) AND NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CENTER (OEO) PROGFAMS CU ?CR33~.5 I D~C .3 S 6 80.4 - To j(030 1199 120C~i4~ 500-1799 jaOO-2099 2002393 ).~00.2499 7022559 ~0B2.3299 3330-3599 3500-3399 109 [1 F ~N3N0-99 ~L3NE 23.03 3~ $1 100-124 23.04-20.04 I 125-149 28.05-34.61 150.174 34.62-40.33 : 8jf - ---- 17S~199 4o.39_46.H~ ---- - 200-224 46.15-Ť=lJo ~;S~ O~- -- ~~3~~S_O : I ------ .---.- . 220-049 50.92-57.63 200-Z74 57.69-43.40 - 275-299 63.46-49.22 I 300-304 325-049 69.23-74.99 75.00-00.76 .; I :~ ~i ~`0Q0-4499 300-374 80.77-06.53 8/300-4799 3/5-399 86.54-92.30 : : , 1 ~000-S099 - 400-404 4Z5-;9 92.31-95.07 93.00-103.54 40C~74 475-499 109.62-015.37 103.30.159.611 ~! .- -- ---. . 050-524 11S.34~020.14 1 . I~ :0:7: 5300-3399 5~43-C69$ ç300-0999 ~~4.6299 1303-6599 8(30-6599 7L00.7499 575-599 33.66-135.45 00-7759 620-549 600-504 135.46-144.20 j 144.23-159.93 ~0-3309 6SC-~M9 100. 05-151.53 C0-0299 750-749 151.54-173.27 01-0599 755-70) 173.05-M4.6; PAGENO="1045" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJXITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 3505 Mr. QUIR. You said on page 6 Of your statement that you consider those who would mock our laws, shatter our peace, burn our homes, kill our people to be enemies of our country. Now, it is true that in all cases anyone who would burn homes or kill people would be enemies of our country. But do you believe in all cases that the local poverty workers out to abide by any local law? Is that what you are saying, that they should never in any cases refuse to accept local laws? Mr. ShRIvEn. I am hesitating just to try to figure out what kind of a law that you would be considering. I think it is true- Mr. QIJIE. Civil rights people are quite upset about the number of local laws. Mr. SIIRIvEii. Where a local law is in opposition or opposed to the laws of the IJnitecl States, I would not say that, no. Mr. QUIE. Let us take as our example, the local housing ordiDances ~i t times where it is not a matter of straight discrimination. The civil rights people would take action not only in strictly civil rights re- quests of discrimination but also if the effect tended to be discriminatory. My question would be then, Would you require that any Community Action agency which is funded would not be able to take action, say political action, to protest against local laws to try to get the local city council to change their laws and to get the legislatures to change their laws? Mr. SI-IRIvER. No, I never intended to imply that. Maybe the ex- pression "mock our laws" is not a strong enough expression. Our position has been the poor, in fact everybody, has a right to express their opinion about the laws in one way or the other and that the poor should not be estopped from expressing their opinion about a law which they find harmful to them any more than anybody else. I did not mean to imply that they did not have the right of protest. That is in the Constitution and we certainly are not trying to take away the con- stit.utional rights of American citizens. What I was trying to get at in this paragraph here was that as it says there "mock our laws." Maybe that is not the right word. What I was trying to say was hold the law up to ridicule as such, the law itself. The other thing is quite obvious, as you said. So with respect to the law we could not possibly put ourselves in the position of taking away a civil right like the right to protest which is in the Constitution or to have assembly, as they call it, in the Constitution and the other provisions of the Bill of Rights. Needless to say we support those. Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield one second? I would like to explore this. Mr. QrnE. I yield. Mr. GARDNER. Let's use a hypothetical case. If a city wanted to build a hospital in a certain location and they were going to have a bond issue, do you think it would be the responsibility of your poverty workers if they were opposed to this, if they felt in some way it affected the people living in the poverty area, to go out and actively march in protest in front of city hall, in front of a board meeting and disrupt what was going on? PAGENO="1046" 3506 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Would this be within their rights? Mr. SHElVER. Let me say, like most hypothetical cases, it is not a very easy thing to speculate about. That is why the Supreme Court never takes hypothetical cases or gives declaratory judgments. Mr. GARmcTR. Let's use the exact case of Newark. Mr. SHElVER. Or the one in Durham where the people object to the location of an urban renewa.l project or to a housing project. Mr. GARDNER. I am speaking now of your paid poverty workers, not the average citizen on the street who has a right to do it. I want to know what your ruling is concerning the paid workers. Mr. SHElVER. I think the paid workers do not lose their rights simply because they are paid workers any more than a soldier who is a paid soldier. He still has a right to express his personal viewpoints. Mr. GARDNER. `Would this be along the lines of protesting "police brutality"? Mr. SHElVER. What I am tr'ving to say in those sentences there is anyone who can encourage or excuse violence, who is against anything we stand for-I read to you the guidelines we have before. It is not a question, Congressman, where I can sit up here in Washington and say it is wrong to protest police brutality or any other kind of brutality because if there is genuinely brutality then it would be right not wrong as an American citizen to protest it.. It would be right to protest bru- tality of a bureaucrat. If I were brutal and work for the Federal Government, that does not mean I become above criticism for brutality. Mr. GARDNER. So you would condone poverty workers marching against city hail and rioting and picketing. `Who determines if it is a. genuine situation? Mr. SHElVER. That is what citizens in this country do, I think. Mr. O'HAit~&. As I understand the law, the restrictions of the I-latch Act are applied to employees of local community action agencies since the salaries are paid in whole or in part by Federal funds. In other words, the same restrictions upon political activity are applied to community action people as are applied to any other Fed- eral employee. I believe that uniformity is the correct policy. Cer- tainly we should not require one standard for postal employees, In- ternal Revenue employees, Park Service employees and then exact a different and higher standard from employees of local community agencies. In each case we have the problem of whether or not the person is exercising his right of free speech. The scope of free speech has troubled the courts for a long time. Of course a person cannot shout "fire" in a theater because that goes beyond the realm of free speech. But we cannot constitutionally re- strict the right of freedom of speech or protest or expression. There- fore I don't see any point to our talking about doing it. It is not within our power to change that rule and happily that is so. That right of protest is just as strong when you are wrong as it is when you are right. It has never been required that a person be right in order to exercise his freedom of speech and I do not think Mr. Shriver intended to imply that. All they need believe is that they are right. Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield? PAGENO="1047" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3507 Mr. O'HARA. Yes, I will be happy to yield. Mr. SHRIVEn. Thank you for clarifying me on that. Mr. PuCiNsici. Mr. Shriver, earlier the lady from Oregon raised some questions about the Job Corps and Readstart in particular. Because of the limitation on time I do not think we received a complete answer from you and your colleagues. I was wondering if you would care to elaborate at this time on why the school superintendents are so insistent on transferring this program to the Office of Education. It seems to me that the program is working very well. I do not know of anything that the country has uniformly agreed on as the success of the Headstart program. It just seems to me that if you start fooling around with this program now that it is working so well would be a great mistake. Perhaps you can offer some suggestion of why there is this con- certed drive to spin it off into the Office of Education. Mr. SHElVER. I join with Jule Sugarman who earlier testified that it is sort of a natural thing that many people who are in the busiuess of education professionally conclude th~t if something has an educa- tional component, an important educational component, `that there- fore it ought to be in the Office of Education. That goes for anything. Mr. PUCINsKI. Headstart is really more than just the educational process of the youngsters. Doesn't this involve parents and the com- munity and everybody else as well? Mr. SHRIVER. That is right, and Mrs. Green and others know there is an interest in some parts for superintendents to do the things we are doing in Headstart. There are many other things where this is not so. You yourself have seen this in a variety of places and so have I. This is not to condemn anybody but it is a fact that educators, that is the professional public school educators, naturally think that any- thing to do with education where public money is used ought to be strictly within the jurisdiction of the Office of Education. Actually that is not altogether true. We don't do things that way. For example, the Defense Department ha's a large educational program that is not within the Office of Education. The State Department has a large educational program that is not there. The former Com- missioner of Education, Frank Keppel, took the position as a matter of philosophy `that he rejoiced in the fact that many, many different agencies in the Government were invloved in education because he saw this as beneficial. I think the current commissioner, Harold Lowe, feels the same way but that does not mean everybody in the educational establish- men:t in the United States feel that way. Some people feel when a Headstart program originates in their area that it constitutes some sort of a threat to their monopoly over the total educational process in their community, so they are recently full of that. They see, or some of them see, Federal money coming in to operate a program which has an educational part over which they dont' have coiitrol, so they don't like that. Now, in addition to that, the idea of Headstart as being a community action device is foreign to most Americans. They don't understand what we mean by that. What we actually mean is that Headstart has proved to be the PAGENO="1048" 3508 ECONOMIC OPPORTtYITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 best catalyst for bringing people together, bringing the rich and poor together, bringing the races together, bringing different religious groups together to focus on the prOl)lems of these children, so it actu- ally is creatlnQ' communities where communities did not exist before. this is particularly true in some of the States in the deep South and elsewhere, so we see Heacistart as a community action program, not as an education program. But the very idea of community action is novel. It is very new in this country. Therefore, you can't expect lawyers automatically to see legal services as a commumty action program. They are beginning to see it more and more but at the beginning it was not quite that clear. `You don't expect to see all of the doctors understand that these neighborhood health centers are community action programs right at the beginning. A large proportion of brightees, sort of most imaginative of them, do see it that way and they do not object, but others do object. That goes for all of our programs. `When we start a program, any program in any field, if it is a manpower program, an educational pro- gram, a health program, a justice program, there is always somebody already in existence who says, "Well, I ought to run that program."' `What they don't see frequently is the community action of it is more important than their little piece of it. `\`\Te have a tough time explain- ing that. I am confident myself that it has not penetrated enough people yet to make it advisable to turn it over to anybody else, especially to a group which looks upon it primarily as being an education rather than a human renewal program as Bill Kelly sometimes talks about the Job Corps. Jules Sugarman said he would like to make a few more points on that issue and perhaps with that permission we could give him a miii- ute or two to do that. Mr. StGARMAN. As I said earlier in my testimony there are many excellent Headstart programs that are run by school systems. But taken as a whole the typical school system has difficulty with at least three of our concepts. No. 1 is the involvement of parents. Most school systems have yet to really understand and feel the need for involving the parents in the process of child development. No. 2 is-and this is limited to certain parts of the country largely- the school systems have been unable or unwilling to operate in accord- ance with the requirements of the Federal law. The existence of an alternative system which would operate within the requirements of Federal law has been a constant thorn in their side and I think much of the opposition has come from that particular group. Thirdly, I think too many school systems have been more or less closed societies, not only closed to the parents but closed to volunteers, closed to nonprofessionals, closed to many other kinds of people who could make an effective contribtuion to the program. This is changing. `We have seen some changes in the city of Chicago in the last year and I think it is changing in many communities in the country, but it is only changing because OEO exists as an alternative, and OEO has the ability to insist that certain kinds of things be done in a program. PAGENO="1049" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3509 This leads to disagreement, to friction and to opposition. Mr. PUCINsKI. Mr. Shriver, I have listened to you for 51/~ hours here and you have made a fantastic presentation. You know this sub- ject. I don't know of any man who is more honestly and sincerely dedicated toward the success of his program than you are. You said earlier this afternoon that perhaps a substitute bill is designed to get you out of it. I say here and now, and I think the American people are sooner or later going to agree with me, it would be a tragic day when you leave this program, because I don't know of any man who have been better qualified, who has the grasp of the problem that you have. This program for the most part is successful and it is a tribute to you and the people whom you have assembled around you. I hope at this crucial time in America we can join hands with our colleagues on the other side and look at this program. If there are shortcomings, let's correct them. Then let's get on with the business of removing the causes that are really hurting the country today. I want to congratulate you for your impressive testimony before this committee today. Mr. SHRIVER. Thank you, Congressman Pucinski, I appreciate that. Chairlnan PERKINS. I too want to join in those remarks. I think you have just accomplished so much at this stage of the game. I feel that Congress would not want to commit such a grave error as that and lose all of the experience gained and have you pass that experience along to some agencies at some future time if programs are spun off at some time in the future. As chairman, I have a note from Mr. Goodell, who says that he cannot possibly get away from a meeting this evening, I am going ~o let Mr. Quie finish his group of questions and that will only leave Charles Goodeil, so at your convenience either today or tomorrow, we will have you return tomorrow at 2 or 3 o'clock. Mr. SHRIVER. I haven't any idea what my schedule is but I will be glad to come back whenever you want me back here. Chairman PERKINS. Let's agree on 2 o'clock tomorrow afternoon. Mr. O'HARA. May I ask a few questions after Mr. Quie has finished? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. QUIE. I would like to go into the Community Action agencies a little bit more. I guess you know my views on the representation of the poor; they ought to be able to select their own representatives there. The other two-thirds or less than two-thirds made up of other grouns-I know some Community Action boards are made up of one- third of the welfare agencies where each of the agencies selects a member for the board and they can replace them any time they want to and then the governing bodies can do this, although some of them, it seems to me, are self-perpetuating agencies and it. seems no one selects them outside of the board, itself. They came in there at the selection of the board and they stay on there year after year. I think in this area there is just criticism from Mr. Pucinski and Mrs. Green has raised those questions but where they really represent no one in the community, have you given this consideration in terms of any changes that need to be made in Corn- PAGENO="1050" 3510 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 munity Action boards in order that everybody on the. board at least represents some group or groups in the community? Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, we have, and we have attempted to cover that in the bill before you. That is our bill before you that has been pending here, lo, these 5 months. In that bill we attempt to spell out exactly the kind of thing you are talking about so that the people on the board do represent specific areas in the community, that they do have to rotate, they just can't get on there perpettually and then perpetuate themselves. The law that we drafted was our best effort to deal with the problem you brought up. Therefore, Congressman, I think all I can do is corn- mend to you the bill which has been proposed.~ This is the bill which we have proposed. We think it covers the question which you have raised. Mr. Quii~. At the present time, some Community Action boards ac- tually select the representatives on the board. Would this no longer be permitted? Mr. SHRIVER. That is right. That is what the proposal proposes. Mr. QUIE. Another question I have, which is away from the board, and that is your summer youth program, for which $75 million was appropriated by the Congress. As I recall there was little criticism of doing that and Congress went along quite willingly. The only criti- cism I have is, it was a crash program, the plans had to be drawn up in a hurry, and many programs didn't get started right after school as they should. There are two things I hear. One is that they should have another crash program next year and do the planning early and, second, don't we need something year rormd as a program rather than just a summer program ? Mr. SHRIVER. I agree with both of them. Mr. QUIE. Do you have in H.R. 8311 a proposal for the summer funds and for the year-round program where, if that bill were enacted and fully funded, of $3,060 million that that criticism could not be made by community people? Mr. SHRIVER. No, it is not in the bill because in the bill we attempted again not to earmark things and it is possible under the bill the com- munities would not finance those things and then in some communities the conditions you have described as bad and with which I agree would occur. So to answer your question, we do not have an ironclad way in the bill which we propose to make sure that there are (a) year-round pro- grams of recreation or (b) summer programs of recreation. It is left up to the locality. Mr. QUIE. Then in that program I have heard some criticism here in the District of Columbia that where the community had some violence occur, they now have some swimming pools and they actually have made some headway whereas in some communities where no violence occurred they do not have much more than they had before. The question was raised when it was reported in the newspapers that in Newark shortly after the first night of riot or the second or third day $3.350,000 of funds was released from OEO even though un- doubtedly it was in the works for a long time before that. PAGENO="1051" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3511 It looks like those are rewards for violence. What is your reaction to those charges? Mr. SHFJVER. First of all, I maintain we should never reward violence. Second, in the case of Newark, those grants actually had been made before the 30th of June. `We had so many grants in June that although the grants were made we didn't get through the process of drawing up the press release and getting it out. So in fact although it appears at that time the money had been available back into June. The local people knew that. Mr. QUIE. `Was the press release rewritten after the riots began? Mr. SHRIVER. I am sorry to say it takes us longer when you have a great swarm of these things come through at one time we just don't have the public affairs people, since we are accused of having so many public affairs people, to grind out all of the press releases we have to grind out. In fact, grants are issued but we don't get the publicity out about it until later. The second thing you have to understand is that every agency has a program year. We tried to stagger them throughout the year but there will be some, for example, expiring today, on the 31st. Some cities have program years that expire today. So we will be an- nouncing in some cases new grants in the first week of August for those agencies. Now, it will be just our tough luck maybe to come out with a big new program, for example, and maybe the day after some ruckus and occurs and they will say we did it on account of that. We did it because the program year happened to occur at that time and we will do it in September and October and November. We at OEO have never taken any step or made any grant in response to violence. `With respect to `Washington here, where the poois are located is a decision again of the UPO, the local community action. If they did allocate them the way you describe I would agree it looks as though there was a mistake. They probably put them there because they didn't have enough money to put them in all of the places, so it put them in the places where there seems to be the most difficulty, which is regrettable. I am not defending it. Don't misunderstand me but I am not trying to con- demn them for doing the best they could with what they had. Mr. QmE. If you were on the verge of making an announcement and violence occurred, would you wait or would you go ahead if you planned it the day before even though you had a chance of holding it up? `Wasn't that about the case in Newark, and also the first time in WTatts? Mr. Sumvru. I suppose if I had it all in front of me at one moment I would try to think about what you are talking about. The truth is these grants are made out in the regions, as you know. Most of those decisions such as the one you are talking about are not even made in Washington. So it would not actually come to me in the normal course of events today. It would be decided in San Fran- PAGENO="1052" 3512 ECONOMIC OPPORTFNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 cisco for Los Angeles. Now. you say to me should the fellow out. there think about that. I suppose h~e should. We hope to get this thing to the point where it is not a supercolossal decision every time a grant is released that it. goes forward systematically. Consequently, I really don't feel that I can give you a very good answer to that question. Mr. QUIE. Even if violence occurs- Mr. SHRIVEn. In other words, you are saying if violence occurs we should take a punitive position. Mr. QUIR. If violence occurs are you in contact with the regional office? Are the regional personnel renuired to make any contact. with you or do they still go ahead with full jurisdiction in the community Mr. SI~RIvnR. They have full jurisdiction in the c.ornmumty. What they are admonished in all cases to do is this. They are advised if there is a grant to be made. about. which they see there could be poten- tial difficulty, political difficulties, problematical difficulties involving programing or something like tha.t they are supposed to refer those to Washin~t.on. Now, this could be one of those. Mr. Qrni. So undoubtedly they would be referred here ? Mr. SHElVER. I would not say undoubtedly. I would say it is a ques- tion of judgment on the part of the regional director and I rely on his judgment.. But I don't think that it would be too smart to say that if a riot occurs and if a grant were to go to that community the next day and the grant was all ready to go and the people in the community knew it was coming, which they usually do, that you would hold it up in order to, as I say, be somewhat punitive to the community. I say that, Congressman, not because I want to condone riots because I don't, but it seems to me that the grant.s go to thousands of people, we hope, who are. not involved in riots at all. It. does seem like a shame not to permit them to go ahead with their work simply because somebody else has clone something wrong. I don't say, therefore, the withholding `of community `action moneys would be a proper disciplinary method of dealing with rioters. I think rioters deserve, something a lot more than that and the innocent should not suffer simply because there. have been guilty `rioters. Mr. QUIE. Remembering that OEO is to be the command post and you are the general of the war on poverty, suppose you pretty well de- centralize the operation and Washington ceases to be a command post as it once was and the conunmnitv action centers seem to be more of a command post now. What woulclvou say to that? Mr. SHElVER. No, I don't think that. is a fair conclusion. lYe have attempted to eQaablish guidelines for our proorams. lYhen the guidelines become perfected so that. it. is then possible to nut the authority over the program into the region we attempt to do that. We don't do it in all cases but we have done it. with resnec.t to com- munity action programs lYe have done it. now because. we. have enough traii~ecl peonle esnec.ially in the regional directors and I have enough confidence in their judgment that we are wiPing to make them make those decisions. PAGENO="1053" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3513 Two years ago we could not have done that. No. 1, we didn't know enough about it when we started to know the conditions under which the delegation should be made. Secondly, this has not been done in the Federal Government domes- tically before. The regional director for 1-IUD out there in San Fran- cisco, for example, does not; have final authority but we have been following the good Republican philosophy you described a few mo- ments ago. In the structure of this agency, we put it as far out and as close to the community as we can get it commensurate with good adminis- tration. The result has worked out to be very good so far. Mr. Qiim. Except putting it in a regional office in some cases by a telephone call or the mails, air travel sometimes is as close to Wash- ington as it is to the regional office. San Francisco is a little bit farther away. Mr. SHElvER. I did not get that. Mr. QU~. When the regional projects are sent in by mail, Washing- ton is just about as close by mail or air as San Francisco. Mr. SHElVER. We could have kept everybody here and made every- body come here. That would mean, let's say, the mayor of Raleigh would have to come up here to Washington about something or the mayor of Miami would have to come up here or the mayor of New Orleans or people from that town would have to come up here. I felt to concentrate all of this in Washington was not particularly wise. You can say we were wrong. All 11 am trying to say is that by delegating it out to the region and putting authority out there to act and the money to act we have definitely improved the administration of the agency. Bert Harding sitting next to me is the Deputy Director of the Agency. He went through a decentralization process like this when he was the Deputy Director of the Internal Revenue Service. One of the reasons I was very happy he came with us about a year ago was he could help us decentralize this process and let me say it is not easy. I think it is fair to say now in the judgment of people in public ad- ministration that this is the way that nearly all of the agencies are trying to go. In fact, I think we have gone further faster than most. Mr. HARDING. It is not really just the physical distance but the avail- ability of personnel, for example, which you can't concentrate here. I think we have a much superior structure under the decentralized system. Mr. QUIE. Do you mean it is easier to secure adequate and competent personnel if you get away from Washington? Mr. HARDING. That is a good part of it; yes, sir. Mr. Quii~. At least it is a valuable experiment for the other depart- ments to look at to see if they want to follow it. Mr. HARDING. It is not really unique in Federal establishments. I think the degree of authority which we have given the regional direc- tors is a little unique, but the idea of the decentralized operation of a national program, I think, is fundamental and completely accepted. Mr. SHRIVER. Let me say one of the reason we were able to do this PAGENO="1054" 3514 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 was we were able to get at least three of these regional directors estab- lished at the GS-18 level. It sounds like pure rank and that sort of stuff but it does make a difference in the quality of the man you can get to take the job out there. If you decide that you are going to delegate this kind of final au- thority you have to be sure there is really a good man out there. We have been very lucky in my judgment in the quality of the men and women we have had in the region. Mr. QUIE. Let me ask a question on the Job Corps and then I will quit for the night. Looking at the men's urban centers, I note that there is quite a difference in the cost per enrollee in the various centers that have been open more than 24 months. I imagine we had better use that because there can be various reasons for the differences in cost for at least those open less than 9 months. The average cost per enrollee at Camp Atterberry was $8,995 and Camp Parks was higher, Gary was way down to $5,266, and Kilmer was $7,988. Why were Atterberry, Parks, and Kilmer so much more expensive to operate than Gary? Mr. KELLY. Gary is the largest center and when you start compar- ing Atterberry with Gary you are comparing a center with 3,000 at Gary to a center with 1,500 youngsters at Atterberry. At Gary you are spreading your costs over a larger number of units and that is one of the things that accounts for the cost. I might also say that in terms of Gary, there are some wage dif- ferentials when you start comparing Gary to a place like Camp Parks in California it has an impact here. Mr. Qurn Why is it that you expect this next fiscal year that Parks will be down to $6,500 but Gary will be up to $6,100? Mr. Kelly. In the case of Parks, the management of that center has instituted a number of things at our behest in terms of cutting costs. The $6,500 and the $6,700 and the $5,266 are based on the re- negotiated contract estimates, Congressman, for this next figure and those are hard figures. What was necessary to do was to cut out some frills and to make adjustments based on experience. Mr. QuiE. Do you expect that next year all of the Job Corps centers will be operating at a cost below the level which is specified in the law? Mr. KELLY. Let me say that based on the congressional definition we think that all those centers that are open more than 9 months will be within the $7,500 ball park. Our 1968 financial plan that I am working against now, even though I do not have an appropriation and I am sure you understand this, makes planning extremely difficult when you get this far into the fiscal year-we are working against a $6,700 average across the board. That means that centers will be more than $6,700; some of our smaller women's centers will be more than $6,700 but our larger cen- ters will be less than $6,700. Mr. QmE. What about keeping them under the $7,500 with your accounting-which is different from the amount of costs that go into this figure in your booklet-different from that in the law; is that right? PAGENO="1055" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3515 Mr. KELLY. No, sir, that is based on the congressional definition. If you look on page 40 you will see on the side we quote the congressional definition. Mr. QUTE. As you interpret the law, the average is only expected to be below $7,500 for the center? Mr. KELLY. That is right, for the average. Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield for a moment? Mr. QIJIE. I yield. Mr. GARDNER. I would like to go back to the community action center when the gentleman from Michigan was talking about the rights of individuals to be able to participate in demonstrations. I think it ties into some extent with the problem I have had in my own State with the regional office of OEO in Atlanta furnishing ve- hicles at an explosive situation. I believe you later reprimanded the Atlanta office and the head of Operation Breakthrough in Durham. Yet, I think it is a very prime example when you have your agencies and allow them to become in- volved in these protests and this is what I was discussing a moment ago not as individuals but as a poverty unit to go on record as opposing a certain activity-a civic project-such as something else they might disagree with. You were talking about and discussing your regional setup. I think this is the prime example of where you had a breakdown in it in Dur- ham and it could have led to an explosive situation. It led to the na- tional Guard being brought out. Do you want to comment on this? Mr. SHRIVER. Over there in the Defense Department they have five people, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secreit~ry of Defense, a Secretary of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and everything else. They do delegate to people out in the field what they call "opera- tional responsibility." The result of that is occasionally somebody in the field makes a mistake. Mr. GARDNER. Why do you think they made a mistake in the Durham situation I just mentioned? Mr. SHElVER. If anyone including all of us knew why we made mis- takes we would not make them. As somebody once said, the way to be sure you don't commit an error is never to leave the dugout-just stay there and you won't make any errors. If you are in the ball game you are going to make some errors, I don't care who you are-if you are Willy Mays. My colleague behind me was present when Willy Mays dropped a fly ball. Why did he do it? Stupid, wasn't it? Mr. GARDNER. I thought your man in Atlanta was operating under OEO directives. Mr. SHRIVER. I got through testifying a minute ago that you have to place responsibility in the regional directors and you don't do it until you get people out there who are very well qualified. Mr. GARDNER. The point I am driving at to which we don't seem to be able to get an answer, do you approve of an agency going on record and approving a community bond project or any civic project, any local project? PAGENO="1056" 3516 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Is it the job and the responsibility of your local community agency program to oppose this as a group? Mr. SHRIVER. I have already answered that two or three times today and Congressman O'Hara helped to clarify my answer. I don't really see that I can add anything more to what I have already said. Mr. GARDNER. I think there is a vast difference between an individual going out on his own time regardless of where he may work and a community action program doing it is a sponsored program. ~hairinan PERKINS. I think we have just about carried this far enough. Mr. GARDNER. It is a strange thing we have been here 21/2 hours and I am sure Mr. Puoinski and others have been very honest in their ap- praisal of Mr. Shriver and I think he has done a. fine job but I do think these are areas we should look into. Is it not the purpose of this committee to pinpoint the weak areas as well as the strong areas'? Chairman PERKINS. You have every opportunity to bring in any witness you care to. You can bring in your witnesses tomorrow and we will hear them. Mr. SHRIVER. I have not been here for 6 weeks and we have not con- trolled the witnesses who were here praising the program. There have been witnesses here from, I think, both political parties. There have been mayors and Governors-I guess maybe Governors; they have been here many tnne. before. There have been all Irinds of people testifying here. If they have all been praising the program, m'aybe that means something. Mr. GARDNER. I would like to have the opportunity of having a week, Mr. Shriver, to bring in a few people who do not. agree with them. Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman lmows we have been operating here on a timetable for weeks and week and weeks and then the last day or so he comes along here and asks for witnesses. You can bring in witnesses tomorrow if you want to and we can sit here until midnight. Mr. PUCINsKI. I want to go to the floor with the record showing the fact that the chairman has afforded the minority Members every sing'e opportunity to bring in their witnesses and we did not select these witnesses. Tile minority Members selected their own witnesses and brought them before this committee. I think the record should make this crystal c1e~r so there is no question about that. Mr. GARDNER. The developments that have taken place in Newark are current events; they just happened. They didn't happen 6 or 8 weeks ago and I think you expressed it so well a few minutes ago that if we have a witness we ought to bring him in. Mr. Puon~sKI. If you have any information, I am one who wants to see it and will hear it and I want all of this brought out. The chairman has said to the gentleman on several occasions that he is welcome to bring his witnesses in tomorrow. Mr. GARDNER. We have a witness appearing right now that I was attempting to question. Mr. O'H~nA. If the gentleman will yield for a moment. PAGENO="1057" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3517 About this Newark matter, I want to be sure I have this straight. As I understood the gentleman from North Carolina, he indicated that a gentleman named Spina- Mr. GARDNER. He is the poiice director of the city of Newark. Mr. O'HAm~&. He had told you when you were in Newark that a Mr. Wheeler had made some statements at some sort of public meeting in June which amounted to inciting a riot. Is that correct? Mr. GARDNER. The police director during my 3'/3-hour conversation at which time I was accompanied by the minority investigator, dis- cussed at length the activities of the local community action program in Newark. In his opinion, they had done numerous things that he felt helped lead to a very touchy situation. He never at any time actually said they were involved in the actual rioting nor have I ever said this but he did say t'hey led protest marchs. They called the meeting in front of precinct four the night the riot started and they were actively lead- ing, protesting, what they call police brutality. Mr. O'HAit~&. As we discussed earlier in our colloquy, there is a line that has to be drawn between legitimate expression of opinion pro- tected by the freedom of speech and the same sort of word uttered in a different context and in a different tone and in a different atmosphere so that it would amount to the crime of incitment to riot. Now, that is a judg&nent that law officers have to make initially. If the police commissioner of the city of Newark honestly believed that those expressions, those acts under those circumstances amounted to a violation of law in the form of a call for civil disorder and incite- ment to riot, it seems to me it was that local police official who had the responsibility to seek an indictment under the laws of the State of New Jersey and under the laws of the city of Newark for that offense. It does not seem to me that Sargent Shriver, 300 miles away, without any representatives from his investigators' office on the scene assessing the situation, is in any position to override the action of the local law officials were Mr. Shriver to take action against these people while local law officers remained inactive would require just such an overriding of the local police decision. If Mr. Spina feels these are incitements to riot, he should have brought prosecution just as the people in the State of Maryland did with respect to Stokely Carmichael. Mr. PUCINSKI. Do I understand the gentleman is going to try to bring in Mr. Spina? Perhaps at that time Mr. Spina. might want to explarn why he did not take certain steps. Perhaps if the police official had taken the decisive action at that time to get these people out of circulation the riot could have been avoided. So, I think we should give him a chance to explain that. Mr. GARDNER. It is quite interesting to note the night that I hap- pened to be in Newark the local community action program was hold- ing a meeting. This was after the riots. They decided that the purpose and the reason behind the riots was because of police brutality. Mr. PUCINSKI. I am sorry. I didn't get that. SO-084---67-pt. 4-67 PAGENO="1058" 3518 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. GARDNER. The incitement that these various agency people had been doing leading up to the riots was reportedly because of police brutality. We have the pamphlet they passed out asking the people to come to the meeting. I think our colleague from Michigan has brought out a very fine point. There is a fine line between an individual operating-as he certainly can as a citizen of the United States-but I also think there is a very fine differencebetween an agency of the Federal Government going into local communities, upsetting the routine of the local communities and agitating these people to go out and protest in various ways. Mr. Pucixsiu. I presume Mr. Spina will be prepared to identify these people? Mr. GARDNER. He already has. I will again go back and refer to his telegram. I did not send the telegram, he did. He certainly did not mince any words. Mr. PucIN5KI. The telegram made clear that there was a telegram sent last May to Mr. Shriver and adequately answered this question. The question that I want to know now and I am presuming if Mr. Spina is called by the gentleman as a witness he will be prepared to tell us if any poverty people actually participated in the riot. I think Mr. Shriver made clear what happened last May. I want to know if any agency people were involved now. Mr. GARDNER. I think we should clear this up for the record. Mr. Spina never said and I have never heard anyone say people partici- pated in the riots. He said they did damaging things that lead up to an explosive situation. Mr. PUCINSKI. As I said earlier, I don't want anything to be con- cealed here. I want to go to the floor with this bill and I want every- thing there. Mr. GARDNER. I hope Mr. Spina will be here tomorrow. Mr. PUCINSKI. This committee has a responsibility to look at all of the facts and I want those facts. Mr. GARDNER. I agree with you. Mr. PUCINsKI. The impression I got from the earlier exchange was that Mr. Spina had indicated that there were people who were passing out literature at the time of the riot. Mr. GARDNER. It was just prior to the riots. Mr. PUCINSKI. Now it is my understanding that you are saying all of this occurred some time before and Mr. Spina never said that there were OEO people actually participating in the rioting itself. Now what the the facts? Mr. GARDNER. What they did, for many many months they made in- flammatory statements and I quote Mr. Spina on that, that led up to the dangerous situation. The community action program in Newark called a mass meeting in front of a precinct station and passed out literature protesting police brutality on the day the riots broke out that night. From this mass meeting the riots started. Mr. PUCINSKI. Is our colleague going to try to have this witness here? Mr. GARDNER. Yes, plus two city councilmen from the city of New- ark. PAGENO="1059" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3519 Mr. O'HA1i~. I for one do not intend to credit or even listen to any testimony charging Mr. Shriver with failing to make a decision about incitement to. riot which the lOcal officials themselves were unwilling to make. I hope he will refrain from those statements. If there was something improper, why didn't the local police make arrests immediately? Mr. GARDNER. If you would allow me, I do hope the gentleman from Michigan will be here if Mr. Spina does come from Newark and will keep an open mind and listen to a man who has first-hand knowledge of what transpired in t.he city of Newark. Mr. O'HARA. If I am tied up in preparations for a press conference, I. will come back the next day. Chairman PERKINS. Let me say that we all have confidence in the law enforcement agencies and if there is anything wrong; it would appea.r to me that the local authorit.ies in the city of Newark would certainly do something about a situation and not be derelict in their responsibilities. I just cannot believe that any police chief would be derelict in his responsibilities. That is the reason I feel the statements that you have made are largely hearsay. I hope your witness comes so we can put him on the stand. Mr. O'1-IAii~. I had some time left. May I use it now? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. O'HARA. It appears to me that the problem is that we are failing to praise your program enough. I think we are directing our inquiries into the piddling details of the administration of this program. I am afraid that we are directing our attention to things which are on the fringes instead of concentrating on the really important ques- tions we ought to face especially after the disturbances in Detroit, South Bend, Grand Rapids, Milwaukee, and other communities around the country. I represent a suburban district.. We have a problem with poverty but not an insurmountable problem, not a problem that defies the resources of our community to deal with. We have poverty programs going in many rural communities where there are problems of poverty but I do not believe the problems defy the local resources there either. At the same time, Mr. Shriver, we have situations existing in certain cities of our great metropolitan centers where all of us can admit the problems of poverty are beyond the resources of the cities and beyond the resources given to poverty program at present. It seems to me if we want to direct our attention to the problems of the poverty program in light of what we may have learned from the riots this summer, that quest.ion is, Should we reorient our entire program? `Wouldn't it be better to draw attention to the central cities of the major metropolitan areas of this country? Indeed, shouldn't we be directing almost our entire effort to the central cities of the major metropolitan areas? Is that not where the really grave and urgent problems exist in Američa? I suggest these are the sorts of questions to which we should direct ourselves. PAGENO="1060" 3520 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. PUCINSKI. I would certainly like to associate myself with that suggestion. In view of the many things we have heard here, especially from our colleague from Minnesota and various others, why not direct this program on a massive effort to the large urban inner cities that are experiencing the greatest difficulties and remove the causes. I think the gentleman from Michigan makes an excellent suggestion. Certainly I would like to get behind it and let's give these big cities the kind of massive help they need to meet the problems confronting their communities. Chairman PERKINS. I want to state that I agree with the great need in the metropolitan areas of the country but we are going to come forth with about $3 or $4 million extra because the rural areas of the country cannot be neglected. We have to pass some legislation here and if we direct it only where we have the problems, the iiumediate problems that we say have been because of the riots, we will go on the floor with the charge that we are rewarding those areas where we have riots and which, of course, we cannot do. I do not believe in discriminating against a metropolitan area or rural area. The rural areas have their problems to the same extent that the metropolitan areas, but in many areas of the country people starve to death. We have certain conditions that brought about this and contributed to it and I want to make every contribution possible to help alleviate those conditions, but if we are going to concentrate $2 billion solely in the metropolitan a:reas, I think it would be a sad mistake, unless we increased this authorization by about another $2 billion to take care of the rural areas where we have about 50 percent of the poverty in the Nation. Mr. QUIE. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. PUOINSKI. I yield. Mr. QUIB. I come from a rural area and the tendency is for me to joint with the chairman but I do think we have a more severe problem in the center city and I am frank to admit that. When people live together, close together, piled up on top of each other, where 15 people live in an area of space in which a family of three should live, you have more problems. These rural people have moved to the center city, many of them lived in a shack and the Negroes in the cotton country, but there is an altogether different problem, more severe when they are congre- gated together in a ghetto or in a slum. At least they got out of the rural area. The thing that disturbs me about the ghetto is the hopelessness that they feel they. can't get out of there. I think that is the most severe socinl problem that faces the Nation. Mr. O'HARA. I thank the gentleman. I obviously agree with him. I do not propose that we now completely neglect the rural areas or the suburban areas of the kind I represent, but comparing urban and problems I think there is a difference in the seriousness of the prob- lern in the urban areas. I think that we are now dealing with the social dynamite that Dr. Conant described. We have seen the explosion of some of that social PAGENO="1061" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3521 dynamite. Some of that dynamite existed in the cities before th~~ poverty program began. I think that what we need to do is to direct the efforts of Congress and the poverty program toward putting just about all, certainly the vast majority of our effort, into these central cities and get at this social cancer which is such a problem. I am mixing my metaphors. Let's say difftise the social dynamite. Chairman PERKINS. Sargent Shriver does not have the tools at his command to go in and do something about the housing situation on a massive scale. All of these other social problems-but he does not have that type of program. He can operate only to a limited degree so far as his social problems affect the metropolitan areas and the programs by and large have been concentrated in the metropolitan areas con- sidering the resources that he has had at his command. I think the record bears that~ out, and if the gentleman from Michigan will examine the record I think he will find that is a true statement. The problem is we just do not have the resources in this bill to touch the real causes that brought about this social dynamite situation~ Mr. O'HARA. Now that I hope I have thoroughly prejudiced the case and have gotten out all of my points, I think maybe we ought to let Mr. Shriver answer briefly. Mr. SHRIVER. As I think my original statement indicated, we are not even close to meeting the problems of the central cities, the big metropolitan areas as you have described them even with the programs that we now have. The programs that we have now could be much bigger and the President asked they be 25 percent bigger. The projections we have shown to show you they would be 50-percent bigger if we get the $2 billion. If as the Chairman said a minute ago, we could get a lot more than $2 billion, then we could do a lot more in the central cities and at the same time do something in the rural areas but you men know better than I what the prospects are for that. From a practical point of view, I don't see how we can just forget the~ rural poor, let us say, in Mississippi, or the rural poor on the Indian reservation or the rural poor up in Alaska where I saw poverty which is worse than anything I have seen elsewhere in the TJrnted States. In parts of West Virginia where I was in 1960 and 1961-and I have been down in Kentucky with the Chairman several times-the rural poor are in a bad sense. Somebody said we should not reward violence. If we put all of the money in the metropolitan areas where we have the most violence, the most probability of violence, we would in a sense be rewarding violence at the expense of the rural people who have not been as violent. The poor from Mississippi end up in Chicago and Detroit, too. Poverty does not respect State lines. I have said many times before that poverty is~ a commodity in interstate commerce and that is why we have to have a national program dealing with it. It really is in interstate commerce; so the poverty problem of De- PAGENO="1062" 3522 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 troit or Chicago or some other place was born and bred and nurtured down in some other place. The Puerto Ricans which are having trouble in Spanish Harlem, some of them were not born there. They are citizens of the United States, however, so we have a pretty good antipoverty program down in Puerto Rico. It could be better obviously. Therefore, I can only conclude that it would be extremely difficult to decide which poverty takes priority. That is No. 1. Within the amount of money we are asking the Congress to give us, it is just impossible to stretch that effectively to deal with the prob- lems we are talking about, because in the 20 cities for which we com- puted here, the needs of community action alone could gobble up the whole appropriation. This is not something that just happened yesterday. I will revert to my own time when we were on the board of education in Chicaro. We had a budget of $350 million. I testified in Illinois that we could have used a budget of $600 or $700 million in Chicago alone just for schools, but there was not a chance of getting that with the property taxes out of Illinois. Let's take Durham, Raleigh, Charlotte, other cities in your State- maybe they don't need the poverty program as much as the rural areas of Mississippi or the big cities, but I find that it is very difficult to say that to the mayor of Charlotte who thinks the antipoverty program in Charlotte is pretty good or to the mayor of Little Rock who thinks it is very good there in Little Rock. Little Rock is not on that list, thank God, but Little Rock just a few years ago was the scene of a lot of trouble. I don't think there is anybody smart enough really who knows enough to say that we are not to have any more trouble in Little Rock or Columbia, S.C., or some place like that, that has not shown up on that chart. As I said a moment ago, I think it is indivisible. Poverty is a dis- ease permeating the social structure of this Nation. Mr. O'H~A. Mr. Shriver, that is a very eloquent defense of your policy but I persist in believing that you are facing a new expression of an old problem, to wit, the allocation of scarce resources. I just happen to believe that we should allocate more of those resources to the central cities where the social dynamite is already in the explosion process. Maybe we can let some of the other areas slide a little bit while we do it. Mr. SHRIVER. You start on the assumption that the resources are scarce. Mr. O'HARA. As a practical matter they are. Mr. SHRrv~. I believe the people of the United States have always responded to the challenge provided it is explained to them properly, provided they understand what it is that they are being asked to do. And when they do understand this, they will do anything. I feel, if I may be presumptuous, that the Congress and the execu- tive branch of which I am a small part, I think we have a big job to explain to the people of the United States, and that goes for the people in the smaller towns and in the rural areas, just what it is that we are attempting to do and why it is essential. PAGENO="1063" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3523 It seems to me now is a pivotal time. Everybody is sudden1y~ alerted to it. Now is the time to say we have the program, at least we have some of the program; we are ready to go. All we need, `as I said before, is to let us out of the box here and go to `work with some money. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. `Shriver, I would not expect you to comment on this obviously, but I think there is some merit to the statements made over the weekend that there is something wrong with our order of priorities when we have vast expenditures for the space program and as Mrs. Green said, for the development of' supersonic transport pro- gram and the GSA report showing all of the great wastes in the prac- tices of the Defense Department, it seems to me that we ought to take another look at `these priorities to see whether or not the eloquent tes- timony that you offered today `should not give us some insight to a redirection of those of these priorities to get at the problems. We are all concerned about what happens in India and various other parts of the world but right now it is happening in America an'd I think the American people would support a reappraisal of these priorities. Mr. SHRIVER. You are right. I don't think there is any question about it. For 2 years I have been going `around the United States saying that the soft underbelly of this country is here at home. I have said this in Chi'cago, in Washington, in New York, in Atlanta, in New Orleans, Houston, Larado, Watts, and Alaska. I have no worry myself as I have said many times that the Green Berets are going to defect out there in Vietnam. If this Nation is weak at all it is weak right here. `That is why I think this program is so important and why sometimes a little bit frustrating not to be able to get on with it. Mr. PuCIN5KI. We are going to try to help you. Chairman PERKINS. Are there any further questions, statements, or observations? Thank you, Mr. Shriver. Would you identify yourself for the record? Mr. ODHAM. I am Brailey Odham from Orlando, Fla. I am president of Orange County Economic Opportunity, Inc., a CAP agency serving Orlando and Orange County, Fla. Chairman PERKINS. I want to take this opportunity to welcome you and your family whh~h has been so patient here today.' I know I treated you so badly since you are on a vacation and hold- ing you here to this late hour but I promised you this morning that we would hear you and I am delighted to recognize you at `this time. You desired to testify, as I recall, about the matter discussed by the Orange County witness that we had here `last week. I know it is im- possible for Congressman Gibbons to `be here at this point but we delayed putting you on this morning because we thought `Congressman Gurney would be here today but he evidently has not come around and has not arrived back in town. Any statement that you care to make, you may proceed with in your own way. ` ` Mr. ODHAM. Thank you. PAGENO="1064" 3524 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 STATEMENT OP BRAILLY ODHAN, PRESIDLNT, ORANGE COUNTY ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, INC., ORLANDO, PLA. Mr. ODn~1. I appreciate and more than you know I have appre- ciated `and enjoyed today the fine work that this committee is doing in trying to get at the root problem of poverty and how to deal with the explosive situation that does exist in America. My interest, in addition to a general interest in America, is in the community action program in Orange County, Orlando, Fla. Last week Dr. Douglass of Rollins College was brought here at the invitation of Congressman Guerney and testified to this committee many things which I think are untrue, and I felt that it was my respon- sibility as president of that committee to give you the honest picture in Orange County. First of all, Orlando is a conservative area and I think that Con- gressman Guerney truly reflects a political attitude of our commumty. The OEO is not an outstanding success in Orange Coimty in the sense that it does not have the support of the power structure or some of the organizations like the dental society and the medical society, and we do have critics. We have one fellow named Jake Braswell who is a professional griper and I have brought with me a copy of an editorial that ap- peared on TV. It shows just how unreasonable some of these people can be. We have a good Headstart program. I was glad to hear today the testimony about Headstart. We have 600 children. I have heard much testimony about the need for additional funds. We could have handled 3,600 children in a full-time Headstart pro- gram. We have 650 in a summer Headstart program in addition to our full-year program. We did get one of the summer youth employment programs just recently for the city of Orlando. It is employing 125 youths. One month after the mayor asked our local committee for help, the regional office in Orlando had funded the program for $73,000 and the pro- gram was in effect within 30 days after the little incident there that brought attention from the city that maybe they had better look out to the Negro community and get a program underway and it was funded through the Orleando office in 30 days. It is for a small amount. I think it should have been for as many as 500, but hearing here today how little is being done for Detroit and some of the other areas, it has given me a better understanding of just how big and broad this program really is. We do not have in our community the cooperation of the dental society which presents somewhat of a problem. They are a conserva- tive organization, but I did hear some comment here today about the one-third poverty people and one-third of our board is from the poverty area, the Negro citizens, and I want to go on record as saying they are the bright spot in our whole board organization and in our whole community program as far as I am concerned. They are very interested in the problem. They have an intimate knowledge of the conditions in the neighborhoods, of the poverty conditions, and they have made a great contribution to our program. PAGENO="1065" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3525 They are well represented on every one of our standing committees exceeding one-third or more of the membership on those committees. If I had any comment to make that I thought might be worthwhile, it would be amidst all of the other problems and programs you have to consider here in guiding the affairs of our. Nation, I don't think riots ought to be rewarded, but I think the OEO, through its pro- grams, have opened the eyes of the needs of the poor. I think the riots serve as an alarm clock to wake us up all into a sense of the urgency of the situation and I think it will take a whole lot more than we have scheduled to begin to do the job. We are doing a fraction of the work. The frustration in Orange County is that we are doing a fraction of the work, but in Orange County we have 19 local churches that are participating in Headstart and we have over 200 volunteers that have contributed over 20,000 hours of their time to our program so far. Although it is not reaching the power structure, 70 percent of our poor in our county are Negro. Any time any programs are working there, the old southern attitude, they are a little bit dubious about it, but we have made great progress, it will work, it is needed, and I just wish you good luck with your judgments as you consider this program. I do appreciate the opportunity you have afforded me in coming before this committee to say these few words. Chairman PERKINS. You have made a good statement and I do appreciate your statement. Mr. Gardner, any questions? Mr. GARDNER. I have several questions. I am sorry Mr. Gurney is not here because he is more familiar with this. In talking with his administrative assistant he brings up several things which I am sure were administrative problems but as Mrs. Zorn-are you familiar `with her? Mr. ODHAM. She is a person who along with 50 other people applied for a job. She was considered along with the other 50 and was not hired. She is whi'te and she filed charges with the Civil Rights Com- mission or someone, or Fair Employment Practices Act, and that is in the process of being investigated by the appropriate agency. This is just one applicant for a job and you have one person to be employed and there are 50 or 60 `applicants. I looked at her application after the fact, not before, although it was on a table at a meeting which I `attended. Mr. GARDNER. What was the particular job she applied for? Mr. ODHAM.' Assistant director or director of Headstart in our full-year program but it is just one individual's right to complain. I don't `think she is right but I think she has the right to complain. Mr. GARDNER. In looking quickly through the information, I be- lieve she had a master's degre&- Mr. ODHAM. I don't believe from a licensed institution that she had any degree. Mr. GARDNER. Did the man who was hired for the job have any degree? Mr. ODHAM. No; he di'd not. He was hired for `another purpose. He was hired for the `purpose that we' had of problems wi'th getting `the school buses routed, getting the food to children, the assistant admin- istrative functions in the Headstart program, and we put him in to fill that job and he did a very good job. PAGENO="1066" 3526 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Incidentally, he is the one who within 1 month worked through and helped fund this whole program for the city of Orlando in the youth training program. We have moved him in now to another program to a neighborhood community center development program. We have a $14 million grant and we want to build a $1 million facility there in the Negro area with $250,000 more in funds. Mr. GARDNER. Do you feel it is the responsibility of your local pov- erty agency to become involved in demonstrations and various other forms of protest against something that is happening in your in- dividual city? Mr. ODHAM. There have been none in which we have been involved. I am not one much for demonstrations myself. Mr. GARDNER. You are not using this as a means for your activities? Mr. ODHAM. No, sir; we are not in that area at all and I think the guidelines pretty well prohibit that. I have read that somewhere in the guidelines. Mr. GARDNER. In your interpretation of the OEO guidelines; this type of activity would be prohibited? Mr. ODHA3I. That is the way I have read it. You are supposed to use lawful means and you are not supposed to be out rioting and be out in violent protest and we don't have any of that in my area. Mr. GARDNER. I do not have any other questions, Mr. Chairman. Mr. ODHAM. I did neglect to bring out one thing. Dr. Douglass said in his statement here that this organization was a politically controlled organization. Chairman PERKINS. That was the quest.ion I was going to ask you, Mr. Odham. Mr. ODHAM. That is absolutely untrue. The former Governor of Florida was Burns and he puts all of the blame on the local program of the Burns patronage committee. I did not go into this program until the 1st of January and I was elected president, a board member, and then president, but I did not support Kirk who was the Republican Governor. I supported Bob BIye who was beaten, so if it is the Burns orga- nization, how did I end up getting the votes to be president? Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield 1 second? This would not be controlled by the State organization but by the local organization which could still be a very democrat organization. Mr. ODHAM. I would say our organization's political structure-we have some Republicans on the board-they are difficult to deal with but we have sorne~ Mr. GARDNER. If my memory serves me correctly the majority of you are still Democrats but I am delighted you have a Republican Governor. Mr. ODHAM. The county I live in runs 2 to 21/2. Mr. GARDNER. Is the city government controlled by the Republicans? Mr. ODHAM. All of the legislative forces were swept in. They are coming in to hold all of the offices before it is over; unfortunately. Chairman PERKINS. The local directors of the community action program in Orange County selected you as their director? Mr. ODIIAM. No; I am not their director. I am the president, I am nonpaid. PAGENO="1067" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3527 I am president of the CAP organization and I am nonpaid. Chairman PERKINS. You are telling the members of this committee that that happened in a Republican county even though you happen to be a Democrat? Mr. ODHAM. This is true, but I ran against SenatOr Holland 2 years ago and was defeated 2 to 1, but I think the people gave me credit for being sincere and honest and very much interested in any program that concerned the problems of the poor people or of the indigent people and that is why I think I was selected. Chairman PERKINS. As president of the county board of directors in Orange County, you are denying `the charges and telling this committee that there is not any politics being played? Mr. ODHAM. I am telling you, sir, that it is absolutely untrue and there are not any politics being played. I have made it my own purpose to not know any of the employees of the organization other than those who are in the headquarters office. I couldn't name you but maybe five of that 125 people that we employ. it is not politically controlled. Chairman PERKINS. Is the core represented-I should say are the poor represented on your council? Mr. ODHAM. One-third of them are and they are the brightest thing in the whole program. They are so very much interested in this. They come to all of the meetings, they come to all of the committee meetings, and they are doing an outstanding job. They understand the problems. They give you insight to these prob- lems, they know how to communicate with the poor people. Seventy percent of the poor in our country are Negro and they render invaluable contributions to our committee. They are the most en- couraging thing I have seen really in this whole program. Chairman PERKINS. So the statement before this committee that it was nothing more or less tha.n a political portion of an Organization is untrue? Mr. ODIIAM. It is absolutely untrue. In the last mayor's race which took place this fall, I do not know how a single employee voted in the local mayor's race. It was not even discussed. Chairman PERKINS. Your employees have not gone out there and participated in elections? Mr. ODHAM. No, sir; the Hatch Act prohibits it-not since I have been president, anyway. Chairman PERKINS. How long have you been president of that organization ? Mr. ODHAM. Since January and they had city, county, and State elections since January. Chairman PERKINS. Since January of 1967? Mr. ODHAM. Yes, sir. Chairman PERKINS. Are there any further questions? Thank you very much. We certainly do appreciate the hardship that we have imposed on you, Mr. Odham. Thank you for being so patient with us. You have been most helpful to the committee. The committee is now recessed until 9 a.m. tomorrow morning. (Whereupon, at 8:55 p.m., the hearing was recessed to reconvene at 9 a.m., Tuesday, August 1, 1967.) PAGENO="1068" PAGENO="1069" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 TUESDAY, AUGUST 1, 1967 HotrsE OP REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 9:07 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room ~175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Carl D. Perkins (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Representatives Perkins, Green, Thompson, Dent, Pucin- ski, Daniels, O'Hara, Carey, Hawkins, Mink, Scheuer, Ayers, Quie,. Goodell, Ashbrook, Reid, Gurney, Erlenborn, Scherle, Deflenback, Esch, Eshleman, Gardner, and Steiger. Also present: H. D. Reed, Jr., general counsel; Robert E. McCord, senior speicalist; Louise Maxienne Dargans, research assistant; Ben- jamin Reeves, editor of committee publications; Austin Sullivan, in- vestigator; Marian Wyman, special assistant; Charles W. Radcliffe, minority counsel for education; John Buckley, minority investigator; Dixie Barger, minority research assistant; and W. Phillips Rocke- feller, minority research specialist. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. We have Congressman Pollock from Alaska. You responded to our call to come before the committee. You came on your own violation. I have invited all Members of Congress who wanted to make a state- ment to come before the committee. Go ahead. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Chairman, may I say just a word? Chairman PERKINS. Yes. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Chairman, I personally would like on the record to welcome Congressman Pollock, who is appearing before our committee. In our 6 or 7 brief months of service together in the 90th Congress, I have been very favorably impressed by Congressman Pollock whom I consider to be one of the outstanding new Members of this Congress. Welcome this morning. STATEMENT OP HON. HOWARD W. POLLOCK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OP ALASKA Mr. POLLOOK. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Oregon. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Howard W. Pollock, the Congressman from Alaska. I appreciate the oppor- tunity to appear before you today and to express my views on H.R. 8311, the proposed 1967 amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act. I will limit my comments to one section of the bill that affects my State, section 244, which deals with the salary limitations placed on 352g PAGENO="1070" 3530 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 employees of community action programs. At present $15,000 is the maximum that can be paid. No additional amount can be paid with Federal funds nor will local funds be counted toward the local share. In Alaska this limitation prohibits the employment of top personnel. The cost of living is such that $15,000 is totally inadequate for such employees in Alaska. A case in point is the legal services program. Alaska received a large grant for the establishment of a statewide legal aid program to the poor. It was, of course, absolutely necessary to have a highly qualified attorney to head the program. None could be found for $15,000. As a result Legal Services floundered until the State contributed $5,000, boosting the total salary to $20,000. Cost of living differentials are recognized in other Federal employ- ment in high-cost areas. Federal employees in Alaska and Hawaii are given tax-free allowances to compensate for the high cost of living. In Alaska this cost of living differential or allowance is 25 percent of the base salary, the maximum allowed under the law. Section 244 of H.R. 8311 would allow the Director of the Office of Economic Opportunity to waive the $15,000 limitation by regulation for areas where qualified personnel cannot be recruited at that level. I think this is a good provision, Mr. Chairman. The overall limita- tion except for these areas would remain. Thus areas such as Alaska would be covered properly and the ability to hire competent people there greatly enhanced. For this reason, Mr. Chairman, I support the concept of the new sec- tion 244, and strongly urge the committee to retain this language in the bill and to favorably report it.. Thank you for your consideration. Chairman PERKINS. You are supporting, I take it from your state- ment, H.R. 8311, the so-called Administration bill? Mr. POLLOOK. I didn't understand your question. Chairman PERKINS. I say I take it you are supporting the Adminis- tration bill. Mr. POLLOOK. Mr. Chairman, I support some aspects of it. I think there are some good aspects to the Quie bill which has been proposed. I must candidly say that there are members of the State government in Alaska who look with great favor upon the concept of keeping the poverty program under one agency, such as your bill provides. Whichever bill or measure comes out of the committee, I would want very much for the Director to have the opportunity, administratively, where the situation warrants, to raise the limitation on salaries. Chairman PERKINS. In other words, the bill as reported, you hope will keep a separate agency as presently constituted, such as the Office of Economic Opportunity? Mr. P0LL0OK. Mr. Chairman, I would visualize that even if all these existing aspects of the program were put in separate departments, there would still have to be some coordinator at the State level. I can't conceive this program could continue without a coordinator. As provided in H.R. 8311- Chairman P~KINs. Don't you think in times like these, if we should change a program that is being administered in an efficient manner with a view to trying to improve it that we would lose all the valuable experience we have gained under the present operation? PAGENO="1071" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3531 Mr. POLLOCK. I think that is certainly possible, Mr. Chairman. I know in the case of the Maritime Commission, for example, I don't happen to think that should be under any other department or pro- gram, but should be a separate agency, which bears out the point you are making. Chairman PERKINS. Your people feel that the Office of Economic Opportunity has done a good job? Mr. POLLOCK. I think many problems have been found in the way it has been administered, but I would have to be honest and say that I think generally it is a very valuable program, that there are ways the program could be improved, and that it is vital and important to the State of Alaska. Chairman PERKINS. Don't you think from your experience in gov- ernment that these problems would multiply if we shift these pro- grams to the various governmental agencies and fragment the program? Mr. POLLOCK. Mr. Chairman, I think that probably is correct. There are some portions of the so-called Quie bill that I think are very good. I think the training program for qualifications for people who don't qualify for the military, for instance, is a very good idea, and I think there are some aspects of that bill, that concept, that could be inte- grated into the bill tha.t is here. I haven't heard all the testimony, so I don't. know what all has gone on. I think there are some very good portions in both programs. Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Pollock, you have been subjected to some very expert cross-examination from our very competent chairman, who is seeking to get an expression from you that I personally don't read into your testimony. Mr. POLLOOK. I do understand what the chairman is trying to do Mr. DELLENBACK. Do I understand from your testimony, Congress- man Pollock, that you really mean to confine your comments on this subject which is before us to this section 244 of H.R. 8311? Mr. POLLOOK. I do, sir, and I indicated this earlier in my testimony that I would limit the comments to the one section of the bill that affects my State, and that is that section. Mr. DELLENBACK. As I understand your testimony, you have indi- cated that you don't mean to speak for or against either bill? Mr. POLLOOK. That is right. I think there are good points and merit to both bills and concepts. Mr. DELLENBACK. May I ask a couple of questions on this 244 idea? Do you feel the section as set forth in 8311 would accomplish what needs to be accomplished in Alaska? Mr. P0LL0cK. Yes, I do. The new material on the bottom of page 65 of the printed bill on the top of page 70 is the particular portion that I think should be in the bill, and it says after a semicolon, "The Director may, however, provide in those rules or regulations for ex- ceptions covering cases where, because of the need for specialized or professional skills or prevailing local wage levels, application of the foregoing restrictions would greatly impair program achievement," and so forth. In Alaska, where the cost of living is much higher than anywhere else in the Nation, we cannot acquire competent people to do the jobs. PAGENO="1072" 3532 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 All Civil Service employees in Alaska get a 25-percent differential, which is untaxable, incidentally, over and above the GS scale. There is no point in trying to conduct a program with incompetent people, or someone with less than the competence that would be avail- able if adequate salaries were paid. Mr. DELLENBACK. Would it be adequate if local funds added to Fed- aral moneys would be counted as part of the local contribution? Mr. POLLOCK. That certainly would be a help. However, I would not like to see the provision stricken which would give the Director au- thority in special cases, which I believe Alaska to be, to waive the limi- tation. Incidentally, I don't think this should be used everywhere to simply raise the salary level, but I do believe we have a unique and difficult situation in Alaska. Mr. DELLENBACK. Without commenting on the other States, now this is somethingt.hat is necessary in Alaska? Mr. POLLOCK. I not only know it, the United States Government has recognized it by authorizing a living differential on Federal salaries in Alaska. Mr. DELLENBACK. I appreciate the testimony, because to the best of my recollection, in the 6 weeks of hearings we have this, this is the oniy comment made on this feature outside of the OEO Mr. POLLOCK. I don't believe this one section would be one that would affect the country as a whole. Mr. DELLENBACK. For those areas that are affected by it, that cer- tainly doesn't lessen its importance. Mr. P0LLOcK. That is correct. Mr. DELLENBACK. I don't mean to speak in anywise in the direction of saying this section is not important because no one else has com- mented on it. I think the fact that you have called it to the committee's atention is very helpful in our deliberations and you have made the point of how important it is in such States as your own. Thank you again, Mr. Pollock, for testifying. Mr. POLLOOK. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Let me thank you, Congressman Pollock, for your appearance here. We appreciate your coming. Mr. Por~ooK. Thank you, sir. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will recess until 2 p.m. this after- noon when we shall hear Mr. Shriver again. (`Whereupon, at 9 :20 a.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 2p.m., on the same day.) A1~ERNOON SESSION Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. A quorum is present. I want to ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to insert in the record a letter received from the Office of Economic Opportunity ad- dressed to me, signed by Mr. Kelly, Director of the Job Corps, concern- ing qualifications for Job Corps enrollees. (The letter referred to follows:) PAGENO="1073" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3533. OFFICE OF ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY, Washtngton D C July 26 1967 Hon CARL PE~RKINS Chairman, Honse Education and Labor Committee, Waslevngton D C DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your inquiry concerning the con- ditions under which Job Corps will admit youths who are still in school and youths who are working at the time of application. SCHOOL STATUS Job Corps' school status requirement states that "an applicant must have dropped out of school and have been out at least three months at the time of ap- plication." Normally speaking, therefore, youths who are still in school or have been out less than three months are not eligible for the program. Under exceptional circumstances the screener may request a waiver of this: requirement. The waiver request must be accompanied by a statement from a re- sponsible school official, e.g., principal or guidance counselor, that the applicant: can no longer benefit from conventional schooling. The regional Job Corps office determines whether the request for the waiver is to be granted. The following are examples of circumstances which are consid- ered acceptable: 1. The youth lives in a State where school attendance is required beyond age 16 and the youth is complying with the law by participating in a special educational program not leading to a high school diploma or that is merely custodial in nature. 2. The youth's school attendance is so irregular as to negate the possibility of normal progress. 3. The youth left school and can't or won't return. 4. The youth attends school in an institution for dependent or neglected children. 5. The youth is well overage for grade and cannot adjust socially. The National Education Association is in full support of our criteria to in-. crease the opportunities for potential and actual dropouts to continue their ed- ucation and training through the Job Corps prograni. Further, it is disposed. toward an "open door opportunity" for youths trained by Job Corps who wish to reenter the public school system in order to continue their education. Less than 10% of the males and 13% of the females enrolled in the Job Corps in 1067 were enrolled directly from school. In the same year, 4,702 Corps-mem- bers returned to school after Job Corps training. EMPLOYMENT STATUS The employability requirement is that "the applicant must need training in order to get and hold a decent job." Three factors are used in determining eligibility under this criterion. Each factor i's given a numerical score which, when totalled, may not exceed 7 for the youth to be considered eligible. 1. Job skill level: Score Unskilled G Semiskilled Skilled 7 2. Labor force status: Unemployed - 0 Employed parttime or seasonally 2 Employed fuiltime 5 3. If not working full time, number of weeks since employed full time: Never worked full time 0 53 weeks and over 0 27-52 weeks 1 .15-26 weeks 1-14 weeks A youth who is working full-time is. eligible if the job he is doing, or the job he is qualified for, is classified as."unskilled." A youth who is working part-time or seasonally is eligible If: 80-084-67-pt. 4-68 PAGENO="1074" ~534 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 1. The job he is doing, or is qualified for, is classified as "unskilled" and regardless of how long it has been since he worked full-time. 2. The job he is doing, or is qualified for, is classified as "semi-skilled," providing it has been at least 27 weeks since he has been employed full-time. A youth who is working part-time or seasonally is not eligible if the job lie is doing, or is qualified for, is classified as "skilled." A youth who is working or qualified for a job classified as "skilled" is not eligible unless he is now unemployed and never worked full-time, or has been out of full-time work 53 weeks or more. Under exceptional circumstances, the screener may request a waiver of this requirement Very few such waivers have been granted. An example of a cir- cumstance under which a waiver may be granted is a case where a youth working part-time at a job classified as "semi-skilled" has no prospects for a full-time job. Job Corps has carefully examined the pre-employment characteristics of Job Corps youth. The most meaningful measure of pre-Job Corps employment is analyses we have made from reported Social Security earnings. These indicate the highly unsatisfactory work experience of Job Corps trainees prior to their entry. While six out of ten have worked at one time or another, their average unual income is $639 and they are employed slightly more than one-half time at average wages of $1.15 to $1.20 an hour. Other information developed by survey shows that at the moment new enrollees enter Job Corps, only 49% are employed and most of these jobs appear to be temporary or holding jobs while the youth is awaiting assignment. We are not aware of any instances in which youth holding meaningful jobs at reasonable wages were admitted into Job Corps. Any such instance, unless there were extenuating circumstances, would indeed be an error on the part of the screener or vocational counselor. I hope this information will be of help to you. If I can provide you with any Iurther information, please let me know. With best wishes. Sincerely, W. P. KELLY, Director, Job Corps. Mr. PERKINS. This afternoon session will conclude the hearings on RB. 8311 and H.iR. 1068 and other measures relating to the extension of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. I have pursued a policy of giving all the members all the way along an opportunity to bring in any witnesses that they so desire. I likewise have ordered the opportunity especially to the minority and I want to state at the insistence of Mr. Quie, Mr. Goodell, and Mr. Gardner, that they could have the opportunity this afternoon to bring in witnesses they wanted to bring before the committee with the understanding that we conclude the hearings some time today or tonight. I have likewise called the Office of Economic Opportunity to tell them if they wanted an opportunity to rebut any statements they would have the opportunity to do so immediately at the conclusion of the statements of the witnesses tefore the committee. I think without exception almost all of the witnesses have acclaimed their positiveness in getting results under the Economic Opportunity Act. All of them have expressed the fact that the act should be con- tinued and all have stated that additional funds should be provided to strengthen ongoing programs. I look forward to the contribution that the witnesses have provided to enable this committee to write legislation which I hope will clear this committee in the very near future. Let me welcome all of you gentlemen before the committee. I will yield to Mr. Ayres. PAGENO="1075" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 3535 Mr. Anui~s. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for arranging for the com- mittee to meet so that these gentlemen could come down from Newark and tell us firsthand some of their observations and views. As you know, the situation there has been very serious and these gentlemen are very `familiar with the problem with which the com- mittee has been faced. Our colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Gardner, is the one who is directly responsible for our witnesses being here, although `I know it is of interest to all the members of the committee to have them here. I think it would be proper and probably to the advantage of every- one, including the press, for Congressman Gardner to explain just how this panel which will be answering our questions came to be here. I yield to the Congressman from North Carolina. Mr. GARDNER. First of all, I would like to express my appreciation to the chairman for allowing these men to come and I would like to express my appreciation to the committee for waiting over 1 hour for these witnesses. I might mention that part of the delay was caused by two of the witnesses having to drive all the way down from Boston. Through my contacts with the Newark Police Department, I have had an opportunity to meet the other gentlemen. They expressed au interest in coming down and testifying before our committee on a nonpartisan basis over various difficulties they actually saw happen- ing in Newark. On my far left we have Mr. William Mallard, a police intelligence officer from the Newark Police Department. Beside him Mr. Tony DeFino, area board chairman No. 9, United Community Corp. of Newark; Mr. Frank Addonizio, city council- man, Newark, N.J., and Mr. Leo Bernstein, also a city councilman from Newark. Mr. Chairman, they have not had an opportunity to sit down and work up a formal statement. With your permission, I would hope that each would be able to give an introductory statement and then possibly we would go into questions and answers. Chairman PERKINS. Unless there is objection, that will be the procedure. Mr. GARDNER. May we start out with Mr. Frank Addonizio, the `city councilman? Chairman PERKINS. Let me state that I hope we can carry on this hearing. We have had it on a real high plane all along and I know that the gentleman from North Carolina is not a supporter of the program. Nevertheless, he is entitled to call any witnesses. It would be the height of folly for us to think the workers throughout the country have been involved in politics. There may be some instances where some members of local community action agency boards have gone overboard and acted in a political manner but he should not have so ~icted. We have the local law enforcement agencies and other investiga- tive and judicial systems to handle such matter. I would hate to see us get into an investigation that took us beyond the scope of these hearings. PAGENO="1076" 3536 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 If the witnesses can make a contribution on the writing of the legislation, fine, but so far as an investigation is concerned, especially concerning the Newark rioting, I think that we should leave that to a bipartisan coimnission that could not be questioned or could not even. be accused of in any manner playing politics. I just hope that we can leave politics completely out of this hearing.. Mr. PucINsKI. Mr. Chairman, I would like the record to show that this committee does not have permission to sit this afternoon. I shall' not raise it as a point of order and I hope no other member will raise a point of order. I point this out merely to show that we on this side, and I was one of those who supported bringing these witnesses here today, yesterday, when this matter was brought up because we want to give the minority every opportunity to bring in their witnesses before this committee. When we do go to the floor with this bill I would like the record to~ show every opportunity was afforded for that purpose to every mein- ber of this committee. If there is something wrong with the antipoverty bill we should try to improve it, straighten it out, make it effective as an instrument so as to benefit the Nation. I think the record should show that a point of order would lie if somebody wanted to be malicious. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead and make your statement. STATEMENT OP PRANK ADDONIZIO, CITY COUNCILMAN, NEWARK, NJ. Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen: Thank you very'- much for affording me this opportunity. Mr. Chairman, I believe in the antipoverty legislation. I feel that properly used it will certainly offer the poor people of this country a. new vision and a new avenue for them to extricate themselves from their poverty. However, I feel that it would be far better if the committee would. ask specific questions of certainly myself-I don't know about the others-so tha.t at least we could answer those questions that are of interest to you. I can assure you, Congressmen, that I am here only because I feeT tha.t this legislation that offered such a great hope for so many peo- plo has not been administered properly and if it is administeredT properly it will open up avenues unforeseen in the United States. Rather than `make a formal statement, I would prefer having any of you ask me questions and I will try to give you the `benefit of my" experiences in that line. STATEMENT OP LEO BERNSTEIN, CITY COUNCILMAN; NEWARK, NJ. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Mr. Chairman, I first would like to thank you for- affording me the opportunity to appear before this committee today. I thought it important enough to drive directly down- to NewarkT and then fly down here directly at the last moment because~ I think: PAGENO="1077" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 3537 my colleagues and I on the city council in Newark and also those in the police department have something to contribute. First of all, I would like tO go on record by saying that the corn- munity action programs in the city of Newark have definitely played an important part in setting off the riots in the city of Newark. Basically, the situation must go back about 4 years when a group of people called the Students for Democratic Society came into New- ark primarily to help in the ghetto areas by training people. As soon as they got there, this became the last thing that they wanted to do. Instead, they started to try to organize in the poor com- munity and tried to set off incidents-mind you, we are talking about 4 years ago-which could then have started a riot, such as picket- ing a police station over something i~ery small, picketing the Hoegard Home for Children who have no parents, and picketing some of our major department stores. These are instances that happened 3 or 4 years ago. Now, how does this tie into the antipoverty program? When the program came to Newark and the community or the pov- erty boards were formed, this group of Students for Democratic So- ciety, who at this time also called themselves the Newark Community Union Project, took over one of the poverty boards. This was Area Board 3. It is one of the boards in the area that I rep- resent in the city of Newark on the city council. Through their means and methods they were able to contribute both directly and indirectly to the causes of the riots in the city of Newark. We have had instances where they have picketed merchants. As a matter of fact, not too long before the riots started through their area board, and I don't say necessarily that the particular paid staff was on the picket line, but certainly their influence was there and they were standing nearby and the police department can vertify those who were arrested. They put a merchant who employed eight Negroes and supported his own business out of business. This merchant ran a grocery store in the shopping area in the Clinton Hills section which was hit very badly by the riots and I don't think it was the intent of the poverty program to destory the small businessmen of this country. They threatened to put this man out of business and they threatened to put other businessmen out of business, too. The programs funded for this area sent representatives around trying to collect a $10 membership from merchants to belong. I don't think this was the intent of the pOverty program in trying to black- mail merchants but this has happened in the city of Newark. This area board was the leader amongst the other eight area boards in setting off or helping to set off the incident that happened on the Thursday night, I think it was the 13th of July, that set off the actual riot in the city of Newark. Actually, it was Area Boards 2 and 3. A fellow by the name of Kennedy for Area Board 2 called a meeting-~what we called a peace- ful meeting-in front of the fourth precinct. When he was advised- and I think this was on the television-or questioned that this might cause some problems he said no it was to be a peaceful meeting and to calm people down. PAGENO="1078" 3538 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 As you know, people were not calmed down. The police precinct was stoned and the riots in Newark had officially started. We have a number of incidents that happened prior to the start- ing of the riots-the appointment or attempted appointment of a secretary to the board of education which was opposed by some in the community and again led by antipoverty people in opposing this person. We have had a number of other incidents that happened. The medical center in the city of Newark which again the area boards played an important part in trying to stop this intimating that they represented the people in the area who did not want the medical center but contrary to this three surveys were run, one by an inde- pendent survey group which showed that 75 percent of the people did want the medical center. Yet, under the leadership of the United Community Corp., the legwork being done by the area boards, specifically numbers 2 and 3, they ran their own surveys and they also found that the people in the area wanted the medical center. But yet the United Community Corp. persisted in fighting this and saying the people opposed it and loaded the meetings to protest this. But ironically, the people they loaded the meetings with did not live in this area. As a matter of fact, they loaded the meetings with peo- ple not only from outside the area but rabblerousers from other States-New York and Washington. So you can see from these few brief remarks and I hope to be able to elaborate more if I am questioned that my conviction really is the community action program through its area boards played an impor- tant part in setting off the riots in the city of Newark. Mr. GARDNER. The next gentleman is Mr. Tony DeFino, chairman of Area Board No. 9. STATEMENT OP TONY DEPINO, CEAIRMAN, AREA BOARD 9, NEWARK, N.L Mr. DEFINO. I represent Area Board 9. At the inception of the poverty program the people in the area felt we did not need this Area Board 9 because people in Area Board 9 were able to keep up their homes and better themselves without the help of the poverty program. Now the community action program came into our area and said you must have an area board. They would load the meetings with peo- pie who didn't live in Area Board 9 and say "well, you must have, an area board: we have to have nine boards; this is the way we want it." We would give the vote and this particular area board did not want to have it and yet they would override us The fact that we wer~ for the poverty program, we said put it where the program would be of use to the people who need it. Of course, a few responsible citizens and myself in the area, if we had not taken over the board, we would `have been taken over by radical boards tha.t have taken over this particular poverty program. Here you have a community action program. as Councilman Bern- stein said,where there is a. medical college site. We would go to a meet- PAGENO="1079" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3539 ing and go in there and say we are going to do this, present it to the' city fathers, this is the way we want it, but this was not the people of the poverty program speaking. It was a certain element that took control of this Area Boards 2 and 3 and outsiders saying this is the way it is going to be. If we made a decision next meeting they would turn it around. So, we had no control because the average good citizen felt that he was wasting his time, that this particular poverty program is good for only a certain few people and so forth. This is as much as I will elaborate now and I would be free to answer any questions that you may care to ask. Mr. GARDNER. Mr. William Mallard, a police intelligence officer from the Newark City Police Department. STATEMENT OP WILLIAM MALLARD, POLICE INTELLIGENCE O~TIOER, POLICE DEPARTMENT OP THE CITY OP NEWARK, NJ. Mr. MALLARD. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, the Police Depart- ment of Newark is not anti-antipoverty programs. The police depart- ment welcomes it and Chief Spina has initiated one of the first police cadet programs in the Nation. The police department feels that this program has contributed quite a bit to the community. * We have a community union project. We dealt with them on June 29, 1964. This was one of the first times when they picketed the fifth precinct in the city of Newark. Of course, this was under the banner of CORE, but many of the' people who later became what we call NCUP and still are NCTJP par- ticipated in this demonstration when they had over 50 pickets, white and Negro, and they carried signs and they picketed the fifth precinct and this is one of the first times we have had a demonstration of this kind. They wanted the police-there was a reference to some police offi- cers parked on the sidewalk and they were giving tickets, and they wanted the tickets stopped and they distributed leaflets demanding immediate `ticketing of illegally parked cars. This picketing was over parking conditions. There were some mem- bers of the Newark community project who were involved in some various demonstrations throughout the city of Newark. During the recent controversy in the city of Newark, Mayor Ad- donizio was allegedly appointing a Mr. Callahan to the position of secretary to the `board of education. Concerning the medical school situation, we know that many of' these people contributed to the disruption of the meetings, stomping their feet and hollering, that type of disruption. As you all know, we had a riot. I want to say again that the Newark Police Department is 100 per- cent for the poverty program. Thank you. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Mallard, do you recommend the continua~ tion and extension of the Economic Opportunity Act? Mr. MALLARD. Absolutely. Chairman PERKINS. Do you think it `has been more helpful in keep- PAGENO="1080" 3540 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 ing down riots than any other act that we have passed in the Congress? Mr. MALLARD. I would not Imow whether it has been helpful in keeping down riots. Mr. Tno~rrsoN. I have some questions but perhaps Mr. Gardner would like to lead off and develop this. So far we have four witnesses in favor of the poverty program, as I gather, so I would like to `hear more from them before I question. Mr. GARDNER. Thank you very much. The chairman said I was opposed to the poverty program. I don't know that I have ever stated at any time that I was opposed to the poverty program. The purpose for these witnesses being here today and my concern is the fact that I think a certain amount of agitation in areas outside the realm of the poverty program are being carried on by poverty employees which in my opinion `actually hurts the poverty program. I would like to lead off with a question to each of these gentlemen and the city of Newark and I am sure this is the only one with which you are familiar. In your opinion, were employees of the United Community Corpora- tion there involved in any way in any incidents prior to the riots that actually caused or `helped the situation that developed on the night of the stoning of the police precinct? Mr. ADDONIZIO. Congressman, there is no question- Mr. CAREY. Would the gentleman yield at `this point? I am seeking classification of the gentleman's question. Did the gentleman ask in your opinion were poverty workers involved? Mr. GARDNER. To your knowledge. I will rephrase it. Mr. CAREY. Strike the word "opinion." Mr. GARDNER. Yes; to your knowledge. Mr. ADD0NIZIO. Yes, sir; Congressman. Many of the members are on the paid staff at the present time and those that are active in the area boards caused a tremendous upheaval in the community because of their inflammatory remarks such as at the hearing of the secretary of the board of education, and I quote Mr. GARDNER. Would you describe `the meeting ~ Mr. ADDONIZIO. I don't know, Congressman Perkins, but I assure you if any of us acted in that fashion `there is no question in my mind that we would have been arrested, not thrown out, but arrested. It became so boisterous that the entire hearing had to be terminated. Certainly, this goes way beyond what is considered civil or in the avenue of anybody's right. I don't feel that it is anybody's right to come in and disrupt any meeting, and the tapes of those hearings will certainly indicate beyond any doubt that this is so. One of the inflammatory remarks that was made was that "blood will be running in the streets." Mr. GARDNER. Was this made by an antipoverty worker? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. He is on the payroll at the present time. Mr. (hRDNER. Then he is an antipoverty worker? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Yes. As a matter of fact, we have a copy of the entire text, lest someone PAGENO="1081" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3541 say I am taking this out of context. I am here to try to straighten this out if I can. I am not here in criticism of the entire program because there are many, many good points to this, but certainly, if I did not come here and try to express what I know to be so I would not be act- ing in the best interests of my own conscience. This is the speech given by a Mr. Harry Wheeler at the special board meeting held on June 26 of 1967. It goes on and makes many, many statements but the statement that I alluded to-I am simply saying to you- Mr. PucINsKI. Would the witness identify Mr. Wheeler? Mr. ADDo~IzIo. Mr. Harry Wheeler is a teacher in. our school system. He was a teacher at one time and he is on the PAL agency now which is an agency funded through the IJC:C. I assume everyone knows the TJCC in the city of Newark-it is the umbrella agency from which all of the moneys flow to the different subagencies. Mr. Harry Wheeler is employed by the PAL program. I believe his title is program evaluator for IJCC. Chairman PnnKINs. It was a local board that approved him-a local board of the UCC-that approved the appointment of this gentleman that you referred to? Mr. ADD0NIzIO. He is appointed by 11CC. Mr. DEFIN0. That was the one appointment that 11CC had to make and those chose Mr. Wheeler and the other positions had to be ifiled by the board, but you are correct, that was the only position. Mr. ADD0NIzIO. It is two pages and I just want to read the type of statement that certainly does not lend to the tranquillity of a community. "I am simply saying to you that when blood runs thick don't come to Harry Wheeler and ask him why because the reasons will be the actions you take in concert on tomorrow night"-which was supposed to be the vote taken for the secretaryship of the board of education which never really came off because they couldn't contain the crowd or anything else. I think that this type of statement and others `such as-"We will stop the bulldozers in the medical center and laying down in front of them and giving our lives if need be." The constant jumping up and down and agitating and bringing about a fervor in the audience which was certainly not conducive to harmony. Mr. DENT. You say that this Wheeler was~ a schoolteacher at one time? Mr. ADDONIZIO. Yes; he is. I believe he is on leave of absence.. Mr. DENT. Do you know whether or not he was personally inter- ested in the person who was named or was about to be named as secretary of the school board? ` Did he' know him to your knowledge or have any relationship with him in any way? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. This would have t.o be his judgment. I couldn't make a decision as to what he had in mind. Mr. DENT. Was he acting as an individual protesting this appoint- ment because of his connection with the school system or did he come PAGENO="1082" :3542 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 in there as a representative of the poor in protest or as an employee, as it were, of OEO? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Mr. Wheeler never indicated that he was an em- ployee of OEO and coming in and stating that as a policy of the OEO. Mr. DENT. He did not do that? Mr. ADDONIZI0. No. Mr. DENT. He was protesting and while it is true that he was em- ~ployed by the OEO in one capacity or another he was acting as an individual who had a gripe as I understand it? Mr. O'H~uiA. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. DENT. I would be happy to yield. Mr. O'H~n~. I believe at the time of the statement, Mr. Wheeler was not an employee Of the OEO or any OEO-related agency. Rather he was an employee of the Newark Board of Education. Chairman PERKINS. Is that correct? Mr. ADD0NIZI0. I would say that is correct. Mr. PUOINsKI. When was that statement made? Mr. AunoNIzIo. June 26, 1967, and the committee is certainly wel- come to a copy of it. Mr. GAR1NER. I would like permission to insert the statement into the record. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection- Mr. DENT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman. Mr. THOMPSON. Reserving the right to object, Mr. Chairman. This statement by Mr. Wheeler was made on the 26th of June at a meeting which was to be followed, as I understand it, by the prospective ap- pointment of a person whom Mr. Wheeler and others felt not as well qualified as someone else for that position. It is my understanding that you said that appointment was not made. Mr. ADD0NIZIO. Yes; that is true. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you have some evidence of Mr. Wheeler being active in the riots in Newark during July? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. I would say that I don't have any personal knowl- edge-let me say this- Mr. GAIWNER. Would the gentleman yield 1 second? May I add to your statement? Do you have any other knowledge of this same Mr. Wheeler, after he became an employee of the OEO-funded agency, being involved in any demonstrations other than the one you have described? I would like to ask this question of Mr. Mallard of the Newark Police Department and can you positively identify him? Mr. DENT. May I have a point of order, Mr. Ohairman? The point of order is that we are now working on an objection by the gentleman from- Mr. THOMPSON. I reserved the objection on the question of the gen- tieman from North Carolina to insert this statement into the record at this time. Mr. DENT. Before we go on to any other topic, we ought to resolve whether this should become a part of the record and then the gentle- man from North Carolina may bring in other instances which may or may not be part of therecord. PAGENO="1083" ECONOMIC OPPORTTJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3543 Mr. THOMPsoN. I reserve and I will withdraw when I have finished saying this: As far as I am concerned, anything can be put in the record and weighed by those who read the record. I am not trying to suppress any evidence in the record. I did want to establish what I have now established: That this statement was in May and it. was an objection to `a prospective event which did not take place. I withdraw my objec- tion. Mr. DENT. I reserve the right but I will not object if the gentleman would allow the statement to follow the insertion in the record that at the time the statement was made Mr. Wheeler was not a part of any OFiO-oriented program. 1~fr. GARDNER. I think it should be in there. Mr. PtTCINSKI. As I understood the witness, he said that these state- ments were made while this Mr. Wheeler was an employee of the pov- erty program? Am I correct in understanding that he did not have anything to dowithit? Mr. ADDONIZIO. No. Mr. PU0INSKI. What is the point of this statement going into the record and what is the point of the testimony? I agree with the gentleman that the action of this particular indi- vidual was apparently very obnoxious but what connection does this have with the poverty program? That is what I would like to know. Mr. ADD0NIzI0. The point I am trying to make, Congressman, is simply this: Any member of any antipoverty agency that uses his position or, in the case of Mr. Wheeler, being a leader in the com- munity before he received this position and making this allegation at a public meeting which is taped certainly was not conducive to harmony in the community. `Mr. PucINsKI. I am trying to find out before I act on my reser- vation- Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield for 1 second? Mr. PUCINSKI. In just 1 second. I want to find out from the witness what is the connection between the statements made by Mr. Wheeler, obnoxious as they were, and the'poverty program. What is the connection? Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield 1 second? Mr. PUCINSKI. I want the witness to answer if he can. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Would someone yield to the witness? I think we should have a little history of what is behind this and it is political. You have `had a number of people who are involved with the poverty program either as trustees or heads of committees or even paid staff. A number of these people ran for office in 1966 against the mayor, against myself, and against `Councilman Turner. Let's not kid anybody that is what is behind this. It is political. It is an attempt by this outside political group to gain power in the city of Newark. When the poverty program was `first formed they got involved with it as a means of creating a forum. Now, whether you like it or not, this is just what happened. PAGENO="1084" 3544 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. THOMPSON. Would the gentleman yield at this point? Mr. ESHLEMAN. Can the witness continue talking without being rudely interrupted? Chairman PE1~INs. Everyone will have a chance to question the witness. Mr. BERNSTEIN. This is nonpartisan. As a matter of fact you might like to know that Councilman Addonizio is a Democrat arid I am a~ Republican and we are both for the poverty program but we have criticisms on the way the Community Action program phase of it is run~ We are trying to show you now and trying to develop this. Now, what has happened here as these political ones stayed out, they did not win. They were in the poverty program, or involved in the program prior the election. Those that ran for office temporarily took a leave of absence, one was a vice president, Mr. Gibson; Mr. Harris was a trustee. There was a Mr. Kervin, head of the personnel committee. These represent what I would call now the radical faction that is trying to take over the political structure in the city of Newark come 1970. Mr. PUCINSKI. What has all of this got to do with the poverty program? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Give me a chance to tell you. I can't do it in two words. I have to develop it for you. They need issues to stay in front of the public just like an elected official needs issues or newspaper copy for projection to show the people what he is doing. These people are trying to show what they are trying to do and they are willing to go as far as almost destroying the city of Newark to accomplish this. Now, what has happened is that they have looked for those issues and they have found a number of them in the last few months. They found the medical center thing and they found the board of education appointment. As pictured here and we can submit this as. evidence, and Mr. Wheeler is not in this picture but his shoulder is and the other one is Mr. Gibson-sometimes the truth is funny but it j5: here. Mr. Richardson is in this picture, Mr. Gibson, Mr. Higgins, an employee. They were at the front of the council chambers where. the hearing was held and they were directing this thing. Chairman PERKINS. Let's have order. This all evolves around the statement that Wheeler made here. As I understand, Mr. Addonizio, you stated he was not an employee of the poverty board at the time the statement was made and furthermore, you stated that he was representing-he was very much interested in a certain secretary for the local school board- Mr. Asiinnoon. Male or female? Chairman PERKINS. The man he was interested in was not approved for the local school board; is that correct? I am addressing that question to Mr. Addonizio because that is the way I understood his response, that the gentleman who made the statement that you inserted in the record was not. an employee of the- local poverty board or not an employee at all of the poverty program and thathe was interested in a candidate or an applicant for the secre~ taryship of the local school board and that did not come about. PAGENO="1085" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3545 Is that correct? Mr. ADDONIZIO. That is true. Chairman PERKINS. That is the way I understand the statement so -that 1 cannot understand the relevancy of these other statements. Mr. THOMPSON. A parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman from Illinois has withdrawn his objection. May I now be recognized? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, go ahead. Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Bernstein, this borders on the hilarious. You say that the problem is essentially one of politics, that these -people are trying to position themselves for political power in 1970. It would follow, I suppose, that their ambitions are a threat to what- ever ambitions you might have in 1970. Is -that a reasonable assertion? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Mr. Thompson, I have no political ambitions in 1970 except to go back into the business world. I think I have had my :fill of politics. Mr. THOMPSON. You are not going to run again? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I have no intention of running again and I would like to say something else, if I may. I took my stand on this community action program in the poverty program before I ran for reelection, knowing that I was going to run for reelection and that it could destroy me because I felt an -obligation to bring the truth to the people. Mr. THOMPSON. I admire you for that. Mr. ERLENBORN. Parliamentary inquiry. I understood Congressman Gardner had the floor at the time the objections were made. I did not understand he yielded. May I inquire how the gentleman lost the floor without yielding it? Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman from New Jersey has the floor. Mr. QrnE. Could we let Mr. Bernstein finish his statement to find out -what he is trying to develop? Chairman PERKINS. Do we want to operate under the 5-minute rule -or 10-minute rule? What is the sense of the committee? Mr. GOODELL. I think we could save a lot of time without batting this back and forth if we could set some ground rules. I think what -this committee is interested in on both sides of the aisle is any verified or documented facts that you gentlemen can testify to as to involve- ment of poverty employees in inciting riots, involvement in the riots themselves, or involvement in a way that directly contributed to those riots. We are not interested in statements about people who are not paid with poverty money and we get way off in right field if we get into this -type of thing. We went through with a statement here, and after a great deal of -exchange finally decided, apparently, that the man is not or was not in the poverty program. Perhaps the reason you brought this up is that he has some connection with the poverty program now. If so, I think it ought to be on the record. Is he or has he ever been in the poverty program? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. He is now. - - Mr. GOODELL. Subsequent to -this speech, he was hired by the poverty group? PAGENO="1086" 3546 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. ADD0NIzI0. It is my understanding that he was involved in an- other program last year. Mr. GOODELL. But he was not at the time he made the speech and subsequently he was appointed to what ? Mr. ADDOXIzIO. He is with the PAL program. Mr. 000DELL. That occurred after he made the speech? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Shortly thereafter, a week later or so. Mr. GOODELL. In Qther words, it is your allegation that this speech contributed to the riot atmosphere, the tinder box, if you will, in Newark and subsequently the man who made the speech was hired by the poverty organization? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Congressman, I am saying this, and I don't mean to play on words or get involved in semantics because I realize that there are politics in this. There is just no question about that, but if all of us, regardless of our party affiliation, are interested in strength- ening this program, we must admit to ourselves that you as a Congress- ma~ making a statement cannot make the statement and then say no, Mr. Goodell, made it. Mr. Goodell is a Congressman or he is involved. Now, Mr. Wheeler has always been involved in the antipoverty program in Newark. Many of his friends are involved in the program and speeches of this type- and I wish that you would take the time to read it-by many, many people set the climate, set the atmosphere, set the catalyst in motion that at the proper time explodes. Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry. Mr. Goodell asked for recognition to ask what ground rules we were going to have, and now he is proceeding with a line of questioning. I ask, Mr. Chairman, whether you yielded your time; if not, I would appreciate your using it under a 5-minute rule and then each of us can have an opportunity to address ourselves to this problem. Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman yield? I agree and I do apologize. I got interested and tried to get the facts straight. But do we agree, I think we do, on both sides that this is what we are after. On the ground rules, too, they ought to limit themselves to statements that do tie into the poverty program? Mr. SCHEUER. Were the poverty people on the program directly involved? Chairman PERKINS. We will operate under the 5-minute rule. The Chair recognizes Mr. Thompson. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you, Mr. Addonizio, or Mr. Bernstein, think be- cause a person is employed under the poverty program he loses his constitutional right t.o speak, or his constitutional right to object, or his constitutional right to peacefully protest? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Of course not, Congressman. I don't believe that anyone is a second-class citizen. However, all of us must be mindful of the fact that if we hold a certain position in our community, the remarks that we make do bear directly on the responsibilities we hold. If an individual has a position in an antipoverty agency and he makes remarks which others will look up to because of his position in a community, I think this is not quite right. Mr. THOMPSON. Must that person agree with your position? Mr. ADDONIZI0. Of course not. PAGENO="1087" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3547 Mr. THOMPSON. Was there any violence involved in the meeting in May? There were incendiary words. I have a copy of it. Mr. ADDoNIzIo. It was a June meeting, Mr. Congressman-June 26. Mr. THOMPSON. Was there any physical violence involved there, Mr. Mallard? Mr. MALLARD. It was not that night. Mr. ADD0NIzI0. There was no physical violence on that night. Mr. THOMPSON. There was great dissension, wasn't there? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Exceedingly so. Mr. THOMPSON. This man took a very strong position and he used what one might consider intemperate language, but there was no violence? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. There was no physical violence, no. Mr. TEIo~rPsoN. Mr. Bernstein referred to the political situation and you say, Mr. Addonizio, that there is a lot of politics in this. I am from New Jersey and I know something of Newark. Mr. Bern- stein says 4 years ago Students for Democratic Society-SDS-en te.red the. scene and "took over Area Boards 2 and 3." Now, that being the. case, that having been known for a long period of time, I would like t.o ask two questions of you. First, what did you do about this, if you didn't believe in it; and second, who specifically, from those boards, participated in the riots in Newark? Mr. BERNSTEIN. We advised the police department, we advised the FBI and had meetings with them. They were aware of the backgrounds of many of these people and also many of these people who used their influence in bringing the Students for Democratic Society into New- ark. Mr. THOMPSON. What sort of backgrounds did these people have? Was it criminal? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would say Communist backgrounds. Mr. THOMPSON. Communist? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is right. Mr. THOMPSON. Card-carrying Communist members? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Not the students but the people who brought them in were. Mr. THOMPSON. Who were these people? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would prefer not to mention their names. Mr. THOMPSON. You have immunity here. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would prefer not to mention the names. You can contact the FBI and if they want to reveal that to you they have it in their files and let them do, it because we worked with the FBI on this for 3,31/2, or even 4 years. Mr. THOMPSON. During those years what did you do about the involvement of "Communists" whom you won't name? Did you make this public knowledge? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I advised the police department, I advised the FBI, and the FBI told us that they were aware of what the situation was and the people who supposedly were backing these students who were in our city and that all they could do was watch and report back to the director. PAGENO="1088" 3548 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. THOMPSON. Do you know the names of any of these people whom you allege are Communists or were any of those whom you say you know to have been Communists- Mr. BERNSTEIN. Communists or Communist-affiliated. Mr. THOMPSON. What is a Communist affiliate? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Leans in that direction. People are laughing but this is very, very serious business to me. Mr. THOMPSON. It is to me too, and I want to know if any of these Communists or Communist-affiliated people are on the poverty rolls.. Mr. BERNSTEIN. People with a very strong left-wing leaning are involved directly with the poverty program. Mr. THOMPSON. Left-wing leaning is a relative term. To some people I have that distinction and to others I am to the right. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Ayres. Mr. DENT. I might inform the committee that the yeas and nays on the Military Construction bill are now being taken on the floor. I would suggest we recess for the rolleall. Chairman PERKINS. We will wait for the second bell and then we will recess for 15 minutes. Go ahead, Mr. Ayres. Mr. AYRES. Mr. Chairman, I think it is important that the evidence be documented that these people did participate in the riots. We have the gentleman here from the police department who could probably answer yes or no with the documentary evidence he has before him. I don't think he brought those pictures here to look at them himself. Mr. MALLARD. As far as any of these poverty workers actually being involved in the riots, first of all, I would like to say that I came back to Newark that Friday on the week of the riot so I missed the first race, but if we knew any of these poverty workers were involved in the riots, 1 probably would not be here now. I would still be slaving because we are certainly locking them up. I have to show you some of the poverty workers in the city of Newark that have been involved in demonstrations leading up to the riot. Chairman PERKINS. Would the gentleman from Ohio yield? His question was whether these people were involved in these riots. Mr. AynEs. He had no pictures of the poverty workers actually throwing Molotovs. He said he did not have those pictures. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Goodell? Mr. G00DELL. Mr. Chairman, can't we let the witnesses speak for themselves? I don't think it helps at all for anybody on either side to try to put words in their mouths. Let's let them speak out. Mr. ATRES. Let the gentleman proceed. I understood this attempt was to show that the remarks and actions taken by the poverty work- ers helped lead to the riots and created a lot of emotion. Now, if the gentleman will proceed as to these people that he has pictures of in the poverty program attending these demonstrations. Just what part did they play in this, if any, prior to the riots? That iS what I am asking the gentleman. Mr. MALLARD. I have here a picture of June ~ 1967, in front of the Newark city hail, Jesse Allen, who is an organizer, Area Board 3, PAGENO="1089" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3549 which is called People's Action Group. It is also under the Com- munity Union Project. This is all one project. You call it Area Board 3 or NCUP. The same people are in NCUP and the same people are in the poverty board. Chairman PERKINS. Was he a paid employee? Mr. MALLARD. Mr. Allen is a organizer. Mr. AYRES. Would the gentleman proceed? Mr. MALLARD. Also, I have a picture of Dean Harrison. He is a paid worker. He is a community action director. I have a picture- Mr. THOMPSON. Is this his high-school graduation picture? Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman be quiet and let the witness' speak? Mr. THOMPSON. I want to know what the picture is. It could be his Bar Mitzvah picture. Chairman PERKINS. The witness will identify the picture, when it was made, on what occasion. Mr. MALLARD. The demonstration in front of city hall on June 24, 1967, and the reference to the controversial issues, the board Of educa- tion appointment; yes, sir. Mr. AYRES. Those people were being paid by poverty funds? Mr. MALLARD. To the best of my knowledge they were, yes, sir. Mr. ATRES. Does any other witness know definitely that they were on the poverty payroll? Mr. DEFINO. There are four and right here you have the SDS man, Tom Hayden, who went to China. His face is here in the picture as plain as day. Mr. THOMPSON. That was before he want to China? Mr. DEFINO. I am sorry, I meant Vietnam, not China. Mr. AYRES. So the record is clear, you have identified these people in the picture as paid poverty workers. Now, was this the demonstration that occurred to prevent the de- struction of the medical building? Chairman PERKINS. That is the school board appointment he is talking about now. Mr. MALLARD. The demonstration here was in reference to the medi- cal school situation and the board of education appointment also. Mr. Ayr~s. Is it t'he opinion of anyone on the panel that this fric- tion that occurred over the attempt to stop the construction of the medi- cal center aroused the community to a point where there was a lot of dissension built up which in your observations, and I say this to the gentleman from the police department particularly, put the place in such a frenzy that anything could happen? Mr. MALLARD. This did not raise the community to any point but these people are just about the same people you will find at every demonstration. Most of the `people were at home. This picture is May 19, 1967, at the Oliver Street School. It is in reference to a complaint against a school teacher. The Black Liberation Party, the black man's party in northern New Jersey, they have a cOlonel, a captain, and a lieutenant. This is a poverty worker here, Donald Tucker, who is at the school. This is a demonstration at the school. At this same demonstration is James Walker- SO-084---67--pt. 4-69 PAGENO="1090" 3550 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mrs. Gn~N. Might I interrupt here? The pictures which you have shown are pictures which were taken of paid poverty employees in May and June; is that correct? Mr. MALLARD. Yes, ma'am. Mrs. GREEN. The most serious riots in Newark were on what dates, please? Mr. kLI~uw. July 13. Mrs. GREEN. Then the pictures which you are showing-will you please make more clear the connection which they have with the actual riots? Mr. MALLARD. I am showing the poverty workers' activities and demonstrations. 1~frs. GREEN. Then you are really making two statements today as I understand it. I am not yielding to anybody except the witnesses. Mr. PucIN5KI. A point of order. Chairman PEEKINs. Would the gentleman state it? Mr. PU0INSKI. I think it is accepted procedure in a proceeding such as this where a witness is producing evidence that the witness give us the names and addresses of the people he is identifying so that we can ascertain as to whether or not they are on some poverty program payroll. All I see is a photograph of people. I haven't the slightest idea who these people are. Mrs. GREEN. Since this is my time, I would make a point of order here that he is not making a point or order. If I may proceed with my 5 minutes-if I understood what you are trying to say to the members of this committee, the poverty workers were involved in two things, one is the actual helping to incite the riot, that this is the allegation that some of you people are making, and the allegation that you are making now with those people in those pictures is that they were participating in activities that you feel are prohibited by the war on poverty. Mr. MALLARD. I am not saying that. Mrs. GREEN. Then just what is the purpose? Mr. MALLARD. I am saying that these poverty workers have been active in demonstrations in the city of Newark prior to the riots. Mrs. GREEN. They were active in demonstrations which helped to create the climate leading to the riots? Mr. MALLARD. They were active in demonstrations leading up to the riot. You could hear all of this testimony. I know that investigators have talked to us and gotten a lot of the names and you can put it together. Mrs. GREEN. Would you proceed with the additional evidence that you have? Mr. PUCINsKI. Mr. Chairman, there has been no ruling on the point of order. Chairman PERKINS. ~he Chair overrules you. You will have an op- portunity to ask the witness questions. Mrs. GREEN. May I say that I am interested in having an oppor- tunity for you to present your testimony and then we can evaluate it and not have you interrupted. Mr. MALLARD. This is one of the last board of education meetings in PAGENO="1091" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3551 the city of Newark around June 28. We have Mr. Higgins here- Chairman PERKINS. What date was that? Mr. MALLARD. I believe that was the 28th of June. I am not certain of the date, however. It was the last meeting of the board of education. This was a meeting taken over by Mr. Higgins and a few other people. They prevented the board of education from holding the meeting. They came in and elected their own board of education. The board of education could not function that night, that is, the board couldn't function because Mr. Higgins, the poverty worker, was there with `these people and prevented it. Chairman PERKINS. We will recess for 15 minutes. Chairman PERKINS. The committee will come to order. Mrs. Green? Mrs. GREEN. Mr. Mallard, for the committee, not now but before you leave today, would you identify every picture which you have presented to the committee? Would you write on the back of it the name of the individuals, why you have presented it, and what demon- stration these people appeared at and of what date, so we have this for the record? I assume you are leaving these with the committee. Mr. MALLARD. Yes, m'am, I will. Mrs. GREEN. You are a member of the police force, is that right? Mr. MALLARD. That's right. Mrs. GREEN. To your own knowledge, were any of the antipoverty people arrested during the time of the `riots or prior to the riots at any of the demonstrations to which you have referred in the last few minutes? Mr. MALLARD. To my knowledge as far as I know now-of course, I have not had a chance really to really cross-check, but the arrests of the people in the record and the people in the poverty program-I intend to do this pretty soon. There were several hundred people ar- rested. I have some records here of some poverty workers who were arrested in t.he demonstration on Clinton Avenue, which resulted in the mer- chant going out of business. I have the records here and I will submit them. Mrs. GREEN. At what time was this? Was this prior to the July 1G serious riots? Mr. MALLARD. Yes, m'am. Mrs. GREEN. On what date do you have that? Do you have other police files in the voluminous papers that you have in front of you-do you have other police files on poverty work- ers where violations of law were concerned? Mr. MALLARD. No, I do not. Mrs. GREEN. In terms of the actual riot which occurred and I am speaking now of the most serious days of the riot, to your knowledge PAGENO="1092" 3552 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 was there involvement of the paid poverty employees in the riot or in incidents that incited others to riot? Mr. MALLARD. Not to my knowledge. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Quie. Mr. QUIE. I think that, in the time that I have I would just as soon Jiave Mr. Bernstein, if you would, finish the statement you were nnaking. I think you were trying to develop that some of the poverty ~workers were involved in inciting people prior to the riots and leading `np to the time. II would just as soon have you bring that to a head, if you would. Mr. BERNSTEIN. We are discussing the involvement of the poverty ~workers and the political implications, and I described to you where some of the so-called political outs who had run for office and had lost and were involved in the poverty program were using this in my estimation as a stepping stone for obtaining political power. In this picture here before the board of education taken in the city council chambers, you have this demonstrated where you have Mr. ~ichardson and Mr. Gibson, both foi~mer candidates that were leading, and Mr. `Wheeler is up here, that were leading this demonstration in the city council chambers before the board of education against the appointment of Mr. Callahan to the position of secretary. Also in the picture you have Mr. Melvin Higgins, who is an em- ployee, paid employee of the community action programs. Mr. QUIE. For whom do Mr. Richardson and Mr. Gibson work? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Mr. Richardson is a member of the Trustee Board of the Poverty Program. He is not a paid employee, but he has an awful lot of power in that sense. Mr. Gibson is the president of the united community organization. Again he is not a paid employee, but he has a lot of power within the organization. I think we should concern ourselves not only with the paid employees, but those who are not paid who are involved. Mr. QmE. Who appointed these two individuals to their present positions? Mr. BERNSTEIN. They were elected through the structure of the United Community Corp. When this was formed, it was very hard to get the average citizen involved and the people who became involved initially were the civic leaders, so called, and the so-called civic civil rights leaders. The poor did not become involved, so the control of the United Community Corp. went in the direction of these people who took the time because they were politically motivated to become interested, and, as I say, to use it as a stepping stone. Mr. QuIE. Did you see these individuals other than that one, at the time the question of the appointment of the secretary came up before a council meeting where they incited people? Mr. BERNSTEIN. We had an ordinance on rent control that came before ns and a number of these individuals, and I think your staff is in Newark now studying the tapes of the meeting, to get the names and the speeches that were made by these individuals who appeared before the city council at these hearings to speak up. A number of these individuals, both paid and unpaid, appeared before the city council when the city council had an emergency meeting PAGENO="1093" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3553 had to approve the request of the urban renewal agency in the city of Newark to apply for Federal funds for the medical center. It was an emergency meeting and the request was being handled by resolution, which normally does not allow for speakers. The city council president broke the rule to keep the peace and quiet, you might say, and allowed, I think, 23 of these individuals to speak. Once again your staff is up in Newark now and they have been ad- vised of this and they are checking into those tapes. `We have verbatim tapes of what was said. Some of the remarks were what you might call threatening. I think Mr. Curvin, who is a trustee, head of the personnel committee, and you can understand how important a position this is, unpaid, making statements they will not allow under any circumstances regardless of what has to be done `to allow this medical center to be built. If I recall correctly, bloodshed was once again threatened. It seems to be the same basic core of individuals who are involved in any in- eident or any situation that could create an incident `in the city of Newark. Chairman PERKINs. Mr. Thompson? Mr. TIio~IPsoN. Mr. Bernstein, on what date was this meeting be- fore the city council where the president allowed the 23 people to speak? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I don't recall the date offhand. It was before the riots. Mr. THOMPSON. Before the riots? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is right. Mr. THOMPSON. Was there any violence at this meeting? Mr. BERNSTEIN. There was a gathering of a crowd before the speak- er's rostrum when the city clerk objected `to the fact that they should speak because they legally did no have `the right to `speak. How far they would have gone if the council-Mr. Valvanni did not tell them to speak, I do not know. Mr. THOMPSON. But he allowed them to speak? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Yes, he violated our rules and allowed them to speak, `to keep peace. Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Mallard, as I understand it, you are the human relations man for Director Spina; is that correct? Mr. MALLARD. No, sir. Mr. ThoMpsoN. You are a detective? Mr. MALLARD. Yes, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. You displayed some photographs earlier taken in June and in May before the riots. What did you take these pictures for? Mr. MALLARD. These pictures were taken by our records bureau. We take pictures of all demonstrations. This has been our policy with Di- rector Spina, for the police department to photograph demonstrations. Mr. THOMPSON. That is reasonable enough. Now, in the June 24 incident when a picture was taken and in the May 1 meeting, was there any physical violence in either of `those demonstrations? Mr. MALLARD. No, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. Did these pictures serve in any way to indicate to you that there might be some trouble brewing? PAGENO="1094" 3554 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. MALLARD. Yes, sir. Mr. ThOMPSON. What did you do on the basis of that judgment? Mr. MALLARD. The Oliver Street situation was only for a few hours .1 day and it was adjusted. There was a complaint against a school- teacher and that was adjusted by the school authorities. Mr. THo~iPsox. And the other was the medical school? Mr. MALLARD. The medical school picture-we just added that to the rest of the other pictures that were taken and try to keep a close observation on different points throughout the city. Mr. THOMPSON. For the background of the committee, New Jersey for many, many years had no medical school. One was eventually established in Jersey City. It encountered numerous difficulties and the legislature finally dc- cided to make a medical school a part of the State university and chose as its site Newark among a number of competing areas because of the availability of clinical facilities and the number of people. It was decided that it would be on a site in the city of Newark- which would require the demolition of housing occupied by predomi- nantly Negro citizens of Newark; is that correct? Mr. MALLARD. That is correct. Mr. THOMPsoN. Those citizens of Newark do not want to be dis- placed? Mr. MALLARD. That is a question. Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is not true. Mr. THoMPsoN. I am trying to elicit the cause of the friction from the point of view of the city officials in Newark. Mr. BERNSTEIN. May I answer that? Mr. THOMPSON. Certainly. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I think I stated earlier that there had been three surveys taken. One was an independent survey taken of every person living in that area and 75 percent-and t.hese records are available if this committee wants them-75 percent of them wanted to leave the area and were for the medical center. Then the United Community Corp. ran a survey. I sort of got the impression they were looking to come up with just the opposite results, because there was feeling in the United Community Corp. that this would be something that they could oppose, at least the facts we have been discussing, and their survey showed, I think, about 60 percent wanted to leave the area and the United Community- Mr. G-OODELL. I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman be per- mitted to continue. Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. Mr. BERNSTEIN. They ran a second survey and I got the impression they were looking to come up with the reverse, but the second survey showed the majority of the people wanted to leave the area. Mr. DENT. May I ask unanimous that my 5 minutes be given to the genfleman from New Jersey. Chairman PERKINS. Unless there is objection. All right, go ahead. Mr. THOMPSON. I don't have copies of those surveys and I have not seen them, but I have read about them. The fact is there are a number of Negro citizens of Newark in the area where the medical school will be placed who are unhappy about it. Is that a reasonable statement? PAGENO="1095" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3555 Mr. BERNSTEIN. I don't think anything is unanimous, including your election and mine. There are always peopie against, but these are not the vocal people in this particular instance. Mr. THOMPSON. That was not my question. Back to Mr. Mallard. Mr. Mallard, do you consider that these dem- onstrations with respect to the school board problem, the placement of the medical school, and the Oliver School incident were part of a creation of the climate for theriot ? Mr. MALLARD. I do. Mr. THOMPSON. You do? Mr. MALLARD. Yes, sir; I do. Mr. THOMPSON. You have named some persons whom you say are poverty workers, whether they were when those pictures were taken or not is not relevant at the moment, but who are identifiable at the three instances I mentioned-the board of education, the Oliver School, and the city hall. Do you know of your own knowledge or from the police records that any of these persons were active participants in the riot? Mr. MALLARD. No, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. You do not? Mr. MALLARD. No, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. To your knowledge, again from your police records, do you have any evidence that any federally paid antipoverty worker was arrested for rioting or looting or otherwise breaking the law in Newark during the riots? Mr. MALLARD. No, sir. Mr. THOMPSON. Mr. Addonizio, you have heard the testimony of your colleagues. Do you know of any of the antipoverty employees who were directly involved not in the earlier demonstrations, but in the riots? Mr. ADDONIZIO. No. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you believe, Mr. Addonizio, that persons em- ployed in the poverty program should not have the right to protest or object politically if they do so peacefully even though they are intemperate? Mr. ADD0NIZIO. They definitely should have the right.. Mr. THOMPSON. They should have? Mr. ADD0NIZIO. They should have the right. Mr. THOMPSON. Do you feel the protest before the board of educa- tion at the Oliver School or anywhere else was part of the creation of the riots? Mr. ADDONIzIO. I believe it created a part of the catalyst that brought it about. If I may, Congressman, I would like to read a short paragraph of the prefix to our investigational report which I as chairman and Coun- cilman Bernstein as vice chairman submitted Mr. THOMPSON. Chairman of what? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. The antipoverty committee in Newark when it was being created. I must mention the fact that this entire report was sent to Sargent Shriver's office and a letter that we sit down and discuss with him at that time some of the pertinent facts. I would just read partof the prefix. PAGENO="1096" 3556 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 * We of this committee support this endeavor. Which is the 11CC antipoverty program. On the other hand, we are mindful of the dangers implicit in the program and unless these dangers are anticipated and provided for, this program can end in disaster and frustration for the thousands of Newarkers who are in need of its promise. We speak of the financial scandals that can follow from the use of free and easy money. We speak of the jealousies and antagonisms that can embitter the outs for the ins, the senseless rivalries engendered by salary discrepancies. We speak of the hostilities generated by the new bureaucracy in striving for recognition. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Goodell. Mr. GOODELL. May I ask that the gentleman be permitted to complete his statement. Mr. ADDONIZIO (continues reading): We refer to the lack of communication and understanding when there is com- munication and, most important, we talk of the striving and seeking for political power financed with Federal funds which can stir up house against house and neighbor against neighbor. This report was written in December of 1965. Many of the things that we mention in our report-and again I can't reemphasize this too much-it is certainly my intention to strengthen this legislation so that certain problems which were created in the past cannot come about. One of the areas that I think you gentlemen should certainly look into is the creation of a Hatch Act so that those that become involved in this program are like Caesar's wife, beyond reproach. Once they be- come involved, they imow that certain of their remarks and so on must be controlled. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. G-oodell ~ Mr. GOODELL. I think what this committee is interested in is evidence of what we would consider to be illegal action by people who are on the poverty payroll or activities by them that contribute significantly to the conditions that lead to a riot. I personally feel, that if the person on the poverty payroll urges or encourages rioting or violence at any time, that this is wrong. I think, if such an individual, who has urged people to solve their problems jy rioting and violence, is hired by the poverty program, within a short time after making those statements, this is wrong. You had pictures there. It is obvious to me there has been a very great controversy swirling around two or three local issues which pitted the poverty agency, 11CC, against the administration of the city of Newark. Pictures of poverty employees at what Mr. Mallard called demonstrations are not necessarily indicative that they were doing anything wrong. They could be there to cool `the situation. They could be there to heat tile situation. I would like your comments. Apparently you feel they were there heating the situation, contributing to something that led to the riot in Newark, but it has not come through very clearly. Just the fact that they help people demonstrate against something they felt was wrong~ does not move very many of us very far. Can you clarify this at all? Mr. ADDONIZIO. Congressman, your investigators, both those that came to Newark when Congressman Clayton Powell was the chairman PAGENO="1097" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY~ ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 ~ 3557 arid those that are in Newark now, have elicited from us inany,~many hours of testimony and questions in depth, because your investigators in my opinion are doing a very good job. I would say that all of you should become informative in their reports because many of the things that we alluded to over a period of an hour or an hour and a half which was personalized from the point of view that many of the statements that we have to make today we must hold back. We are in the position of being boxers in a ring, who have to hold back our remarks, because the press is present. In the remarks of your investigators this was not done and they have `the unabridged state- ments. These are your men and you can read these reports and based on their deduction not only from what I have said or from what Coun- cilman Bernstein or anyone on this panel, but as a composite from everyone in the city of Newark draw your own conclusions. Mr. GOODELL. I would like for you gentlemen to have an opportunity to document it further, but let me ask each of you to answer this question yes or no, and then offer any other qualifications you want to give. Is it your opinion that poverty workers contributed significantly to the riots in Newark? Mr. ADDONIZI0. I say "Yes" for myself. They can answer the question as they deem necessary. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would say "Yes," too. Mr. GOODELL. I come back for documentation. If you have a quali- fication to your "Yes," go ahead. Mr. BERNSTEIN. For instance, I would expect people who work for me on my staff as city councilmen to be loyal to me. If I were to ask them to do something, 1 would expect that they would do it because they might be fearful of keeping their job otherwise. I say to you this is why some of these people, it is my opinion, are on this picket line, because they have been ordered to picket. I raise a very serious question here, whether a person working for the poverty program should have the right to picket, because you have a situation here, and there are a number of individuals I can identify on these photographs as I look at them-there is a Mr. Donald Dyer, who is picketing out in front of city hall, who is making over $10,000 a year with the poverty program. Mr. GOODELL. I would like to ask unanimous consent to have a fast answer from these other gentlemen. We will come back to you for expansion of your answers. Mr. THOMPSON. I would like to reciprocate by asking that Mr. Goodell have 3 additionalminutes. Chairman PERKINS. There is no objection. Mr. DEFINO. I feel the poverty program helped bring about the con- ditions we face in Newark. I felt they could have played a mediating role, and do something good for the city while actually some of the people who are either employees and/or trustees in very important positions in the progrtm, use it to create the position th'tt we are in today. Mr. GOODELL. So your answ~r is basically yes? PAGENO="1098" 3558 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. DEFn~O. Wholeheartedly. MIi'. MALLARD. Yes. Mr. GOODELL. Let me ask one other question in this connection. I think, Mr. Mallard, you indicated that so far, you have named no more than one of the actual poverty workers who were arrested. Mr. MALLARD. None. Mr. 000DELL. It is my understanding that you have all indicated that as far as the involvement in the rioting and violence itself is con- cerned, that you have no evidence that any poverty workers were actually directly involved in the rioting; is that correct? Mr. ADDONIZI0. Congressman, I must reiterate, your staff has docu- mentation. They have asked us your question. This is privileged and this information will be made available to you, so it serves no good purpose for us to mention names, and so on and so forth, because in all fairness to the individuals that we may name, they may have justifiable reasons, and so on and so forth, based on what others may say about them. Just let me say one other thing, if I may. There is nothing that creates or stimulates you, or brings you to a full realization of what problems are entailed as being shot at. Councilman Bernstein and I were in the streets with the police department, being shot at many times and going to the funerals of those unfortunates on both sides who were innocent victims. Mr. GOODELL. Are you talking about the period subsequent to the riots ~iow? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Yes. Having lived with this problem over a long period of time, we have deduced certain facts. There is no questiOn that legalistically and so on and so forth, many of them cannot be documented, no more than a man can document the fact that. his wife loves him. He has to take her word for it. So we know certain things because of our day-to-day activity in the field. I say to you, once you receive your reports and you analyze them, I hope that the legislation is made stronger, so as to alleviate many of the ills we have encountered that are current. Mr. GOODELL. By making that statement, you imply that there is a big fat file coming, full of investigative evidence that will support the allegation, that they were involved in the rioting and violence, but you don't want to involve individuals without having the evidence right here before us. I think you ought to understand that is the implication of your answer. I presume what it means is that, in your opinion, having seen a good deal of this evidence, yes, they were involved in the rioting; is that correct? Mr. ADDoNIzIo. I would say that based on dialog which was trans- mitted between your investigators and those of myself, Councilman Bernstein, and others and myself who gave information to your in- vestigators, I would say yes, you are going to have quite a file. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Puéinski? Mr. PUCINSKI. On that last point you made; the majority on this committee vot.ed last weekto have a very thorough professional study made of the situation in Newark and I can assure you as one member of this committee, I am going to look at that report. If there were PAGENO="1099" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1.96 7 3559 any people directly or indirectly involved in any~ CAP agencies that were involved in the riot, and I am sure my colleagues would join me in requesting that they be removed forthwith if our investigation shows that. Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman yield for a clarification? I am sure you would not want to the record to imply that just one side wanted the thorough investigation. Mr. PUCINSKI. If you want that understanding, it is airight with me. The CAP agency in Newark is the United Community Corporation. How many members are there on the board of that corporation? Br. BERNSTEIN. The trustees? They keep expanding it and I think the employees are now up around 105. Mr. PUCINSKI. How are these trustees appointed? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I think there were certain regulations that came down from OEO which called for more government people being in- volved, so members of the city council were offered the oppor- tunity- Mr. PUcINSKI. Are you a member? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I am a trustee. Mr. PUOINSKI. Is Mr. Addonizio a trustee and. do you have one- third of that board representing the poor in that area-representing the poor you serve? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Do one-third actually represent the poor? Mr. PUCINSKI. Yes. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would have to ask you what you define as "poor." Mr. PrJCINSKI. Just answer me. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I don't think so. Mr. PUCINSKI. You know the law. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I know what the law is. We have here a picture and we have Willie Wright in the picture, who claims he represents the poor, but I think he makes in excess of $130 a week, so, does he actually represent the poor? Mr. PUCINSKI. I don't know. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I don't know either. Mr. PtTCIN5KI. The question I want to find out is how do you get the one-third poor on this board of trustees? How do you go about finding these people and how do you select them and how are they brought to the board? Mr. BERNSTEIN. This is the problem that we have. I think you will find that it is very hard to get the poor involved in civic activities or antipoverty ~tctivities. I have many poor people come in to my office, and I maintain a ward office in the area I represent and I tried to get them involved in dif- ferent programs and it is very hard to do. Mr. PUcIN5KI. How many community action boards do you have in the city of Newark, how many community action centers and boards? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Believe it or not, we have eight community action boards and we almost had nine, which means in essence the city is poverty-stricken. . . Mr. PU0INSKI. How are these local people appointed to these boards? . Mr. BERNSTEIN. A notice is sent outinitially when the board is being PAGENO="1100" 3560 ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1~9~7 formed by the United Community Corporation, the staff, inviting people to come out to a meeting. Then those who come. out decide what they are going to do and who the officers are going to be. They may send out hundreds or thousands of letters and maybe you will get 30 or 40 people to come out. Mr. PtTCINSKI. Is this a good way of doing it, in your judgment? Mr. BERNSTEIN. No. In my judgment, I would not have poverty boards. Mr. PticIxSKI. Would you support an action or an amendment that these poverty programs be fundamentally controlled by the responsible elected public officials in a community? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Yes. Mr. PUCINSKL Why would you do that? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Because somebody has to answer to the people. You cannot put money and power in the hands of groups and we are seeing it happen in Newark now, who are not directly responsible to the people. Mr. P~CINSKI. As I understood your testimony, you say poverty people did not participate in the riots, but they helped create a climate that led to the riots? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I assume you meant throwing the Molotov cock- tails and stones. No, they did not do that, to my knowledge. They were smart enough not to. Mr. PUCINSKI. As I understood your testimony-I ask unanimous consent to proceed for a few more minutes. Chairman PERKINS. Without objection you may proceed. Mr. PIJCINSKI. For instance, the Students for Democratic Action took over two loc&l boards and the ones they took-once they took over these boards, you literally lo~t control and the elected officials of that community. Mr. BERNSTEIN. The elected officials never had control. The people of the area never had a chance to get control when they took over and they did it in a very well-planned manner, because I attended the initial meetings. They would put their people in the audience and spread them out a few here and there- Mr. P~CINSKI. In other words, what you are saying is under the procedures now being operated in Newark, it is very difficult for the responsible elected officials, who have to respond to the people at elec- tion time for their stewardship, to have any effective control over these actions. Is that what you are saying? Mr. BERNSTEIN. They have no control over the community action programs. Mr. PUCINSKI. I want to congratulate you for your good sense and I would just like you to know, that this is one Member of Congress who has been trying to tell my colleague just what you said here. I think that one of the weaknesses of the program and one reason why we have had the difficulties, is the responsible elected officials too often have no control over the programs. Mr. ADDONIZIO. Mr. Chairman, may I make an observation to high- light a glaring iproblem in the area boards? Chairman PERKINS. Yes, you may. Mr. ADDONIZIO. To show you how ridiculous the total poverty board PAGENO="1101" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3561. situation is in the city of Newark is this. The area I represent, fortu- nately for those people, there is not any that would he categorized as area-struck. The area board sent out letters to my area. asking people to come to a meeting to organize an area board. The people in the area categorically said, no, we do not want an. area board. The UCC again said, you must have an area board. At that point I said, "Look, it does not make sense for the central ward of the city of Newark," which is a ghetto situation, to have one area board for 100,000 people and this area that has approximately 45,000 people does not have any poverty program to have an area board. Doesn't it make sense to put the area board that you want to put in Balesburg in the central ward, thereby giving the people in that area more direct representation. Mr. PUCINSKI. The amendment before the committee, the recom- mendation by Mr. Shriver and the OEO to this Congress is that we indeed amend the act to bring the mayor and the public officials more directly into the participation and the management of these programs. Would you suggest you could support that? Mr. ADDONIZIO. There is no question in my mind. Again, I know all of you looking inward as elected officials and campaigning for office want to be in a position that when you run for office, that. you are elected or defeated based on what you do, not what other agencies of government do in your name that you have no control over. Mr. PUCINSKI. I subscribe to what you say. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Gurney? Mr. GURNEY. Speaking as one member of this committee, I can as- sure my colleague from Illinois we want no part of the way the poverty program is being run by some of these local organizations. In my county of Orange, Fla., we have had the same experience. There is a political struggle to see who is going to control this thing with very little poverty work being done. The Republican position is, of course, to change the poverty war programs and put them into agencies of government that have been fairly successful in dealing with this problem, and that is what we are hoping for. I did not intend to question you this afternoon, because I had an-: other committee meeting. But while I was out, I saw a press wire, dated today, from Newark, that a Negro volunteer group led by a Ne- wark poverty worker is being urged to prowl city streets at night and look for evidence of police brutality. This man said in an interview, "What I am advocating around town is get yourself a piece of gun, put it in the bottom drawer fully loaded and if some joker breaks into your house like they did at Plainfield, let them have it. The next time those cats come into our community. with that kind of stuff, we are going to be prepared." This man's name is someone called Willie Wright, a member of the board of directors of the United Community Corp., the official anti- poverty agency in Newark. Could you tell us a little bit about Willie Wright and his participa- tion in the poverty program? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Think of the most militant person you can think of, and he is worse. I think Detective Mallard might be able to say some- PAGENO="1102" 3562 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OP 1967 thing-incidentally, he is the one we entered into the record in that picture over there. Mr. GURNEY. Could you give us some indication of his participation in the poverty war program prior to the riots and if you have any evi- ~dence of his participation in the riots in Newark? Mr. MALLARD. No evidence of participation in the riots. Mr. GURNEY. Did you see him at all during the riots? Mr. MALLARD. Most of these people that we were trying to find during the riots evidently went underground. Two or three days after it was secured, then they all popped up. Mr. GURNEY. Let's pursue that a little bit. These people who were referred to during the course of the testimony here as well as, well, let's call them the militant troublemakers. There was no evidence of these people at all during the riot? They just disappeared from the scene? Mr. MALLARD. In fact. Jessie Allen came to a city hall meeting on that Saturday and was assisting in getting volunteers to go up into the community with armbands to see if they could get the people to go back to into their houses. Willie Wright is a very militant person. By that I mean he teaches hatred of the white man. Mr. GURNEY. Where does he preach this? Mr. MALLARD. Anywhere, anybody on the street that will listen to him. Mr. GURNEY. How many instances are recorded in the department? Mr. MALLARD. Nothing is recorded. This is what we get from inform- ants. He just recently organized a community black man's patrol. They are to patrol the city of Newark with a black helmet on and today he was in Newark, I understand-I didn't see him-somebody called me-he had on a black helmet and stenciled on the helmet was "Com- mittee Black National Patrol." Mr. GURNEY. This is apparently a news release that talks about this patrol. What does he do in the poverty war program? Mr. MALLARD. He is a former vice president. I don't know if he is a paid worker. Mr. GURNEY. Do any of the other gentlemen know what his job is or was? Mr. BERNSTEIN. He was a vice president and he was also a chairman of the board of the area board, representing the area boards in the 111CC. At the time he also was president of Area Board 2. He was just defeated here approximately 2 or 3 months ago. Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. DEFIN0. Some gentleman asked a question if Willie Wright said anything at a meeting. I am an area president for Area Board 9. I was present at a meeting on a Saturday morning at approximately 11 o'clock. He said that the Negro police in Newark should not partici- pate in any duties to enforce law and order to his brother Negro citizens in Newark. If they needed the money so bad they would take a collection amongst t.he1nselves and this was at a meeting of area board chairmen. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Daniels? Mr. DANIELS. Are you members of the. council trustees of the United Community Corp.? PAGENO="1103" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3563 Mr. ADDONIZIO. Now we are, yes. Mr. DANIELS. Both of you? Mr. ADD0NIzIO. Yes. Mr. DANIELS. You have testified so far that you have officers head- ing your community action program. There has been reference to a president, vice president. What other officers do you have? Mr. ADD0NIZIO. I think, you know, when you hear trustees- Mr. DANIELS. I didn't say anything about trustees. I want tO know who the officers are. Mr. ADD0NIzIO. You have a president and you have several vice presi- dents and secretary and secretary-treasurer-the regular table of organization. Mr. DANIELS. Are they paid officers? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. No, they are not paid. ii\ir. DANIELS. You have a board of directors. I believe you testi- fied, Mr. Bernstein, there are 105 members on the board of directors? Mr. BERNSTEIN. On the board of trustees. It has been expanded to try to get Government more involved. I think they have started to see what the problems are. Mr. DANIELS. How many members of that board are poverty peo- pie? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Do you mean how many members of the board are poor? Mr. DANIELS. Yes. Mr. BERNSTEIN. By the definition I don't think anybody is. Mr. DANIELS. Or is a representative of the poor. Mr. BERNSTEIN. You say "representatives of the poor." I represent the poor. I am an elected official. In fact, the only people who represent the poor are the city councilmen and the mayor. Nobody else represents the poor. They were not elected by anybody. Mr. DANIELS. Do you know a man by the name of Mal Davis? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Yes, president of a bank. Mr. I)ANIELS. Does this board get together? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Yes. Mr. DANIELS. How often? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I think they get together once a month. Mr. DANIELS. Do you attend the meetings? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I attend as many as I can. Mr. DANIELS. Do you attend them regularly? Mr. BERNSTEIN. As many as I can. I get bounced around so much I get discouraged. Mr. DANIELS. Mal Davis is the president of one of the larger banks in the State of New Jersey- Mr. BERNSTEIN; He is president of the National & Union Trust Co. Mr. DANIELS. Do you know the editor and publisher of the Newark News? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I have met him. Mr. DANIELS. IS he a member of the board? Mr. BERNSTEIN. He may have been at one time. I know what you are alluding to- Mr. DANIELS. You don't know what I am alluding to. I will have reference to it in a few minutes. Is Mr. Scutter a member of the board? PAGENO="1104" 3564 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. BERNSTEIN. At this time I would not know. Mr. DANIELS. Have you ever seen him at a board meeting? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I don't think so. Mr. DEFINO. I am a member of the board and I have never seen Mr. Scutter or Mr. Davis there. As far as their names, yes, they are members. Mr. DANIELS. Do you participate in moneys? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Only if there are fairs where there are bows to be taken, but we in the back seat just take the wrath. Mr. DANIELS. Do you know if the gentlemen whose names I men- tioned approve of the poverty program? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would say initially they did, but at the present time I couldn't say. Mr. DANIELS. For your information, I can tell you that those two gentlemen plus a number of other businessmen who represent them- selves to be members of the board came to Washington several months ago to endorse this poverty program. Mr. BERNSTEIN. They may have voted to endorse it, to try to get more money in the city of Newark, but I say to you if they endorsed the community action program as it is now constituted, then I would say they are doing it because they are misinformed and don't have the in formation. Initially when these gentlemen became involved- Mr. DANIELS. I don't want any speeches from you. I am asking the questions. Reference has been made to the fact that a number of poverty em- ployees have been motivated by political power and there has been some testimony, too, that you date this back to 1964. I believe reference was made to the fact that picketing started as far back as 1964 when they picketed the police station. Mr. MALLARD. I did not say the poverty people. I said the North Community Union Project people were instrumental in creating that demonstration around the precinct. Mr. DANIELS. You came here to tell this committee there was involve- ment of the poverty workers in the picketing and demonstration. Mr. MALLARD. I had to tell you that to bring you up to date. Mr. DANIELS. Specifically what the demonstrations and what meet- ings did these poverty workers attend where they demonstrated and built up an air which gave rise or contributed to the rioting on July 13? Mr. MALLARD. I would say all of the planned board hearings and all of the board of education hearings. Mr. DANIELS. How many peopk. are involved in those area boards? Mr. MALLARD. I am not familiar with the totals of the area. Mr. DEFINO. Congressman, if I may, understand one thing about an area board. They are supposed to be the people who live in the area board that it represents. If one is in a certain area, fortunately the peo- ple who would take over Area Board No. I would run it under the ruse of being for Area Board No. 1. Some people don't live in it, but they have control of Area Board No. 1. This happened in three instances. It is a strong area board. Peo- ple do live there, but they jump up all over. They seem to control the whole TJCC program. PAGENO="1105" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3565 Mr. DANIELS. I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 3 more minutes. Chairman PERKINS. You may,with*out objection. Mr. DANIELS. Can you name specifically the names of persons on the payroll of the United Community Corp. who contributed in any man- ner or fashion to building up an atmosphere that tipped off the riots on July13? Mr. BERNSTEIN. We mentioned Mr. Kennedy, who arranged for the mass meeting in front of the fourth precinct. I could mention to you a Mr. Bernard Dyer who is picketing here in front of City Hall con- cerning a school incident down in the next section of the city~ Mr. DANIELS. Would you specify the date that this took place? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The date of the photograph is June 24. Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield 1 second? Mr. DANIELS. I will be glad to yield. Mr. GARDNER. Could you give us the time of day this picture was taken? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would have to ask the detective. Mr. GARDNER. Was it during working hours? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Yes. Mr. GARDNER. So this man was picketing at a time they were on a UCC poverty? Mr. BERNSTEIN. They probably covered it by saying he had compen- satory time off or was on leave or his lunch hour. There is also a Mamie IRollins and Lucille Capriano, and this information has been given to your staff, incidentally, and-now, some of these signs here I would say are very inciting and I would say they did lead to the eventual troubles we have had. Mr. DANIELS. Are you taking the six or seven people you have named have created the atmosphere for the riots? Mr. BERNSTEIN. These are just the ones we have pictures of. Mr. DANIELS. Who are the others ? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Mr. S. A.-Mr. Walker who was involved, a Thur- man Smith who is involved and there are others whose names I don't recall offhand. Mr. DANIELS. The riot started on June 13. How long did it continue? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Maybe 4 days. Mr. DANIELS. Have you talked to 1,400 police officers? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The 1,400 includes other people working in the department. It does not put 1,400 policemen on the street. Mr. DANIELS. Could you tell us how many police officers are included, Detective Mallard? Mr. MALLARD. I don't have the figures. Mr. DANIELS. During these 4 days of rioting, how many were ar- rested? Mr. MALLARD. 1,400. Mr. DANIELS. And no poverty workers were arrested? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would give them credit enough not to be out there when the firing started. They set the situation and then went under- ground. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Scherle? Mr. SCHERLE. Mr. Bernstein, on May 25 a telegram was sent to Mr. Shriver by Newark Police Director Dominick H. Spina, demanding 80-084-67-pt. 4-70 PAGENO="1106" 3566 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 that such practices be ordered to desist immediately. This was in re- gard to the antipoverty workers agitating the poor. To continue, in his telegram to Mr. Shriver, Mr. Spina said: I strongly protest the use of resources and manpower from the United Com- munity Corporation, an agency of the Office of Economic Opportunity, for the purpose of fomenting and agitating against the order and democratic govern- ment of the City of Newark. Some 11CC employees have told us they have been threatened with loss of their jobs if they do not participate in picketing and demonstrations against agencies of the government for the City of Newark. Yesterday, Mr. Shriver was here in person and gave testimony and in his testimony he mentioned that during the worst days and nights 30 Neighborhood Youth Corps cadets worked 12 hours a day, manning communications systems, and so forth. The remark made by Police Commissioner Dominick Spina was that they were magnificent. How on May 25 could he find such danger involved in regard to the activities of OEO workers and in regard to their participating in agitating the poor and then turn around a short time later, about a month and a half later, and commend these people for help ? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The police cadet program we have is perhaps funded through the TJCC umbrella organization, but is run by the city, iust. as the Neighborhood Youth Corps and the Headstart and the preschool program is run independently. We are talking about the community action program, the neighborhood board, and central staff, so this could be very much so. Mr. SCHERLE. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield the remaining portion of my time to my colleague from North Carolina, Mr. Gardner. Mr. GARDNER. I would like to address my remarks to all four of the gentlemen and go back up and pick up a point my colleague from New Jersey, Mr. Thompson, dwelled on at some length and, that is, individuals employed in the poverty program or any other Govern- ment agency have the right as any American citizen has to go out and demonstrate. This has been brought up repeatedly before this com- mittee and I think it needs to be thoroughly investigated. It is my understanding in talking with Director Spina and others in Newark that the employees of the TJTCC program there actually went a great deal beyond actual participation in demonstrations, and I cite examples, that at 111CC meetings. areas of protests were actively discussed by the leadership of the 11CC. Then they not only participated in the demonstrations, but they were actually talking at community meetings sponsored by the 11CC. telling people in these slum areas that they needed to go out and protest the hospital example. Also I think it is quite interesting to follow the pattern of events that we have been discussing here at some length, the protest move- ment that was going on of the hospital and the selection of a secre- tary to a school board and various other meetings. I think it is. most interesting that the riots actually started from a 11CC-called meeting. I would like verification from you gentlemen also that the riots were actually sparked off at a 11CC meeting called on the night of July 12, at which pamphlets were distributed through- out the area asking people to attend a mass meeting to protest police brutality. PAGENO="1107" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967. 3567 I see a chain of events led by the UCC, the poverty workers, that led up to this situation on July 12 that actually got out of hand and developed into a riot the next day. I would like your comments if you agree or disagree with that. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I agree with you. I would like to add the night be- fore the `Wednesday night that the taxi driver was arrested- Mr. GARDNER. What was this taxi driver arrested for? Mr. BERNSTEIN. He was following very closely to a police radio car, as I understand it. When the police pulled him over, he became very abusive. As it so turned out, he was on the revoked list and lie couldn't even drive. But what is interesting to note that night- Mr. GARDNER. Do you mean he actually had no license to drive a cab? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is correct. Mr. GARDNER. I ask unanimous consent for the witness to finish. Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to object to this exten- sion of time, but I will object to the next one because some of us are not going to have an opportunity to even ask a question if we con- tinue to do this. We have been here for 2 hours. Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. ATRES. Can't the gentleman answer the question? Mr. HAWKINS. I have objected to the extension of time. Chairman PERKINS. You may proceed. Mr. BERNSTEIN. It is interesting to note- Mr. O'HARA. Is my time begim~ing, Mr. Chairman? Mr. ~ I asked unanimous time that the gentleman be per- mitted to answer the question. Chairman PERKINS. Objection is heard. Proceed, Mr. O'Hara. Mr. O'HARA. I would like to try to sum up the events to this point. First, as I gather from the testimony of the `witnesses there is no direct evidence which is sufficient basis for arrest of paid poverty workers for involvement in the actual rioting. Second, the complaints of the witnesses have to do with activities preceding the rioting, which they believe created a climate in which the rioting occuri~ed. Is that correct? Third, there is some intimation that Sargent Shriver, in connection with Mr. Spina's telegram, was derelict in not requiring the dismissa.l of persons involved in the statements that you believe created the cli- mate that lead up to the riot. I would like to cite to you gentlemen, and to the committee, provi- sions of the Federal law applicable to this situation. The poverty em- ployees, through an amendment adopted last year, are subject in whole or in part (depending on the agency employing them) to the Hatch Act-which governs the political activities of Federal employees. What does the Hatch Act say that is pertinent to this situation? The Hatch Act says that employees, such as those involved here, shall retain the right to vote as they choose and to express their opinions on all po- litica~l subjects and candidates. The Hatch Act further states that noth- ing contained in it shall be construed to prevent or prohibit any per- sons subject to the provisions of the act from engaging in any political act-any political activity-in connection with any question which is not specifically identified with any national or State political party. PAGENO="1108" 3568 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Now, under Newark's nonpartisan form of government, I think that clearly any political activity on the part of Federal employees would not be a violation of the 1-latch Act. And the Director of OEO has no authority to require the dismissal of anyone for political activity un- less it is a violation of the Hatch Act. Certainly the Director could not be derelict for failing to exercise authority he does not, in fact, have. Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield for one brief question? Mr. O'HARA. I would like to continue; unless the gentleman could get me some extra time, in which case I would be delighted to yield to him. Furthermore, the testimony has indicated that ~me of them were not employees at the time of the incidents described and that some others are not employees of the delegate agency, but, indeed, are people elected to the governing board under the provisions of last year's Re- publican amendment to the poverty legislation and neither Sargent Shriver or anyone else has any authority to dismiss them. But getting down to the key question, since this was not a violation of the Hatch Act, we must rely upon the judgment of the people directing the program locally to decide who should be hired or fired and who should not be hired or fired. It seems to me if the expressions of these people went beyond legitimate political expression, to the area of inciting, then the local people would be justified in terminating their employment. But I would gather the opinion of the law enforcement officials of Newark is that these statements did not go beyond political state- ments to incite to riot. Under New Jersey law-and I call your atten- tion to section 2(A) 148-10-if they were involved in inciting perjury, violence~, or destruction of property they should have been arrested and prosecuted. Similarly, if they publicly circulated propaganda in- citing perjury, violence, or destruction of property, they should have been arrested and prosecuted under section 148-10 of volume IT-A of the New Jersey statutes. The mere fact that they were not, after all the surveillance which we have heard described, seems to me to be a pretty firm indication, in the opinion of the New Jersey authorities, their actions did not take on that coloration. So, we rely on the local poverty agency to use their discretion con- cerning hiring and firing. We have had one case where a man was hired after he had made inflammatory statements, but he was hired by the delegate agency for the block program. It was the block pro- gram? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is right. Mr. O'HARA. This hiring had to be passed on by the board, did it not? Mr. BERNSTEIN. By the personnel committee which to my knowledge is still chaired by Mr. Kervin. Mr. O'HARA. And on that personnel committee were representatives of one of the delegate agencies involved, to wit, the police athletic league? Mr. DEFINO. He votes on that, eight against- Mr. BERNSTEIN. Mr. Congressman, to correct the record, what you say is so, but the personnel committee of the block program did not have any control over this program evaluator job. This was decided by the personnel committee of the United Community Corporation. PAGENO="1109" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF .1.9:6.7 3569 Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Dellenback? Mr. DELLENBACK. I yield my time to my colleague, Mr. Gardner. Mr. GARDNER. I do thank my colleague from Oregon. It is true in the Hatch Act that it says an individual cannot do cer- tain things, but I think we have a clear-cut case here of a very differ- ent situation where we have a Government organization, not an mdi- viclual but a Government organization, a community action program actually putting the entire weight of this organization behind certain events that led up to a dangerous situation in the city of Newark. `In my mind there is a very vast difference between one individual who might during his lunch hour or `after hours gO out and protest the hiring of a secretary as opposed to the entire community action program as we had in Newark, `the UCC actively opposing the situation. I think `the crux of the problem we are faced with today is just this. I would be `alarmed to think Congress was commi'ting large sums of funds for organizations to go out to 150,000 communities throughout the United States for the sole purpose in mind of trying to oppose the local democratic form of government, be it partisan or nonpartisan, and yet they are doing just this. They did it in Newark, and they did it in Durham, N.C., and we feel they `are doing it in very many other cases, too. I am afraid that it has been `brought out before this committee. I think it is our responsibility to look into this situation and if indeed there i's a loophole in the law which allows a Government agency such as OEO t.o get around the law, I then think it is our responsibility to plug that hole up. Mr. DENT. Would the gentleman yield for an observation? Mr. GARDNER. No, not at the present time. My colleague from Florida mentioned `an individual, Willy Wright, and I would like to explore this a little bit more. it is my understanding that he `serves on the local `board of tru'stees or whatever it is called of the UCC in Newark. Mr. DEFINO.' He `did. Mr. GARDNER. Does he at the present time? Mr. DEFINO. No, `he `d'oes not; no. Mr. GARDNER. Do you know, `and I will ask this of Detective Mal- lard, at any time prior to `the riot's did this one Willy Wright get in- volved in `any protest movement o'r protest demonstrations either at the hospital or the meeting for `the purpose of `hiring the `secretary or at the police station to protest police `brutality? Mr. MALLARD. At the city hall demonstrations Willy Wright w'as one of'the leaders in disrupting hearings. Mr. GARDNER. Do you have documentary proof of this? Mr. MALLARD. He even spoke at the meeting. Mr. GARDNER. This is on public record? Mr. MALLARD. You can get the minute's of these meetings `and `they `are being documented now. Mr. `GARDNER. Going back `and picking up briefly `the comment of my coilegue from New Jersey, Mr. Daniels, he made the pOiiit during his cross-examination `that we had a number of leading `people on the board of trustees `an'd certainly `we have seen OEO do `a very effective PAGENO="1110" 3570 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 job in bringing in a number of citizens, not only Dr. Billy Graham and others who I think are very conscientiously seeking an answer and certainly everyone wants to see poverty eliminated in America but I think it should also be made quite clear that the statement in the record that these people you mentioned are not involved in the program. They know very little about what is going on. Yesterday I asked Mr. Shriver about the turnover in the local board of directors made up of these key business people. I would like to ask you, to your knowledge, in the city of Newark has there been a constant turnover of people involved in the program and do you know of any specific cases where leading business people became disenchanted with the whole program and wanted out ? Mr. BERNSTEIN. To answer that question, I would have to ask you to enter this into the record. Mr. George Hainey, a businessman in the city of Newark, a stockbroker-manager of Auchincloss, Parker & Redpath quit the UCC with a very torrid statement. Likewise, the president of the poverty program, and this is my opinionS Dean Heckel, seeing- Mr. GARDNER. Would you please identify Dean Heckel? Mr. BERNSTEIN. He is the head of the Rutgers University Law School and was president of the United Community Corp. It is my observation from meetings I have attended that he got to the point where he got disgusted and he bowed out using the excuse that he was busy at Rutgers. Likewise, there is a Rabbi Prinz who was active initially as vice president and he bowed out saying he took a job in New York but I think he, too, got a little disgusted. These are my observations. Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins? Mr. HAWKINS. First, I would like to ask how many members of the city council do you have? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Nine. Mr. HAWKINS. How many are Negroes? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Two. Mr. HAWKINS. How many members of the board of education do you have? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Nine. Mr. HAWKINS. How many are Negroes? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Three~ Mr. HAWKINS. Are they appointed by the mayor? Mr. BERNsTEIN. Yes. Mr. HAWKINS. What is the mayor's racial, national, or ethnic group? Mr. ADD0NIZI0. I don't think thishas any relevance. Mr. HAWKINS. I am asking the questions here. Mr. BERNSTEIN. He is Italian. Mr. ADDONIZI0. He is an American. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I stand corrected. Mr. ADDONIZIO. I would like to think that you represent all America. Mr. HAWKINS. I would like to restrict the answer to those relevant. Mr. ADD0NIzI0. I can give you one back, too. Mr. HAWKINS. I can see why you are having trouble. PAGENO="1111" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3571 Mr. Mallard, how many members do you have on the police force in Newark? Mr. MALLARD. I could not give you the exact figure. Mr. HAWKINS. Just give me a rough figure, please. Mr. MALLARD. 1,300 or 1,400. Mr. HAWKINS. How many of these are Negroes? Mr. MALLARD. I wouldn't know because we don't make any account of how many are Negroes, how many are white. Mr. HAWKINS. You have no regard to race, creed, or nationality in Newark at all? Mr. MALLARD. No. Mr. }L~v:iiINs. It just so happens that about a majority of the total citizens are Negro, are they not? Do you know whether or not a majority or less than a majority of your city is Negro? Mr. MALLARD. I wouldn't have any idea. It is rumored to be 50 per- cent or a little better. Mr. HAWKINS. You are on the police force yourself, I assume? Mr. MALLARD. Yes, sir. Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Ohairman, I see it is a waste of time to interro- gate witnesses because it seems to me this hearing itself is typical of why people are rioting. It seems that while there are distinct problems in cities, individuals are not talking about the problems, they are not talking about the un- employment rate and the slums, and I have seen them in Newark my- self and they are not talking about the fact that the city is changing in its composition and yet apparently the city officials do not reflect this change in condition. It seems to me- Mr. BERNSTEIN. Do I havethe right of personal privilege to ask the Congressman to explain that? Mr. IL~vKINs. Ihavetime- Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman from California has the floor. Mr. HAWKINS. It seems that while we have distinct problems in the area of race relations there are individuals who are more concerned about trying to keep those-whom I assume in this instance are Negroes in their city-out of the real representation of their city gov- ernment and then while they have problems in those schools, the fact that de facto segregation is just as bad in Newark as any place in America and nobody is talking about that and yet we have individuals coming down here to Washington to talk about a few people ex- pressing their constitutional rights and opposing this, and it does seem to me that while we do have these conditions developing and certainly of an explosive nature, there are individuals who want to fiddle around with the poverty program. Yet, they wonder why people do become disturbed or are in despair. Just for the sake of the record, may I offer a document which was circulated in my own area by what is called the neighborhood adult participation project, which is one of the projects financed under the poverty program of a group which this last weekend in the area of Venice, in the city of Los Angeles, was called on by the police in a situation which might have erupted into a riot. PAGENO="1112" 3572 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNE AcT ÂME ~~Tff Or~ i96~ They called on this antipoverty group to quell a crowd of about 500 and they did an excellent job. I think the record should indicate a very excellent example of what some of the people in the poverty program are actually doing. I would like for the sake of the record to have this included as a part of our record today because I think it is a wholesome contrast to the attitude of some of the things that have gone on in another American city where apparently the people are not aware of what is happening in their own city. I think it is most unfortunate that we don't have a hearing on the povert.y bill and get that out of the House as soon as possible and not fiddle around listening to some of the complaints that I and the others have heard today of individuals who apparently don't know the causes for riots and disturbances in our American cities. Chairman PERKINS. We will insert into our record at this point, without objection, the document to which Mr. Hawkins has just referred. (The document referred to follows:) WHAT WILL Wn GAIN FROM A RIOT? Ten points why NAPP says keep "cool" this summer 1. Many black persons will be shot down in the streets. 2. Many persons will lose their jobs. 3. Parents will not be able to move about freely going and coming from work. 4. Homes will be searched and ransacked. 5. Helicopters tear gas, and bullets will be used to disperse crowds. 6. A vast number of persons will be jailed and convicted of crimes. 7. Businesses will not be open to provide food and other necessary items. 8. Soldiers will be called in to occupy our neighborhoods. 9. Many mothers and fathers will be hurt or killed in an effort to protect their children. 10. The damage that will be done in a riot will be done to you, your family, and your neighborhood. JULY 25, 1967. DEAR Famxn: As an adult and a responsible person the Neighborhood Adult Participation Project feels that you share, along with the rest of us, an enor- mous concern for maintaining a cool summer and lessening the possibility oi~ a rut; therefore. we are asking you to join us in a mouth to mouth conversa- tion with your neighbors and the many persons that frequent your business. The effects of a riot would be disasterous for our community. Many innocent persons would be the victim of violence, most of it would be inflicted upon com- inunity people. Persons would lose the freedom to come in and out of the com- munity. In many cases people would lose access to their own homes. Our commu- nity would become a battle field arrayed with tanks and guns, and occupied by policemen and National Guardsmen. We realize the frustrations, restlessness, and weariness of the people in our community. We are all searching for a way out but the way out must not be that of a suicide. We must explain to our friends and neighbors that law en- forcemeiit agencies are prepared to do whatever is necessary to prevent another August 1965. We know that law enforcement officers will not hesitate to "shoot to kill". Regardless of what depth our frustrations might run we are powerless in the face of tanks and machine guns in a riotous situation; Hiding behind boxes or on roof tops with pea shooters and gas filled bottles. We mustexert every effort to inform the community of what the true picture really is and ask members of our community not to bring this holycaust and disaster down upon our heads. We are asking you to "m~tke it a point" to talk to your customers and friends. "Tell em like it is." PAGENO="1113" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 3573 Chairman PERKINS. Mr. Hawkins, your time has expired. Mr. Esch? Mr. ESOH. I hope the individuals representing the city government of Newark will have time later in the testimony to refute any adverse comments about their city. I t.hink that we ought to preface this by placing this particular hearing in the context :of the total hearings of this committee and the war on poverty. As such, it is my understanding that OEO was developed to stim- ulate social change, that is, to give the poverty stricken an opportunity that they would not otherwise have. I would like to ask the witnesses- Have the OEO programs offered and said they have made promises to the poverty stricken that they could not fulfill? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Basically speaking, I don't think that the pro- grams have gotten down to the grassroots poor. Mr. ESCH. This is my concern-the individual human beings in- volved in Newark. There has been suggestions made that the in- dividuals have not been helped but have been offered promises until unrest arises. You are suggesting that the OEO has been used to at- tempt to change political structures in a given cit.y environment? Mr. ADDONIZIO. If I may, I would like to throw a statistic at you. Mr. Esoii. Would you just answer the question, please? Mr. ADDONIZIO. In the last 5 years the Federal Government has pumped $45 million in various antipoverty programs into the city of Newark. Those of us who work with the grassroots of all nationalities real- ize what their problems are more than some who may not be involved. Mr. ESCI-I. You a.re suggesting, however, that the present OEO in- dividuals or certain individuals in the OEO programs have been try- ing to change the political structure of Newark; is that correct? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. There. is just no question about that. Mr. EscH. You are suggesting also that because they have not been effective through normal political structures they have become more militant in their activity? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Some of them have but not all. Mr. Eson. `What we are attempting to determine is whether or not some individuals have become more militant in their attempt to change the structure. You are suggesting the present structure is adequate to meet all of the needs of the citizens of Newark? Mr. ADDONIZI0. Which structure? Mr. EsoH. The present council and the present school board. Mr. ADD0NIZIO. There is no question about it-since they were elected by the majority of the people. Mr. ESCH. You accept the right of lawful protest? Mr. ADDONIZIO. There is no question about that at all. I should also mention and I am put in the position to possibly re- iterate some of the statements of our mayor-he has done more for civil rights, he has given more of his time to try to solve problems with all ethnic groups than any other mayor in the city of Newark and he. brings to that higher office as mayor a background of having served in the Congress of the United States for 14 years and I can assure you that the very day the riots occurred he was talking to so-called civil rights groups to try to help adjust it. PAGENO="1114" 3574 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 As a matter of fact he has been accused by the white community as having gone overboard in helping the Negro community. Mr. ESOH. What you are suggesting is in spite of this there were some individuals- Mr. ADDoNIzIo. That could never be placated, of course. Mr. Eson. You have identified people with the OEO program as those who have attempted to create unrest and you have also directed your attention to the fact that there wer~ individuals involved in this from far extremes in terms of political philosophy. Chairman PERKINS. The time of the gentleman has expired. i\frs. Mink? Mrs. MINK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. These are questions which I feel need to be answered in order for this committee. to have an adequate understanding of the administra- tion of the poverty program in Newark. I would appreciate it if you would confine your remarks to as brief a response as possible. First of all, how does a person become a member of the DCC in your city? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Just by joining. Mrs. MINK. Who determines whether a person shall be a. member of this 105-member organization? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The trustees are established by OEO regulations and are elected by the membership at large which meets once a year and there are some 10,000 members at large. When we call a meeting I think maybe we get out 150 people and they elect. Mrs. MINK. The 10,000 members that you mention-how are these peonle selected for membership? You said they just join? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Anybody who works or lives in the city of Newark is eligible to be a member by filling out a simple application. There is no cost. Mrs. MINK. Without regard to whether they are poor or live in the poor districts? Mr. BFRNSTEIN. Right. Mrs. MINK. What efforts are made by the organization to make sure that. the 10,000 people who do join actually do participate in the ele~t~on of the trustees? i\Ir. BERNSTEIN. Prior to a meeting they receive a card or a letter informing them that there is going to be a meeting and what topics of discussion will be on the agenda. T think this is a yearly meeting. Mr. T)EFIX0. And also telephone calls are made for the same puvnose. Mrs. lINK. Of your 105-member board to which you refer as trustees on the hoard, is th~c number clütermined by the organization itself or is ftis snec.ified by the office in Washington? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I think originally it was determined by guidelines from the OEO by the DCC and then the OEO stepped in to get it more reuresentative of government and the poor and expanded it. Mrs. MTNK. Once the 105-member board has been elected by the membership, what quorum requirements are in effect in order for the ho~ rd to meet. and to take legal action? PAGENO="1115" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3575 Mr. BERNSTEIN. Twenty-six. Mrs. MINK. Twenty-six members out of 105? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is right. Mrs. MINK. Going back to your response to questions involving Harry Wheeler, you testified that he made certain inflammatory re- marks at a June 26 meeting but at that time he was not a poverty employee. My question, then, is: WThen did he become an employee? Mr. BERNSTEIN. To correct the record, he was a poverty employee last year and his employment was renewed in the same capacity this year and I think it was shortly-I am trying to get the time in my mind-I think at the very beginning of July. Mrs. MINK. Were you in attendance at the meeting where his ap- pointment was discussed? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I was in attendance at the meeting of the personnel committee of the play street program which endorsed him, although they had no legal right to endorse him and they endorsed him without looking at anybody's application, including his and they sent the letter to the personnel committee of the UCC. That meeting I did not attend and he was hired for whatever good reasons they chose to hire him. Mrs. MINK. When did this hiring become authorized by the per- sonnel committee? Mr. BERNSTEIN. When the play street program was funded. Mrs. MINK. Which would be what date? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I wouldn't know the date on that. Mrs. MINK. What role did the PAL program have, in recommend- ing the appointment? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I understand the director of PAL was opposed to it. Mrs. MINK. Did he submit a letter in opposition to this appoint- ment? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I don't know what the form of opposition was but lie made his voice heard. Mrs. MINK. Your second comment about the poor not being repre- sented on the area board, my question is: How does a person become a member of an area board? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Fill out a simple application and that is it. Mrs. MINK. How many members are elected to each area board? Mr. BERNSTEIN. I have a chairman, a vice president, a secretary, and a treasurer who has no function. Mrs. MINK. Those are the four elected officials to an area board? Mr. DEFINO. It is approximately six or seven. Mrs. MINK. It has been discussed several times in this committee in vurious ways that the poor ought to be given a more ample oppor- tunity to be represented in these area organization. One suggestion that was discussed several `times was that the matter of providing a regular election so that the poor within a community could, through a regular election procedure much the same as you are elected to the city council, elect their members on the area boards. Would either of you two gentlemen who serve on the city council care to comment on such a suggestion? . . PAGENO="1116" 3576 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. Br.nNs~rEIN. If the area board has been forced upon a particular section of the city of Newark as it has, then I think everybody should have the right to vote for the officers of it. I don't know how you would define poor. As I understand it there are certain OEO guidelines of $3,000 for so many in the family. I think this would be very hard to prove except if you limited your member- ship to people on public welfare. Mrs. MINK. Do you have anything to add to that, Mr. Addonizio'? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. One of the problems, you as an elected official for office campaign among your constituency, going around, meeting many people, and some of the people whom you may meet are not aware who their representative is and some, unfortunately-and they have this right not to be concerned-during the recent riots in Newark, I rode in the lead car with Councilman Bernstein, Director Spina, his chauf- feur, and the following car was Governor Hughes touring the area~ to ascertain exactly what the damages were. Time after time our car was stopped by the chauffeur and we got out to stop the looting-the looting was going on while the Governor was watching it happen. Mrs. MIrNK. If you would respond to my question, I would appre- ciate it. Mr. ADD0NIzI0. LTnfortunately, many of these problems don't lend themselves to easy answers and certainly the Congress of the United States cannot solve today's problems with yesterday's solutions, so you must have a background of what the situation is. This is the point I want to make. In one of the stores that we blocked because of the number of looters in it, there were numbers of people that I spoke to asking them why did they do this. They couldn't tell us who the mayor of the city of Newark was or who their councilman was- Mrs. MINK. I am sorry to interrupt but I would like to reiterate my question to you: Would you support or oppose a suggestion that pro- videci for tile regular elections of legal residents in Ioor commumties to the area boards? Mr. ADDoNIzIo. Only if orientation courses were given and actual door-to-door solicitation was made to these poor people to indicate to them just what their rights are- Mrs. MINK. Would you make that same requirement for your own election? Mr. ADD0NIZI0. In my own election I have my own canvassers that go out and do this and I am sure you do, too, but many of these people are fearful. Many of them have come up from down South and they are afraid. Whenever they hear Government or police or so on they walk away. Now, how to get these people involved from a practical point of view is the problem. It is not an easy problem. Mr. THOMPSON. We have learned some very interesting things from these gentlemen today and I thank them. I understand their purpose was to demonstrate to us participation in the riots- Mr. ESHLEMAN. The chairman informs me these remarks are on my time. I have sat here patiently. I have 5 minutes and I would like to use them. PAGENO="1117" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 3577 I am a freshman in the Congress. I am not sure if this is correct ~r not, but I would like-since aspersions that have been cast on these gentlemen who have come here at our invitation, and aspersions have been cast on them as officials of the city of Newark, both elected and appointed-I would like to yield to them my 5 minutes. I would like to yield them my 5 minutes so that they may get on record whatever they desire. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would like to have this entered into the record because I made a comment earlier in this hear- ing about a left-wing group and this Students for Democratic Society admits to being such. One of their ardent workers has published a book "Studies on the Left". Mr. MALLARD. I brought the book down. I will give you copies but I have to keep that one. Mr. BERNSTEIN. The detective said he would make copies available to you. I think you will find it very interesting reading. It is kind of discouraging the way our democracy is goingS Mr. MALLARD. I am told this goes to anyone who works on an area board and works on a staff. This book was previously the property of James H. Blair. He was second in command. One of the editors of this book is Tom Hayden, who recently went to Vietnam. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Against the United States. Mr. ESHLEMAN. Would you please give the title of the book? Mr. MALLARD. "Studies on the Left." Mr. BERNSTEIN. In winding up, I would like to say that `all of us believe `there is a need to eliminate the poverty situation in this country. I think the discussion here today is certainly the best way of going about it. I feel that the responsibility lies in the hands of the elected officials because they answer directly to the people. There are some who feel that it should be left to the poor people or to those outside of the Government and keep politics out of it. I don't necessarily feel by having elected officials involved that you necessarily have politics as we know it getting involved. You have direct respresentation of the people involved. I think this is the most serious thing that faces us and I would like to feel this coun- try is that great that there will never be an outside power that could defeat us but I am very much concerned about the undercurrent of an inside power that could some day possibly destroy this great democ- racy of ours. Mrs. GREEN. I agree with the statement you have just made and how the I-latch Act has been quoted from in its legalistic terms. While I have no question about any individual having a constitu- tional right to speak or to protest or to participate in demonstrations, I have a very serious question, in fact, I would heartily disapprove of the expenditure of Federal -funds to finance people who are outside of Government and who would be working for the express purpose of changing the political structure and changing the democratic process and upsetting or overturning the decisions which are made by mayors of duly elected city officials or council people or anyone else that has been chosen by the ma]orlty of the people through the democratic process. PAGENO="1118" 3578 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I couldn't agree with you more that if this is being done and if it is being done in a lot of places, then Congress most certainly-and `when the bill gets to the Floor-I would think they would certainly want to take a look at it. I can't imagine the representatives of the city of Chicago approv- ing of a bill that would finance with Federal funds those groups of people who would be working outside of Government and outside of the democratic process to upset the decisions that are made by the duly elected officials of that city. I may say that as you gentlemen have sat here today, I have thought of the duly elected officials of my city of Portland and of my county of Multnomah, and I want you to know that I would not approve of one dime of Federal funding being paid to anybody for the purpose of going out to upset the democratic process, and I would certainly agree that we ought to have a greater involvement. I would hope more people would turn out at the ballot box at the elections and that they would use the ballot box instead of bullets. If there is any program that the Federal Government is financing that in any way contributes to this upsetting of the democratic process, then I want you to know that I am going to vote against it. I don't see a single thing here in the community action program that was ever designed by this committee or by this Congress that was for the pur- pose of doing the things you outlined. Mr. DENT. If the gentlelady will yield, we find ourselves with an agency without authority, the elected officials in a community with responsibilities without authority. So long as that condition exists we cannot approve of the situation as we now find it whether it has brokell out in Newark or Detroit or wherever. In fact, it must come home clearly that you cannot have authority without responsibility and responsibility without authority. Mrs. GREEN. I might ask you gentlemen how many women serve on the council in Newark, or `how many women serve on the school board or when last you had a woman mayor. I would not draw from that conclusion, and I suspect there will be very few such women, I would not assume that bec~use they did not serve that the women of Newark are not represented in the gov- ernment as well as the men. Neither would I assume that because no women serve in these positions that `it gives us the right to go out with guns or broomsticks or whatever women are supposed to use, and I suppose that some members of the committee would say broom- sticks, or any weapons to turn over the Government that has been elected and that has been charged with the responsibility of carrying out the Government. If this committee or this Congress follows this procedure, can I predict we are going to have real anarchy in this country? chairman PERKINS. Mr. Gardner. Mr. GARDNER. I would like to associate myself entirely with the remarks of my colleague from Oregon. I think she has quite a way of being able to cut through all of the conversation and put her finger right on the problem. I don't think I could add anything else to this testimony today that PAGENO="1119" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3579 would in any way more eloquently express my feelings than she has just done. Before I yield to my colleague from New York as a member of the committee, I want to express my deep appreciation to these gentle- men who have come down here to Washington at great expense, their own personal expense may I say, to testify as witnesses. I think for the first time we have had an opportunity to really see what the grassroots of `this program feels. In the past we have only had an opportunity to see the top echelon. Now we are talking to the gentlemen who have been involved in this program on a grassroots level and I commend you for your testimony today. I think the committee on both sides of the aisle appreciates your coming down here, also. I yield the balance of my time to my colleague from New York, Mr. Goodell. Mr. `GOODELL. I thank the gentlelady from Oregon-and I agree basically with many of the things `she has said, but I don't know that the analogy of women in our society here is quite apt. I have a feeling that women have a great deal more power in our society than maybe she implies. It is frequently indirect, but if I had to choose between men and women as to which ones have the greatest influence over our society I would say `it is the women who do. Gentlemen, there is just one point that has not come through very clearly. I think it is important and I don't know if you have any evidence on it or not. It is asked frequently with reference to the riots-and that is the question of people from outside your area who come in who in any way organize or contribute to the matrix that produces a riot-now, do you have an indication of this in Newark? Mr. ADDoNIzIo. Yes, Congressman, definitely so. Your investigators have the names and addresses and so on of those out-of-towners who came to Newark to cause the trouble. Through your chairman I would like to express to all of you our gratitude for coming here today and I say this because Councilman Bernstein and I were attending a conference in Boston and we had to leave Boston at 5 o'clock this morning and drive all night to get to Newark and at that time I was wondering in my own mind whether or not this committee would be receptive to new ideas and approach it with an open mind. I am very elated and happy to say that I feel that. the majority of you will evaluate the remarks we have made, study the reports as submitted by your staffs and certainly, take a long hard look at this program with the thought in mind of making it a better program for all. So, I personally would like to thank you, Mr. Perkins, for your fore- bearance in many cases and also the members of your committee for the courtesy they have extended to us. For a minute or two I thought I was at a city council meeting in Newark so I can well appreciate your position as chairman. Mr. GOODELL. Do any of the rest of you have comments with reference to this question? Mr. MALLARD. I would like to state in reference to race relations in PAGENO="1120" 3580 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 the city of Newark, as far as the Newark police department is con- cerned, we enjoy a very good relationship with the community. We have a program on WTednesday evenings in the director's office where any of the citizens of the city of Newark or out of the city can come up and sit down with the police director himself and make a complaint in any direction. ~\Te have human relations courses that police officers go through and the chief of police and the whole city of Newark are pleased with this program. We do believe in a person's right to demonstrate and dissent. The Newark police department recognizes everybody's right, and as far as the Negro population in the city of Newark is concerned, they have expressed time and time again in letters to the police department their appreciation for the fine work the police department is doing and the good relationship that there is in the city of Newark. Chairman PEm~INs. Mr. Thompson. Mr. Tno~rPsoN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentlewoman from Oregon to the extent that I too oppose Federal funding of the equivalent of anarchy. I don't think that because a person is employed directly or indirectly by the Federal Government he should in any way be prohibited from an absolutely free expression in a peaceful manner of his or her views. The right to dissent and even the right to say incendiary things, subject of course, to Justice Holmes' admonition that one does not have a right to cry fire in a crowed theater without justification, is a precious thing. If a program is designed in a maimer which would prohibit abso- lutely legitimate demonstrations as these photographs show and as this testimony indicates, then I would be opposed to it. I don't think the mere fact of employment in the poverty program should in any way restrict any person's right of political activity, right of dissent, or right to peacefully, without violating the law, conduct himself or herself. May I say to these witnesses today, thank you for your sacrifices, particularly the two who drove from Boston. These witnesses have come forward with some interesting and challenging ideas. They have left a lot of things unexplained. They have not produced the single name of a person paid by the poverty program who par- ticipated actively in the riots. They established apparently that some people associated with the poverty program participated in three earlier demonstrations which might be considered in a sense inflammatory. \\Tith respect to the detective and his statements concerning the relations of the police and the people in Newark, I just can't under- stand how this business was touched off by the arrest of a cabdriver if the recitations which I have heard are accurate. It was alleged in the area that the cabdriver had been killed by the police. I don't understand what climate exists in Newark which would have led so many hundreds of people to believe that to be the fact. I think that is a question which must be answered. I think it might PAGENO="1121" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3581. be indicative of not quite so much faith in the police among sothe of the citizens in Newark as the detective would indicate. That is a~ tragedy. That is something which nOne of the gentleman before us I believe to be responsible for. In conclusion, I thank them again and restate my conviction that there has been nothing here to indicate any participation by the poverty workers in `the dissension and the actual rioting in Newark. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that the testimony and the discussions we have had in the past few days in this committee have been characterized by efforts to prove that the poverty program is "responsible for the riots" and the argument to back up this conten- tion rests on one very simple premise. That argument seems to me to be summed up in the view that the poverty program stirs up the poor, that it makes them aware of their poverty by making them aware of their hopes for breaking out of it; that it encourages them to vote, and encourages them to criticize public officials; that the poverty program says to the poor, "This community belongs to you as well as to the bank presidents and the editors, and you have as much right as they to demand change in it." The argu- ment `then goes on to suggest that once you break this news to the poor, it is only a short step down the road to a riot. Once you tell the poor, the argument implies, that they, too, are human beings and full mem- bers of a community you are, in effect, encouraging them to make vio- lent change, because, we are told, the community has no intention of allowing change under any other stimulus. Mr. Chairman, by this same reasoning, the Christian Gospel and the Constitution of the United States are "dangerous, inflammatory docu- ments." If bringing hope to the hopeless and freedom to those who have for years been locked in prisons of poverty and discrimination are conducive to riots and violence, then this country is sick indeed. If keeping the promises of the Constitution and spreading the good news of human equality were revolutionary, `then I would say hooray for the revolution. Mr. Chairman, this hearing has proven one thing to me beyond any dou'bt, that the poverty workers-paid and unpaid-may in fact be a stronger defense against violent revolution than those who want to abolish the poverty program in order to avoid "making the natives restless." Mr. PUOINSKI. I would like to thank the gentlemen for the contri- bution they have made here today and I am very pleased that I was among those who called yesterday for them to be given a chance to appear before this committee t'oday. I am not sure if we were in a court of law that one would conclude' decisively that they have m'ade any case here that OEO personnel either precipitated the rioting in Newark or participated in it but this is one of the things `which our staff, when the staff report is brought `before us, will `certainly help us to conclude. I think what these gentlemen have demonstrated `here today by their testimony is the extent to which local responsible elected officials lose control of `a program like this. Mr. Shriver has sent out directive `after directive calling upon the immediate dismissal `of people employed under the poverty program 80-084-67-pt. 4-7i PAGENO="1122" 3582 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 who in any way participate or contribute to rioting or any disturbance in a community and the record here is complete with statements that have been made and the directives and memoranda that have been sent out by Mr. Shriver. The problem I see here is when a group like the Students for Democratic Action take over two of their local boards, the local officials, the TJCC here is almost literally helpless in carrying out the directives sent out by the Director of the OEO himself. I think that the main thrust of these gentlemen's testimony-and I am pleased at the suggestion of our colleague from North Carolina- is the need for tightening up this whole program. Mr. Shriver has come before the committee. He has asked that we amend the act to make the responsible elected officials part of this program and to give them greater authority. I do think that the com- mittee will probably want to go beyond what Mr. Shriver has suggested. I am delighted to see the gentlewoman from Oregon make the state- ment she did. It has been kind of lonely around here for a long time when I try to tell my colleagues that you are not going to have an effective antipoverty program when you take away complete control of these programs from the men and women and the elected officials who have to go before their electorate either 2 years or every 4 years and account for their stewardship. May I again congratulate you gentlemen for the contribution you have made here today. I think you have definitely focused on the need for strengthening this program. But I am most impressed with one thing: Every one of you has come before this committee and has said renew this program and continue with this program because this is the only way that we. can meet the problems that make people such easy prey for the authors of the boqk you have cited here and for all of the other agitators and the outsiders who come into our commirnities and tear up our com- munities. I am glad I voted for the antiriot bill. I do think that is another step in the right direction. With your testimony added to the record of our committee, I think if the Democrats and Republicans on this committee will sit down and take a. long hard~ look at this bill we can come forward with legis- lation that will strengthen this war on poverty and will help us remove those elements which have made us easy prey for the agitators. As I said, Mr. Chairman, I think this has been a very instructional, educational, and enlightening testimony this afternoon from these gentlemen. These gentlemen have made a very significant contribution. Mr. Escn. I would like to thank the individuals for coming before the committee and I would also like to associate myself with the re- marks of the gentlewoman from Oregon. I think the larger question is how can we bring about orderly social change within our cities. As a committee and as a Congress and as a people we need to re- examine more effective ways of developing local initiative of breaking through the old political structures without creating an anarchy and move ahead, on social change programs in cooperative programs PAGENO="1123" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3583 between Federal, State, and local levels and the public and the private sectors as well. The incidents of the last month have occurred with OEO present. However, there is no real casual relationship shown, I think, except that it does illustrate that OEO to this date, either because of im- proper structure or because of a lack of funds, has not been totally effective in curing the problem facing us to date. This committee needs to continue to look at a very definite wa~y of more involvement of the local individuals. Perhaps this point should be considered more than anything else to determine the funding to some from the Federal Government and the responsibilities of elected public officials in State and local governments. Again, Mr. Chairman, I would like to add my appreciation and thanks to these gentlemen for coming down here to Washington to give us the benefit of their testimony today. Chairman PERKINS. I think at this point I will insert into our record that document which aroused so much concern among my colleagues today. It is that statement made by Harry Wheeler at a special board meeting held June 26, 1967. Without objection, the document will be placed in our hearing record at this point. (The document referred to follows:) STATEMENT BY HARRY WHEELER, SECRETARY, NEWARK, N.J. BOARD OF EDUCATION, AT A SPECIAL BOARD Mi~urixa HELD JUNE 26, 1967 Now I would like to address myself to what I consider is the most serious aspect of all of this business at hand. You are about to engage in the worst kind of political deal, even worse than the whole land medal land scandal when I was a youngster in the City of Newark and `the difference is that now you are playing with the present and future lives of the future citizens of Newark and it all revolves itself around a person having the gall to dictate `to' the policy making body how this should be done. It is a simple matter of unmitigated gall that is being foisted on the citizens of Newark and you gentlemen find yourselves p'arty to this ungodly situation. Now it is worse than an' unholy `alliance because it carries with it `the threat of the kind of human unrest that none of you will ever be free from for as long as you are alive and awake on this earth because as sure as your name is McCune, Cervase, D'eF.ilippo, Ashby, Moran, `Stolow;ski and Krim, the action's `that `have already been arrived `at, `because all of this is again about the Callaghan `appointment is going to be the catalist for blood running in the streets of the City of Newark like there has never `been anywhere else in America. Phe m'atter is of `such a sensitive nature that `people all over this city are saying that if they do, if they usurp `our rights after we have lived up to the rules of the game, then we `have no other choice than to move to `take the situation in our bands'; and I simply want to say to you that your action tomorrow night will make other instrumentality for the worse holocaust that `this nation has ever seen and I am not going to beg with you or `plead with you as' previous speakers have done, I am simply going to say to you that the blood will be on your hands. You will pay the supreme price and the city, the state and the nation will know that in Newark, New Jersey, `six supposedly upright citizens became the instrumentality for the worst kind of blood `bath that America has ever seen, it is going to put the pogroms of Poland, the destruction ~f free thought in many of the European coun- tries `by the Russians to sha'me because the matter has reached the point w'here there is no turning back and I simply want to leave with you, `and purposely, because I want you to pay t'he `supreme `price because you are going in'to it with your eyes wid'e open, you know that your `actions are wrong, you know that you are perpetrating the worst kind o'f fraud, `human fraud `that i's conceivable and yet you're hell bent on doing it, so I'm~ simply saying to' y'ou that when the blood runs thick don't come to Harry Wheeler and ask him why, because the reasons for it will be `the action that you take in concert on tomorrow night. PAGENO="1124" 3584 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. Are there any further comments? Mr. O'HARA. The witnesses have put the. Newark situation in per- spective. They were brought here following charges, which appeared on segments of the press and elsewhere, that employees of the poverty program in Newark participated in the riots in Newark and/or par- ticipated in inciting the riots in Newark. It is clear from their testimony that they make no such charge. Their charge is that- Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield at this point? Mr. O'HARA. Yes. Mr. GARDNER. I would have to disagree with the gentleman. I think your first statement is absolutely right. I know of no one who has ever made a public statement that poverty employees were directly involved in the actual rioting, but I think each of these gentlemen, when asked the question, "In your opinion, do you think that the pov- erty workers were involved in a situation that led to the riots," each of them answered yes. Mr. O'HARA. I didn't. get to that point. Let's be specific. Do any of you gentlemen contend that any person employed by the poverty pro- grain incited the people of Newark to riot? Mr. ADD0NIZIO. It is never any one person. Mr. GARDNER. Again, would you yield for one brief question? Mr. O'HARA. Has any individual or group of individuals employed by the poverly program incited the people of Newark to riot? Mr. GARDNER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. O'H~uiA. I want an answer. Chairman PERKINS. You asked a question, didn't you? Mr. O'HARA. I asked a question. Chairman PERKINS. The gentleman will answer. Mr. ADDONIZIO. The response to tha.t question- Chairman PERKINS. Answer from your own personal knowledge, Mr. Addonizio. Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Would the Congressman please restate the question? Mr. O'HARA. I asked if any of you gentlemen are accusing any per- son employed by the Newark Conimunity Action Agency with incit- ing the people of Newark to riot. Mr. ADDONIZIO. No, I'm not. Mr. BERNSTEIN. No. Mr. MALLARD. No. Mr. O'HARA. I thank you. That hears out my statement. I think you have, however, indicated that some of the demonstra- tions and protests and some of the statements made by various peo- ple-one or two specifically employed by the poverty program, others elected to governing boards of the poverty program, and others who later became employees of the poverty program, helped to create a cli- mate in which the riots occurred. Is that right? Mr. ADDONIZIO. Yes. Mr. ~1ALLARD. That is correct. Mr. O'HAuA. I have been attempting to clarify just what the opi- nion of the witnesses was. I would like at this point to reiterate the fact that to the extent these people were engaged in legally protected freedom of expression, PAGENO="1125" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3585 that the Office of Economic Opportunity has been powerless to cause or demand their dismissal, and so I don't think that anyone could suggest that the Office of Economic Opportunity has been derelict m its responsibilities under the act for not doing so, and would anyone wish to take exception to that statement? Mr. ESCH. Mr. Chairman, I think that the purpose of this com- mittee is not to-is to investigate only insofar as future legislation is concerned. In this particular case, I hope we will look carefully at this question for future legislation. Mr. O'HARA. I think the gentleman is correct, but he would not take exception to that statement I have made, would he? Mr. GOODELL. Well, Mr. Chairman [laughter], I don't know who you are questioning here. Mr. O'HARA. I asked the member from New York if lie would take exception to that statement. Mr. GOODELL. Make your statement again, then, if you are going to have us on the witness stand. Mr. O'I-IARA. That the Office of Economic Opportunity has been without power under the statute to demand the resignation or the termination of the employment of persons engaged in the sorts of activities these witnesses have just described. Mr. GOODELL. Yes, I take exception. Mr. O'HARA. In what way? Mr. GOODELL. I take exception. If the testimony of these witnesses is true pertaining to some of the activities poverty workers were en- gaged in, some of the statements they made, and the making of con- tributions at meetings, and the speech of the one gentleman calling for a blood bath, or suggesting there was going to be a blood bath, 1 think OEO has full authority to insist these people be dismissed if these are the true facts. I think the local Community Action Agency has the power. We haven't got our full report, and apparently you want to give a com- plete whitewash to the situation before we get the report. I don't want to deal on inadequate facts. Mr. O'HARA. My question is not concerned with what the later report will establish, but under the law, on the basis of what we have heard today, would the gentleman suggest that the Office of Economic Opportunity has the authority to require the- Mr. EsolT. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. O'HARA. I would like to ask the gentleman a question. Mr. ESCH. I would like- Mrs. GREEN. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. O'HARA. I would be happy to to yield- Mr. GOODELL. Mr. O'Hara- Mr. O'HARA. Can you tell me under what provision of law they have that authority? Mr. GOODELL. Under the poverty law, I know of no guarantee of employment given to any employee of the poverty program. If OEO or a local Community Action Agency feel that an employee has dealt irresponsibly in terms of his authority or responsibility, they may have him dismissed. We do not require this. You are saying the law should say that whenever somebody does something of this nature PAGENO="1126" 3586 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 he be dismissed? I would like for you to cite the provision of law that guarantees these people a job with OEO 0when the, local Com- munity Action Agency says they will no longer be on the payroll. Mr. PuCINsKI. What you are saying is. correct, as far as you are saying it, but look at this situation, and this Congress wrote these things into the act. You have set up certain limitations and certain regulations on these Community Action Boards. The Congress wrote in the regulations on what kind of boards you should have and the various participation. The Congress took away the very thing that I have been saying here for a long time. You took away from the elected officials the right to institute discipline and the right to manage these programs, and you gave them to a lot of people who had no responsibility to anyone except themselves-just a second-and as these four witnesses testi- fied-just a minute Mr. 000DELL. I have heard this speech. Mr. PucrxsKI. The Students for Democratic- Mr. DEFINO. The Students for a Democratic Society. Mr. PUCINSKI. Nobody had anything to say about it except this renegade outfit that took over these two boards. Mr. GOODELL. I don't think we are serving any particular pur- pose in- Mr. PUCINsKI. You asked for an answer and I gave you an answer. Chairman PERKINS. Will the gentleman yield? Mrs. GREEN. I would like to have somebody point, out where in the act the Office of Economity Opportunity has had the authority, to give Federal funds to any CAP Agency for the purpose of putting peopli on the payroll who would be demonstrating and who would be try tng to overturn the political structure, or who would be trying to have different decisions made by the duly elected officials. I think this is the problem. Mr. PUCINSKI. I will show you where. Mrs. GREEN. There is nothing in the bill that says that or in the law which say this, and surely the Office of Economic Opportunity, in its guidelines doesn't give them the authority to carry on these kinds of procedures. Mr. GOODELL. I would put it the other way. The gentleman from Michigan put it very cleverly as to what requirement there was to dismiss them, and what authority do they have under the law to dismiss them. I would like t.o ask the gentleman from Michigan what in the law guarantees these people a job. They can be dismissed at any time, and the OEO can refuse to fund it, and the local Community Action Agency can refuse to fund. The gentleman is saying, I am afraid, that no matter what a poverty employee says or does, we are powerless, and OEO is powerless to do anything about it. I don't believe that. I don't know whether or not what these poverty workers said and did was sufficient justification under the circumstances for dismissing them, but I am sure the authority was there to do it. Mr. O'HARA. May I respond? Mr. GOODELL. Absolutely. Mr. O'HARA. I refuse to accuse the gentleman of being clever PAGENO="1127" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3587 [laughter] but I would suggest that the gentleman knows that there is no statute guaranteeing funds for anything or guaranteeing jobs to anyone. But it is clear, from numerous decisions of the Supreme Court, that employees may not be dismissed by the Federal Government be- cause of their political activities or their political views or the manner in which they express them, unless those activities or views pass beyond the limits of permissible freedom of thought and expression. The State of New Jersey has similar laws, and they also have laws specifically prohibiting activities designed to destroy our system of government, activities designed to incite to riot, and activities designed to create a disorderly assemblage. I think the fact that none of these employees have been accused in the courts of New Jersey of such offenses would suggest that perhaps their activities did not exceed the limits of freedom of expression. I don't think that it is the case that the failure to prosecute these em- ployees suggests a lack of diligence on the part of the police. I am willing to accept the judgment of the police and law enforcement agencies of New Jersey. I don't approve of the actions of these employees, you understand, but I think that to imply from any of the proceedings today that the Office of Economic Opportunity has been derelict in its responsibilities under the act would be a mistake. Mr. 000DELL. I would say that I reserve judgment on whether OEO itself had any responsibility or has been derelict. As fitr as I know the gentleman from Michigan is the first one to raise the question here this afternoon, as to whether OEO was derelict. I think he has brought up a straw man at this point. We haven't drawn any conclusions on that line, and I would hope we would reserve judgment on that until we get the facts. Mr. PUCINSKI. I would like to ask Mr. Addonizio, the members of the United Organization Trustees-you have a photograph here of what you allege to be employees of a CAP agency demonstrating and creating what you call the climate that ultimately erupted into a disturbance. Mr. Bernstein and Mr. Addonizio, why wasn't some disciplinary action taken against these people? Why weren't they dismissed, why weren't they fired, why weren't they severed from the program? You had these pictures a month or ~ months before that, you said. Why wasn't action taken against them? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The board of trustees, even though it numbers 105, I think you would find in an average meeting you have 35 or 40 people out. The so-called dedicated citizen did not take enough interest to come out to these meetings. The meetings that he went to, he found long talkathons that went late into the night, and the group I was referring to that controlled the TJCC planned these talkathons so that the aver- age interested citizen who had an interest at the outset would get disgusted and go home, and I have seen it happen many, many times, and these agitators, as I like to call them, they could put through anything they want. Mr. PUCINSKI. Who does the hiring and the firing? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The personnel committee, and the director has the PAGENO="1128" 3588 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 right to dismiss, from what I understand, and he tried to cut back on one program, the Blazer program in Newark, and he claimed he went a little too far. He claimed the Blazer program was costing about $9,000, and he tried to cut back on this program, and he found out he went into a situation where he ended up getting fired, even though the papers said he resigned, and I am talking about Mr. Wolf. Mr. PUCIXsKI. Fired by whom? Mr. BERNSTEIN. The militant part of the board of trustees. Mr. PucINsKI. And these trustees are elected- Mr. BERNSTEIN. From the membership at large, and the member- ship at large once again, although it numbers 10,000, you find maybe 150 that come out to the meeting and again it is the agitators who get the people to the meeting and they control it on that basis. Mr. PUCINSKI. And these 10,000 are just people who sign up, they don't have to be poor, or from a poor neighborhood or anything; is that right? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. In reference to your question as to why these people are continued on the payroll, each area board has seven employees, and each area board hires its own people, and each area board has the people that they employ. They make sure they express the same philosophy they have, so consequently they do not take any remedial action against those people. Mr. PUCINsK1. And these two boards taken over by the student group, they could go ahead and hire whoever they wanted to and the mayor of that city and the city council and the responsible city offi- cials had nothing to say about this? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is right. Mr. PuCINsKr. This is in essence the doctrine that my good friend from New York, and I am sorry my friend from Minnesota is not here, have been trying to persuade the Congress this is the best way to run this program. Mr. GOODELL. Would the gentleman yield? Mr. PUCIN5KI. Yes. Mr. 000DELL. I am not going to engage in a debate with you and distort the philosophy involved with the poor helping themselves. I would not claim full credit, but I am glad to be classified with those who I believe in this involvement, believe very sincerely in it. I know the gentleman from California believes very seriously in it, and I know a great many others on both sides of the aisle believe in it, but we don't accept your distorted description- Mr. PUCINSKI. This is the first time you have had witnesses come down here and tell you what- Mr. G-OODELL. In many areas, it is inspiring. I am glad to see i results. Mr. GARDNER. Would the gentleman yield? I think it should be brought up at this time that OEO was properly warned of the situation in the telegram of May 25. They were also sent a copy of the report Mr. Addonizio mentioned earlier in his testi- mony, and so far as I know and so far as the director of police in the city of Newark knows, no OEO investigator came in to ask why he complained. Mr. PUcIN5KI. Mr. Shriver testified they had investigators there. PAGENO="1129" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3589 Mr. GARDNER. They never seemed to go to the heart of the problem. Chairman PERKINS. I think I have been very patient sitting here- Mr. GOODELL. I think you have, too. Chairman PERKINS. We are not getting anywhere at this stage of the game. Mr. HAWKINS. I have been listening to this dialog, but you never seem to get around to this side. Chairman PERKINS. It has been open here. Go ahead, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. HAWKINS. I think you should at least look down this side of the aisle. Chairman PERKINS. I will make a public apology to you off the record. [Laughter.] Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you. I would like to make a comment, because I don't know who started this hearing, but I would like to go on record as saying that I think the hearing has been a waste of time. I think that if we were going to have a hearing that both sides should have been heard from. I think this has been a waste of time because some names have been abused today, Mr. Harry Wheeler, for example-I have read through this statement several times, and I think I made statements more mili- tant this afternoon on the record than Mr. Wheeler made, merely sug- gesting that something might happen if things did not occur. I don't know Mr. Harry Wheeler, and I don't know what he was advocating, but it seems to me this goes to the issue of whether or not individuals who in good conscience and honesty make statements about improving conditions of their neighborhoods are to be considered anarchists and Communists, I assume, also, and are not to be heard from at all. It seems to me what we are listening to is a profile of what is wrong in many American cities, that they are not responding to the needs of the people, and it seems to me that we have heard nothing but a lot of testimony to the effect that people who are poor must be more honest than anyone else, more honest than public officials who are elected and paid, and they must be more moral than anyone else, I think the ex- pression "like Caesar's wife" was used. "The poor must be above sus- picion." If people who are poor must not express themselves on public ques- tions, about their schools, for example or if they have a dirty street, they are not supposed to do anything about it, or if they walk up and down this street and see the garbage in the street, they should say nothing, and if the poverty program awakens them out of their lethargy and indifference to what is going on so that they try to become self-sustaining and take care of themselves that is bad, then there is something wrong about what some of us consider the program to be. It seems to me that what we are saying here is that poor people must just climb in a cave or get in a ditch and go to sleep. and I would suggest that if this is what the poverty program is all about, I think we should be honest and tell the people, but I don't think that we should sit by. and wonder why people are engaging in disorders. I don't think that we should assume that, because some people in some of the cities engage in conduct that certainly we don't. condone. and we certainly don't like, that merely Our expressing ourselves as being PAGENO="1130" 3590 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 against violence is sufficient, and I think that it ill-behooves indi- viduals who represent officially a city to tell us these things that we have been listening to today and to not bring to us the problems of their city, and tell us what we can do to help the people get jobs and get better schools, what we can do to help mothers who have prob- lems with their children and who are trying to take care of them on aid to families with dependent children, and discuss these things honestly and forthrightly. I think it is most unfortunate that the gentlelady from Oregon sought to take an exception to my trying to find out to what extent minoriy groups in cities have a voice in the Government. I think nobody in the Congress has fought more for the rights of women than the gentlelady from Oregon. She has sought to bring them into the mainstream, and I want to see people, black or white, brought into the mainstream, and for people to tell us that they are so colorblind today that they don't know how many Negroes are on the police force, in the schools, and in the other areas, I think that is most unfortunate or dishonest. I think they well know, and I simply suggest we had better hurry up and try to represent these people and not condemn them, and we had better hurry up a.nd get a poverty bill out of this session and some of the other legislation, that is now being filibustered to death and killed, if people-if we intend to do something, to bring hope and not despair, and support responsible leadership to prevent the dis- orders in American cities that have had them, and prevent them- Mr. BERNSTEIN. Can I answer him? Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Congressman, I sat back and listened, and I wasn't going to answer you, but I think you, in your own way, have raised a very serious question in our democracy here. I think what you have intimated-at least this is the way I under- stood it-that since I represent a district that is 65 percent Negro that I should step down and let a Negro take my place because there are 65 percent Negroes, and likewise, to go one step further, if a dis- trict has 65 percent Catholics, and it is represented by a Protestant, then you should step down. and I think this is a direct violation of our Constitution, and I dare sit here and say to you that if your formula were followed then such a fine Senator as Senator Brooke would not be sitting in the Senate today, because he is a Negro and there are less than 5 percent Negroes in the State of Massachusetts, and I am sure there are many other such similar situations across this land of ours. I like to feel that the people who are most qualified get elected regardless of race, color, or creed. You cannot say we should have equal rights, or we should have a representation that one part of the city has to be one way and go into the suburbs and say, "You have to hire a Negro." Because we have a majority in one area, the rule shouldn't fall that way, and if that same group is the minority in the other area, they should be accepted. I think you are bigoted in your thinking. I don't think this great country of ours was ever designated to be judged by how many Catholics we have, or how many Jews. I like to feel that the people PAGENO="1131" ECONOMIC OPPORTIJNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 3591 who aspire to political office put their name in nomination and they run for it and the people pick the person they like best based upon qualifications and I would like to enter into the record that I resent your statements. Mr. HAWKINS. I would like to respond them. Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, and then we will stop. Mr. HAWKINS. Certainly I am not suggesting any of the things that the witness apparently drew conclusions on, but I see Newark is in such trouble, I can see why at the end of the term of the present councilman, his district might be better off if he does retire. I did not indicate in any way that a Negro has to serve Negroes or a white cannot serve Negroes, nor dra.g the Catholic issue into anything I said. I merely said that anyone who represents a district today in a city such as Newark, who is not out in the forefront advocating better schools, integrated schools, who is not giving support to a poverty program, certainly with the involvement of the people in a poverty program, is not representing Negroes, because half of them are in the poverty classification, and certainly I don't think that the views that have been expressed today by the individuals who apparently are trying to represent their districts represent at all the needs of disadvantaged people. And I certainly think, if this is called bigotry, that certainly it is a distortion of the meaning, and certainly I feel that the gentleman has certainly misunderstood the whole essence of our democratic government, and really, I think, is just completely ignorant of the changing times in which we live. Mr. PUCIN5KI. Mr. Chairman, a. point of order? I think that Mr. Bernstein probably would agree that he would want to strike from the record his accusation of our colleague as bigoted. If any Member rn this Congress is not bigoted, it is Gus Hawkins. He has worked closely with all these bills. I would like to give the witness an opportunity to correct the record. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would like to withdraw that statement. Mr. GARDNER. I would hope my colleague from California would withdraw his statement. Mr. HAWKINS. If there is a statement I made that reflects on the personal honesty or integrity of the individual, I certainly did not intend that, but I did say that his views did not really correspond with the needs of the people in his district. Mr. GARDNER. Are you familiar with his district? Mr. HAWKINS. Yes; I am. I was in Newark just a year and a half ago. I am not as familiar as he is himself, but I do know this, that anybody who in any way weakens the fight for an antipoverty bill is certainly not reflecting the views of Negro people. Mr. GARDNER. May I say this in comment to my colleague from California, and I do not in any way doubt your sincerity in this situation, but I do think we should at all times be openminded and want to hear any criticism of the program in order that we in some way may strengthen the program and in the end result the poor will have a better and more effective program. This is the purpose of this committee. PAGENO="1132" 3592 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Mr. HAWKINS. I am very glad to know that YOU are supporting the program. Mrs. GREEN. I move the committee go on record for the relection of Gus Hawkins and Mr. Bernstein, and that we adj ourn. Mr. HAWKINS. If Mr. Bernstein thought I made a statement that reflected on his personal integrity, I would like to go on record that anything I said in the heat of the debate that might have reflected on his personal integrity or in any way reflected on his individual honesty, I would like to indicate that I did not mean it in that sense. I only meant it in the physical way of issues, and not as a personal indictment of his character, his integrity, or any implication along that line. Chairman PERKINS. I ask unanimous consent that Congressman Hawkins be permitted to revise and extend his remarks OU this point. Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to say for the record that I want to commend the chairman for his handling of the hearings and his fairness throughout. In spite of some moments when people wanted to cut down on the witnesses in the hearings, the chairman has had an even gavel through- out. He has been extremely fair on all matters, and I think we all appreciate it, both Democrats and Republicans. Chairmall PERKINS. I had said if OEO wanted to respond briefly, if they have a witness here, that I would like to give them the opportunity. (Statement of Timothy Still, president of LTnited Community Corp., Newark, N.J., and documents submitted by 111CC follows:) STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY STILL, PRESIDENT, UNITED CoMMuNITY Coup., NEWARK, N.J. My name is Timothy Still. I reside at 45 17th Avenue, Newark, New Jersey. I am President of the United Community Corporation, Newark's `anti-poverty agency. This statement, on behalf of our corporation. is respectfully submitted to the Committee on Health Education and Labor of the House of Representa- tives for their consideration and deliberation on H.R. 8311 relating to the Office of Economic Opportunity. I have been a resident of the City of Newark for 44 years and have been active in the affairs of our community for an extended period of time. I have served as President of Hayes Homes Tenants League, President of the Joint Council of Public Housing Tenants Association, Vice President of Fuld Neigh- borhood House. member of the Board of the Urban League, Director of the Dukers Athletic Club, and have been active in other community organizations. I am presently employed as a consultant to the Newark Public Housing Authority. In addition, I have the honor to serve as home secretary to Congressman Joseph G. :Minish (N.J. 11th District). I have also served as vice chairman of the Hugh J. Addonizio Association and as the central ward chairman for Mayor Hugh J. Addonizio, Mayor of Newark. While my personal history may not appear to have any direct relevance to the issues under consideration by this Honorable Committee, this is part of my credentials which establishes my competence to inform you about our city, some of its problems. and the role our anti-poverty agency has played in dealing with them. Mine is not the voice of the ghetto, but it is a voice from the ghetto. Among the many pieces of constructive legislation adopted by Congress, the Economic Opportunity Act of 1904 as amended, has been most meaningful to that sector of our nation described as "the poor or the disadvantaged". It has given a new dimension to the lives of many and has been the vehicle through which the hopes and aspirations of my people may yet be attained. In my PAGENO="1133" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITy ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3593 humble view, the concepts enunciated in this law make it Possible to meet and solve the great challenge of~ this decade. The Economic Opportunity Act is an instrumentality for good, its precepts enhance the dignity of man and in our struggle for fulfillment of its ideals is reflective of the broad strength in American Life. It can survive and it must survive! The United Community Corporation was organized in September, 1964. At the call of Mayor Addonizio, representative citizens of our community met and established our corporation as the community action agency for the City of Newark. This group included representatives of the poor, the business corn- inunity, social agencies, the clergy (representing the three major faiths), organized labor and elected officials of the City of Newark. At the outset, we devoted ourselves to the task of organizing the poverty community in our city to enable them to share in the total development of the attack upon poverty in the city. We accepted with utmost seriousness the touchstone of the statute `to assure "maximum feasible participation of the poor." The problems of our city were considered from the point of view of the city as a whole and it was, and is, our intent to involve the entire community to combat the evils of poverty. Naturally, this includes men and women from all stations and walks of life. The city was divided into various areas and local neighborhood groups were established which we called "area boards". Our corporation simultaneously proceeded to design and develop a series of proposals to bring meaningful programs into the community to assure maximum utilization of the Economic Opportunity Act for our city's poor. This included the cooperation of and reliance upon existing agencies and institutions and the development of innovative concepts which led to the formation of new corporate structures to meet the previously unmet needs of the poor. Through this medium, we sought to effectuate the Congressional intent expressed in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. Through the direction given by our corporation, more than 10,000 people of diverse backgrounds and interests who live or work in Newark have become members of the UCC. We have organized and now have function- ing eight area boards which, except for one area, encompass the entire city. Since 1965, programs have been developed and have been operational on a city-wide basis ,to bring into reality the development of new and expanded educational, employment and social opportunities in our city. We developed a full-year pre-school program on a city-wide basis. This was the first such program in the history of our country. The purpose of this program is to provide ~hi1dren with an introduction to the educational process and give them an experience in group activities to aid in preparing them for entry into the school system. The most significant feature of this program is the fact that it was designed, organized, and has been and is currently being administered by community people. Most of the staff includ- ing teachers, teachers-in-training, and teacher assistants, have come from the community. This program has three primary tasks: (1) community involvement; (2) training opportunities for prospective new teachers who are desperately needed; and (3) direct services to the children. This pro- gram supplements and complements the summer Head Start Program oper- ated by the Newark Board of Education. WTe also have established special- ized pre-school programs through the Fuld Neighborhood House, the Hilary School, and the Child Services Association. The total number of enrollees served in our community to date by the pre-school and head start program ~ is approximately 15,000. The foregoing operational projects are in "the nature of pre-school devel- opment which is geared to a "head start". We have also sponsored educa- tional projects designed to assist in the development Of youth in the school systems such as Upward Bound, College Work Study, High School Head Start, and Queen of Angels tutorial programs which include remedial edu- cation. In attempting to ameliorate some of the social patimology in our community, we have sponsored programs conducted by the Urban League and the Family Service Bureau such as Project Enable which deals with family structure, and FOCUS which is directed specifically to the Hispanic community and is operated by said community. The leaguers, a long estab- lished interracial, volunteer agency, working with Negro youth in our corn- munify has been funded through FCC for a program which is designed PAGENO="1134" 3594 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 (1) to provide remedial and tutorial services; (2) to provide special train- ing in self-improvement such as grooming, speech, etc., and cultural ad- vancement through such things as minority history and other structured activities. Our corporation has also been concerned with the problems of senior citizens among the poor. The city originally submitted a program proposal which con- templated a `budget of $75,000. Upon study and review `by our staff, it was felt that such a limited proposal could not begin to meet the need's of our older citizens. A new proposal (Senior Citizens Commission "Golden Age Plan") was prepared with the assistance and guidance of the United Community Corporation staff which program `has been funded `by the Office of Economic Opportunity for ap- proximately $1 million for its nine months of operation. This program is designed to do several things: (1) provide employment opportunities for our older poor; (2) to serve the special needs of the elderly `through food distribution centers, health services, social services, planned recreational activities, and under a special grant for Operation Medicare Alert, with the assistance of the staff of the Golden Age Plan (Senior Citizens Commission), over 26,000 elderly citizens, have been enrolled in Medicare. The Senior Citizens Commission which is established by law is complemented by 45 representatives from the `area boards who play a role in formulating the policy and guiding the administrators of this important project. It should be noted that this program is administered by the City of Newark through the Senior Citizens Commission. In `bringing employment opportunities to the poor, several work training pro- grams have been sponsored by the United Community Corporation: The Blazer Work Training Program is designed by community people, is run by community people, `and has served many `hundreds `of the poor and prepared them for em- ployment in the open labor market. COPE (Career Orientation Preparation for Employment) has served over 1,200 of our youth as a combined Neighborhood Youth Corps and OEO project. The On-the-Job Training project directed and ad- ministered by the United Community Corporation has to date consummated 132 training contracts with different employers of varying size throughout the city. In addition, the United Community Corporation is a co-sponsor with the City of Newark in the Concentrated Employment Project. It is anticipated this program will serve `approximately 2,000 people through its first year of operation. We have also cooperated on a functional basis with the Businesa and Industrial Coordi- nating Council, State Employment Service, Youth Opportunity Center, Urban League, Project Head Start, Job Corps, the City of Newark, and other agencies in providing new~ employment opportunities for many thousands of youth and adults of our city. Our city was one of the first in the country to establish a legal services project. This agency, created by our corporation, has brought a sense of reassurance to the impoverished community of Newark that the law as a process is available to help and not to hinder the people of the community. Our Newark Legal Services Project has established community offices in six `of the local `area boards which are staffed by practicing lawyers working on a full-time basis to serve the previously unmet `legal needs of the poor in our community. It should be noted that on the board of trustees `of our legal `services project we have representatives of the local Bar Association, the Legal Aid Society, other professionals, `as well as substantial representation of the poor of the community. In point of fact, one-third of the board of trustees of our legal services project is composed of the poor, one-third is composed of community people who are serving for the entire community and one-third are representatives of the legal profession. The foregoing are but some of the positive accomplishments of our corporation which have been made possible by our effectuation and implementation of the purposes and objectives of the Economic Opportunity Act. It is my firm conviction that the productive efforts of the United Community Corporation has helped to organize the poor of our community and to give our entire community a sense of hope for the future. This is not to suggest that our efforts have overcome all of the problems within our community. To the con- trary, because of the enormity of the problems, this is but a mere beginning of what must be done. The root causes of discontent `and disillusionment that have ~volved over decades and have plagued the poor cannot be eradicated in a corn- paratively short period of time. The basic problems of unemployment, inadequate housing, inferior educational facilities, discrimination (in all its aspects), the exploitation of the poor, the PAGENO="1135" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3595 patterns of segregation that exist and the inability of the law enforcement au- \thorities to truly relate to the poor in our community and the resultant grossly insensitive attitude of the police and other official agencies in the community can no longer be ignored. In the winter and spring of 1967, the basic failure to overcome the foregoing problems were accentuated by other factors. There was increased concern of many in the community about claims of acts of police brutality. The decision to establish a medical school in the heart of the central ward of the city, which has the largest concentration of Negroes and poor in the city, without involve- ment of the community in reaching such decision, produced substantial resent- ment. The proposed appointment of a white political leader as a replacement for the secretary to the Board of Education which completely ignored a Negro from Newark who was unquestionably the most qualified candidate for the position, likewise, caused deep resentment. These problems aroused many persons of the community, both black and white, and increased the tensions and undercur- rents within the city. However, these concerns of the citizens in the community were substantially ignored. The problem of the appointment of a successor to the Secretary of the Board of Education is a glaring example of what aroused the community. The refusal to appoint Mr. Parker, then employeed as Budget Director of the City, the first Negro to become a Certified Public Accountant in the state of New Jersey, an honor graduate of Cornell University School of Business Administra- tion and the holder of a Master's Degree was viewed as a rejection of opportunity for Negroes to advance. The white person under consideration and completed high school, and his work experience was in no way comparable to Mr. Parker's except that he was a member of the City Council. Both the Negro community and many representatives of the white community expressed gross' dissatisfaction, and indignation with the adamant position taken in refusing to recognize the best qualified candidate for this important and vital post. Moreover, the leading newspaper of our state also joined in the condemnation of the refusal to select the best qualified individual. This conduct caused many Negroes in the com- munity to charge that the promises and assurances that a better life would be theirs if they pursued their education were in `truth meaningless and empty phrases. It was said again and again throughout the black ghetto that even where the Negroes of our community had `the superior qualifications, there was a different test applied. It is my firm conviction that this rejection of Mr. Parker was one of the con- tributing factors in inciting community people to express their hostilities in such a dramatic fashion in mid-July. It has been said that UCO contributed to the outbreak in Newark because it aroused people over this appointment. I categorically deny this. UCC did not take any position on the appointment of the School Board Secretary. No one spoke on behalf of, or as a representative of UCO at any of the Board meetings when this issue was being considered. Individuals and other groups did protest the School Board's actions, some of whom were members of UCO. However they spoke out as individuals or repre- senting other groups and not UCC. As heretofore noted, we have more than 10,000 members of our corporation representing diverse views in the community. UCC cannot and should not be charged with responsibility for the conduct of its members or staff except when they are acting on behalf of the corporation~. The history of the medical school controversy, likewise, reflects that any charge that UCC contributed to the Newark outbreak by its conduct in this regard is without merit and fact. Our corporation endorsed the advantages to the community of establishing a new medical and dental school in the City of Newark. However, our Board of Trustees passed a resolution objecting to the construc- tion of a medical school on the selected site, (consisting of 150 acres in the heart of the Negro community of the city) without advance adequate provisions' for relocation of the persons to be displaced. It was the position of our Board that the land sought was grossly in excess of any reasonable needs, taking into account the much more limited acreage utilized by the State University in the establishment of a new Law Center, the expansion of the Newark Rutgers Campus, and the rebuilding of the Newark College of Engineering. No effort was made to truly consider the concerns expressed by the community with respect to the excessive demand of 150 acres PAGENO="1136" 3596 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 in the heart of the Negro community to be used for the medical school. It is indeed regretable that it was not until after the incidents of mid-July that any effort was made officially on the part of the City, to meet with the Board of the Medical School urging that they reconsider the need of such acreage and that a special program for relocation and redevelopment be pursued. I am hopeful that such discussions which have been initiated since the Newark outbreak may result in a limitation of the acreage to be given for the medical school and also the development of a modern urban complex which wiliprovide adequate housing that the people of this area can afford, increased jobs and employment opportu- nities as well as facilities for the social improvement of the commUllity within this area of the city. Had these discussions been undertaken before the city exploded the explosion might not have occurred. In the face of the foregoing problems, tensions in the city were heightened as a result of the feeling of lack of concern with the problems already referred to. It should be made abundantly clear that these problems were not created by the United Community Corporation. Nor did we create or precipitate the inci- dent which triggered the events of mid-July. To the contrary our entire course of conduct was designed to relieve community tensions and we did within our power to prevent the outbreak. The outburst in Newark was precipitated by a charge of police brutality against a Negro taxi driver. Immediately upon our being informed that a group of people bad gathered at the police precinct where the brutality w-as charged to have occurred. I, as president of this corporation, in the company of our acting director and one of our vice presidents w-ent to the scene. We found an angry, hostile crowd vocally expressing its discontent. We sought to disperse the crowd. assuring them that this grievance would be lodged w-ith the appro- priate authorities of the city to prevent any recurrence of such alleged mis- conduct. Despite our efforts to urge the crowd to disperse and go home. they were so enraged by the time we arrived that w-e w-ere unable to persuade them to do so. We then sought to channelize the hostility of the crow-4 away from the pricinet and attempted to organize a peaceful demonstration moving away from the precinct. At one point it appeared that we would be successful in our efforts but, unfortunately, because of the precipitous action and indiscretion on the part of the police, the course we had pursued was nullified. Once the outburst started, our corporation, through its Board members, officers, and staff, took every reasonable measure to restore peace and order to the community. We had meetings with the Mayor of the City and the Governor designed to explore measures which would enable us to restore normalcy to the community. Members of our staff, our Board, and our officers spoke over the radio and through other media of communication urging the community to return to a state of normalcy. In addition, we helped organize a group of com- munity leaders to work throughout the affected area with specially designed armbands with the endorsement of the governor in a futher attempt to calm the community. Furthermore. when it became apparent that there would be a great need for food, medicine, and other essentials for the Innocent victims of the disturbance we organized an emergecy relief operation which distributed 200 tons of food (dispersed at 13 different centers in the affected parts of the city) and provided other direct assistance through an Emergency Relief Com- mittee for those in need. I responded to a request of the Governor, to plead with a sniper at Scudder Homes, to cease his firing when the lights were out in the project. I responded to this request with full knowledge of personal danger that I would be facing. I was deeply concerned that many innocent people had been injured and killed inside their homes from ricocheting bullets and to prevent this from recurring I responded to the governor's request. The UCC office became the headquarters for Negro leaders and people from the ghetto who were seeking to restore order. We established contact w-ith the Governor and his staff and Oliver Lofton, Director of our Legal Services Proj- ect was designated by the Governor as spokesman for various community groups. Through this medium the Governor was able to keep in touch with the people inside the ghetto. We responded to the Governdr's request to provide attorneys for the hundreds of persons arrested. Our Newark Legal Services Project attorneys worked in cooperation with the Public Defenders Staff to expedite the processing of all prisoners. PAGENO="1137" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMEND~'IENTS OF 1967 3597 In summary, DCC, through its staff, officers and Board members were in the forefront of efforts to prevent the outburst as it was starting. We were in the forefront of efforts in conjunction with the Mayor, the Governor, and their staff to bring an end to the hostilities as they progressed. These actions were at great personal risk to all of us and in a sincere and genuine effort to preserve order in the community. Our leaders took to the radio and in the streets in an effort to end the hostilities. It is my firm belief that DCC's record in the coin- .niunity helped to restore order to Newark. On August 1, 1967, two members of the Newark City Council, Councilmen Bernstein and Addonizio, accompanied by Detective Mallare and Anthony DeFino appeared before your Committee and testified with regard to the alleged involvement of representatives of our corporation in the riots in Newark or the conduct which allegedly precipitated the riots. The testimony of each of these gentlemen was replete with inaccuracies, as- sumptions, and reflected the dismal lack of awareness they had of the concerns of the people of our city. Their statements were unpardonable acts of irrespon- sibility and contained outlandish charges that were not supported by facts in their appearance before this Committee. I hesitate to respond to what they said lest it lend a color of dignity to their reprehensible remarks. However, I do respond to certain statements made by them so that there will be no question in the minds of any members of this Committee as to the con- duct of this corporation its staff, its hoard members, and officers. I categorically deny that the conduct of our corporation can in any way be labeled as "communist" or tainted with `communists". Though this charge was made by Councilman. Bernstein, when pressed for support.ing evidence, he con- ceded he had none. Councilman Bernstein charged that the community action progra me in the City of Newark played an important part in setting off the riots in our city (TR 4377). This is grossly untrue. We have heretofore set forth the kinds of programs developed by our cor- poration which have sought to bring about stability in the community. The councilman alluded to the conduct of the Newark Community Union Project (NCUP) which he said contributed to the riots. It should he made clear that the New-ark Community Union Project is not affiliated or associated with the United Community Corporation and, as a matter of fact, on numerous occasions some persons who have been affiliated with NCUP and have been members of DCC have differed most vigorously with some of the policy positions taken by the Board of Trustees of this corporation. I make no comment on the conduct of NCUP since any allegiations levelled against them should be answered by their representatives. The councilman charges that several of the area boards helped to set off the incident that happened on July 13 which precipitated the riot. We categorically deny this. To the contrary, as heretofore indicated, the officials of our corporation took every reasonable measure to calm the anger and hostility of the crowd when it appeared that there might be an outburst. It is charged that opposition of the appointment of the secretary to the Board of Education was led. by anti-poverty people (PR 43.79). We have already indicated to the Committee the community issue involved in the appoint- nient to this position. However, the corporation took no official position on the appointment nor did anyone speak in any meetings in regard to this issue, as an authorized representative or on behalf of UCC. It is charged that UCC opposed the medical center in Newark and that among other things DCC loaded the meetings w-ith people from the outside area and outside the city of Newark. WTe also categorically deny this. To the contrary the only person w-ho spoke on behalf of DCC was the then executive director who addressed one of the blight hearings dealing with this problem, whose testimony is part of the official record of that meeting for examination. It was charged that inflammatory remarks were made by Mr. Wheeler who w-as then allegedly an employee of DCC (TR 4389-4390). We likewise deny that at the time Mr. Wheeler was alleged to have made the statement referred to he was an employee of DCC. We also note for the Committee that Council- man Addonizio subsequently conceded in response to a question by Congress- man O'Hara and Chairman Perkins that during the time period referred to, Mr. Wheeler w-as an employee of the Newark Board of Education and not of DCC. . 80-084-67-pt. 4-72 PAGENO="1138" 3598 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Moreover, Councilman Addonlzio conceded that he had no knowledge of Mr. Wheeler's being active in the riots in Newark during July (TR 4394). Councilman Bernstein charged that UCC was an "outside political group" attempting to gain political power in the City of Newark (PR 4394). It is patently untrue that our corporation is a political group. We are the local community action agency who seek to alter the course of our community and to improve our community, through the types of programs referred to in effectuating the purposes and policies of the Economic Opportunity Act. Moreover, a long time ago, our Board adopted a policy that anyone who became a candidate for office was required to take a leave of absence from the Board to assure that there would be no utilization of the corporation for political purposes. In passing, I note that all nine councilmen, including Councilmen Addonizio and Bernstein, are members of the Board of Trustees and serve by virtue of their elected position. They have never been requested to absent themselves from participation in the affairs of UCC because they are elected officials of the community, but, to the contrary, we seek their active participation which, regrettably, we have never had on a constant basis. Despite the irresponsible statements and lack of foundation for the asser- tions by the witnesses referred to who appeared before the Committee, when pressed by members of the Committee they had to concede that they had no knowledge of any involvement of any particular employees of UCC who engaged "in the riot or in incidents that incited others to riot" (PR 4414, 4421, 4422, 4433, etc.). The lack of informed and factual data on the part of the witnesses is reflected by the absurd contention that the former president of our corporation, Dean C. Willard Heckel, and former vice president, Rabbi Jonathan J. Prinz, resigned because they were "disgusted with the conduct of the affairs of the corporation" (TB 4457). Attached hereto is a copy of a newspaper interview with Dean Heckel, following his retirement as president. in which he clearly expressed his intent to remain active in the corporation (he presently serves as a vice president of the corporation). and in which he asserted his confidence in the corporation and its goals. Attached hereto is a letter concerning a sermon delivered by Rabbi Prinz in which he reaffirmed his belief in the design, purpose, and function of the corporation. It is apparent that the distress of Councilmen Bernstein and Addonizio with the activities of the UCC is because they reject the fundamental philosophy of the Economic Opportunity Act which urges maximum feasible participation of the poor. They resent the involvement of the community because it impinges upon the control they seek to exercise in the affairs of the corporation. It is their contention, as testified before this committee, and as earlier asserted in their own inquiry two years ago, that the anti-poverty program should be run by the elected officials of the city and not by the people of the community. It is this very distinction, the guarantee of involvement of the poor which makes the Economic Opportunity Act unique and in the ultimate is the assurance that its objectives will be achieved. The tangible results of the riot in Newark in terms of death, property damage, and injury to the people of our city is horrible to behold. Resultant attitudes can bring about disaster to the social structure we have been working to improve. Our corporation does not agree with or condone resorting to violence as the answer to the social evils we have sought to overcome by our activities in our communities. Neither do we condone or agree with resorting to violence by those charged with maintaining order. It is our view that it is the responsibility of our entire community to address itself to the creation of a new and social, eco- nomic and political climate which will eradicate the ghetto and all of the per- sonal indignities and deprivations associated with this type of life. It is through active and sympathetic and sensitive support by the private and public sectors of our community that this war against the social evils of our time can be won. The solution to our problems does not lie in rejection of the concepts of Con- gress which gave birth to the Economic Opportunity Act. We cannot abandon those whose hopes and ambitions have been stimulated by this law. The same creative thinking and action that spawned the War on Poverty must be con- tinued and expanded by discovery and devising new methods and techniques to eliminate poverty from American life. It is my fervent hope that God will give our elected officials and other leaders in our community, divine counsel to enable them to recognize that they do an PAGENO="1139" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3599 injustice to themselves when they separate themselves from the community in dealing with the problems of the community. It is only when the entire community can truly unite to deal with the problems that beset the community that there can be any hope of bringing about an end to poverty, disease, human degrada- tion and those evils that are the true enemy of America. It was never more true that "united we stand, divided we fall." The Economic Opportunity Act provides the vehicle for uniting the entire community, including those who suffer the most, in achieving our goal of the best life for all the citizens of our country. UNITED STATES R. & D. CORP., New York, N.Y., August 10, 1967~ Mr. TIMOTHY STILL, President, United Commanity Corp., Newark, N.J. DEAR Tmi: I have been shocked beyond words by the recent attacks on the TJCC in connection with the tragic riots of Newark. As a member of the Board of Trustees and founder of the Agency, I know that the allegations against our organization are completely unfounded. It is reprehensable of people to point a finger at community action agencies and most particularly at ours. What disturbs me even more is the suggestion, that I understand was made that Willard Heekel and I are no longer in top positions because of any un- happiness with the agency. In the first place Willard remains a major officer so that any suggestion about his role is silly. As for myself, I have already told you in letter `and in personal conversation, that one of the most difficult things about leaving Newark is' my inability to continue serving the UCC. I was so sorry that it was impossible for me to seek a fourth term as Vice President. I wish that I could be in office at this time. Let me for the record state clearly that I continue to support the United Community Corporation. I am pleased with its leadership and its integrity. To my mind the UC'C is one of the most positive and creative forces ever to evolve in Newark. It continues to `be a corporation of which all of us are very proud. I hope that this letter makes my position clear. When I move to New York at the end of this month I will be sending you my resignation from the Board. When I do, however, it will be with the greatest possible regret. With warm personal regards. Sincerely, JONATHAN J. PRINZ. STATEMENT OF TIMOTHY STILL, PRESIDENT, UNITED COMMUNITY CORP., BEFORE THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNITED COMMUNITY CORP., JULY 20, 1967 At oui~ last board meeting, when I was elected president, I indicated that I would have some remarks to make later in the meeting. Because our meeting ran so long, I postponed that statement and would like to make it at this time. First ,of all I want to state that I consider my election to this extremely im- portant post a great `honor and privilege and I would like to take this oppor- tunity to thank the board of trustees for enabling me to be of further service to the community and to the corporation. Our corporation has faced many problems in the past and because of recent events will be facing many new problems in the future. We shall continue to make ever'y effort to meet such problems in a forthright manner. One of the problems that confronts any community action agency which honestly attempts to establish a broad-based `board representing various groups within the community is to insure that `differences can be aired and resolved in a democratic manner, and that all involved will have an `opportunity to play a vital role in the affairs and administration of the community action agency. I have decided as one of my first acts as president to establish within our com- mittee structure representation from various points of view, to that end I will be appointing cochairmen to standing committees of the corporation to insure that this procedure is followed at every level. Hopefully this kind of structure will provide an opportunity for various view- points to be presented. and be fully examined on the basis of merit before pres- entation of recommendations to the board of trustees'. My second area of concern which is' shared by everyone who supports the poverty program has been the serious curtailment of funds from the Office of PAGENO="1140" 3600 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Economic Opportunity. As a consequence, I have instructed our executive staff to immediately seek out alternative sources of funds for the many programs and projects this community desperately needs. As a result they will be in contact with both private and public funding sources, including but not limited to private foundations, other departments of the Federal Government, the Community Affairs Department of the State of New Jersey, and other agencies, institutions, and corporations within our community. It is anticipated that with a more vigorous attempt on our part to take advantage of resources heretofore untapped, that we will be able to reinforce worthwhile existing programs and also provide moneys for new projects. The first four vital needs that I will ask this corporation to look at are- 1. Housing, 2. Social action, 3. Employment, and 4. Drug addiction, with other vital needs to follow. I am therefore recommending that the board establish or reactivate the com- mittees outlined above. 1. Housing committee to be chaired by Dean C. Willard Heckel. and to be responsible initially for convening a meeting of members of the TTCC and the financial leaders of the city of Newark, community groups who are striving to form nonprofit corporations to build better housing in the city of New-ark, and whoever else the chairman feels will be helpful to explore the possibilities of private industries sponsoring private housing through existing Government pro- grams, and any new imaginative and innovating approaches that will provide decent, safe, and sanitary housing for the low- and middle-income families w-ith- out eroding the city's tax base. 2. Social action committee to be chaired by Mr. Oliver Lofton. The initial task of this committee will be to present to the corporation a practical plan of action w-hereby persons with criminal records may be assured opportunity of employ- ment in the public sector, particularly. In cooperation with others this commit- tee will seek to obtain changes in law-s or regulations w-hich do not allow such persons to be hired in civil service positions. There has also been brought to our attention the fact that former drug users are required by law in New Jersey to carry cards identifying themselves as drug users. The social action committee will be requested to investigate the legality of this procedure. 3. I am recommending that the employment committee chairman be Mr. Ken- neth Gibson. This committee will have two major functions: (1) To evaluate and ascertain the effectiveness of nfl job training pro- grams operating in the city of Newark and Essex County. The evaluation to include but not be limited to (a) numbers of persons who have been and are currently receiving training, and the type of positions trained for; (b) numbers of persons who have been placed on jobs; and (c) numbers of in- dividuals who have dropped out of programs, and n-hat followup provisions are made in this category. (2) To make a concentrated effort to open up the building trade industry apprenticeship programs to minority group members. 4. Narcotics committee. The corporation has been instrumental in establishing the Essex County Narcotic Council which we have asked Monsignor Dooling to chair. It is our expectation that in the near future the council will be incor- porated and elect its ow-n officers and serve as a delegate agency to conduct and administer programs to treat drug addicts, and n-ill actively involve former drug users in helping to develop an(l administer programs. Because of the current critical state of our community, n-c are adding the follow-ing two committees: 5. Consumer education. I am moving tQappoint Mrs. Marie Gonzalez as chair- man of the committee on consumer education. Every year thousands of families are unduly charged for merchandise they purchase. Hopefully this committee can work with the area boards and legal services and save the community thousands of dollars per year. 1. [CC emergency relief fund and project. I have asked Mrs. Grace Malone to chair this committee, and am asking the following persons to be among those n-ho serve on it: Mary Smith. Marie Gonzalez, Marion Kidd, Esta Williams. George Malone, Bernice Scott. Richard Debevoise. Duke B. Moore as board coordinator, Francis Quillan, and myself. PAGENO="1141" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3601 The chairmen that I have recommended for other than standing committees are all vice presidents of the corporation, with the exception of Mrs. Malone. In terms of strengthening UCC, it is my firm intention to see that the vice presi- dents play a greater role in the affairs of the corporation. In my opening remarks I made mention of the fact that the corporation will undoubtedly face problems in the future, as it has in the past, but I am confident with the support of the board of trustees of the UCC, the staff of the corpora- tion, our delegate agencies, and the community that the 15CC can continue to make a positive contribution to the community at large and be an instrument for social advancement and the common good. [From the Newark Sunday News] HECKEL REVIEWS ANTIPOVERTY BATTLE (By Douglas Eldridge) The front line of Newark's war on poverty is a good place to strain the nerves but stir the mind. That is one of many impressions gained by C. Willard Heckel during three hec- tic years as president of the United Community Corp., the city's antipoverty agency. The 53-year-old civic leader retired last week to devote more time to his job as dean of Rutgers Law School. He has turned over the presidential gavel-a well-worn one-to Timothy Still, a Central Ward leader. As he unwound in his Rutgers office-a cool, quiet contrast to the meeting halls where he has referred many of 1500's battles-Heckel expressed relief his task is over, but few regrets about the last three years. "If I had it to do all over again, I still would have gotten into it," he said. HAILS ELECTION He also voiced excitement and satisfaction about the election of his successor. "This is what has to happen in the city," said the dean, "a fairly rapid transition from white to Negro leadership." Heckel did not comment on the outcome of the vote, but said the fact the three candidates were all very able Negroes proves UCC is developing the leadership Newark needs. Heckel said he is proud of many UCC programs, but considers them less im- portant than the opportunity it gives many people "to become seasoned leaders `~ * to develop, to mature." Heckel said the UCO has been for him "a great seminar in human relations and city life. And the veteran educator, lawyer and churchman said many UCC debates were "better than 50 per cent of what goes on in the life of a university." But he conceded the rough-and-tumble arguments tested his stamina as well as his legal skills. He said he knew when feelings threatened to explode at re- cent meetings,. that he could not call in the police. "That would have been contrary to the whole philosophy of the corporationS" said the dean. "I had to enforce things by just standing there and looking at people." Since the founding of 15CC in 1964, Heckel has been criticized by militant groups for being too rigid in following the rules, and by city officials for being too lenient in giving the floor to malcontents. But both sides have generally re- spected him, and conceded he has worked hard to keep the agency in business. Heckel agrees he tried, as a lawyer, to adhere to the rules. And he takes issue with those who think 15CC has to forsake formal procedures to be effective or militant. But he also disputes those who want to clamp down on dissident forces that could damage or destroy 15CC. "That is always the calculated risk of democ- racy," he said. 1300 may always have trouble transacting corporate business while providing an open forum for anyone, he said. But this must be done "in a city full of tensions," he added. PAGENO="1142" 3602 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Heckel said it is hard, too, to give poor people a real role in antipoverty deci- sions that are extremely complex. (The dean confesses he never had time to study some of the inch-thick proposals that passed through the board.) But Heckel also believes the biggest dangers to Newark's antipoverty effort are not local but national. Cuts in federal aid have forced community groups "to fight with each other for what little flesh is on the bones," he said, and further reductions could be fatal. In Heckel's view, the biggest challenge facing still is to persuade the city government to give major moral and financial support to the 13CC. Heckel aims his sharpest barbs at elected local officials, and says their "non- involvement" has hampered 13CC efforts to develop a dialogue among elements in the community. "We've never had real fiscal support from the city," he said. "Members of the City Council have refused to even try to understand what the corporation is all about." Looking back, he sees a parallel between the antipoverty effort and the city charter reform drive he led in 1953-54. Both movements re~ected widespread sentiments, he said, and both were underestimated by professional politicians. TO REMAIN ACTIVE And both were based on hope in the rebirth of the city. It is the kind of hope reflected in Heckel's determination to play "a completely active role" in his new position as czar one of five vice presidents of 13CC. Heckel is convinced white liberals must now accept subordinate roles in civic affairs, but continue to give strong support to the Negroes who take over top positions. This is one reason be refused to seek a fourth year as 13CC president, but agreed to run for a vice president. And Heckel said the best reward he could receive for his service to 13CC were his 58 votes in the vice presidential contest. All but a half-dozen members of the predominantly Negro board voted for Heckel. "This w-as worth more to me than a check for $100,000," be said. TURNER REBUTS CRITICISM OF NEWARK POVERTY AGENCY Newark Councilman Irvine I. Turner yesterday rose to the defense of the United Community Corporation in its role as the city's administrative arm in the war against poverty. Turner issued a 15-page minority report in which he challenged a report criti- cal of the 13CC prepared by Councilmen Frank Addonizio and Lee Bernstein and said he wished to disassociate himself from the majority thinking. TURNER'S STATEMENT For `the last three months, the three councilmen have conducted a series of public hearings and private conferences into the workings of the UCC in Newark's anti-poverty program. In a covering letter to Council President Ralph A. Villani, who appointed the special committee. Turner declared: "I regret `the necessity for filing a minority report as a member of the special committee to study the antipoverty program. However, my deep concern with the problems of Newark and the problems of the poor make this step necessary." Addonizio, committee chairman, and Bernstein had attacked what they called "pork barrel" aspects of the 13CC and were extremely critical of out-of-town res- idents holding key jobs, high salaries, lack of "poor" residents in advisory posts and the shelving of programs they believed were needed in New-ark. This past week, Addonizic and Bernstein informed the federal office of Eco- nomic Opportunity they were prepared to push an ordinance creating a nine- member committee to take over a share of 13CC work. The committee would consist of the mayor, four councilmen and four Newark residents with an income of $3,000 or less. In addition, a 25-member advisory committee would be created. Turner defended the structure of the 13CC and its director, Cyril P. Tyson, whom he called a "highly skifled' technician, imaginative, creative `and a man of substantial experience and training in dealing with problems of poverty." PAGENO="1143" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3603 TURNER CONCERNED Turner, who has advocated council representation on the DCC, said it has "been a source of deep concern and even sadness to me that more Newarkers were not found to assist Tyson as top level staff members. "In the selection of a staff," Turner asserted, "I am certain efforts were made to get the best person possible for each job to be done * * * J do not consider that Tyson is running a one-man show or that he is autocratic." As to the tabling of programs such as neighborhood rehabilitation, teacher aids and to senior citizens as charged by Addonizio and Bernstein, Turner declared: "There is no evidence that Tyson has prevented any program from being considered, nor did I see any concrete evidence submitted during this investiga- tion that Tyson or his staff prevented a program from being enacted." Turner said he could not "concur that any pork barrel or grab bag has been created by DCC." The Central Ward councilman also challenged the majority's contention that the city could not legally contribute 10 per cent of the antipoverty funds (the federal government grants 90 per cent) to the UCC because it is not an official governing body. Turner said he had been informed City Corporation Counsel Norman Schiff has prepared a legal opinion contrary to the contention of Addonizio and Bernstein. "I rely upn the legal opinion of the corporation counsel and reject the claimed legal bar to the council contributing the necessary 10 per cent. "The majority report," he added, "charges that the DCC has taken many of the aspects of a political-action pressure group. From my experience on the streets I have not observed the DCC to be a political force." VOCAL CRITIC Informed of the minority report, Addonizio and Bernstein said they were "amazed because Turner had been kept abreast of our report and concurred with it." Addonizio said that when the three councilmen were quizzed by staff members of Rep. Adam Clayton Powell, who is investigating the use of federal funds in anti-poverty programs. "Turner was most vocal in his criticism of Tyson." "In fact," Addonizio said, "Turner wanted our report to concentrate on Tyson and the fact Newark Negroes have been excluded from top posts with the DCC." "It is obvious," he added, "the tremendous pressure put on Turner by the UCO caused him to buckle." A spokesman for the mayor said he is seeking common grounds for both parties in the hope a solution can be reached this week. The mayor has conferred with members of the council and DCC officials in regard to both criticism and support of the city's war against poverty. MINORITY REPORT OF COUNCILMAN IRVINE I. TURNER, MEMBER. COUNCIL COMMITTEE To STUDY THE ANTIPOVERTY PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF NEWARK, N.J., TO RALPH A. VILLANI, PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL, AND MEMBERS OF THE NEWARK CITY OOUNCIL I regret the necessity for filing a minority report as a m~mber of the special committee to study the Anti-Poverty Program for the City of Newark. However, my deep concern with the problems of the Oity of Newark and the problems of the poor make this step necessary. Unfortunately, I did not see a copy of the proposed report as rhleased by Councilman Addonizio prior to its issuance. I was unable to attend the press conference convened for the purpose of releasing this. report because of a prior commitment to meet with the Governor on State and Local problems. V Because of my recent illness, I was unable to attend all of the hearings and conferences relating to the investigation, and I was unable to participate in the private investigations conducted by other member~ of the committee. Neverthe- less, I have kept abreast of the development of the Anti-Poverty Program in the city of Newark as an interested citizen and responsible elected official. I have carefully read the report issued in the name of the special conimittee and have considered the exhibit as annexed thereto. I herewith disassociate PAGENO="1144" 3604 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 myself from the report as released, and submit herewith this minority report, upon the ground that I do not agree with many of the assumptions stated in the report, nor do I agree with the recommendations or conclusions Qontained in the report. Perhaps my view can be best understood by reflecting some of the areas in which I am in disagreement with the report. The preface of the report suggests that poverty is "~ * * a state of mind * * * an abstraction * * * an idea * * ~" I cannot accept this thesis. To me, poverty is a reality which is much more accurately described in the Annual Report, 1905, of the New Jersey Office of Economic Opportunity, as submitted to Governor Richard J. Hughes by John C. Bullit, the Director, in which he stated: "Poverty in New Jersey has many faces. It is a mother with six children living in one small room with no heat or running water-and therefore no toilets; it is a man who hasn't held a job in three years: it is an eighteen year old who doesn't know how to give change for a one dollar bill; it is the young mother sitting up at night with a broom handle to keep the rats from biting her children; it is a middle-aged couple who can neither read nor u-rite; it is a child with rickets; it is a sense of hopelessness and alienation and despair." Representing the people of the Central Ward of Newark I know that this re- flects poverty as it is in our community. These are the problems of my people. I agree w-ith the fundamental principles expressed in the "Economic Oppor- tunity Act of 1964": "The United States can achieve its full economic and social potential as a nation only if every individual has the opportunity to contribute to the full ex- tent of his capabilities and to participate in the w-orkings of our society. It is, therefore. the policy of the United States to eliminate the paradox of poverty... by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the oppor- tunity to w-ork, and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity." I agree w-ith the basic philosophy of the United Community Corporation as re- flected in the words of Dean Willard Heckel, President of the UCC, when he appeared at the first hearing of the committee and stated the belief of UCC to be: "* * * the right of the poor to participate in Anti-Poverty Programs, not only as recipiants of a service, but as program developers, employees, and policy makers.": I endorse the concept that the War on Poverty must be w-aged by a total com- munity effort w-hich should include the poor, the elected city officials, the heads of appropriate city departments, and community people representative of all forces in the community. It is my belief that no ally can or should be overlooked. In- dispensible to any community action program is that portion of Title II of the Economic Opportunity Act which defines a "Community Action Program" as one, "* * * which is developed, conducted, and administered with the maximum feasible participation of residents of the areas and members of the groups served * * ~" Based upon the foregoing, I cannot agree w-ith that portion of the report which urges that the Mayor and Council should "exercise substantial administrative and financial control over the community action agencies." That kind of a conclusion rejects the poor as participants in the development and administration of pro- grams, is contrary to the basic philosophy of the Economic Opportunity Act and the United Community Corporation by rejecting the War on Poverty as a total community efforts and substituting for it an effort to be controlled by political leaders. I believe we as political leaders have a right and a duty to share in the direction of the War on Poverty, but I reject the thesis that we alone are to control it. The report attacks Mr. Cyril D. Tyson, the Executive Director of UCO as having "singular and exclusive control . . . detrimental to the best interest of the com- munity", and whose status is conceived of as "autocratic." Tyson is a highly skilled technician, imaginative and creative and a man of substantial experience and training in dealing with problems of poverty. Many of the approaches he evolved in his experiences in New York City in developing the Haryou Program found their way into the concepts enunciated in the Economic Opportunity Act. Based upon his outstanding records and experience, he was selected as the best man to head the New-ark program. Further evidence of his outstanding qualities as a technican and leader in the War on Poverty is re- flected by his designation by the Mayor-elect of New York to participate as a vol- unteer with leading figures from all over the country to help New York review its PAGENO="1145" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3605 approach to the War on Poverty. This in itself is a testimonial to the ~~isdom and judgment of the Newark community in selecting Tyson to direct our Community Action Program as part of our War on Poverty in the city of Newark. It is well known that from time to time I have been critical of specific actions taken by Tyson and the UCC. For example, I have always felt that more city officials, including my fellow councilmen, should have been members of the UCC Board. It has been a source of deep concern and even sadness to me that more Newarkers were not found to assist Tyson as top level staff members. Neverthe- less, these criticisms were made in the spirit of helping not hindering the pro- gram. I feel it is my obligation as an elected representative to keep a watchful eye on any program that affects my people. It is my deep concern for them that evokes me to react now. It is my belief that our prime concern at the outset must be devoted to the development of programs in this tremendous battle against poverty. To achieve this objective required that we get the best man possible to lead us. I believe this has been done in securing Tyson as the Executive Director of TJCC. In the selection of staff, I am certain efforts were made to get the best person possible for each job to be done. I also recognize that as the programs develop, we will have an apportunity to examine earlier personnel decisions. I expect that there will be a review of personnel selections to maximize the all-out effort we have emarked upon in Newark to eliminate poverty. In this process, I look for in- creased participation of local people at all levels of the staff and in all areas of program participation. I do not consider that Tyson is running a one-man show or that he is "auto- cratic". Moreover, the question is not whether Newark has good capable of serving in the War against Poverty, but rather in the selection of the number one staff professional person, the duty was to find the best man available any- place for the job. I believe Tyson is the best man available for the job. I am an honorary Vice President of tJCC and one of the two councilmen originally asked to serve on the Board of Trustees as a full board member. I have received copies of the minutes of the Executive Committee of UCC and of the monthly meetings of the Board of Trustees. In addition, I have talked with men and women who are active participants in the operations of UCC. I am advised, and the minutes so reflect, that Tyson reports weekly to the Executive Committee who counsel and advise with him and assist in directing him in the performance of his duties as the Chief Executive person in the operations of TJCC in carrying out the policy set by the Board. Moreover, through *the devices of the Program Committee and Task Force~, the community does in fact, determine the destiny of programs. Tyson and his staff perform as technicians in assisting in the development of programs. There is no evidence that Tyson has prevented any program from being considered, nor did I see any concrete evidence submitted during this investigation that Tyson or his staff prevented a program from being considered. In addition to the foregoing committee structures, among other cbm- mittees are Personnel Committee, which has conducted frequent meetings and participated fully in all personnel matters. Though I was unable to attend all of the hearings, I am satisfied from my read- ing the minutes of the Executive Committee and Board of Trustees meetings, my examination of the By-Laws of 15CC, and data submitted to this special coin- `mittee that there are reasonable checks and balances which establish adequate controls over `the conduct o.f `the Executive Director. The report asserts "that the program pursued by the 15cC lacks essential fiscal con'trols * * ~" I find no evidence in the transcript of the hearings before the committee nor any of the documentary material submitted to the committee, to substantiate such an assertion. To the contrary, during the period in question, the comptroller of DCC has been Fleming Jones, a former employee of the City of Newark. In addition, the DCC auditors, I am informed, are Puder & Puder, recog- nized as one of the most outstanding reliable auditing firms in the city. I am sure that these people would not stand by idly in the face of inadequate fiscal controls. which would jeopardize the monies handled by UCC. Moreover, an accountability is required to the Federal Government, which is also in a position to make an audi't where it deems it necessary. I cannot concur that any "pork barrel" or "grab bag" has been created by DCC. The report refers to an alleged question "concerning the propriety of former Board of Trustee members creating and taking high salary positions on the TJCC programs. It is suggested that this is a technique of "logrolling, hack- PAGENO="1146" 3606 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 scratching, featherbedding". I do not agree that the evidence warrants these conclusions, nor are there any facts offered in support thereof. Apparently, these comments are intended to refer to the Pre-School Council Program and the Blazer Youth Council Program and more specifically, the em- ployment of Mrs. Rebecca Andrade, by the Pre-School Council and Mr. Walter Dawkins by the Blazer Youth Council in executive positions. It should be noted that these two programs have been singled out as classic examples of Community Action Programs conceived and developed within the philosophy of the Economic Opportunity Act. From the information reported in the press, and commonly known in the community, Mrs. Andrade played a leading role in conceiving the Pre-School Council Program as did Mr. Dawkins in developing and creating the Blazer Youth Council Program. Both of these programs present new concepts in waging the War against Poverty. It is appropriate that those persons who participate in the planning and development of the program should not be excluded from carrying on the program when it becomes a reality, particularly where they are of the poor and so long as they are qualified to administer the program. There is not suggestion that either Mrs. Andrade or Mr. Dawkins are unqualified. Moreover, there is no evidence or indication of any impropriety in their selec- tion to head these programs or that their participation in the planning or de- velopment had any but the highest motives. It is contended that there are legal bars, based upon provisions of the New Jersey Constitution, which preclude the City Council from continuing to con- tribute the necessary 10% to enable the UCC and its programs to be funded by the Federal Government under the Equal Opportunity Act. No court decision or substantial authority is included in the report in support of such contention. None of the members of the committee are lawyers, I am advised that an exten- sive legal memorandum has been prepared by the Corporation Counsel of the city of Newark which disagrees with the legal contention asserted as a bar in the report. I rely upon the legal opinion of the Corporation Counsel of the city as the Chief Legal Officer in the city and reject the claimed legal bar to the council contributing the necessary 10%. I respect the opinion of the Corporation Counsel and in reliance upon it, feel there is no legal barrier to doing what I did before, voting in favor of contributing the necessary 10% to the United Com- munity Corporation. The report also contends that serious financial problems may face the city in the event it becomes necessary, after a two year period, to enter into a 50-50 contribution with the Federal Government for continuation of programs. I am no less concerned about maintaining the city's financial stability than my col- leagues. However, at the moment, the contributions are 10% by the local commu- nity and 90% by the Federal Government. I feel that this ratio should be retained and pledge myself to urge upon our Congressmen and Senators that no change be made in this portion of the law which will in any way increase the obligation of the local community. The report charges that "the UCC has taken many of the aspects of a political- action pressure group." I concur in the view expressed by Mayor Hugh Addonizio that the United Community Corporation as such should not be involved in poli- tics. I am pleased to note that the Board of Trustees of UCC adopted a motion to require any member of the Board who becomes a candidate for public office to take a leave of absence from the Board during his candidacy. I believe that this action was consistent with the view that United Community Corporation as such should not become a political instrumentality in the city. Moreover, from my experience on the streets I have not observea the DCC to be a political force. I endorse the Area Board concept which was approved by the New Jersey Office of Economic Opportunity as a method of obtaining maximum feasible participation of the poor. I am pleased by the UCC's policy restraining area boards from endorsing political candidates. I have also been impressed by the praiseworthy comments from representatives of the Office of Economic Oppor- tunity regarding the utilization of area boards as a means of involving the poor. I urge all citizens of Newark to participate in the area board activities. This is the medium through which the poor may freely express themselves. This new concept is beginning to work and is involving the poor with all segments of the total community in the planning and development of programs as conceived by the Economic Opportunity Act. PAGENO="1147" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1067 3607 I do not agree with that portion of the report which criticizes the community `for its appearance and conduct at the first hearing of the committee on Septem- her 9. I ani at a loss to fully comprehend the criticism of the community's partici- pation, in light of the statement of Chairman Addonizio at the conclusion of the first hearing when he stated: "The committee at this time takes the opportunity to thank those in the audi- ence for demonstrating their interest in this vital area and also for their good con- duct. I would especially like to thank the members of the United Community Corporation that are present and have participated this evening * * *" I am no less concerned than my colleagues about the tax rate of the city of Newark. I have put my beliefs and convictions into action in many ways to help protect the tax payers of our city. When the Blazer Youth Council Program was announced I endorsed the program because I believed in its principles. I moved `the City Council to contribute the necessary 10% ($37,000.) to the Blazer Pro- gram. I did this because I believed in the program and also because I believed that an expenditure of $37,000 by the city, which would result in a saving to the city of approximately $600,000 by reducing Welfare costs was good sound economics and would help to reduce the tax rate. I regret that this motion did not succeed before the City Council. I commend the devotion and dedication of the Blazer Youth Council, those associated with them, and the business com- munity which contributed the in-kind share to permit the program to proceed in the City of Newark. The population of the city of Newark is in a state of flux. Today our city is 50% non-White. As the only Negro elected official in the City of Newark, I wish to publicly state that without the programs developed, and being developed by the United Community Corporation and those agencies working with them I see a dim, bleak future for `our city. Being black and having grown up poor, I have a special commitment to the Anti-Poverty program. I reject any attempt to de- `feat the needs `of the people of our city because of a lack of understanding. I reject and refuse to join in the recommendation of the report to withdraw support from `the United Community Corporation because of a dispute over con- trol of the Anti-Poverty program in our city. I support President Johnson and his administration w'hich has breathed life into the War against Poverty as part of the development o'f our Great Society. I support President Johnson, the phil- oshophy of the Equal Opportunity Act, and the UCC in urging involvement of ~the poor as part of a total community effort in waging the War against Poverty. I am informed that recommendations are about to `be submitted to the UC'C membership to amen'd the By-Laws of UCC by expanding the Board of Trustees to include `additional representatives of the poor from the Area Boards and at the same time, to expand the involvement of elected city officials and heads of ~appropriate city departments which will insure a maximum total community involvement in the direction of the affairs of the UCC. Based upon my convic'- `tions what I've said above, `and the proposed changes in the UCC By-Laws to result in total community involvement in the direction of UCC, I recommend that the City Council approve the continuance of IJCC and express their confi- dence in the programs necessary to elimination of poverty' in our city by contrib- uting whatever funds are necessary to the functioning of UCC as the Community Acti'o'n agency in the city of Newark. STATEMENT OF UNITED COMMUNITY Coup. `ro THE Crr~ OF NEWARK RELATING TO THE HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT AND PERFORMANCE OF THE UCO AND IN RESPONSE TO THE REPORT OF THE NEWARK MUNICIPAL COUNCIL COMMITTEE To STUDY THE ANTIPOVERTY PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF NEWARK, N.J. To: Hon. Hugh J. Addonizio, Mayor of the City of Newark, Hon. Ralph A. Villani, President, Newark Municipal Council, and Members of the Newark Municipal Council. On August 10, 1964, Mayor Hugh J. Addonizio, other public officials, and rep- resentatives of all segments of life in the City of Newark caused the United Community Corporation (hereinafter referred to as 1100) to be organized as a private non-profit corporation under Title 15 of the New Jersey Revised Stat- utes. 1100 was created as the Community Action Program Agency in the City of Newark to effectuate the purposes and policies of the Community Action Pro- PAGENO="1148" 3608 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 gram section of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1904. Approximately one year later, on August 4, 1905, in response to a request for municipal matching funds, as contemplated by the Economic Opportunity Act, a special three member sub- committee (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) of the Newark Municipal Council was appointed to study "The Federal Anti-Poverty Program as it existed and as it was evolving in the City of Newark." Approximately four months later, on December 8, 1905, the Committee issued a report on its investigation in which it made certain recommendations relating to implementation of the Federal Anti-Poverty Program in and for the City of Newark. A minority report was also filed. The DCC welcomed the investigation and the opportunity this presented to inform the City Council of its history, philosophy, accomplishments and prob- lems. Regretfully, this did not happen. The DCC reaction was clearly stated by Dean C. Willard Heckel, President, when he appeared before the Committee on September 9, 1905, and stated: "The United Community Corporation welcomes the opportunity afforded by an interested Newark Municipal Council, to report on the development of our city's Anti-Poverty Program." We view this paper as a factual presentation designed to answer the recom- mendation in the Committee Report; to respond to its unsupported, unwarranted and unfair allegations: to correct the erroneous conclusions and false impres- sions created before, during and following the Committee's investigation; and as a positive comprehensive statement of the Corporation's objectives, activities and contributions to the well-being of the people of Newark, which was never adequately developed by the Committee in the hearings or its report. HISTORY. DEVELOPMENT AND PHILOSOPHY OF TJCO This statement would not be complete without first returning in time for a glimpse of the events that led to the formation of TJCC and the manner in which it was created. In 1902, the year of genesis for the Corporation, an attempt was made to formulate a program known as the South Side Project. a plan to utilize all community resources dealing with the problems of increasing school drop- outs and unemployment, particularly among the Negro population of the city u-hich represents some 50 percent of a total population of 405.000. Focus was on the 1900 census and on the shocking picture it painted of con- ditions in Newark-so much so that the Federal Government declared that the city was badly in need of programs and funds to prevent it from being com- pletely engulfed by blight and impoverishment (See letter of August 17, 1005, Federal Area Redevelopment Administration to Newark Redevelopment Corpora- tion. confirming declaration of Newark as a depressed area). In addition to an appalling rate of unemployment among its Negro citizens. running something in the area of 9 percent, studies found that infant mortality ran at better than 45 percent. and that 52 percent of Newark's Negroes living in rented units were living in substandard dw-ellings. (U.S. Census of Population: 1900 Final Report PC (1)-32C General Social and Economic Characteristics, New Jersey. Published by U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census. p 32-200. Supplemental Statistics on Negro Living Conditions in New-ark, by Urban Studies Center. Rutgers. The State University. December 1, 1904. Ab- stracted from Urban League Report based on U.S. Census of Housing; 1000' Series HC (3)-252 published by U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census). The advent of the Economic Opportunity Act provided the stimulus and direc- tion needed to move the city closer to the ideals and objectives of the South Side Project, and to provide expansion of this massive approach to the problems created by poverty. Mayor Hugh J. Addonizio recognized the significance and the potential of this revolutionary legislution that sprung from the combined vision of the late John F. Kennedy and of President Lyndon B. Johnson. The Mayor convened a meeting of community leaders that led directly to the creation of the United Community Corporation, in the summer of 1004. To DCC came other men of vision dedicated to the cause of building and re- building human resources. The ranks of the 15 incorporators expanded to form an original board of 53 members representing government. business and industry, educators, labor. social welfare agencies, civil rights, religious and community PAGENO="1149" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3609 leaders. They, in fact, represented a unique and true partnership between the municipal government and all of the organizations and interests that exists in the large urban complex of Newark. This board has been further expanded since its inception and its compositioii will always be flexible to meet the needs of the community it serves. Historically, this proved to be the first time that so many diverse groups had come together dedicated to drastically changing the lives of the poor in the City of Newark. The Corporation then moved rapidly into its next phase of development with Dean C. Willard Heckel, of the Rutgers Law School, installed as President. The Personnel Committee of the UCC conducted an intensive country-wide search for an Executive Director that finally resulted in the selection of Cyril D. Tyson, recognized as one of the most creative, imaginative social l)lanners, and adminis- trators in the country. This search for the kind of Executive we sought, and found, was described by Dean Heckel in the Committee bearing as follows: "When we undertook the responsibility for developing anti-poverty programs we were faced with the need for professional leadership. From the beginning, we came to the conclusion that the problems facing this city relative to poverty were so immense that only the most experienced leadership would do. Altogether w-e adhere to the philosophy that Newark deserves the best. As we see it, these are critical years in our Nation's history and Newark itself is, like other major cities, deep in crises. Nevertheless, we have deep faith in our community and its future. WTe set up a Personnel Committee under the Chairmanship of the late Peter V. H. Schuyler, Jr. an early FCC supporter and leader. That com- mittee searched this community, it searched the entire country. Numerous men with varying qualifications were heard from. Fiiially, after several months we were fortunate to convince one of the Nation's most talented and creative men, Cyril D. Tyson, to come here. Having had experience in one of the forerunners of the Anti-Poverty Programs, HARYOTJ, where he was Project Director of a study of Central Harlem which produced the publication "Youth in the Ghetto" and Acting Director of HARYOTJ-ACT, the implementing agency, Cyril D. Tyson was uniquely qualified to guide the program. In the short time that lie has been here he has been able to create, out of nothing. a Community Action Program which many cities envy. No one active in this city could deny the impact of Mr. Tyson's work." Today, one year after its incorporation, the FCC is made up of over 7,000 members who live in, work in, or perform a direct service to Newark. The Board of Directors meets monthly to govern the affairs of the agency, and an Execu- tive Committee of the Board, comprising the officers of the Corporation and standing committee chairmen, meets weekly. The Honorary President of the Corporation is Mayor Hugh J. Addonizio. Two members of the City Council are Honorary Vice Presidents. Dean C. Wil- lard Heckel is President. The Vice Presidents are Msgr. Joseph J. Dooling, Rabbi Jonathan J. Prinz, Mr. Timothy Still, Mr. Willie Wright, and Mr. Kenneth Gibson. Secretary is Mr. Edward Kirk, Assistant Secretaries are Andrew Wash- ington and Miss Hilda Hildago. Treasurer is Mr. Francis Quillan. Assistant Treasurers are Mr. Irving Rosenberg and Mrs. Estelle Pierce. Chairman of the standing committees are Dr. Thomas Reynolds, Rev. B. F. Johnson, Mr. Robert Curvin, Mrs. Coil Arons and Mr. Walter Chambers. The committees represented are budget and finance, membership, nominating, personnel and program, which coordinates and directs the activities of the Task Forces. The complex organizational process involves still another very important step the formation of units known as Task Forces for each area of program concern-Community Action, Education, Employment, Housing and Special Pro- jects. Each Task Force, composed primarily of residents of Newark who are members of the Corporation, evaluates proposals and recommends to the Board of Trustees courses of action. Each is chaired by members of the Corporation w-ho usually are not members of the Board. The role of the Task Force, each numbering from 3~ to 100 in membership, is to provide a vital link in the relationship between the Board of Trustees and the Corporation membership. This design insures broad-based participation in a decision-making process affecting the substance and quality of program pro- posals to meet the pressing needs of Newark's residents. In Newark, the vehicle for implementation of the philosophy of rebuilding PAGENO="1150" 3610 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 our cities in terms of human as well as physical needs-as expressed in the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964-is the unique Area Board. To understand fully and appreciate the concept of the Area Board it is essential first to dwell on two other facets of the war on poverty: (1) The philosophy of the Economic Opportunity Act with emphasis on Title II of Community Action; and (2) The objectives and role of the United Community Corporation. The Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 is an expression of the nation's con- cern for the poor and impoverished, for the ill-housed, undernourished, unem- ployed and uneducated. It is a credit to our Chief Executive and the Congress, for it is imaginative and cuts through to the core of many ills that beset our domestic economy; at the same time it is a sweeping indictment of our society and our failure to meet realistically emerging problems before they reach mammoth proportions. The Act essentially seeks to stimulate a program that will better the condi- tions under which some 30 million people live, work and learn. It was the spark to unite for the first time all the forces that fight poverty, and to bolster these efforts with new resources, programs and ideas. Seven sections or "titles" of the Act touch upon every segment of the Ameri- can culture. Title I pertains to programs such as the Job Corps and the Neigh- borhood Youth Corps to provide work training and experience to unemployed youth in order to increase their employability or to increase their chances of re- suming or continuing their education. Title II relates to community action, pro- gram development, conduct and administration research training institutes, and adult education programs. Title III is aimed at dealing with some of the special problems of rural poverty. Title IV deals with government assistance in the area of establishing, preserving and strengthening small busthess concerns. Title V is designed to aid in the expansion of opportunities for constructive work ex- perience and other needed training available for persons unable to support them- selves or their families. Title VI and VII deal with Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) and a number of administrative matters pertaining to the conduct of War on Poverty, and income from these programs as it relates to those persons receiving public assistance. The DCC derives its guidelines and direction from Title II of the Act-Urban and Rural Community Action Programs. In a sense, the local Community Action Program, such as that developed and promulgated by the UCC, is central to the War on Poverty. The Program is de- signed to fight poverty in the community through local initiative aimed at mo- bilizing public and private resources, using techniques and activities that give promise of eliminating the causes of poverty; and to involve the poor in the development and operation of these activities. The DCC envisions the foregoing program as a total city-wide community effort involving all levels of the community in its development and adminis- tration. To further insure such total community commitment, the 11CC mem- bership will soon act upon recommendations to amend the By-Laws to further expand the Board of Trustees to include additional representatives from the Area Boards in the community and additional representatives from the elected and administrative levels of the City Government. The major goal of community action is to help individuals help themselves and inherent in this approach is the conviction that the poor should play an active part in helping to develop, manage and work in community action programs. The concept of wider involvement of the poor is no longer a new one. Under direction of the Federal Government, through the President's Committee on Juvenile Delinquency and Youth Crime, some 17 studies were conducted in major urban centers throughout the country, dating back to 1961. The first of these to produce a major theoretical document was Mobilization for Youth, Inc. MFY conducted a study on New York's lower East Side, an experimental project spon- sored by the Ford Foundation and The President's Committee and produced the document entitled A Proposal for the Prevention and Control of Delinquency by Expanding Opportunities. It was in the MFY document that serious attention was given to the concept of involvement of the people to be affected-in this ease, the poor. In the section dealing with the community, the Mobilization study on page 126 indicated: PAGENO="1151" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3611 "What we have said thus far suggests that we must increase the willingness and ability of local residents to participate in the social and political life of their community. Participation by adults in decision making matters that affect their interests, increase their sense of identification with the community and the larger social order. People who identify with their neighborhood and share common values are more likely to control juvenile misbehavior. A well integrated com- munity can provide learning experiences for adults and interpreters of com- munity life for the young. In short, there is an inverse relationship between community integration and the rates of juvenile misbehavior." (See Also: "Community Integration and the Social Control of Delinquency," Journal of S'ocial Issues, Vol. 14, No. 3 (1958) pp 38-51-W. G. Mather, "Income and Social Participation," American ~S'ociologicai Review, Vol. 0, No. 3 (June. 1947)-Morris Axelrod, "Urban Structure and Social Participation", American Socioloqical Review, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Feb., 156) pp 13-18) The Programs which the U'OO will administer and sub-contract are not to be perceived as separate entities. These are viewed rather as interrelated programs designed to bring about specific social and economic changes in the City of Newark. Services, for instance, are perceived `as vehicles through which citizens will express concern for the problems, the tools, techniques and skills required to overcome them, and in the process become full participants in an expanding democratic process. This, as the United Community Corporation views it, is a comprehensive, coordinated approach to the problems that create poverty and their effects, recog- nizing the fact that people in the ghetto have no power and cannot achieve unless the programs developed lead to securing such power and result in involvement in improving life in the community. How then does one a'chieve this participation, stimulation around concerns, and direct action; or, as the Economic Oportunity Act puts it: ". . . maximum feasible participation of the poor . . ." The law itself calls for involvement in the development, conduct and admin- istration of community action programs, "and in terms of the Newark program, develop means program `planning; conduct means implementation and possible employment opportunities; and administered implies involvement of those to be served on the policy level of such programs. The dimensions of this involvement of the poor, we begin to see, transcends the usual argument of how many will sit on a governing board of trustees. The concept of this total `thrust reflects an attempt to secure for the impoverished full participation on all levels of the process that determine how their needs can best be met. In fact, the Economic Opportunity Act funds are allocated to the poor-CAP agencies and staff, therefore, are `the custodians of the monies of the poor. It is their money and the determination of its use should reside within a body in which they are more `than adequately represented. The essence and foundation, therefore, of Newark's anti-poverty drive is the concept of involvement of those to be served either by expanded programs devel- oped by established agencies or programs set up by newly created groups or agencies. The Area Boards are essential building blocks in this process. Each of the nine boards, covering the entire City of Newark, from `border to border, will focus attention on community action `to meet both local and city-wide needs, and hasten movement away from mere dependence on traditional social services, In this regard it should be noted that we `envision the War on Poverty in Newark as a `total city-wide effort, recognizing that some sections of the city have more poverty than others. There still remain pockets of poverty, or persons on the fringe of poverty, even in the more fortunate sections of the city. It is not indispensable that the entire area to be served by an Area Board he a poverty stricken area. The Federal Area Redevelopment Administration similarly treated the City of Newark as an entity when it declared Newark a depressed area, thereby making ARA funds available to the City. In the Area Board Concept is the mechanism for involvement of the citizenry of the community, residents of every area should `be encouraged to participate in the development of the Area Boards. The Area Board will provide the mecha- nism through which all citizens may participate in the rebuilding of the city. While they are independent an'd free to establish their own programs, without interference from the P00, `the Area Boards rely on paid staff, generally per- sons who reside within the Area Board boundaries. The size of staff organiza~ PAGENO="1152" 3612 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 tion will vary with the needs of the area to be served. Organization at the "grass roots" level, a process that requires considerable time and effort, is nevertheless necessary if we are to increaSe the chances of the poor for partici- pation in responsible social action, that will in turn result in meaningful pro- grams and services that benefit those involved. Further, Area Board members, all of whom are required to become members of the United Community Corporation, are then in a position to effect program movement and direction through Task Force participation and election of the LOC Board of Trustees which is the body responsible for final approval of all programs. Finally, the counsel of Area Boards is sought in a wide range of activities all related to the War on Poverty, in New-ark. It is less than a year since the United Community Corporation received its initial grant of $184000 from the Federal Government, and during that time it has had two responsibilities: 1. To organize the community, generally, and the Area Boards specifically; and 2. To help stimulate creative approaches to solving complex, socio-economiC problems. The interlocking design of the program provides a real, working plan evident even during the initial stages of Area Board organization. Area Board members are asked to serve on various boards and committees planning local and city- w-ide programs. such as Project Head Start, Newark Pre-School Council. sum- mer programs sponsored by Seton Hall University and Queen of Angels Church, and the Flazer Community Employment Program, which provides work train- ing experience for some 200 w-elfare recipients at a savings of some $600,000 to the City of New-ark. When enumerated, the myriad of program planning and development in which Area Board representatives participate provides a more striking picture of the philosophy of FCC, as well as a formidable record of accomplishment in its first year. In addition to the aforementioned programs, Area Board representatives are making significant contributions to such program plans as Newark's Legal Services Project, the Small Business Development Center and the Senior Citi- zens Program. sponsored by the City of New-ark to effect professional movement. We feel that the foregoing overview of the historical development of FCC and the perception of its mission in Newark reflects the dedication to the principles conceived in adoption of the Economic Opportunity Act of 1904. We believe that this is the mechanism through which we can and will make good "the promise of America" as envisioned by President Johnson. INTERNAL STRUCTURE AND OPERATION OF UCC Membership in FCC is available to "any citizen 15 years of age or over w-ho is a resident, works in. or performs a service to the City of Newark". . . ([CC constitution, Article I, Sec. 1, Exhibit # 3 annexed to Committee report. For simplification, exhibits annexed to the Committee report will be referred to by their designated Arabic number. Annexed to this statement is an appendix. Ex- hibits therein will be identified by their designated Roman numeral. The mem- bership elect the Board of `Trustees. who conduct the business of the Corporation. (Exh. # 3, Article II, Sec. 1). The officers and chairmen of standing committees constitute the Executive Committee, which is responsible to the Board of Trustees. The Executive Committee may not initiate new policy, but may recommend policy to the Board of Trustees, and it functions to facilitate the operation of the Cor- poration between Board of Trustee meetings. (Exh. #3, Article III, Sec. 9.) The standing committees include nominating, program, budget and finance, perU sonnel, and membership. (Exb. # 3, Article III, Sec. 10). In terms of day-to-day operations, the personnel, budget and finance, and program committees are responsible to the Board in their respective areas of concern. In addition, Task Forces for purposes of program planning, coordina- tion, research and community relations are appointed by the Board. (Ex. # 3, Article \~II) Personnel Policies And Procedures At a meeting of the original incorporatorS on July 29, 1964, Mayor Addonizio appointed a committee on personnel and finance under the chairmanship of the PAGENO="1153" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3613 late Peter V. R. Schuyler, Jr., Executive Director of the Welfare Federation. This eqmmittee was charged with the responsibility of securing an Executive Director for the Corporation. In September of 1964, the committee was expanded to in- clude newly-elected members of the Board of Trustees. Dean Heckel, President Pro-Tern of 11CC at that time, gave any interested board member the opportunity to join the committee. This portion of the task of the committee was accomplished on November 2, 1964, with the Board's approval of Cyril D. Tyson as Executive Director, effective January 1, 1965. At the meeting of the Board of Trustees on December 21, 1964, the President of 11CC appointed a permanent Personnel Committee, of which Walter Chambers of the New Jersey Bell Telephone Co. was named Chairman and Peter Schuyler was named Co-Chairman. At this same meeting the Board of Trustees unanimously adopted a recom- mendation on the hiring of top staff of the 11CC as presented by the Personnel Committee-this resolution stated: `~The Personnel Committee will select the member, in concert with Mr. Tyson, who will be satisfactory for top staff. However, the choice among the Personnel Committee's approved candidates will be Mr. Tyson's." A Resolution on Philosophy of Employment Practices and Purchasing was also adopted on December 21, 1964. This resolution stated in part that: "...wherever possible, preference will be given to residents of Newark in the hiring of per- sonnel for the United Community Corporation". Utilizing these two resolutions as its directives, the Personnel Committee pro- ceeded with its immediate objective of recruitment and selection of top staff members and establishment of personnel practices and policies. The Committee was divided into three sub-committees-Personnel Practices, Job Descriptions and Specification, and Screening and Selection. These sub-committees~ were ap- pointed in January of 1965. The Sub-Committee on Personnel Practices, under the chairmanship of James Pawley, Executive Director of the Urban League of Essex County, drafted the manual on personnel practices which covers such areas as working hours, salary administration, vacation and leave policy, health and welfare benefits and other matters of concern to staff members of the UCC. An Employee Handbook, setting forth these policies was adopted by the Board of Trustees at its meeting of July 15, 1965. (Ex. ~ 4~. The sub-committee on Job Descriptions and Specifications, under the chair- manship of Ralph Geller, District Supervisor, New Jersey State Employment Service, drafted the jobs summary and prerequisites for the various top staff positions in the UCC which established the guidelines utilized for the evaluation of job candidates. The sub-committee on Screening and Selection, under the chairmanship of Francis Quillan, Senior Vice President, Prudential Insurance Company, has screened and interviewed candidates for the department head positions in 11CC and recommended qualified candidates to the Executive Director to make the final selection from such recommendations, according to the procedure approved by the Board of Trustees. The sub-committee on Screening and Selection has always been guided by the resolution stating, "Wherever possible preference will be given to Newark residents in the hiring of personnel." Its major responsibility however, has been to find the most qualified people available for the top staff positions in the United Community Corporation. The Personnel Committee has carried out its objectives efficiently and expedi- tiously. It has recruited a staff of the best people available to launch Newark's War on Poverty; it has facilitated the administration of personnel practices through the Employee Handbook and Job Descriptions and Specifications; and has recommended sound personnel practices and procedures which have been adopted by the Board in administering the internal personnel affairs of the 11CC. A copy of the Employee Handbook was made available to the Committee, and as heretofore indicated, was attached tO the Committee Report as Exhibit #4. In addition, a copy of the Job Summaries prepared by the Personnel Commit- tee was made available to the Committee, but not attached to its report. A copy of these summaries is incorporated in the appendix as Exhibit XIV. To fur- ther facilitate comprehension of 11CC Personnel Practices a statement of hiring procedures was prepared by the Personnel Department, under the guidance of the Personnel Committee, and is incorporated in `the appendix as Exhibit XV- SO-084-67-pt. 4-73 PAGENO="1154" 3614 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Program Development.-Programs for consideration by LTCC may originate through the Area Boards hereinbefore referred to, the City Government, inter- nal bodies established within 15CC or in different community agencies. Program proposals are first submitted to the Executive Director for professional evalua- tion through his staff. Upon completion of such review the program proposal proceeds to the Program Committee of which Mrs. Cell Arons, former member of the Newark Board of Education and Mr. Timothy Still, of the Newark Ten- ants Association are Co-Chairmen. Further evaluation and review is the role of their committee, with participation of members of DCC appointed by the Presi- dent as contemplated by Article III Sec. 10 of the By-Laws. Thereafter, the Pro- gram Committee will refer the professional evaluation of the Executive Di- rector, and its evaluation to the appropriate Task Force, i.e. Education Task Force, Employment Task Force, Commuinty Action Task Force, Special Proj- ects Task Force, and Housing Task Force. It is further scrutinized, studied, and evaluated, and a final recommendation prepared for submission to the Board of Trustees, pursuant to Article VI, Sec. 2 of the By Laws. The role of the Executive Director and staff is that of the professional to as- sist in consideration of programs by the Program Committee, Task Force, and the Board. The professional staff is also available to assist in the preparation of program proposals. Proponents of proposals will sit with the staff, the Program Committee and the Task Force to share in the development of the final proposal to be acted upon by the Board of Trustees. Thereafter the program proposals are forwarded to the Office of Economic Opportunity in Washington for their approval. It should be noted that various professional services are furnished by the Executive Director and his staff in the process. In addition to the philosophical, economic and social concerns, budgetary matters and involvement of programs in development of the overall community design are of great significance. Fiscal responsibility The Budget and Finance Committee is charged with the preparation of the budget and consideration of fiscal matters affecting the Corporation. The Treas- urer, the fiscal officer created by the By-Laws, is accountable to the Board of Trustees and is required to render reports as to the financial affairs of the Corporation to the Board. 15CC employs a Comptroller and an accounting department responsible for maintaining the financial books and records of 15CC. The Comptroller and the books of account are regularly audited by Puder and Puder, one of the largest and most highly respected certified public accounting firms in the City of Newark and in the nation. Moreover, upon approval of a grant by the OEO Office in Washington, the fiscal responsibility of DCC is outlined under the procedural guidelines promul- gated by the OEO under the caption of Community Action Program Guide, Volume II, Financial Instructions. Also procedures must be rigidly adhered to as a condition of grant. The foregoing guidelines require that each grantee, whether public or private, is required to maintain an accounting system adequate to meet the purposes of the grant and particularizes the criteria to be met. Prior to the release of any grant fund we are required to submit to the OEO office in Washington a certification from our certified public accountants stating that the grantee has established an accounting system adequate to comply with the financial instruc- tions referred to. Moreover, assurance must be given the OEO Office in Wash- ington that arrangements have been made for the appropriate bonding of grantee officials. UCC has secured blanket bond coverage in the sum of $250,000.00 for all 15CC employees. Thus, with the establishment of the Comptroller and his office, the fiscal accounting procedures he pursues, subject to audit and review by the outside auditing firm and the Federal Government, and the involvement of the Budget and Finance Committee, adequate safeguards exist to assure maximum fiscal responsibility. With this background as an overview on the development and operation of DCC, we now address ourselves to the Committee Report. PAGENO="1155" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 36151 THE UCO EVALUATION AND RESPONSE TO THE REPORT The con4 vet of the investigation As heretofore indicated, when it was announced that. the City Council ap- pointed a sub-committee to study the Federal Anti-Poverty Program in Newark, UCO welcomed the opportunity to report on its activities and to communicate its organization, operations, and needs to the City Council. UCC conspicuously avoided any public controversy with the Committee dur- ing the course of the investigation to prevent any suggestion of interference or lack of cooperation with the Committee in its investigative processes. It is regrettable that the Committee did not approach its task with the sense of ob- jectively such an important undertaking required. This unfortunate circum- stance is reflected in the manner in which the investigation proceeded and in the content of the report itself. Following designation of the Committee on August 4, 1965, repeated requests were made by UCC throughout the month of August to talk with the Commit- tee about our activities, plans and needs to facilitate the inquiry and to proceed to the issue at hand, waging an effective War against Poverty in Newark. A meeting was sought to ascertain the nature of the information sought in order that UCC be fully responsive to the Committee and to set out procedural guide- lines for the investigation. Despite assurances that such meetings would be arranged, in fact, these requests were ignored. Finally, on September 3, 1965, the Friday of the Labor Day Weekend, without any advance notice, a letter was received from the Committee requesting exten- sive data and materials to be provided by 10:00 A.M. of Wednesday, September 8th, for a hearing to be held on Thursday, September 9th, 1965. (Exhibit II, Ap- pendix) Such request was without consideration of the personal needs of the UCC staff or of the regular normal operations of the agency. No explanation or reason was given for failure to meet with us at a reasonable time regarding the informa- tion required, the delay in requesting the information, or the short time provided over the holiday week-end for its preparation. Nevertheless, a DCC devoted staff worked around the clock on the holiday week-end to assemble and duplicate all the detailed records requested, which were hand delivered to the Committee on September 8th with a written request for a conference on procedures. (Exhibit III, Appendix). No such conference was provided. The first hearing held on September 9, at 8:00 P.M. City Hall, was well attended by the concerned Newark community, Dean Heckel, President, and Msgr. Dooling, a Vice President of DCC were invited and appeared as witnesses. Dean Heckel read a prepared statement into the record, copy of which was supposed to have been made a part of the transcript of the testimony. (Exhibit #12, page 3). This statement was neither printed in the record nor was it appended to the transcript; Exhibit #12 annexed to the report. Included in the appendix and marked Exhibit #1 is a copy of the prepared statement read into the record by Dean Heckel. Despite the depth and detail in which Dean Heckel's testimony and prepared statement described the operations of DCC, both were completely ignored by the Committee in its report. During the course of the September 9th hearing Dean Heckel and Msgr. Dooling were questioned on certain aspects of personnel and other matters which were not within their personal knowledge. The Committee investigators announced at the hearing that they would call the Chairman of the Personnel Committee, the Ex- ecutive Director and other DCC staff people, and some of the Pre-School Council People, as witnesses at the next hearing, since they had the information desired. (Exhibit #12, pp. 34-38). None of the foregoing were called to testify, nor were they requested to provide the information sought. Additional documentary data requested by the Committee was made available by DCC, but only after protest regarding the conduct of Councilman Bernstein in improperly using material submitted to the Committee for personal political pur- poses, and assurances that there would be no further improper utilization of material provided the Committee. (Exhibit IV, V, VI, Appendix) The cooperative spirit of DCC was noted and complimented by the Chairman of the Committee at the outset and conclusion of the September 9th hearing. (Ex- hibit #12, pages 2 and 51.) A second hearing was convened on November 9th at 5:30 P.M. without prior notice to DCC (Exhibit #13). The selection of the normal dinner hour to con- PAGENO="1156" 3616 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 vene a public hearing was indeed unfortunate. It had the desired effect of limit- ing attendance of community people interested in the inquiry. Except for a request on November 30, 1965, for information concerning appli- eants for employment who were not hired by UCC, there has been no other com- munication with the TJCC by the Committee or its investigating staff. It is regrettable that none of the 15CC staff were called to testify. Since much of the report relates to Mr. Tyson and his relationship to and control over 15CC, it ap-. pears most logical that he should have been called to testify on these matters to provide the Committee with direct evidence in the areas of their concern. Fail- ure to call Mr. Tyson, in particular, casts a shadow of doubt and uncertainty on those portions of the report that deal with his relationship to and alleged con- trol over 15CC policies and conduct. It is both unfortunate and improper that some members of the Committee found it necessary, prior to and during the period covering the investigation, to make public statements that "the entire 15CC program must get a new base of opera- tion" . . . "some of the revelations we will make will be very startling".. . and to allege that 15CC was dominated by "militant left-wing groups." (Newark Sunday News. August 22, 1965). These comments were made before any hearings were convened or evidence assembled. No facts have been offered to support these claims. ~The conduct of the Committee members precipitated the fear expressed by the Very Rev. Ledlie I. Laughlin, Jr. Dean of Trinity Episcopal Cathedral and Co- Chairman of the Newark Citizens for Community Action, that the Committee was biased and hostile. (Newark Evening News, September 8, 1965). This bias and hostility is borne out by the conduct of the Committee referred to above, and the intemperance reflected in the report. Despite the statement in the report (page 1) that "the purpose of the inves- tigation was not to impugn the integrity of the men and women who have or- ganized the present private Anti-Poverty Agencies now operating in the City of Newark." the preamble of the text of the report established the contrary, It is replete with unsupported statements of "Financial scandals . . . uncontrolled use of free and easy money. . . jealousies and antagonisms that can embitter the outs for the ins.. . and seeking for political power financed by federal funds. . ." etc. Nowhere in the report is there factual substantiation of such claims. Rather, the report is nonfactual and speculative, replete with claims of we "understand", "surmise" and the like. The Committee was supplied detailed factual information and data in response to its requests. No effort was made to analyse these documents regarding hiring practices and procedures, salary and related financial information, schedules, program summaries, etc., or to attach them to the report. Similarly, no effort was made to analyze the testimony of Dean Heckel and Msgr. Dooling, which dealt with the role of the Executive Director, hiring prac- tices, and the conclusions set forth in the report. The report attached two purported sets of by-laws (Exhibits # 2 and # 3). Exhibit # 2 was a working draft of the by-laws from w-hich the first set of by- laws was adopted by the Corporation in Nov. 1964. Exhibit # 3 had originally been submitted to the Committee on September 8, 1965 pursuant to the Commit- tee's request. However, the Committee was thereafter informed that Exhibit ~3 contained errors, and a corrected copy of the by-laws then in effect was pro-- vided. (Exhibit VI, Appendix). The Committee report failed to annex the cor- rected copy of the by-laws to the Appendix herein as Exhibit VII. Moreover, when the Committee published Exhibit #3, it failed to publish the entire last page of the by-laws as submitted on September 8 and predicated part of its case regarding the alleged autocratic authority of the Executive Director upon a docu- ment it knew, or should have known, was incorrect. We have annexed to our Appendix, as Exhibit VIII a copy of the last page of the by-laws as originally submitted to the Committee. These are but some examples of the lack of responsibility demonstrated by the report. It is against this background, against this evident bias and prejudice that we deal with the specific claims in the report. S-ynop~i~ of the committee -report The Committee report concludes ". . . because of the facts, the law, the eco- nomics, and general iolicy considerations" 15CC should no longer receive sup- port from the- City of Newark. and the "municipality should immediately under- take its own Aifti-Poverty Programs." PAGENO="1157" ECONOMIC' OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3617 The report fails to delineate with `precision the factual findings upon which it relies for its conclusions. Accordingly, it is difficult to synopsize what has been covered in a rambling excursion into the field of speculation, assumption, inference and innuendo for the major portion of 11 pages. Nevertheless, the report, as we read it, presents the following claims: 1. The municipality is precluded from providing UCC matching funds under the Economic Opportunity Act because of alleged legal barriers to wit: (a) constitutional prohibitions (b) Derivative contractual imponderables. 2. The alleged singular and exclusive control over hiring and programs by Cyril D. Tyson, Executive Director, constitutes an autocracy which is detri- mental to the best interests of the City of Newark. 3. DCC has systematically excluded Newark residents from employment on its staff. 4. There is a lack of relationship between salaries paid, background of em- ployees and services to be performed; and excessively high salaries are l')aid en1ployees of DCC. 5. UCC programs lack essential fiscal controls to prevent them from becom- ing a source of political patronage. 6. DCC functions as a political pressure group. 7. DCC espouses a philosophy of maximum involvement of the poor which is rejected by the Committee as in conflict with its philosophy that substantial administrative and financial control of CAP agencies should repose in elected officials of the City. 8. Contribution of matching funds by the City to DCC will increase the budget and tax rate of the City. We regret the extent to which the report resorted to invective and vitupera~ tion, failed to support its conclusions by facts, and disclosed the bias and prej- udice of the Committee. Perhaps the original purpose of the Committee became blurred because of the philosophical conflict over "control". The alleged legal eornple~ities The Council Committee Report asserts two basic legal barriers to the munici- pality providing DCC with matching funds. Firstly, it is contended that under provisions of Article VIII, of the New Jersey Constitution, the City of Newark is `prohibited from participating in such financing. Secondly, it poses a series of contractual and derivative questions arising out of such participation. The questions raised have no legal sufficiency; are asserted merely as "legal ramifications that should be considered"; are unsupported by careful legal re- search; and reject the premise upon which funds were provided to the DCC by City Council action on two prior occasions. This is a smoke screen designed to obfuscate the real issue and a weak attempt to provide some colorable stature to the unwillingness of the authors of the report to participate with DCC in the War on Poverty in the City of Newark. It is contended that by reason of Article VIII. Section III, paragraphs 2 and 3 of the New Jersey Constitution any contribution of matching funds to DCC w-ould be unconstitutional. The constitutional provisions are as follows: "Section III, Par. 2 No county, city, borough, town township or village shall hereafter give any money or property, or loan its money or credit, to or in ahi of any individual, association or corporation, or become security for, or he di- rectly or indirectly the owner of, any stock or bonds of any association or cor- poration. "Par. 3 No donation of land or appropriation of money shall he made by the state or any county or municipal corporation to or for the use of any society, association or corporation whatever." In adopting the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964. Congress stated its find- ings and declared the purpose of the law as follows: "Although the economic well-being and prosperity of the `United `States have progressed to a level surpassing any achieved in world history, and although these benefits are widely shared throughout the Nation, poverty continue,s to be the lot of a substantial number of our people. The United States can achieve its full economic and social potential as a nation only if every individual has the opportunity to contribu1~e to the full extent of his capabilities and to par- ticipate in the workings of our society. It is, therefore, the policy of the United PAGENO="1158" 3618 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty. in this Nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the oppor~ tunity to work. and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity. It is the purpose of this Act to strengthen, supplement, and coordinate efforts in further- ance of that policy." The statute outlines various programs as the mechanism to eliminate "the paradox of poverty". One program is under Title II of the law, the community action section. The purpose of the community action section was, described by Congress, as follows: "The purpose of this part is to provide stimulation and incentive for urban and rural communities to mobultae their resources to combat poverty through community action programs." Title II, sec. 202(a), sec. 204. and sec. 205(a) envisions that community action programs may be "conducted, administered or coordinated by a public or private non-profit agency". Pursuant thereto UCC was organized as a private non-profit corporation under Title 15 of the New Jersey Revised Statutes. (Ex- hibit No. 1). TJCC was conceived for the purpose of serving the City of Newark as the CAP agency through which Title II programs would proched. Among its original incorporators were Mayor Hugh Addonizio and other officials of the City of Newark. Similarly, members of the City Council were included on the Board of Trustees of the corporation. (Exhibits No. 2, 3 and 6). Thus. on November 4, 1964. as revised on December 2. 1964, the City Council adopted an emergency resolution appropriating $15,000 "to provide funds to enable the United Community Corporation to initiate local anti-poverty pro- grams." On a subsequent occassion a similar resolution was adopted in a dif- ferent amount. These monies were appropriated for the precise purpose con- templated by the federal statute referred to and to enable mobilization of re- sources of the City of Newark to combat poverty through community action programs. By such action the City Council recognized that UCO u-as performing a public service, function, or purpose-working towards the elimination of poverty. It is respectfully submitted that the constitutional issue posed by the com- mittee report was considered and answered by our New Jersey Supreme Court in 1964 in Roe v. Kervick 42 N.J. 191, 207, 212, 214, 217 (5. Ct. April 20, 1964). The issue there involved the right of the State to contribute money to area re- development agencies to assist in financing of redevelopment projects. This involved contributions from the Federal and State governments under the Area Redevelopment Assistance Act. It was contended that State contributions were barred by Article VIII, section III, pars. 2 and 3 of the New Jersey Oonstitu.tion. Speaking for the Court in rejecting this contention Mr. Justice Francis re- viewed the historical development of the constitutional provisions and concluded: "The strictures of Article VIII, which were adopted in 1875, were simply the retreat to a fundamental doctrine of government, i.e., that public money should be raised and used only for public purposes." The Court then described what was meant by a public purpose. "The concept of a public purpose is a broad one. Generally speaking. it con- notes an activity which serves as a benufit to the community as a whole, and which at the same time is related to the functions of government. Moreover, it cannot be static in its implications. To be serviceable it must expand when necessary to encompass changing public needs of a modern dynamic society. Thus it is incapable of exact or perduring definition. In each instance whefe the test is to be applied the decision must be reached with reference to the object sought to be accomplished and the manner in which the object affects the public welfare." With respect to the specific objectives under consideration herein, Mr. Justice Francis. speaking for the Court, said: "Relief of the poor has been considered an obligation of government since the organization of our State. Such relief has been regarded as a direct charge on the body politic for its own preservation and protection, standing very much in the same position as the preservation of law and order. Expenditure of money for that purpose by the State or a sub-division of local government pursuant to legislative authority Is looked upon as the performance of a governmental func- tion . . . (citations omitted) . . . No one, suggests use of public funds to sustain the impoverished constitutes a donation or gift tran~gressmve of Article VIII of the Constitution. PAGENO="1159" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3619 ". . . The prohibition against lending of credit or money does not mean that the State and its political sub-divisions cannot buy and pay for what they need to achieve public purposes. Nor do they signify that governmental units cannot employ the services of a third person or corporation to do any lawful act which, they have the right to have done, and to pay for it." In Whelan v. New ,Jerseii Power and Light Co., 45 N.J. 237 (S. Ct., Decided June 28, 1965),. Chief Justice Weintraub, speaking for the Court, reaffirmed the view expressed in the Roe case that the constitutional prohibition did not bar the State or municipality from arranging with private persons to perform a public or quasi-public function. It is interesting to note that the constitutional provision did not preclude an arrangement with a private corporation where the corporation was engaged in a business for profit. The Court said: ". . . If the government decides there is a need which it should meet in the interest of its citizens, the amendments do not deny govern- ment the power to' meet those needs through contracts with private companies merely because the companies are attracted by the prospect of profit." In commenting upon the Roe Case, Chief Justice Weintraub said: "There we sustained a statute under which the Legislature, recognizing a public duty to relieve the poor, undertook to meet that duty under a program whereby the Federal Government, the State and the municipality loaned monies to finance redevelopment projects, privately owned and operated for private profit, which would provide job opportunities in economically distressed areas. The public purpose being to deal with poverty, we accepted the legislative deci- sion that its program was a suitable and desirable approach to the problem". This question is not novel to the City of Newark. In Simon v. O'Toole, 108 N.J.L. 32 (S. Ct. 1932), affirmed 108 N.J.L. 549 (E. & A. 1932), the City of Newark made cert'ain contributions available to the Prudential Insurance Company to facilitate the `construction of housing to alleviate inadequate housing facilities in the Ironbound section of the City. The right of the City to cooperate with the Pru- dential Insurance Company was sustained because of the public purpose to be served by alleviating ina'dequate housing conditions in the City. The same issue wa's raised and similarly affirmed in Redfern v. Jersey City, 137 N.J.L. 356 (E. & A. 1948). It should also be noted that when this constitutional question was under discussion with Mr. Reichenstein at the November 1st hearing of the Committee he acknowledged that questions of law" . . . would finally have to be determined by the Corporation Counsel". (Exhibit 3, page 4.) We are informed that Corpo- ration Counsel for the City rendered an extensive opinion on the constitutional question raised in the Committee report in which he holds that the bar urged does not exist. Although the Committee did not see fit to annex a copy of said opinion to its report, or to comment upon it, we deem the Corporation Counsel's opinion most pertinent. We have withheld annexing a copy of that opinion to this statement because we view it as a communication from one municipal official to other municipal officials which should be released `by the municipal officials involved. Accordingly, the constitutional question is an unreal issue, and is in fact the smoke screen we heretofore suggested. We submit, the constitutional limitation does not preclude the contribution twice heretofore made by the City Council to the United Community Corporation, where its purpose is so clearly a public service and function designed "to provide stimulation and incentive . . . to mobilize . . . resources to combat poverty through community action programs." The question of other legal ramifications posed on Page 8 of the report ~:5 purely imaginary and without substance. None of th'ese questions were raised on the two earlier occasion's when the City made the necessary contributions; have never been dis'cussed with representatives of the United Community Corpora- tion; were not rais'ed during the course of the hearings when an opportunity should have been afforded to respond to these questions if they were of serious import; and in the Committee report are raised' for the first time. If these issues are of serious concern to the Committee, `should not the report have attempted to answer the questions raised? Did the Committee seek the advice of the Corporation Counsel, or other counsel on these matters? Is it ex- pected that by raising these issues uncertainty will be created as to the duties and obligations of the City in continuing to provide matching funds? We urge `the Council to summarily reject these questions as not providing any serious "legal ramifications". PAGENO="1160" 3620 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 19 67 The nature of the municipal contractual liability is limited by the appropria- tion sought. No one has sought an open and blank check. No municipal contrac- tual liability exists to the employees of the funded agencies or creditors and none has been sought to be established by TJCC. Neither does any tort liability exist to persons associated with funded agencies, since the sole involvement of the City as a legal entity providing a limited amount of money is to make pos- sible the contributing of substantial Federal funds under like circumstances. There is no delegation of police powers at issue herein. Neither does the UCC in any manner seek to control, or determine municipal budgetary requirements, although we firmly believe that success of the DCC and programs developed through its operations will substantially help the City's fiscal problems, as evi- denced by the savings to be effected in welfare costs through the Blazer Youth Council Program. The issue of a private agency is not a legal one at alL but rather one of philosophy in development of programs designed to eliminate poverty. Similarly the Hatch Act issue has no bearing on the legal right of the City to contribute matching funds, nor is the question posed a legal question relating to the War against Poverty. It should be noted that there are currently twenty-six community action pro- grams operating in the State of New Jersey today. Twelve of these programs are independent corporations which receive grants from the applicable city or county without interposition of the constitutional or alleged legal ramifications or com- plexities referred to in the Council Committee's report. We submit that the alleged legal complexities raised in the Committee Report are without merit or foundation; they are contrary to existing judicial opinion in the State of New Jersey; they are contra to the opinion of the City Corpora- tion Counsel; they reject the concept of total community effort as envisioned by the framers of the Economic Opportunity Act; and we respectfully urge that these considerations be disregarded by the Council in deciding whether to con- tribute the matching funds required by the United Community Corporation. The alleged control of the e~recntive director over hiring and programs Dean ileckel's prepared statement, (Exhibit # I, Appendix) set forth the extensive search made for an Executive Director and the confidence expressed by the UCO Board in its selection of P. Tyson. The wisdom of this choice is reflected in Mr. Tyson's performance in Newark and the comments of Mr. Theodore M. Berry, National Director of Community Action Programs of the OEO when he said ". . . DCC has a good program and a good Director. We think highly of Tyson." Similar commendations have come from civic leaders of Newark and other communities and also other national leaders. The Mayor-Elect of New York City recently designated a special Task Force to study the New York Anti-Poverty Program. Mr. Tyson's selection to serve on this Task Force with other outstanding government and community people from various sections of our country is further evidence of the high regard in which he is held as one of our nation's leaders in this form of social planning. The Committee report, pages 2 and 3, charge UCC with an abdication of responsibility in giving Mr. Tyson "full control of all Executive Personnel", citing in support thereof its "understanding" of his employment contract and an alleged amendment to the by-laws. This is a distortion of the facts and contrary to the evidence submitted to the Committee. At the outset it should be noted that the Executive Committee meets weekly and the Board meets monthly. A full report is made of the Executive Director's activities during the preceding period with ample opportunity for discussion and review of his stewardship. This has of course included consideration of per- s6nnel and program matters. At the request of the Committee, a copy of Mr. Tyson's agreement was pro- vided. It was not annexed as an exhibit to the Committee report. A copy of the hiring agreement submitted to the Council is annexed to the Appendix as Exhibit X. Nowhere in said agreement is there any reference to arrangements regarding hiring as alleged in the Committee report. As heretofore noted, the Committee failed to annex to its report the corrected current by-laws as submitted to the Committee. It failed to properly print the last page of the by-laws as originally submitted (Exhibit 3). The notation on the bottom of that page stated that Article V, relied upon by the Committee as the claimed amendment granting unusual powers to the Executive, had not yet been submitted to the membership and therefore was not properly part of the by-laws. PAGENO="1161" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3621 Moreover, this misconception and misconstruction of the powers of the Execu- tive was clarified in the testimony of Dean Heckel (pages 28 through 31, Exhibit 12). It was made explicitly clear that the Executive Director's right to the selection of top staff was not "exclusive". Why the Committee ignored this is not explained in the report. In point of fact, the decision with respect to the involvement of the Executive Director in the selection of "top staff" is contained in a recommendation to the Board of Trustees of UCO from the Personnel Committee. Mr. Tyson is permitted to elect his preference for staff from a list of qualified candidates selected by the Personnel Oommittee. A copy of this recommendation was also submitted to the Council Conimittee with Mr. Tyson's hiring agreement, but not annexed to the Committee Report as an exhibit. A copy of said recommendation is incorporated in the Appendix as Exhibit IX. Perhaps it is even more significant that the foregoing recommendations to the Board of Trustees from the Personnel Committee was adopted at a Board of Trustees meeting on Monday, December 21, 19G4, attended by both Councilman Addonizio and Councilman Bernstein neither of whom interposed any objection or comment to such recommendation. Annexed to the Appendix Exhibit XI is an extract of pertinent portions of minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting of Monday, December 21, 1961, reflecting the attendance of Committee members and adoption of the recommendation. Moreover, detailed procedures to be followed in hiring personnel were out- lined at the UCC membership meeting of February 1, 1965, likewise attended by Councilmen Addonizio and Bernstein, neither of whom is recorded as objecting thereto. Pertinent portions of said minutes reflecting the foregoing are included in the Appendix Exhibit XII. The recommendations adopted by the Board of Trustees, with respect to the hiring procedure to be followed did not constitute an abdication of responsibility of the Trustees of UCC. Neither did this vest "special, singular and exclusive control" in Mr. Tyson with regard to hiring. It gave Mr. Tyson a role to play in hiring,' after the Personnel Committee made the selection of qualified people. The Trustees, through the Personnel Committee, were involved in the selection of personnel. The hiring procedures were sensible and sound. However, included in this charge of the Committee is the claim that Mr. Tyson's authority, whatever it may have been, was "detrimental to the best interest of the community". There is not a scintilla of evidence to support this allegation. No witnesses were called to demonstrate that the method of selection of personnel was detrimental to the best interest of the community. To the contrary, leaders in the world of industry in Newark joined with others in the community in making selections. Perhaps this is best reflected by the care and devotion to duty reflected in a communication from the Chairman of the Personnel Committee, Mr. Cham- bers, to Mr. Tyson, regarding the selection to be made of Comptroller. (Exhibit XIII, Appendix). As further evidence of the care and concern pursued to seek out Newark residents for "key" jobs the communication stated: "Not having had any success in getting a Personnel Director from the first three interviews it is obvious that we need to secure more applicants. On this point of recruitment, it was the consensus of the sub-committee on Screening and Selection that we need to get more applicants for each position, especially from residents of Newark." The report also alleges that the Committee "understands" Mr. Tyson's employment agreement "provided in part. . . that the Director would have the final say on all Anti-Poverty programs initiated and undertaken in the municipality". In addition, it is contended that this is similarly reflected in the by-laws. An examination of the hiring agreement reflects that it is totally silent on program matters. Similarly the by-laws do not reflect final authority in the Executive on programs. Article VI of the by-laws provides for the appointment of Task Forces for the purposes of program planning, coordination, `etc.' The suggestions of the Task Forces are to be considered by the Board of Trustees. At the Board of Trustees meeting of December 21, 1964, (Exhibit X, Appendix) attended by the members of the Council Committee, including Councilmen Ad- donizio, Bernstein, and' Turner, the Program Committee submitted a detailed report setting forth the procedure to be followed in the submission of program proposals to UCC. This contemplated that "final action" on program proposals would be left to the Board of Trustees. PAGENO="1162" 3622 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 `Subsequently, a document entitled "Procedural Guidelines for All LTnited Community Corporation Task Forces", copy of which was anne~ëd to the Council Committee Report as Exhibit # 5 specifically provided for final action to be taken by the Board of Trustees. Page 3 of the document, paragraph D, reads as follows: "The Board of Trustees shall consider the proposals and recommendations as submitted by the Task Force with the changes, if any, and take final action." The foregoing procedure provides for program proposals to go through the Executive Director and his staff in the first instance for professional evaluation and then through the remaining procedures without veto power in the Execu- tive. This was explicitly testified to by Dean Heckel at the September 9th hearing, page 2T of the testimony, Exhibit # 12, as follows: Mr. BREITXOPF. Now, it would appear from that document (Procedural Guidelines for Task Forces) that the Executive Director shall study and make the initial evaluation of the proposal. Dean HECKEL. Right. Mr. BREITKOPF. Now, if his initial evaluation is that the proposal is some- thing he thinks is not valuable? Dean HECKEL. It would still go on to the Task Force for its valuation. Mr. BREITKOPF. Would it come to the Board of Directors? Dean HECKEL. Yes, it would go on through the procedure. In other words, the Executive Director doesn't have a veto power. In other words it is in the discretion of the Board of Professional Staff. They cannot block a program. It must move on with their either favorable or adverse recommendation. That is the professional evaluation. It then goes through the Task Force to get a com- munity evaluation. Evaluated by the non-professionals." The procedural guidelines for program formulation and approval clearly delineates the responsibility of the Executive and his staff. They serve to provide professional evaluation. They may not prevent any program from proceeding through the process established by the by-law-s and the guidelines referred to, which contemplate that final authority for acceptance or rejection of any pro- grain rests solely with the Board of Trustees and no other body or individual. It is beyond our comprehension to determine how the Committee could have been confused on the responsibility and function of the Executive Director with respect to programs. Suffice it to say, the testimony presented to the Committee, and the documents they considered are in fact diametrically opposed to the con- clusion in the Committee's report. Furthermore, no evidence was submitted to the Committee, nor is there any evidence in the exhibits annexed to the Committee report, that suggests directly or indirectly that the Executive Director has ever prevented any program pro- posal from proceeding through the process outlined above. Accordingly. we contend that the Committee conclusion that "singular and exclusive control" over hiring policies and programs is vested in the Executive Director, is without substance. It is contrary to the facts, as reflected in the policy determinations made by the DCC at public meetings attended by the authors of the Committee report, and documents made available to the Committee. Tie alleged systematic ereivsion of ~re?vark residents from UGU staff The report, page 4, states that "The LTCC has systematically excluded New- ark residents from key positions on its staff and from other important positions." Such contention is predicated on an extrapolation by a committee member from a list of employees DCC provided the committee at its request (such extrapola- tion hereinafter referred to as the Bernstein list), and upon a letter from one job applicant who was not hired. Upon close scrutiny, neither the Bernstein list nor the letter supports the con- clusion of systematic exclusion. In response to the committee's request for factual information prior to the September 9 meeting, DCC prepared and provided the council meeting with a list of employees, as of September 7, 1965, their salaries, and place of residence. This roster was not annexed to the committee report as an exhibit, although it was provided on September 8, along with other documents requested. A copy of said personnel roster is included in the Appendix as Exhibit XVI. The personnel roster reflects that 35 persons were employed by the 15CC as of September 7, 1965, of whom 27 resided in Newark, 5 outside of Newark but in Essex County, one outside of Newark but in Union County, and two from New PAGENO="1163" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 .3623 York City. Thus, 77% of the persons then employed were residents of the City of Newark, 17% were residents of Essex County or its environs, and 6% were New York City residents. S More recent statistics disclose that as of December 12, 165 there were 55 per- Sons employed by the UCC, of whom 44, or 80%, reside in the City of Newark; 5, or 9%, reside in Essex Cou.uty; 4, or 71/2%, reside in the metropolitan area of New Jersey; and 2, or 31/2%, reside in New York City. An examination of the Bernstein list, Exhibit #10 appendix to the commit- tee report, reflects that it is not confined to employees of the UCC. The list con- tains 36 names, of which 12 are employees of UCC, and the remaining 24 are employees of the Pre-School Council. In addition, there are several errors in the addresses as they appear on the Bernstein list. For example, Emil Hirrschoff is listed as residing in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania; Malachi D. Rountree is listed as residing in East Orange; Domi- nick Pitrelli is listed as residing in Bloomfield, New Jersey; Donald Wendell is listed as residing in New Haven, Connecticut. The personnel roster provided the council lists each of these men as residing in Newark, New Jersey. Each employee was available to the committee as a witness. None of them was called. Attached to the Appendix as Exhibits XVII, XVIII, XIX and XX are state- ments from each man certifying to his residence in Newark, New Jersey. With respect to Wendell, it should be noted that the Bernstein list is dated September 13, 1965. While Wendell previously resided in New Haven, Connecticut at the time of the exhibit and of the hearing and for some time prior thereto, he has resided in the City of Newark. The report states that the list relied upon is a "partial listing" of employees of UCC. No explanation is offered as to why the Committee relied upon a "partial list" when a complete list of UCC employees had been made available. It seems strange to rely upon such an obviously inadequate and incomplete document to support a "factual determination" that a systematic plan to exclude Newark residents from employment with UCC had been put into effect, when the entire list of UCC employees was provided. Of similar interest is the failure of the report to indicate why the "partial listing" was confined to the combination of some DCC and some Pre-School Council employees. Included in the same material provided the council com- mittee, and enjoying the same relationship to UCC as did the Pre-School Coun- cil, was a list of persons employed in the Queen of Angels Remediation Pr.oject. Project Pre-High School Head Start (Seton Hall University), Project Head Start (Newark Board of Education), and Youth Chance (Mt. Carmel Guild). In the lists of employees for each of these agencies we find persons in key jobs from cities other than Newark, such as Irvington, Maplewood, Livingston, Hill- side, Nutley, Bloomfield, other New Jersey cities, and Po'tsdam, N.Y. Part of the `data provided the council committee included material prepared by the Newark Board of Education with respect to the Project Head Start in which approximately 18%, 10 out of 55 of the cafeteria workers employed were non-residents of Newark. No less significant with respect to hiring of non- residents of Newark was the testimony of Dr. Mildred Groder, Administrator of Project Head Start (Newark Board of Education) when she was questioned as to the utilization of Newark people in this program (exhibits 13, pp. 28-39) "Mr. GOODMAN. As I understand it this was a municipally operated program? "Dr. GRODER. Board of Education sponsored. "Mr. GooDMAN. In other words, administered and handled by Newark em- ploychs? "Dr. GRODER. That's correct. "Mr. GOODMAN. And you feel that such a program as you conducted this sum- mer should be handled by professionals? "Dr. GRODER. Well, I certainly think if we are going to give the proper educa- tion to our boys and girls we should have as many highly qualified people in our schools as we can. "Mr. GOODMAN. Do you feel that such qualified people, if there are such quali- fled people in Newark, can handle such programs? "Dr. GRODER. Employed by Newark? "Mr. GOODMAN. Employed by Newark and who live in Newark as well, and who can handle such programs. S "Dr. GRODER. Well, all of our teachers don't live in Newark. You realize that we can't do this by state law you know. PAGENO="1164" 3624 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 "Mr. GOODMAN. There are qualified people to handle this who do live in Newark? "Dr. GRODER. There wouldn't be enough of those who applied who live in Newark." Since a question has been raised concerning the Pre~School Council employees, it should be noted that as of December 15, 1965, there are a total of 245 em- ployees in the Pre-School Council, of whom 207, or 84.5% are residents of Newark. Of the 38 non-Newark residents. 35 reside in Union and Essex Counties, New Jersey, and 3 are from out of the state. It might also be of interest to note that from a residence survey of employees of the Newark Board of Education as of December 15, 1965, there are 566 high school teachers employed, of whom 214, or 37.8% are residents of New-ark, and 352 reside out of Newark. The foregoing statistics are not submitted for purposes of adversely reflecting upon employment policies of the Board of Education or the Pre-School Council, but nierely to demonstrate how their employment statistics compare to FCC, and to indicate that there has been no systematic plan or move to exclude New-ark residents from employment with UCC. Substantial effort u-as in fact made to provide ireference for New-ark resi- dence in the hiring of employees. This u-as consistent with the policy of FCC, enunciated at the Board of Trustees Meeting of December 21, 1964, attended by members of the council committee as heretofore noted. A resolution on philoso- phy with employment practices and purchasing w-as unanimously adopted, w-hich in part stated: "Therefore, be it Resolved: 1. That, w-herever possible preference u-ill be given to residents of Newark in the hiring~ of personnel for the United Com- munity Corporation." Thereafter, the procedure to be follow-ed by UCC in the hiring of staff w-as presented by the Personnel Committee to the membership meeting of February 1, 1965, which emphasized preference to be given Newark residents in hiring. Likewise, this concept was emphasized in subsequent communications from the Personnel Committee to Mr. Tyson. The claim of a systematic plan to exclude Newarkers from UCC jobs was also refuted by the testimony of Msgr. Dooling and Dean Heckel. Msgr. Dooling testified on pages 17-18 of the minutes of the September 9 hearing (exhibit 12) as follows: "Councilman BEn~csTEIN. Monsignor, to the best of your knowledge. u-hat efforts were made to hire bonn fide Newark residents at the exemption level? "Monsignor D00LING. I think every effort was made. As a matter of fact I was chairman of the Policy and Philosophy Committee of the United Com- munity Corporation and this is one of the things that w-as incorporated in the statement that wherever possible people from New-ark would be employed * * * * * * "I really think that a conscientious effort was made to follow the philosophy of FCC in the hiring of employees, but I think you must also coa~ider the quality of the people that had to be bired for these positions and their ava~labiIity. In other w-ords, you have to go by supply and demand and the various programs that started at the same time really drained the available people who could be qualified for these positions . . . I mean in the various cities and states. So that you w-ouid have a lot of programs in New York and have a lot of programs operating in our ow-ia state." Dean Heckel also testified (Pages 34 and 35 of Exhibit 12) that extensive efforts were made to seek New-ark people for positions, but that the prime con- sideration at the outset was to get the best qualified people for the executive jobs so vital to the functioning of the corporation. UCC records disclose that as of September 7, 1965, there were a limited num- l)er of Newark applicants for the "key" jobs at issue. As of September 7, ex- eluding the Executive Director, there were four key jobs, of which, three w-ent to New Jersey applicants, one of whom was a resident of Newark, one a resi- dent of Montclair. and the other a resident of New Providence. It is regrettable that the council committee did not pursue its intent to call representatives of the FCC Personnel Committee and the Pre-School Council as witnesses. Had they been called and interrogated regarding FCC employment PAGENO="1165" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3625 Policies and Pre-School Council employment policies, they would have shown the success in hiring Newark people for employment. More than 80% of the em- ployees come from Newark. If all of the foregoing information had been considered we seriously doubt that the council committee report would have charged an attempt to system- atically exclude Newarkers from jobs within 11CC. In each instance, the screening and selection sub-committee of the personnel committee, headed by Mr. Francis S. Quillan, Senior Vice-President of the Pru- dential Insurance Company, interviewed and did the screening of the applicants. The sub-committee through the personnel committee then submitted the list to the Executive Director who made the selection from such list pursuant to the procedure earlier described. It should be noted that there is no OEO or other agency regulation or direc- tive requiring that key personnel come from the city to be served. Many top staff positions in the muncipal government including the Board of Education in the City of Newark and elsewhere go to people outside of Newark, the objec- tive being to get the best man for the job. It is no different in CAP agencies. For example, the Executive Director of the Community Action Progiamn in Paterson is headed by a resident of New York. We recently noted that Mr. Ralph Zinn, a resident of the City of Newark, formerly Assistant Executive Director ofthe Human Relations Commission. had been selected as Executive Director of the Community Action Program for Plainfleld. It is apparent from the foregoing that the claim of a systematic plan to ex- clude Newarkers from jobs is without foundation; it is contrary to the facts, and contrary to the declared 11CC policy which has been carried out in the selection of employees. The committee conclusion in this regard is erroneous because it was based upon an inaccurate, partial listing of employees prepared by one of the members of the committee and it failed to duly consider the avail- able evidence. The alleged lack of relationship between salaries, background of employees and services to be performed; and claim of ecceessive salaries The committee report, page 5, referring to the Bernstein list. Exhibit 10, contends that this document demonstrates a "lack of correlation between salaries paid, background of recipients and services to be performed". An examination of the document discloses fOur headings, to wit, "Name-Position-Address- Salary". Nowhere does this document reflect the "background" of any of the people named, or the "nature of the services to be performed". While one may speculate as to the services to be performed by an "Executive Director" or a "Community Action Director" or any of the other job titles referred to, this would only be speculation and should not be relied upon to support a charge of `lack of correlation". The committee report contended that ". . . your Committee obtained factual information of great import . . ." and continued, "We will explain these facts before we examine the paramount legal and economic questions involved" (page 4). What were the facts available before the Committee to support the charge of lack of correlation? What efforts did the Committee take to ascertain the background of the persons hired by 11CC, or the job requirements, or com- parable salaries paid for comparable services? We respectfully submit that the Committee did not seek any facts in this area of their apparent concern, and even to the extent that they became in- directly available, the Committee chose to ignore them, and instead, to rely upon unsupported speculation. Only the Committee can answer why it pro- ceeded in this fashion. We know, and the hiring procedures hereinbefore des- cribed prove the precautions taken to assure the best possible men for the jobs to be filled. We know, and the facts prove the close relationship between back- ground of the employees hired and the duties required in the jobs they were hired to fill. Among the documents given the Council Committee on September 8 was a list of job summaries, explaining in brief the requirements for various jobs with 11CC. The Committee ignored this document and did not annex it to the report. We incorporated a copy of the job summaries in the Appendix as Exhibit XIV. Had the Committee called a representative of the Personnel Committee of 11CC, information on background of each person was available and would have PAGENO="1166" 3626 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 been provided. Why no such witness was called, although committee representa- tives said they would be called, only the Committee can answer. Nevertheless, to set the record straight, the following is the background of some of the people hired by FCC in "key" jobs. We have already reviewed Mr. Tyson's background and his obvious outstanding qualifications require no repe- tition. Mr. Wendell, Associate Director, had served as Executive Director of an agency and was Program Associate of CPI, the New Haven, Connecticut Com- munity Action Program Agency; Mr. Blair, Community Action Director, had been a senior probation officer with the Essex County Probation Department, with extensive knowledge of Newark and its problems and experience in com- munity action work; Mr. Alba, Personnel Director, was formerly Manager of the Personnel Department of two plants of Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co., located in Michigan and New Jersey. Why the Bernstein list saw fit to exclude Fleming Jones, Comptroller of FCC, we cannot explain. Perhaps this was because be resided in Newark when hired. Prior to becoming Comptroller of TJCC, be was employed in the Finance Department of the City of Newark and a graduate accountant. The foregoing discloses that in each instance, and without exception, men were selected for employment with TJCC based upon their prior experience and suitability for the position in question. And now to the salaries paid CCC employees and the question of whether they are excessive. We contend that the salaries paid by FCC are not excessive, are comparable, and in some instances, lower rated than salaries paid in similar municipal positions or other organizations engaged in Anti-Poverty work in the metropolitan area. It is regrettable that the Committee did not publish the salary information they gathered, if any, as the basis for comparison. This might have disclosed the error in the conclusion presented that FCC salaries are "out of line". Attached to the Appendix are five graphs which pictorially demonstrate bow FCC salaries compare with comparable jobs in comparable Anti-Poverty Agencies and with comparable jobs in the City Administration. Haryou Act and Mobiliza- tion for Youth were selected because it was felt that the areas each of them serve bear a close resemblance to the City of Newark, the area served by FCC. Exhibit XXI is an executive group salary comparison chart between FCC and Haryou Act. The median of salary ranges was used for the comparison. In every instance UCC salaries are low-er. Since moment has been made of the Executive's salary, it should be noted that Haryou Act's Executive receives $27,000, in con- trast to FCC's Executive who receives $23,000 now, or $24,000 in 1966. Exhibit XXII is the same type of chart, except that it compares UCC execu- tives to Mobilization for Youth executives. Without exception, the same fact appears, FCC salaries are lower. The MFY Executive Director receives $27,500. Exhibit XXIII is a comparison of Executive Group salaries actually paid, com- paring FCC to the City of Newark in related jobs. While job titles are not iden- tical we have compared jobs with similar job content to each other. Except for the Executive Director, and here the difference is limited to $500, all FCC jobs are scaled lower than the City jobs. It should also be noted that, while much inoment has been made of the Executive Director's salary in comparison to the Mayor's salary, the Superintendent of Schools and Executive Director of the Newark Housing Authority each receive salaries substantially in excess of the CCC executive, and also larger than the Mayor's. This is not intended as criti- cism of salaries paid to either of these men who have outstanding reputations and abilities. It merely reflects the need for fitting the man to the job and then pay- ing what is necessary to procure the best services for the community. Exhibit XXIV is a sample group of Administrative-Clerical jobs, based upon median of salary ranges, comparing FCC to Haryou Act and MFY. Once again, it is clearly demonstrated that FCC people are paid less. Exhibit XXV is the last chart. It compares administrative clerical jobs, based upon median salary ranges, as paid FCC and City of Newark employees. When the 30-hour week and overtime premium for City employees is compared to the 35-hour week and no overtime premium to FCC employees, the differential is widened even further, depressing FCC salaries lower again than those paid City of Newark employees. Thus when the facts are disclosed the glitter removed and FCC salaries are by no means excessive, or out of line with other comparable positions, and in point of fact are uniformly lower. In addition to thinking of the dollars paid for PAGENO="1167" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3627 each job we should not lose sight of the tremendous demands made upOn 11CC employees in terms of excessive hours of work required because of the nature of the problem that confronts us and the dedication of the 11CC employees to the task ahead. A comparison of hours worked would further demonstrate that 11CC employees and the jobs they hold face greater demands than persons employed in City Government. From the foregoing it can hardly be seriously argued that salaries paid and hours worked "demean the long standing Civil Service program activated by the Municipality". Moreover, there is no evidence that 11CC salaries have caused "serious morale problems among City employees". To the contrary, the only evi- dence is that Fleming Jones, the 11CC Comptroller has decided to return to work for the City, at a reported lower rate of pay. The attack upon salaries and the employees of 11CC is without merit. No facts have been presented to support the claim of excessive salaries or the claim that there was no rational basis for determining salaries. The evidence available, and which the Committee chose to ignore, is to the contrary, and further re- flects the prudent judgment exercised by the 11CC Trustees in discharging their community responsibility. UCU as a political instrumentality The report (page 4) charges 11CC with functioning as "a political action pres- sure group" because of its hiring policies and procedures, Its alleged excessive salary scales, and alleged utilization of "log rolling, and feather bedding" tech- niques in providing jobs for a select few. Nothing could be further from the world of reality than to make such charges. The contention that 11CC has been used as a political instrumentality is diamet- rically opposed to the conclusions of Congressman Adam Clayton Powell of the House Education and Labor Committee. Congressman Powell's representatives spent some time in Newark talking with people at all levels of the community, including members of the Council Committee. As reported in the press on De- cember 9, Congressman Powell said that 11CC is "politically pure" and even sug- gested that perhaps it has been too politically pure. We have abundantly demonstrated the care devoted to development of sound hiring practices and procedures. It is difficult to believe that the Committee intended to impugn the integrity of such outstanding community leaders as the Dean of the Rutgers Law School, a Senior Vice President of the Prudential Insurance Company, an executive of the New Jersey Bell Telephone Company, religious leaders of all faiths, and community leaders of all levels, by suggesting that 11CC has been permitted by them to assume the image of a political instru- mentality that warranted a resort to the adjectives used in the report to describe its activities. 11CC has studiously sought to avoid becoming a political instrument or vehicle. At a meeting of the Board of Trustees on February 1, 1965, attended by Councilman Bernstein, a resolution was adopted to "lay aside any political differences . . . and unite together for the common goal of eliminating the pov- erty and misery suffered by thousands of Newark Citizens." Thereafter, at a meeting of the Board of Trustees on August 19, a resolution on political activity was adopted by the Board requiring an elected Trustee to take a leave of absence from the Board during any period he or she was an "avowed candidate for public office" and permitting cancellation of membership in the Corporation if any Trustee "uses, attempts to use, or threatens to use the Corporation for political purposes." (Exhibit XXVI, Appendix) Once again we must examine the facts. The report (page 4) charges a lack of fiscal controls sufficient to prevent 11CC from. becoming a source for "a political grab bag or pork barrel". Such contention relies upon the testimony of the September 9th hearing, without in any way identifying the portiOn of the testimony relied upon, and, strangely enough; a "proposed budget which may not be available at this time"; centralization of control in Mr. Tyson; the Mrs. Berger letter; and excessive salaries. It should be noted that the Committee never sought any information with respect to the fiscal controls in effect in the 1100 operations. Nor was there any interrogation of witnesses with respect to fiscal accountability of 1100. In the letter of September 2, 1965 requesting information for the first hearing, the PAGENO="1168" 3628 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Committee asked for a statement of "funds appropriated, expended and pro- posed . . ." This information was provided in detail as requested. Subsequently, under date of September 10th, the Committee requested "bids submitted for office furniture and equipment". It was likewise provided. The report does not comment on either item. The concerns expressed in the report about the September 9th hearing (pages 6 and 7) and the political significance attached to the fact that "the Council Chambers were packed with patrons and beneficiaries of UCO" attribute a dif- ferent motive or purpose than in fact existed. The Council Committee convened a hearing on a matter of vital concern to the community. There is no evidence that 11CC exercised any influence or brought pressure to bear upon individuals or groups to attend and participate. The public expressions at the hearing were not the result of any 1100 actions designed to "pack" the Council chamber. Com- munity participation in the hearing was a positive expression of an awakening and a new and healthy vigor and spirit in the City of Newark. At the conclusion of the September 9th meeting Councilman Addonizio thanked the members of the 11CC who were present and participated, reflecting the spirit in which UCO and its representatives sought to assist the Council Committee in its investigation. The Chairman stated (exhibit 12; p. 51.): "The Committee at this time takes the opportunity to thank those in the audience for their demonstrating their interest in this vital area and also for their good conduct. I would like to thank the members of the United Community Corporation that are present and have participated this evening . . .". Such pronouncement reflecting the course and conduct of the hearing does not call for characterization of DCC participation as "packing the ball" or being "politically motivated" or "venturing to any extreme" to espouse a particular philosophy. The report refers to Mrs. Berger's letter (Ex. 11) as reflecting an "obnoxious employment practice" predicated on political loyalty as an indispensable ingredient. We deny the facts recited in the Berger letter as they relate to "loyalty" and suggest that she may have misunderstood or misheard the state- ment she repeated. However, in light of the details we have sci forth as to the hiring practices and policies pursued by DCC, the characterization of her "experience!' as an employment practice is unwarranted. The report questions the "propriety of former Board of Trustees members creating and taking high salaried positions on the DCC Programs". Presumably the Committee members bad reference to selection of personnel in the Pro-School Council and Blazer Programs. Once again, the facts belie the claim. No UCC Board of Trustee members have been given positions in either of these two programs. People who participated in conceiving these programs were hired by the Board of Trustees of these separate agencies to share in running these programs. Both the Pre-School Council and Blazer Youth Council are autonomous bodies not subject to control of DCC. They have their own Board of Trustees, Officers, hiring practices, etc. We agree, the Anti-Poverty Program should not be for political patronage, and are pleased to see the Committee report shares this concern. We also agree that "capability and need" are the factors to be utilized in hiring employees. The selec- tion of personnel for key jobs by Pre-School and Blazer has offered opportunity to those who conceived of the program to participate in its further de':elopment and has provided expression to the concept of "maximum feasible participation of the poor". The charge that high salaries, centralized control in the Executive, and ques- tionable fiscal responsibilities as evidences of the political structure of DCC are totally without merit. The evidence presented, evidence available but not considered by the Committee, and evidence it failed to seek, clearly establisl that DCC has been administered and functioned outside the arena of political involvement. The impact of UCU operations vpoa the bndget and taa rate Much moment is made in the Committee report that contribution of matching funds to UCC will seriously impair the city's fiscal structure (pages 8-10). How- ever, once again no substantial facts are offered to support such conclusion. We trust that disclosure of the following facts will generate a little more light and less heat to enable a more careful consideration of this question. PAGENO="1169" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3629 In the first year of TJCC existence, OEO grants and local contributions reflect the following summary: Received from OEO grants $3, 420, 771 Head Start grant 602, 940 Total OEO funds to Newark through FCC 4,023, 711 Contributions received: Cash: State 60, 000 City (initial) 15, 000 Board of education 15, 000 Welfare federation (FOP) 15, 000 City (supplement) 13, 503 Total cash 118, 503 In-kind: City (Block proposal) 17, 733 City (Senior citizens) 1,250 Community pledge (Blazer Council) 37, 640 Community and full-year pre-school 192, 969 Seton Hall 6, 800 Queen of Angel Church 3,025 Board of education 60, 300 Total in-kind 319, 734 Total in-kind contributions (Cash and for facilities and service) 438, 237 Net gain to Newark 3, 585, 490 While every dollar brought into the community does not have an immediate direct impact upon the tax structure, the end product of these programs will be economically beneficial to the city. For example, the City of Newark contributed $28,503.00 in cash to FCC during the first year of its existence. During this same period over $4,000,000 came into the community for community programs which will have an ultimate effect upon education cost, welfare costs, etc. Perhaps of most significance is the impact that the Blazer Youth Council Program will have, economically, in removing 200 welfare recipients from the relief roles, for a saving of $600,000 to the City. This one program will have an immediate effect on the city's economic concerns and is but a forecast of 110w ingenuity in program development can fulfill the objectives of the Economic Op- portunity Act in helping to eliminate poverty, bring about an improved social order in the city and, during this process, release city welfare and related funds to other city needs, thereby helping to stabilize the city's economy. There is nothing in the FCC programs that would place an undue burden on city finances. The evidence to date reflects that monies brought into the city were utilized in the organizational phase, plus interesting programs such as Pre-School, Blazer Youth Council, Head Start, Neighborhood Block Program, and the myriad of other programs regularly reported in the public press. The present budget which would bring well over $1,000,000 for which the city would be involved in a cost outlay of $33,000. This expenditure can hardly be conceived as seriously imparing the city's fiscal image. The conflict in philosophy between the council committee and UCU The Committee report (page 3) presents this conflict as one of "control" over Community Action agencies. Point three on page four of the Report charges, in part, that FCC "has espoused a philosophy which your Committee rejects." We have, heretofore, outlined our philosophy and how we feel we have pursued the objective of maximum feasible participation of the poor. Mr. Frederick 0. hayes, Chief of Field Operations in the Community Action Program Division of the Office of Economic Opportunity was reported in the Newark Evening News of Tuesday, November 9, 1965 as having".. . cited the FCC's neighborhood Anti- 80-084--67-pt. 4-74 PAGENO="1170" 3630 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 i'overty Boards, the Newark Pre-School Council and the Blazer Youth Council as outstanding efforts to involve ordinary citizens in the planning and operation of Poverty Programs". We do no seek the exclusion of the City Government from development of the UCO program. We have, heretofore, outlined our adherence to the concept of the total city-wide effort that must be pursued. We stand by this view and seek the cooperation of all segments of the city in the fulfillment of our mission. CONCLUSIONS We respectfully submit that the recommendations of the Council Committee majority report not be accepted. We concur in the recommendation of the minori- ty report and urge adoption by the Council. We have gone into considerable detail to outline the past and our vision for the future in waging the war on Poverty in Newark. It is unfortunate that many statements w-ere made that w-ere not factually supportable. We felt that the community had to know what the real facts are so that no erroneous presumptions be permitted to continue. It is our sincere hope that we can now jointly proceed to produce the imagina- tive creative program so sorely needed in our community to bring hope to those who seek to eliminate poverty from our midst. This can only be achieved through a total community-wide effort in which we earnestly seek the coopera- tion and assistance of the Mayor and City Council. Respectfully submitted, C. WILLARD HEOKEL, President, United Community Corporation. APPENDIX I PREPARED STATEMENT OF DEAN C. WH1~ARD HECKEL, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED COMMUNITY CORPORATION, SUBMITTED TO THE NEWARK MUNICIPAL COUNCIL COMMITTEE To STUDY THE ANTI-POVERTY PROGRAM-THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1965 The United Community Corporation welcomes the opportunity, afforded by an interested Newark Municipal Council, to report on the development of our City's Anti-Poverty Program. The study is well timed for it comes just about one year after the United Community Corporation was formed, as the invitation of the Mayor, by a group of civic minded citizens who represented many walks of life and community interests. The United Community Corporation as constituted today is made up of over five thousand members who live in, work in, or perform a direct service to Newark. Its members include government officials, business leaders, professionals, teachers, clergymen, social agency personnel and sup- porters, civic and group relations leaders. The Corporation's governing body is a Board of Trustees which reflects in its composition the community, including Mayor Addonizio and representatives of the Council who sit on the Board which meets monthly. It is important to note that the United Community Corporation Board is more than 50% non-white. This in itself is unique in American life, for it is rare that our minority groups have the opportunity to share so fully in any major decision making body. Of course, it is also a sad commentary in our society that poverty is so closely tied to the color of a man's skin or the fact that be may be an American of Hispanic Origin. The Board is headed by Officers which they elect annually. These men and women together with Standing Committee Chairmen make up an Executive Committee which has been meeting at least once a week since the inception of the United Comunity Corporation. When we undertook the responsibility for developing anti-poverty programs we were faced with the need for professional leadership. From the beginning, we came to the conclusion that the problems facing this City relative to poverty were so immense that only the most experienced leadership would do. Altogether we adhere to the philosophy that Newark deserves the best. As we see it, these are critical years in our Nation's history, and Newark itself is, like other major cities, deep in crisis. Nevertheless, we have deep faith in our community and its future. We set up a Personnel Committee under the Chairmanship of the PAGENO="1171" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967~ 3631 late Peter V. B. Schuyler, Jr., an early DCC supporter and leader. That Com- mittee searched this community, it searched the entire country. Numerous men with varying qualifications were heard from. Finally, after several months we were fortunate to convince one of the nation's most talented and creative men to come here. Having had experience in one of the forerunners of the Anti-Poverty Pro- grams, Haryou, where he was Project Director of a study of Central Harlem which produced "Youth in the Ghetto" and Acting Director Of HARYOU-ACT, the implementing agency, Cyril D. Tyson was uniquely qualified to guide the program. In the short time that he has been here he has been able to create, out of nothing, and Community Action Program which many cities envy. No one active in this City could deny the impact of Tyson's work. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNITED COMMUNITY CORPORATION It should be pointed out that the development of. the United Community Oorporation also involved growing pains. This is understandable in light of the fact that we started with no real guidelines. The Economic Opportunity Act itself was new and revolutionary. Everybody was feeling his way in uncharted waters, even the Federal Government was not quite certain of its course. These difficulties included making up a Board. As we look back today, we discover that there are still many inadequacies. Perhaps there ought to be a wider range of community and governmental representatives to help in dealing with the Anti-Poverty battle. Most important, while the ratio of poor has improved on the Board due to an increase in number and an effort to. add poor to the nominated slate, we are still not satis'fied with their share. In addition to these problems, we faced many others. During our early days when the staff was small, we were being pressed into immedate acton and the need for programs. This made it impossible for us to study every initial under- taking as carefully as some Board Members would have liked. This was, at times, somewhat frustrating. Nevertheless, the programs that were approved and subse- quently funded, seem to be working quite well and effectively. Finally, in spite of a concentrated effort it has grieved us that we have not as yet found enough local talent for all staff positions. This is unfortunate, but we still believe that we are obligated to bring Newark the best. It should also be noted that of thirty-four employees, twenty-six reside in Newark, five in Metropolitan Essex County, one in Union County and two in New York. PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT The United Community Corporation received its first program development grant of $184,122.00 in February of this year. Approximately one-third of the funds or $56,700.00 was allocated for the development of the first three of the nine area boards that would be the organizing and community action vehicles for the impoverished of Newark. The first three area boards are: Area #1, Project; Concern-Area #2, "Op- eration We Care"-Area #3, Peoples' Action Group, all located in the Central Part of the City. They have trustees elected by the residents of their particular geographical area and are in various stages of program development and refining of their organizational structure. The United Community Oorporation has re- ceived an additional grant that provides for the development of three more area boards. Preliminary organizing meetings were held last week in two areas; North- east Newark and Ironbound and the organizing meeting for Dayton will be held this week. Within the next two months the Corporation will apply for funds to organize the poor in the last three areas of the City; Northwest Newark, Wee- quahic and Vaiisburg. At the completion of this process the City of Newark, which has been deeclared a depressed area by the Federal Government, will be com- pletely organized as part of the process of providing full participation by the poor in anti-poverty progranuning. AREA BOARD REPRESENTATIVES IN PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY It has been necessary, because of the urgent needs of the City, to collapse time and work on .a nUmber of levels at the same time, in order to insure that programs were funded even while the systematic involvement of the poor in program development was being organized. An explanation of the various levels PAGENO="1172" 3632 I~CONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 of program development may enhance your understanding of the aims and goals of the United Community Corporation. At the same time that the communities were in the process of developing area boards, the Corporation was requesting those same communities to elect tem- porary representatives to various program development committees that were planning city-wide programs. As a result of this process, the poor participated in the development of the Newark Pre-School Council and are represented on the Council's Board of Trustees. The Council is the delegate agency for the development of year-round pre-school programs in churches and social agencies that have had no prior experience in the field of child care. Area Board repre- sentatives were part of the Personnel Committee established by the Board of Education to recruit and screen individuals who applied for positions as Teacher Aide and Teacher In Training, in the Operation "Head Start" Program that provided nearly 3,000 children with a summer pre-school experience. More than 300 community residents were employed in this program. Area Board representatives participated as an Advisory Committee to the Police Athletic League, in their administration of the Summer Neighborhood Block Recreational Program, and a sub-committee was part of the Personnel Committee that recruited and screened community residents for employment in the program. Area Board Representatives are provided for in the Constitution of the Blazer Community Employment Training Program which has received approval by the Office of Economic Opportunity to edminister a work training program for 200 welfare recipients. Area Board representatives participated in the development of the Small Business Development Center Proposal and will be members of the governing body. This program to be funded under Title IV of the Economic Opportunity Act, is now pending in Washington. Another pro- gram pending approval in Washington is a proposal to provide Legal Services to the Poor. Area Board representatives participated in the planning of this pro- posal and will be represented on the Board of the Administering Corporation. Area Board representatives constitute an Advisory Committee to tii e Sen ior Citizens Commission, which has a sub-contract to develop a city-wide Senior Citizens Program to be presented to the Office of Economic Opportunity for funding. In addition, there are two programs in various stages of planning; City-wide Remedial and Tutorial Program, and City-Wide Arts and Culture Prograims which have area board representatives. There are I)OSitiOflS available on the Policy Boards of these programs for Area Boards that are not yet devel- oped. What the Corporation is articulating here, gentlemen. is the right of the poor to participatae in anti-poverty programs, not only as recipients of a service, but as program developers, employees and policy makers. THE ROLE OF TASK FORCES While the process of developing community organizations was proceeding, and while temporary representation in all areas of city-wide program develop- ment was secured from the developing area boards, the United Community Cor- poration was entertaining proposals that were approved by the relevant Task Force which is a sub-committee of the Program Committee of the Corporation. These Task Forces, composed of residents of New-ark who are members and non- members of the Corporation evaluate proposals and recommend to the Board of Trustees courses of action. The Task Forces are usually chaired by members of the Corporation. The Education Task Force approved "Operation Head Start," administered by the Board of Education, The Queen of Angels' Summer Remedi- ation Program; the Seton Hall High School Head Start Summer Program; the Newark Pro-School Council Program and the Mount Carmel Guild Pre-School Readiness Opportunity Project (PROP). The Employment Task Force approved the Jewish Vocational Service Career Oriented Preparation for Employment Proposal (COP), The Blazer Council Work Experience Proposal; and the Mount Carmel Guild Youth Chance Proposal. The Community Action Task Force approved the proposals for the development of the area boards and their houn- daries; and the Summer Neighborhood Block Recreational Program sponsored by the Police Athletic League. All programs which have received funds from the government, did not go through this process. Approval of the Corporation was not required in all in- stances of programs emanating frOm Metropolitan Newark. However, where such approval was required or requested by the Office of Economic Opportunity, it was provided by the Corporation. These programs included: The Housing Authority Neighborhood Youth Corp Proposal, the Board of Education Work PAGENO="1173" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3633 * Study Proposal, the City Administration's Neighborhood Youth Corp Proposal, the Welfare Title V Work Experience Proposal and the Bureau of Employment Service Youth Opportunity CenterProposal. RESTRUCTURING THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES The Third process going on simultaneously was the restructuring of the Board of Trustees of the Corporation. As you are aware, `the United Community Cor- poration is an `open membership organization. Anyone living, working or hav- ing a major interest in Newark can become a member of the Corporation by simply filling out a membership blank. It is the membership that elects the Board of Trustees. At the first annual meeting the membership expressed their desire to allow for voting at large for some members of the Board of Trustees, along with the aJ)proval or disapproval of a slate of Board Members arrived at through open meetings provided by the Nominating Committee as a vehicle for expansion of Board Membership. As indicated earlier, the `Corporation is presently consider- ing recommendations to the membership that will further expand the Board to provide specific representation from all area boards and increased representa- tion from city agencies, commissions and departments. It seems quite clear to me that as the Corporation organizes the poor on a city-wide basis to attack poverty, that the membership of the Board of Trustees must reflect this larger commitment. Therefore the need for systematic representation by the area boards and the city on the Board of Trustees. It was also recognized that many of the programs would touch on the lives of youth under twenty-one and the Corporation thought that .young people of high school age should have the opportunity to be involved in the decision making process concerning programs `that affect the city in which they live. In `addition, it w-ould provide the basis for participating in the democratic process while ex- posing the adults to insights on `the needs of youth. To meet this objective, `the age for membership in the Corporation was lowered from twenty-one to fifteen. THE DELINEATION OF PRIORITIES Finally, the Corporation perceived that the real challenge was in utilizing the funds available in a creative way. This required an over-all plan, and priorities that related to the amount of monies available and the needs of the City. The beginning approach utilized by the Corporation recognized the need for as many Neighborhood Youth Corp Programs as possible as long as they were not conflicting with one another. The City Administration had taken the initia- tive, and received the first Neighborhood Youth Corp grant in the country. The Housing Authority has a similar grant training youth in their facilities and Mount Carmel Guild will be training youth under this program in affiliated institutions. The Jewish Vocational Service Program in this area will provide training in social work and recreational agencies. However, plans had to be made to create the additional steps needed to. make the under twenty-one youth em- J)loyable. Where would he go after the training program ended? The present plan is to move to expand the social service programs of various agencies in Newark with pre-professional and sub-professional jobs allocated in the ex- panded budget. In addition, the `Corporation will move for expanded On-Job- Training Programs. Both of these approaches allow for the involvement of Neighborhood Youth Corp individuals `after graduation or at any time that the Counsellors shall determine .a youth has the aptitude for such areas of em- ployment. Of course, the regular labor market is available but has not been adequate for the needs `of Newark especially for minority group youth which constitute a clear m'ajority of the youth unemployed. The second priority was in the area of preventative programming. The Cor- poration allocated in the first fiscal year its Title II funds to Education. We have set in motion year round pre-school educati'on, which has since been recommended to all communities by the Federal Government. We are also working closely with the Board of Education to link the anti-poverty act with the Education Act for the benefit of the City. We have now m'oved to the third priority level, the Expansion of Social Agency Services. In our first meeting with representatives of all the agencies in Newark, the Corporation outlined aims and goals. Of course, some of the organizations are represented on our Board of Trustees and most of them are affiliated with Welfare Federation which is represented on our Board of Trus- PAGENO="1174" 3634 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 tees. We shared with them the need to plan expansion of programs and requested that they involve representation from the area board, in which they. are located, to participate in the planning. In addition, we. requested that they reconsider the criteria by which they determine eligibles, to their Board of Trustees to allow for greater participation of the poor in a policy, level position. All of these processes have been going on in .seven short months since Federal Funds were received. We will cOntinue to be sensitive to the needs to evolve a' Corporation that represents the interests of the poor for we are, in fact, custodians of their monies. PARTICIPATION OF MUNICIPAL AGENCIES Upon recommendation of the Executive Committee of the United Community Corporation, the Mayor established a Coordinating Committee for the develop- ment of human resources under the Business Administrator. This Committee, composed of representatives from agencies and organizations that receive or could receive anti-poverty funds, or funds through other relevant legislation meets bi-w-eekly. It is a vehicle for keeping the Mayor informed on all matters relating to program activities. The Corporation has contracted with the Senior Citizens Commission of Newark to prepare a city-wide proposal for programs for the elderly. The Board of Education administered the "Head Start" Program and has participated in the planning of Educational Programs by our delegate agencies. The City Museum is participating along with the Mayor's O~ce in the development of a proposal for a city-wide Ar.ts and Culture Program. The Department of Welfare is scrbening welfare recipients as prospective trainees in the Blazer Council Work Training Program. The Police Department, through the Police Athletic League, was the delegate agency which admini.stered the Summer Neighborhood Block Recreation Improvement Program, which provided recreation, camp ex- perience, and work training opportunities for Newark youth. Finally, the Bureau of Employment Service, Division of Employment Security have provided counselling and guidance services for various Neighborhood Youth Corp Projects and has been utilized as a source of staff recruitment, screening and evaluating candidates for this Corporation. The late President John F. Kennedy in his inaugural address stated that the torch has been passed on to a new generation and implored communities to be- gin the reconstruction of democracy. We have begun in the City of Newark. The United Community Corporation has dedicated itself to creating a better day for citizens, some of whom have suffered for generations from the ravages of unequality and poverty. With the help of the City Council, the Mayor and the community itself, we will win this fight. APPENDIX II NEWARK MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, Newark, N.J., September 2, 1965. Dean WILLARD C. HECKEL, President. United Community Corporation, Newark, N.J. DEAR D~x HECKEL: Pursuant to a motion made, seconded and duly adopted at the Newark Municipal Council meeting. President Viilani appointed Council- men Addonizio, Bernsten and Turner a Council Committee to Study the Anti- Poverty Program. This is to advise you that the committee has started the study of this program and will hold its first public hearing at 8 p.m., Thursday. September 9. 1965 in the Council Chamber, City Hall, Newark. You are invited to appear before the committee at that time. It is requested that a list of all Anti-Poverty Programs, proposed programs, complete personnel file on all employees, a list of employees by name, title, duties, salary and residence: and funds appropriated, expended and proposed be made available to the committee by 10 a.m., Wednesday, September 8, 1965. A staff member of this committee will be in touch with you to personally expedite delivery of this information. . . . . . Sincerely yours, . . , FRANK ADnoNIzIo, Chairman, Comm.~ttee'toStv.dy Au~ti-Poverty~Program~ PAGENO="1175" ECONOMIC* OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3635 APPENDIX III `"```UNITED COMMUNITY `CORPORATION, Newark, N.J., September 8, 1965. Hon. FRANK ADDONIZIO, Chairman, Committee to Study A~iti-POverty Program, Newark Municipal Council, Newark, N.J. DEAR COUNCILMAN ADD0NIzI0: This will acknowledge receipt of your letter dated September 2, 1965, addressed to me as President of the United Community Corporation, received at the corporation office on September 3, 1965. Despite the intervening Labor Day national holiday and the short notice of the information you requested, I arranged with the Executive Director of the cor- poration to have the staff prepare all of the material you requested for your Council Committee relating to the study of the Anti-Poverty Program you are undertaking. This will also acknowledge your invitation to appear before the Council Com- mittee at its first public hearing to be held on Thursday, September 9, 1965, at 8:00 p.m. Enclosed herewith please find the following documents requested: 1. List of all Anti-Poverty programs, in the City of Newark indicating those funded through our corporation as the OEO agency in Newark, and those other- wise funded. 2. List of all presently proposed programs, including programs awaiting ap- proval of Washington, and programs in the process of formulation. 3. Personnel roster of employees of the corporation by name, residence, title and salary. 4. Statement of job summaries for each job title. 5. Financial report showing all funds appropriated, expended, and proposed, including funds channeled through our corporation or, to our knowledge, other- wise funded, as it relates to the Anti-Poverty program in the City of Newark. Our complete personnel files on all employees are in our office and available for inspection by you or any member of your committee or your authorized staff representative. I suggest you communicate with Sidney Reitman of Kapelsohn, Lerner, Leuchter & Reitman, legal counsel to the corporation, to arrange for such inspection as you desire and is appropriate. We regret that we have not had the opportunity to meet with you and your legal counsel to discuss procedures to be followed at the proposed hearings. It was and still is our view that such a conference is proper, would clarify pro- `cedural problems that will otherwise arise, and would avoid unnecessary delay or confusion in the conduct of the hearings. Under the circumstances, we are prepared to participate in the manner in which we assume the hearing should be conducted, with appropriate opportunity to be afforded us to fully and properly disclose the participation of our corporation in the War on Poverty in Newark. We renew our request for a conference on procedure and await your response. You may communicate directly with my office at the Law School for such purpose or may make arrangements to meet through legal counsel, as you propose. Sincerely yours, APPENDIX IV C. WILLARD HECKEL, President. NEWAIiK MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, Newark, N.J., Sept ember 10, 1965. Dean C. WILLARD HECKEL, President, United Comntnnity Corporation, Newark, N.J. DEAR DEAN HECKEL: Will you please furnish the Council Committee to Study the Anti-Poverty Program a copy of the following: 1. Oontract with Mr. Tyson. 2. All amendments to the By-Laws. 3 Bids submitted for office furniture and equipment 4 Records of minutes of meeting approvmg By Laws 5. Original `application `of every employee on the' U.C.O. payroll. ` PAGENO="1176" 3636' ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 6. List of members of the Personnel Committee; number in attendance at these meetings, whether in person or by proxy and how often the committee meets. Sincerely yours, FRANK ADDoNIzIo, Chair'nuIn, Coinm4ttee to Study the Anti-Po~erty Program. APPENDIX V UNITED COMMUNITY CORPORATION, Newark, N.J., September 29, 1965. Councilman FRANK J. ADDONIZIO, City of Newark, City Hail, Newark, N.J. DEAR COUNCILMAN AD1xNIzI0: The United Community Corporation has in good faith been furnishing to your investigating committee of the City Council infor- mation requested bearing on the Corporation. We certainly have every intention of fully informing the Council. We of the Executive Committee of the Corpora- tion were, therefore, very much shocked to learn of the way in which Council- man Bernstein is using the information supplied to him in his official capacity as a member of the committee. I am enclosing a copy of a leaflet that I understand was distributed by Council- -* man Bernstein. We consider this to be a very improper use of the information furnished the Council. It is also extremely unfair to the individuals involved and subjects them to possible harassment. We certainly concede the issue of whether the Corporation is or is not hiring too many non-residents to be a legitimate, issue over which people can be in disagreement. We also consider that the matter of salaries is a legitimate issue. We do not consider that per- sonalities have any place in the matter. The Executive Committee has therefore asked me to request a meeting in the immediate future to discuss the handling of future material to be given to your committee of the CounciL We must respectfully decline to furnish additional information until such a conference is held. Sincerely yours, C. WILLARD HECKEL, President. APPENDIX VI OCTOBER 20, 19(35. Hon. FRANK ADD0NIzI0, C/ma irman, Committee To Study Antipoverty Program, Newark ~1tuncipa1 Council, Newark, N.J. DEAR COUNCILMAN ADDoNIzro: In response to your letter of September 10th and following our conference of October 7th, enclosed herew-ith please find the following documents requested of our Corporation: - 1. Employment Contract between Cyril D. Tyson, Executive Director, and the Corporation, dated December 21, 1964. 2. Amendments to By-Laws indicating original language, amendments, and dates of amendments. 3. Bids submitted for office furniture and equipment from Brenner Desk Co., dated March 24, 1965; Max .BIau & Sons, Inc., dated April 12, 1965, letter to Max Blau advising him that contract was given to another firm whose bid was lower; Amical Television Co., for air conditioners, dated May 12, 1965; and Olivetti Un- derwood Corporation for typewriters dated May 5, 1965. 4. Copies of minutes of Board of Trustees meeting of November 2, 1964 ap- proving By-Laws; notice and minutes of Special Membership Meeting of Feb- ruary 1, 1965 adopting amendments to By-Laws; and notice and minutes of An- nual Membership Meeting of May 27, 1965, adopting amendments to By-Laws. 5. Copies of original application for employment of all persons currently employed by the Corporation. 6. List of members of Personnel Committee, including Sub-Committee meet- ing dates, and statementregarding attendance and proxies.. In addition to the foregoing, we are enclosing herewith a current copy of the PAGENO="1177" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3637 By-Laws of the Corporation, corrected because of some minor errors in tran- scription in the copy of the By-Laws submitted to you at the hearing of Sep- tember 9, 1965. We also wish to call to your attention that a bid on the air conditioners was submitted by Fedders Corporation. Such bid was higher than Amical and there- fore rejected. Copy of the Fedders bid was misplaced. We have attemi~ted to obtain a duplicate from Fedders but they advice their copy was destroyed. If you desire verification of this, I suggest you communicate with Bedford Air Conditioning, 675 Springfield Aveune, Newark, New Jersey. With respect to the typewriters, we also had a verbal bid from IBM on electric typewriters, which was lower on the electric machines than Olivetti, based upon the specifications. Accordingly, electric machines were purchased through IBM. Manual machines were purchased from Olivetti Underwood because their price was the lowest, based upon the specifications. We trust that the enclosures will assist you in your deliberations and that your inquiry will soon be concluded. You indicated at the meeting of September 9th that additional witnesses might be called. In such event, we would appre- ciate as much advance notice as possible to avoid unnecessary conflicts in sched- ules. Very truly yours, C. WILLARD HECKEL, President. APPENDIX VII UNITED COMMUNITY CORPORATION BY-LAWS, AS AMENDED BY MEMBERSHIP MEETING, MAY 27, 1965 ARTICLE I. MEMBERS SEcTION 1. Any citizen 15 years of age or over who is a resident, or works in, or performs a service to the City of Newark, is eligible to become a member upon written application to the Secretary of the Corporation. The membership of the Corporation shall consist of a minimum of 75 persons, with no limitation on maximum number, and a member shall participate solely as a person and not as a representative of any organization. Membership shall continue for four years or until terminated by death, resignation, and at the end of four years shall be renewed upon application in writing to the Secretary of the Corporation. SECTION 2. No member requesting or admitted to membership less than three months prior to the annual meeting shall be eligible to vote at said annual meet- ing. No member shall be allowed to cast a proxy ballot for any officer or Tiustee of the Corporation. SECTION 3. The procedure for becoming a member of the Corporation shall be well publicized in the leading local papers of the Newark area four months prior to each annual meeting of the Corporation. * SECTION 4. The functions of the membership body shall be to elect the Board of Trustees and the officers of the Corporation and to receive and review- the annual program and financial reports of the Corporation, and to approve such major actions of the Corporation as the Board of Trustees deem advisable to submit to the consideration of the entire membership. Members shall be encour- aged to serve on various task forces of the Corporation and they may attend as observers all meetings of the Board of Trustees. SECTION 5. The Board of Trustees shall be authorized to establish a procedure for cancelling the membership of a person for cause and for reinstatement as a member of the Corporation when cause for removal has been cured. ARTICLE IT. BOARD OF TRUSTEES SECTION 1. The business of the Corporation shall be conducted, subject to these by-laws, by a Board of Trustees, the majority of whom shall be residents of Newark, and all of whom shall be directly concerned with the welfare of the City of Newark. SEcTION 2. The Board shall be composed of the Mayor, two members of the City Council, the President of the Board of Education, the Superintendent of Schools and the following number of persons to be elected by the members of the Corporation: forty-eight until the annual meeting of members in 1965; fifty- PAGENO="1178" 3638 ECONOMIC OPPORTLTNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 three thereafter until the annual meeting of members in 1966; fifty-eight there- after until the annual meeting of members in 1967; and sixty-three thereafter. The seven remaining members of the City Council shall be honorary members of the Board of Trustees. Trustees elected by the members of the Corporation shall not represent but should be representative of government, social agencies, busi- ness and labor, religions and ethnic groups, and youth as well as those in the community who are to benefit from the work of the Corporation. Elected Trustees shall serve a three year term and shall be divided into three classes so that one- third shall be elected each year. Elected Trustees may serve only two successive terms. SEcTIoN 2a. At the end of the first year, May 1965, the term of office of one- third of original 48 elected Trustees (16) shall terminate. Similarly, the term of office of 16 original elected Trustees shall terminate at the end of the second and third year. Elected Trustees whose term of office terminates in the first three years will be eligible for only one successive term even if they have only served one or two years. Five Trustees shall be added to the number of Trustees to be elected each year until the year 1967 when the elected Trustees shall number 63. SEcTIoN 3. The Board of Trustees shall submit at each annual meeting of the members of the Corporation a full report of the condition and finances of the Corporation. together with a review of the activities of the Corporation during the preceding year. SEcTIoN. 4. If the office of any Trustee becomes vacant, the remaining Trustees, by a majority vote, may elect a successor who shall bold office for the unex- pired term. SEcTIoN. 5. The Trustees shall have power to provide for the appointment of committees. SECTIoN 6. A Trustee, may in writing, at the time of the meeting or prior thereto, file with the President or the Secretary the name of a person of his choosing to vote his proxy at any of the meetings of the Board of Trustees, ex- cept for the election of officers and the expenditure of funds. Such authorization may be revoked by said Trustee in writing at the meeting or prior thereto. SEcTIoN 7. An elected Trustee who is physically absent from three consecu- tive meetings of the Board, and whose absences are not justified, will be dropped from the Board. ARTICLE UI. OFFICERS AND COMMITTEES SEcTIoN 1. The officers of the Corporation who must be 21 years of age or older, shall be a President, not more than five Vice Presidents, a Secretary, not more than two Assistant Secretaries, a Treasurer, and not more than two Assistant Treasurers. An Honorary President and not more than two Honorary Vice Presidents may also be elected. The officers shall be elected annually by the Board of Trustees at its first meeting following the annual membership meeting. The officers shall be elected from amongst the members of the Board of Trustees elected at the same annual meeting. SECTION 2. The term of office of each officer shall be from the time of hi~ elec- tion until the election of his successor. In the case of the absence of any officer and of any person herein authorized to act in his place, the Board of Trustees from time to time may delegate the powers and duties of such officer to any other officers or to any Trustee whom it may select. The Board of Trustees shall have the power to fill any vacancy in any office at any time for the unexpired term. SECTION. 3. The President shall preside at all meetings of the members of the Corporation and at all meetings of the Board of Trustees and its Exucutive Committee. He shall have the powers and perform the duties incident to his office. He shall also have such other powers and perform such other duties as may be assigned to him by the Board of Trustees and the membership. He shall sign all warrants drawn on the treasurer in accordance with any authorization of the Board of Trustees. SECTION 4. During the absence of the President, the Vice Presidents, in the order designated by the President, shall have the powers and perform the duties of the President. They shall also have such other powers and perform such other duties as may be assigned to them by the Board of Trustees or the President. SECTION 5. The Secretary shall cause all minutes and records of the Corpora- tion to be made and kept in proper order. He shall also have such ot.her powers and j~erform such other duties as may be incident to his office or may be assigned to him by the Board of Trustees or the President. PAGENO="1179" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3639 SECTION 6. `The As,si'stant Secretaries, during the absence of the Secretary, in the order designated by the Secretary, shall have the `powers and perform the duties of the Secretary. Each Assistant Secretary shall also have such other powers and perform such other duties as may be assigned `to `him by the Board of Trustees, the Presi'dent or the Secretary. SECTION 7. The Treasurer shal'l cause all monies belonging to the Corporation to be deposited and disbursed in accordance with the directions of the Board of Trustees. No monies shall be disbursed by him except on warrant signed by the President, a Vice President or the Executive of the Corporation. He shall keep account of the financial affairs of the Corporation and render such statements in such forms and at such times as the Board of Trustees from time to time may prescribe. He shall also have such other powers and perform such other duties as may be incident to his office or may be assigned to him by the Board of Trustees or the President. SECTION S. The Assistant Treasurers, during the absence of the Treasurer, in the order ` designated by the Treasurer, shall have the powers and perform the dutIes of the Treasurer. Each Assist'ant Treasurer shall also have such other powers and perform such other duties as may be assigned to him by the Board of Trustees, the President or the Treasurer. SECTION 9. The officers of the Corporation and the Chairmen of the Standing Committees shall constitute the Executive Committee. The President of the Cor- poration shall be the Chairman of the `Executive Committee. It shall meet at regular intervals between Board meetings. The Executive Committee shall be directly responsible to the Board. It may rule on questions relating to policy already taken. It may not initiate new policy, but it may recommend policy to the Board. Its function is to facilitate the operation of the Corporation. SECTION 10. The Standing Committees to be appointed by the President from among the members of the Corporation are the Nominating Committee, the Pro- gram Committee, the Budget and Finance Committee, the Personnel Committee and the Membership Committee. ARTICLE IV. NOMINATIONS AND ELECTIONS * SECTION 1. Nominations for Trustees and officers shall be submitted to the membership by a Nominating Committee. This Committee shall consist of 4 members of the Board of Trustees and 5 members of the Corporation w~ho are not Trustees. The Chairman of the Nominating Committee shall be one of the 4 Trustees. SECTION 2. The Nominating Committee shall hold an open meeti'ng at least six weeks prior to the annual meeting when they shall receive suggestions, written and oral from `the membership for nominations. Due notice of the open meeting shall be given to the membership. They shall thereafter meet to consider a sla'te of Trustees and officers. The Committee shall use as its guide line the stated purpose of the Corporation that members of the Trustees "shall not represent but should be representative of government, social agencies, business and labor, religious and ethnic groups, and youth as well as those in the community who are to benefit from the work of the Corporation." A balance of these groups shall always be maintained within the Board of Trustees. SECTION 3. The Nominating Committee shall report to the Secretary no later than one mouth prior to the date of the annual meeting its slate of 16 (out of the 21) Trustees for election at such annual meeting. These names shall be included in the written notice of `the annual meeting sent to all members of the Corporation. SECTiON 4. The membership shall elect 21 Trustees at the annual meeting. In addition to the slate `of 16 proposed by the Nominating Committee, 5 shall be nominated from the floor at the annual meeting. From among those nominated from the floor, those who receive the 5 highest number of votes shall be elected. *The above Article IV was a new article adopted as an amendment at the membership meeting of May 27, 1965. not intended to be a substitute for the Article IV theretofore in effect. The May 27, 1965 membershIp meeting was unable to complete consideration of all amendments set forth in the notice of meeting because of the lateness of the hour resulting frOm the election of Trustees. No action was taken to alter the old Article IV which Is therefore carried In the within By-Laws as an additional Article IV which will be submitted for revision to read Article V and the subsequent Articles advanced one in number, with such amendments as `may be' proposed, at ` the membership meeting to be convened to complete consideration of proposed amendments to the By-Laws. As herein- after noted, action was taken with respect to the old Article VII renumbering It Article VIII and adopting amendment thereto. This will not require renumbering Article VIII at the membership meeting to be convened for the purpose of completing action on the proposed amendments. ` ` ` ` ` PAGENO="1180" 3640 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The manner of election, whether by paper ballot or voting machine, shall be deter- mined by the Board of Trustees. APPENDIX VIII. EXTRACT, B~r~&ws OF UCC, AS SUBMITTED TO CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE * * * * * ARTICLE IV. OTHER PERSONNEL SECTION 1. The Board of Trustees shall employ an Executive Director who shall be responsible for all operations of the Corporation, subject to the direction of the Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees may also employ such other office and professional personnel, and retain such consultants, or subcontract with ex- isting community agencies, as may seem necessary or desirable to the Board of Trustees in order to attain the proper performance of the purposes of the Corporation. SECTION 2. Educational institutions, or `individuals designated by the Board of Trustees may be the agent of the Trustees responsible to the Board of Trustees for evaluating research associated with the Corporation. and for designing and carrying out research, for the administration of projects proposed by the Board of Trustees and shall have the authority necessary to execute these responsibilities. ARTICLE V. MEETINGS SECTION 1. The annual meeting of the members of the Corporation shall be held on the fourth Thursday in May, in each year, at such time and place in Newark as shall be designated by the Board of Trustees and stated in the notice of the meeting. If in any year the fourth Thursday in May shall fall on a legal holiday, the annual meeting of the members of the Corporation shall be held on the following Wednesday. At least 20 days' written notice of each annual meeting shall be given to each member of the Corporation. SECTION 2. Other meetings of the members of the Corporation may be called at any time by the President and shall be called by the President upon the written request of a majority of the Board of Trustees or upon the written request of one- fourth in number of the members of the Corporation. Each special meeting shall be held at such time and such place as shall be designated by the President. At least ten days' written notice of each special meeting shall be given to the mem- bers of the Corporation, which notice shall contain a statement of the purpose of the meeting. SECTION 3. Seventy-five members shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any annual, regular or special meeting of the members of the Corporation, unless the representation of a larger number shall be required by law, and in such case the representation of the number so required shall constitute a quorum. If no quorum shall be present at any meeting, the meeting may be ad- journed from time to time until a quorum is obtained. SECTION 4. Regular meetings of the Board of Trustees shall be held at such times and such places as the Board of Trustees may determine. At least ten days' w-ritten notice of each regular meeting shall be given to each member of the Board of Trustees. SECTION 5. Special meetings of the Board of Trustees may be cafled at any tinie by the President and shall be called by him upon the written request of 15 mem- bers of the Board of Trustees. Each special meeting shall be held at such time and place as shall be designated by the President. At least ten days' written notice of each special meeting of the Board of Trustees shall be given to each member of the Board of Trustees, which notice shall contain .a statement of the purpose of the meeting. SECTION 6. A majority of the Trustees in office shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of business at any regular or special meeting of the Board of Trustees. If no quorum shall be present at any meeting, the meeting may be adjourned from time to time until a quorum is obtained. SECTION 7. Any notice of any meeting required to be given under these By-Laws may be waived in writing by the person entitled thereto, either before or after the holding of the meeting. ARTICLE vi. TASK FORCES SECTION 1. The Board of Trustees shall appoint task forces and chairman there- of from amongst the membership for the purposes of program planning, coordina- tion, research, community relations and for such other activity as will best effectuate the purposes of the Corporation. SECTION 2. The suggestions of the task forces, to be made in writing, are not PAGENO="1181" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3641 binding on the Board of Trustees, but shall be given serious consideration by the Trustees in their deliberations. SECTIoN 3. The Chairman of a task force shall preside at the meetings and appoint a secretary of the group to take the minutes. SECTION 4. The secretary shall provide all members of the task force with notice of each meeting and designate the time and place of such meeting. SECTION 5. The costs incurred for such meetings and other duly authorized activities of the task forces shall be, if approved by the Board of Trustees, paid by the Treasurer of the Corporation. ARTICLE vii. NON-LIABILITY OF MEMBERS AND CONTRIBUTORS* SECTION 1. No member of the Corporation and no contributor to the Corporation shall be liable for the acts or debts of the Corporation, its Board of Trustees, its agents or its representatives. ARTICLE viii. DISPOSITION OF ASSETS UPON TEItMINATION OF EXISTENCE SECTION 1. In the event of the liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Corporation, whether voluntary, involuntary, or by operation of law, the Trustees of the Corporation shall dispose of the assets of the Corporation by gifts to chari- table or educational institutions located in the City of Newark, New Jersey, which qualify for exemption from taxation under Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954'or similar provisions of future laws. ARTICLE IX. SEAL SECTION 1. The seal of the Corporation shall contain the name thereof, the State of its inCorporation, and the year of its incorporation. ARTICLE X. AMENDMENTS SEcTIoN 1. These By-Law-s may be amended, revised or repealed by two-thirds of those present at any annual, regular or special meeting of the members of the Corporation, provided written notice of the proposed action shall have been given by mail to each member at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting at which it is proposed; to take such action. ARTICLE IX. DISPOSITION OF ASSETS UPON TERMINATION OF EXISTENCE SECTION 1. In the event of liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Corpora- tion, whether voluntary, involuntary or by operation of law, the Trustees of the Corporation shall dispose of the assets of the Corporation by gifts to charitable or educational institutions located in the City of Newark, New Jersey, which qualify for exemption from taxation under Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1054 or similar provisions of future laws. ARTICLE X. SEAL SECTION 1. The seal of the Corporation shall contain the name thereof, the State of its incorporation, and the year of its incorporation. ARTICLE XI. AMENDMENTS SECTION 1. These by-laws may be amended, revised or repealed by tw-o-thirds of those present at any annual, regular or special meeting of the members of the Corporation, provided written notice of the proposed action shall have been given by mail to each member at least ten days prior to the date of the meeting at which it is proposed to take such action. APPENDIX IX UNITED COMMUNITY CORP. RECOMMENDATION TO BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE The Personnel Committee will select the members in concert with Mr. Tyson who will be satisfactory for top staff.t However, the choice among the Personnel Committee's approved candidates will be Mr. Tyson's. This recommendation was approved by the committee with Dr. Edward F. Ken- nelly voting no in principle. See footnote on Page. 3639. tDepartment Heads, Comptroller, Assistant Director, Legal. Counsel and Personnel Director. PAGENO="1182" 3642 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 APPENDIX X AGREEMENT Agreement made this 21st day of December 1964 between United Community Corporation, Newark, New Jersey (hereinafter called the "Employer") and Cyril Tyson, presently residing at 5700 Arlington Avenue, Bronx, New York (here- inafter called the "Employee"). Whereas, the Employer desires to secure the services of the Employee, and the Employee desires to work for the Employer, upon the terms and conditions here- inafter set forth, Now, Therefore, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter con- tained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Employment.-The Employer employs the Employee in an executive capacity to serve as Executive Director of the Employer. 2. Duties.-The Employee accepts such employment and agrees to devote his best efforts and his entire time to perform his duties hereunder which shall in- clude such executive services on behalf of the Employer as are of a character required by his executive position in the Employer. 3. Term.-The term of employment hereunder shall commence on January 1, 1965, and shall terminate on December 31, 1965 if either party serves ninety days advance written notice of cancellation; in the absence of such notice, the term shall renew automatically for one year under the same terms and conditions unless otherwise mutually agreed, and such renewal shall be repeated in sub- sequent years in the absence of said notice. However this contract may be ter- minated for just cause by the Employer with ninety days written notice at any time during the duration of contract. 4. Compensation-The Employer shall pay to the Employee for his services a salary payable on alternate Fridays at the rate of twenty-three thousand ($23,000) dollars per year during the calendar year 1965. and twenty-four thou- sand ($24,000) dollars per year during the subsequent calendar years. 5. Ewpenses.-The Employee shall be entitled to reimbursement from the Em- ployer for all travel and other expenses incurred by him on behalf of the Em- ployer or in connection with his duties hereunder and which in the opinion of the properly designated officials of the Employer seem reasonable and proper. The Employer shall reimburse the Employee in an amount not in excess of five hundred ($500) dollars for out-of-pocket moving expenses not exceeding that amount incurred by the Employee in moving his residence from New York to Newark, New Jersey in order to assume his duties hereunder. 6. It is understood that the arrangement for vacation, retirement, disability and sick leave as developed in the manual for all employees, will apply to Mr. Tyson. 7. Blue Cross-Blue ~hield.-The Employer will arrange for and pay Blue Cross and Blue Shield protection for the Emp1oyee.~ 8. Entire Agreement.-ThiS Agreement and the incorporated by laws contain the entire agreement between the parties hereto, and cannot be changed or ter- minated orally. 9. Situs.-This Agreement shall be governed and construed according to the laws of the State of New Jersey. 10. Bindery Effect.-This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Employer and its successors and assigns, and the Employee and his personal representatives. In Witness Whereof', the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. UNITED COMMUNITY CORP., By~ C. WILLARD HECKEL, CYRIL D. TYSON, APPENDIX XI UNITED COMMUNITY CORP. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, DECEMBER ~1, 1964, NEWARK, N.J. Present: Herbert Tate, Msgr. Joseph Doollng, Ralph Geller, Irving Rosenberg, Dr. Thomas Flagg (Proxy Mayor Addouizio), Zain Matos, Dr. Thomas Reynolds, Charles W. Garrison, Rev. B. F. Johnson, Miss Hhlda Hidalgo, Marshall Stalley, Francis S. Quillan, C. Willard Heckel, Rabbi Jonathan Prinz, Miss Dorothy PAGENO="1183" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3643 Gould, Peter V. R. Schuyler, Jr., Kenneth A. Gibson, Thomas F. Edwards, Abe L. Sudran, Lee Bernstein (Honorary), Frank Addonizio (Honorary), William D. Payne, Rev. John Green, Mrs. Helen Hoffman (Proxy Mrs. Arons), George C. Richardson, Walter Chambers, Irvine Turner, Rev. Earl Huff, Frank Loria, Mrs. Grace Malone. ~Presiding: C. Willard Heckel, President. Personnel Committee Report: Mr. Schuyler reported for the Personnel Com- mittee which had been charged with the responsibility of working out the arrangements with Mr. Tyson. (A copy of the contract signed by Mr. Tyson and Mr. Heckel is attached to and becomes a part of the original minutes of this meeting.) Mr. Schuyler further reported that the following policy was recommended by the Personnel Committee to the Board of Trustees. RECOMMENDED TO THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES FROM THE PERSONNEL COMMITTEE "The Personnel Committee will select the members in concert with Mr. Tyson who will be satisfactory for top staff.* However, the choice among the Personnel Committee's approved candidates will be Mr. Tyson's." *Department Heads, Comptroller, Assistant Director, Legal Counsel and Personnel Director. On motion properly made, seconded and unanimously voted, the policy for authority to hire staff as recommended by the Personnel Committee was adopted. RESOLUTION ON PHILOSOPHY WITH EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES AND PURCHASING "Therefore be it resolved: That, wherever possible preference will be given to residents of Newark in the hiring of personnel for the United Community Corporation." Program Committee report: Miss Hilda Hidalgo reported for the Program Committee as follows: The Program Committee has held only one meeting but it was very fruitful. The basic philosophy of the United Community Corporation is the guideline that the Program Committee and its Task Force will use in developing, evalu- ating and implementing programs. This basic philosophy calls for a unified coordinated approach in defeating poverty, an approach that relates to the rates of social pathology in Newark so that poverty can be corrected and arrested. As a way of work, U.C.C.'s basic philosophy demands that the victims of poverty be involved in the planning and the process. It was decided that the procedure to follow in submitting program proposals to the Corporation will be as follows: 1. All proposals will be directed to the Executive Director of the Corporation. 2. The Executive Director will study and make an initial evaluation of the proposal. As the staff of U.C.C. expands, the Executive Director will dele- gate the proposal to the appropriate staff person. 3. After study and staff evaluation the proposal will be sent to the appropriate sub-committee with the staff evaluation and recommendation. 4. The sub-committee will study and will make a report to the Program Com- mittee with its recommendations. 5. The Program Committee will consider the proposal and make a final recom- mendation to the Board of Trustees or the Executive Committee for final action. The report of the Program Committee was approved after being properly moved, seconded and unanimously voted. Attest: PETER V. R. SCHUYLER, Jr., Secretary. APPENDIX XII NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING To: Members United Community Corporation. From: Peter V. R. Schu~4er, Jr., Secretary. Mr. Willard Heckel, President of the United Community Corporation has asked me to inform you that there will be a special meeting of the members of the PAGENO="1184" 3644 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 United Community Corporation on Monday, February 1, 8 p.m. at the Quitman School Auditorium, 21 Quitman Street, Newark, N.J. The meeting has two objectives: 1. To get your reaction of the following amendment to the By-Laws: "Article.II, Section 2, to read as follows: `The Board shall be composed of the Mayor, two members of the City Council, the President of the Board of Education, the Superintendent of Schools and forty- eight members at large, (plus the seven remaining members of the City Council who shall be honorary members of the Board of Trustees.) These members shall not represent but should be representative of government, social agencies, business and labor, religious and ethnic groups, as well as those in the community who are to benefit from the work of the Corporation. "Trustees shall serve a three year term. They may serve only two successive terms. At the end of the first year, May 1965, one third of the forty-eight mem- bers at large (16) shall be subject to rotation off the Board. This process shall be repeated during the second and third years so that sixteen Trustees shall begin a new term each year. Those who are rotated in the first three-years will be eligible for only one successive term even if they have only served one or two years." The part in parentheisis would be added. 2. The second will be to give you a full report on the activities of the Cor- poration to date by the president of the Corporation, various committee co- chairmen and the executive director. UNITED Co~fMuNITY CORP., ME~1BERSIIIP MEETING, FEBRUARY 1, 1965, NEWARK, N.J. ATTENDANCE Newark, N.J. Peter Schuyler Walter Dawkins Ralph L. Sims. Fredericka Ingham Gloria Bridges Irvine I. Turner Beatrice C. Slaten Mrs. Charles O'Flaherty Bernice H. Webber Mr. & Mrs. Gilbert Hunsinger Mrs. W. Scott Young Mrs. Ethel M. Moore James P. Nelson James Eastman Mrs. Alexzina W. Brown Rev. John Collier Timothy still Monsignor Joseph Dooling John Green Oscar Coxson Howard Goeringer Harry Van Dyke Thomas J. Reynolds J. Thomas Flagg George C. Richardson Ruth Fisher Robert W. Harvey Charles W. Garrison B. F. Johnson Ralph T. Geller Rabbi Israel E. Turner James A. Pawley Tom Hayden Herbert H. Tate Duke E. Moore, Sr. Kim Jefferson Ralph Zinn Mrs. Sylvia Woodson Fred Ewing Mrs. Yvonne Pogue Marjorie T. Van Dyke Mrs. Sylvia Josephson Ulysses Blakely Irving Rosenberg Emil Hirrschoff Belle Rosenberg Hilda Hidalgo Rabbi Jonathan J. Prinz Lee Bernstein Myron Redford Frank Addonizio William D. Payne Kenneth A. Gibson Phillip Thigpen William A. Mercer 0. Willard Heckel Mary Smith Cyril D. Tyson Harry P. Wheeler Walter Chambers Earl Harris . Carolyn Kelley Rev. Thomas J. Oarey Derek T. Winans Mrs. Esta Williams Rufus W. Cooper Miss Dorothy Gould Horace Hunt Richard D. Marshall Harold Story Thomas F. Edwards Irvin L. Solondz Jack Tracy Norman Steinlauf Grace E. Malone Jimmy Rell Joy 0. Smith Mary L. Williams Douglas Amos Jim Rospel. PAGENO="1185" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3645 Presiding: Mr. Heckel, President, presided. Welcome: Welcome was given by Mr. Heckel to the first Membership meeting of the United Community Corporation. REPORT ON MEMBERSHIP Miss Hidalgo read that section of the By-Laws which dealt with membership :and discussed it with the members present. Iii the discussion which followed Mr. Wheeler, Rabbi Turner, Rev. Johnson, and Dr. Blakely discussed membership and urged appointment of a membership committee. PROGRAM COMMITTEE Vice President, Timothy Still, reported that the Program Committee was set up to clear all programs that would be presented under the Economic Oppor- :tunities Act. Mr. Still further reported that the purposes of the programs would be to reach the people who are existing in a state of poverty. CHANGE IN BY-LAWS Mr. Tate presented the proposed change in the By-Laws as follows: "The Board shall be compOsed of the Mayor, two members of the City Coun- cli, the President of the Board of Education, the Superintendent of Schools and :forty-~ight memhers at large, (plus the seven remaining members of the City Council who shall be honorary members of the Board of Trustees.) These mem- ~bers shall not represent but should be representative of government, social agencies, business and labor, religious and ethnic groups, as well as those in the community who are to benefit from the work of the Corporation." "The part in brackets would be added." It was moved and properly seconded, and by two-thirds vote, voted that the ~By-Laws be amended as proposed. Mr. Frank Addonizio reported that some of the Councilmen did not want to be I honorary trustees because they did not have a vote. REPORT ON STAFF Mr. Chambers made the following report. (A copy of which is attached to and becomes a part of the original minutes of this meeting.) DRAWING BOARD ROTATION The following named people were drawn to be eligible for rotation the first Iyear: * Charles W. Garrison Mrs. Grace Malone Frank Lena lEulis Ward Very Rev. Ledlie Laughlin TRaiph Geller Marshall Stalley Charles A. Matthews The following named people were first two years: Raymond Proctor LouisR. Quad Dr. Thomas Reynolds Albert Saldutti Miss Dorothy Gould Peter V. R. Schuyler, Jr. Rev. Earl Huff Francis A. Quillan Kenneth Carberry Irving Rosenberg Herbert Tate Kenneth A. Gibson Mrs. Ethel M. Moore Zain Mates Rev. John Green Duke B. Moore, Sr. drawn to be eligible for rotation after the C. Willard Heckel Franklin Roberts Louis Danzing George. Haney Rt. Rev. Msgr. Joseph A. Dooling. Frederick Ewing. Miss Hilda Hidalgo Rabbi Jonathan J. Prinz SO-084-67-pt. 4-75 PAGENO="1186" 3646 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 The following named people were drawn to be eligible for rotation after the first three years: Very Rev. Msgr. Thomas J. Carey Mrs. Cell Arons Mrs. Louis Patterson James A. Pawley Rev. B. F. Johnson William D. Payne Timothy Still Thomas F. Edwards RObert W. Harvey Walter Chambers Abe L. Sudran James Brown George C. Richardson Mrs. Reynold Burch James Williams Rev. Boyd Cantrell QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS During the question and answer period emphasis was placed upon the fact that individual salaries were listed at the top of the range and that this did not mean that Overyone would be hired at that level. The geographic area of the three Area Boards was described and the indication was made that work would start immediately on settling up these Area Boards. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business the membership meeting was closed at 9 5Opm RespectfullY submitted. PETER V. R. SCHUYLER, Jn., ~Secretary UNITED COMMUNITY CoRP., Newark, N.J., Febraaryl, 1965. REPORT OF PERSONNEL COMMITTEE The Personnel Committee is composed of the following members. Walter D. Chambers, Chairman; Peter V. R. Schuyler, Co-Chairman; Mrs. Ccii Arons; James Brown; Frederick Ewing; Ralph Geller; Kenneth A. Gibson; Reverend John Green; Reverend Earl Huff; Dr. Edward F. Kennelly; Duke E. Moore, Sr.; William D Payne; James A.~ Pawley; Francis S. Quillan; George C. Richardson; Irving Rosenberg; Abe L. Sudran. This Committee, appointed at the Board meeting of December 21, 1964, met on January18 and 28,1965. The Personnel Committee agreed that its immediate objective is the recruitment and selection of top staff members. This objective is spelled out in a recommenda- tion adopted by the Board of Trustees on December 21, 1964. In addition to staff selection, the Committee accepted a second objective-the establishment of per- sonnel practices and policy. To accomplish these objectives the Committee was divided into three Sub- committee5~-Per5onnel Practices, Job Descriptions and Specifications and Screen- ing and Selection. (See attached list for the Subcommittee assignments.) The Subcommittee on Personnel Practices-James Pawley, Chairman-will draft the manual on Personnel Practices which will cover such areas as working hours, salary administration, vacation and leave policy, health and welfare bene- fits and other matters of concern to staff members of United Community Corporation. The Subcommittee on Job Descriptions and Specifications-RalPh Geller, Chair- man-will draft the job summary and prerequisites for the various top staff positions in the UCC. The Subcommittee on Screening and Selection-Francis Quillan, Chairman- will publicize all pertinent information on current job openings in the Corpora- tion and make applications available to the interested public. In addition, this Committee will process the applications and make appropriate recommendations to the Executive Director, who will make the final selection. These Subcommittees immediately functioned to carry out their purpose in order that the process of hiring might proceed as quickly as possible. At a meet- PAGENO="1187" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3647 ing of the full Personnel Committee the following reports `of' progress were received: Personnel Practices.-T'his Subcommittee is compiling the material to be in- cluded in the manual. Expects to complete the job by February 15. Job Descriptions and $peciflcations.-Subcommittee has drafted the descrip- tions and specifications for the positions of Associate Director, Comptroller, Per- sonnel Director, Legal Counsel, Employment Training Director and Community ~Action Director. These are thetop staff positions included in the Revised Operat- ing Budget. Screening and Selection.-Subcommittee established the procedure by which applications will be received and processed. First, information on all job openings will be made available to the public `through all possible sources. Secondly, appli- cations will be received and screened by the Executive Director. The applications of qualified candidates will be reviewed by the Subcommittee which will select those persons to be invited for an interview. All members of the Personnel Com- mittee may participate in the interview sessions. Members of the ~Board of Trustees will also be invited to attend as observers. Following the interviews the list of approved candidates will be submitted to the Executive Director who will make the final selection. Throughout its `deliberations the Subcommittee on Screening and Selection and the entire Personnel Committee will be guided by the resolution adopted by the Board on December 21, 1964 which stated in part, "wherever' possible preference will be given to residents of Newark in the hiring of personnel for the United Community Corporation." After the immediate objective of the selection of top staff has been achieved the Personnel Committee will continue to work with these staffers in the `estab- lishment and implementation of the personnel practices and po'licy of the Corporation. Respectfully sUbmitted. WALTER D. CHAMBERS, Chairman. PETER V. R. SCrnTYLER. Jr., ______ Cochairman. UNITED COMMUNITY CORP., PERSONNEL COMMITTEE, SUBCOMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS, JANUARY'28, 1965 1. PERSONNEL PRACTICES James Pawley, Chairman; George Richardson; Samuel Warrence. 2. JOB DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS Ralph Geller, Chairman; Dr. Edward Kennelly; Kenneth Gibson'; Abe Suciran; Rev. Earl Huff; Fred Ewing. 3. SELECTION' Francis Quillan, Chairman; William' Payne'; Mrs. Ceil Arons; Irving Rosen- berg; James Brown; Duke Moore, `Sr.; Rev. John Green. APPENDIX XIII MEMORANDUM, MARCH 22, 1965 To: Cyril D. Tyson, Executive Director, United Community Corporation. From: Walter D.' Chambers, Chairman, Personnel Committee. Subject: Recommendations for Position of Comptroller. On March 19, 1965 the Subcommittee on Screening and Selection interviewed four candidates for the position of Comptroller in the United Community Cor- poration. One other person was not contacted for an interview since he lives in Indianapoii~, Indiana. PAGENO="1188" 3648 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT A~DJNDMENTS OF 1 961~ Based on this interview session and the application submitted by each appli- cant the Subcommittee unanimously recommends the following two men listed below as being acceptable for appointment to the position of Comptroller: Fleming Jones, Jr., 811 South 13th Street, Newark, New Jersey. Howard J. Bitz, 61 Hicks `Street, Valley Stream, Long Island, New York. Additional information on Mr. Jones not included on his application is the fact that he has been assigned by the City of Newark to set up `accounting proce- ~iures for the Neighborhood Youth Corps under Dr. Flagg. He is also a member of the Public Accountant's Association of New Jersey and the National Public' Accountant's Association. I am returning their applications and resumes in the folder which you for- warded to the Subcommittee. The other applications are also returned. `There was one other candidate for the Comptroller's position who impressed the members of the Subcommittee with his background and experience. This man told us that he prefers a more general administrative position than that of Comptroller. It was the consensus of the Subcommittee that he might be consid- ered for some other administrative job. This condidate is: Raymond E. Rath, 145 Charlotte Terrace, Rosefle Park, New Jersey. We also interviewed three applicants for the position of Personnel Director- not one of these applicants was acceptable or available. However, two of the canthdates might be considered for other staff positions. At the beginning of his interview Melvin L. Berger, 13 Sunset Avenue, Bayonne, admitted that he was not qualified for the job of Personnel Director but would be interested in a lesser position. Members of the Subcommittee were impressed with his honesty and qualifications. George B. Warren, Jr., 16 Nishuane Road, Montclair, New Jersey, was most impressive but will not `be available for employment until July 1, 1965, because of a present commitment. Mr. Warren might be `considered for an opening at that time. Not having had any success in getting a Personnel Director from the first three interviews it is obvious that we need to secure more applicants. On this point of recruitment, it was the consensus of the Subcommittee on Screening and `Selec- tion that we need to get more applicants for each position, especially from resi- dents of Newark. Interviewing will continue on March 23 for the positions of Employment Di- rector and Education Director. Other recommendations will be forwarded to you' as soon as possible. WALTER D. CEAMBFIRS. APPENDIX XIV UNrPED `CoMMUNIrY Conp., NEWARK, N.J., Jon SUMMARIES 1. Ecveoative Director: Responsible for all agency activities, personnel and fiscal control. 2. Associate Director: Assists the Executive Director in all agency operations with primary responsibility for administrative function's. 3. Personnel Director: `Under the supervision of the Executive Director is responsible for the hiring of personnel and related function's. 4. Clomptroller. Under the supervision of the Executive Director is responsible for the fiscal management of the agency and all other related functions. `5. Community Action Director: Under the supervision of the Associate Director is responsible for the formation of Area Boards and the development of Com- munity Action Programs. 6. Education Director: Under the general supervision of the Associate Director is responsible for the administration of all programs and personnel involving community education. PAGENO="1189" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3649 * 7. Employment Director: Under the general supervision of the Associate Direc- tor is responsible for the development of community on-the-job training programs and the placement of trainees in business and industry. 8. Community Information Specialist: Under the direction of the Executive Dir~ctor is responsible for the dissemination of information to the pubhc and interested organizations with regard to the agency goals, policies and activities. 9. Commwnity Action Coordinator: Assists the COmmunity Action Director in the formation and implementation of Area Board activities. 10 Com1!~wrtity Researcher (Area Boards 1-VI) Under the supervision of the Community Organizer secures, tabulates, and arranges demographic informa- tion ~oncerning the area to `cvthicli assigned for presentation so as to provide a base for program development. 11. Community Organizers: (Area Boards 1-VI) As an agency employee renders technical assistance to Area Board officers and personnel in their activ- ities and program development in addition to supervising other assigned agency personnel. 12. Community Workers: (Area Boards I-VT) Under the supervision of the Community `Organizer makes contact with residents of the community to which assigned to stimulate participation and involvement and assists in program development and other related activities. 13. Community Organizers-Spanish Speaking: Acts in same capacity as Com~ munity `Organizers assigned to Area Boards hut primarily in reference to the Spanish speaking residents of total Newark. Advises and makes recommendations to Community Action and Area Board personnel with regard to this specific group. 14 Office Manager Under the supervision of the ASsociate Director supervises and controls the `flow of clerical and administrative duties of the main offices. Acts as purehasing agent in the `securing of `consumable supplies and office equipment. 15. AssistantPersonnel Director: Under the direction of the Personnel Director screens, tests, and interviews applicants for positions with the agency. 16. Associate Community `Information Specialists: Works with and under the direct `supervision of the Community Information `Specialist In the preparation of information for dissemination to the general public and other interested orga- nizations concerning the agency and its activities. 17. Pre-school Coordinator: Under the supervision of the Education Director acts as liaison between the agency and the Pre school Council in the adnunistra tion of that program Evaluates and makes recommendations concerning the prograurs. 18 Alter School Tutorial a'nd Remediation Coordinator Under the general supervision of the Education Director organizes and administers a broad base program of tutoring and remethation for the community as needs are determined and defined. 19 Vocational Education Administrator Works with and under the super vision of the Employment Director in the development of on the-job training programs and assists in their evaluation. 20. Accountants: Work under the direct supervision of the Comptroller in the agency's fiscal management. 21. Administrative Assistant: Under the direct supervision of the Executive Director `serves in an administrative and liaison capacity to the Agency's officers, the Board of Trustees and all Committees and task forces. 22. Erecutive Secretary: Under the direct supervision of the Executive Director serves in the capacity of secretary performing all functions a's required and needed. 23. Steno-Secretaries: Perform all secretarial duties for department managers. 24. Clerk Typists: Perform all typing and `clerical functions as assigned. (One for each area board as well a~s other assignments in `central offices.) 25. Receptionist-Typist: Handles all incoming telephone calls as well as directs business visitors to the various `departments. Performs typing work as time permits. PAGENO="1190" 3650 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1.967 26. Office- Clerks: Under the direct supervision of the Office Manager performs all functions as directed and needed such as internal mail delivery running of office duplicating machines, special errands into the community etc. 27 Clerk Typtst (Bi lingual) Under the supervision of the Spanish speaking CommunIty-Organizers. performs all typing tasks. required. Typ~s from Spanish to English and vice versa APPEI~DIX XV UNITED CoMMuNITY Coa~ NEWARK ~\ J HIRING PROCEDURES i. GENERAL POLICY - . - - Applications-foropen positions will be received Iby the Agency at its- offices, 124 Branfo-rd Place, Newark, New, -Jersey, througth the Personnel Department. All candidates will -be considered on the basis of qualifications to perform the work and without regard to race, creed, -color, national origin, sex or age. Preference will be given to qualified applicants who reside-in th-e City of -Newark. In addition consideration will -be given those -qualified applicants who- are- unemployed or underemployed. - - - - -- - - - - - .-. - - II DEPARTME~ T HEAD POSITION S (a) The Personnel Director will upon request furnish all -applications for Department Head positions, to the Personnel Committee of the Boar4- of Trustees. After. screening the -Personnel Committee will interview the -basically qualified candidates to -determine suitability to meet- the - requirements - of the vacant position. - - - - - - -- - - -- - - (b) The Personnel Committee will refer the applications of one or-more of the -candidates;it -deem-s qualified-to the-Executive-Director withrecomrnendations. The Executive Director may- select- one of the candidates -for assignment. to the -position. If. none are selected he -may request -t-he Personnel -Committee to furnish him with a- new list for consideration. - - - UI. OTHER VACANCIES - - - - - - - - (~) All apphcations will be filed with the Personnel Director (b) Where possible and practical all candidates will be interviewed and tested (c) The applications of those candidates who meet the minimum requirements for a given vacancy will be referred to the manager of the department in -which that vacancy exists with recommendations from the Personnel Director. - - - (d) The department manager will interview tile -qualified applicants. - - - (e) After cOnsultation with the Personnel Director and/or Executive Director a selection will be made -by the department head. - - - - - - (f) If a -selection is not made from the referred- candidates -further screening, interviews and tests will -be conducted in order to furnish a new list of candidates foi the department manager s consideration - - APPENDIX XVI - - -- - - UNITED `Co~rMuNITY Conp., PERSONNEL ROSTER - - - 1. James Andrew Alexander, Newark, New Jersey; Community Researcher, Area III-; Administrative Classification. Salary: $5,225. - - - - - 2. Mrs.' Jessie Mae Alexander, Newark, New Jersey; Receptionist-Typist, Area - III; Clerical Classification. Salary: $4,000. -- - - 3. James Henry Blair, Montclair, New Jersey; Community Action Director; Executive Classification. Salary: $12,000. - - - - - -- -- 4. Joseph Ahthony Befumo,' Newark, New Jersey; Arts and Culture consultant; Professional Classification. Salary: $25.00 per day, two days per week. - 5. Mrs. Anne Calloway, Newark, New Jersey; Clerk Typist; Clerical Classifica- tion. Salary :`$3,800. 6. Mrs. June Childs, Newark, New Jersey; Steno-Secretary; Administrative Classification. Salary: $5,000. 7. William Daniels, Newark, New Jersey; Community Worker, Area I; Admin- istrative Classification. Salary: $5,800. PAGENO="1191" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3651 8. Mrs. Beatrice Easley, Newark, New Jersey; Administrative Assistant; Ex- ~cutive Classification Salary $7 000 9 Mrs Doris Folkes East Orange New Jersey Steno Secretary Administra tive Classification. Salary : $4,500. 10. Mrs. Josephine Gaudious~ Newark, New Jersey; Clerk Typist; Clerical Classification. Salary: $3,200. 11. Miss Sarah Goss, Newark, New Jersey; Clerk Typist; Clerical Classifica- tion. Salary: $3,200. 12. Dean Harrison, New York, New York; Community Action Coordinator; Professional Classification. Salary: $9,000. 13. Emil Hirrschoff, Newark, New Jersey; Community Organizer, Area I; Executive Classification. Salary: $7,200. 14. Fleming Jones, Newark, New Jersey; Comptroller; Executive Classification. Salary: $10,000. 15. Mrs. Ruth Levey, East Orange, New Jersey; Steno-Secretary, Administra- tive Classification. Salary: $5,000. 16. Rafael Lozada, Newark, New Jersey.; Community Organizer; Executive Classification. Salary: $6,375. 17. Abdulla Najeed, Newark, New Jersey.; Accountant; Professional Classifi- cation. Salary: $6,400. 18. Miss Mary Louise Mayse, Newark, New Jersey; Clerk Typist.; Clerical Classification. Salary: $3,200. 19. Miss Betty Jean Miller, New Jersey; Clerk Typist, Area II; Clerical Class- ification. Salary: $3,200. 20. Perseverando Miranda, Newark, New Jersey; Community Organizer; Ex- ecutive Classification. Salary: $6,375. 21. Mrs. Franceine McOray~, Newark, New Jersey; Clerk Typist, Area I; Clerical Classification. Salary: $3,400. 22. Mrs. Bess Norman, Maplewood, New Jersey; Pre-school Coordinator; Pro- fessional. Salary: $9,000. 23. Mrs.. Rebecca Owens, Newark, New Jersey; Community Organizer ;t Exec- utive Classification. Salary: $6,800. .24. Mrs. Virginia M. Pelosi, East Orange, New Jersey; Executive Secretary; Executive Classification. Salary: $6,000. 25. Domenic Pitrelli, Newark, New Jersey, Formerly of Blóomfield, New Jersey; Office Manager; Executive Classification. Salary: $5,500. 26. Mrs. Ludlle A. Pnryear, Newark, New Jersey; Steno-Secretary; Admin. istrative Classification. Salary: $4,500. 27. Malachi Rountree, Newark, New Jersey; Community Organizer, Area II; Executive Classification. Salary: $7,100. . 28. Charles D. Settle, Newark, New Jersey; Accountant; Professional Classi- fication. Salary: $7,300. 29. Mrs. Mary Smith, Newark, New Jersey; Community Worker; Administra- tive Classification. Salary: $5,225. :30. Mr. Emory: Pulley:, Newark, New Jersey; Office Clerk; Clerical Classifi- cation. Salary: $4,000. 31. cyril DeGrasse Tyson, Bronx, New York; Executive Director; Executive Classification. Salary: $23,000. :32. Donald M. Wendell, Newark, New Jersey; Associate Director; Executive Classification. Salary: $14,500. .33. Miss Imogene Whitaker, Newark, New Jersey; Steno-Secretary; Admin- istrative Classification. Salary: $4,250. 34. Mrs.. Laddie Wyatt, Newark, New Jersey; Receptionist-Typist; Clerical Classification. Salary: $4,275. 35. Albert E.. Tiba, New Providence, New Jersey; Personnel Director; Exeen- five Cisssification. Salary: $12,000. APPENDIX XVII AFFIDAVIT STATE OF Naw. JERSEY, Coi~nty of Essex,. ss.: Emil Hirrschoff, of full age, being duly sworn according to law upon my oath depose and say: PAGENO="1192" 3652 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 I now reside at 131 Clifton Avenue, Newark, New Jersey, and, have resided~ at said address since September 1965. I `deny that I. have ever resided in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. I resided at 75 Park Avenue, Newark, New Jersey, from May 1946 to Sep-- tember of 1965. EMIL C. HIRRSCHOFF. Sworn and subscribed to before me this 20th day of December, 1965. VIRGINIA M. CARPENTER, Notar~jPiiMic.. APPENDIX XVIII ,, . . AFFIDAVIT STATE OF NEW JERSEY, Cownty of Essex, ss.: . Malachi Rountree,' of full age,' being duly sworn according to law upon my oath depose and say: ` I now reside at 79 Treacy Avenue, Newark, New Jersey, and have resided at. said address since 1955. I deny that on September 13, 1965, I resided in East'Orange, New Jersey. MALACHI D~ `ROUNTREE.. Sworn and subscribed to befOre me this 20th day of December, 1965. VIRGINIA M. CARPENTER, Notary Public.. APPENDIX XIX AFFIDAVIT STATE OF NEW JERs~, ` ` County of Essex, ss.: . ` Domenle Pitrelli, of full age, being `duly sworn accorthng to. law upon my oath~ depose and say: I now reside at 306 Gra'fton Avenue, Newark, New Jersey, which premises I~ rented as of August 1, 1965. Prior to renting said premises, I lived in Bloomfield,. New Jersey, for approximately 19 years. , ` ` I, commenced occupancy of my Newark apartment on said premises on Sep- tember 12, 1965. ` I deny that as of September 13, 1965, I resided in Blooinfleld, New Jersey. DOMENIC. P. PITRELLL Sworn and subscribed to before me this 20th day of December, 1965. VIRGINIA M. CARPENTER, _______ Notary Public.. APPENDIX XX : ` AFFIDAVIT STATE' OF' NEW JERSEY, ` ` . County of Essex, ss.: , ` ` ` Donald Wendell, of full age, `being duly sworn according to law upon my oath~ depose and say: `" 1 now `reside at 445 Elizabeth Avenue, Newark, New `Jersey,' and' have re~ided~ at said address since August 1, 1965. I resided at `5~5 High Street, Newark, from April 15 to August 1, 1965. Prior to thi~, I lived in New Haven, Connecticut, for- approximately two years. I deny that as of September 13, 1965, I resided in ~ew Haven, Connecticut. DONALD WENDELL. Sworn and subscribed to before me this 20th day of December, 1965. VIRGINIA M. `CARPENTER. Notary Public.. PAGENO="1193" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3653 0 0 U) 0 U) Ui `-4: U) I *to --~i---~---- V uP" 0)0 " 010)-i 0 u~ )~ *`-i~ 00' .-~-~---~ 0( a a. 0~.- -i-u C0~-4 0 -i a~ roo=-~ 4: -O ci: i-i3,~i 5 `O*)-i 0' 4-' =4 0)10)-) )-4-' 0 `U) C C/)5 Eoc' v~ ~)-iCJ=.- sos i-i ti-i~ o 4~ (00 a ooo E -i.i-'i `( `-oN-- ~u1-~---c~ `-`4:4-iS, 4:. Executive Group Salary Comparison Chart 15CC - Related Agency (Baryott-Act} ________Related Agency (I(edian of Salary Roages Used). (Haryou Titles. in Parenthesis) 27OQ~, Appeoclix XXr 26OO~,,_ 2500 2400L, ::::~~ 21OO~CL~ l3P0~. lQ0.0Q_ 9Q0Q_,_ 700p_ - ~JCC 3.2/16/65 0 4-i 0 0 a 01_U 14 1)) -.4: r 0 -. 0 4-' 0 --I U) e `i-i 4 14 5 0 PAGENO="1194" 3654 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 7000 2600Q_J 25000 24000 23000 2Z000 21000 20~0_ 19000 18000 17000 16000 150Q0_ 14000~ 13000: 12.00.0. 11000 10000 9000 ?000_ 7090~ 6000 iJcc AEA 12/17/65 Executive Group Salary Coz~pariacn chart. UCC-Relatea Agency (Mobilization for youth) - tJcc ~Re1ated Ag~ncy. .(M.edian of Salary Ranges Us~d) (MFY jobs iriparenthesis) i~ ~*~: Lid: I::i'~ a4 ~ q4j~ ~/j `1~4u~ ~ .~ ~ . a *~ ~ *~J.4 4.~.sJ .~J, a ~j . C ~ ~ 8~ OQQ~ Q~''O~ ~JO)C~ PAGENO="1195" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF. 1967 3655 (Supt. Authoti~y) A~pe~~dix ~ Execut~ve Group Salary Comparison Chart UCC-City of Newark ~Jcc. __________City, of Ne~.*~ (Actual Salarieo Paid) (City. ~ob titles in p:~rrr~~ \ \ .~*- .Ucc ~.EA 32/17/65 0 c PAGENO="1196" H ~ ).J V~ `~ C!) 0. rP, `c~pI El (1H CD rJ i~ i ES 4~ fl P~ ~ ~ P$ * VS I~O IS 5-i ~ rn `I .O.~: s.' ç~, VI! fl~ Li ~ ~ § g g ~ .~. .g g ~ *g (Bt~s1naa* 4a~á~e~) (R~~a*c~. 1i~t~t) (S~cx~eta~y) ~Ta~in~r~btflg TyE'4. r'l ~ / 1' (CierJ~ ~y~i$t.) Offirse Clerk (Mai~. 0 0 0 0 PAGENO="1197" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3657 Sam~1e Group Adam istrative-Cletical ucC-City of Newark -_~City. o~ Newark RESOLUTION ON POLITICAL ACTIVITY OF UNITED COMMUNITY CORP. BOARD MEMBERS (Adopted August 1, 1965) Resolved by the Board of Trustees of the United Community Corporation: That any member of the Board of Trustees shall be free to be active in any political campaign or for any cause, provided thRt he does not use, attempt to use, or threaten to use the Corporation for political purposes. If any elected mem- ber of the Board of Trustees becomes an avowed candidate for public office, he or she shall be required to take a leave of absence for the duration of the cam- paign. If any member of the Board of Trustees uses, attempts to use, or threat- ens to use the Corporation for political purposes, this shall be cause for cancel- ling his membership in the Corporation and his membership on the Board of Trustees which shall be determined by a two-thirds majority vote of the Board of Trustees after due hearing before a committee of the Board of Trustees and the committee shall submit its report, after prior notification, to the Board of Trus- tees within ten days. AppendmR lIT * Dcc 35.Rr., Wk No 0? ]~ty. 30 Er. Wk. OT Prem. Pavntent 6000 ~ 40~0 3000. :1000 13CC AEk. 12,:17/65 APPENDIX XXVI PAGENO="1198" 3658 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairman PERKINS. How many poverty workers did I understand you had in Newark? Mr. ADDONIzI0. I am sorry, what was that? Chairman PERKINS. How many poverty workers- Mr. ADDONIZI0. Thirteen who had been arrested during the riot. Mr. DEFIN0. 150 poverty workers. Chairman PERKINS. You are not considering the Neighborhood Youth Corps? Mr. DEFINO. No, Community Action and executive staff down m there. Chairman PERKINS. I think your Neighborhood Youth Corps youth have been highly complimented for their stand in the prevention of riots. Am I correct in that statement? Mr. DEFINO. They have worked. They worked. Chairman PERKINS. Do you all concur in that statement? How many Neighborhood Youth Corps do you ha~ein the city? Mr. DEFINO. Nine hundred. Chairman PERKINS. Nine hundred. And you would strongly recom- mend the continuation of that program and all the programs, sir? Mr. BERNSTEIN. We would suggest that that program be expanded. Chairman PERKINS. What? Mr. BERNSTEIN. We would suggest that the Neighborhood Youth Corps program be expanded. We also bring to your attention that it is run by the city. Mr. GOODELL. Be careful, gentlemen. You are in the hands of a master. Chairman PERKINS. Let me ask you a couple of other questions. If I understood-at the protest meetings, that is-protesting the location of the medical building and the secretary being employed by the local school board, that you have identified sorne~ six or seven anti- poverty workers in those pictures. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I would say at least that. Chairman PERKINS. Well, I thought I had counted it at six or seven. But you likewise further stated that you had no knowledge of any poverty worker, these six or seven, or any other worker inciting the people to riot. You all said no to that? Mr. MALLARD. That's right. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Wait a minute. It depends on your definition. Chairman PERKINS. I was asking you if you said "no" before. Mr. BERNSTEIN. I did not answer that question. I would like to know what you mean by "incite." Chairman PERKINS. You have no knowledge of any poverty work- ers causing anybody to riot? I am asking your personal knowledge. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Directly, no; but I feel Mr. Wheeler's remarks were inciting. Chairman PERKINS. That is all I am asking you. You can guess, but I am asking you if you have any knowledge. Now you have never taken any action, you have never taken any ac- tion under New Jersey law to even go and swear out a warrant or make any charges against these six or seven that you have identified in the protest meetings, have you, sir? You just have not taken any action? PAGENO="1199" ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 3659 Mr. BERNSTEIN. Yes, but I would like to give you a reason. Chairman PERKINS. But you have not taken action? Mr. BERNSTEIN. No. But there is a reason we haven't. We didn't want to incite a situation. Chairman Pi~nxINs. If you thought it was & violation of law it was your duty to do something about it. Mr. DEFINO. Stokely Carmichael speaks, and nobody stops him. It is open to the press of the United States. It is not fair. Chairman PERKINS I would hate to see the day arrive-we think people are irresponsible, and I think I am talking~to responsible peo- ple-but you have not taken any action insofar as prdferring charges, have you? Mr. BERNSTEIN. We have enforced the law loosely. When Cornell Hussein- Chairman PERKINS One concluding question Do you f'wor the Re- publican approach, the Opportunity Crus&de, or do you favor the Mr GARDNER Would the gentleman yield at this ~oin~- Chairman PERKINS. We brought them here to get some informa- tion from them. fl Mr. GARDNER. I wish you would allow them to answer your questions. Chairman PERKINS. You believe in~a Community Action program, and you are not recommending to this committee that we trančfer and dismantle the Office of Economic Opportunity, are you? Mr. BERNSTEIN. Well, to give you my personal observation, first of all, as far as the Community Action programs it is not run by th~\. duly elected officials-I am talking about the Community Action pro- ~. grams. I would say abolish it. Chairman PERKINS. You would say abolish it if the local public offi- cials are not in control? Mr. BERNSTEIN. That is right. Chairman PERKINS. And that is the breach between the poverty workers that seem to be disgruntled against the public official up there, and you have a breach between you and the poverty workers along that line. Mr. BERNSTEIN. Wel1,~it ~i~rny~feeIing iháit all of these programs should be run by Government, because ~ to the people. Ch'urmrn PERKINS Well, do ~ ou believe they should all be run by State law, Mr. Addonizio? Mr. ADD0NIzI0. Mr. Congressman, the Congress of the United States in their wisdom voted into the act proportionate shares to be borne by the municipalities and by the Federal Government, and each year the percentage that must be raised by the municipality is increased. Now the elected officials are those who are directly responsible for the tax rates, et cetera, et cetera. Chairman PERKINS. I don't want to take that line. Mr. ADD0NIZI0. Since the elected officials have a direct responsibility to their constituencies. PAGENO="1200" 3660 ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY ACT AMENDMENTS OF 1967 Chairnian P~n~INs. Just give me a "yes" or "no." Mr.. `ADDoNIZIO. Yes, I believe the area, boards should be abolished, because they have created more problems than they have solved. I wouuld also like to just mention this, that I was under the impression th~t this hearing was to discuss the antipoverty program, because cer- tainly_I would be very happy to enumerate those considerations that I would like to have, not only for' the city of Newark, but also every other city that we need-I would like to `have the Congress immedi- ately pass funds' for the demonstration grants to the municipalities, because this is something that is sorely needed in another area that is before them now. `Chairman PERKncs. Do you have any further questions? M1~S: Gi~EN. No. // Chairman PERKINS. Th~ motion is before the committee that we "adjourn and the hearings be concluded. -Itisagreedto. ,~ ,` ` Thank ~,i all forlour appearance here. (Whereupon, at 720 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.) /~ ` 0 "7 / /