any means, regard our effort as wasted if we started now and found that, for whatever reason, our suggestions could not be acted upon. Senator CLARK. Then I would appreciate it if you would start now on the three bills which you mentioned you favored in your report, so that we could get such technical changes as may be desirable before us before we go to the full committee, which I guess would be in the next 10 days. I do not imagine it is too big a job to make those technical suggestions.

Mr. RICHARDSON. We would be happy to give them. (The information requested follows:)

SUGGESTION FOR TECHNICAL IMPROVEMENTS IN S. 694, S. 765, AND S. 766

1. What priority would you give to the need for additional training of persons now working in the juvenile delinquency field as compared to the need to increase our national pool of psychiatrists, social workers, etc.?

Training needs are very great both with regard to persons now working in the juvenile delinquency field as well as in regard to increasing our national pool of trained personnel. Because of the number of persons now working in this field who are either untrained or inadequately trained, the Department believes that training of personnel now working in the field is of first importance. 2. If we did have a Federal program of fellowships and stipends to train more professional personnel, would there be any assurances that they would end up in juvenile delinquency work?

The Department believes that the usual provision in a Federal program of fellowships and stipends for careful recruitment and selection of individuals to be trained, and for giving consideration to their demonstrated interest in the field of juvenile delinquency would assure that individuals trained would work in the field of juvenile delinquency.

3. I understand that there are a number of Department of Health, Education, and Welfare programs under which fellowships, stipends, loans, and other financial help are now being given for the training of psychiatrists, social workers, psychologists, and others who have skills needed in juvenile delinquency work. Could you supply us with some data showing the extent to which such people are being trained?

Following is data for fiscal year 1958 showing the extent to which financial help is being given, some direct or indirect, with Federal financial assistance to individuals for the training of psychiatrists, social workers, and psychologists. These data have been secured from the five unts of the Department whose programs are the most likely to be utilized for training individuals in these three fields:

Neither the Children's Bureau nor the Bureau of Public Assistance currently makes direct grants to individuals for fellowships or stipends. Such grants are made to individuals by the appropriate State agency, through the use of Federal funds available to it.

4. Some bills before this subcommittee propose new Federal training programs, including fellowships, traineeships, and stipends. We would find it

41638-59- -11

helpful to have some cost estimates showing the numbers of different categories of personnel for whom training is needed and the cost of providing such training. See statement on "Personnel shortages and estimates of training costs in the field of juvenile delinquency" (p. 149).

5. Will you also indicate what portions of this proposed training can be carried out under existing authority now vested in the various units of the Department if funds were made available for this purpose, and which require additional legislative authority?

None of the existing authority now vested in the various units of the Department contains express authorization for training in the field of juvenile delinquency. Under several laws, the Department has authority for providing Federal financial assistance for training activities. In each instance, the authority is for a broad purpose not necessarily related to juvenile delinquency. For example, the Surgeon General is authorized to provide training and instruction and to establish and maintain traineeships in carrying out the mental health purposes of section 301. However, juvenile delinquency is a complex problem which involves not only disciplines that contribute directly to mental health but also those related to religion, social work, law, education, recreation, and others. Thus, the mental health aspects, while important in many instances, represent only one facet of the problem.

Under the Social Security Act, Federal funds are available to State public welfare agencies for establishing, extending, and strengthening public child welfare services. The States use some of these funds for training of personnel to provide these services. The 1956 amendments to the Social Security Act authorized grants to States for training of personnel for work in public assistance programs. No funds have been appropriated for this purpose. The State agencies to which Federal child welfare or public assistance funds are available are not necessarily the State agencies vested with responsibility for services for delinquent youth. Furthermore, neither the child welfare nor the public assistance provisions of the act authorize the Federal Government to provide funds directly to institutions of higher learning nor to individuals.

The juvenile delinquency legislation before this committee would enable somewhat more narrowly focused training activities aiming at juvenile delinquency as such to the extent that it is a problem involving children with courts, correctional institutions, social agencies, and police.

Senator CLARK. I have interrupted both of you in the course of what you wanted to say, and I would be happy to withdraw now and let you continue in your own way.

Mr. RICHARDSON. We have already covered, Mr. Chairman, everything I had in mind saying, and I would like to ask Mrs. Oettinger to begin at whatever point she now feels to be appropriate.

Mrs. OETTINGER. I know you have had a great deal of testimony. However, the testimony which I have for you today is recent information about the problem of juvenile delinquency, and, in turn, some of our thinking about the priorities for more effectively dealing with the problem.

If you like, I will read the statement for the record or will file it, according to your suggestion.

Senator CLARK. If it is agreeable to you, I would like to have it filed in the record, and then just conversationally between us, if you would give it the emphasis which you feel is desirable, I assure you I will read it, and so will the staff and the other members of the subcommittee.

Mrs. Oettinger's statement will be placed in the record at this point.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF KATHERINE B. OETTINGER, CHIEF OF THE CHILDREN'S BUREAU, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am very happy to have the opportunity to appear before you today as you consider Federal legislation in the field of juvenile delinquency.

I would like to share with you some of the most recent information the Children's Bureau has about the mounting problem of juvenile delinquency, and, in turn, some of our thinking about the priorities for more effectively dealing with this problem.

For the ninth consecutive year (1948-57) juvenile delinquency court cases have continued to rise, reaching an all-time high of 603,000 cases involving 520,000 children. The increase in the number of these cases coming before the juvenile courts was almost five times as great as the increase in the child population of juvenile court age (10-17) during these 9 years.

Not only the number of cases, but the proportion of children involved, has steadily risen, In 1948, about 12.6 out of every 1,000 children (10-17) came to the attention of juvenile courts for alleged juvenile delinquency. By 1957 this rate had mounted to 23.5 out of every 1,000 children-almost double the 1948 rate. '

The FBI reports of police arrests of juveniles under 18 show a similar upward trend in the number of arrests. Additionally, these reports show that young people under 18 are committing an increasingly disproportionate number of serious offenses. These FBI reports show that by 1957, young people under 18 were arrested for 68 percent of the auto thefts, 55 percent of the burglaries, and 20 percent of the rapes.

We are sometimes prone to think of juvenile delinquency as an urban problem. The statistic from the FBI reports, as with those from the juvenile courts, show greater increases occurring in smaller communities than in large urban areas. The FBI reports show, for example, that in 1957 as compared with 1956 juvenile arrests increased 8 percent in the large urban areas, in contrast with a 16 percent increase in smaller communities.

At one end of the spectrum, police handle about 1.7 million cases of misbehaving children a year-only a fourth of whom are referred to the court.

At the other end of the spectrum, some 52,000 delinquent children are committed by the courts to training schools for delinquent children each year. At least 15 percent of the children admitted to public training schools within a single year are being returned there because of a new offense, or violation of parole.

What may we anticipate in the immediate years ahead with regard to the number of delinquent youth? By 1965 there will be an estimated 30 million children in the United States in this high-risk vulnerable age group a third more than in 1957. If juvenile court delinquency cases continue to increase at the same rate as they have since 1948, then by 1965 the juvenile courts will be handling delinquent children at an annual level of about a million cases. And by then, a much greater number will be police cases which never reach the courts.

Even if the rate of juvenile court delinquency cases does not continue to increase but remains fixed at he 1957 rate, juvenile courts will be handling delinquent children at an annual level of about 800,000 cases per year by 1965. The problem of juvenile delinquency has already reached major proportions. But even more serious is the increase that may be expected to be in the immediate future.

Because juvenile delinquency has multiple forms and multiple causes, no one remedy will suffice. We shall have to continue to seek multiple answers through multiple means. Two things are clear, however. First, the knowledge we now have must be applied more vigorously. Second, the knowledge we lack must be sought more productively if we are to make substantial progress.

I shall limit my remarks to a few of the priorities, as we see them. I shall not attempt to cover all the possible approaches to solving this problem. I am sure, Mr. Chairman, that your committee is fully aware that a many-pronged attack is needed. Such an attack, using a great variety of approaches is the

only effective way, in the long run, to prevent juvenile delinquency and restore delinquent youth to a wholesome way of life as quickly and as fully as possible. First, let us consider the need for strengthening existing programs in the States and local communities. Here are some facts showing why we have reason to believe that the States are falling further and further behind in dealing with this problem:

1. The number of juvenile probation officers has increased only 46 percent between 1952 and 1957 as contrasted with an 82 percent increase in juvenile delinquency. About one-half the counties have no probation services at all for delinquent youth.

2. While most of the large urban communities have established specialized units for improving police handling of children's cases, only about one-half of the middle-sized communities and only about one-fourth of the communities with less than 10,000 population have established these units.

3. Provisions for detention care are inadequate an estimated 100,000 children are being held in jail annually. An additional unknown number of children are being held in inappropriate facilities, such as training schools and makeshift detention quarters.

4. The average daily population in institutions for delinquent youth increased about 25 percent between 1953 and 1956 alone. Few of these institutions have the staff needed to offer an adequate treatment program for the rehabilitation of these youth. Yet most children in these institutions have had sufficiently diffcult, unsatisfying, and damaging experiences to require a variety of services in order to work out some of their problems and modify their behavior.

5. For many years, States and communities have relied mainly on two measures of rehabilitation of delinquent youth-probation services or care in a large custodial institution. Only a small beginning has been made in developing a comprehensive program so that treatment may be planned on the basis of the individual child's particular needs. In a few places new measures are being tried, such as central reception and classification centers. "Half-way Houses" for small groups of youth to aid them in the transition from the institution to normal community living, and street club workers for working with neighborhood gangs.

Since certain services for delinquent youth, such as training school programs, are among the oldest special provisions for children made under State laws, major attention needs to be given to bringing these programs up to date and incorporating in practice current knowledge about helping children.

Secondly, I want to refer to the great need for more training of personnel. We are confronted with an almost total lack of training on the part of personnel already employed in serving delinquent youth. Additionally, the absence of a pool of trained personnel to fill existing vacancies, and the inadequacy of training resources constitute a major roadblock in improving the quality of existing services.

The seriousness of the problems related to training of personnel are highlighted by the following facts:

1. Only 1 out of 10 juvenile probation officers has completed social work training. More than 4 out of 10 lack a college degree and are not eligible for professional training. The same serious shortage exists for parole or after-care workers who follow up on planning and supervision after the child has been given a start in rehabilitation at an institution.

2. Six out of ten of our State training schools do not have a staff psychiatrist either full or part-time; 4 out of 10 have no full or part-time psychologist on their staff; 3 out of 10 do not even have a full or part-time social worker. These are the clinical staff essential to the proper functioning of an institution. In addition, many of the institutions have poorly prepared cottage parents and other types of nonclinical personnel who need in-service training. Many lack sufficient numbers of this kind of staff. Inadequate trained personnel too often limit care to a custodial emphasis rather than a treatment program geared to understanding the child and providing him with the individual help he needs to restore him to a wholesome way of life.

3. Carefully designed in-service training programs are universally desirable since police deal with more juvenile delinquents or potential juvenile delinquents than any other agency. At the present, there are few facilities, sparsely located, for providing training for the highly specialized responsibilities of handling juvenile offenders.

Third, much greater emphasis is needed on evaluating the effectiveness of existing services and developing and demonstrating new ways of helping de linquent youth and controlling juvenile delinquency. Further research is needed on such questions as

1. How valid are techniques for early identification of delinquents?

2. How effective are currently popular programs and measures for controlling juvenile delinquency, such as recreational services, "workreation" camps, detached worker activities, saturated services, curfew and parental responsibility laws? From such an evaluation, what leads can be obtained for developing new and more effective measures?

3. How can we best bring together the knowledge of various disciplines (for example, social work, sociology, psychology, psychiatry, and anthropology, or medicine) to identify and attack basic causes of delinquency? 4. What relation exists between juvenile delinquency and maternal employment, school dropouts, poor housing, broken homes, and population shifts?

There is also need for more demonstrations-such as, for example, demonstrations of

1. Intensive institutional treatment programs for psychopathic juvenile delinquents including the sexual deviant.

2. Effective clinical treatment programs for adolescent recalcitrant girls. 3. The value of training specialized personnel in law enforcement, probation, and juvenile court work.

4. Effectiveness of residential treatment centers for young, emotionally disturbed offenders involved in serious offenses such as arson, assaults, and habitual ungovernable behavior in the community.

5. Effectiveness of group foster homes or residential centers for returnees from institutions for the rehabilitation of delinquents.

In conclusion, greater self-scrutiny and action in States and local communities is basic to the achievement of both short-term and long-range objectives for alleviating the problem of juvenile delinquency. I want to join with Mr. Richardson in expressing my appreciation of the opportunity to consider with your committee various steps that might be taken to enable delinquent children and youth to develop their fullest potentials. If together we can devise ways of more effective help for these children and youth, we shall have taken a long step forward in bringing untold benefits not only to the children of today but to the world of tomorrow.

Mrs. OETTINGER. I think we need not underscore that for the ninth consecutive year the number of juvenile delinquent court cases has continued to rise.

Senator CLARK. Let me interrupt and ask you if you think to any extent at all that is due to an improvement in the court structure, and perhaps the expansion of the courts, so that it does not all represent an increase in juvenile delinquency.

Mrs. OETTINGER. I think this is probably true. There is some expansion due to more effective working of the court, but not enough to take account of the steady and increasing rise. We have to realize also that 1,700,00 cases of misbehaving children came to the attention of the police, one-fourth of which only came to the juvenile court.

So you see there is quite a latitude in there for children who might have come to the court, if it were merely a matter of the better working of the courts that were reflecting these increased statistics.

Senator CLARK. Taking into account the concentration of population, could you draw any empirical conclusion as to whether this is more of an urban or suburban problem?

Mrs. OETTINGER. We have some statistics on that that show that, while there has been an increase between 1956 and 1957 of 8 percent in juvenile arrests in the larger urban areas, there has been a 16 percent rise in those communities with a population under 25,000.