"5. The staff of the Public Assistance Division is increasingly drawn from young people who have had no previous employment, no experience in working with people, and very little life experience. To do this job they must quickly acquire accurate knowledge of the law, and of detailed and complicated policies and procedures; increase their understanding of people and put understanding into actual practice; achieve an identification with the purpose and goals of the agency; and learn to represent a democratic government to an underprivileged group in a critical community. "The provision of public assistance for people in financial distress is fraught with stupendous problems. Its administration is infinitely difficult, and is subject to constant criticism from all sides and from every angle." Shea replied: "The question was also raised, sir, as to the caliber of the social workers we have in public assistance. "The social workers in public assistance, as you know, are taken from the civil service register. They have the classification that is the lowest, in terms of grade, of any so-called professional worker. This is the GS-5 grade, which means that the type of person that is appointed to the job barely meets minimum requirements for appointment. "They are taken from the registers. Many of them have an A.B. degree in college, with the minimum qualifications or requirements in terms of either psychology or education or social work or sociology, and they have the minimum number of credits in those areas. "We have a real problem in the District of Columbia with respect to the tremendous competition that we have for social workers in other areas. "What happens is that many of our GS-5 workers, after they have obtained a certain number of years of experience with us, or after they have gone on to get graduate training, which we encourage them to do, they move on to other jobs. "We have a constant number of people in this particular group that are practically fresh in the field of social work. "We also have initiated an effort to meet the impact of these workers who have minimum training and experience with a very intensive in-service training program. We have our own training program in the Division, within the Department, and also a training office in public assistance. No worker goes on the job until that worker has gone through 6 weeks of training courses within the Division. "We are also attempting to have a very careful and all-inclusive internal evaluation going on within the Division so that we can find out actually more of the characteristics of the cases that are on public assistance, so that we can assign the more difficult cases to the better trained workers and the less-complicated cases to the less-trained workers, so that we can get more service to the people who we think have the greatest potential for rehabilitation. "That is a very complicated problem, you can realize. That is something we are looking at, and looking at vigorously in the Department." So, Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the demonstration projects would not be meeting up with the same type of problem. And I wonder if the answer is not to be found by increasing substantially stipends and study grants all along the line? The question has been raised also about how the funds should be funneled into the projects. In this connection, I seem to recall that the unemployment compensation programs operate through State agencies fairly well. It occurs to me that public welfare matching funds are distributed through State agencies although they are expended upon local levels. Here again, an eclectic approach may not be unreasonable, but if the projects are to be evaluated, and if statistical studies are to be meaningful, it would appear to me that the job of collecting and evaluating results could well be performed at the State level first and HEW could collate, comment upon, and publish the results of the State experience very satisfactorily. We want to stimulate local awareness and participatin in the challenging job of solving a very pressing problem. If money in the form of grants in aid is advanced to the States, I predict that it could be well spent at the local level and the experience which would be gained could be shared not only among the political subdivisions of each State but also among all the States as they reviewed each others records as I am sure they would. The value to be gained from a standardization of reporting requirements alone seems to be to be a persuasive argument. However, Mr. Chairman, I promised to be brief. I shall conclude with your permission by submitting for the record a series of letters I have received and which have been made available to me through the courtesy of a very gracious lady, the able and distinguished Congresswoman from the Third Congressional District of Oregon, the Honorable Edith Green who is a member and an active one on the counterpart subcommittee of the House. These letters all bring out the same point with regard to training and the need for a program in this field which I have spoken to this morning. In presenting the letters for the printed record of these hearings, Mr. Chairman, I should like to comment upon one of them in particular, although I feel that all are valuable and germane to our purposes, because it is from a colleague on the bench of a witness we have with us this morning. Judge Virgil Langtry, of the Fourth Judicial District of the Circuit Court of Oregon, has this to say in part: "I hope something comes out of this session of the Congress which will at least implement training facilities for people working with children in trouble. One of our greatest needs is for people with the right personalities who are properly trained." He is echoed in another letter from Mr. Stuart R. Stimmel, State director of the Boys and Girls Aid Society of Oregon who said: "I was particularly glad to see that it (H.R. 772) included an appropriation of $5 million toward the training of personnel in the field of juvenile delinquency prevention and control. It is so very clear to those of us who are working with children that there is an acute shortage of people with adequate training to carry out effective programs in this area." Dr. Roy E. Buehler, an associate professor at the University of Oregon, who serves also as consultant on training of the Oregon Juvenile Judges Association, has a most moving appeal for training funds. He writes: Mr. Chairman, I submit the complete correspondence for the record. (The correspondence referred to follows:) UNIVERSITY OF OREGON, COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS, Hon. EDITH GREEN. Congresswoman, House of Representatives, DEAR MRS. GREEN: I have been informed by Judge Joseph Felton that you have introduced a bill which would provide funds for training and research in the area of juvenile delinquency. I would be most appreciative if you would provide me with a copy of your proposal, and some indication of the possibilities of its being adopted by this session of the Congress. As Judge Felton may have told you, the Oregon Juvenile Judges Association has been making some very constructive moves in the direction of training, both on the inservice and the preservice levels. Upon the invitation of the association's committee on training and research, the University of Oregon cosponsored a 1 week, intensive, inservice training institute last summer for juvenile judges and juvenile court directors and counselors. Funds for defraying the minimal costs of the institute were provided out of each participating court's budget. The institute was apparently successful because the association is inviting us at the university to cosponsor another institute, for the same court personnel, this coming summer. Also, we are jointly planning a graduate training program, specifically focusing upon training personnel for work in juvenile correction and rehabilitation programs. A 2-year program leading to the master's degree is being planned, 1 year of which will be an oncampus academic year, with a prescribed interdepartmental curriculum of psychology, sociology, education, and law. The second year will involve internship experience in selected juvenile courts, detention homes, and/or correctional institutions under the supervision of university staff members and the staff of the selected internship agency. We have a joint committee working on the details of this graduate training program, the members of which represent the Oregon Juvenile Judges Association and faculty members from the participating departments here at the university. One problem, the major problem in fact, which we are facing is the problem of financing, of both the summer inservice institute and the planned pre service graduate training program. Graduate stipends are plentiful these days, seemingly for every purpose except to support persons who aim at service and research on the critical problems of delinquency. In the apparent absence of any other source of funds we are planning to present our needs to the National Institute of Mental Health, and request funds for stipends for students in the program and for the university consultants who will be required to supervise the students in the internship situations. It would be of immeasurable help to us here in Oregon if some Federal funds could be provided and earmarked for these specialized training and research needs in the area of juvenile delinquency. It is our belief that none of the existing graduate training programs meet the peculiar needs of personnel in juvenile correction work. Present graduate training in the social sciences (sociology, psychology, social service, etc.) as well as in law and education do not include integrated and intensive training for juvenile programs. We feel that our program is on the order of a rather unique and pioneer effort. We have been following with appreciation and approval your efforts in regard to juvenile problems. It is for this reason that I have taken the liberty of writing to you in detail regarding our plans. Any suggestions which you may have, in regard to programing, financing, or any other aspect of the problem, will be most gratefully received. Sincerely, ROY E. BUEHLER, Ph. D., Associate Professor, Consultant on Training, Oregon Juvenile Judges Association. CIRCUIT COURT OF OREGON, FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, Hon. WAYNE MORSE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR WAYNE: I have a notice from the American Parents Committee, Inc., calling attention to the fact that juvenile delinquency prevention and control bills will be heard in the subcommittee of which you are a member, today and tomorrow. Without having studied the bills in particular, I am of the impression that the one that Edith Green is interested in is a somewhat better draft than Senator Clark's bill, which, I believe, is numbered S. 694. In any event, however, these bills all are pretty good, and I hope something comes out of this session of the Congress which will at least implement training facilities for people working with children in trouble. One of our greatest needs is for people with the right personalities who are properly trained. Another of the greatest needs is something along the line of Senator Humphrey's bill, of which you are a cosponsor, for youth camps. Incidentally, I had not heard of the American Parents Committee before, and from a perusal of their board of directors and national council, numbering somewhat over a hundred people, I would say that they have not heard of any of the United States west of the Mississippi River except Los Angeles. Sincerely yours, VIRGIL LANGTRY, Circuit Judge. THE BOYS AND GIRLS AID SOCIETY OF OREGON, Hon. EDITH GREEN, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MRS. GREEN: Thank you very much for your letter. It is always a pleasure to hear from you. I have studied H.R. 772 which you introduced and I would like to express my full support of the bill and my hope that it will receive favorable consideration at this session of Congress. I was particularly glad to see that it included an appropriation of $5 million toward the training of personnel in the field of juvenile delinquency prevention and control. It is so very clear to those of us who are working with children that there is an acute shortage of people with adequate training to carry out effective programs in this area. The section of the bill providing for grants for special projects to demonstrate or develop improved practices for juvenile delinquency prevention or control is also highly desirable. If there is any way in which I can be of assistance with H.R. 772, please let me know. I am sending a letter expressing these sentiments to the Honorable Carl Elliott. With best personal regards. Hon. EDITH GREEN, STUART R. STIMMEL, State Director. REGIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE COUNCIL, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MRS. GREEN: This is in reply to your letter of March 4 regarding the contents of your proposal on juvenile delinquency, H.R. 772. I have read the bill with much interest since it has been my observation that the Congress should long ago have taken more initiative in this area of concern. My reactions to the specifics of H.R. 772 are as follows: (1) Provisions for the creation of a Federal advisory council are sound. Juvenile delinquency is, as you have said, a nationwide problem; it requires the best thinking of informed people from the whole Nation and from a cross section of all walks of life. (2) The encouragement by Federal Government to the States toward training of specialized personnel in this field is a most direct and appropriate approach. The human personality is fully as complicated as a space-destined rocket, if not more so, and requires technical skills of an equally high order to understand and deal successfully with it. In summary, I would endorse your plan in principle and in detail. I hope your efforts have success. DEAR MRS. GREEN: You would have heard from me sooner in response to your letter of March 5 were it not for the fact that we wanted to have the benefit of deliberations by the committee on law of our board of trustees in relation to H.R. 772, as well as other legislation. At its meeting our committee on law reviewed our earlier statement and reaffirmed the position we took then in relation to Federal legislation. A copy of this statement is attached. At the time we were asked to lend support to Senate bill No. 694 and House bill No. 3464 we did not know of the existence of H.R. 772, and were not able, therefore, to weigh one against the other. Many of us who have been working in the States and throughout the country to develop more effective delinquency control have been disappointed during the last several sessions of the Congress at the failure of passage of legislation to provide Federal leadership. In testimony relative to previous legislative proposals we have stressed the importance of the Federal Government's exercising greater leadership in this field, particularly in the training of personnel. At the time we studied the legislation introduced by Senators Hill and Clark and Congressman Elliott, we were concerned that there was no specific emphasis on training. We concluded that the advisory committee could establish training as a top priority in any grants to be made, and if the legislation passed we would make strenuous efforts to urge that such a priority be established. After studying H.R. 772 I believe that it has an advantage over the other legislation in that it establishes in section 201 legislative intent and funds for grants for training personnel. Is there any practical possibiilty of reconciling the differences so that longoverdue Federal legislation, with a priority on training of personnel, can be enacted this year? I can assure you, and other Members of the Congress, that enthusiasm and support for such a program would manifest itself. Sincerely yours, WILL C. TURNBLADH, Director. STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL PROBATION AND PAROLE ASSOCIATION ON S. 1455 AND SIMILAR BILLS TO CONTROL JUVENILE DELINQUENCY The NPPA is a nonprofit voluntary national agency which for approximately 35 years has provided consultation to and made studies of community services and programs related to juvenile delinquency. Through the committee on law of its board of trustees it has reviewed S. 1455 and several other bills to similar effect and offers the following observations on them. 1. The experience of our association is that these bills would, if enacted, serve a useful and important purpose in the nationwide effort to deal with the problem of juvenile delinquency. 2. There are approximately 3,500 probation officers serving in juvenile courts, most of them without the essential professional training in a school of social work. The need is for no less than 20,000 officers, properly trained. The committees should consider that our criminal courts also have jurisdiction over youthful offenders. The number and training of probation officers in these courts is as far from the need as is the situation with respect to juvenile court officers. It is clear that since these courts deal with the most disturbed young offenders in our communities, the training of probation officers should receive top priority consideration. 3. With respect to research, it is our belief that what is needed is a basic research plan formulated by the Federal Government, and maintained by it. Under this plan and as a part of it, grants should be made available within the States and to the States. Such a comprehensive approach is not authorized in the present bills. Grants made available as under the present bills would have greater value and meaning as part of an overall plan. Such a program would have a scope which no single State would be likely to undertake either through its own resources or with Federal assistance. In support and as part of an overall comprehensive research plan, the support to the State research programs would have increased significance. 4. We endorse the grants to the States for assistance in planning and for direct services and special projects, in view of the present backwardness and lack of adequate facilities in many communities. We stress, however, the need for greater concentration of Federal funds first for training of personnel, and second for research. 5. In the light of the existing need, it is our view that the proposed appropriations should be increased substantially. 6. We endorse the proposal to establish a Federal advisory council on juvenile delinquency. The advice and interest of a sizable, responsible citizen committee can bring to the Department, at little cost, the points of view of many agencies and individuals carrying a considerable part of the work done to stem delinquency. At the same time, comprising individuals and representing agencies of important prestige, the council would be able to assist materially in public interpretation of problems and remedies. Respectfully submitted. Committee on Law, Board of Trustees, National Probation and |