minimal allotments, and that means that their money reverts. So if we had the $5 million figure we could use $4.6 million of it. Senator PASTORE. That is the maximum that you could use; is it not? Mr. McKONE. The maximum with reference to the $5 million grant allowed by the House. Senator POTTER. Irrespective of how much you would need to operate, the maximum you could use would be $4.6 million in 1958; is that not correct? Mr. McKONE. According to the evidence the States collectively could use only $4.6 million of the $5 million proposed. Senator SMITH. If you do not use it all, does it go back? Mr. McKONE. It remains available for the second year, but for all practical purposes, it reverts back to the Treasury. Senator HILL. But if you had the entire amount of $7,500,000, you would use only $6,900,000; is that correct? Mr. KELLY. That is correct. Senator HILL. You would use $6,900,000 only, even if you had the full amount of $7,500,000? Mr. DUNBAR. That is correct. Senator HILL. Subtracting the $6.9 million from $7.5 million, the difference there would be $600,000. You would have to make your allocations to the States on the basis of your overall amount, is that not correct? Mr. DUNBAR. That is correct, sir. Senator HILL. In other words, instead of taking the $7.5 million, the figure you took was $6.9 million, and then you would have to cut down every State, since that $600,000 is not allocable, so to speak; is that not correct? Mr. DUNBAR. That is right, sir. Mr. McKONE. It is quite similar, Senator, to the authority you gave us in vocational education last year. We always had a balance of around $400,000, because many of the States could not use their allotments. For example, the District of Columbia does not use its agricultural allotment. Last year this committee gave us the authority to reallot balances. in vocational education funds, and those balances will be allotted. We have no authority to reallot under this act. Senator PASTORE. Let me ask this question: In other words, if we made it $4,600,000, then maybe only the amount you could possibly match would be $4.3, or something like that? Mr. McKONE. Yes. Senator PASTORE. It comes down to the fact, does it not, that you are always going to have this unused amount? Mr. McKONE. Yes. Senator HILL. I think that would be largely true in nearly all of these matching programs. I think the record would show that. Are there any further questions, gentlemen? TOTAL STATES PARTICIPATING Senator POTTER. I would like to ask how many States participated in this year's program? You spent $2,050,000 this year? Mr. DUNBAR. Thirty eight States have submitted plans as of today. Senator POTTER. And you are anticipating how many States to participate in the program in 1958? Mr. DUNBAR. All but one. Senator POTTER. All but one? Senator POTTER. Then if you received the appropriation of $3 million would you keep the program about level, or would that cut the program that you now have due to the increase in the number of States participating in the program? ALLOCATION ON BASIS OF RURAL POPULATION Mr. DUNBAR. No, sir. That is because of that $3 million we would allocate first $40,000 to each State on a matching basis. Then of the remainder of that 3 million after the $40,000 had been given out to each State, we would allocate additional money to each State on the basis of the rural population to the total rural population of the United States. Senator POTTER. My question is this: Would the States who have participated in the program this year get more or less money in 1958 under the $5 million allowance made by the House? Mr. DUNBAR. Yes, sir. They would get more. For instance, Michigan, which this year is entitled to the $40,000 flat and no more, would under the $5 million, receive $138,000. Senator POTTER. What about the $3 million? What would happen if the budget figure of $3 million were left in? Mr. DUNBAR. Michigan would get $71,444. Senator POTTER. Is that over and above the $138,000? Mr. DUNBAR. Not over and above. Senator POTTER. Is that altogether? Mr. DUNBAR. That is altogether. That is $40,000, and then about $31.000. Mr. McKONE. There is a table on page 19 which shows the amount of money each State will get under a $3 million appropriation. Michigan, for example, this year got the minimal allotment of $40,000; under the $3 million appropriation they would get $71,444. Senator POTTER. Now I understand. Even with the $3 million that the Bureau of the Budget recommended, there would still be an increase in the program in the various phases, would there not? Mr. DUNBAR. A slight increase. Senator POTTER. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Senator HILL. Are there any other questions? If not, we will go to the next item. PAYMENTS TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS STATEMENTS OF L. G. DERTHICK, COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION, AND RALL I. GRIGSBY, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR FEDERALLY AFFECTED AREAS APPROPRIATION ESTIMATE "Payments to school districts: For payments to local educational agencies for the maintenance and operation of schools as authorized by the Act of September 30, 1950, as amended (20 U. S. C. [236–245), $79,000,000] ch. 13; 70 Stat. 909, 970-972) $127,000,000: Provided, That this appropriation shall also be available for carrying out the provisions of section 6 of such Act." Estimated requirements for payments to school districts Public Law 874, as amended, as amended, fiscal years 1956, 1957, and 1958 Mr. DERTHICK. Mr. Chairman, I will ask Mr. Grigsby, who is Assistant Commissioner for School Assistance in federally affected areas, to comment, to join me here at the table. Then I would like. to read my opening statement on the payments to school districts. Senator HILL. Will you come up here, please, Mr. Grigsby? Mr. GRIGSBY. Thank you. Mr. DERTHICK. The program of Federal financial assistance for operation of schools in federally affected areas was extended by the 84th Congress through fiscal year 1958. Appropriation requirements 91359-57-25 for payments to school districts to help meet these current operating expenses amount to $127 million for the fiscal year 1958. This request is to be compared with the sum of $113,050,000 appropriated for fiscal year 1957 for this same program. The factors causing the increase of approximately $14 million in appropriation requirements in fiscal year 1958 are the continuing increases in numbers of federally connected pupils attending school and the rising costs of education. Payments to eligible districts in fiscal year 1957 and fiscal year 1958 will be based on the numbers of pupils in attendance in the current school year rather than the previous year, as a result of one of the amendments enacted by the last Congress. Thus, it is necessary for the Office, in estimating appropriation requirements for fiscal year 1958, to project school attendance figures through both fiscal year 1957 and fiscal year 1958. TOTAL DISTRICTS ELIGIBLE The estimate as thus projected assumes that some 3,000 school districts will be eligible to participate in this program in fiscal year 1957 and fiscal year 1958. They will have in attendance some 1,125,000 federally connected pupils in 1957 and 1,230,000 in 1958. An additional 20,000 pupils will be in attendance at schools operated by the Federal Government on Federal installations where local educational agencies cannot accept responsibility for free public education. Although the exact number of applications to be received for fiscal year 1957 will not be known until the second week of April-and that is almost here since applications may be accepted if postmarked not later than April 1, as of March 28 the Office had received applications from 3,325 school districts. Some 540 of these applications were from school districts which had not made application in fiscal year 1956. This is the largest number of new applications that has been received since the third year of the program-that was 1953-and exceeds the expectations of the Office of Education when the appropriation estimates for fiscal year 1957 and fiscal year 1958 were compiled. The excessive number of new applications raises doubt as to the sufficiency of the 1957 appropriation to pay full entitlements and definitely confirms our belief that the 1958 estimate is conservative. That is the overall view. We have Dr. Grigsby here, who is in charge of this program, for detailed questions. Senator HILL. Are there any questions? Senator PASTORE. No, Mr. Chairman. Senator POTTER. NO. ASSISTANCE FOR SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION APPROPRIATION ESTIMATE "Assistance for school construction: For an additional amount for providing school facilities and for grants to local educational agencies in federally affected areas, as authorized by title III and title IV of the Act of September 23, 1950, as amended (20 U. S. C., ch. 14; 70 Stat. 909, 968-969), including [payments upon applications filed on or before June 30, 1956, and] not to exceed [$500.000] $800,000 for necessary expenses of technical services rendered by other |