prescribed, you go home and wear it, it is rejected, so it is a very costly kind of program, means only financially feasible institutions such as we maintain here, where the cost of the service is hidden in the cost of education and training.

Mr. O'HARA. Thank you very much, Dr. Morgan.

Mr. Giaimo, do you have any questions?

Mr. GIAIMO. No.

Mr. O'HARA. Dr. Morton Gordon.

Dr. Gordon, if you will identify yourself to the reporter, we shall be pleased to hear your testimony.

STATEMENT OF DR. MORTON GORDON, HEAD OF UNIVERSITY EXTENSION, UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA

Dr. GORDON. My name is Morton Gordon. I am head of the University Extension at the University of California, Berkeley. University Extension has a very large community organization program that last year in the State as a whole enrolled about 160,000 students. Of this, about 60,000 or 70,000 were enrolled in programs developed from the Berkeley campus.

Now, in the past couple of years, we have received at the University Extension many requests from people dealing in the community with the aged and with problems of aging. Almost invariably, at least to my knowledge, we have had to turn these requests down for the reason that University Extension lacks the financial resources to do these kinds of programs. We are presently financed on the basis of a 9-percent allocation from State funds from Sacramento. This means that 91 percent out of every dollar that we spend for everything has to come from the student. So we invariably have to tell people who are engaged in developing training program, (1) that we think that what we are doing is very good, (2) that we are in modesty forced to believe that we know something about how programs ought to be developed and would be delighted to work with them, but, (3) because we would be forced, because of our financial condition, to charge such fees that the people who would come to us for these programs to take the training will not be able to do so.

So, my purpose in coming here today to testify is essentially to argue that for a very modest outlay of funds such as is contemplated in H.R. 8732, which provides a measure of Federal support for general university extension purposes, one could then utilize already existing organizations of university extensions throughout the country to work with people in the community in developing a host of programs involving training such as the other Dr. Gordon and other witnesses here have testified about.

Specifically, I have a couple of suggestions I would like to make, which will only take a minute. The University of California is making important contributions to increasing knowledge about aging and additional research is essential. University extension has been able to relate this knowledge in its community educational programs, largely for financial reasons. Assistance is needed urgently for the following programs which extension has been able to develop.

A problem identification and training conference for key leaders in the bay area concerned with aging. By involving leaders from diverse

groups in the community together with older persons, the conference would stress the importance of thinking in terms of how a city can best utilize older people as a resource in the community rather than just "taking care of" older persons, identify the critical needs of older persons, and assist in planning the most effective mobilization of the resources of this area.

Two, a training conference for personnel in associations and agencies; for example, public welfare agencies, social welfare planning council, et cetera, who work with older persons. The conference would emphasize training personnel in the assessment of the needs of older persons and the long-range planning of programs which associations and agencies are uniquely qualified to develop.

Three, development of a counseling center for older persons at extensions, downtown San Francisco center.

Four, a study of retired persons who are employed as instructors in extension programs with a view of learning more effective ways to utilize and increase the numbers of retired persons as instructors in the programs of university extension.

Five, a conference for public information persons in the bay area to interpret the needs of older people and to increase public awareness of their needs and what groups and agencies are doing in the field.

Six, a conference on the special problems of employing aging persons. This conference would be directed primarily toward business, industry, and labor, and would stress the need to increase our productivity through the employment of older persons. Attention would be given to the development of special programs of preparing persons for retirement.

That's all I have to say.

Mr. O'HARA. Thank you very much, Dr. Gordon. I suggest we use the tremendous experience and resources that have been developed by the University Extension. My experience in Michigan convinces me of that as well as your testimony. I am really very sorry that the chairman of this subcommittee isn't here to hear your ringing endorsement.

Dr. GORDON. So am I, a little bit.

Mr. O'HARA. H.R. 8732 was introduced by Representative Cleveland Bailey, chairman of this subcommittee. Counsel, don't you think he would be pleased with Dr. Gordon's testimony?

Mr. McCORD. I do, indeed. He was very interested, and I am sure he will be glad to hear of your support when I tell him about your testimony.

Mr. O'HARA. The effect of H.R. 8732 is pointed up by your testimony with regard to this problem, as well as earlier testimony on vocational rehabilitation and special education, in which Mr. Giaimo of Connecticut has a special interest. I think your testimony illustrates the diverse nature of the problems of the aged and the relevance of many of the things that we undertake in these problems. I would like to thank you. Mr. Giaimo, do you have any questions? Mr. GIAIMO. No questions.

Mr. O'HARA. Mrs. Van Frank.

If you will come forward and identify yourself for the record, you may proceed in any manner you wish.

STATEMENT OF MRS. ISABELLE VAN FRANK, SENIOR CITIZEN, BERKELEY, CALIF.; MEMBER OF BERKELEY COMMITTEE ON AGING; PRESIDENT OF THE COORDINATING COUNCIL OF EAST BAY CITIZENS' GROUP

Mrs. VAN FRANK. I am Isabelle Van Frank. I live here in Berkeley. I am a senior citizen. I am a member of the Berkeley Committee on Aging. I am also president of the Coordinating Council of East Bay Citizens' Group.

While I don't feel qualified at this point, since I have not seen the bills that are under question, I do not feel qualified to discuss them or to give my opinion as to whether we should have a commission on aging or a bureau with HEW. I certainly am in favor of the idea of the, general idea of centralizing the services projects and research projects for aging. I feel that now the situation is a little bit chaotic. I have the experience sometimes, when I am trying to get information, of not knowing just where or how to reach it. This is just one little aspect of the situation.

Now, there is one thing the senior citizens want. Of course, you can't speak of the senior citizens, as we happen to be about 17 individuals, men and women, but if we do have one thing in common, it is the passionate desire to remain independent, to remain active participating members of the community. We don't want to be shoved aside. We don't want to be hand spoonfed. We don't want to have the services that are offered to us.

The doctors tell us that many more and more of us are going to live longer and longer. Well, I can't see myself living for 30 or 40 years and being useless members of society and society not alone support us by entertain us and do everything for us. This is not what we want. It is not what we are looking for. We want to be active members of your community. We want to serve our community. But, gentlemen, you cannot feel free to serve and do and to be active in the community if you are beset with problems, economic, health, and others.

If you are confined because of your income, if you are confined to a small area within walking distance of your miserable little home, you cannot think, worry or concern yourself very much with what is going on in your community or the needs of the community or what you, yourself, can offer.

You know, I am sure from our own experience that you have to have a certain serenity of mind in order to be able to contribute to society, or even to carry on your daily work. Well, my feeling is that so many millions of our older people are not able to contribute to society for the very fact that they are beset with worries. And if I may, I should like to address myself to two of the most pressing problems, to my mind, that are facing our senior citizens, and that is in the field of housing and the field of health. I don't know whether I would be out of order if I mentioned King-Anderson, but I certainly do hope most urgently that you will work to see that this kind of legislation is passed in this session. I don't think that King-Anderson is the best bill that has been offered, but certainly it will do very, very much to quiet the fears and to meet the needs, the most pressing needs of our people.

I don't have to go into detail, because you are all very well acquainted with the economics of the situation, and of the bill, and what it would mean in terms of freedom from worry and help in meeting the expense of medical costs today. But I would like to tell you some specific, a couple of specific cases here in Alameda County that might just pinpoint the situation.

Our Alameda Council of Social Planning, for instance, 2 years ago, had a survey in preparation for establishing a homemaker service. They wanted to see the extent of the need of such a service. Well, during this survey it was a spot survey, it consisted of 170 chronically ill elderly-now, of course, there were many who were not discovered, not uncovered, but there were 170 who turned up during the survey. Of these, more than two-thirds were unable to hire a homemaker. They simply did not have the money to take advantage of such a

service.

Now, the King-Anderson bill would help to establish and to expand homemaker service in the community.

I can think of a woman I know who is in her seventies, who is living on the insurance that her husband left her. She figures that if she lived as frugally-and believe me, it is frugal-if she continued to live as frugally as she is now for the next 10 years, she would be able to get along, so she looks forward to a life of 10 years. She doesn't want to think beyond that point.

Well, up to now she has been well and so she has been able to get along on this budget. Recently, she was not well, she went to her doctor, he sent her to the hospital for 1 day. It cost her $74 for the tests and for the services in the hospital for that 1 day. Now she says and she does have humor in spite of suffering-she says, well, perhaps I have to lower my perspective to 5 years and content myself about living for another 5 years, because I don't want to think of what would happen beyond that, because we don't want to turn to government to help support us.

I can think of another person, a man who I know very well, who developed a pain in his arm last year, less than a year ago. He kept from going to a doctor by rubbing his arm, saying, well, it is arthritis or something, I will rub it. He didn't pay much attention to it because he didn't have hospitalization and he was worried about possible expense. Finally, he had to go to the doctor--he went to a hospital, to make a long story short-he went to a hospital for 5 days; that cost him $600. They sent him home; a month later he was sent back to the hospital; he had his arm and part of his shoulder amputated. He had cancer.

Now, we know that if cancer is discovered early enough, treated early enough, there is a very good chance of it being controlled. This man perhaps would not have lost his arm, would not have lost part of his shoulder, if he had not had the fear of expense, of his medical expenses, and would have gone to a doctor immediatley. He was a shoe cobbler, and he augmented his social security check by continuing to do a little bit of cobbling on the side, although he is retired. Of course he can't do that now. He would need both hands. And so now he is faced, of course, with not being able to augment his social security checks.

Well, I have other cases like this. I could go on, but I want-I think I have made my point, and do hope and urge you to use all of your influence to see that this legislation is passed.

In the field of housing, and you know that housing is not housing alone; it is not just a roof, there are many aspects of housing, of the social aspects, the health, the ability to remain independent when you are well housed.

About 6 years ago, a group of Berkeleyans wanted to meet the need for low-cost housing here in Berkeley, and when they thought of lowcost housing, of course, they thought of $35, $40, and $45 for the really low-income people in Berkeley, and there are quite a few of them, and they are poorly housed, many of them are now in thirdand fourth-rate hotels within walking distance of our magnificent university. For 6 years this group worked and struggled and finally we did get a grant, a direct loan of $1,660,000, to erect a 151-unit project for the elderly. But it is not low cost. It is moderate; yes. The rentals range from close to $70, perhaps $67.50 for a very small, a very limited unit, to $100 and over for the larger unit.

Now this is not low income, this is not going to help many of the people who have been waiting for 6 years for the housing, knowing of course that we were trying to put up a project that was really low

cost.

And so here again are a group of people trying to do something for themselves and for each other, and simply are not able to because, again, because of the cost.

So I make the strong plea for an augmented and accelerated program of public housing which I think is the only way that we can bring the cost of homes down low enough to take care of the people who are now so poorly housed.

Thank you very much.

Mr. O'HARA. Mrs. Van Frank, I am not going to ask any questions. At one point in your presentation you said you thought you had made your point. I want to say that I think you made your point very well indeed.

Mrs. VAN FRANK. Thank you.

Mr. O'HARA. Perhaps we should have your address. Maybe we should ask you to testify before the Ways and Means Committee. The testimony you have given with regard to the needs of the aged in the health and housing fields is among the more important and forceful statements I have ever heard.

Mrs. VAN FRANK. Thank you very much.

Gentlemen, in that connection, I would say if you pay my fare, I would be very happy to testify, because this is a very moot point with senior citizens like myself, who are active, because, although we can ill afford it, it is an expense to us to do the things we are doing and there is no fund anywhere to help the senior citizens who want to remain active in this capacity, so you might just add that to my comments. My address is 2134 Grant Street, Berkeley.

Mr. O'HARA. Is Dr. Ben Rosner present? Doctor Rosner, if you will identify yourself for the record, you may proceed in any manner you wish.