we must provide immediately for the educational services to the severely and profoundly retarded who have been denied their educational opportunities in the schools down through history and this landmark decision has been the catalyst for a number of other States and their courts are saying the same thing that these children must be served and must be served now regardless of the cost.

This is going to be paralleled and duplicated by the same court decisions about other types of handicapped children who have been excluded from services in the schools. You have a yellow brochure attached to our formal statement entitled, "A Continuing Summary of Pending and Completed Litigation Regarding the Education of Handicapped Children," regarding education of handicapped children in which these type of court decisions and mandates are presented in very brief form.

All of the 47,000 members of the Council for Exceptional Children are working toward the day when we will be able to say that every handicapped child has been provided with an opportunity for the appropriate educational services, a correctly designed program, and a highly qualified teacher to teach him.

That day will come but it is going to be sometime yet before that day does arrive. The need for further service from the Education of the Handicapped Act is clearly before us and now is not the time to stop this vital service provided under this act.

The Council for Exceptional Children reiterates its strong support of H.R. 4199 and hopes that this committee will give it prompt attention.

We also hope that at a later date the committee will give its attention to a bill which addresses itself to the even larger question of helping States and communities offset the direct and expensive cost of educating all handicapped children.

Mr. Chairman, the Council for Exceptional Children is proud to note that you have already shown your sensitivity to this larger issue by introducing H.R. 70, the Education of the Handicapped Children's Act.

I should like to thank you very much for this opportunity to present the views of the Council for Exceptional Children on H.R. 4199 today. We of the Council for Exceptional Children again offer any and all assistance we might provide to your future considerations of this final issue and finally if I might add a personal appreciation for the opportunity provided by our national legislative system whereby an unknown person like myself from a very small college and very tiny town in western Pennsylvania, could have the privilege of coming before you here this morning in Washington and adding my views for your consideration of this act.

This is something very good about a government which encourages this type of input from persons like me.

I have been greatly impressed with this new experience of appearing before you on behalf of this act and I think you for hearing me this morning.

[The prepared statement and brochure follows:]

STATEMENT OF DR. JACK C. DINGER, PRESIDENT-ELECT, THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN, AND PROFESSOR AND CHAIRMAN, DEPARTMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATION, SLIPPERY ROCK STATE COLLEGE, SLIPPERY ROCK, PA.; ACCOMPANIED BY WILLIAM C. GEER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN, WASHINGTON, D.C.; FREDERICK J. WEINTRAUB, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, THE COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is indeed a pleasure to come before this distinguished panel to offer the comments of The Council for Exceptional Children relative to The Education of the Handicapped Act from the standpoint of services provided for this nation's handicapped children.

At the outset, let me emphasize again-in concert with the feelings of past officers of The Council for Exceptional Children-the real and deep gratitude of all of us in the special education profession for the remarkable concern for and efforts on behalf of handicapped children demonstrated by this Subcommittee of the Education and Labor Committee, especially in recent years. This committee long ago acknowledged the special responsibility of the national government for the education of America's exceptional children; and the EduIcation of the Handicapped Act is a singular monument to this committee's attention and this committee's diligence.

And to you in particular, Mr. Chairman, may I extend my special thanks. Throughout your stewardship as chairman of this subcommittee, you have been an unrelenting protector of the interests of handicapped children and an equally unrelenting advocate of their special needs.

Let me make it absolutely clear that The Council for Exceptional Children endorses H.R. 4199 to extend the Education of the Handicapped Act, the foundation of present federal support for the handicapped in education.

Permit me to review briefly the components of this most effective legislation: (See Appendix A, expenditures by state for handicapped.)

(See Appendix B, handicapped served by state.)

(See Appendix C, state of EHA, authorization, appropriations.)

AID TO STATES PROGRAM

The state grant program under Part B (Title VI) has acted as a most useful catalyst to local and state program growth. Joint planning with the states under this program has meant increased programming on a comprehensive basis involving other federal programs (such as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Titles I and III) as well as local services.

With appropriation levels for Fiscal 1972 and Fiscal 1973 totalling $37.5 million, this program has stimulated new educational opportunities for an encouraging 215,000 handicapped children in 1972 according to the Bureau of Education For The Handicapped (See Appendix C). The catalytic effect of what might be described as the "seed monies" provided under Part B should not be underestimated. (See Appendix D, grants by states, Title VI B).

Members of this committee may be interested in noting the unusually wide disparity between the authorization level approved by the Congress for Title VI B for Fiscal 1973 and the estimated actual expenditures for Fiscal 1973, i.e. $200 million compared to the actual $37.5 million. (See Appendix C)

SPECIAL TARGET PROGRAMS

The special target programs under the aegis of Part C of the Education of the Handicapped Act have tremendous impact upon our total effort on behalf of exceptional children. (See Appendix E, special target programs by state.)

For instance, the ten regional Deaf-Blind Centers coordinate resources and services for approximately 1,700 deaf-blind children in those regions. As you know, the number of deaf-blind children increased dramatically as a result of the 1964-65 rubella epidemic. In fact, over 4,500 children have been located and identified through the regional deaf-blind program as of December, 1972. The regional centers provide not only educational services (residential and day care) but also diagnostic counseling and tutorial services.

Let me also make brief mention of the crisis care facilities operated under this authority in which approximately 100 children are enrolled. These facilities are aimed at achieving appropriate placement of deaf-blind children in other programs and providing assistance to the parents. A byproduct of such crisis care units not to be underestimated is the reduction of personal anxiety for the parents themselves.

I am pleased to note, as well, the plans at BEH for greatly expanded services at the centers beginning in September 1973. Anticipated are: educational services for 2,900 children in residential and day care facilities; crisis care services for 200 children and their families; diagnostic and educational assessment for 700 children; parent counseling for parents of 2,200 children; inservice training for 1,200 educators, professionals, and parents; summer school and camp programs for 500 children.

Another vital special target component under Part C is the early education programs. This program originally established as the Handicapped Children's Early Education Assistance Act (Public Law 90-538) has as its purposes to: 1. Provide parents with counselling and guidance so that they may effectively respond to the special needs of their handicapped children.

2. Develop programs and materials designed to meet the unique needs of preschool handicapped children and to prepare personnel to work with such children. 3. Acquaint the community with the problems and potentials of handicapped children.

4. Insure continuity of education by demonstrating coordination between various private and public agencies providing services to the handicapped. The importance of early education for handicapped children can not be minimized. For many handicapped children the early years are nothing more than a period of waiting. While other children develop their readiness skills for education from exploring their environments, the blind child and the physically handicapped child remain confined to rooms or homes because of no mobility training; the deaf child remains in a world without communication, because no effort is undertaken to develop existing hearing or other communication channels; the retarded child falls further behind his peers, because no high intensity teaching program is provided and the disturbed child becomes more and more a social outcast, because no one will help him resolve his problems.

Research is clearly demonstrating that we could reduce the demands for special education services within the compulsory school age range or at least the duration of such services, if comprehensive preschooling were available. Realizing this, many states have begun to undertake this responsibility on their own. As we move in this direction the experimental early childhood education programs and its present centers will be critical.

Part C of the Education of the Handicapped Act also authorized the development of regional resource centers to assist teachers and administrators of programs for handicapped children in bringing effective educational services to the entire population of exceptional children. The six centers now in existence served more than 25,000 handicapped children in eighteen states with direct and indirect services in 1973.

The current goals of these centers reflect their overall mission since being created:

1. Provide educational testing and evaluation services for the children referred to them especially the severely handicapped.

2. Develop individual prescribed educational programs.

3. Assist state and local agencies in finding handicapped children currently not enrolled in schools and recommend suitable programs.

It is anticipated that approximately 40,000 handicapped children will receive comprehensive services from the centers in 1973; and, since emphasis in the centers is being placed upon the too often hidden and unassisted severely handicapped, it is further anticipated that an additional 2,000 severely and multiply handicapped children will be served. (See Appendix E)

And finally, in the special target category, recognition must be given to the program in learning disabilities (Part G, EHA). The National Advisory Committee on the Handicapped reported in 1969 that some 600,000 to 1,800,000 or one to three percent of the total school-age population have specific learning disabilities. The federal effort is aimed at exploring the nature of the disorders,

discovering approaches to treatment, and stimulating an expanded supply of teachers to effectively deal with these disabilities. Grants are made to state education agencies to establish model centers and state program plans for these children. It is expected that during 1973, 40 states will be receiving grants under this program.

The State Education Agencies are required to:

1. Conduct a specific learning disabilities intervention program.

2. Evaluate that program.

3 Design a process for determining the validity of the intervention model. 4. Develop a plan for implementation of that model.

Total federal expenditures for Fiscal 1973 for the learning disabilities project are $3.25 million. (See Appendix E for state by state distribution.)

PERSONNEL TRAINING

Part D of the Education of the Handicapped Act provides for the training of personnel for the education of the handicapped. Much has been accomplished under the authority of this section in the preparation of teachers and other personnel; but perhaps the best way to illustrate the importance of this federal program authority would be to cite the immense unmet need in the preparation of personnel.

If we are to extend quality educational services to all handicapped children under current teacher-student ratios, we must have an additional 245,000 teachers for school-age children and 60,000 for preschool children . . . that is notwithstanding the need to upgrade and update the 133,000 teachers currently in service, of whom nearly one-half are uncertified.

The $84 million provided in FY 1973 to states and colleges and universities (See Appendices F and G) has been a critical factor in making educational opportunities for handicapped children a reality. With the movement to provide education for all handicapped children the continuance and growth of this program is imperative.

RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION

Research and demonstration is also a vital component of the EHA package, since it supports applied research and related activities. For instance, in 1972 research was produced further demonstrating that retarded children can be taught effective strategies for learning. One project provided learning experiences via educational television for over 200 children in North Carolina. Other research under this component has led to training programs for teachers of low vision children; major curriculum development in the area of programs in the area of post-secondary school vocational training for hearing impaired youth; a computer-assisted course of instruction designed to acquaint regular teachers with the identification of handicapped children in their classrooms. The list trails on impressively; this federal investment must be continued.

Research and demonstration (EHA Part E, Sec. 641 and 642) has been obligated at a level of $9.9 million in Fiscal 1973, and the Administration proposed maintaining that level of funding in Fiscal 1974. In Fiscal 1973, some $7.9 million will have been obligated for continuing research with the remaining $2 million applied to new research. Approximately the same division between the "new" and "continuing" is estimated for Fiscal 1974.

For Fiscal 1974, research priorities have been assigned to improving. the delivery of services in preschool education, in establishing new initiatives in career education and supporting continuing education programs for the adult deaf.

MEDIA SERVICES AND CAPTIONED FILMS

The Meda Services and Captioned Film program responds to the need to provide the handicapped child with special education materials. (Part F of the Education of the Handicapped Act) What are examples of accomplishments? In 1973, efforts such as the development of Computer Based Resource Centers have afforded teachers of handicapped children with detailed instructional strategies and materials. Nearly 500,000 CBRU's are in use now by about 75,000

teachers of the handicapped. Another example: Project Life, a programmed language system to teach handicapped children, and Project ME, a learning program for young handicapped children, are now well known. These programs started with the federal funds. Federal activities in the captioned TV area for deaf persons has meant the captioning and broadcasting of numerous programs over the Public Broadcasting Network, including the captioning and broadcasting of the recent Inaugural Address (a first attempt at the captioning of a national event for immediate broadcasting).

Media Services and Captioned Films were obligated at a funding level of $13 million in Fiscal 1973, and the budget proposes to maintain that obligation in Fiscal 1974. (See Appendix H) Objectives for Fiscal 1974 in the communication area show a continuation of many worthy initiatives in early childhood programs, in manpower development, in career education, as well as all full services, examples of which I have previously cited.

Simply by way of reiteration then, Mr. Chairman, The Council for Exceptional Children supports extension of the Education of the Handicapped Act for all of the reasons previously cited.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer a postscript relative to future considerations of the handicapped in relation to federal legislation. The fairly recent flurry of suits which have generated court decrees mandating full appropriate public education for exceptional children may be viewed in two aspects by this Congress: namely, a compliment to the even earlier determination of the Congress that handicapped children be in full possession of those very rights the courts are now demanding for them; and a signpost to the Congress of what may be new dimensions in the federal role.

It might be suggested that what has thus far been a useful and productive relationship between the federal government and handicapped children may in time become a fullblown partnership.

With the best information indicating that, of the six million handicapped children of school age, roughly sixty percent of these children are still not receiving appropriate special educational services and with the courts now decreeing that such services be provided (in significant cases nationwide)—you in the Congress are, of course, because of the force of events coupled with your own concerns, considering the question of increased federal educational support.

It is our conviction that the Education of the Handicapped Act is the foundation of the present and future federal commitment. The EHA maintains some vital basic services in the development of educational personnel, in continuing research, in model programs, in promoting flexibility from state to state, and perhaps, most significantly-in initiating the "untried" in numerous areas.

However, the joining of our own concerns with the growth of the "right to education" mandate have brought all of us to the next level in the public finance equation. Quite frankly, it is estimated that it will cost $7 billion to educate all handicapped children. The federal commitment is, at best, spending some $230 million. The federal government is providing only slightly more than 3 percent of the cost of educating handicapped children, while providing almost 7 percent of the cost of educating all other children.

In consequence, this distinguished committee confronts the basic dilemma: shall an excellent program of stimulation and improvement represented by the EHA be expanded into a partnership in which the federal government does in fact share a significant position of the overall cost of the education of the handicapped?

That you, Mr. Chairman, have become highly sensitive to this question and have become determined to confront it is well illustrated by your introduction of the "Education for Handicapped Children Act," H.R. 70. Which we hope will be given the most serious consideration after the basic programs have been extended.

Let me say, finally, that all the resources of The Council for Exceptional Children will be at your disposal as you deliberate on this difficult problem.