minorities, veterans, welfare recipients and former manpower trainees.' In the absence of any such age break-out, it is impossible to provide you any projection of CETA funds allocated to the older workers category in the State."

We have been seeking for several years, with equal vigor and similar lack of success, to secure age-related information on social services provided through federal funds made available to the State of Illinois. A recent letter from the Illinois Department of Public Aid advised—

"Costs for social services are accumulated within each State agency by the type of service delivered rather than by category of eligibility, so it is not possible to accurately segregate social service reimbursement for services to the aged at this time."

Without this information, planning for use of Title III social services funds cannot be truly effective. In fact, planning in general for the elderly cannot succeed without access to full and current data on all services, recorded and gathered to be of maximum utility to those who have planning responsibilities in aging. We believe that administration of community service employment funds is not a proper task for national organizations in aging, but more properly one that belongs to State Offices and area agencies on aging. We believe that the State and area agency on aging should have specified roles in State and local manpower planning councils.

In my view the Foster Grandparent Program is not a volunteer program, but rather one of community service employment for low-income elderly. I objected the last time I appeared before this committee, and I still object today, to the use of language in a way that does not reflect truth and thus succeeds in distoring reality. The Foster Grandparent Program belongs back in the AoA, instead of ACTION, and so do the community service employment programs now administered by the Department of Labor, unless some other way can be achieved of relating planning and administration of community service employment programs to State and area offices on aging.

We believe that specific sums of money should be authorized and appropriated for all titles of the Older Americans Act. We have come to understand that the practical result of the phrase "such sums as may be necessary" is no funds at all. It is misleading in the extreme to have such important programs as Multidisciplinary Centers of Gerontology called for in Title IV C or the Multipurpose Senior Centers of Title V, simply carried on the books, if the intention is not to fund them. We believe in all of the programs called for in the Older Americans Act, a good reflection of what the elderly proposed at the 1971 White House Conference on Aging, and we believe they should all be funded.

We would like to enter into the record a document we have prepared on proposed specific revisions to the Older Americans Act, that also includes six requests for clarification of Title III regulations promulgated by the Administration on Aging. I will mention only one of them now, the need for clarification on criteria of eligibility, to say this: we cannot long continue to provide programs that offer unlimited eligibility, with finite resources to fund them.

When 3,000 people a day are served in Chicago's Title VII nutrition programand that level was reached last year-we were at the limit of our federal grant and city matching funds. The city budget for 1975 gives me an additional cash appropriation of $528,000 to buy food and transportation for the elderly, sufficient to serve 4,000 people a day, but whom do we turn away first, when these funds run out and the four thousandth person is served?

There are realities to face and difficult problems to resolve as we move to strengthen our programs for the elderly. We have come to respect many of our colleagues in the Administration on Aging. Even as we differ with them and are sharply critical of this administration's unbelievably negative proposals on the welfare of the elderly, we acknowledge the individual professionalism and personal concern for our older people of many who work in the Administration on Aging.

Most of all, our respect is won by the Congressional Committees and staff, whose professionalism and concern is coupled with the indispensable factor of leadership. Considering the unfortunate negative attitude that the national administration has evidenced toward the elderly, that leadership becomes even more important. Chicago stands ready to help in any way it can in the efforts needed to insure a better life for our nation's older people and, thereby, for us all. I know I speak also for the cities of the nation represented in the Urban Elderly Coalition, who share the sentiments and will also share the work.

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE OLDER AMERICANS ACT OF 1965, AS AMENDED

TITLE I-Declaration of Objectives

Amend Sec. 101, as underlined below, to read as follows: "provide comprehensive programs which will assure the coordinated delivery of a full range of essential services to our older citizens, and, where applicable, also furnish meaningful employment opportunities for older persons in particular, as well as younger persons and others from the community."

TITLE II—Administration on Aging

Amend Sec. 201. (1) (a) to provide, as recommended by the 1971 White House Conference on Aging, that the national office on aging be located within the office of the Chief Executive.

Amend Sec. 202.(a)(4), as underlined below, to read as follows:

"(4) develop plans, conduct and arrange for research in the field of aging, and assist in the establishment of and carry out programs designed to meet the needs of older persons for social services, including nutrition, hospitalization, prehealth and employment services;"

Amend Sec. 202.(14) to include continuing evaluation of the following programs: the Food Stamp Act, Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, Urban Mass Transportation Act, Housing and Community Development Act, and National Legal Services Corporation Act.

Add a Section 204. (a) to empower the Commissioner on Aging to secure agerelated data necessary for planning on a federal, State and local basis, from other federal departments and agencies.

Amend Sec. 204. (b) to require the Commissioner to report to the Congress by specific dates on the implementation of the National Information and Resource Clearing House for the aging.

Amend Sec. 204. (c): A specific sum of money sufficient to implement the purposes of this section should be authorized and appropriated.

TITLE III-Grants for State and Community Programs on Aging

Sec. 302. (1) (A) : add employment and legal services.

Sec. 303. (a): add a section to provide that when the financial effort of a city office on aging exceeds that of its State office on aging, independent of matching funds for Title III and VII, the city automatically becomes an area agency on aging funded directly by the Administration on Aging and reporting thereto, with funding made on the same direct grant, per capita basis as to the States. Sec. 304. (a) (1): Strike the exception: "except that the State may designate as a planning and service area, any region within the State recognized for purposes of areawide planning which includes one or more such units of general purpose local government when the State determines that the designation of such a regional planning and service area is necessary for, and will enhance, the effective administration of the programs authorized by this title."

Sec. 304. (a): add a section to provide that when the financial effort of a city office on aging exceeds that of its State office on aging, independent of matching funds for Titles III and VII, the city automatically becomes an area agency on aging funded directly by the Administration on Aging and reporting thereto, with funding made on the same direct grant, per capita basis as to the States. Sec. 304. (c) (4) (C) : Inclusion of legal services at this point leaves the impression that legal services are of less importance than other social services allowed for under Title III. Legal services should be mentioned in Section 302.(1)(A) so that they are given equal status with other social services which may be necessary for the general welfare of older persons.

Sec. 304. (c) (4) (E) states that an Area Plan shall provide that the Area Agency on Aging will, "where possible, enter into arrangements with organizations providing day care services for children so as to provide opportunities for older persons to aid or assist, on a voluntary basis in the delivery of such services to children;" In part, and because of the existence of the RSVP program, we do not feel that an Area Agency on Aging should be mandated to undertake this kind of activity.

Amend Sec. 304. (c) (4) (F), as underlined below, to read as follows: "establish an advisory council, consisting of representatives of the target population and the general public as well as representatives of the general purpose local governments when the arca agency is other than a unit of such local govern

ment/s, to advise the area agency on all matters relating to the administration of the plan and operations conducted thereunder."

Sec. 304. (c) (4): add a paragraph (G): review and comment on all proposals for programs within the planning and service area which may be funded directly under the various titles of the Older Americans Act.

Sec. 304. (c): add a paragraph (5): provide for a mechanism to ensure cooperative planning with sponsors of Title VII nutrition projects within the planning and service area.

Sec. 305. (a): add a paragraph (10): provides that the factors of total elderly population, incidence of poverty, isolation, and concentration of minority elderly are considered in the allocation of funds made to area agencies.

Sec. 306 (b) (1): add a section to provide that when the financial effort of a city office on aging exceeds that of its State office on aging, independent of matching funds for Titles III and VII, the city automatically becomes an area agency on aging funded directly by the Administration on Aging and reporting thereto, with funding made on the same direct grant, per capita basis as to the States.

Other issues to be considered under Title III regulations promulgated by the Administration on Aging

1. Clarification of the regulations pertaining to minority contractors, relating to their definition, existence, capabilities and the factors of bidding and costs. 2. Clarification relating to establishment of eligibility criteria for services when funds appropriated are insufficient to provide services to all the elderly who need and request these services. Whom do we turn away?

3. Clarification of the regulation requiring the AAA advisory council membership to include low income persons in proportion to their number in the area. Does this imply a means test? If not, then what?

4. Clarification of instructions to destroy parts of client records when such a mandate inhibits both client service as well as planning and evaluation. 5. Revision of the format required for both State and Area Plans, to allow · opportunity for description of the comprehensive plans which are the objective of the legislation, and to facilitate more informed public discussion of these plans. 6. Clarification of intent that information and referral services be accessible Statewide, to insure that no single system is imposed before the feasibility of such a system is first determined.

TITLE IV-Training and Research

Part B-Research and Development Projects.-Sec. 411: The introduction should state that research efforts under the Older Americans Act should be geared to action and utilization by providers of services, and joint research projects, funded cooperatively with other government agencies should be undertaken whenever possible.

Part C-Multidisciplinary Centers of Gerontology.-Sec. 421. (1): add a paragraph (H): create a library facility for the use of students of the centers and for the training of librarians in the field of aging.

Part D-Authorization of appropriations.-Sec. 431. Specific sums of money should be authorized and appropriated for Parts A, B and C.

TITLE V-Multipurpose Senior Centers

Part A-Sec. 501.: Authorization of payment for construction should be added, when the cost of acquisition, alterations or renovation of existing facilities is prohibitive or not feasible.

Sec. 507. Add a new program of direct loans for construction, rehabilitation, acquisition, etc., of multi-purpose senior centers because—

1. Mortgage Insurance Programs 236, 235, 221(d) 3 have had a history of failure and scandals. Many buildings constructed with federally subsidized mortgage insurance have been closed or turned back to FHA because of

(a) high cost of mortgages

(b) insufficient operating funds

(c) poorer quality construction which is encouraged by minimal quality standards and budgets which must be met.

2. Direct loans as offered by the 202 program have been more successful, and the incidence of economic failure of a building has been virtually nil.

3. Conventional mortgages are currently very difficult to obtain: rates vary from 9.5% upward.

Specific sums should be authorized and appropriated for all parts of this Title.

TITLE VII-Nutrition Programs

Sec. 703. (a): Add a section to provide that when the financial effort of a city office on aging exceeds that of its State office on aging, independent of matching funds for Titles III and VII, the city automatically becomes the administrator/ operator of Title VII nutrition programs, funded directly by the Administration on Aging and reporting thereto, with funding made on the same direct grant, per capita basis as to the States.

Consideration should be given to establishing eligibility criteria for participation in the program since funds appropriated are insufficient to provide services to all the elderly who need and request these services.

TITLE VIII—Amendments to Other Acts

1-Specific amounts should be authorized and appropriated for the activities proposed.

2-Language should be added to require the Commissioner on Aging to be responsible for disseminating information regarding availability of funds for the various programs authorized.

Section 804-Amendment to the Adult Education Act.-Amend Sec. 310 of the Adult Education Act to give emphasis to leadership training programs as one of the specific projects for the elderly authorized under this section.

Include within Title VIII the mandate for special programs for the elderly under the National Foundation on the Arts and the Humanities Act of 1965. TITLE IX-Community Service Employment for Older Americans

Add a stipulation that the Commissioner on Aging will be responsible for disseminating information regarding availabilty of funds for the various programs authorized, and reassign Title IX programs to the Administration on Aging from the Department of Labor.

The Foster Grandparent Program should be reassigned to the Administration on Aging from the ACTION agency, as a community service employment, rather than volunteer program, for older Americans.

Set up Sec. 903, so that as in Title III grants are made to the States and through them to the Area Agencies on Aging.

Mr. LEHMAN [presiding]. Thank you very much, Mr. Ahrens.

We have heard the comment that it is difficult for some of the triple A programs to build a nutritional program because the nutrition projects are funded through separate mechanisms.

Can you tell us to what extent title VII projects are funded through separate agencies on aging when they are located in the planning or service area?

Mr. AHRENS. Chicago is in a unique position. We began our nutrition program with HEW in 1968, so we were one of the original demonstrators. We had 35 community sites before we became named an area agency on aging which we are.

As I told you our grant in Chicago is something like $1.8 million but the city is putting in better than $700,000 in cash.

I have an additional grant now of about $300,000 to hire 77 CETA employees to work in the nutrition program.

So, it is coordinated because it is run by the mayor's office for senior citizens which also happens to be the area agency on aging.

We would suffer problems if we ran into direct service prohibition because of the amount of money the city is putting in. I think we are the only area agency on aging in Illinois that is also operating the title. VII program.

Some mechanism needs to exist because if someone has the planning responsibility and someone else has all the action, you can't plan it very well.

Mr. LEHMAN. Do you do it 7 days a week or 5?

Mr. AHRENS. We are going to 7 days a week with city funds. We are 5 days a week. The city is divided into five service areas. There is ap

proximately 100,000 of the city's 517,000 people over 60 in each area. We will get up to about 70 sites. Some in each area will offer weekend

service.

Mr. LEHMAN. Do you have any security problems in these nutritional centers when you are closed for the weekend?

Mr. AHRENS. No, because the nutrition centers are generally sites operated by such as Jewish community centers, Central Housing Authority, churches, a whole range, WMCA, different community groups, many of whom operate 7 days a week or have their own security on

the site.

Mr. LEHMAN. We had a little problem operating our senior citizens community centers that closed down for the weekend.

Mr. AHRENS. I wish we had better security for our elderly wherever they are all over this Nation.

Mr. LEHMAN. What are your views as to whether there should be a close coordination between these programs?

Mr. AHRENS. I think it is essential and also, as I said, with the employment programs.

In the document I have introduced for the record which has specific recommendations we are suggesting that the State and the area agencies ought to have review and comment on anything that is funded under the Older Americans Act in putting research projects in the area. I would like to volunteer, too, that I share the expression of concern voiced by many this morning on the question of transportation.

Transportation is a problem. For example, we have had an application in the city of Chicago sitting for 2 years in front of UMTA. The city council voted $300,000 to match. We asked $700,000 from UMTA. We got our transit authority to agree to run a pilot demonstration in one part of the city of Chicago of personalized, specialized transportation with a commitment to extend it citywide when they worked the bugs out.

This has been the longest, most drawn-out program in which you keep filing another report, answering another question.

Now, they are talking about would the city give them some information so that they could fund a phase I of that which would be a research study and the elderly get disbelieving we are ever going to offer them anything under those circumstances.

Mr. LEHMAN. Could you tell us how you are doing with your RSVP and your foster grandfather programs in the area?

Mr. AHRENS. The foster grandparents program was administered by our office. Back in 1967 we wrote the proposal because nobody else was apparently interested in doing it.

The RSVP program is administered through the Hull House Association. We have been able to have a very close relationship where even our RSVP volunteers, nutrition type and other programs on aging. So there is no problem there.

Mr. LEHMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Miller.

Mr. MILLER. I would like to make a couple of comments.

You mentioned you had 3,000 people a day in your title VII program and now it is 4.000. If I remember your remarks correctly most of that increase is because of city funding.

Mr. AHRENS. The increase is entirely made possible from 3,000 to 4,000 through the city funding.