Mr. BRADEMAS. What were those figures again?

Mr. GANLEY. At ACTION headquarters, there are 77; and in the field, there are 357.

Mr. BRADEMAS. So about 400 you are saying?

Mr. GANLEY. Yes.

Mr. BRADEMAS. And 16 are devoting their time only to these three programs?

Mr. GANLEY. Mr. Chairman, 16 are working full time on those programs.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Well, tell me, how many full-time employees do you have at ACTION headquarters and in the field, "to marry apples and apples."

Mr. GANLEY. We have 77 full-time employees in Washington headquarters, and 16 of those are full time on the older American volunteer programs.

Mr. BRADEMAS. How about the corresponding figures for the field? Mr. GANLEY. In the field, with the way we are organized today, there are no full-time employees.

Mr. BRADEMAS. No full-time employees for ACTION?

Mr. GANLEY. No full-time employees on older Americans programs. Mr. BRADEMAS. In the field?

Mr. GANLEY. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRADEMAS. That is quite startling, isn't it?

Mr. GANLEY. No, sir.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Why isn't it?

Mr. BALZANO. Because there are project sponsors and supervisors who work full time on older Americans volunteer programs. Our job is to supervise and provide backup services for them. We have 840 project directors who are full time.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Are you familiar with the history of the Older Americans Act?

Mr. BALZANO. Parts of it, yes.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Are you familiar with the fact that Congress has had to drag the administration kicking and screaming to understand that Democrats and Republicans in Congress have insisted that AOA have high visibility in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare and is not to be buried within its bowels? It seems to me what you are doing, and I am perfectly prepared to be told that my understanding is deficient, is burving the older Americans volunteers programs within the crevices of ACTION by the kind of administrative structure you just suggested.

If I don't understand what you are telling me, you have every opportunity now to straighten me out.

Mr. BALZANO. Mr. Congressman, the evidence is just the opposite. The older Americans programs have grown many times, just in the last year alone, under ACTION. What we have been doing is not burying the older Americans programs but lifting them up to a state of prominence. We have now reorganized the entire agency to better service those programs by multiplying the number of people in the field who work directly with local projects. For the first time, we are able to address adequately their needs. It has been quite the opposite.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Now, how many of your staff at the regional level are familiar with the three programs of RSVP, foster grandparents,

and senior companion programs. You have already said that none of your regional staff is working full time on these programs, but how many of the ACTION regional directors and deputies have had any prior experience or training in the field aging?

Mr. BALZANO. I can provide you with that information. All have been provided training in gerontology by gerontologists from Duke University and Utah State University.

Mr. BRADEMAS. How many of the 50 State directors of ACTION have had prior experience or training in the field of aging?

Mr. BALZANO. I can provide you with that information.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Is there any member of the ACTION National Advisory Council who is identified with expertise in the field of aging? That you should have to wait so long before answering troubles me. Mr. BALZANO. There are two people I have in mind.

Mr. BRADAMAS. Who?

Mr. BALZANO. Mr. Osinski and Mr. Haller.

Mr. BRADEMAS. What is their background?

Mr. BALZANO. Mr. Osinski worked in many programs, volunteer programs in social services in the city of Buffalo and State of New York; and Mr. Haller has done the same thing in the State of Florida.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Social services programs, but that is not the question. We have witnesses here today who are all identified as authorities in the field of aging. Are there such persons on your advisory board? Mr. BALZANO. No, sir.

Mr. BRADEMAS. I take it you will appreciate from my questions I have some reservations about the degree of commitment insofar as ACTION is concerned to the older Americans programs under its auspices. I am sure you are well aware, Mr. Balzano, there has been a good deal of criticism on these programs remaining under your aegis at ACTION. Certainly the chairman has had a lot of wires and letters charging that these programs have not received sufficient attention under the ACTION program, and ought to be brought back home to AOA. What do you say to that particular kind of proposal? Mr. BALZANO. First of all, Mr. Brademas, let me say I am not aware of much criticism of the way ACTION has administered its programs. I understand there are a number of State aging office directors who seek to have the older Americans volunteer programs brought under the Administration on Aging. That does not constitute a criticism of ACTION. It is just a different way of being.

In terms of the programs' size, the older Americans programs have multiplied many times since coming under ACTION. I might add, sir, we have received many supportive comments from project sponsors and supervisors in the field who feel exactly opposite of the position you just stated.

Mr. BRADEMAS. What about your budget? Could you comment on the overall budget of ACTION and then the overall percentage of that budget devoted to the programs we have here been discussing, particularly since you have become its Director, Mr. Balzano?

Mr. BALZANO. Perhaps we can give you a statement for the record. Mr. BRADEMAS. Yes, I do think, and I don't say this critically, but I think that was a fairly fundamental question you might have anticipated we would ask. If you come to testify on older American pro

grams operated by ACTION, you ought to know the amount of money spent on them.

I hope it is not thought to be an unfair question.

Mr. BALZANO. No, but we can supply it for the record.

45.3% of ACTION's total domestic budget is spent on Older Americans Volun teer programs directly.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Pressler.

Mr. PRESSLER. Perhaps I sound like a record to some of my colleagues, perhaps this can be submitted later, but the various programs under ACTION, on paper apply to some of our Indian reservations in rural areas but in practice they just don't seem to. In my district, as I said, it includes much of the old Sioux empire and three of the largest Indian reservations in the States are therein.

I am perfectly willing to support these programs with assurances that they are reaching our Indian and rural people.

I don't know if you have comments now and perhaps it is better to submit something later if you don't have anything now.

Mr. BALZANO. Yes, sir.

Mr. PRESSLER. I am also told that some of these programs, may have received a lower priority by the administration but that has been true in both Democratic and Republican administrations. Yet, there is a great deal of bipartisan support for it. I just submit that as a thought. I would like you to go a little more into what are the benefits of having the aging volunteer program in the ACTION Agency rather than in the Administration on Aging?

Mr. BALZANO. You would like me to go over the benefits?

Mr. PRESSLER. Yes.

Mr. BALZANO. Well, I think there are a number of them as I said earlier. The real key here is volunteers. To go back to the chairman's question about the number of experts on aging that ACTION employs, this is the kind of technical assistance we provide mainly through outside consultants. I think when the ACTION agency was formed and the programs were placed in ACTION in the first place there must have been the knowledge on the part of the Congress that we were not an agency that dealt solely with senior citizens.

I think that the older Americans volunteer programs were placed in our charge primarily because they are volunteer programs and ACTION is a volunteer agency.

Now, in terms of being a volunteer agency, we have more experience than any other agency in the Federal Government. We have over 10 years working with full-time volunteers, both domestic and international. Therefore, in such areas as technical assistance, training, and innovative ideas for volunteer support, there is no agency that can compete with us.

In terms of our training program we have taken sight of some of the shortcomings in this area we have had in the past. We have addressed those shortcomings, the training system we have just developed deals now with a number of aspects of daily support for volunteer programs at the community level.

We have placed new emphasis on fundraising at the community level, so that we can find local organizations concerned with the aging to sponsor volunteer programs in the community.

The value of integrated programing I think. simply cannot be underestimated here. It is of prime benefit I think for senior citizens to have interaction with the young people.

If there is one outstanding example of this it is the Spastic Children's Foundation in Los Angeles, where there is a 105-year-old foster grandparent working full-time with UYA volunteers, ACTION cooperative volunteers, and other foster grandparents in a program which we think really puts the spotlight on the benefits of program integration. It has been good for senior citizens and good for the country.

As for retaining individual program indentities, there is no question about it. If you were to ask the question a few years ago around the country and around town, what is RSVP? No one could have told von. There were 11 RSVP projects and no volunteers when ACTION took over the program in 1971. Today there are 666 RSVP projects and 117.000 RSVP volunteers. It has become the focal point of our attention because we understand, we recognize, the contributions that senior citizens can make as volunteers.

Another point I mentioned earlier is that RSVP still is in an experimental stage. Let's face it, the program has only run for 3 years and has grown by leaps and bounds. Yes, we have learned a lot, but we still have a lot to learn. I don't think anyone ever assumed that we have all of the facts or all of the knowledge.

We are learning as we go along. The very fact that so many are interested in RSVP indicates we are doing a good job. The program is popuar. It was unknown 3 years ago.

Finally, I might add the benefits of the new change in our field structure. We have changed our entire field structure so that we could better serve the senior citizens and others for whom our programs were designed. This field structure, for the first time, places in all of the States, not just some, State Offices designed to provide Federal support at the local level.

We can now supervise the programs better than when we began. We are in a better position today to administer all of the older Americans volunteer programs than we were when they were placed in our hands at the beginning.

Mr. PRESSLER. You mentioned the agreement between your Agency and the Agency on aging. Would you describe particularly what that agreement is and how it works. My earlier question was that you listed things that vour Agency does but why couldn't these things be done under AOA? I mean what is unique to your Agency that makes it do it better? We have our associate director for older Americans program to answer the question.

Mr. HRUSKA. Are you referring to the agreement that Dr. Flemming and I signed?

Mr. PRESSLER. Yes.

Mr. HRUSKA. Congress asked us to cooperate and Dr. Flemming and I are doing that. The things that we are doing in that agreement are things that can be done by anvbody. It so happens that the retired senior volunteer program has many volunteers who are anxious to serve in meaningful roles, Dr. Flemming has supplied us with figures that indicate that at the present time 25,000 RSVP volunteers are serving in the nutrition program.

The agreement we signed was sent to all State offices on aging and to the area agencies on aging by Dr. Flemming. We sent copies to all of our program people in the field. As a result, they, too, have gotten together and have cooperated. RSVP has the volunteers and the nutrition program needs volunteers so this cooperative effort has worked out very well.

Mr. PRESSLER. Thank you.
Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Cornell.

Mr. CORNELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I am sure, Mr. Balzano, you are aware of the fact that quite a number of the witnesses that we have had in the previous hearings in regard to this bill disagreed with the idea that the foster grandparent program should be under ACTION. One of them I noted said it was really a community service employment. Another criticized the fact that they are really not volunteers, they are recruited from a low income elderly segment and are paid an hourly wage and paid $1.60 an hour under ACTION guidelines. Would you care to comment on this criticism?

Mr. BALZANO. I would say that Congress already resolved the question by calling Foster Grandparents a volunteer program.

It was placed in ACTION because it was a volunteer program. Simply because the volunteers receive a stipend does not mean that they are not volunters. It is the Congress that put the label of the volunteer stamp on it.

Mr. CORNELL. Do you think it would qualify better as a community service employment under that category?

Mr. BALZANO. It is hard to say. I think that a volunteer program is a community service program. That is what we are making it. There is no question about it, the Congress had to determine whether this was an employment program or a volunteer program. A person is not a volunteer simply because some stipend is given. If we adhered to such a rigid definition of volunteer, we would have to recall back all Peace Corps volunteers and put them in the Labor Department because they are stipended.

The same thing is true of Foster Grandparents. I do not see $1.60 an hour as determining whether or not they are volunteers. As a matter of fact, in the dictionary the definition of volunteer does not refer to paid or unpaid.

I do not see it as a valid argument and I am surprised someone even included it.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Jeffords.

Mr. JEFFORDS. I have no questions.

Mr. BRADEMAS. Mr. Miller.

Mr. MILLER. In yesterday's testimony, it was suggested that perhaps, think in your opening statement you said, volunteerism is our business and it was suggested in the testimony earlier last week that these programs ought to be removed from ACTION because they are left out of the overall planning and development process that is going on in regard to the agency. Would you care to comment?

Mr. BALZANO. I fail to see how they are left out of the overall planning. We work very closely with the State offices on aging. As a matter of fact, in all testimony I don't see any of the State people coming in and saying that the programs are poorly administered. The State