the development of programs and services for older people. In 1961, another significant step was taken by the enactment by the 1961 legislature of the Community Services for Older Persons Act, and we are proud to mention that Congressman Hawkins was the assembly coauthor of this pioneering legislation. This grant program provides State matching funds on a 50-50 basis to local communities for the development of such community services for older persons as the staffing of senior citizen centers, voluntary services, community coordination and organization, community homemaker and home nursing care, information and referral services, inservice training of professional and voluntary personnel, and community planning for needed facilities. Frankly, it is still a pilot program, but it is interesting to note that the annual appropriation for the program was increased by the 1963 legislature to $175.000. It is also interesting to note that the total amount of matching local contribution now exceeds more than the 50-percent requirement which is certainly evidence of the type of stimulation that such grant programs can have on community responsibility and action. In California, the program is administered by the State department of social welfare with the committee acting as an advisory body to assist in the evaluation of criteria and in evaluating proposals submitted by local communities. At the present time, there are 26 local projects in operation and a brief summary of these are enclosed for your information. Because of this background, the committee, and many others in California, were very pleased with the introduction by Congressman Mills and Senator Smathers at the request of President Kennedy, of the Senior Citizens' Community Planning and Services Act of 1963, last April. As you know, the MillsSmathers bill includes a five-part grant program for grants to the States for community planning services, research and demonstration, training, construction and equipment of multipurpose recreational centers, and the stimulation of employment opportunities. This bill and its provisions have attracted widespread attention throughout California from several community planning groups, senior citizen clubs, and others working in the field of aging. In May, the committee introduced, in principle, the purposes of each of the five parts of the MillsSmathers bill as essential and needed legislation.

At the same time, the introduction last month by Representative Fogarty and Senator McNamara of the Older Americans Act of 1963, focused attention again on the importance of an agency in the Federal Government with sufficient authority, funds, and flexibility to develop the more coordinated and strengthened Federal program on aging that was recommended during the White House Conference on Aging and since by many State commissions on aging, National and community voluntary organizations, and National and State senior citizen organizations.

Thus, it seems to us that there are definite advantages to the enactment of legislation which would incorporate both the major features of the FogartyMcNamara and the administration bill.

As to the specific provisions of H.R. 7957, we would like to conclude with the following comments:

1. We support the establishment of an Administration on Aging in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.----We endorse the provisions of H.R. 7957 to establish an Administration on Aging in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Historically, the Department has been responsible for much of the leadership provided by the Federal Government in programs in aging, and the present programs under its jurisdiction affect the greatest number of older people than any other department of the Federal Government. We commend both Congressman Fogarty and Senator McNamara for proposing this as a practical alternative to the creation of an independent Federal Commission on Aging.

We believe that this is essential in this crucial period of national awareness of the various concerns and problems of older people. We believe that it is a period which requires the type of organization which is not identified with any single aspect of aging or single program, but, rather, has the freedom and flexibility to be concerned with the development and planning of services and facilities in as broad a field of endeavor as possible.

Such an organization would parallel the present organization of the Citizens' Advisory Committee on Aging as an independent unit of the California Health and Welfare Agency which also includes our State departments of mental hygiene, public health, rehabilitation, and social welfare.

2. We endorse the need and priority represented in H.R. 7959 for Federal grant to the States for community planning and demonstration grants and for grants to public and private nonprofit agencies and organizations for research and development and training of qualified personnel. -Despite the efforts underway and in operation in California, we know of no single community in California which is satisfied with the extent and range of services actually available to their older residents. This would apply to either health or social services, physical restoration services, employment, housing, recreational and educational opportunities, and sufficient opportunities for participation in voluntary and civic activities. Recent public hearings and meetings of the committee in such communities as Long Beach, Los Angeles, Napa, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Francisco, and Santa Rosa documented all too clearly the many current gaps in service and the need for more effective organization and coordination at both the State and local level, and by both public and private groups, in planning of services and programs for older people.

Grants to the States for this purpose, together with research, demonstration, and training grants, could be used in California to meet such needs as expressed by community representatives during our recent hearings. These included central information and referral services, more adequate facilities and programs, for free-time activities, low- and moderate-cost housing, staffing of existing and new programs and facilities, increased opportunities and training of volunteers, educational instruction in preretirement programs, leadership training for older persons, increased full-time and part-time employment, community planning and coordination, and other services designed either to protect the older person from unnecessary hazards as well as to broaden their ability to contribute to the community.

3. We urge amendment of H.R. 7957 to include grants for the construction of multipurpose recreational activity centers and for stimulation of employment opportunities. - We favor the broadening of H.R. 7957 to include the recommendations of the President that are represented in parts D and E of H.R. 5840, the Senior Citizens Community Planning and Services Act of 1963.

California has been the pioneer in the development of senior center programs. We have some of the most outstanding and nationally known centers in the country such as, for example, the Little House Center in Menlo Park, the Aquatic Park Senior Center in San Francisco, the Pasadena Senior Center, the Santa Monica Senior Center, Bakersfield Community House, Town House of Carmel, the Santa Cruz Senior Center, the Felicia Mayhood Center in Los Angeles, and the Chula Vista Center in San Diego County. But these are the exception rather than the rule.

At the present time there are over 1,000 single senior activity programs in more than 100 California communities. However, many of these are unable to function more frequently than weekly, biweekly, or even monthly, due to the lack of facilities in which to meet, or because of the lack of adequate staff and use of volunteers. In many communities there is an expressed but unmet need for leisure-time activities for older persons. Then senior activity center has demonstrated its value to contributing to a better life for the older person and the community. It should be a part of the basic framework of any community program. Substantial interest has been expressed to the Committee regarding Federal grants for such facilities, and we are certain that more local governments, or a private nonprofit group, or combination of both working together would work toward providing the financial and service support for adequate facilities if such grants were available.

Similarly, we believe that grants to stimulate employment opportunities for older people, including those who have reached age 65, is important. The Committee believes that there is too much pessimism being expressed about the ability and capacity of this country to provide employment to older people affected by either automation or technological change or those who wish to work, and need to work, after the age of 65. This attitude is not the official policy of the State of California, and thanks to the leadership of Governor Brown and the legislature, California has made a concerted effort in recent years to expand the counseling and placement services of our department of employment, to outlaw age discrimination in employment, and to provide more training and employment opportunities. Most of these efforts, however, have been directed to persons under age 65. We believe that one significant value of grants for this purpose would be to demonstrate how, and in what specific ways, employment opportunities could be made available to those over 65 who for both economic and psychological reasons are interested in remaining employed, either on a fullor part-time basis, or in a second career, or serving their community. For lack of such programs and opportunities, we are wasting the skills and talents of many older people who wish and are able to remain productive members of our society. 4. We urge consideration of amendments to section 303(a) of the bill which would clearly delineate congressional intent regarding the State agency responsible for administering or supervising the administration of the State plan pertaining to grants for community planning, services, and training. It is sound administrative practice to require that each State submit a plan to qualify for grants or community planning, services, and training. We especially endorse the requirements of State and community participation since a Federal grant program in aging should be a catalyst rather than a substitute for State and community action and responsibility. We similarly endorse the inclusion of the representatives of State and local public or nonprofit private agencies in the administration and development of this State plan. This corresponds to much of the planning that occurred in the States under the White House Conference on Aging Act grants.

However, we would urge consideration of language that would amend lines 15-20 of section 303(a) to read: "establishes a single State agency on aging or designates the existing State agency primarily responsible for coordination of State programs and activities related to the purposes of this title as the sole agency for administering or supervising the administration of the plan."

This language is consistent with a recommendation adopted by the section on State organization during the White House Conference on Aging; namely, that there be a permanent State unit on aging to provide statewide leadership in programs for the aging. Permanent State units have been established in 33 States, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, and we believe that this broad requirement would support the principle of coordinated community and statewide planning that is one of the key objectives of the bill.

5. There is an urgent need for this legislation and it should be enacted this year. We cannot emphasize too strongly the important effect that this legislation would have in encouraging sound policies and programs for older people throughout the country. In our opinion, the next 5 years will be the most critical period that we will face, on National, State, or community level, in developing the facilities and services which will be required by an expanding older population. As individuals, as members of families, as citizens of a community, older people will legitimately want and should have the full range of opportunities so eloquently set forth in the declaration of objectives of the bill.

In California itself, we know that there must be a redoubling of our present efforts in future years just to maintain our present level of State and community programs and services. As the attached population table indicates, the percentage of our population 65 and over will increase by 80 percent from 1960 to 1980, with even more dramatic increases in percentage of persons living to age 75 and 85. When we consider that education for retirement is a major concern in our society today, the increase in the number of persons, age 50 and over, in the immediate preretirement period, is even more dramatic.

Grants of the type proposed in this bill would enable the States and local communities, and their citizens, to really move out in a thoughtful way to both better meet the current of our older people as well as to plan intelligently for the future. And, that future, as described to us currently by many older people in California, should be one which permits, to the maximum degree possible, the opportunity to lead self-sufficient lives, have ample opportunity for continued participation and responsibility as family and community members, a decent standard of living and environment, and available services which are effective in times of personal crisis or as change takes place in living arrangements, physical abilities, or family composition.

These have been our goals in California, and this legislation would help us reach them sooner and more effectively.

Community services for older persons projects (senate bill 437 and assembly bill
1670 progress report) (1963-64 budget)

STATEMENT OF DR. MARY C. MULVEY, HONORARY PRESIDENT AND BOARD MEMBER OF RHODE ISLAND STATE COUNCIL OF SENIOR CITIZENS

It is a pleasure to support "The Older Americans Act of 1963."

Congresman John E. Fogarty, author of the bill, dedicated to the initiation and progress of programs for older adults, was also author of the White House Conference on Aging Act which was held in January 1961, for the purpose of planning and implementing long-range development programs for older people. Two years ago he introduced another bill which proposed a U.S. Commission on Aging, which is a manifestation of his consistent purpose in developing a growth plan for the aging similar in scope to the already widely discussed, but not so widely implemented, plans and recommendations emanating from the White House Conference on Aging. Congressman Fogarty's present bill to create an Administration of Aging within the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, headed by a Commissioner of Aging who would be appointed by the President of the United States is worthy of enactment. Its provisions for grants to the States for community planning and coordination, demonstration programs and training of personnel, and also grants to public and nonprofit private agencies for study, development, demonstration, and evaluation projects recognize the needs of importance for older adults. If and when these needs are met, our older persons will be brought to a position of dignity and fulfillment; and the Federal organization primarily responsible for programs in aging will be brought, in part at least, to a position of excellence.

Since the White House Conference on Aging of January 1961, responsible individuals throughout the country have been hard at work trying to implement the recommendations emanating therefrom. These presons are representative of many areas of concern--education, civic life, health and medical care, housing, employment, economics, legislation, welfare, church, recreation, research, etc.and are generally accustomed to developing long-range plans within their own endeavors. To inform the individuals concerned as well as the public at large about these efforts and objectives, and to coordinate these efforts, it is necessary to establish units or agencies on aging at the State and local levels whose sole responsibility would be to promote and coordinate programs for and with older adults. These individuals and/or State and local units on aging are confronted with all the problems associated with meeting the needs of ever-increasing numbers of elderly, an increasingly complex business and industrial life, and the ever-challenging network of problems and needs of society as a whole.

To help in developing realistic plans and programs and in marshaling the resources, it is necessary to create an aging unit at the Federal level with prestige and broadness of operating framework to a degree that the agency's personnel will not be unduly restricted within narrow boundaries of compartmentalization. The present Office of Aging is "buried" within the Welfare Administration which is an agency within the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The "Older Americans Act of 1963" proposes to set up an Administration of Aging which would raise its status significantly, allow it to operate with more latitude and flexibility, and remove the stigma of welfare from the image of the older person. The image of the older person as being dependent economically, socially, and healthwise, in a lonely setting, becomes increasingly more unrealistic in modern society. While welfare is necessary, and the sole resource of some of our elderly, the modern older person-thanks to our efforts in many instancesmore often selects the independent role if and when he has his choice, and rejects the dependent and welfare recipient role as his goal. Likewise he usually rejects welfare-sponsored programs.

The needs of older people are real and growing. The organization at the Federal level needs the support of individuals and groups, both public and private, and at all levels-national, regional, State, and local. If we cannot, at the present time, realize, through legislation, a U.S. Commission on Aging as proposed by Congressman Fogarty and Senator McNamara 2 years ago, then the kind of organization proposed by Congressman Fogarty and Senator McNamara in the present proposal, "The Older Americans Act of 1963," seems well suited to command the support of the wide range of persons and institutions necessary to realize the "good life" for our senior citizens. The present operating "home" of the Office of Aging within the Welfare Administration seriously affects its effectiveness. The image of the Office of Aging is not acceptable to its many publics, and thus its full potential cannot be achieved. The important areas of service demand a broad framework of operation. Viewed from this perspective