Mr. MUSKIE, from the Committee on Government Operations submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 11] The Committee on Government Operations, to which was referred the bill (S. 11) to strengthen intergovernmental cooperation and the administration of grant-in-aid programs, to extend State and local merit systems to additional programs financed by Federal funds, to provide grants for improvement of State and local personnel administration, to authorize Federal assistance in training State and local employees, to provide grants to State and local governments for training their employees, to authorize interstate compacts for personnel and training activities, to facilitate the interchange of Federal, State, and local personnel, and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. PURPOSE S. 11, is designed to improve the quality of American government, with particular emphasis given to strengthening State and local governments through improved personnel administration and more efficient recruiting and training of personnel. S. 11 is almost identical with the bill S. 699, which passed the Senate in the 90th Congress by a substantial majority. House action did not take place however, and the measure died with the adjournment of the 90th Congress. As reported, S. 11 is a bill consisting of the major points advanced by the earlier measure, S. 699. Both measures were designed to help strengthen State and local governments through improved personnel administration and more efficient recruitment and training of per sonnel, particularly in the administrative, technical, and professional categories (APT). As reported, S. 11 is intended to provide the first comprehensive Federal aid program for improving and strengthening State and local personnel administration. It focuses on four basic problems in the public manpower area: the interchange of Federal, State, and local employees; training programs; quality of the public service and merit system requirements; and personnel management. It is the purpose of the bill to provide for a system of Federal financial and technical assistance and other Federal support to State and local governments on a voluntary basis. It is provided that the authorities granted by the bill shall be employed in a manner designed to encourage innovation and to allow for diversity on the part of State and local governments in the design, execution, and management of their own systems of personnel administration and their own training programs. Specifically, the bill seeks to achieve the following ends: 1. To provide for intergovernmental cooperation, through an advisory council appointed by the President, in the development of policies and standards for the administration of programs for improvement of State and local personnel administration and training. The advisory council would report from time to time to the President and to the Congress, and in transmitting to the Congress reports of the advisory council, the President would submit to the Congress proposals of legislation which he deems desirable to carry out recommendations of the advisory council. 2. To authorize the Civil Service Commission to make grants to State and local governments to plan and to make improvements in their systems of personnel administration. 3. To transfer to the Civil Service Commission responsibility for administration of existing Federal statutory provisions requiring merit personnel administration for State and local employees engaged in certain federally assisted programs. 4. To authorize Federal agencies to admit State and local government officials and employees, particularly in administrative, professional, and technical occupations, to Federal training programs. To meet the costs resulting from the admission of State or local employees or officials to such training programs, the Federal agency concerned may use its appropriations or may be reimbursed by State or local governments, or the Civil Service Commission may use its appropriations to reimburse the Federal agency concerned or make advances toward these costs. 5. To authorize Federal agencies administering programs of financial grants or assistance to State or local governments to provide special training for State and local government officials or employees who have responsibilities related to those programs; and permit State and local governments to use appropriate Federal funds to establish training courses for or to pay certain education expenses of their officials or employees who have responsibilities related to the program concerned. 6. To authorize the Civil Service Commission to make grants to State and local governments and other appropriate organizations for carrying out approved plans for training State and local government employees, for the development of such plans by State and local governments, and for government service fellowships for employees selected for special graduate-level university training. 7. To authorize the Civil Service Commission to join with State and local governments in cooperative recruitment and examining activities and to furnish technical advice and assistance, at the request of State and local governments, to strengthen personnel administration. 8. To give the consent of Congress to interstate compacts designed to improve personnel administration and training for State and local employees. 9. To authorize the temporary exchanging of personnel between the Federal Government and States and local governments. 10. To direct the Civil Service Commission to coordinate activities of Federal agencies in providing training and technical assistance services to State and local governments, so as to avoid duplication of effort and to insure maximum effectiveness of administration. RELATIONSHIP WITH CURRENT PROGRAMS In addition to setting up various new programs to strengthen State and local personnel administration, the bill provides for the transfer and coordination of current functions relating to Federal statutory requirements for personnel administration on a merit basis. in grant-in-aid programs. The importance of continuity of operation and close coordination in the administration of intergovernmental personnel functions and the grant programs is to be stressed. A desirable extension of technical assistance can be built upon the efforts and experience of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare's merit system program in providing assistance on personnel administration in the grant programs, as well as upon the current efforts of the Civil Service Commission in providing technical advise and assistance to State and local governments under the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968 (Public Law 90-577). The bill does not provide for extension of the current statutory requirements to other programs-this is to be studied-but does provide for continuity of administration in the current programs. This is achieved by the transfer to the Civil Service Commission of functions of departments now administering merit system provisions in grant programs. The bill provides for continuance of merit system standards issued under the present laws until these standards are modified or superseded by the Civil Service Commission. The transfer of Federal staff relating to State and local personnel administration in grant programs will provide a nucleus for expanded technical assistance. Continued coordination of Federal efforts can be promoted with the use and adaptation of established channels of communication. Continued encouragement of innovation on the part of State and local governments can be combined with new types of support for the development of strengthened administration responsive to State and local needs. The provisions in the bill for support of training and the establishment of fellowships for State and local employees are supplemental to the various types of support of State and local inservice training and educational leave under various grant-in-aid programs. The bill does not overlap or limit the training activities under the grant-in-aid programs, but provides for support in fields not covered and for necessary coordination of Federal training activities. BACKGROUND The swelling tide of population and the increasing urbanization of the United States are posing tremendous problems to government at all levels. The areas in which these problems arise are well known: slums and commercial blight, inadequate housing, water and air pollution, crime and juvenile delinquency, racial tensions, unemployment and underemployment, traffic congestion, and inequities in education, to mention only some of the major ones. Citizens are demanding more effective government, better education for their children, more and better roads and public transit facilities, clean and plentiful water, unpolluted air, better police and fire protection, more and better recreation facilities, more and better hospitals, better facilities for the treatment of mental illness, programs for safeguarding economic security, and many others. The major burden of providing these and other such public services rests with State and local governments. These mushrooming demands, however, generally have been beyond the financial capabilities of the State and local governments to meet, as evidenced by the continually increasing need for and the amount of Federal aid. In 11 years, total Federal aid to State and local governments have more than quadrupled, rising from $4.1 billion in 1957 to an estimated $17.2 billion in 1968. This aid in recent years has constituted about 15 percent of total State-local revenue and covers a wide variety of activities: from airport construction to urban renewal, from highway construction to public. assistant and community development. By a conservative count, there were 162 Federal programs of aid to State and local governments in January 1966. The need of State and local governments for substantial financial assistance is only one of the many facets of the overall problem of meeting the demands of our citizens and of making our population centers fit places to live. Also critical is the fact that many of the States and local governments, now and in the foreseeable future, lack the highly qualified administrative, professional, and technical personnel in the numbers required to plan, innovate, organize, and execute the wide variety of necessary programs. Between 1955 and 1965, State and local government employment increased from 4.7 to 7.7 million persons. This is a 63-percent increase a rate of growth four times that of the U.S. economy as a whole and seven times that for Federal employment. It is estimated that total State and local government employment will rise from 7.7 million in 1965 to a level of approximately 11.4 million by 1975-an increase of 48 percent. Total recruiting needs for administrative, professional, and technical employees (other than teachers) are estimated at 2.5 million persons over the 10-year period an average of 250,000 a year. This includes both replacement needs. and growth. Nothing similar to this critical manpower situation has ever been faced before by State and local governments. There can be little question, that now and in the future State and local governments must face a serious problem in obtaining and retaining the large numbers of the high quality administrative, professional, and technical personnel they must have. The general shortage of such trained and talented people throughout the economy will compound this problem. THE GROWING CONCERN WITH THE PROBLEM The concern over the problem of trained and talented manpower at all levels of government is not a recent development. As long ago as 1933, the Social Science Research Council, an autonomous body representing seven national professional societies in the social science field, appointed the Commission of Inquiry on Public Service Personnel to report to the American people on the problem of governmental manpower. The Commission's report, "Better Government Personnel," concludes with a statement which is remarkably similar to conclusions reached today: In spite of the vital importance of government and governmental services, American National, State, and local governments do not at the present time attract to their service their full share of the men and women of capacity and character. This is due primarily to our delay in adjusting our attitudes, institutions, and public personnel policies to fit social and economic changes of the past 70 years. Almost 30 years later, in 1962, the Municipal Manpower Commission, after an extensive investigation which included interviews with hundreds of local officials, reported similar findings in its study "Governmental Manpower for Tomorrow's Cities": The quality of APT (administrative, professional, technical) personnel in local governments today, by and large, is inadequate to cope with present and especially emerging metropolitan problems. * **The local governments have not attracted at the entry level, a fair share of the ablest young people equipped with intelligence and training to rise to APT positions. Although the two studies reach similar conclusions, the situation of the labor market, of course, was significantly different at the respective times of these reports. The critical shortage of workers in more recent years especially those of high training and quality— led the Municipal Manpower Commission to add: In a significant number of instances, local governments are living on the "fat" of the manpower they were able to recruit during the depression thirties. *** The retirement of a large proportion of all department and division heads in the next decade must be expected. The Committee on Government Operations has long been concerned with the problem. Through its Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Relations since 1962, it has conducted a continuing investigation of the American Federal system. In its 1965 study, "The Federal System As Seen by Federal Aid Officials: Results of a Questionnaire Dealing With Intergovernmental Relations," the subcommittee points out: S. Rept. 91-489- -2 |