Corrections with young adult males in which they tried to bring together as much staff and inmate shared participation as possible in the program.

This was a well-designed experiment where there was a comparable control group that did not go through the program. After 3 years of running the study it turns out that those who had this kind of shared involvement with the staff have a better postinstitutional success record than those who did not get in the program.

The thing that is extremely important, however, is that they had considerable difficulty with the staff in getting them to share the program with the offenders. I am sure this is something this group will have to think about and the country will have to think about as we move further in this direction.

Mr. SCHEUER. Could you help us think about it by supplying us with a copy of the report for the record?

Mr. GRANT. I certainly will, gentlemen.

At one point the six professional members of the staff, all M.S.W.'s, masters in social work, resigned from the project because they were being asked to share the work and supervision of laundry maintenance that the project was doing together and they felt this was unbecoming to professional workers.

This brought a real crisis to the program and greatly extended the amount of involvement that the inmates themselves were having in the program. They took over many of the duties being covered by the professional staff. This was not all of the professional staff; it was just the majority that left at that time.

It has come out later in our followup that there was a marked improvement in the postinstitutional performance of the inmates that participated in this program after the professionals resigned from the program.

Mr. SCHEUER. What kind of production of a professional character did the inmates take over?

Mr. GRANT. They took over the supervision while working and the supervision in the barracks themselves. They kept logs on what they were doing and bringing this into meetings to be reported and discussed. They did rather extensive small-group discussing with each. other about the problems they were having.

I think the findings are much more general than this particular type of professional service. I think the professionals were not doing an adequate job and it is a matter of these men themselves feeling a part of this in that they take a part of the commitment in trying to make this thing work.

Then you get involvement with this trying to make it work and I think that is one of the things implementing this, which again I think has tremendous savings for the taxpayer. I think it is in line with what Mr. Milton Rector was talking of earlier, our main problem is going to be one of how to work out an adequate way for training and development of existing staff to be able to participate in this kind of programing. Their whole professional emphasis has been in another direction.

I think this needs to be built into the bill, both provisions for exploring further the employment of offenders in both operational and

research roles, and special provisions for working with the staffs to allow this to happen.

I might add that this is fortunately a rather healthy finding even though it gives us immediate problems in that every field, very much including corrections, was faced with what we thought of as a profes sional shortage.

We actually have a joint commission now on correctional manpower and training that is trying to face the overwhelming estimates of staff we are going to have. It now seems very apparent that we can get a great deal of use out of people whom we have thought of as only a drain on our professional services and that they can help actually staff expanding welfare and service programs definitely in the correctional field and a comparable case can be made for the other services.

Mr. SCHEUER. Can you describe the kind of training and preparation, and the duration of such training and preparation a two- or threetime loser in a security institution would need before he could function as an extension of the professional in helping others?

Mr. GRANT. Yes, this is an extremely important question.

I think you certainly have to get quite a shift in attitude to have someone confined four times for armed robbery, as three or four of the people in our project have been, to then become a social worker in essence and to work now, as several have for a couple of years, being very concerned about his fellow man, being very concerned about changes in his community and changes in society.

I think we have two things going for us that we have lost sight of in our eagerness to get the most out of our now graduate school models for professional training.

The graduate school, let us not forget, is really in the business of training scholars. There is no doubt we very much need scholarly approaches to our problems, but to be a scholar concerning a problem is not necessarily to be effective in coping with the problem.

A simple examination we have given, I have written a not very good book on boxing. Fortunately nobody expects me to compete with professional boxers in proving how effective that book is in outlining how to approach a boxing conflict.

I think we have very much that kind of thing going on in our ap proach to this field. We are developing people to this systematically, to pull knowledge together and apply it in the field. It is one we need to clarify more.

I think we water down our services by having these people performing actual operation services that we now have leads showing these services can be performed by nonprofessionally trained.

We do this as one would approach training a boxer. We do this much more by having people learn performances by doing. And learning performances by even trying to teach others while still crudely involved in it themselves. I am talking of group techniques, interviewing techniques, things like dealing with a community.

They can apply the things they picked up from the community themselves, plus working this through with someone making them a little more aware of what is going on but these kinds of learning techniques which we can think of as alternates to the textbook and classroom give us considerable encouragement about the level of competence we can expect of mankind in general.

Mr. SCHEUER. Is this more or less what you mean by the phrase "share involvement"? If not, would you describe that phrase as used on other occasions?

Mr. GRANT. This is part of the learn by sharing. I think another point that is germane to your bill, I think perhaps the crucial issue for our entire culture is that people have to feel that they are an important part of what is going on, that they are contributing to their society, that they are contributing in terms of the job they do. One of the things that becomes more plausible, as you look at lower class delinquency and our higher class society, people who don't believe they can have a meaningful role or feel needed in terms of the main games played by our culture are very apt to make up games of their own.

They get over on the side and make up games of their own where they feel important. Several of our armed robberies were probably playing games of armed robbery. It was very expensive to our society but important to them.

Now as we bring about changes with their becoming a part of our society, we can turn that power working against us to working with us. This is what I mean by the feeling of involvement and part of a

cause.

Mr. SCHEUER. Can you tell me to what extent you think juvenile defenders can and should be involved in this type of program?

Mr. GRANT. I think the implications are very clear now that next to our lead for working with people, is the importance of optimizing their involvement in the community. This matter of making them meaningful part of the program is our next important lead for which we obviously need much more study, much more research and followup as to how far the implication should go.

I am sure synanon is not the optimum model or our new career program, but they are very meaningful.

Mr. SCHEUER. How have you tackled the problem of these professionals who quit en masse; how are you going to tie them in and involve them in this whole new philosophy of sharing with the kids in trouble?

Mr. GRANT. We do have some things that are rather encouraging, actually the National Association of Social Workers and the National Association of College Workers have a joint committee studying the implication of new careers and the use of the nonprofessional for their professions.

I think it is going to take a great deal of time; it is going to take probably some kind of working with the professionals. In our new careers program we actually brought professionals and graduate students into the training of these offenders and had them sharing together working on projects, working together in terms of different value systems and so on.

I think the other major contribution that can be made is if we stop having to think of some kind of closed game, that there is only so much work to be done and if the nonprofessional does it, it takes away from the professional and instead think of the fantastic challenges to us now and coming up over the next two decades and take advantage of our automotive material production and moving into the service fields.

We have way more work than we can possibly handle and the trick is to define meaningful more scholarly type activities for the professional where he becomes much more the strategist in our efforts to move.

I would just like to add here that for the first time we are faced with a society where the one thing we know for sure is that our children are going to face a world extremely different from the world we have had to face. It puts tremendous emphasis on this business of change, change that we are seeing reflected in delinquency but we are also seeing it in our entire way of life and we are going to have to give tremendous attention to a science of change and innovation.

There should be a tremendous call here for our professional people to become involved in how do you bring about change, how do you cope with it in some systematic way rather than as a sporadically and perhaps as chaotically as it looks like we are doing now with the crime and delinquency problem.

Mr. SCHEUER. Having just that problem in mind, I ask you how you are working with the professionals to get them involved in this progress of change?

Mr. GRANT. In three ways; one, in taking part. I am on the joint committee trying to attack this at the top of the professions and get the most thinking there. Two, I have worked with the operating professionals in actually sharing in a project and I have recommended in several papers that we explore the kind of model that I think Public Health has already offered to us where they have a masters degree for professional people in public health work and the idea our professional could go to some kind of training research center which would not necessarily lead to a masters degree but give him some recognition of working with new techniques being developed and give him an opportunity to work with the offenders who were in training themselves. Mr. SCHEUER. Then you would advote as part of the training program for professionals that they learn to work in a field situation with nonprofessionals themselves?

Mr. GRANT. Yes. If I may speak to this a moment, the way we brought graduates into this work was through discussions with a well known sociologist. If we are on the right track the world of the future is going to be involved, many noncollege trained people and the professional to be working with and through them, should we not work out shortcuts having to train our graduate students implicitly and explicitly to join a world as far removed as possible from the noncollege graduate where they join sort of a fraternity of its own and immediately after they get their degree have to retrain them to get with the people.

That is why we started this model of having them learn work and share together.

Mr. SCHEUER. Is this new model you are talking about suggestive of some kind of inservice training concept that we ought to spell out in the language of this bill?

Mr. GRANT. I think it is imperative, not because of the immediate implications of the participation model finding that we have to shift from a more professional directed service to a more participating type of service but the one thing we know again just like our whole culture is this field is going to be in a continual shift and change.

As we talk in the electronics field where they have the slogan, "If it works, it is obsolete," we are going to be close to this in social service fields and people are having to get away from the model that they go to school for the first 30 years of their life and then for the next 30 years apply what they learned.

We are going to have to have training, working, and teaching all through your entire life.

Mr. SCHEUER. The gentleman just before you had some interesting figures on the comparable cost of traditional training school models and this community-oriented, shared involvement principle you have been discussing.

Have you had any experience that would give you some comparable costs?

Mr. GRANT. Well, we are doing what is now being referred to, and I think it is a very healthy trend to cost analysis and cost effectiveness studies over this new careers program. One of the figures that we have come up with so far which the new careers referred to in the news clipping was that these men have cost society-this is even when you equate the fact that their cost for being trained in State correctional institutions you can take off some of that for what it would have cost to train them in regular institutions, a quite conservative figure, is $1 million to the taxpayer.

Incidentally, this is taken of known offenses. They, incidentally, figure this can be almost doubled in terms of offenses they have committed for which there is no official record. We have moved this to where these people instead of being that kind of drain on society are taxpayers at the rate of $7,500 annual income. I think this needs more study and will receive it.

Mr. SCHEUER. You are talking about two costs: first, the cost of rehabilitation in the training school model as against the new careers training; second, the positive contribution that the individual makes after the rehabilitation process has been finished?

Mr. GRANT. Yes, both in terms of his productive life and also that he is no longer doing the things that are the kind of liability drains, both the acts and the cost of treatment or confinement.

Mr. SCHEUER. When you spoke of a million-dollar cost, how many of these young people were you speaking of?

Mr. GRANT. I am talking of 18 people who have done things all the way from being proud of their ability to burglarize police stations to armed robberies that are up in the hundreds, where it is a regular way of life, to 32 known bank robberies, loan company robberies and, without trying to say we have got all the answers, we certainly haven't but the fact that these men have converted from such a one definite way of life to such a meaningful other way of life I think has tremendous hope for us.

Mr. PUCINSKI. We want to thank you, Mr. Grant, for coming here and giving us your views on this legislation. We are hoping that the message of hope you and the other witnesses have endorsed would make us all realize that we Americans do not have to accept crime as a way of life.

One of the things that disturbs me about our present-day society is that so many of our people accept crime as a way of life. They read