thing in writing to the committee. I could point out several changes and comment on them.

Senator CLARK. Yes, I think that would be useful. I suggest before you do that you read Secretary Gardner's testimony, because he made specific comments on the House bill, and you ought to take a look at Senator Dodd's testimony, too. He was our first witness. He also made specific comments. Of course, it would be very helpful to the committee if all three of you were in accord. Then we wouldn't have to worry about it very much. So don't feel you have to get up something entirely original. To the extent that you find yourself in accord with Senator Dodd and Secretary Gardner, this would be helpful. Of course, if you don't, you must tell us and then we will have to choose between the various branches of the rose family.

The second question has to do with an amendment which Senator Dodd has offered. Have you had a look at it?

Attorney General CLARK. We have not had an opportunity to examine it in detail.

Senator CLARK. I wish you would, because we have a very high regard for Senator Dodd's competence in this field, and he has made rather extensive changes in the Senate bill of which he was the original sponsor. The rest of us were cosponsors. He has come to believe that the administration version which he introduced is not entirely adequate.

Now you will have some budgetary problems with it because he wants more money than the administration is willing to give.

Attorney General CLARK. He is primarily concerned about augmenting resources in the correctional area, the rehabilitation area as we call it in our bill.

Senator CLARK. Yes, but he has a statement of purpose which I would like to have your thinking on. He is stressing community institutions and resources, educational programs, in addition to the other areas which are covered directly, and some of these are covered by implication in the bill.

He has recommended dealing with delinquency prevention by public educational agencies, with a grant authorization. He has a title 5, "Model Juvenile Correctional System," for its establishment and development; title 4, "Training of Personnel" with a grant provision. It is fairly comprehensive, and I think it would be useful to the committee if you gave it your best thought, so when we come to mark this up, we will have a little better idea as to just what we ought to do.

I have been very much interested in legislation which we sponsored I guess 2 or 3 years ago now, which provided for an overall study of the manpower and personnel needs of the various disciplines which are concerned with the correctional system of the country, which, of course, includes juvenile delinquency as well as adult crime. We learned then during the course of the hearings that there are something like 60 different disciplines involved directly or indirectly with our correctional and penal system, running all the way from prison warden to psychiatrist, and that there is a short supply in practically every category of manpower involved.

This study was to delineate these problems and then make suggestions as to what should be done about it. I don't think we have a report from that group as yet. As I recall it, the staff will correct

me if I am wrong, we authorized a rather modest amount, $500,000 for the study.

But I wonder if you have any views as Attorney General, generally in charge of the whole field of corrections as to whether there is, as I suspect the testimony indicates, a serious shortage of skilled manpower in these various disciplines. Secondly, if there is, what do you think we should do about it?

Attorney General CLARK. Yes, I have some very strong views on that subject, Senator. We spend only slightly more than $1 billion in the United States.

Senator CLARK. $1 million, or $1 billion?

Attorney General CLARK. $1 billion for all of our correctional activities, Federal, State, and local, and this is not nearly adequate. Senator CLARK. Your Middle Atlantic States and New England State associations here don't know whether you said $1 million or $1 billion.

Attorney General CLARK. $1 billion. It is about $76 million in the Federal service alone, but it is about $1 billion for all Federal, State, and local correctional activities in the United States. This is not nearly adequate. One-third of the juvenile courts in the country have no probation officer nor even a caseworker available to them. You can see what that means to a sentencing judge.

He has two choices. First, send this youthful offender to a prison which may have no special facilities for youth, as one-fourth don't, and incarcerate him with hardened criminals. Or, second, turn him loose without any supervision, because you have no supervision potential, to the very environment that permitted him to get into this trouble in the first place.

We find that something like 83 percent of the juvenile courts of the country have no regular access to any psychiatric or psychological assistance for treatment of offenders.

Senator CLARK. The last time I looked at it, I believe there was one psychiatrist for every 4,400 individuals incarcerated. I am pulling that off the top of my head. Does that sound about right to you?

Attorney General CLARK. I am unable to verify that, Senator. I don't know. That would seem high.

Senator CLARK. Anyway, there is a shocking lack of trained psychiatrists: is there not?

Attorney General CLARK. Yes. The 4,400 figure would seem awfully high when you use the phrase "incarcerated." I think if you include people on probation and parole, it might come pretty close. The case load of probation workers, even in the Federal system, averages almost twice what it should be. I think the National Council on Crime and Delinquency says that a probation officer with no other function should have no more than 40 or 50 individuals that he is supervising and working with.

Senator CLARK. That is pretty high.

Attorney General CLARK. Even in the Federal system, which is well above average

Senator CLARK. Even that is pretty high, don't you think?

Attorney General CLARK. Well, it depends. Many of our probationers and parolees don't require a significant amount of time, for example tax evasion parolees. But surveys of some Federal districts

indicate that up to 85 percent of the time of the probation service officers goes to presentence reports. This means that only 15 percent is left for caseload supervision. The surveys also indicate that the caseload is twice as high as it should be by standards set by the people who have done the most work in this field. You can see that we are way short.

Senator CLARK. Now suppose you were able to double the appropriation. I would still be skeptical as to whether you could get the people to operate it at the present salary level, at the present rate at which these individuals are being turned out, whether it be from high schools for wardens or graduate schools for psychiatrists. Would you comment a little bit on that.

Attorney General CLARK. Yes. I think we need intensive training and intensive study on standards and all of the disciplines that go into corrections. The resources have to be utilized wisely. They have to go to salaries as well as to more people.

Senator CLARK. I am not even sure, to start a little discussion, that you are right about that. My own view as chairman of the Manpower Subcommittee is that there are a great many skills which are in desperately short supply in our society today.

One of the worse is in the correctional profession. If you raise the salaries, I would be concerned that all you did would be to cannibalize from some other area which also has great needs.

It seems to me the problem is a national manpower policy, which obviously can't be imposed on a free society, but which would give us some idea of the priorities as to where we needed our skills most. Although I wouldn't expect you to agree, I think far too many of our skills are going into the military services and not nearly enough into the correctional profession.

This involves the morals of a society, standards and points of view, but I would be concerned that you have only got a certain pie of skilled manpower availability, and if you raise the salaries, improve the living conditions, and generally sweeten up the appeal of the correctional profession, it seems to me about all you do is to increase the piece of that pie without making the pie itself any bigger. Would you comment on that.

Attorney General CLARK. I would agree only to a very limited extent. I think if you take the total personnel involved in corrections, and even more appropriately the allocation of skills that should be involved, which would be considerably more numerous, you would find the highly trained and professional skills to which I assume you are referring are only a small part.

Caseworkers and probation officers don't have to be accomplished in medical science and the like at all.

Senator CLARK. You don't have to have high skills either to be drafted into the Army or to enlist in the Navy or the Marine Corps or the Air Force, but there is a pool of upcoming young men, and to some extent young women, who are being drained away from skill shortages in scores, dozens, several dozens of professions.

I am not asking you to become a pacifist while you testify here. I am just pointing out what seems to me to be a basic fact of American society. Our priorities I think need an awfully good dusting off and looking at.

Attorney General CLARK. Certainly it is the purpose of this administration to raise, as a priority, the whole field of criminal justice, of law enforcement, and of juvenile delinquency. We feel strongly that more must be done, that we must attract more people and better people.

Senator CLARK. Well, you feel the same way about education, you feel the same way about VISTA volunteers and in the Peace Corps. It seems to me we have to face up to the fact that the way the society is operating at the moment, we are going to have a shortage all the way across the board. I gather you don't agree.

Attorney General CLARK. I really don't. I think we have resources to do far more than we are doing right now, in terms of unemployment, in terms of underemployment, and in terms of reallocation of people in skills. I don't think we will have trouble attracting good people in adequate quantities if we will devote the resources to it in this terribly important field of juvenile delinquency.

Senator CLARK. You are much more optimistic than I am, and I sure hope you are right. Thank you.

Senator Kennedy?

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. You made a very compelling case for training programs. Yet, in the administration bill there are no provisions in the legislation for training programs. They were added in the House, the House bill, training grants. Would you care to comment on that?

Attorney General CLARK. Yes. I would say that we feel quite strongly that training is a vital part of upgrading and better performance throughout the criminal justice field. We have emphasized that in the Crime Control Act. It was not felt to be a necessary component in the Juvenile Delinquency Act because of other potentials of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to provide training in this area, plus the training that would be provided under the Crime Control Act itself.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. That is anticipating the Safe Streets Act is passed. The Law Enforcement Asssistance Act has a very limited authorization in any event.

Attorney General CLARK. Yes.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. It covers a wide scope of activity.

Attorney General CLARK. The appropriation in the Law Enforcement Assistance Act does place a low ceiling but a great deal of training has gone on under LEA.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. So the training aspect of it would, therefore, principally come from the Safe Streets Act that is before us now; is that correct?

Attorney General CLARK. No. Training on the law enforcement side would come under safe streets, but the training in other areas would come within the potentials already available to HEW. HEW can explain this in greater detail. But, as I understand it, they presently have authorization and appropriation in training areas with which to reach the problem and, therefore, don't feel they have a critical need for training authorization.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Another provision in the House bill was to provide for training schools for rehabilitation and education of youth who were in custody of any public agency charged with the care of delinquent youth.

Do you have, as far as the use of the funds, do you have any comment on that? Do you think that that is a worthwhile program, and if so, are you not concerned with the drawing away of considerable resources to be used for brick and mortar, while certainly the scope of this bill is of a much broader range?

Attorney General CLARK. I would share this concern that you have expressed at the end of your question. I feel we have to put the funds authorized and appropriated under this legislation to their highest and best use, and I would consider bricks and mortar for training school purposes at this stage of our development as not of the highest priority.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. The administration bill has a provision in there for participation of youth in the development of these community services. That provision was left out of the House bill. Could you give us some idea of the kind of priority placed on including young people in the development of these community services and these community programs to prevent delinquency and to provide for rehabilitation?

Attorney General CLARK. I feel personally that their participation is of critical importance to the success of these programs. It is something to which today's youth are so vitally aware, and they have so much that they can contribute to the success of the program that their participation is very important.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. On the development of these planning funds, in the administration bill as I understand it, there are provisions for the planning funds. That is left out of the House committee bill. They feel that the local communities, the local States ought to be interested enough in these programs to make the appropriate commitment of funds and resources to the development of planning for the particular parts of the bill.

Would you give us at least the background, what your experience has been in the development of these plans? Do you feel that we should require the commitment, the full commitment of resources for planning grants from local communities?

Attorney General CLARK. I feel very strongly, and all my experience indicates, that careful detailed prior planning is essential to effective development and execution of one of these programs. The Federal Government, to assure the success of this program, needs to encourage planning-needs to do everything it can to encourage planningand must help finance planning. I think this is of critical impor

tance.

Senator KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Has your experience been in the other law enforcement bills that unless you do make these kinds of planning grants, that there is not the development of the applications and the full utilization of the legislation that you would like to see? Attorney General CLARK. Yes. First, we sometimes find great delay, because the agencies are unable to come forward with the format.

Second, we find inadequacies in the format that they come forward with, because they haven't fully studied their problem. They haven't planned. They haven't coordinated with other activities in the area and other agencies engaged in the same general field. So that the lack of comprehensive early planning both delays and undermines the quality of the proposals and of their execution.