the present time appear to be directed more toward law enforcement and the prevention of fraud than they do upon providing services to individuals. Undoubtedly, the service oriented programs including rehabilitation have suffered from this emphasis. Again, the unwholesome relationships that exist between the state vocational rehabilitation agencies and the Social and Rehabilitation Service and the unhappy relationships that exist between some of the committees of the Congress and SRS indicate that there is no quick solution for this problem. Under these circumstances, we believe that the proposed transfer will be best for the program. Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation Suite 1110, 1522 K Street, N. W., Washington, D. C. 20005 Telephone: 202-659-9383 July 9, 1974 The Honorable Jennings Randolph Chairman, Subcommittee on the Handicapped United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 Dear Senator Randolph: Enclosed is the testimony of the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation with respect to legislation currently pending before the Subcommittee on the Handicapped to extend the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and to remove the Rehabilitation Services Administration from the Social and Rehabilitation Service. These views were arrived at only after full consultation with the entire membership of the Council of State Administrators. If we can be helpful in any way to the Subcommittee during its consideration of this legislation, do not hesitate to let us know. Membership consists of the chief administrative officers of the state vocational rehabilitation agencies responsible for administration of the state-federal vocational rehabilitation programs in each of the states. STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL OF STATE ADMINISTRATORS OF VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION BEFORE THE SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON. THE HANDICAPPED, COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, CONSIDERING S. 3108, S. 3381, AND H.R. 14225, JULY 8, 1974 Mr. Chairman, the Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation deeply appreciates the opportunity to present this statement to the Subcommittee and to make our concerns known on pending legislation to extend the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and remove the Rehabilitation Services Administration from the Social and Rehabilitation Service. The Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR) is composed of the top administrators of the public vocational rehabilitation agencies for physically and mentally handicapped persons in the states, the District of Columbia, and the five territories. These agencies constitute the State partners in the State-Federal program of vocational rehabilitation services for the disabled provided by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Public Law 93-112). This 54-year-old program is a major resource for vocational rehabilitation services, and the CSAVR has been an active force for strengthening the effectiveness of service programs for the disabled since its establishment. To provide state input for the State-Federal Vocational Rehabilitation Program, the Council was established by the State Directors in 1940 on the recommendation of, and with the full support of, the Federal Commissioner of Education, who was then responsible for the administration of the Vocational Rehabilitation Program. Our Council has enjoyed quasiofficial status, since its inception, as an active advisor to the Federal administrators in the formulation of policy and program decisions at the Federal level. It is because of our close relationship with the administration of the Vocational Rehabilitation Program at both the State and 2 Federal levels that we deem it important to make our concerns known to you today. We are here to strongly support an extension of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and to emphatically stress the need for the removal of the Rehabilitation Services Administration from the Social and Rehabilitation Service. Extension of the Rehabilitation Act The importance of extending the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 through Fiscal Year 1976 cannot be overstated. A repetition of the 1972 and 1973 experiences in which the Congress considered rehabilitation legislation after the appropriation authority had lapsed would be a heavy blow to a program which has already been dealt more than its share of uncertainty and discord in the past few years. Continuity and regularity in administration would be wellserved by the extension of the Act for an additional year. Insofar as the Administration is asking for a September 30, 1975, completion date for the Comprehensive Needs Study (a study which will be important to the consideration by the Congress of any new legislation) an extension of the Act will assure continuity of the program until and during consideration of a successor Act. The importance of an early extension of the law should not be minimized. An early enactment of extension legislation will assure that the states' need for adequate financial and program planning will be met. State Legislatures, many of which are now in session, are considering programs the success of which is often contingent upon advance knowledge of Federal nithorization figures |