the land-grant colleges and universities. First established by the Smith-Lever Act and subsequently broadened by additional legislation, this program now has a very large annual expenditure derived from Federal funds, as well as from State and local sources.

Community service programs

In keeping with the intent of President Johnson to extend the role of the university "far beyond the ordinary extension-type operation," the committee is proposing a program of Federal assistance for institutions of higher education to enable them to establish and maintain community service programs. Throughout consideration of this title, the committee was mindful of the principal role of the university and its primary responsibility to undergraduate and graduate students. Thus the committee has adopted language in section 102 of the bill which will insure that the resources and skills of the university will be utilized only in very specific areas and not be dissipated on programs and activities not consistent with the overall objectives of the institution. Specifically there is a prohibition against the use of funds for courses and activities which are of a frivolous nature. Further, where any program, activity, or service involves course offerings, the extension and continuing education courses must be either credit courses, or of college level as determined by the institution.

The above restrictions apply to all activities to be carried on under approved projects. Because the committee wishes to give the highest priority to programs, services, and activities specifically designed to assist in the solution of urban and suburban problems and because of the diversity of the problems and, thus of the means by which to solve them, the committee has provided considerable latitude with respect to programs aimed at urban and suburban problems. Thus programs, activities, or services specifically designed to assist in the solution of urban and suburban problems will be eligible for support. It is the committee's intention that the term "specifically designed" be interpreted narrowly. Thus, the following examples of activities would qualify as programs "specifically designed":

1. Concentrated studies of employment problems and the resources of the community toward stimulating economic growth and more effective management of community enterprises that will largely determine the course of the community's future.

2. An ad hoc task force to appraise the community welfare administration and to subject the problems revealed by this appraisal to the insights of a wide variety of university disciplines; among others, psychologists, economists, architects, lawyers, and physicians.

3. Conferences and seminars to assist community leaders in mounting an attack on poverty.

4. A special course to train nonmedical personnel in case-finding techniques, as a means of alleviating a shortage of public health personnel in the community.

5. A conference for government and school officials and members of the business community to discuss ways in which the end of discrimination patterns in housing, education, and employment can be hastened with wider community support.

Without mitigating circumstances or further qualifications, the following would not qualify as "specially designed" to assist in the solution of urban or suburban problems:

1. A short course to bring the most recent laws, court cases, and legal trends to the attention of local attorneys.

2. A monthly seminar for physicians, meeting with the staff of the university medical school, to discuss new advances in the drug industry and in drug research.

3. A short course, by administrative officials in business, government, industry, and education, in the application of automatic data processing techniques to current management procedures.

4. Courses scheduled at times that would enable housewives to work toward college degree requirements by examination, perhaps, or through regular courses, evening and Saturday programs, correspondence, or television instruction.

The committee recognizes that changes are occurring not only in our cities and suburbs, but also in our rural communities and areas as well. The committee further recognizes the desirability and necessity of providing support for university extension and continuing education courses which are not specifically designed to assist in the solution of urban and suburban problems. Nevertheless, the committee does not wish to encourage competition between institutions of higher education and local school systems with respect to adult basic education, job retraining, or vocational education; nor does the committee wish to permit and finance a duplication of efforts in that certain educational programs are already eligible for support under the Economic Opportunity Act, the Manpower Development and Training Act, the Housing Act, and under the Agricultural Extension Service. Further, the committee does not wish to draw colleges and universities into programs and activities which might interfere with the primary role or functions of an institution of higher education or which might impede the maximum utilization of the special resources of an institution and the competencies of its faculty. The bill, therefore, contains language which permits the inclusion of programs, activities, or services beyond those specifically designed to directly assist in the solution of urban or suburban problems. However, such programs must be at least indirectly related to the solution of community problems. The institution must determine that such programs are not otherwise available in a community or to persons in a community and secondly that they are consistent with the overall educational objectives of the institutions and are congruent with the effective utilization of the special resources of the institution and the competencies of its faculty.

Administration of the program by State authority

Each State that wishes to participate in this program must designate a State institution or agency to design and submit a State plan, setting forth its programs of community service projects. It is anticipated that in many States a State commission or agency, representative of institutions of higher education in the State, will be established and has been the case with the recently established State commissions pursuant to the Higher Education Facilities Act. In other instances the State may wish to appoint the State university, a land-grant college, or even a private urban college or university to administer the State plan. The bill permits this if there is established an advisory council broadly representative of institutions of higher education in the State which are competent to offer community service programs to consult with the designated institution in the preparation of the State plan. Among other requirements for the State plan, the plan must set forth a comprehensive coordinated statewide program of approved educational activities and services for which Federal financial support is being requested. The plan must also set forth such policies and procedures to be followed in allocating Federal funds as will insure that due consideration will be given to the capacity and willingness of particular institutions of higher education (whether public or private) to provide effective community service programs, to the availability and need for such activities and services in the State, and to the results of periodic evaluation of such activities and services in the light of information regarding State problems.

Authorizations

The enormity of the need of American communities, both urban and suburban, to increase their competencies in solving their social and civic problems, was stressed by all witnesses who testified on title I. Impressed by this great need, the committee has authorized $50 million for fiscal year 1966, the first year of a 5-year program, to pay part of the costs of new, improved, or expanded community service programs. Only such sums as the Congress may hereafter authorize by law are proposed for the remaining 4 years of the program. Of the funds authorized, a certain amount is guaranteed to each of the territories and the respective States, with the remainder being allocated to the States on a formula based on population. The funds for fiscal year 1966 would be distributed as follows:

Estimated Federal payments under title I, Higher Education Act of 1965

1 Estimated distribution of $50,000,000 with a basic amount of $100,000 to the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico; $25,000 to American Samoa, Guam, and the Virgin Islands; and the remainder distributed on the basis of the total resident population.

The 20-percent reservation for grants and contracts for experimental projects proposed in the introduced bill has been deleted to avoid placing a limitation upon the State's ability to develop community service programs and projects which are most likely to meet their own needs. Since the amount of money available to any one State will be exceedingly small in relation to the need, the committee did not wish to impose even this much of a limitation on its use. Rather, it expects that the State plan will indicate, depending on the needs and priorities of the State, whether or not funds will be given to experimental activities, projects, and programs. Some States may already have sufficiently successful and proven community service programs that they may wish to allocate most of their funds to the expansion and rapid diffusion of these successes. committee feels that the States are the ones most capable of deciding how to allocate the available resources.

The

Under title I, Federal funds will be used to pay 75 percent of the cost of the State's plan for community service programs in fiscal year 1966 and 50 percent of such costs in the next 4 succeeding years. Up to 5 percent of the Federal grant may be used for the development and administration of the State plan required under the program. The committee has deleted the original limitation on the use of fee-related matching funds in order to insure that institutions of higher education, particularly private institutions, will have sufficient resources to provide the matching funds required. To prohibit the use of fee-related funds might preclude the effective participation of private colleges and universities, many of whom are finding it extremely difficult to meet existing expenses. How

ever, in permitting the use of fees for matching, the committee does not wish the cost of the program to be borne entirely by the participating students, since in many instances, the participants will be persons who can least afford to pay tuition or course fees. The committee expects such charges and fees to be reasonable and consistent with the objectives of the program. With respect to the matching program, the committee has included a prohibition against the use of Federal funds obtained under other Federal programs for matching. The determination of how the required matching will be obtained within each State will rest with the State agency or institution responsible for the administration of the State plan. In order to insure that the Federal funds are not used to supplant existing State, local, or institutional funds, the State plan must set out policies and procedures designed to assure that the Federal funds will supplement and increase the amounts of non-Federal funds to be made available for community service programs.

A National Advisory Committee on Community Service Programs, composed of representatives of Federal agencies with extension education responsibilities, will be established to advise the Commissioner in the preparation of general regulations concerning policy matters. A Review Council on Community Service Programs, to review programs for which funds are appropriated, and to make recommendations by March 31, 1969, for needed improvements to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, will also be established.

54-404-65--5

CHAPTER III

THE TWO CULTURES AND THE URBAN REVOLUTION William L. C. Wheaton, director, Institute for Urban Studies University of Pennsylvania

The revolutionary impact of scientific development upon our way of life is daily hailed by press and radio. In the Redefield lectures, Č. P. Snow helped focus our attention upon the growing gap between this new scientific world and our traditional culture. But another revolution no less profound or far reaching is currently being wrought all over the world. This is the revolution of urbanization. We face it at home and abroad, in the developed Western countries, and in developing areas on every continent. It, too, threatens the division of our society into two cultures: the affluent, educated, productive, and urbanized, those, in short, who participate in the rich productivity of modern society on the one hand, and on the other the poor, uneducated. and unproductive, those who are largely denied the privileges and benefits of which we so often boast. If we prove incapable of closing the gap between these two groups, our civilization will surely fail in the task ahead.

This urban revolution has four aspects to which I draw your attention. First there is the revolution in technology and productive capacity. We can now produce an average per family income of $6,000 per year, and this will probably increase to $9,000 within a decade or two. We are increasingly in a position to produce more material wealth with less labor, a condition never anticipated by social philosophers.

Second, there is a revolution in population growth rates and migration. It is resulting in an absolute decline in farm population, a 40percent increase in urban population in the last decade, and will add 90 million people to our urban areas in the next two decades, half of them by migration from rural areas.

Third, there has been a revolution in human skills and human socialization. We have a population with an unprecedentedly high degree of literacy, job skills, and social discipline. To be able to put 60 million cars on the road each day is indeed a remarkable achievement. It is even more remarkable that 98 out of 100 of the drivers will stay in the proper lane, stop for a stoplight, obey the speed limits, and get home alive. No other civilization has remotely approached this level of skill and self-control.

Fourth, there has been a revolution in consumption, and more important in the expectations of progressively higher consumption. As unprecedented levels of material well-being are achieved, all expect, and have a right to expect, to share in them in some degree. Thus we have guaranteed, through social security, unemployment insurance and general relief that none will overtly starve. In so doing we may have