provided homebound meals to sustain them until they are able to join in or return to the congregate meal site. 909.40 Charges to Recipients for costs of meals (b) The establishment of a suggested fee schedule serves no purpose other than to burden the elderly with undue expectations and pressure, leading to confusion. We propose that a flat fee be established low enough so that most people who earn over the BLS standard will be able to pay. This fee will be determined by the governing board of the local site to be no more than 30% of raw food costs-it could be less. [See 909.33 (3) (a)]. All participants should be informed of the right to a free meal in the event they cannot pay. No person earning less than the BLS should be influenced or pressured in any way to pay for meals or services. Special Indian Provisions The following are a list of suggested recommendations to ensure that elderly Indians on reservations receive the full benefit of the Nutrition Program to which they are entitled: 1. Each state plan should include: a. the total number of eligible elderly in the State b. the number of Indian elderly in the State. 2. Each state should reserve on behalf of Indians a portion of funds that is at least proportional to their numbers when compared with all the eligible individuals in the State. 3. The State should reserve these funds specifically for Indians for a period of at least nine months so that tribes, inter-tribal councils, and reservations are able to have full opportunity to organize these projects. If after nine months, the money is not used, it should be returned to the general state fund. 4. The State should list specific steps it will take to make certain those Indian groups who would be interested in the project hear about the money and are helped in applying for funds. 5. The 10% matching fund from local sources shall include funds received by Indian tribes by contract with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 6. States should be able to make grants to the central tribe authority outside their State boundaries on behalf of the Indian elderly living within the State boundary. FROM THE CRUSADE AGAINST HUNGER New York, N. Y., June 1972. REGARDING NATIONAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR THE ELDERLY THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS: AN OVERVIEW FOR THE USE OF CONCERNED GROUPS The Notice of Proposed Rule Making for the Nutrition Program for the Elderly was published on June 6, 1972, by the Social and Rehabilitation Service (SRS) of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. They do very little to enhance or interpret the recent legislation which created the program (Public Law 92-258, Title VII of the Older Americans Act). In fact, only about 25% of the language in the proposed regulations is original; the balance was takenwith little embellishment-from the statute itself. One must infer that the vagueness of these proposals means that SRS may plan to be more specific in the guidelines which it will issue subsequently to state agencies in helping them to develop a state plan of operation for the program. These guidelines would not have to be published in the Federal Register and, therefore, would not be as readily accessible to the public for comment or criticism as these regulations are, for example. In addition to the vagueness of the language of these proposals, they also show some glaring omissions. Most notably, there is no mention anywhere of the Administration on Aging, that agency of SRS which the statute specifically desigated to administer the new program. The regulations were issued by SRS and give states accountability to SRS. This may indicate that what Congress giveth, the Administration (through top HEW and SRS officials) may take away. The proposed regulations also add something to the Nutrition Program that was not in the statute: the creation of a new level of program administration. These project areas, to exist between the State agency and the program sites themselves, would have the major responsibility for the Program's implementation. This summary or overview of the proposed regulations was written to help concerned groups and individuals read through them. At times it was impossible to avoid some editorial comment. Its main emphasis is on the new material supplied by SRS in the regulations; these sections are marked *. 909.1 This section, in describing the purposes of the program, states four main reasons why older people are malnourished and need such services. 909.3 Definitions of some of the key terms in the regulations: (a) "Eligible individuals" are those persons over 60 who cannot afford to eat adequately or are unable to prepare their own meals because of limited mobility or lack of motivation; (b) “Minority individuals”—a reasonable attempt at identifying the intent of the statute which stated that "to the extent feasible, grants will be awarded to projects operated by and serving the needs of minority, Indian and limited English-speaking eligible individuals in proportion to their numbers in the state." (P.L. 92–258, Sec. 705 (a)4.) *(c) "Project area" is not derived from the statute, which speaks only of a "project site" to be furnished by the recipient of a grant disbursed by the appropriate state agency. (P.L. 92-258, Sec's. 705 and 706.) The setting of criteria for the size of this project area-that which says it "may not be less in area than . . a population of at least 250,000" seems an arbitrary choice, with no basis in Title VII, or in reality. It disqualifies any smaller city from being a separate project area. By keeping project areas large, the administration of each project is kept more remote from its consumers. (d) "State agency" according to Title VII, is "the sole agency for administering or supervising the administration of the (state) plan for this program. It emphasizes that this be a "single State agency." § 909.24 Opportunity for hearing The State plan shall provide that the State agency will provide that any nutrition project applicant, whose application for approval is denied, will be afforded an opportunity for a hearing before the State agency. Add second sentence, reading: If satisfaction is not obtained by state hearing, the nutrition project applicant shall be afforded the opportunity for a regional HEW/AOA appeal hearing. State politics may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle to participation by local groups. The appeals process should be extended to the federal level to insure "fair play" in such cases. § 909.31 Standards of Personnel administration (b) Second sentence now reads: The affirmative action plan will provide for specific action steps and timetables to assure equal employment opportunity. Add to read: The affirmative action plan will provide for specific action steps and timetables to assure equal employment opportunity for minorities and elderly at least in proportion to their numbers in the State. (a) Each project shall have a project council. It shall be the responsibility of the council to advise the recipient of a grant or contract on all matters relating to the delivery of nutrition services within the project and to approve all policy decisions related to: (1) The determination of general menus; (2) The establishment of suggested fee guidelines; (3) The hours of operation of the project; and (4) The decorating and furnishing of the meal setting. (c) The State agency shall develop formal procedures regarding the tenure of members, responsibilities and operations of the project council prescribed in this section, in keeping with guidelines established by the Social and Rehabilitation Service. Change (a) and (c) to read: Governing Council. (a) Each project shall have a governing council. It shall be the responsibility of the governing council to decide on all matters relating to the delivery of nutrition services and to approve all policy decisions related to: 1. The determination of general menus; 2. The establishment of suggested fee guidelines, 3. The hours of operation of the project; 4. The decorating and furnishing of the meal setting; 5. The development of formal procedures regarding the tenure and responsibilities of members; and 6. The development of personnel practices and policies for staff. (c) The State agency shall develop formal procedures regarding the composition and operations of the governing council in keeping with guidelines established by HEW/SRS. The type of structure set up by HEW, similar to the Parents Council in Headstart programs, is not satisfactory; we have found that it does not give consumers the kind of participation and control necessary for a project to meet the real needs of the community. We strongly advocate a governing board structure. § 909.34 Selection of congregate meal sites (b) First sentence now reads: Such congregate meal sites shall be located as close as possible, preferably within walking distance, to these concentrations of older persons. Add to read: Such congregate meal sites shall be located as close as possible, preferably within walking distance, to these concentrations of older persons, and, where appropriate, transportation shall be furnished to such site. § 909.49 Purchase of goods and services Add section (d) Preference should be given to minority vendors. We would also like to share our views with regard to two further areas of concern project size and treatment of Indians. First, the National Council on the Aging would raise serious question with project area size as defined in § 909.3 of the guidelines, especially in terms of city population. What is the Administration's rationale for disallowing project awards for localities with populations of less than 250,000? Why should the county structure receive the award, instead of the city of 200,000 which falls within it? NCOA is of the belief that two grants should be awarded in this case-one to the county and one to the city-for maximum effectiveness operationally and administratively. Surely a city of this size can meet the minimum standard of 100 meals daily, as outlined by HEW. Finally, we question the effectiveness of the regulations in dealing with Indian participation in the program. NCOA would recommend, if legally feasible, that monies be earmarked to serve the Indian population and direct federal grants made to the reservations. We are asking, in effect, that they be treated more like a Trust Territory described in § 909.50 for the purposes of this program than a large city or county definied in § 909.3. It seems unrealistic to expect the Navajo Nation, for example, to deal with different state agencies having dissimilar state plans and requirements on such items as matching shares. The National Council on the Aging stands ready to assist your Committee in implementing these recommendations and to provide any further information you may request. Sincerely, JACK OSSOFSKY, Acting Executive Director. 76-300 0-72-pt. 2-8 FROM THE NATIONAL RETIRED TEACHERS ASSOCIATION AND THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS STATEMENT OF NRTA-AARP REGARDING THE PROPOSED REGULATIONS FOR Our Associations, the National Retired Teachers Association and the American Association of Retired Persons, have come before Congress on various occasions in the past seeking the enactment of this legislation establishing a Nutrition Program for the Elderly. We, therefore, particularly appreciate having this opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations for administering this program. (1) NRTA and AARP are pleased to note that the proposed regulations do not contain any time limitation on Federal support for individual projects. Our Associations fear that local officials would be unwilling to undertake large-scale projects if they knew that they would have to bear the full cost alone after a few years of Federal support. We favor the concept of a permanent grant program for nutritional projects for the elderly. (2) We note that under these proposed regulations the Social and Rehabilitative Service is given authority both to issue guidelines for the operation of nutrition programs for the elderly and to adminster grants to the states for these programs. Our Assocations would like to point out our understanding that the law has already vested this authority specifically in the Administration on Aging, which is located within the Social and Rehabilitative Service. The law states that "the Secretary shall administer the program through the Administration on Aging", and it is our impression that issuing guidelines and admnistering grants constitute major elements in the administration of the program. In order to bring the proposed regulations into conformity with the intent of the law, we suggest that the words "Administration on Aging" be substituted in the regulations wherever the words "Social and Rehabilitative Service" now appear. The American Association of Retired Persons and the National Retired Teachers Association hope that the Administration on Aging will soon be restored to the status originally intended for it by Congress, as a powerful, creative and independent agency within the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Even without this hoped-for change in status, we feel that the Administration on Aging is best able to coordinate and administer programs for older persons because it is the department most directly concerned with and experienced in the special problems of the elderly. (3) Our Associations have serious reservations about the concept of "project areas" outlined in the proposed regulations. We feel that this concept might be interpreted as an attempt to move gradually by administrative ruling toward the system of "allied services" which has been proposed by the Administration. The project area concept would concentrate funds in seven or eight target areas within a state. As a result, groups of elderly persons living outside the designated project areas would not have access to nutritional programs even where there were capable organizations willing to operate projects in the area and a sufficient number of eligible persons to justify a project. NRTA and AARP would prefer a system under which the states could distribute funds directly to institutions, organizations or governmental units willing to operate local nutrition programs for the elderly. Funds could be dstributed more widely under this system, which would be more suitable to the needs of rural and suburban areas. Our Associations feel that the states will have difficulty in locating large-scale project area grantees who are both capable of and interested in conducting citywide or county-wide projects, and that this difficulty may cause delays in implementing the nutritional program. We do, however, agree that nutrition projects should be as cost-efficient as possible without sacrificing any of the basic aims |