point what the total amount will be for equipment during the fiscal year 1969. It may be more, it may be less.

Mr. FLOOD. Look at your justifications on page 41. There you have equipment in the amount of $165, 960,000, and that is 14.1 percent of the total appropriation, you say?

Mr. ESTES. That is right.

Mr. FLOOD. Then in 1969 you have $152,980,000, and you say that is 12.9 percent of the total appropriation?

Mr. ESTES. Yes.

Mr. FLOOD. Now, under this "Other" in 1968 you have $189,499,192, and you say that is 16.1 percent. Then in 1969 the amount is $179,112,944,and you say that is 15.1 percent. But what you are doing is an offtackle play, aren't you; you are shifting those reductions up the next two line to salaries and contracted services?

Mr. ESTES. No. Really, this entire effort and I may say at this point that these figures were estimated and have now been adjusted. We would like to provide for the record the figures that have come out of our annual report that will be available within the next few days.

(The information appears on p. 83.)

Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Estes, on the same page in the justifications, take a look at your salaries and the contracted services; they are both up.

Mr. ESTES. That is right. That is consistent with our overall effort to emphasize instructional activities rather than materials and equipment. We are interested in people and services to people, human services to people, rather than the service activities and purchase of equipment and materials. Therefore, this is certainly consistent with our emphasis during this past year and the criteria we have established for use by State departments in approving title I projects submitted by local school districts.

Mr. KELLY. The amount of money that a community gets out of the appropriation is established by law and they decide and plan how to use it in conjunction with the State. This is an attempt to portray for you how they have used it in the past and how we think they will use it in the present and in the future. We believe that one of the advantages derived from advance funding, which gives them longer leadtime for their planning, will result in more of their funds going into the employment of teachers and the provision of the educational services to these youngsters and less will go into capital expenditures and those capital expenditures they make will be more interrelated with specially designed programs and will be less happenstance-type buying because of the availability of Federal funds. So we believe that this movement in the direction of their using more of their funds for teachers and less of their funds for equipment is in keeping with the whole purpose of the act and improved education of disadvantaged youngsters.

Mr. ESTES. The amount for instructional activities has actually increased to 65 percent rather than the 59 percent that we indicate here. The greatest single increase in any one instructional activity has been in the area of the communication arts, particularly with regard to reading, basic reading instruction. There has been a significant increase in instructional activity in the development of reading skills on the part of local educational agencies. This is certainly a desirable direction as far as we are concerned.

BUDGET CATEGORY "OTHER"

Mr. FLOOD. What do you include in this fascinating category "Other"? I will have to us that myself some time. You have this budgeted for $189 million for 1968 and $179 million for 1969. It occurs to me that when people worked on this table down at your shop, it must have been late in the afternoon. They just got tired and said "Well, 'Other,' let's go home."

Mr. ESTES. This relates to a number of items, instructional materials, and supplies, and other items. I would like Mr. Hughes, the Director, to add to this if he cares to.

Mr. HUGHES. There would be a variety of services, Mr. Chairman, provided under the program that would also be included there, library, health, guidance and counseling service, transportation, school social work, clothing, things of this kind. The classification here, I think, in a way is an attempt to get at the ways in which the funds are spent rather than a substantive breakdown of the funds. We could give you a breakdown which would indicate the way in which funds are spent for academic and service purposes that would serve your needs.

Mr. FLOOD. We are interested in the $189 million in 1968 and $179 million in 1969. "Other" is kind of casual, isn't it, for $189 million? If you had spelled it out, I would not have had to ask you this question.

Mr. ESTES. We will be delighted to provide this for you, if you like, a detailed breakdown with regard to the services provided under this category.

Mr. FLOOD. Oh, yes. "Other" just won't do.

(The information follows:)

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT OF 1965, PUBLIC LAW 89–10, AS AMENDED-TITLE I, ASSISTANCE
FOR EDUCATIONALLY DEPRIVED CHILDREN
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES CLASSIFIED AS OTHER

School supplies (pencils, tablets, etc.).

Items

Student body activities (athletics, band, orchestra, clubs).

Community services (recreation, movies, concerts, camping, cultural enrichment).

Food, related food services, hardware, etc..

Pupil transportation...

Health services..

Operation and maintenance of plant..

Fixed charges (social security, retirement, rent, employee and liability insurances, etc)__

Staff travel.

CONTRACTED SERVICES

Mr. FLOOD. What about the contracted services? What does that cover? You have $62 million in 1968 and $71 million in 1969. Mr. ESTES. Local school districts can contract with institutions or other agencies outside the school district for services to pupils within the school district. For instance, one item of contracted services would be that of evaluation. Frequently we find school districts who contract

with a university or with a rexional educational laboratory or perhaps some other organization to assist them with the evaluation of title I activities. These types of activities would be included in the contract item.

Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Shriver?

APPLICATION OF ADVANCE FUNDING TO OTHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Mr. SHRIVER. I think it is commendable to fund these programs a year in advance. What other educational appropriations would meet the same criteria that you have here that we might be faced with in some year in the future, either next year or the year after, to fund in this way, appropriate in this same way? Aren't there others? It would be an advantage to a school district to know how much money it is going to receive in federally affected areas. It would be an advantage to the school district to know how much money is going to be received for libraries, or some other program. Doesn't the argument hold true for most educational programs?

Mr. KELLY. I think it has a much wider application than the single project. I would not think of it as having a significant application where the nature of the payment is a tuition payment. I think of the federally impacted areas as being in the nature of a tuition payment, that if you have a student, a certain amount is paid with respect to him. I think when there is going to be a precipitous change or there is going to be a change in the nature of the Federal payment, there should be lead time on that change but I think that the concept of the tuition payment, educational institution are accustomed to that, they predict the students and then count them. You don't need it there. I think when it is in the nature of construction, the nature of making planning funds available and leaving the funds available until they are used, does away with the necessity of this large advance funding. Then when you have a relatively stable ongoing program the administrators of programs do not find it difficult for our continuing resolutions, and so forth, to keep these programs in operation. When you are putting in a new program, when you are placing a fiscal year limitation on it, when it is a project type orientation, when it involves services, and when it is very widespread, such as to the number of school districts involved here, I do think it has an application.

Mr. SHRIVER. So you don't believe we will be asked in years hence to be appropriating for a year in advance or 18 months in advance! Mr. KELLY. I think you will be asked on more than one program but certainly not all of the educational programs.

Mr. Howe. I think this goes back to the cycling of the local school districts budget planning, which typically has a local school district planning for a fiscal year that will start July 1, and is buttoning up its decisions in regard to its local budget some time in the early spring. If it can have some knowledge of what is likely to be coming along in the Federal contribution to that budget, it could do a better job in planning.

Mr. SHRIVER. Absolutely. That is why I think it would tend to be helpful.

Mr. HowE. We addressed ourselves here to the program that had the widest application in the most school districts. Certainly, it was the

one making the greatest problem for school districts in that planning process. So that I think this will be the most helpful move that could possibly be made in this regard.

Mr. SHRIVER. I agree with that.

Mr. KELLY. I think some evidence of this problem is that the Federal Government, as you know, operates every year on a continuing resolution that says pending the enactment of your budget you can spend at current rates, and so forth, and that administrators have learned to develop techniques of carrying out their programs under these concepts. The place that has had, I think, the greatest difficulty with the continuing resolution of any place is the district school system, that they will have an enlarged number of children enrolling and, therefore, they need the larger number of teachers. If their bill has not proceeded far enough they have to open schools without having hired those teachers and put them on. Other systems, the effective date of starting and launching a new program is not tied so rigidly to a date that on September 9 somebody has to be standing in front of a class. This is merely a multiplication of this on a very large scale. Mr. SHRIVER. Right. I think it would apply to other Federal programs. For instance, the federally impacted school districts. They need to know in advance because they are going to anticipate that from an airbase they will have a certain number of children coming in, federally affected children, and they need to hire the teachers early for the fiscal year. So I would think that would be an instance where it would be helpful, almost necessary, considering you don't know what the Federal Government is going to do, in connection with this program.

Mr. KELLY. That part I think is important, that they do know whether there is going to be a change in policy.

Mr. SHRIVER. That is right. So I would think there will be more applications to this committee in the future.

NUMBER OF TITLE I, E.S.E.A. PROJECTS

What is the reason for the increase in the number of projects?
Mr. ESTES. Increase in title I projects?

Mr. SHRIVER. Yes. You said the number of children participating in title I projects has increased. Is it the normal increase in the number of children?

Mr. ESTES. Actually, we are serving more children than are used for purposes of calculating local school district entitlement. Of course, once we identify a target area we move toward educational deprivation and use that in our planning purposes for providing services to these children. There has actually been an increase in the number of children that we have served from 8,300,000 to 9,500,000, but there has been a decrease in the number of projects. During the first year we had 21,000-22,000 projects, and now we are down to 18,000 projects.

Mr. SHRIVER. That is because they are combining?

Mr. ESTES. That is right. I think this is significant. We are moving toward a comprehensive approach in providing these services. It is

a good sign as far as we are concerned. Local school districts are moving away from the fragmented, piecemeal approach to an overall comprehensive design.

PROCEDURES FOR APPROVING PROJECTS

Mr. SHRIVER. Just what are the steps that are taken from the time a school district makes application before projects are approved? How is this handled?

Mr. ESTES. In title I, projects are approved at the State level. We would hope that before the project is completed by a local school district that there is broad involvement at the local level of a number of community resources in the planning, the developing, as well as devising procedures for implementing proposed activities. Once the local school district has developed the project it then submits it to the State Department of Education for final approval of these projects. Many States use the criteria that we have distributed to them for their approval process. Other States have modified it, extended it, adapted it to meet their own particular needs within their State. The State approves it, they send it back and then, of course, the approved projects are ready after negotiations for implementation.

Mr. SHRIVER. And automatically, then, it is implemented if the State approves it? Mr. ESTES. That is right.

NEGLECTED AND DELINQUENT CHILDREN

Mr. SHRIVER. In your statement, on page 3, you say that you estimate in 1969 2,000 additional neglected and delinquent children in State-supported institutions will benefit.

Mr. ESTES. That is right.

Mr. SHRIVER. How have they been educated?

Mr. ESTES. The State now provides for the education of these children. It provides for all of their maintenance and operation funds. Mr. SHRIVER. These 2,000 have not been benefited?

Mr. ESTES. That is right. They have not been included this past year in receiving the special supplementary services that are provided under title I. They will be included this coming year.

Mr. SHRIVER. Is that all of the neglected delinquent children in Statesupported institutions in the country, 2,000?

Mr. ESTES. This would be about 5 percent of the children. It goes back to the term "educational deprivation." We want State-supported institutions as well as local school districts to concentrate on those pupils in the greatest need of special assistance.

Mr. SHRIVER. They haven't been doing that in the States.

Mr. ESTES. Surely, they have been doing this in the States.

Mr. SHRIVER. In the State institutions?

Mr. ESTES. They have been doing this. This will make it possible for them to expand and include others that need this kind of special assistance.

Mr. HUGHES. Our studies show that the children in these State institutions, by and large, have not been getting an adequate educational program which would assure when they are discharged they are able