female, that's one problem; if you are black, that's another problem; if you're young, that's a third problem. That's the process that will be used in an attempt to weigh and add in each of those factors. Even after doing that, we determined in Denver that the unemployment problems of youth caused them to come out as 15 of the top 18 most needy groups in the city. Regardless of the approach we used, we kept coming up with youth as probably the most severely impacted in terms of unemployment in Denver. In Denver, approximately 42 percent of our clients in the last year under title I were youthful participants. There is some more data in the statement that will detail that, but in addition to that, we diverted 254 youth that were entering the labor market for the first time from school or from their summer youth program into a very intensive short-term employability development program run through a contract with the Denver Singer Career Development Center. As a result of that program, approximately 69 percent of those individuals were successfully treated, meaning that they were either placed in a job permanently or returned to school in the fall.

The cost of this was approximately $500 per client, which indicated to us that if we could get these clients at an early age, as soon as they get out of high school, whether that be as a result of dropping out or terminating, if we can get that disadvantaged client then, we have a reasonably high probability of succeeding.

A similar program was carried on through the title III summer program where out of approximately 2,400 young people, about 250 of those received specific job readiness training and an additional 240 received vocational education training and another 180 were enrolled in cultural enrichment programs and the remainder were employed in very closely supervised settings.

It's our impression, the impression of our staff and the youth involved and a variety of the youth servicing agencies of our city that this was a considerably more valuable experience than we had had in the past in impacting on the two factors we spoke about earlier.

In speaking about the types of activities, the CETA system in Denver, there are essentially three service deliverers that can deal in the employment area. First, is a variety of Law Enforcement Assistance Administration funded programs, which you will hear more about later on, which were set up basically under the high impact program over a short period of time and designed for experimental projects. Those projects were not designed to be a service delivery system, rather designed to test certain types of programs with certain types of client groups. As soon as they were put into place, needless to say, the community viewed them as if they should be treatment centers rather than experimental projects.

You may hear some criticism of these programs for lack of coordination, lack of comprehensive approach. Those criticisms might be well justified if the programs were initially designed as comprehensive delivery systems. But, they weren't. They were designed as experiments. I might note that the high impact fund is gone and at this point only small elements of those programs have been operated over the last 3 years and are still in operation as a result of State funding. Taking that area of it out of the question, that leaves us with the welfare incentive program of the State employment service. As Mr.

Brainard will tell you shortly, that is not designed to deal particularly with the problems of youth. The reason for that is that most youth don't qualify for the welfare incentive program since they don't qualify for welfare payments.

The second group, or the second possibility of being, the employment service is hampered by the fact that they have been traditionally viewed as a labor exchange, meaning that they deal with large quantities of clients that are essentially job ready for the employment service.

That leads us back to the CETA model and a concern that you must have on a national level is human resources of CETA, giving the question that you most clearly pointed out about giving the son or the father a job. I think you will find given in this most current year's report on manpower that 57 percent plus of the clients in CETA title I activities as of June 30, 1976, were youthful, which seems to demonstrate that on a nationwide basis, the CETA local prime sponsors have, in effect, determined that youth are a most significant recipient of their services.

What's the problem, then? The problem in Denver is, we simply do not have the resources under CETA, the comprehensive system that should be dealing with this problem, to treat the number of people that should be and must be treated. For example, under title III, this summer with absolutely no advance publicity, we received 3,500 applications for that program and we could accept no more than 2.400. We could create, as I indicated earlier, sophisticated job enrichment programs for a very small percentage of the overall number.

What would we then suggest? We would suggest not the development of an independent system or categorical system dealing with the problems of youth. We understand that in the coming Congress there will be a number of programs or a number of acts suggested to you to deal specifically with youth problems. We are suggesting in the alternative that in the 1973 Congress advance the Employment and Training Act as the Nation's main vehicle to deal with the problems. The CETA program has been in operation for approximately 2 years. During that period of time, it has made significant strides to develop a comprehensive approach to employment problems. particularly with respect to youth.

It would therefore be our recommendation that more adequate resources be allocated through the CETA model. Prime sponsors have indicated through past performance, that they will direct substantial portions of those resources to youth programs within a context of a comprehensive system.

Further, other categorical structures should not be created to compete with this existing comprehensive approach. I refer specifically here to a variety of proposals to charge the Employment Service with the responsibility for employability development of non-job ready youth. In our view, that was already demonstrated to be ineffectual as with the YOC programs that were operated through the late sixties.

Finally, we would recommend that where experimental designs are being tested, such as the LEAA projects in Denver, that those projects establish relationships with the ongoing CETA service system and

that the image not be created that they are to be, themselves, delivery systems, but rather that they are, in effect, tests.

Thank you for your time that you have given me and I'm sure that you will get a lot more information from a number of other witnesses.

Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you, Mr. Joyce. I hope you will remain seated up front. As soon as we have heard from the second witness in this panel, we will direct questions to both of you, if that's agreeable with you.

The next witness is Frank Brainard, director of the WIN program. We welcome you as a witness before the committee.

STATEMENT OF FRANK BRAINARD, DIRECTOR, WIN, DENVER, COLO. Mr. BRAINARD. I'd like to start out today by saying that the main application of WIN is for people who are on ADC, including the father as the head of the household or the mother as the head of the household. At this point in time, we have approximately 57 people registered with the work incentive program. I have our automated reports and I tried to draw some conclusions on how many youth, as you are identifying here today, we are actually dealing with. Unfortunately, the report indicates that 643 people are presently registered in the program.

If you take a look at actually what kinds of people these account for, there are heads of households under the age of 19. The office is fighting to change that particular rule and there are mandatory referals to the program. However, some of them still come in for information on the program.

The best thing I could come up with was to make a physical count of individual we have that fall within the category of youth and these are individuals in the ages of 16 and 17. For them, the rules are a little bit different. We have approximately 170 individuals in the age of 16 and 17. We are presently working with 107 and 75 percent of those registered are under the age of 18 and by the rules of the Department of Social Security, if they are over the age of 18 they can receive manpower services from the program. At this point in time, the activities with the 16- and 17-year-olds as far as the services-we try to make referrals to one of the other agencies. Vocational rehabilitation is one. of the agencies that, we have been using for 16- and 17-year-olds out of school and our major counseling tends to center around detecting the problem and getting the client back into school so they can get their high school education.

Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you, Mr. Brainard.

We would like to address some questions to both of you. First, to Mr. Jovce.

Mr. Joyce, it seems to me that your testimony raised the problem of whether or not some new system is needed rather than the present one. I wish you would elaborate on that. In connection with that issue, could you tell us whether or not it's your opinion that the need for youth is such that a comprehensive youth program, quite distinguished from CETA or WIN or any of the other programs, would be desirable as a means of focusing not only on the employment needs of youth, but on the other problems pertaining to counseling and training.

Mr. JOYCE. Yes, I think you have quite clearly gotten my position that I would not like to see an additional delivery system developed to deal with the problems of youth. I think that the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act is quite capable of dealing with the problems if it's given the resources on a level that would allow it to address the significant amount of people involved. The major basis of this comes from the title of the act, the "Comprehensive." We do not find that the services that are required by youth differ dramat ically from the services required by an adult. They may differ in terms of quantity, they may differ in terms of time, but for example, we find that with very young clients-say, 16 to 18-that on-the-job training is not a very outstanding method of treating those clients. Yet, we find that for clients that are 18 or 21, they deal in on-the-job sessions far better than any other clients, regardless of the age. We have developed on-the-job training mechanisms. It seems to be fruitless to develop another youth employment system dealing with a similar type of on-the-job training system where we would be, in effect, competing with those organizations for jobs in the community. This way, the city can make a determination, or local government. whether be city, State, or the counties make a determination overall level of performance in each area and fully direct interests to that. In other words, if we decide that 30 percent of all the OJT slots in the city should go to youth, that single entity will insure that is

done.

as to an

The big problem or complaint that you will hear-and I again want to emphasize that LEAA programs that you're going to be hearing from today are criticized on occasion by various adjudication agencies. by the police, by a large number of organizations for the lack of comprehensiveness. They are criticized for not knowing of all the poten tial available services in the city. Well, they weren't designed to do that: CETA was. At this point, if our staff does not know of a mental

health program or mental health assistance available or a variety of counseling techniques, then that is a problem that is very legitimate. I view it as totally redundant to create another system charged with

the same responsibility.

you in the coming year, there is one thing that is tentative-and I With respect to the legislation that I expect to be pending before haven't had a chance to review it totally-but, it strikes me as possibly fication of title II to include public service employment programs a very youthful change to CETA and that would be the possible modiin title I, the cities around the country, the CETA responsibilities directed at youth. There, I do see a problem. As I indicated earlier, are directed at 57.7 or something like that percent of their slots toward youth. With respect to titles II and VI, the public service jobs, they are more on the order of 25 percent and I don't have the exact figures with me now. I see in the public service jobs, a possibility for an increase there. I see that as directed through the CETA mechanism so there's a central point that can control the efforts in the private sector

or the public sector.

supporting services as education, for example, as heavily Mr. HAWKINS. Do you see in CETA the close connection with such

identified

ognize if CETA has developed the type of ties with the schools that with youth and the problems of youth as I'm not so sure that I ree

might provide a more comprehensive separate type of approach to the problem?

Mr. JOYCE. I think, at least in Denver, we are very closely tied to the schools as I indicated for example in the title III program where about 250 youth received full time vocational training. They received that as a result of our close contact with the school system.

We similarly have, on several occasions, proposed demonstration projects to the Department of Labor which they put out bids or fees jointly with the school departments. We have, on repeated occasions, over the last 5 years more intensely in the last several years, received assistance with members of the school departments on our advisory council and with a variety of contracts with them.

They undertake our entire summer youth program and the branch that I mentioned where we took 250 recent graduates or persons recently leaving school into title I. So, while I can't speak for the rest of the country, it's been our experience in Colorado that we have consistently worked intensively with our school departments. The most recent indication of this would be the vocational exploration where we are developing under a demonstration grant with the Department of Labor, a series of video-taped programs to be used by clients in career exploration and those are being undertaken with some advise and consultation with the schools. So, we don't see any problem. Rather, CETA encourages very much the distributed education and cooperative education programs with them and we very much are interested in taking disadvantaged clients immediately from their hands rather than waiting 3, 4, 5 years until they become chronically unemployed.

Mr. HAWK INS. On page 5 of your statement, the last paragraph at the bottom, it says, "The LEAA Projects were never fully integrated into a comprehensive delivery system because of their individual project constraints designed to test specific sociological theories." Would you clarify that?

Mr. JOYCE. What they were designed to do was determined in most instances whether a particular kind of treatment would be effective in reducing the rearrest rate in multiple offenders and in almost all instances they were designed for what is referred to as high impact crime areas. These were the six cities that received the impact special grants from the Department of Justice under LEAA. You'll hear more about the kinds of things from the project director today, but it was a situation that we were talking about taking a multiple offender and giving him a particular kind of intensive treatment over a short period of time, a period of a year, and attempting to determine whether or not that impacts on the rearrest rate.

One thing that we have found very interesting in those programs, the one variable that tends to conclusively produce the rearrest rate is employment. It drops something on the order of 70 percent while the youth are employed, so that seems to verify to us something that we have felt this early for quite a while. While someone's workng, they're not going to get picked up and put in jail. The problem. is-well, it's not really a problem; it was just designed for two different things. The LEAA programs, probably 8 or 10 of those were designed to operate specifically with youth and were designed to test certain kinds of things, an alternative high school situation, concerns with