Secretary HUFSTEDLER. Therefore, the school role will be convening of the school site council. This is a support group, the infrastructure that permits all of these programs to be linked together. The school itself develops the school plan. The school itself establishes its own goals and its own objectives to design its own program in cooperation with the support agencies represented on the school site council. It also coordinates with the CETA prime sponsor and the private sector. Again calling upon the assistance and the help of the school site council, it develops its own implementation program.

In short, it sets its own goals and its own benchmarks. As a matter of oversight thereafter the school makes sure it is meeting its own benchmarks, and the LEA's have the responsibility to see to it that they are doing that. At the same time, LEA's see to it that the schools get the help they need when they are having difficulties meeting their own goals.

I realize that the next chart is printed in small print, but I have asked to have a copy of it given to each one of you. It is designed to show you what the overall view of the Youth Act of 1980 will be when you put together the two inseparable parts of the program, the Department of Education Services component, and the Department of Labor services component.

[The chart follows:]

Secretary HUFSTEDLER. On the Department of Education Services side, we remember, of course, that we are dealing primarily, although not entirely, with in-school youth from junior high school to high school.

For our in-school junior high school youth the primary purposes of the program are to develop basic skills training; to develop employability skills training; to give career counseling; and summer work opportunity information.

We recognize from a lot of work that has already been done that where we begin to lose the youngsters that we never caught in title I is in junior high school. It is the place where you can get the most results.

We have asked in our design that 50 percent of the targeted funds be spent on junior high school youth. It is here that the youngsters can have not only peer teaching, but intensive teaching in content areas throughout the whole school to develop the basic skills component of the program. It is here that young people must be given the opportunity to realize what the world of work is about, what careers mean, what kinds of options and opportunities there are for both young men and women in the community. It is in junior high school that we can create an atmosphere of relevance so that students can understand what they are learning and what the world holds for them.

The second component is the high school component. Here again we reinforce the basic skills training. We give the high schools the option to offer the young people vocational educational training using the vocational education system, as well as employability skills training, career counseling, and occupational training.

In each high school unit there will be actual work for the youngster. That work is not designed, as some of our earlier programs have been, simply to put dollars in the pockets of the young, but rather that work experience has to be directly overseen and correlated with the youngster's learning experience, so that one reinforces the other.

We know that the key here is motivation, and the motivation we hope to provide is the skills training and work experience related to the classroom.

We have an additional component which is for out-of-school youth. However, these young people do not come to us except through the Department of Labor services finding these young people and helping them find a way back into school. When these youngsters find their way back into school with the help of the Department of Labor, then the Education Department's programs pick them up and give them the kind of career training service, guidance and skills that are available in the regular school system. Also, there will be available alternative school programs and additional services that are going to be worked out by local communities to meet the special needs of the young people in that community, and to find jobs.

The Department of Labor services serve essentially out-of-school youth, except that the CETA money will be used to pay for summer jobs of junior high school youth. Also the Department of Labor will provide additional services for 14- and 15-year-old youth in various kinds of occupational and career information.

64-578 0 - 80-4

The 16- to 18-year-old youth receive a host of target services. The young person who has dropped out is given opportunities to reenter, to relearn and to succeed. For the 16- to 18-year-old youth, we have work experience, part-time work, summer youth programs, vocational training, and support services of all types which are necessary to put these young people from the outside on the trail of successful performance. They are given a great deal of counseling and guidance to help school-to-work transition, including labor market information, and career guidance.

There are, then, many opportunities for the young people the Youth Act is designed to help. The 16- to 18-year-old age groups have a number of different options by which they may reenter. Obviously, there are going to be many 16-year-olds, let alone 18year-olds, who simply will not fit into the standard high school curriculum. For those young people, there will be alternative school programs.

There are others who have special problems, teenage mothers and other individuals who need special help. They also will have an opportunity for help and for entering either the alternate schools, the vocational education programs, and, in some instances, they will be able to come back to the high school.

For the 19 to 21-year-old youth, the Labor Department component provides on-the-job training, vocational training, basic skills training, and work experience.

Although the moneys requested for the Department of Education component is only $50 million this year for planning and implementation, we have asked for $850 million for implementation the following year. Our component for the education portion is $900 million.

In the meantime, the Department of Labor's multiple programs already in existence will still go on. However, by the time we have reached 1982, we then have funding of both programs, because we will then have come together with the 1982 funding level requested for the Department of Education of $1 billion for 1982, and a 1982 funding level for the Department of Labor of $1.8 billion.

The Labor Department component is frankly more expensive. Every year that we do not teach our young people basic skills— every year that young person does not have an opportunity to work and to learn about the world of work-we add more dollars that will have to be spent later.

I want to make what seems to me an essential point in support of the Youth Act. It is not a program designed solely to help youngsters, although goodness knows we ought to do it for that reason only. But the fact is that we are laboring under no doubt at all about who the young people are who are going to be available for public and private sector employment in the 1980's.

Those youngsters are already here. They are in school. Many of them are the very youngsters who are in our target group. If we do not work to implement what we know how to do-which is to train these young people-the private and the public sector are simply not going to have the young people available and trained to fill the jobs that they have.

We expect the schools to come up with an abundant supply of trained youth for white-collar as well as blue-collar jobs. We have

to help these young people enter the labor force, and we need the cooperation of not only public sector employers, but private sector employers to do that job.

It is a job that we know how to do. We are building on successful programs. The difference is that those programs are going to be developed by persons, as I said, who are those who are going to live with them, administer them and work in them. We are going to help them make their own ideas work creatively for the success of our most disadvantaged youngsters.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman PERKINS. Go ahead, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

May I join the chairman, Mrs. Hufstedler, in welcoming you to the committee this morning. I think you have ably presented the case for the Youth Act of 1980. However, you made reference to the victory of the hockey team. May I make reference to the fact that last week we also were informed that the inflation rate is exceeding 16 percent, and based on that and on the fact that historically the reaction to the inflation rate has been a reduction in budget items on the domestic side, I would assume that what we are doing here this morning is theorizing about a program that may itself be modified based on budget restraints. So it is within that broad picture that I would like to direct these few questions.

When I listened to the President proclaim this program some weeks ago under the terminology of a massive commitment to the youth of this country, I was very much encouraged. I must confess that I had some reasons, I thought, to support the proposal.

However, as I have learned much more about it, I must confess that currently I am in constructive opposition to the proposal because I believe that it is a further delay on a very serious issue facing us, and that it takes us again afield from a real solution, a reasonable solution to the problems facing youth.

To indicate as a massive commitment to the youth of this country a program that is going to allocate only $900 million in 1982 on the education side, and only $50 million in 1981 on the education side and on the jobs side in 1981, which is almost a year from now or roughly a year from now, and then provide roughly about $700 million in 1982 plus what might have been unspent in 1981, does not appear to me to be an answer to the problems of youth at this time.

It is reasonably assumed, or at least forecast that by the end of this year another 11⁄2 million persons are going to be unemployed, including the parents of many of these young people, as well as the young people themselves. So we can reasonably assume that by the end of the year there will be more unemployed youth added to the target group, and what this program will begin to address 2 years from now.

So it would seem to me that the program, to begin with, is thoroughly inadequate in its thrust, and that it again demonstrates that sometimes rhetoric can be great but lack in substance.

I recall that this committee passed out a bill just 22 years ago, the Youth Employment and Demonstrations Project Act of 1977. The Congress approved this proposal, and the President signed it.