Page images
PDF
EPUB

I think this is true also of juvenile delinquency. What a child does to society is important. But, what society does to the child is equally, if not more, important.

Senator CLARK. This would be an emphasis on housing.

Mr. TUCKER. I think housing is one of the basic factors. There is a very direct and close relationship to the kind of housing people live in and the kind of people who come out of such housing.

Senator CLARK. Would you agree with Mr. Royfe that the absence of a male influence in the family is an important factor in delinquency?

Mr. TUCKER. Yes; our testimony will show this and the need for the communities at least in some ways to provide a reasonable substitute male figure.

Senator CLARK. Now, then, I notice here you comment that availability of trained personnel is a problem. Mr. Royfe put the major emphasis on that. Almost every witness has stressed the need for better training and for better compensation for trained workers. But I am wondering whether you believe that if we had only a certain amount of money to put into this program that training should have the highest priority on funds.

Mr. TUCKER. I would agree that if there was only a certain amount of money put into the program it should be available for the implementation of much of the information and techniques and know-how we already have in dealing with the problem.

Senator CLARK. That would be the collection and dissemination of already available information?

Mr. TUCKER. Not only the collection and dissemination of the information, but the implementation of specific program activity, which I think could be implemented.

Senator CLARK. This would be in the nature of financing pilot projects in order to determine and measure their worth?

Mr. TUCKER. That is true.

Senator CLARK. You think that should have a higher priority than training or an equal priority?

Mr. TUCKER. I think they must go hand in hand. In social work there is a tremendous shortage as has already been indicated-of trained workers. I think that in order to implement some of the excellent program ideas which have already been developed we are going to need additional staff and personnel to do so.

Senator CLARK. Go right ahead, sir.

Mr. TUCKER. I would like to read just one or two of the final pages of my testimony because it refers specifically to the bills under consideration.

Senator CLARK. Before you get to that, Mr. Tucker, let me call your attention to your statement.

Mr. TUCKER. Yes.

Senator CLARK. We are somewhat puzzled in the subcommittee at this point as to whether it is desirable to make allotment of funds to several States, wondering whether State machinery should not be removed from decisionmaking on the ground that it has been pretty hard to find more than a few States which have any administrative organization capable of dealing with juvenile delinquency, and that perhaps it is better to go right to the urban community rather than

to try to work in the States, where, in many instances at least, the preponderance of rural legislators at a State level makes the State government unsympathetic to this kind of program.

How would you react to that?

Mr. TUCKER. The position of the Urban League would be that this would be highly desirable, other things being equal.

Senator CLARK. You mean to skip the State?

Mr. TUCKER. Yes, this could be most acceptable. In our testimony as was indicated here, if the position of the Congress was that it would want to go through the States then we would propose certain types of safeguards to insure the availability of the program on the basis of need.

Senator CLARK. But you would be in favor of skipping the States? Mr. TUCKER. We would if at the Federal level, there would be adequate assurance of equitable administration of the program and a minimum of redtape.

Senator CLARK. Now coming back to what you started to do, which was to read a couple of the excerpts in the last pages

Mr. TUCKER. We feel that the proposed advisory council should represent a cross section of the varied interests which have made contributions through planning and research projects and programs. We would wish for a council whose membership would include representatives from related private voluntary, as well as public organiztaions. We recognize the value of participation of professional experts and authorities who have and can define the problem and suggest methods of meeting it. They would be an essential part of the council. We do feel, however, that the membership of the advisory council should be broadly based and representaitve of the many groups which, in the final analysis, are going to have to do the work on the community level, whether with families or with individuals.

What we are concerned about here is that we not have a council that is weighted with the experts who have only national responsibility, who may not have any direct and specific relationship to local problems. We also should have on the council, persons who deal with some of the grassroots aspects of the problems of juvenile delinquency.

Senator CLARK. You think it is important to have an advisory

council?

Mr. TUCKER. We think this is a very good method. I think that No. 2 here gets a little closer to the kind of construction about which you were commenting a minute ago.

(2) Ideally, we would wish for a foundation type of Federal advisory council, to whom local and community groups could look for direct assistance. Ideally, we say, a foundation type of council is desirable, but we recognize that it may be necessary for the States to administer the program, and we support the proposals in the several bills for local councils similar to the Federal council.

Senator CLARK. What do you mean by foundation type of council? Mr. TUCKER. I think in terms of a local community group or agency being able to present a prospectus of a project or a program idea directly to the Federal council and that the council then would consider this on its merit in the same manner that a local group may present a prospectus of a project to a private foundation. In this

way it would cut through some of the machinery and eliminate some of the other possibilities of misuse.

Senator CLARK. I am still not clear, though, as to what you mean by a foundation-type council.

Mr. TUCKER. In speaking of the Federal advisory council this would compare with what we would regard as a board of directors of a private foundation and this Federal advisory council would consider specific program proposals, which would be presented to them in accordance with the machinery which the council would establish. The Urban League for instance, had a project idea that it felt would serve to alleviate the problem of juvenile delinquency. It could then seek an audience with the advisory council, make its presentation and get action purely on this basis.

Senator CLARK. Specifically, would it be your thought that there should be a representative of the Urban League on the advisory council, or not necessarily?

Mr. TUCKER. It would seem to me that any advisory council would be incomplete without a representation from the agency which has concerned itself most directly in 49 years with the problem of pre

vention.

Senator CLARK. In other words, the answer is yes?

Mr. TUCKER. The answer is an emphatic yes, sir.

Finally, may I say this, any amount of Federal moneys-wisely used-is going to help the States and the local communities with the growing problem. Any type of advice and direction, thoughtfully conceived at the Federal level will stimulate the people of our country to invest their local funds and energies to deal with the problem of youth and family. Such moral leadership in itself is meaningful for those who for so long have struggled with this problem. There can be no better investment than in an implemented ideal which wipes out, diminishes, or even deters juvenile delinquency and offers to the youth of our Nation a chance for the fullest exercise of their abilities with which they were endowed.

Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, Mr. Tucker.

Senator Javits?

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Tucker, there is one fundamental problem on which we would like your advice and that of as many organizations as we can get.

First, let me apologize because of a defective airplane which kept me from being here on time.

That problem is whether or not the idea of financing projects, essentially pilot plan research projects such as contained in the bill which is sponsored by our chairman and the chairman of the committee, is the best plan, or whether it is necessary actually to do what you say, I notice on page 7 of your statement, to back up States and local communities and voluntary organizations with some Federal funds.

Now, this represents a problem of money. It presents a problem of effective action. It is also possible that we could accomplish the same result under the guise of backing pilot plan projects. But I believe that the emphasis of the legislation might well be lost in that it may take a long time and it may be hard to set up the projects and we may frustrate our own objective in not going anywhere for so long that it would not really matter.

This is a most friendly thing. I am in deepest sympathy with my colleagues. Certainly I would vote for this proposal if it is the best we can do. Probably they would vote for mine if that was possible, but we would like all the guidance that we can get on that subject.

Do you think specifically that we ought to spend our money on pilot planned research projects in communities and we can find enough to justify the effort or do you feel as you indicated in your statement that we have to get some Federal money to back up local, State, municipal and voluntary organization money, and that that is the most effective thing we can do, rather than seeking more research experience?

Mr. TUCKER. I believe, Senator, that these are not necessarily incompatible. I think it might, as a matter of fact, be a mistake to limit the expenditures to one or the other area, mainly because I think that there is some unused talent and some unused skill and some unused know-how in both areas. I think some funds, if possible, ought to be made available to pursue both approaches.

I do think, however, that the initiative of implementation of whatever bill is passed need not necessarily be left to a Federal advisory council. Nor to Congress or a committee of Congress. I think if it were generally known that a Federal advisory council would welcome program ideas or program suggestions from local and national organizations interested in the problem, such suggestions would be forthcoming.

I think the Urban League, for instance, if it felt that a program idea would be welcomed by a Federal advisory council would cooperate in every possible way. Our experiences provides us with a good deal of background which could be useful to this program.

Senator JAVITS. On the other hand would you recommend that we confine the program to pilot planned research operations?

Mr. TUCKER. We need both research and program activity. We believe that in the area of research, emphasis should be on action rather than basic.

My comment here on behalf of the National Urban League is that we not place the emphasis on study but, rather, on programing.

Senator JAVITS. You certainly would not confine the use of the funds then to study?

Mr. TUCKER. We definitely urge that use of funds not be confined to study.

Senator JAVITS. To what extent do you think we have covered the field in terms of research? Do you think we have done a great deal or we have done much too little? What is your impression of our progress in the field in terms of research?

Mr. TUCKER. Our impression is that we have more research than we have been able to use. Research, however, must continue in all fields but we are not at the point where we have used up all the research we have available to us.

Senator JAVITS. What is your impression as to the extent to which we have developed techniques for dealing with juvenile delinquency, even though we may not be employing them in our work? Do you think we have developed an adequate number of techniques?

Mr. TUCKER. I think in the matter of cure or programs of rehabilitation we are doing a fairly good job. I think with more personnel

and more finances we could improve our effectiveness in this area of the problem.

As for prevention, we have done much too little. And our plea here in the Urban League is that we develop more programs designed to work with prevention.

Senator JAVITS. And there you feel, if I have your view correctly, that the support of operations preponderates over the need for research, but we certainly should not exclude pilot projects for research? Mr. TUCKER. That is true, sir.

Senator JAVITS. That would be the summation of your view?
Mr. TUCKER. Yes.

Senator JAVITS. What do you think of the sums called for in this Hill-Clark bill, $5 million a year?

Mr. TUCKER. We have had some discussion regarding this matter. We recommend in our testimony that there should be flexibility of the amount of money available; thus providing for program growth.

Our feeling is that in the first year of the project there might be some fixed sum but that after that year the program ought to be reviewed at which time we will have a better idea as to where we are going and what we are likely to accomplish. We would rather the sum be somewhat flexible but with perhaps some type of controlling formula.

Senator JAVITS (presiding pro tempore). Thank you, Mr. Tucker. You have been very helpful and we certainly appreciate it.

The next witness scheduled is William D. Gladden, superintendent of the Pennsylvania Junior Republic Association.

He is not here.

Bernhardt E. Mitler, of New York, also is not here.

Our final witness is Fred P. Amershadian, director of the Neighborhood Youth Branch of the YMCA of Greater New York.

Mr. Amershadian, I am glad to welcome you to the subcommittee. I know you well. You have a very long history of effective work in this field. Certainly I know your statements will be valuable. Will you proceed in your own way.

We will take this statement and make it part of the record so you may feel free to deal with it as you choose.

STATEMENT OF FRED P. AMERSHADIAN, NATIONAL COORDINATOR OF YOUTH TOWNS OF AMERICA

(The statement is as follows:)

STATEMENT OF FRED P. AMERSHADIAN, NATIONAL COORDINATOR, YOUTH TOWNS OF AMERICA

Good morning, Senator Javits. Thank you for this timely opportunity to appear before your Senate subcommittee, as a witness, in support of proposed legislation to alleviate the Nation's No. 1 domestic problem--juvenile misbehavior.

My name is Fred P. Amershadian, formerly a resident of Watertown, Mass., but presently living in New York and working for the New York City YMCA as the youth executive of the Washington Heights and Inwood YMCA Branch. For the past 17 years, I have been connected with youth work in a number of community and church programs, and have also worked as a senior master, under the Youth Service Board, in a Massachusetts' State institution for adjudged delinquent boys. All in all, it has been my privilege to serve over 5,000 different boys and girls in individual and group work programs.

« PreviousContinue »