The study group attaches particular importance, because of its knowledge, on the provision of Federal financial participation in day care for children, whose parents are unable, during a part of the day, to provide supervision. Here in New York City where the day-care program has been in the vanguard, there are long waiting lists because full financial support of the program must derive from city funds. The study group believes that if Federal funds can be made available, the State of New York would be in a better position to provide financial help to the city. Thus, the waiting lists would be decreased and the high cost of institutionalization would be obviated as more children would be enabled to stay in their own homes.

The study group also attaches primary significance to the provision in the bill which would stimulate States to expand their efforts in training welfare personnel.

Likewise, our group is strongly supportive of the intent to provide Federal financial participation in payments under the ADC program made to needy persons for work done under community work and training programs.

We are pleased to note the Federal financial incentive for States to remove the residence requirements from public welfare programs. The membership of the Junior League of the City of New York is officially on record with the State of New York in opposition to residence requirements for public welfare.

Finally, the study group notes with sympathy and appreciation, the intent of the administration's bill to increase the knowledge of public welfare on the part of all citizens through such means as periodic advisory councils to assure careful public review of the entire program from time to time. Here in New York City, there is an advisory board of citizens to the commissioner of welfare which is now beginning to interpret forcefully to the general public, various aspects of the problems and progress in the administration of this vast program. Sincerely,

Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS,

Mrs. THOMAS H. BARTON, President.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., February 13, 1962.

Chairman, Ways and Means Committee,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR COLLEAGUE: In connection with the hearings being conducted by the House Committee on Ways and Means on H.R. 10032, Public Welfare Amendments of 1962, I take the liberty of forwarding herewith a statement by Dr. Guillermo Arbona, secretary of health, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, with the request that it, together with this letter, be made a part of the record on H.R. 10032.

I fully subscribe to the viewpoints expressed by Dr. Arbona and add my sup port to H.R. 10032, which would eliminate the ceiling for Federal participation in public assistance payments in Puerto Rico.

As you may know Operation Bootstrap, Puerto Rico's program for industrial and economic progress, has been immensely successful in creating employment opportunities and in raising living standards for most Puerto Ricans. Nevertheless, considering the low position in economic development from which we started, the problem has had to be attacked on many fronts simultaneously. This has meant an enormous financial challenge to the Commonwealth government, and it has most severely taxed us economically. Despite the great progess made in Puerto Rico, we still have a greater percentage of unemployment than is the case in any State. In addition, our success in improving health standards and lowering the death rate in Puerto Rico, even below that of continental United States, has had the effect of increasing our senior citizen population, many of whom require public assistance.

Dr. Arbona details these and other considerations in his statement, which supports the recommendation of the administration, and I hope your committee will give due consideration to these views and accept the President's recommendation for Puerto Rico in reporting on Public Welfare Amendments of 1962. In addition to the statement by Dr. Arbona, I am including two tables which I request also be made a part of the record of H.R. 10032. The first is a cost

comparison of the public assistance program in Puerto Rico, 1961-62, in terms of three alternatives, and the second is a table of funds available, showing number of cases and average monthly payment, by category, in public assistance in Puerto Rico, 1943-44 to 1959-60. These tables were made available to me by the Department of Health, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

Sincerely,

A. FERNÓS ISERN, Resident Commissioner.

STATEMENT BY DR. GUILLERMO ARBONA, SECRETARY OF HEALTH, ON H.R. 10032, THE PUBLIC WELFARE AMENDMENTS OF 1962

The proposals embodied in this bill aim at the improvement of public welfare programs throughout the Nation. It will enable the States to incorporate into their programs long-needed services and administrative procedures that will strengthen the rehabilitative and preventive aspects of public welfare.

The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico strongly endorses the provisions contained in part E, section 151 of the bill, which provide for the removal of money limitation on total public assistance payments to Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam. This measure, if approved, will constitute a strong incentive for the improvement of our welfare program.

When the social security assistance titles were extended to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 1950, the intended matching formula for Federal participation was established at 50 percent. However, a statutory money limitation on the total public assistance payments has limited the realization of the dollar-perdollar matching formula. Although increases in the ceiling have been authorized by Congress at different times, the Commonwealth's appropriation have remained above the Federal Government's share. Figures published by the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for fiscal year ending June 30, 1961, show that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has been providing 53.8 percent of the total cost of its asistance program. The Commonwealth government's share during 1961 was 52.7 percent of its old-age assistance program, 53.8 percent of the aid to dependent children, the costliest of the assistance programs, and 52.9 percent of the aid to the blind and to the permanently and totally disabled.

The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is making great efforts to improve the living conditions, the standard of living of its population. These efforts actually could be considered as designed to prevent dependency. A large proportion of the Commonwealth's fiscal resources have been directed to cope with the unemployment problem through the industrialization of the island and the improvement of its agricultural programs. Great efforts have also been directed to the development of an adequate school program, stressing both the academic and vocational training of children of school age, as well as providing opportunities for adult education. Accelerated programs for housing, including slum clearance, road construction, and public health have been developed. In spite of the high costs of these programs, the Commonwealth's appropriation for public assistance has been raised from $3 million in 1943 to $8 million in 1956 and over $10 million at present. This, in addition to other welfare programs such as child welfare services, institutional care for children, special services to other handicapped families, and medical and hospital care for the medically needy. Around 54 percent of the total Commonwealth budget is being appropriated at present for health, education, and welfare services.

The industrialization program and the creation of additional employment opportunities have been extremely successful in Puerto Rico. Our per capita income has risen from $121 in 1935 to $641 in 1961. The gross national product has been increasing on a 9-percent average during the last 10 years. Our starting baseline was so low, however, that the extraordinary efforts of the last 20 years have not been sufficient to do away with such problems as unemployment and dependency. Thus, we still have from 9- to 13-percent unemployment in our labor force and the number of public assistance beneficiaries is very large.

The demographic characteristics of Puerto Rico help define the situation we face. According to the 1960 census, 50 percent of our population is constituted by children and youths under 18 years. Although persons 65 years of age and

80118-62- -43

over constitute only 5.4 percent of our population, projections made by our demographs indicate that this proportion will be doubled by 1970. This phenomenon is the result of the migration of young productive adults to the mainland. This high prevalence of the very young poses heavy burdens to the productive young and middle-aged adults.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN PUERTO RICO

Public welfare services in Puerto Rico are administered by the division of public welfare of the department of health. Local governments participate in an advisory capacity. Public assistance and child welfare services, including the administration of public institutions for dependent and delinquent children are administered by the division. Public welfare services at the local level are rendered through a single operational organization, the public welfare unit. It is administered and operated by the division with the advice of the local authorities. In some municipalities public welfare and health services are housed together. In selected large urban areas which face special welfare problems, we have two or three local offices.

Local welfare offices are staffed with full-time child welfare and public assistance civil service appointees. All local offices are directed by social workers who must have at least a years graduate training in social work. Public assistance workers have at least 2 years of university training plus 2 years experience in related fields. Many are college graduates. Child welfare and intake workers must have at least a year's professional training in social work. Child welfare aids are required to be college graduates.

Municipalities are grouped into districts or regions for health and welfare supervisory purposes. Experienced social workers staff these five regional offices which serve also as a liaison with the main offices. The regional offices assume responsibility for the actual day-by-day supervision, both of the public assistance and child welfare programs at the municipal or local level; of course, there is a fully trained social work staff at the central offices with responsibility for the overall administration of the program, including training and consultation.

We feel that the public welfare program in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico has developed along sound lines and that an additional support from the Federal Government as is proposed in part E, section 151 of the H.R. 10032, will greatly further the orientation of the program's rehabilitative and preventive aspects. As it has been suggested earlier the demographic picture and the unemployment situation account for very inadequate grants in the public assistance program. In November 1961, the Commonwealth government was making an average monthly payment of $11.42 to its public assistance recipients, which is supposed to cover a fraction of the recipient's needs. The additional funds that would be made available through the approval of this bill would not enable us to significantly increase payments to beneficiaries.

However, improvement in the service aspects of the program could be attained. We would be able to reduce caseload assignments so as to make possible the rendering of individualized services directed to the rehabilitation of families. Present average caseloads are about 250 per worker and do not allow the offering of the type of social service that many of the beneficiaries need. Greater emphasis to training and other staff development programs could also result in a better quality of services and eventually in a reduction of the welfare caseload. Because of its organizational structure, in which public assistance and child welfare programs are administered by a single State agency and services are rendered to people through the same local structure, we are in a very good position to stress the family approach in the provision of public welfare services. This facilitates coordination of public welfare with other community programs, and provides a good opportunity for the development of community planning and organization so much needed to cope with many of the welfare problems our people face. The additional resources made available if this bill were ap

proved would provide the additional staff and the improvement through training of our present staff.

Present staff limitations do not allow us to comply regularly with Federal requirements for prompt attention to applicants and regular annual recertification of cases. In spite of these serious staff limitations, a recent survey of the fraud situation in the Commonwealth public assistance program showed an extremely low percentage of undue payments. During 1961 fraud cases reported to the courts amounted to 17.

Statistical data for the Commonwealth public assistance programs during the last 3 years show a gradual reduction the rate of increase in the active caseload and in applications received. Figures for the last 6 months show an actual though slight reduction in the absolute number of active cases, in other words, more cases were closed than cases authorized.

Trends in the program are very similar to those in the States. A gradual decrease is being obsevred in the old-age assistance program as more persons are covered by old-age and survivors insurance. The number of children in the aid to dependent children program is increasing due mainly to desertion by parents, however, a reduction in the rate of the increase is being observed. In the aid to the blind and to the permanently and totally disabled, caseloads are practically stabilized. This seems to indicate that the economic improvement in the Commonwealth finally is reflecting itself in the public assistance program. As said above, the additional fund that may be made available will be used mainly to strengthen and expand the preventive and rehabilitative services aspects of the program. The increase on the basis of present Commonwealth funds will not permit a significant increase in money payments to beneficiaries. Cost comparison of the public assistance program in Puerto Rico, 1961–62, in terms of 3 alternatives1

The program for medical assistance to the aged is not considered, as it would remain the same under each of these alternatives.

Old-age assistance, aid to the blind, aid to the permanently and totally disabled, aid to dependent chil

dren.

General assistance, aid to dependent children with guardians.

Estimated amount of medical care to recipients of old-age assistance, matched on the basis of 15 percent Federal and 85 percent Commonwealth, with a ceiling of $500,000 on the Federal contribution.

Estimated amount of medical care to recipients of old-age assistance, matched on the basis of 65 percent Federal and 35 percent Commonwealth, with no ceiling.

Four-fifths of the cost of medical care of the 1st $30 per recipient to be covered by the Federal Government.