Appendix C

INTERVIEW TOPICS FOR ON-SITE VISITS

1. Completed questionnaires will be reviewed and key issues selected for discussion as appropriate in each city.

2. Relationships with, services provided by and to, and problems with the Veterans Administration.

3. Relationships with, services provided by and to, and problems with the National VETS Staff.

4. Usefulness of the national meetings and workshops.

5. Usefulness and problems with the automated reporting system.

6. Nature of relationship with the local institutional host.

7. The impact of the local political situation on the project.

8. Reasons behind any extensive staff turnover or turnover of key personnel.

9. Controls over hiring and firing in the project.

10. Nature and content of mass media campaign.

11. Opposition or problems encountered with local groups of any kind; exceptional support received from local groups.

12. The extent to which these are active prestige and technical advisory committees, what they do, and the extent to which the contribution is useful.

13. Nature and extent of activities in the employment counseling, job referral, and job creation area.

14. Key elements or functions which have been added to the program as it has evolved.

15. Major obstacles which have existed in the program or which continue to exist. 16. Current major problems.

17. Nature of any internal difficulties (such as staff conflicts, etc) which exist.

18. Total services available to veterans through the program.

19. The aspects of the program which the local staff feels are the strongest and the weakest. 20. Any additional factors deemed important by the local staff.

21. Relationships with local colleges and universities.

22. Relationships with the mayor, the mayor's office, city hall or the county commissioner/ commissioners.

Appendix E

MONTHS OF OPERATION OF VETERANS ADMINISTRATION COMMUNITY SERVICE SPECIALIST PROGRAM AS OF 31 DECEMBER 1972

Dr. MCMURRAY. Senator Williams has had information that the ratio of schedule C employees in the agency was very high. We understand that it is something like 1 to 25 as compared to 1 to 2,000 in other agencies.

We wonder, first, if that information is correct, and then what are you doing about it? Are you going to try to reduce this ratio, or what? Mr. GALLEGOS. Yes. This is a problem that I have had to address myself to, and have addressed myself to, and will continuing addressing myself to.

I might say that not too long ago we had approximately 64 schedule C's. As of this date, September 18, 1974, we are down to, I believe, 23 or 24 schedule C's, so you see in a relatively short time there has been a very large reduction down to 23 or 24.

I am making a thorough evaluation of our entire organizational setup in OEO in view of the situation that we have reduced in employment from, say, 2,500 to down to just under 1,000. That results in a necessity of looking into and evaluating the entire personnel situation and the entire organizational structure.

This is an ongoing problem for any administrator, but particularly when there is this limbo, as it were, and also where the fluctuation in employees is as great as it is. I can assure Senator Williams that I am making every effort to bring down the schedule C employees to what might be a proper level.

Again, the various ratios that have been alluded to with all sincerity, statistics, and ratios sometimes when they do not relate to anything else may be used here and there, and I am not sure that this is valid or not, but nevertheless I am well aware of the problem, and I can assure the Senator and the committee that I will continue to make the proper move so that the balance will be in line with what is proper.

Dr. MCMURRAY. And you will keep the committee informed?
Mr. GALLEGOS. Yes.

Dr. MCMURRAY. One other question, and then Mr. Scales, who is a minority counsel representing Senator Javits, has some questions also. Our information is that there are 900 community action agencies for which grants have been made. Formerly you had 2,000 employees to carry on the work and see that the contracts were properly carried out and that the regulations were enforced. Now we understand you have less than 1,000 employees to do this. The question is can you properly protect the agency and the Government's interest with such a small staff?

Mr. GALLEGOS. One of the problems we have is not necessarily smallness of the staff, but the problem that there are certain categories where perhaps there is an overstaffing, and other categories where there is an understaffing.

Some of our regions are understaffed. There may be departments, or at headquarters that have more employees than might be needed. One of the problems that we have had, of course, that I inherited, was that last years in the evolution of the agency there was an effort to reduce the employment.

The results have been rather disastrous because, in keeping with the policy then, in some places there were reductions, and then in