or inability to hire enough teachers. Also, there is the lack of a metropolitan aspect for the entire program.

We look with hope in this area to the proposed amendment dealing with expanded educational opportunities for handicapped children. In addition to the establishment of regional resource centers, it would enable more adequate diagnosis of the handicapped and more efficient educational planning for handicapped children in the Greater Cleveland area.

You will note that my reactions to the proposed amendments are, on the whole, favorable. However, I must admit certain reservations regarding the provisions of the amendments that would authorize the use of public moneys by private agencies and organizations.

To date, my experiences have been varied. I would caution that adequate safeguards be developed to prevent the injudicious use of public funds by private organizations who might be more interested in promoting their own goals than in contributing substantially to the education of children and youth.

Some of the problems that we face immediately in the city of Cleveland are these: Cleveland is a city with massive problems and challenges. But education will not alone solve all these problems or meet all these challenges. None of the problems can be solved without improved education.

As we attack these problems, it is urgent that we have the assurance and support of the full and prompt funding of authorized Federal programs, including especially all titles of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and the impacted areas legislation.

There are a number of key projects which we in Cleveland feel hold great promise for helping to sustain the forward movement and we believe they merit Federal financial support.

First, adult education programs which would enable our city school system to continue to operate and to expand the full-time day and evening high school program for adults is very important.

We have a daytime high school 1 year old in operation enrolling about 1,600 pupils, but we have lost our funding as we have shifted between OEO and elementary and secondary education funding programs. Today, $75,000 is being contributed by businessmen in Cleveland to keep this school open.

Fifty percent of the daytime enrollees are on relief. A large percentage of them that are graduating are getting jobs. The city of Cleveland feels this is a great success story and they want to keep it moving.

Second, the establishment of a large downtown metropolitan type high school as an attack on de facto segregation. We envision a high school of the highest quality in every respect, with a student body selected by formula in such a way as to insure racial, economic, and class integration.

This high school would be associated with the State university as well as with the public schools. This center would not only develop pilot educational programs, but it would also provide a realistic laboratory for the training of teachers for service in urban secondary schools.

We are comfortable with the new partnership which has developed between the Federal, State, and local levels of government. I am per

sonally convinced that this partnership would strengthen education in Cleveland. We urge further development of this Federal, State, and local partnership. The Federal programs have made a real difference in both quality and quantity of education in the city of Cleveland. I thank you for having the opportunity of testifying before this distinguished committee today.

Thank you.

Chairman PERKINS. Thank you very much for a very fine statement. Dr. DONOVAN. Mr. Chairman, I know the time of the committee is limited, and I know you have other responsibilities. We have five other superintendents today. I am going to let a representative of the west coast talk so we don't think all the Federal money has been spent on the east coast.

We have three of our great cities-Los Angeles, San Diego, and San Francisco there-but just one of the superintendents with us. I would like Dr. Ralph Dailard to speak at this time.

Each of the representatives who will speak from now on will try to highlight their remarks so the committee will have an opportunity for questioning.

Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to whether or not the superintendent from Los Angeles will testify?

Chairman PERKINS. The superintendent of Los Angeles will testify before the committee, yes. He will be making a trip. I told him to come on in at his convenience. He will be here 1 day next week.

Mr. HAWKINS. May I inquire as to whether or not the superintendent from Los Angeles is presenting a statement?

Mr. DAILARD. May I respond, Mr. Chairman?

I have with me the statement of that superintendent. As you know, he has just returned from an extended sick leave and did not feel he wanted to make the trip.

Mr. HAWKINS. I hope it gets into the record somehow.

Mr. DAILARD. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, in light of the passage of time, and hoping that there will be time to respond to questions, I would like the privilege of submitting for the record the statement I had prepared and the statement which the superintendent of Los Angeles has submitted.

Chairman PERKINS. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The statements referred to follow :)

STATEMENT BY RALPH DAILARD, SUPERINTENDENT SAN DIEGO CITY SCHOOLS

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I appreciate this opportunity to appear before you and comment on the legislation under consideration. I hope the San Diego experience with the various programs will be useful to you in making the decisions you must make.

San Diego is one of the rapidly growing cities of the nation and now has a population in excess of 650,000. It is a port city and a "Navy town." The Miramar air base, the Marine Corps Recruit Depot, the Naval Training Center, the Headquarters of the Eleventh Naval District, and a number of smaller Federal installations are within the city.

The programs of the San Diego City Schools extend from kindergarten through junior college. The current enrollment in all programs exceeds 140,000. The parents of 25% of the children enrolled in the day schools of the district live on and/or work on Federally owned property-are "Federally connected" under the definition of Public Law 874. Our interest in the continuance and full financing of that law is substantial. Federal funds are also received from 21 sections of

ten other currently effective Federal acts. In total, the district will receive approximately $10 million, or 12% of the operating budget of $82 million, from Federal sources this year. Submitted for your examination and record is a brief report of the educational programs for which these funds are being used. Review of this report will indicate that the Federal funds available to San Diego are used for three general purposes:

1. Increase in scope of offerings.

2. Improvement of the quality of instruction.

3. Extension of equality of opportunity.

All programs so far as content, emphasis, method of teaching used, materials or personnel selected, have been locally planned and directed. The report demonstrates that:

(a) National needs as defined in the applicable statutes have been satisfied. (b) Progress has been made toward meeting the full educational needs of the citizens of the local district.

(c) Local control and direction of the educational program has not been weakened or compromised. The successful achievement of a constructive "new alliance" between the Federal Government and one community for educational improvement is documented.

To be useful to the committee, some of the problems in this emerging relationship with the Federal Government must be pointed out-and there are problems.

First, the newer categorical aid programs have generated a substantial amount of planning, administrative, and evaluation costs which are not reimbursed Over one half of the funds received by San Diego are from the "impacted area" legislation authorized by P.L. 874. Under this act the only requirement is that the eligible children be identified, the eligibility verified, and the number reported. Once this is done, the district entitlement is calculated and the money is paid into the General Fund of the district. There are no restrictions on the use of these funds and no post audit of use. We must guarantee only that the opportunities available to the Federally connected children are equal to those available to other children of the district. Only one application per year is necessary under P.L. 874. By contrast, the San Diego district prepared and filed more than 150 applications last year for funds under the other acts. This alone required a major amount of administrative time. The task was further complicated by the varied requirements of the basic laws and the guidelines issued by both Federal and State administrative agencies. Further, the funds when received must be expended through a special account so that assurance can be given that the funds were in fact used for the specific purpose of the project. This has required special routines in the purchasing, accounting, and personnel services as well as the operating divisions. In general, no funds have been allocated in the project for this purpose. Since local funds have been restricted, it has not been possible to add personnel for these added duties. The result has been a severe overload on many of the officers of the district and a loss of service to other activities of the district. Two needs seem apparent :

1. That the procedures for application, record keeping, and reporting be simplified through consolidation, standardization, and simplification of both the basic statutes and the administrative guidelines.

2. That provisions be made in both the statutes and the administrative guidelines to permit use of a fixed percentage of each grant for planning. administration, record keeping, project evaluation, and reporting; in short. for "overhead" costs.

In this connection, I note President Johnson's recommendation for a $15 million authorization to help states and local communities evaluate their educational programs and plan for the future has been implemented in Sections 521-525 of H.R. 6230. Enactment would meet an urgent need. Massive programs of edu cation have been inaugurated as a result of the new Federal legislation. Many have been quickly, even hastily, developed. Comprehensive and sophisticated evaluation is needed so that the best may be continued and improved and weak programs dropped. To do this, the best of technical knowledge must be applied. New strategies and procedures of evaluation need to be devised. While I would urge approval of this measure, I would also urge that safeguards be included to assure that projects of capable local districts or combination of such districts be eligible for support from these funds. Cooperative effort of these agencies is highly desirable and is needed. The Great Cities Research Council represented

here today has been contemplating such a joint effort. I spent Monday of this week with the director of the council and representatives of the Southwest Regional Laboratory working on the design of the proposed program. I would hope that such an effort could receive support from this source and would be eligible under Section 524 (b) of the proposed act. We are working locally to develop a long-term master plan for the program of our high schools. In particular, we wish to develop a comprehensive program of career development and occupational education. This projecct is taxing our resources. A small amount of planning funds could vastly improve and speed up this effort.

Second, delays in appropriations have had a crippling effect on the operation of the authorized programs. I am aware that the President has called this to your attention in his recent message and urged "that Congress enact educational appropriations early enough to allow the nation's schools and colleges to plan effectively." I would add emphasis to this by telling you that as of this moment I do not know the amount of money the San Diego City Schools will receive for this year for the program for deprived children being operated under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Under California law, the district budget had to be enacted not later than the first week in August. No appropriation had been made at that time for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. On advice of the State Department of Education, we included a budget estimate for the purpose equal to 85% of the amount we had received for the seven months of operation during fiscal '66. I do not yet have firm information of the amount we will receive. Information I did receive last week led me to believe that the 85% estimate was optimistic and that our actual grant would be below that level. I am distressed to tell you that I issued instructions last week to cut back the project, freeze all vacancies, and cancel all unspent appropriations for materials. This will be destructive to the morale of the staff and parents in the neighborhoods being served. The quality of the program will suffer. However, I had no alternative. The district does not have funds to replace the deficit that has apparently occurred in Federal funding. To plan and operate the authorized programs adequately and efficiently, the local school districts need firm information on financing prior to final budget enactment which, in general, occurs in June or July. Funds must be disbursed early to permit districts to maintain a cash operation. The district I represent had to borrow $8 million— 10% of its anticipated revenue, early in the fiscal year to meet current operations. The normal district does not have adequate cash reserves to maintain these massive new programs when payments are delayed.

This apparent reduction in funds for Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act leads me to believe that a supplementary appropriation is needed to support programs planned and authorized under the act. If such is considered, it should also be recognized that the adult basic education program is funded at a reduced level this year and that funds are not available to pay entitlements created by the amendments of P.L. 874. I do not have the data necessary to calculate the size of the supplement currently needed. I do know that it is very destructive to local programs and to public confidence in the Federal support to cut back programs after a promising start has been made. Neither can I evaluate the budget priorities with which the Congress and Administration are faced. I would hope, however, that you would find it possible to request the proper agency to develop an estimate of the supplement needed and would give committee support to a supplementary appropriation bill for this purpose. A third problem is very important to California districts. The basis for deriving entitlements for Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is the 1960 census. The great westward migration of recent years has resulted in a 20% increase in California population since 1960-and that migration has included a full quota of deprived and needy families. Current entitlements for California districts are significantly below need. We would urge that steps be taken to derive these entitlements from current data. Surely the techniques of survey and estimation are available to develop a reasonable current basis for calculating these entitlements.

A fourth problem results from the assignment of responsibility for conduct of educational programs to agencies not normally responsible for education. Specifically, our local kindergarten program would be vastly improved if the full responsibility for its conduct were to be assigned to the school district. If this is to be accomplished, the responsibility at the Federal level needs to be placed with the U.S. Office of Education so that funds and directives will flow normally through the educational offices of the states to the school districts.

I note that the proposed amendment to the Teacher Corps legislation would require that all interns assigned to a local district be approved by and acceptable to the district. This is most important. In areas where tenure laws grant lifetime contracts after short probationary periods, we who are responsible for the program want to be in a position to select those most likely to succeed in the local community.

I would doubt that the proposed Teacher Corps effort is adequate to meet the need for teachers now or in the immediate future. We are near, or perhaps already in, a period of great shortage of teachers. I would urge that legislation be enacted to stimulate entrance into the teaching profession. Perhaps the enactment of the Education Professions Act recommended by President Johnson would be a first step in meeting this need. Stimulation of an increased supply is essential if the nation's schools are to be staffed in the years ahead.

This statement of problems and suggestions is offered not in criticism but in the hope that solutions may be found by which the joint effort between the Federal Government and the San Diego City Schools to improve education may be furthered and made more efficient and effective. We have made a good start on the important task of developing fully the most important natural resource of our nation-the abilities of its people. The continued progress and greatness of this nation may well depend on the completion of this task.

TESTIMONY BY JACK P. CROWTHER, SUPERINTENDENT LOS ANGELES CITY SCHOOLS

SUMMARY

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, the uncertainty of the availability of federal funds for the variety of programs which have been passed by Congress has been of great concern to educators. The recital by school administrators of difficulties encountered in conducting federally funded programs should not be interpreted as mere complaints about inconveniences we are encountering. Our real concern is the effect on children, youth, and adults and on the lost and impaired potential for developing and maintaining a continuity of effective, meaningful programs for these pupils. Unless Congress can provide some answers to these very real problems, we shall all fail. It seems to us. on the basis of our experience, that the following things must be done in order to make it possible for local school districts to make truly effective use of federal funds for education.

1. Congress should appropriate funds for educational programs early in the spring if programs are to be implemented the following fall term.

2. Local school districts should be notified no later than March 15 of a firm commitment of funds for all federally supported activities to be undertaken by them during the ensuing fiscal year.

3. Federal commitments must be firm, with minimum possibility of reductions of funds during the year for which the funding was provided.

4. If commitments for programs designed to extend over a period of time can be known to the local school district during the initial implementation stage, it can plan a totally well-articulated program.

5. If fiscal requirements for different items of legislation can be standardized. local districts will not be faced with a different set of rules for each federal activity in which they become involved.

6. When the use of government-furnished property is contemplated, as in the case of MDTA programs, the commitment of this property should be firm and the property should be made available to the local districts in time to operate the program effectively.

7. Although the use of the continuing resolution for programs which have been funded for more than one year is helpful, it is extremely difficult to plan a meaningful program around a commitment that must be renewed from month to month.

8. Guidelines for determination of entitlements under federally funded programs should be written so that individual school districts may plan a program extending over the total period of time authorized by the Congress in any act which provides financial assistance to the public schools. This means that the minimum level of funding would be the amount provided for the first year of any program.