Mr. WEEKS. That is correct. It is primarily because of the availability of the appropriation, the money to use for construction did not come until the winter had set in, in fact, and winter is not a very good time to go into construction unless you are willing to incur premium costs which we did not feel was appropriate to do.

Senator PROUTY. What is the average cost of construction for a 100-boy camp?

Mr. WEEKS. The average cost for constructing a 100-man camp is $3,300 per individual, roughly $330,000. That includes if we have to construct everything from scratch. Now, in many, many cases there are existing buildings or facilities which we use in it and the construction cost will be substantially lower. That depends on the kinds of buildings that are available. There are same sites which we have been able to take over for as little as $40,000 or $50,000 investment, simply to modify certain facilities and put in additional sewerage or

water.

Senator MURPHY. Is that the custom, wherever there are available facilities that can be rebuilt, you take those rather than constructing from scratch?

Mr. WEEKS. We try to identify any site where there are existing facilities which can be used and which meet all the other criteria. For instance, we would not go to an existing site if the community exhibited a disinterest in having a Job Corps center located nearby. For instance, there are small Army bases which have been phased out, which we are using for Job Corps centers.

Mr. SHRIVER. I might point out he is talking about Job Corps rural centers exclusively now.

Mr. WEEKS. That is correct.

Mr. SHRIVER. What he has said about them is not equally applicable to the urban centers. So there was no confusion on that score. Senator MURPHY. I understood that.

Senator PROUTY. Secretary Freeman last year estimated the cost for 100-man camp as $460,000. According to you it is $330,000.

Mr. WEEKS. That is according to our experience so far. We have completed the construction contract awards so far on, I believe, 66 out of the 88 centers announced.

Senator MCNAMARA. So that we might keep the record running rather consistently, let us see if we can make the answers just a little shorter. We have to go on the floor shortly, I think. We would like to make some progress in the record. Go ahead, Senator.

Senator PROUTY. What would be the average cost per camp, the average cost per enrollee?

Mr. WEEKS. According to our present cost estimates and these are based on the experience which we obviously have had to date, and assuming that an enrollee stays in an average of about 9 months, approximately $4,700.

Senator PROUTY. Now, let me get this straight. We have approximately 10,000 in these camps now.

Mr. WEEKS. We have 8,000 in now, that is correct.

Senator MURPHY. 8,000 in now and 8 on the way, is that correct?

Mr. WEEKS. That is correct.

Senator PROUTY. In your presentation you indicate that you have spent $190 million for 10,000 enrollees, which raises that figure considerably.

Mr. WEEKS. You recognize that the initial figure includes all the startup costs and all these. The figures which I am giving you include those costs amortized over several years.

Senator PROUTY. Do the rural job conservation camps do vocational training? I think Mr. Shriver in testimony before the House said that the camp would be primarily conservation and work of that character. ls that true?

Mr. SHRIVER. In the conservation centers?

Senator PROUTY. Yes; the job camps. Are there vocational courses being given there?

Mr. SHRIVER. Basic education. As Mr. Weeks developed a few minutes ago, a lot of these kids arrive with a fourth-grade competence. There is a large amount of basic reading, basic arithmetic, and spelling, I suppose, the three R's. There is quite a concentration on them in the rural camps.

Mr. WEEKS. That is correct. There is modest amount of vocational training in the center, but it is substantially a lower scale and intensity than that given at an urban training center.

Senator PROUTY. What confuses me during the hearings of last year before the House in answer to a question from Mr. Frelinghuysen, it was said, "The camps we talk about will be primarily conservation and work camps. This will not be teaching vocational education." Mr. SHRIVER. I think that is correct. Let me say this. For example, if they are doing conservation work, we want them, for example, to learn how to repair the equipment they are using or how to operate a bulldozer or some other piece of equipment. Since that is in a sense training them to do vocational work, that is the point that Chris Weeks does not want to be lost sight of. Some of these kids do come out of a conservation camp qualified bulldozer operators. That is a vocation. But we didn't bring them there to teach them bulldozing. You might say that is a byproduct of the work they do.

Senator PROUTY. Yes; but a very, very small percentage will be qualified for work of that character. Isn't that true? What I am trying to find out, after the youngsters leave the camps, what job will they be qualified for?

Mr. SHRIVER. What they are going to have when they leave the conservation camp that they did not have when they went in there is, first, we hope, reading, writing, and arithmetic ability. That will help them to get a job. If you don't have at least an eighth grade education, it is difficult to get any kind of job.

Secondly, they will have work habits which they didn't have when they went in. They will be ready and disciplined for a job. You go to work 9 to 5, and you show up every day. You don't just breeze in and breeze out as you wish.

Senator PROUTY. How many will actually be performing physical labor?

Mr. SHRIVER. How many hours a day?

Mr. WEEKS. Roughly half their time. It may not be 4 hours a day in education, and 4 hours a day in physical labor. It may be 2 days on a job at a far part of the campsite and then 2 days in basic education, but roughly half their time. I would like to emphasize that we consciously plan and are in fact transferring enrollees who fill in their basic educational deficiencies in a conservation center to urban

training centers to get a more advanced vocational skill. This is part of the program which we have developed and we are already doing this now.

Senator PROUTY. Very extensively?

Mr. WEEKS. Yes; we hope at least half of the enrollees in conservation centers will in fact go on to urban training centers for a specific vocational skill and then on to a job.

Senator PROUTY. Have you any figures to show what has happened to boys who have completed their training in the camps? What type of job did they receive?

Mr. WEEKS. Our sample is just not large enough to provide you that kind of data at this point in time.

Senator PROUTY. Will you have those figures later on?

Mr. WEEKS. Certainly by September when the first large numbers of enrollees will start to graduate, we certainly should be able to supply you with some data. At this point our sample is too small to draw any valid conclusions.

Senator PROUTY. Is it a policy to send the enrollees to distant camps? I raise that question because of the first three boys in my State, one was sent to Öregon and I believe two to Texas, which does not make too much sense to me. There may have been specific reasons for it.

Mr. WEEKS. There are three factors considered in assigning_an enrollee. The first is, where spaces are available in camps. The second is, the needs of the enrollee, his vocational and training preferences and his basic educational deficiencies. The third is cost to the Government. All three of these factors are taken into account in deciding to which camp an enrollee should be assigned.

Senator PROUTY. How is the Army's proposed STEP program coordinated with the Job Corps?

Mr. WEEKS. I may be wrong in this, but I believe Army's proposed STEP program is nonexistent at the present time.

Senator PROUTY. It has been under consideration.

Mr. WEEKS. It has been under consideration, yes.

Senator PROUTY. I am told that the request is in the present Defense budget. If that is true, will that not ease the burden that you are carrying now?

Mr. WEEKS. The proposed STEP program of the Army-no, it will not. For one thing, the STEP program of the Army is designed for candidates who just barely failed the selective service examination, and therefore with a very short period of training can be brought up to selective service requirements. We are aiming at a kind of young man who often fails the selective service examination dismally in fact. That is one factor to be considered. There is a difference in the level of the young man that is aimed at.

The second problem is that a young man has to volunteer for the Armed Forces before he can get into the STEP program. We start at an age group of the age of 16, and therefore an individual of 16 or 17 is not ready yet to volunteer for the Armed Forces. We think it is important to reach these age groups. In fact, half of the enrollees in the Job Corps now are either 16 or 17 years old. None of them is eligible for the STEP program.

Senator PROUTY. Have you been contracting with private business to operate Job Corps programs?

Mr. WEEKS. Yes, we have.

Senator PROUTY. And with universities?

Mr. WEEKS. Yes.

Senator PROUTY. I noticed this noon on the UPI ticker a story from Detroit which began, and I quote—

Detroit, a showplace for President Johnson's antipoverty efforts, staged a minor revolt over the weekend over the Federal handling of the program.

The article went on to say that Wayne State University in Detroit had washed its hands of the project because OEO had gone directly to private industry in the area to set up a very similar program.

Would you care to comment on this development? It seems to me we are hearing more and more criticism of the program. I think it is only fair that we bring them out and you have an opportunity to answer this criticism and, if justified, correct it.

Mr. SHRIVER. Thank you very much. I don't consider that criticism. That is competition. I think our system in this country is built on competition. I don't consider that criticism.

Senator PROUTY. I would disagree. We had no intention of private industry participating in this program. Certainly the university apparently is much concerned about this and considers it at least unfair competition. Put it that way.

Mr. SHRIVER. Well, I don't personally consider it and I don't think many Americans will consider it unfair competition for American industry to participate in the training of people for jobs in this economy. I am happy to say that universities are conducting these programs and they don't seem to consider it unfair competition.

Senator PROUTY. On the same ticker I notice Mayor Cavanaugh, of Detroit, has also objected to a $408,000 OEO pilot grant to the University of Michigan on the grounds that the grant was not cleared through TAP, the Detroit citywide antipoverty coordinating body. Is it ŎEO's intention to work around the city rather than through a coordinating body like that?

Mr. SHRIVER. This illustrates what we were talking about earlier today and what we will be talking about for quite awhile. Namely, when we make a grant to a private contractor, in this case the University of Michigan, or let us say we make a grant in accordance with an appeal which was discussed earlier today by Senator Javits, then somebody is going to object to that. If we don't make them, somebody will object to the fact that we don't make them. So, you cannot satisfy all the people all the time.

What you do is try to run a program that takes people out of poverty. That is what we are interested in. Not trying to satisfy everybody all the time.

Senator PROUTY. The Public Works and Economic Development Act will authorize the Secretary of Commerce to set up economic development districts and promote area wide economic planning. The Department of Agriculture is trying to expand its rural area development program to provide new recreation, housing, industry, and community facilities in rural areas.

50-620 0-65- -12

The new Elementary and Secondary Education Act authorizes the Federal Commissioner of Education to set up local area wide supplementary education centers and services. Under the Office of Economic Opportunity Act, title II, community action programs are being set up. Are you coordinating the diverse programs to prevent overlap and duplication?

Mr. SHRIVER. Yes, we are, and we have one man whose specific area of responsibility is coordination within the Federal Government. His name is Lisle Carter. He was Deputy Assistant Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare before he came with us. That office, in our operation, is charged with the responsibility of doing this job. Senator PROUTY. Are you being reasonably successful, Mr. Carter? STATEMENT OF LISLE C. CARTER, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR

INTERAGENCY OPERATIONS

Mr. CARTER. I think so. I think we are getting a good deal of cooperation. We would expect in the next fiscal year there will be increasing effort to make sure that we are blending what is being done under title II with the other programs of the Federal Government which provide antipoverty assistance.

For example, we would hope, under the new Education Act, to get the kind of support for education projects that would enable us to use title II money in other areas.

Senator PROUTY. Mr. Shriver, in your presentation you admit that your programs for the aged are behind schedule. Now just what programs are these?

Mr. SHRIVER. Let me say this. They are not our program that are behind schedule. What we said was that we hope that more programs for the aged will be presented to us by communities across the country. We do not have specific programs for the aged as yet, with the exception of the foster grandparent program which will be inaugurated shortly. What we had hoped in the past was that community action programs would come to us with a component in them for the aged. Some have. But not as many as we would like.

Senator PROUTY. A year ago before this committee you stated that the administration could not figure out an economical and practical way in which to incorporate older people in this program under a separate title. Is this new 19-member task force, named by you on June 14, planning to come to grips with this problem?

Mr. SHRIVER. I hope so. That is why we put them into business. Senator PROUTY. As of now you are not prepared to state what type of programs will be available for the aged?"

Mr. SHRIVER. No, sir; we are not prepared to guess what they are going to propose. In testifying before the Senate Subcommittee on the Aging, I made the statement there that I would hope that if there were specific proposals that that committee or others could come forward with which could be shown to be effective in taking aged people out of poverty, that they would propose them, it might be desirable that this statute could have an entirely new and additional title like title I here is on youngsters. There could be a title strictly on the aged.