NEA's counsel has not yet determined whether the Endowment can make multiyear grants under the present act or whether this would require new language in the legislation.

I know that Nancy Hanks has placed a high priority on solving the problems associated with AFI's growth and that her intent is to develop a relationship between our agencies which will enable the Endowment and the AFI to jointly serve the rapidly growing field of the film and television arts in America in the most efficient and effective way. I am confident that with the cooperation of these committees a valid and lasting solution can be obtained.

I would like to take just a moment to report to you on the growth of what we call our self-generated support which is the private part of that partnership between the Federal Government and this institution.

I am proud to report not only our enlarged support from the private sector, our public fundraising doubled between 1973 and 1975, but our self-generated revenues are expected to increase another 27 percent in 1976.

This means that in the period from 1973 through 1976, AFI's annual self-generated revenue has grown from $900,000 in 1973 to $2,370,000 in the present year. This is an extraordinary development and the result of a great deal of hard work and an evergrowing constituency.

We are now planning a major long-term fundraising effort, including for the first time, an Endowment program. It is a necessity in obtaining endowments for an institution to have assurance of its continued existence. I believe that the dramatic growth of our self-generated support and the stability which will come from the clarification of the institute's relationship to the Federal Government will fulfill and fully realize the sound organizational approach which President Johnson envisaged at the time of AFI's funding, a partnership between the Federal Government and private citizens.

My report goes on to describe and summarize our program achievements. Knowing the pressure of time, I would like to take just a few moments and touch on a few of those in a rather special way.

It occurs to me that the question of film preservation, which Congressman Miller raised a moment ago and suggested the necessity and importance of public support for that kind of project, is dramatized by the gentleman who sits on my right, Frank Capra, one of the leading creative artists in the entire history of film. Most of Frank Capra's movies survive, but not all. Many of those that do survive might not, if the Arts and Humanities Act and the AFI had come along, say, 5 years later.

In 1967, when AFI was created, we discovered that less than half of the films produced in the United States since we invented this art form survived. The other half were lost or missing.

Mr. Capra started in silent films. The movies didn't talk then. I believe he made nine silent films. One of those survives. It is called "Submarine". It is a classic. We will never know about the rest, whether they are classics or what they are because they don't exist.

It happened that Columbia Pictures, which was the producer and copyright holder of those films, decided they were not important and junked them 20 years ago. They are gone. It was that idea that a film was a commercial product that had no value beyond its immediate value at the box office. The only reason it turns out that "Submarine"

is still with us is that somebody at Columbia thought it was a sound picture. It exists because of a mistake.

I am happy to say that all of his talking pictures has been saved from oblivion. They are part of the 12,500 films that AFI has preserved in its collection in the Library of Congress.

Mr. Capra's films have a value to this country. They are part of our heritage, in many ways uniquely so because he dealt so well with the American dream. We showed last night at a presentation at the Kennedy Center a scene from "American Madness" in which Walter Hudson played the head of a bank, a film made in 1932, which should be seen today because it seems like one of Abe Beam's nightmares; "Lady for a Day", "It Happened One Night" with Claudette Colbert and Clark Gable, which, I believe, earned Mr. Capra his first Oscar.

These are part of our collection: "Lost Horizon", "You Can't Take it With You", "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"-that was either his first, second or third Oscar-"Meet John Doe", "State of the Union". These are part of our American heritage. They are part of our culture. I can tell you that without this Arts and Humanities Act and without the American Film Institute it is very likely that many of those films would have been allowed to perish.

So, I compliment all of us on the fact that we have created a method and an institution for insuring the survival of the important works of American film.

Representative BRADEMAS. Mr. Stevens, if you will forgive me for interrupting you, before you introduce Mr. Capra I would like to recognize Senator Pell because he must go to another meeting. Then we will come back to you.

Senator PELL. Thank you very much.

I have a rollcall vote going on now on the Senate floor.

I am pleased to hear the progress being made in relationships between the American Film Institute and the National Endowment of the Arts. As many of those here know, I have supported AFI as a most constructive force in the development of the art of film in our Nation. I have applauded at previous hearings the leadership of you, Mr. Stevens, and Mr. Heston.

I have taken pains to point out inadequate funding when I perceived it, in my capacity as chairman of the Senate Special Subcommittee on the Arts and Humanities, and to advocate appropriate funding for AFI, so that a meaningful program can be carried on year by year. I will continue to work with these objectives in mind.

With everything, there has to be a meeting together, and far better that it be done as it is being done and worked out between the leadership of the NEA and your own leadership.

We in Congress have to be careful, too, I think, not to be dazzled by the stars and the enjoyment that you give us and try to be as evenhanded as we can in picking out what the correct answer is. I think you are on the path now. I think you have given us some outlines in your own statement that suggest the course we can go.

I have two specific questions I would like to ask you either to answer now or let you supply for the record.

The first is in connection with Greystone.

What is the number of students there and the total annual cost? In other words, what is the cost per student?

Mr. STEVENS. I would like to supply the specific details for the record.

There are over 1,000 people now participating in the various programs at the Center for Film Studies each year. The cost is in the neighborhood of $700,000 a year.

Senator PELL. The reason I raise this question is that it has come to my attention that similar training for young producers could be given at private institutions at perhaps less cost to the taxpayer.

I would like to see the counter argument material presented for the record. I think we should have it before us.

Mr. STEVENS. We will be happy to do that, Senator.

I might note that a distortion became apparent in the cost per student of the Center for Advanced Film Studies because it started as a very small dream 7 years ago with 18 students, and people have continued to divide by 18 through the years and have not taken into account the vastly enlarged participation.

Senator PELL. I guess you should submit for the record, too, the number of full-time students that you have now, that are there for a full year, whatever it is, 9 months, whatever the term may be.

Mr. HESTON. An important statistic in the equation you are seeking obviously is the number of full-time fellows. Nevertheless, it would be a mistake to overlook the importance of the other programs such as the program which, as I said in my statement, is really quite unique and enormously successful, not only by your witness but by the members of the Screen Actors Guild, the program we have set up with them.

Senator PELL. Thank you.

Also, could you supply for the record a listing of your support from nongovernment sources for the past year and also over the last few years from the inception of AFI, showing whether the total amount from nongovernmental sources has grown or declined. Mr. STEVENS. We shall submit them. [Material requested follows:]

Hon. CLAIBORNE PELL,

U.S. Senate, Old Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C.

THE AMERICAN FILM INSTITUTE, Washington, D.C., November 14, 1975.

DEAR CLAIBORNE: This is in response to your inquiry at today's hearings concerning the National Endowment for the Arts and The American Film Institute. You asked for enrollment figures and cost figures for the Center for Advanced Film Studies and for a history of AFI's record of self-generated revenues. With respect to the self-generated revenues you will note that in the material submitted with my statement we report that the amount of funds provided by the National Endowment for the Arts and the National Endowment for the Humanities since the inception of the Institute in 1967 totals $9,642,509 and the revenues otherwise generated by the AFI amount to $11,073,525. I am attaching a chart which will show you the fluctuation and growth in the selfgenerated revenue, as well as year-by-year totals of our AFI generated revenues which show the major sources of that income.

With respect to participation at the Center for Advanced Film Studies, I am enclosing a report which was developed jointly by the NEA and the AFI last July. It should be noted that the cost figures in this report make no allowance for tuition and other revenues received by AFI from students and other participants and that the "cost per Fellow" calculation is calculated on the basis of the 100 full-time Fellows and makes no allowances for the use of staff time and facilities for the education of part-time participants whose number exceed 1,000 annually (see detailed listing).

If I can be helpful in providing any further information on these or any other matters, please call upon me.

Sincerely,

GEORGE STEVENS, Jr.

THE AMERICAN FILM INSTITUTE, ANALYSIS OF AFI SELF-GENERATED REVENUE

NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS,
Washington, D.C. July 17, 1975.

To: Byron Nielson, staff assistant, House Appropriations Subcommittee on the
Interior and Related Agencies.

From: Ana Steele, director of planning.

Ref: Your July 14, 1975 inquiry re American Film Institute/Greystone.

For background, I quote parts of a 7/16/75 letter from AFI's Deputy Director. In it, he responds also to some of your inquiries.

"The Center for Advanced Film Studies (hereinafter referred to as 'Greystone') was originally established as a conservatory to train filmmakers in various disciplines of the film art-that is, directing, cinematography, screenwriting and production. In its formative years, a small number of Fellows (otherwise known as 'students') were accepted and participated in the two year program of study and activity. As each year went by, Greystone became more of an activity central to film production, teaching and learning. Thus, the Greystone scene has grown from a handful of Fellows pursuing their careers to an involved facility which operates days, nights, and weekends with Fellow teaching, training, and production, workshops and seminars, film screenings and discussions and generally serves as a center of learning for well over a thousand persons per year.

"It is difficult (practically impossible) to be exact on the count. Of course, we know how many Fellows are accepted and enrolled each year. That's the easy part. When it comes to those who participate in workshops and seminars, there is no rigid enrollment (except in the Women's Directing Workshop) and the number fluctuates from week to week. Therefore, the numbers you will see below reflect the best judgment of officials of the Screen Actors Guild and the Cinematographers Union whose members are the most active participants at Greystone. You might be interested to know that in the instance of the Screen Actors Guild, the rules of the game are that an actor can only participate in this learning and training experience once and then must make room for another. In other words, when an actor is cast for a role in a production at Greystone, that is considered a learning/training experience of sufficient importance to warrant that kind of exposure to as many actors as possible. As a result there is currently a waiting list of approximately 1,500 SAG members who hope to go through Greystone in the next year or so.

1 This figure is approximate since there is no "head count" at seminars and lectures/ screenings and there are many duplications.

NOTE. during the second year, some Fellows who have not completed their production or training are included as 'extensions'-generally for three months or less.

"You also asked about Fellow graduates and what they are doing . . . a survey... is currently underway I might tell you that there are graduates