supported, to be certain that the services we are providing are the most effective services we can deliver for each dollar.

Effectiveness is a factor the client can help evaluate perhaps better than anyone else in the system. We feel that the human service delivery programs throughout the country, regardless of size, need to find better ways to deliver service at less cost in administrative areas. Social service administration today must be responsive to the need for accountability.

The comments that Ms. Gilbert made regarding judgmental attitudes of personnel on the local levels also should be acknowledged as existing at the State and Federal levels in the bureaucratic system. Perhaps more direct lines to funding source are extremely important, not only from the client, but from those who are delivering services at the grass root level.

Mr. PRESSLER. Thank you. I have no further questions.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you, Mr. Pressler.

Might I just remind the members of the joint committee that we have two more panels following this one, and while the Chair does not intend to limit questions, the press of later business may do that as it is.

Mr. Hall.

Mr. HALL. In that circumstance, Mr. Chairman, I have no ques

tions.

Senator STAFFORD. In that case, Mr. Hall, I am almost constrained to use your time.

Mr. HALL. It seems like I should make a rather profound comment, but I will just say that the family existed before agencies or Congress.

Senator STAFFORD. The Chair is going to submit two or three questions to the members of this panel in writing, and if the members would be willing to supply answers in writing, it would be very helpful to the committee, and would save our time this morning.

I will go directly to one of the issues that we encounter as members of both the Senate and the House Committees. That is, we hear criticism, and we will have to meet criticism, no doubt, that the type of legislation we are considering today is a type that some claim tends to weaken, rather than strengthen, the American family.

I would invite each of you to briefly comment to this committee your belief, and I assume you have it, that this legislation actually strengthens, rather than weakens the American family.

Mr. BAKER. I feel strongly that it does. I do not see any merit in the argument that I have heard to the contrary.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you.

Ms. Gilbert.

Ms. GILBERT. I think that the arguments imply some form of coersion which I do not see in the legislation. Therefore I would agree that it is a matter of choice, and therefore strengthens the family. Senator STAFFORD. Thank you.

Mr. Tremitiere.

Mr. TREMITIERE. Senator, I would see the question as similar to asking if a glass is half full or half empty. It depends on the point of view of the person asking that question as to whether or not they would see it as supportive or destructive and damaging.

I think the bill is supportive, and would provide tremendous resources to families.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you.

Monsignor?

Monsignor REESE. Senator, I would say that it would seem to me that a person who would think that these programs would weaken the family is just not aware of the facts of life.

There are, in fact, millions of children with no provision for their care and development, and certainly these programs would make a big contribution toward that.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you very much. Let me ask the panel for a brief comment on also whether or not the existing Headstart program might serve as a basis upon which to build in the child care area? Ms. GILBERT. Having been a director of Headstart Day Care Center, I would like to comment on that.

I believe the bill offers a great deal more flexibility in the provision of services the round-the-clock full year program which has not an age limit, and which is more than an education which is support for the entire family, which would mean counselling and other services. I believe that there can be a division of responsibility so that in a community these two programs might work hand in glove. Senator STAFFORD. Does anybody else care to comment?

If not, one final question from the Chair for anybody on the panel who cares to respond.

That is, what is the role of the parent in the operation of the day care center, and specifically, what do the words "direct involvement" mean?

Does anybody care to respond to that?

Monsignor REESE. The bills, both versions, provide for significant parental involvement in two areas. One on the management committee at various levels, and secondly, in planning.

It seems to me that in addition it provides opportunity for parent education and for counseling, consultation. But I think the most important thing would be the direct involvement of the parent, either as staff members, or volunteers, or whatever, whereby they could be exposed to good practices of child care, and this would involve nutrition, and all kinds of things, they could then carry over into their own family living situation.

This is the way I would see the problem.

Senator STAFFORD. Would anybody else care to comment?

Ms. GILBERT. I believe there is also a place for parents to be involved in the philosophy of education. There are several philosophies of education.

I will give an example. In some preschool programs the philosophy is strictly what is known as developmental. This philosophy involves the provision of chance for children to relate to each other, to play out certain roles.

Then there is another philosophy which would require that the preschool children begin to learn as soon as possible. So this one has electric typewriters and all of the technological equipment to help preschool children to learn as much as possible. That might be two different kinds.

I think the parents should have the right to choose which kind of program, which kind of educational philosophy they want their child to begin in at this early age.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you very much.

Mr. Tremitiere.

Mr. TREMITIERE. I would just like to add a brief comment to that. We would certainly agree with the reactions that you have received so far to that question.

I would add, however, that I think there is a need for parents to have information about what their children are learning in these settings, because in many cases parents are somewhat lost, and somewhere behind where their youngsters are.

Children today are learning so much, and seeing so much about the world, things that many of the parents have not been exposed to.

Perhaps the parents will feel much greater distance from their children unless the feedback is included in the process. I think it has to be a two-way involvement, on a very voluntary basis.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you very much.

The Chair, unless there are other questions, wishes to express its appreciation both to the Senate and House Joint Committee members for your testimony and for your appearance here this morning. We will consider the hearing closed as far as you are concerned.

We will call the next panel. I think we can combine the next two panels: Ms. Marilyn Marcosson, Mrs. Mary Allen Jolley, Mrs. Lillie Herndon, and Dr. Janet Heddesheimer.

We will invite the panelists to identify themselves, starting at your right and my left.

STATEMENT OF MARY ALLEN JOLLEY, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, AMERICAN HOME ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION, ACCOMPANIED BY MS. MARILYN MARCOSSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AMERICAN PARENTS COMMITTEE; MRS. LILLIE E. HERNDON, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS AND TEACHERS, ACCOMPANIED BY MRS. ANN KAHN, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL CONGRESS OF PARENTS AND TEACHERS LEGISLATIVE SERVICES COMMITTEE; MS. DANA FRIEDMAN, INFORMATION SPECIALIST, DAY CARE AND CHILD DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF AMERICA, INC.; AND DR. JANET HEDDESHEIMER, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS COMMITTEE, AMERICAN PERSONNEL AND GUIDANCE ASSOCIATION, A PANEL

Mrs. JOLLEY. Thank you.

I am Mary Allen Jolley, director of public affairs, American Home Economics Association.

Ms. MARCOSSON. I am Marilyn Marcosson, executive director, American Parents Committee.

Mrs. HERNDON. I am Lillie E. Herndon, president, National Congress of Parents and Teachers, and with me is Ann Kahn of our legislative services committee.

Ms. FRIEDMAN. I am Dana Friedman, information specialist for the Day Care and Child Development Council.

MS. HEDDESHEIMER. I am Janet Heddesheimer, Government relations committee, American Personnel and Guidance Association.

Senator STAFFORD. Thank you very much.

We will start at the left.

Mrs. Jolley.

Mrs. JOLLEY. The American Home Economics Association supports the legislation before this committee to provide child care services and family support services.

Our members believe that child care legislation should be high on the list of priorities in the 94th Congress. Already you have received much evidence about the urgent needs of children and their families. I would simply point to the necessity for this legislation by reminding you of the following significant facts:

One: First, there are many social indicators which point to the enormous problems facing children and their families. A task force of extension home economists has identified the following as indicators of the magnitude of concern:

Four million new births in the 1970's;

One of every ten 17-year-old girls is a mother;

Nearly one-third of all teenage marriages end in divorce;

One of five marriages is broken;

One child in six will lose a parent by divorce by the time he is 18 years old;

Approximately 10 percent of all school-age children have moderate to severe emotional problems;

Nearly 26 million children are represented by 12.7 million working mothers 5.5 million of these children are under 6 years of age;

Twelve percent of all families are headed by women, 53 percent of these women are in the labor force, their median income is $5,114;

Only about 8 percent of group day care centers provide truly developmental child care; about 21 percent provide limited developmental care; few family day care homes offer developmental opportunities; two-thirds are custodial care only.

Two: Second, the importance of the first 5 years in the life of a child cannot be overestimated. We know that during these very critical years, attitudes, habits, values, intelligence, health-literally every aspect of a child's character and his mental and physical well-being are vitally affected at this early stage of development.

Thus, we believe that services to children and their families hold potential for reducing the human and financial costs which result from a deprived childhood.

A study by Sheldon and Eleanor Gleuck has reinforced this concept. Their study dealt with 500 delinquent teenagers, and 500 nondelinquent teenagers. They looked at many measures of both groups, including medical histories, psychiatric and psychological examinations. A final interpretation of all the data and measurements led the researchers to conclude that all factors, save parental influence, fade in importance in establishing the differences between these two groups of adolescents. One brief comment about the general approach to child and family services which seems to us to be inherent in the bills which we support, S. 626 and H.R. 2966.

We believe that the comprehensive services provided for in these bills, including the involvement of parents and the possibilities that

exist for use of various delivery systems of child care and family services, provide a sound approach for the optimum development of all family members. No one group owns the field of child care and development, and no single approach to child care and family services can possibly meet the variety of needs that may exist with various forms of family.

The term "family" has come to encompass more than the traditional form of father, mother, and children. The family today connotes many patterns ranging from adults living together to a single adult with responsibility for children or other adults.

It should be safe to predict that as family interactions with social and other environments continue to bring transition for families, that the nurturing and socialization of children will likewise change. At the same time, the family will continue to be the most humane, efficient and economical system for making human beings human. But, with all its strengths, the family cannot function without support from the community and neighborhood, from the world of work, and from social and political institutions at local, State, and national levels. Thus, the importance of a comprehensive approach to child care and family services if we do, indeed, intend to help and strengthen all families. We see this philosophy as undergirding the provisions of the legislation now under consideration.

Apart from the acute needs of society which we believe this legislation addresses, home economists have professional concerns about many aspects of the child care and family services bills.

For example, we see ourselves involved in the training and preparation of professional and paraprofessional personnel who will provide services for children and their families. We can provide expertise in developing standards to assure quality in facilities and programs. We have a significant role to play in providing food and nutritional services. And, finally, we believe that home economists constitute a major resource for the delivery of high quality child care and family services in various agencies and settings.

We are interested in all these aspects of the legislation, but I would like to briefly focus on two settings in which home economists constitute a major resource for implementation of programs envisioned in this legislation.

In terms of delivering child care services to rural areas, we believe our capabilities are especially significant. This capability has a long history and tradition of Federal support, and was created by the Congress when it passed the Smith-Lever Act of 1914, and the SmithHughes Act of 1917.

In 1914, the Smith-Lever Act created the Cooperative Extension Service to help people improve their homes, farms, and communities. The Federal Government, the State and local governments, and landgrant colleges and universities in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands, all participate in supporting this national out-of-school educational program for adults and youths in cities, small towns, and rural areas. Approximately 3,400 extension home economists, located in more than 3,000 extension offices in every State and county throughout the Nation, are now assisting families in finding better ways to manage home and family living problems. These extension agents are supported in each State by administrative staff and research specialists in the land-grant colleges.