Mr. DERRYCK. Add-on. Mr. BROWN. We would welcome evaluation in that same mechanism, we will add on the evaluation, but I should say for the record Mr. OBEY. I would not only welcome it, I suspect it would be absolutely essential. What I would like to know is what has been your experience vis-a-vis the Labor Department in obtaining agreements for that kind of evaluation. Mr. DERRYCK. We are in the process of negotiating with the Department of Labor. They have through one of their organizations, Manpower Development Research Corporation, developed a design looking at all other youth programs. It has been a very cooperative venture thus far in terms of being able to gather comparative data across programs, but we are not included as part of that evaluative program. It is an initiative over and beyond what we are doing. Mr. OBEY. It seems to me you ought to be included. I do not know what is really happening between you and Labor, but if you are not involved-as far as I am concerned, and I would think the other members of the committee would agree you ought to be. We have to make decisions on spending for all of those programs and would want to see that evaluation. Mr. BROWN. We would welcome it. Mr. OBEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. FLOOD. Mr. O'Brien. Mr. O'BRIEN. Mr. Brown, I have a lot of questions here. Some I have for the record that I will not bother with now. Others I would like to address to you, but you are to provide the answers for the record. JUSTIFICATION OF VISTA INCREASE You note in your budget submission that President Ford proposed the VISTA program be terminated. Since you have provided a substantial increase for it, obviously you differ from his conclusion, and I would like your justification for the record. [The information referred to follows:] Mr. BROWN. The VISTA program reflects a firm belief in the democratic processes upon which our system of government is based and the willingness of people to help each other and themselves. It is also based on the belief that the problems of poverty will be amerliorated only when communities become self-sufficient and need to rely less and less on government to find solutions. Many have come to look skeptically at legislative solutions to the problems of poverty as many Federal programs failed to provide the expected results. Examples of this abound: revenue sharing funds have been used to build tennis courts, housing projects have been destroyed because the poor would not live in them, and welfare programs have required armies of bureaucrats to approve the purchase of cribes for babies. The VISTA program offers an opportunity to solve the newest American dilemma-poverty in the midst of a plethora of Federal, local, and private programs designed to ameliorate the condition of poverty. VISTAS have served with groups that forced improvements in migrant housing, have focused attention on the shame of Black Lung disease, have forced County Commissioners to offer food stamps to their needy, have secured land, mineral, and fishing rights for Indians and Native Americans, have encouraged parents to fight for bi-lingual education for their children, and they have fought for rights of welfare recipients. They have helped people who are poor to organize themselves to form consumer co-ops, to build or rehabilitate housing, to prevent highways and urban 25-260 (Pt. 7) 07814 renewal schemes from destroying neighborhoods, to assure older people the physical and financial security they deserve. Their major task is to eliminate the need for VISTA resources over time by identifying and working to develop the leadership potential which exists in every community and by transferring information and skills which will assist those leaders identified to work with their neighbors in a way which will lead to a solution of community problems. In these accomplishments, VISTAs have always worked within the letter and the spirit of the philosophy held in common by so many-that people should work together to achieve their needs. In doing so, VISTAS have in myriad of individual situations made opportuities offered by Government work for people envisioned by the originators of the programs. Mr. O'BRIEN. Also for the record any reports or reviews prepared with reference to that decision. [The information referred to follows:] ACTION EVALUATION VISTA Project Study FY76 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The primary objective of this study was to conduct a national assessment of ACTION'S VISTA program. The scope of the assessment included the accomplishment of national goals and project objectives, project and volunteer productivity, community impact, and policy compliance. The products of this effort have been designed to assist ACTION management in performing key agency functions. VISTA, Volunteers In Service To America, was enacted in 1964 and transferred to ACTION from the former Office of Economic Opportunity in 1971. It currently functions under Public Law 93-113 entitled "Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973", as amended. This act enables persons from all walks of life and all age groups, including elderly and retired Americans, to perform meaningful and constructive full-time volunteer service in agencies, institutions, and situations where the application of human talent and dedication may assist in the solution of poverty and poverty-related problems. There were 4,400 VISTA Volunteers serving in 522 different projects when this study commenced in April, 1976. A national representative sample of VISTA projects was drawn from a list of projects that had been in existence for at least five months prior to April. The sample of 114 projects was stratified according to the percent of VISTA projects in each region. A 45% random sample of volunteers who had been on these projects for at least five months resulted in a list of 404 volunteers to be interviewed. A total of 757 community members were also interviewed. On-site interviews were conducted at each of the 114 projects through the use of five separate study instruments. Two were pre-mailed questionnaires sent to the VISTA Supervisors and Volunteers to be interviewed. These were reviewed at the out set of the interviews and two standard interview guidelines were completed during the interviews. A separate standard interview guideline was used when interviewing community members. The variables contained in the five separate instruments were quite related. Upon completion of the site visits, which took place between May 5 and September 10, 1976 individual project profiles were written and distributed to the project and appropriate ACTION personnel. The findings of this study were analyzed at the descriptive and relationship levels. This report is based on that analysis. Although the results do sometimes point to the possibility of causal relationships, the findings are not intended to show cause and effect. Results The findings of this study clearly indicate that VISTA is accomplishing its legislated purpose with a high degree of success. Four national VISTA goals were assessed and the findings relating to them are very favorable. A vast majority of VISTA Volunteer tasks (95%) were seen as related to project objectives. Assuming that the objectives reflected community needs, it can be said that VISTA Volunteers are providing effective human services to poor communities. Based on the tasks volunteers were performing, the average value of services rendered by a volunteer was $9,864 per year; approximately 180% of the cost of putting the volunteer in the field. Eighty-four percent of the community members responded that the community supported the VISTA project. When asked the reason for the support, the most frequent response was that the project was providing needed services. Eighty-seven percent of the VISTA Supervisors and 92% of the community members gave high ratings when asked to rate the performance of the VISTA Volunteers. All of the VISTA Supervisors felt that the volunteers helped the sponsoring organization become more effective. The amount of resources generated by VISTA projects for antipoverty programs, the target community, or individual community members was quite high. Dollar values were given whereever possible to a list of mobilized resources, i.e. office equipment, books, construction materials, space, grants, welfare benefits, legal settlements, etc. Based upon this information, a conservative estimate of the average amount generated per project would be $447,455. A conservative estimate of the average amount generated per volunteer would be $46,822. Because the projects differed so greatly from one another it is unreasonable to base projections solely upon the average dollar per project/volunteer. A more accurate picture can be drawn by eliminating the top and bottom quartiles. Using the interquartile (middle 50%) range, it can be said that the 486 qualifying VISTA projects, from which the sample was drawn may have generated anywhere from 6 million to 125 million dollars. The interquartile method results in a volunteer tange of resources generated of $1,820 to $31,700. When comparing the $5,460 it costs ACTION to place and maintain a volunteer in the field for FY76 to the average interquartile range of benefits generated by a volunteer, it can be seen that this results in a cost-benefit range of 1:0.33 to 1:6 with an average of 1:2. The median dollar value for benefits generated per project was $53,089. The median per volunteer was $6,817. This results in a cost-benefit ratio of 1:1.24. The figures on generated resources are conservative in that some projects could not separate resources generated by VISTA Volunteers from those acnerated by other staff. No systematic method for recording resources generated was in use so the interviewers had to review the list developed by the VISTA Supervisor in a very thorough manner. That whic was not clearly resources generated by VISTA Volunteers was n' counted in the study estimates. Besides monetary resources, volunteers were asked if they were mobilizing local agencies, organizations, schools, etc., to address the needs of the low-income target communities. Some interesting findings 1egarding the mobilization of non-monetary resources are as follows: 2. 3. 1. Volunteers in Community Program Development, 4. |