and information centers and in more effective and increased use by the public. In addition, the Conference will be a major force in developing

a balanced intergovernmental system of services and funding with the

appropriate participation at the local, state and Federal levels.

Mr. FLOOD. How long has the Commission been in operation?
Mrs. MOORE. Since 1970.

CHIEF ACCOMPLISHMENT

Mr. FLOOD. In your opinion, what is your chief accomplishment to date?

Mrs. MOORE. Well, I think our chief accomplishment, and I would like for my colleagues to answer, too, has been the writing and preparation of this document, as the basis of putting in place a national plan.

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS

Mr. FLOOD. In that justification you mention preparation of, you call it "major legislative proposals" in 1978. What legislative proposals do you have in mind?

Mrs. MOORE. What page is that on, Mr. Chairman? Do you recall? Mr. FLOOD. Page 4.

Mrs. MOORE. Would you speak to that, Al?

Mr. TREZZA. The Commission's work, besides doing the studies, of course, is to recommend and advise the Congress and the President on national policy and legislative proposals in the area of library and information services.

We have been doing that on a continuous basis now for the last 3 years, dealing with existing library legislation, such as Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and Higher Education Act, the Library Services and Construction Act and we have a number of studies which we are just finishing one of the effectiveness of the Federal funding of the public libraries, and another which is a national inventory of library and information needs, and a third on copyright and library photocopying patterns.

All of these are going to help us prepare suggestions for legislation for library support.

One of the problems we face is whether the suggestions we might offer in 1978 will be considered by the Congress as they may wish to wait for consideration of the proposals by the library community through the White House Conference. Otherwise, we would not have the support and concurrence of the library community. The White House Conferences at the State level tie into our plans; they will consider ideas such as a proposed omnibus library bill, as some suggest, or whether we need a whole new approach to categorical aid rather than LSCA as we have it today.

It is that kind of activity.

POSITIONS AUTHORIZED

Mr. FLOOD. How many permanent positions are you currently authorized?

Mr. FLOOD. What is the breakdown in your setup between the professional and clerical positions?

Mr. TREZZA. We have four professional and four clerical. The one we are requesting now would make five.

Mr. FLOOD. Do you use temporary or part-time employees?

Mr. TREZZA. Yes. We could not possibly do the work we have to do with our limited staff.

We will sometimes put out a request for a proposal. In that case we sign a contract and buy our expertise. Other times we use a different device which is quicker and less costly, a task force, where we get experts throughout the country who contribute their time. We hire a person on either a 1- or 2-day-a-week basis for a given period of time to actually work on the project.

For example, we have a task force right now with an expert in the area of national periodicals. This task force represents various views, such as the public libraries, research libraries, State agencies; we have our researcher working with them developing a national system. Mr. BURKHARDT. That is on an ad hoc basis.

HEW ASSISTANCE PROVIDED

Mr. FLOOD. Does HEW handle your basic administrative services for you, budget, accounting?

Mr. TREZZA. They handle that, yes.

Mr. FLOOD. How much do you reimburse them for that?

Mr. TREZZA. In fiscal year 1976 we reimbursed them $7,622.

WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE

Mr. FLOOD. With respect to that White House Conference on Libraries that you hope to hold, what is magic about that figure you were talking about $3.5 million? That is the full amount authorized. Could you not get along with less than the full amount authorized? Mrs. MOORE. No, sir, I do not think we can.

We started out with a request for $10 million. This is down to the $3.5 million.

Mr. FLOOD. This is the full amount authorized?

Mr. TREZZA. The White House Conference is a 3-year activity, a single appropriation for the entire time.

Mr. FLOOD. How many White House conferences have there been of one type or another in the last 10 years?

Mr. BURKHARDT. There have been four or five.

Mr. FLOOD. There have been quite a few of them?

Mr. TREZZA. There have been four or five concerning different subjects but none regarding library and information services.

Mr. FLOOD. You know the tangible benefits derived from these are pretty hard to find. Why is this one going to be any better than the others?

Mr. BURKHARDT. They vary, Congressman. The White House Conference on Youth was considered pretty much of a waste of time and a fiasco.

The one on the aged I think was considered a very good and constructive one. It led to a number of very concrete proposals.

I do not think one can generalize about them being good or bad. The important thing I think is that one has to plan them in such a way

and take the time to plan them in a way that will not just produce a list of needs, "We need this, more money, more money."

What we need is to plan to improve services in all quarters.

Mr. FLOOD. I know. But why is this conference going to be any better than the others?

Mrs. MOORE. I think it is going to be better because the core of this White House Conference is the supporting State conferences. We are going to organize those State conferences. Each State will conduct its own conference and only State conference delegates will be approved to be national conference delegates. We have tried to learn from other conferences' mistakes so we will do a better job.

As I said in my testimony, they will all be studying some basic issues.

THREE-YEAR FUNDING

Mr. FLOOD. All right. That being the case, why do you need all of these funds for 3 fiscal years all at one time for a White House Conference?

What would happen if we just appropriated funds for the first 2 years now and then take a look at the rest of it next year? What is wrong with that?

Mr. TREZZA. Our problem is this: Part of the $3.5 million will go directly to the States to help them hold their State conferences. That amount is predicated on the $3.5 million. We cannot commit that amount if we do not definitely have the $3.5 million. If we received, say $2 million, and then we gave out the grants of $1.1 million to the States and we will not get the balance, we could not have a White House Conference.

So there is no way we can do the planning without knowing the total amount of money available to us and to live within the budget and within the ceiling. This means we cannot spend any more for the total time, because it is a one-time approporiation.

The other way, it is conceivable we could come back and say we did not figure right and we need more. It has the great advantage of Congress saying to us, $3.5 million is the limit. We can then definitely commit $1.1 million directly back to the States.

STAFF FOR CONFERENCE

Mr. FLOOD. You are going to have a staff for that White House Conference; is that going to be completely distinct and separate from your regular staff?

Mr. TREZZA. Absolutely.

Mr. FLOOD. How many people are you talking about, that staff?

Mr. TREZZA. That staff will start

Mr. FLOOD. How many people?

Mr. TREZZA. At any given time it will vary.

Mr. FLOOD. How many maximum?

Mr. TREZZA. At any one time, I would say 24.

Mr. FLOOD. Where are these people coming from?

Mr. TREZZA. From Washington and different parts of the country.

Clerical staff will probably come from the Washington area.

Mr. FLOOD. Are you going to phase out that staff after the Conference is over?

Mr. TREZZA. Exactly, it works up to 24 or so, back down to 8, and then zero. It is temporary staff.

Mrs. MOORE. Another thing, too, Mr. Chairman, the matter of recruiting the staff and having the right kind of people to do this job, we need to know; this would be difficult if you gave us money enough only for the State conferences. We need the staff to assist the States, in doing a good job with the State conferences.

Mr. FLOOD. I understand that.

LIBRARY SERVICES

Mr. MICHEL. Your statement indicates that library services are often inadequate with the estimated cumulative resources some 40 percent below the needs.

What kind of criteria do you use to come to this kind of conclusion? Mr. TREZZA. In trying to assess the adequacy or inadequacy of library services, you must depend on the standards developed based on community needs.

Over the years the professional associations of the State, regional, and national levels have developed these standards. We use that as a measuring stick.

Also, there are many user studies. In Illinois, where I used to be director of the State libraries, I know that firsthand. We did a very careful study of the needs and, based on that, we developed a State program of grants with the library system act in Illinois. It has been in effect 10 years. It has been very effective.

So we know from experience it works.

Mr. MICHEL. One of your studies indicates that 95 percent of our people throughout the country have access to library services.

Mr. TREZZA. About 10 million people in our country are still without direct access. The percentage is not high, but there are still a lot of people who do not have it. Of the 95 percent who do have library services, 40 percent of it is inadequate.

Mrs. MOORE. I am from Arkansas, take Arkansas, for example; our service is pretty inadequate in almost all of our State. This White House Conference will help us have concentrated effort and a concentrated look at the inadequacies that those of us who have been working at it a long time know are there.

We hope to have only one-third librarians participating in the State conferences as delegates. The other two-thirds will be public officials, the general public, the people who need library services, the decisionmakers, the people who are using the libraries and are not finding what they need.

Mr. MICHEL. In the main, are you not going to find that if your services are inadequate at the State level, the State just did not do what it should have been doing?

Mrs. MOORE. That is the point exactly.

Mr. MICHEL. Don't you think that if we have done a fairly good job in Illinois and that we can convince those people in Arkansas to raise your taxes to provide it, that you will have better service? Do you have to have a conference to prove that; is that not evident on its face right now?

Mr. TREZZA. No.