in the program. Certification is based on some general over-all policy which I think has been agreed upon between our Administration and the various States, but actually put into application, as far as the individual families are concerned, by the States. There is one exception to this certification process that includes six States, whereby the Farm Security Administration, in the rural areas of those six States is making grants to families with farm backgrounds for subsistence purposes. These families, through the grants and the use of the stamp program, are receiving relief through joint arrangement worked out with the Farm Security Administration.

STAMP PLAN CERTIFYING PROCEDURE

Mr. THOMAS. This procedure of certifying people for benefits under your program and your urging of the States to certify would seem to indicate that the States are reluctant to certify people to the program, perhaps for one of two reasons: Either because they do not want to put nonresident needy persons on the program before a resident needy person is put on, or because the State feels that it cannot. expend State funds in connection with the certification of nonresident needy people. You have already stated that you have tried to obtain a relaxation of State and local laws in connection with distribution of surplus commodities. Could you tell us how you attempted that? Mr. MAGUIRE. We use the same certification machinery as that used by the W. P. A., the Social Security Board, the N. Y. A., the C. C. C., and every other Federal agency concerned with that type of aid. From State to State, you run into a wide variety of situations. We know, of course, the different stands taken on certification by the States and by the counties, and it may be a matter of law, or it may be a matter of their whole attitude, but quite often their attitude is likely to result in the complete exclusion of nonresidents from our program. Undoubtedly there are a number of such exclusions caused by circumstances we never hear of.

Mr. THOMAS. You said that if you had the funds, you would probably work out a program where you yourself could certify the people.

Mr. MAGUIRE. I am afraid that you are reading something into our statement we did not mean. As far as our own personal opinions are concerned and we have demonstrated this in the different meetings that we have had-we do believe that there should be a greater participation by the Federal Government in determining the standards used in rendering aid in our program, as well as any number of other programs, notably W. P. A. and social-security programs.

Mr. THOMAS. Excepting those cases involved in the six States you mentioned, where the Farm Security Administration certifies the applicants, does the Surplus Marketing Administration ever certify people of its own initiative?

Mr. MAGUIRE. No.

Mr. THOMAS. You rely in every instance upon a State certification agency?

Mr. MAGUIRE. That is right; and with the Farm Security Administration our arrangement is such that they take the place of an agency administering relief in performing the certification function.

Mr. THOMAS. Just from the standpoint of administrative practice, do you think that your program would work better if you had the whole administration through the agency, and by that I mean without the intervening or certifying procedure of the State agency?

ADVANTAGES OF CONSOLIDATED CERTIFICATION MACHINERY

Mr. MAGUIRE. That is a little difficult to answer, too; but I think the answer is that it would work better. It would not make very much sense for the Surplus Marketing Administration, in the light of the situation that you have, to set up a separate and distinct case machinery today. There is no good reason why there cannot be a consolidated certification machinery. I think that would go a long way toward eliminating any abuses that may now occur in the certifying process. Mr. THOMAS. When you say "consolidated certifying machinery," do you mean some agency which would operate in connection with certification for all Federal programs?

Mr. MAGUIRE. That is right. I think there is a general agreement of all Federal agencies that it is desirable to have one central certifying agency to which people in need of aid could come, in a given community, instead of having to go through half a dozen agencies in order to determine what program that particular person is eligible for, the degree of his need, and the checking and investigation that must be done. On the other hand, if he can go to one place and have competent case-work supervisors who will determine the need on the part of his entire family, it might be that they would all be given work under some Work Projects job; or a good case worker could soon allocate them, and then the family could be certified for aid under one particular type of operation, with a minimum loss of time; that is, the certifying process and the actual operation of the program would go through a minimum of procedure in the one place.

OBSTACLES TO PARTIAL ASSISTANCE

Mr. THOMAS. It would be possible, too, that some nonresident needy people who were certified to your program would still not be able to participate because they would be unable to buy your stamps. Is that

true?

Mr. MAGUIRE. That is true, and it presents a problem that worries us a great deal. The danger, of course, is that if you provide a little aid from a program such as the stamp program, you come close to destroying incentive in the localities for taking care of their own population through their own program or programs, which frankly are better administered and designed to take care of the over-all needs of the family. Ours is a supplemental aid program, designed as such, and is not supposed to take care of all the needs of the family. Actually, what is involved in our case is the making available of surplus commodities in relatively small amounts to families who are in need. of additional aid, because they probably are under programs already, however meager.

BASIS FOR ALLOCATION OF FUNDS

Mr. THOMAS. This is a question which may not apply to your program, and it may not be important in itself, but I would like to put it

at this time and we can think about it. It is a question in connection with what you are using to determine your basis for allocation of funds. For example, suppose we say that perhaps funds are allocated on the basis of the needy population in a given State. Now it might so happen that the needy population in that State would include a great many nonresidents. Then when the State came along to distribute the benefits of the program in question, whether they be funds or surplus commodities, the State would necessarily exclude the nonresident and give their benefits only to residents; is that not so? Mr. MAGUIRE. I do not believe that could happen. I do not believe it could because again our figures on needs in a given area are prepared or compiled by the Social Security Board. I probably should not be talking about what considerations they make, but it is my understanding that they list the persons who are recipients of various aid programs, plus persons who are certified for some of these programs-W. P. A., and so forth-but not actually at work.

Now, in each instance in which those figures are used, and they are, of course, used all the time for allocations to communities or under the stamp program, arrangements have been made, admittedly they are not very satisfactory in some instances, for the inclusion of all those persons covered by the list of figures that make up the total need for the State for which funds are allocated.

Dr. LAMB. I would like to ask Mr. Tate a question on one point, and that is, who would make the inquiries which would be undertaken under the plan?

Mr. TATE. I think, perhaps, the State department of welfare would make the investigations for the program, to determine the eligibility under the several programs and certify the need to Mr. Maguire's people on the basis of those classifications. Is that not right, Mr. Maguire?

Mr. MAGUIRE. Yes; I think so.

STATEMENT AND TESTIMONY OF ARTHUR E. BURNS, CHIEF, ECONOMIC RESEARCH SECTION, WORK PROJECTS ADMINISTRATION, FEDERAL WORKS AGENCY, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. THOMAS. I think we will call upon Mr. Burns, of the Work Projects Administration, because his problems appear to be somewhat the same as Mr. Maguire's.

STATEMENT IN REPLY TO COMMITTEE QUESTIONNAIRE

The letter from the chairman of the Committee Investigating National Defense Migration to the Commissioner of Work Projects, dated July 8, 1941, raised a number of specific questions which are answered in the following: 1. Does your organic act provide any residence requirement which must be met before an individual is eligible for employment under your program? The Work Projects Administration does not have an organic act. Appropriations are made on a yearly basis and each appropriation act contains the legislative provisions regarding the operation of the program during that fiscal year. The Emergency Relief Appropriation Act, fiscal year 1942, does not provide any residence requirement which must be met before a person is eligible for project employment. The policy of the program under Federal law is to provide work to people in need of employment, and residence is not a consideration under this law.

2. Are any quotas allotted to States under your program? If so, how are the same determined?

Employment quotas are allotted to the States each month. The general method of determining these quotas is as follows:

The average amount of Work Projects Administration employment for the country as a whole is determined by the amount of funds appropriated to Work Projects Administration each fiscal year. The monthly total of Work Projects Administration employment within the fiscal year varies from month to month and is established by the national Work Projects Administration office. In establishing the monthly quotas in the past, allowance has been made for the normal seasonal influences which cause the need for relief to increase in the winter months and to decrease in the warm months when there are more opportunities for farm and other outdoor labor. Allowances also are made for anticipated changes in need as indicated by unemployment, employment, business activity, and other relevant economic data.

When the total is established Work Projects Administration employment quotas by States and Work Projects Administration regions are then set each month by the Washington cffice in consultation with the regional directors. In setting the State quotas all factors bearing upon the economic and unemployment situation in each State are considered. These include the volume and trend of unemployment, the population, farm employment, the number of people awaiting assignment to Work Projects Administration projects, the general relief situation, the impact of the defense program, and other factors. For some time an attempt has been made to follow reasonably closely a formula in which population and unemployment are weighted 40 percent each, and 20 percent is left for discretionary distribution on the basis of the other factors. The rigidity of a statistical formula of this type, however, makes it inadvisable to follow it precisely in all cases.

Employment quotas for districts and localities within a State are determined by the Work Projects Administration State offices on the basis of reports they receive from the district administrative officials, the number of waiting assignments, industrial and crop conditions, and other information available concerning local conditions and the need for Work Projects Administration jobs. 3. How are the prospective employees of your program selected?

Needy persons seeking project employment apply to the referral agency in the community, which is usually the public relief agency. If that agency determines that the applicant is in need, employable, and otherwise eligible for project employment, he is referred to the local Work Projects Administration. The referral is examined by the Work Projects Administration, and if it concurs in the decision of the referral agency, the applicant is certified as in need and eligible for employment. His application is then placed in the assignment file. Persons are selected from that file for assignment to projects on the basis of occupational classification and in accordance with preferences established by the

act.

4. Does any State law, or State administrative practice, in any way affect the operation of your program?

The Work Projects Administration is a Federal program and its existence in the States is not dependent upon State legislation. The referral agencies, however, are State and local agencies. Accordingly, the State laws under which such agencies operate and the administrative practices of the agencies affect the operation of the Work Projects Administration program by their effect upon the referral of people in need of employment.

Projects must be sponsored by public tax-supported bodies, and at least 25 percent of the project costs in a State must be met by the sponsors. Because of the provision in the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act requiring at least 25 percent sponsors' funds within a State, any laws or administrative practices within the States which affect the activities of the sponsoring agency and the funds available to such agency for sponsoring projects affect also the operation of the Work Projects Administration program.

5. Does your Administration know whether or not nonresident persons in any State are precluded from the benefits of your program?

The Work Projects Administration makes an agreement in each State with a public relief agency to determine the need and eligibility of persons seeking project employment. The agreement provides that the eligibility of applicants will be determined in accordance with the regulations of this Administration. However, in most States the jurisdiction of the State agency over local public

relief agencies is limited. Accordingly, even though the State agency agrees in good faith to apply the regulations of this Administration, the application of these within the State is not uniform.

In the following States the State manual, which sets forth the regulations governing eligibility for project employment and which is accepted by the State referral agency, contains a provision requiring the referral of nonresidents who are otherwise eligible. However, as stated above, there is no uniform application within the State upon a local level.

In Nevada and Wyoming, the manual contains a provision that nonresidents are eligible but qualifies it so as to render it ineffective. In Washington State and the District of Columbia, nonresidents are referred when such action is considered to be of the best interests of the applicant.

In the following States the manual contains no provision regarding residence requirements:

Alabama.
Arkansas.

Georgia.
Massachusetts.

Utah.
West Virginia.

No manuals are currently available for Oregon, New York State (excluding New York City, which has a manual containing no provision regarding residence requirements), and Virginia. However, evidence indicates that in most communities in New York State and Virginia nonresidents are not referred.

In Arizona, California, Delaware, and Florida the referral agency refuses to refer nonresidents.

6. Does your Adm'nistration have any effective means of determining whether or not nonresidents are precluded from your program?

This Administration is not able to determine in all cases whether or not nonresidents are precluded from the program. As above stated, applicants must apply to the local relief agency and be referred by the agency to the Work Projects Administration. If nonresidents are refused referral by the agency, this would not normally come to the attention of the Work Projects Administration. It should be emphasized that it is difficult to force referral of such persons as long as there is limitation of Federal funds which restricts the number of jobs this program can provide.

7. If nonresidents are precluded from the benefits of your program, is such preclus on brought about by either (a) any provision of the Federal law, (b) any provision in a State law, or (c) by reason of any administrative practice, either Federal or local?

Federal legislation governing this program has no provision requiring residence. The exclusion of nonres dents arises both from provisions of State laws governing residence for relief and from local administrative practices. Even where the State agency is barred by State law from giving direct relief to nonresidents, such a provision does not necessarily prohib't the relief agency from referring nonresidents to the Work Projects Administration. However, in many communities nonresidents are refused referral as a matter of local administrative practice.

8. If, in fact, nonresidents are being precluded from your program, have you any effective means of preventing such practice?

The exclusion of nonresidents could be substantially reduced by this Administration by one of two methods, neither of which is feasible at the present time: (a) If the Work Projects Administration determined eligibility of applicants and certified them without the applicant having to apply to the local relief agency, nonresidents could be certified as eligible for employment. However, such action is not feasible, because the amount of money which this administration may spend for administrative purposes is not sufficient for it