the authority of the Comptroller General to make audits and examinations of the programs authorized under this act. It is a technical amendment.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a letter from the Comptroller General requesting this language.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE

UNITED STATES,

Washington, D.C., May 2, 1973. Hon. JAMES O. EASTLAND, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,

U.S. Senate.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: It has come to our attention that S. 1234, 93d Congress, a bill which would amend the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as amended, to provide for special law enforcement revenue sharing, has been referred to your Committee. We are concerned in particular with proposed section 512(b) in which provision is made for review by this Office in the following terms:

"The Comptroller General of the United States is authorized to make reviews of the work as done by the Attorney General, the State governments, and the units of local government as may be necessary for the Congress to evaluate compliance and operations under this title."

While under existing law we have access to the books, records, etc., of the Department of Justice, the above-quoted provision does not adequately authorize access to the records of recipients of Federal assistance under such title. Without such access, we cannot evaluate compliance and operations as required. Therefore we suggest for the Committee's consideration the following sentence to be added to section 512(b):

"The Comptroller General of the United .States, or any of his duly authorized representatives, shall, until the expiration of three years after the completion of the program or project with which the assistance is used, have access for the purpose of audit and examination to any books, documents, papers and records of recipients of Federal assistance under this title which in the opinion of the Comptroller General may be related or pertinent to the grants, contracts, subcontracts, subgrants, or other arrangements referred to under this title."

Sincerely yours,

ELMER B. STAATS,

Comptroller General of the United States. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment.

The amendment was agreed to.

COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS PROGRAM

Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, in its consideration of amendments to the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, the Senate grapples again with one of the most persistently vexing problems of society; that is, the proper enforcement of its laws and the appropriate Federal role in that process. The hard questions of crime control and justice have been asked in recent years by the American people in their attempts to come to grips with a problem that threatens the viability of a free and open, yet secure, society. We must seek methods of controlling criminal activity that will not seem oppressive or authoritative to the general community. Responsive government must seem an extension of a shared spirit of

concern within the community instead of a strictly external mechanism of control.

In this regard, I am especially hopeful about one particular program in local law-enforcement efforts-the community service officer program. It is a program designed to increase the effectiveness of local crime control while also contributing to the improvement of police-community relations.

This program, allowing the funding of grants for community service officers, was authorized by an amendment to title I of this act that I was privileged to introduce in 1968. That amendment, adopted into law and part of the present legislation, specifies that grants might be approved for:

The recruiting, organization, training and education of community service officers to serve with and assist local and state law enforcement and criminal justice agencies in the discharge of their duties through such activities as recruiting; improvement of police-community relations and grievance resolution mechanisms; community patrol activities; encouragement of neighborhood participation in crime prevention and public safety efforts; and other activities designed to improve police capabilities, public safety and the objectives of this section.

Subject of course to the approval of the local government or law enforcement and criminal justice agencies.

The amendment was a response to a clear need for an initiative in that area. Such a program was recommended by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice in 1967 and a nearly identical proposal by the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders in 1968.

The essence of the concept is that particular attention should be directed to those areas and those segments of our society which are the most seriously affected by crime, especially the densely populated, deteriorating sections of our inner cities.

It is in these areas that relations between the community and the police are notoriously strained and have, in too recent memory, tragically erupted into street violence. It is here that suspicion and hostility rather than confidence have been the order of the day.

My amendment in 1968 was an effort to emphasize to local government the inadequacy of crime control efforts in urban communities and to suggest that the problem was partially structural in nature. Specifically, there is a basic weakness whenever law enforcement is simply superimposed on a community rather than appearing to the people as a natural reflection of their own community concerns.

The community service officer program addressed this problem by creating a link between the community and the police in the person of the community service officer. In addition to performing many of the regular police functions, the community service officer provides a special and critical understanding of his own community. The program helps to minimize the negativism and the demoralization of the adversary relationship. Law enforcement then truly becomes a part of the community, a service in the purest

sense; and the enlarged confidence of the people in the police will itself increase the effectiveness of local crime control in that a highly constructive partnership evolves.

I would like to refer my colleagues to the May 10, 1968, RECORD in which I elaborated certain aspects of the program as I then hoped it would evolve.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the excerpts be printed at this point in the RECORD.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 1.)

Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, I would like to relate specifically the experience of the city of Minneapolis with a community service officer program. In a letter to me dated April 24, 1972, Jerris Leonard, then Administrator of the LEAA, wrote about the program.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Leonard's letter be printed at the conclusion of my remarks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 2.)

Mr. PERCY. I would, however, like to read briefly from his letter at this time: Although all of the community relations programs have not been as successful as you or I would hope. I would like to give you a report on a current program in Minneapolis which is quite successful. The Minneapolis Police Department was awarded $129,455 by LEAA in FY 1970 to operate a community service officer recruitment and training program.

This particular program has helped to provide positive feedback to and from the minority communities and has aided in the development of a meaningful effort by the Police Department to bring minority members into the police force.

Further, according to Deputy Chief Eugene W. Wilson of the Minneapolis Police Department:

As project director of the grant, I can state unequivocally that the Community Service Officers Program has benefitted the Minneapolis Police Department as well as the cadet.

The National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, established under the LEAA authorization in 1968, has prepared summaries of a sampling of projects made possible by the community service officer provisions of the LEAA legislation. I believe the summaries are testimony to the wisdom of the broad legislative approach that the Congress took in 1968. We suggested in a general manner the response that local governments might make to the problem of improving police community relations; and, as indicated in the National Institute summaries, the local agencies responded flexibly, according to their special situation and needs.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the project summaries dealing with community service officers and related concepts be printed at the conclusion of my remarks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit 3.)

Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, related programs have been developed in Chicago, Milwaukee, Washington, D.C., Sacramento, Boston, Las Vegas, Denver,

Portland, Honolulu, Des Moines, Iowa, Dayton, Ohio, and numerous other cities.

It is clear that the questions of community relations are difficult ones. Not all programs have or can enjoy the success of the one in Minneapolis; but this shows once again the wisdom in the principle of maintaining the greatest discretion at the local level where the problems are most clearly perceived.

It is the Federal role to provide selective supplemental funds and sometimes to suggest appropriate uses of those funds. This was our purpose in permitting funding of community service officers. In the years since the passage of the 1968 legislation, the wisdom of our action has been demonstrated by the experiences of many of our Nation's cities.

But while substantial progress has been made, the problem of unsatisfactory relations remains policy-community urgent; and the funding for community service officer programs under title I, part C of this legislation remains a valuable resource to local government.

The provision for the community service officer funds is maintained as originally adopted in the House-passed bill to revise and extend the LEAA authorization (H.R. 8152) and the Senate amendment No. 248 that is being offered as a substitute to the House bill.

I wish to suggest today that, on the basis of our experience thus far, the program merits your continued support.

Mr. President, I am pleased that the community service officer provisions are being maintained in the LEAA legislation and I am hopeful that they will continue to be of assistance to local crime control efforts.

EXHIBIT No. 1

The community service officer is a police assistant or police aide. He should be qualified in capability, motivation, and integrity for police assistance work, and be from the locality of the police unit with which he serves. He should be a representative member of the community he will serve in ethnic origin and economic status. He may lack formal requirements for regular police qualifications, such as a high school degree or a spotless arrest record.

His service should be geared to enable him to qualify for regular police status, in most

cases.

As a part of the ghetto, the community service officer would have a measure of understanding of ghetto problems that could never be acquired by an outsider. He would be an agent for the people of the central city as much as for the police. He would provide a vital link-a bridge-for communication. He would help translate the concepts of one society to the other. While performing his basic tasks, he could provide the kinds of nonpolice services that police normally perform outside the ghetto, but rarely have the manpower to provide in the ghetto. This would, by the way, free regular policemen for the very demanding traditional police functions.

The uniformed or at least readily identifiable community service officer, while not possessing full law-enforcement powers or carrying arms, though frequently equipped with a 2-way radio link to police headquarters, would be available to assist precinct level line officers in their regular patrol and investigative work. They would work closely with other uniformed and nonuniformed police personnel to keep open valuable lines of communication to and from the ghetto communities. They would inform the officers with

whom they work of the culture, attitudes, and institutions of the community. They would also inform the community of the attitudes and concerns of the police departments.

Community service officers, in addition to continuing their education with the aim of becoming full-fledged police officers, will make a significant contribution to a development of better police-community relations. Indeed, their very presence in the community will symbolize a quickening relationship between the police departments and the community.

The community service officer would be a transfer agent for municipal information to the ghetto community. He would enable a police department to refer citizen complaints, like violations of the housing code or the closing of a school playground to other governmental agencies. He would enable the police departments to handle more service calls, such as getting a homeowner into his locked house or getting a drunk off the street. He could seek to refer delinquent children to a social service agency.

A very important task he could undertake is working with juveniles who were in trouble and explain to parents why their children had been arrested. This juvenile work has been successfully undertaken in Richmond, Calif., where five neighborhood aides have been assigned to a juvenile unit. The Richmond project shows that the community service officer could be very effective in organizing community meetings to deal with problems within the community relating to the police. It is hoped that the community service officer would work with regular policemen in these projects so that the police officer will not be viewed as a more isolated person than he is considered today in many ghetto communities.

The CSO could also be trained to render emergency aid to the sick, the mentally ill, or the alcoholic. He could investigate certain minor thefts and loss of property. This investigative function currently is done by regular officers and is a tremendous drain of man-hours which could be more effectively used for patrol. Creating the CSO might do much to solve some of the manpower problems which prevail in many police department, and allow the police to better serve the public. The community service officer program offers a rapid means of recruiting large numbers of well-qualified and experienced minority group personnel-it is an employment program as well as a policeaugmentation program.

The community service officer could provide continuing assistance to families encountering domestic problems; a frequent, but often unrecognized Job of our policemen.. The CSO could become active in police athletic league activities, Boy Scout troops, and many other character development programs.

In short, there is almost no limit to the function that community service officers could perform with imaginative local programing. The young men reached under this program-many of whom could be returning servicemen-are a valuable source of energy which we can harness and direct into productive community service. We have seen the ugly harvest if this tremendous energy is not directed to creative, beneficial activity. The communuity service officer is one possible way to direct a valuable dynamic human resource to helping inner city residents in particular, and our society generally.

EXHIBIT No. 2

Hon. CHARLES H. PERCY,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR PERCY: This is in response to your recent letter requesting information regarding the funding of community service officer programs under section 301 (a) (7) of

the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 and regarding the evaluation of these programs.

Because 85 percent of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration's Part C action funds is distributed to local units of government by the state planning agencies under the block grant concept, we will not have a complete record of individual subgrants until our Grants Management Information system is fully operational. I have, however, directed the Programs Management Division' to manually review the FY 1972 Comprehensive State Plans to determine the number of community service officer programs that will be funded out of FY 1972 block grant funds and the total amount of funds for these programs. This effort will not be completed until after the close of FY 1972, when all the state plans have been approved by LEAA.

I have also had our Programs Management Division compile a list and description of all community service officer programs and all other police-community relations programs funded directly by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration during fiscal years 1969-1971. This material is enclosed.

Although all of the community relations programs have not been as successful as you or I would hope, I would like to give you a report on a current program in Minneapolis which is quite successful. The Minneapolis Police Department was awarded $129,455 by LEAA in FY 1970 to operate a community service officer recruitment and training program. After initial recruitment problems involving traditional civil service testing procedures, this program has developed into a very beneficial effort to provide better opportunities for minority members to become policemen. The Minneapolis program is one in which the CSO recruits are fully integrated into the police department and are given rotating assignments which familarize them with all aspects of the department's law enforcement program. This particular program has helped to provide positive feedback to and from the minority communities and has aided in the development of a meaningful effort by the Police Department to bring minority members into the police force.

To date we have not had an evaluation of

community service officer programs. The Na

tional Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice is presently studying some aspects of community relations programs in police departments. When the general study is completed during the latter half of FY 1973, the National Institute will undertake an evaluation of selected community service officer programs funded directly by LEAA and by the states. I will advise you when this effort is started.

Although this is not a complete answer to your inquiry, I trust you know that LEAA shares your concern about the need for viable community service officer programs as important steps in the effort to improve our criminal justice system. With kind regards. Sincerely,

Enclosure.

JERRIS LEONARD, Administrator.

EXHIBIT No. 3

Project Title: Servaid II (Community Service Aides).

Grantee: New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services.

Subgrantee: City of Mount Vernon. Functional Program Category: Prevention. Project Director: Edward J. Lorch, Police Department, Roosevelt Square, Mt. Vernon, New York.

Total Project Cost: $113,115.
LEAA Contribution: $81,545.
State Contribution: $31,570.

Period of Award: July 1, 1970-July 31, 1973.
Project Summary: Like many urban areas,

the City of Mount Vernon has encountered a growing antagonism between its police department and its minority group residents. One of the chief concerns of the city's Black community has been its lack of property representation on the Police Department and the general lack of communication with the Department.

To ameliorate the situation the applicant implemented a community service aide program primarily aimed at utilizing young Blacks in an attempt at improving rapport between the Black community and the Police Department, and to recruit young Blacks into the Department. Ten young people were selected for the Aide position, given training in the operation of the Police Department and other city agencies, and assigned a number of tasks including: manning the Police Mobile Information Center to record citizen complaints and requests for service; providing service requested or making referrals; accompanying community relations officers on visits to schools and community group lectures; patrolling the community and maintaining direct contact with its citizens; and assisting police at large public gatherings.

Indices of Effectiveness: The evaluation of the project found it to be successful in proforming the tasks cited above. On-site observation, interviews, and attitude surveys show that the Aides were very effective in averting potential conflicts between youth and police during the summer months, in assisting the city's schools in stopping disturbances, in rendering service to the general public in terms of taking complaints, providing referrals, and in following up on these actions. Police officers had a generally favorable attitude towards the Aides-expressing the opinion that the program had helped to improve the police relationship with the public. Surveys taken of the City's youth indicate their awareness and acceptance of the program as a positive force for helping to avert disorder and for "cooling" things. In some respects, however, the evaluation illuminated several weaknesses of the project. Recruitment procedures were far too narrow-none of the Aides through the schools or community groups Entrance requirements and tests were often irrelevant to the needs of the program, training had to be revised to reflect the requirements of the project, and the city failed to provide sufficient opportunities for admitting Aides into the Department.

was selected

To correct these deficiencies and expand the impact of the program, the applicant seeks to implement many of the recommendations made by the evaluator. These include: a small increase in the number of Aides (to a total of 14, including several white Aides); improving the recruitment and selection system for Aides, modifying the training procedure to reflect more accurately the requirements of the Alde position; providing greater opportunities for Aides to advance in the program as a reward for effective service, tightening of the administrative controls of the project, and finally, seeking to develop with the City's Civil Service Commission procedures for entry into the Department of some Aides who might otherwise be ineligible for positions as police officers.

Project Title: Expanded School Relations Bureau.

LEAA Contribution: $114,263.
State Contribution: $147,739.
Period of Award: May 11, 1972-April 30,

1973.

Project Summary: To effect early detection and control of juvenile delinquency and to foster deeper understanding between youth and police officers, the Montgomery Police Department established a School Relations Bureau. By placing teams of officers, who work with the 37,000 students in the City's forty-nine public high schools and in three of the City's junior high schools, the School Relations Bureau endeavors to redirect predelinquent as well as delinquent behavior.

The school and the Board of Education serve as a conduit through which youth and policemen may encounter one another in a positive and helpful environment. Cooperation between these two agencies has created an opportunity for early detection and correction of problem behavior and for better communication and understanding among school, police and youth.

At the close of 1971, the School Relations Bureau could refer to several favorable results of its program. Placement of officers in a situation where they could be perceived as friends of youth has resulted in an increased respect for and more positive at-. titude toward law enforcement and police officers. This placement has resulted in the early identification of seriously disturbed individuals while simultaneously maintaining the treatment of nondelinquent behavioral problems in an informal environment outside the criminal justice system.

The coverage of the School Relations Bureau has almost doubled since this grant has gone into effect. Eight additional officers have been placed on the staff, cars and equipment have been purchased for these officers, and a two-week training institute in delinquency prevention has been conducted. A full-time Ph. D. psychologist has been added to the School Relations Bureau staff to work with youth exhibiting delinquent and pre-delinquent behavior resulting from underlying emotional problems.

The School Relations Bureau coordinates the services of many of the community agencies to assist in problems outside of the particular police expertise. Therefore, a student, who shares his problem with the officer in his school, essentially asks for assistance not only from his school and the officer but also from the community agency to which his particular need will be referred.

as

Indices of Effectiveness: Since the initiation of the project, a decreased tendency for students to progress from minor infractions to more serious ones has been noted. Property damages in the schools as well acts of violence against persons have declined. Data collected from 1971 and 1972, while inconclusive, indicate the desired tendency to treat more individuals on an informal basis, less on a formal, courtroom basis. With an increase from eight personnel in 1971 to nineteen in 1972, the School Relations Bureau has increased its number of informal dispositions from 422, in 1971 to 649 in 1972, while diminishing the number of cases which had to be disposed formally from 115 in 1971 to 96 in 1972. Preliminary data covering the first months of this grant show an even stronger trend in this direction.

Project Title: Many Aiding Youth By Experience (MAYBE).

ment.

Functional Program. Category: Prevention.

Project Director: Raymond D. Fowler, Jr., Ph.D., Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, University, Alabama 35476, 205/348-5083.

Total Project Cost: $262,002.

Grantee: State Law Enforcement PlanSubgrantee: West Orange Police Depart

ment.

Functional Program Category: Community Involvement in Local Juvenile Delinquency Prevention Programs.

Project Director: Joseph J. McGuire, Municipal Plaza, West Orange, New Jersey 07052, 201/736-1500.

Total Project Cost: $123,363.
LEAA Contribution: $88,705.

State or Local Contributions: $34,658. Period of Award: October 7, 1972-October 6, 1973.

Project Summary: West Orange policemen are working hand in hand with university authorities on human relations in a program designed to help youngsters in trouble and to help the police help the youngsters stay out of trouble. They call the program MAYBE (Many Aiding Youth by Experience) but there seem to be few "maybes" voiced over the effectiveness of the project in promoting understanding between the police and youngsters enrolled in the program and their families.

West Orange is a suburb of Newark in populous Essex County. The project was initiated by the West Orange Youth Services Bureau in conjunction with the West Orange Police Department and Seton Hall University. The program, first of all, gives West Orange police officers training designed to enable them to relate better with youngsters and to understand their needs and problems. Seton Hall educators providing the training have in turn been getting the policemen's point of view by spending hours riding in patrol cars and monitoring calls and reports at police headquarters. The theory, explains one of the professors, is that police can give emotional or psychological first aid on the beat just as they give physical first aid; that training in behavioral sciences enables the policemen to deal more effectively with people and their problems.

The second phase of the program is the counseling service bureau which is staffed by 12 counselors from Seton Hall plus four group therapists, a psychiatrist and a psychologist.

Indices of Effectiveness: Between last October and mid-May, the service agency had treated nearly 200 boys and girls between the ages of 13 and 20. The program, aimed at preventive action, is open without charge to any resident of West Orange but most of the youngsters come in through referrals from the police. Youths who have appeared in Juvenile Court can have their records cleared if they agree to counseling and are judged to be making progress in the program. The actual counseling is confidential and winds up with the youngster's family joining him in counseling sessions. People close to the program say the municipality's youngsters are beginning to see policemen in a new light-that they realize police aren't out just to arrest them but are willing to help them out. Representatives from another state have come into West Orange and plan to use the program as a model for one of their own.

Project Title: Crime Prevention Unit. Grantee: New Jersey State Law Enforcement Planning Agency.

Subgrantee: City of Plainfield. Functional Program Category: Prevention of Crime Through "Hardening" Crime Targets and Public Education.

Project Director: Charles K. Allen, Director of Public Affairs and Safety, 200 E. Fourth Street, Plainfield, New Jersey 07060 209/5615933.

Total Project Cost: $60,599.
LEAA Contribution: $45,449.

State or Local Contribution: $15,150. Period of Award: June 1, 1972-May 31, 1973.

Project Summary: The Plainfield Crime Prevention Unit project has united police and residents of an aging, high crime rate neighborhood .in an effort that has had a marked effect on both the incidence of crime and community/police relations. The project director reports that crime statistics in all categories have undergone a steady downward trend since the program was initiated. The unit staff has been engaged in multi-pronged efforts to educate and gain the confidence and cooperation of residents. The unit staff