Hearings Before the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs Of

,.,gwAsAi.': 11144 11111iiiii lPjd 0 3 2

Lawd 11111

j''' 11111r2;=_R I walk Applmoi ggiImilmanlb

11111-1 11111-11 DOCUMENT RESUME ED 057 147 UD 011 956 TITLE Hearings Before theSelect Committeeon Nutrition and Human Needs of theUnited StatesSenate, Ninety-SecondCongress, First Session and Human Needs, on Nutrition Part 6--Summer FeedingProgram and USDA Decision toWithhold Funds forSection 32. Hearings HeldWashington, D. C., 1971. June 25 and July22, INSTITUTION Congress of the U.S., Washington, D. C.Senate Select Committee on Nutritionand Human Needs. PUB DATE [Jul. 711 NOTE 230p. AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent ofDocuments, U.S.Government Printing Office, Washington,D.C. 20402 ($1.00) EDRS PRICE MF-10.65 HC-$9.87 DESCRIPTORS *Administrative Policy;*Breakfast Programs; Community Surveys; Federal Government;Food Service; *Inner City; *LunchPrograms; Nutrition; Programs *Summer IDENTIFIERS California; DepartmentOf Agriculture; Jersey; Texas Michigan; New ABSTRACT Testimony concernthgthe Sumner Feeding heard during theJune 25, 1971 hearing Program was from R. S. Gribbs,mayor of Detroit, Mich.;K. Gibson,mayor of Newark, N, and Edward Koplan, J. and, ArnoldRobles program administratorsof Los AngelesCounty, Calif., ani Cityof San Antonio,Texas. Testimony withholding of funds concerning the for section 32was heard during theJuly 22, 1971 hearing fromPew. W. Cunninghamand E. 3osaitis, program coordinatot, director and Focus: HOPE--Detroit;D. Jones, mayor's Committee forHuman Resources, Detroit; SenatorW. Magnuson, U.S. Senator from Wasaington;and P. Olsson, U.S. Department of deputy assistantsecretary, Agriculture. Amongthe appendixedsubmissions to the comnittee bywitnesses wasa comprehensive HOPE Food andDrug Survey involving report on the 1968 and drug prices the comparisonstudy ofgrocery and services.["The case for iron infant feedingregimens," by Lloyd supplements in from the material A. Filer, Jr., hasbeen deleted presented inAppendix 2, dueto its marginal legibility in theoriginal document.1 NUTRITION AND HUMANNEEDS 1971

HEARINGS tr. iJL.ILJ THE SELECT COMMITTEEON %fat NUTRITION ANDHUMAN NEEDS

UNITED SLt;S SENATE NINETY-SECOND CONGRESS FIRST SESSION tiN NUTRITION AND HUMAN'NEEDS

PART 6SUNMER FEEDINGPROGRAM and USDA DECISION TO WITHHOLDFUNDS FOR SECTION32

WASHINCTON, D.C., JUNE 25AND JULY 22, 1971

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF 1 EALTH. EDUCATION & WELF ARE OFFICE OF EDUCAT.ON THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO. DUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIG- INATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN IONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDU CATION POSITION OR POLICY

Printed for the use of the Select- Committee on Nutrition and HumanNeeds

U.N. GOVERNMENT PRINIINGOFFICE It 854 WASHINGTON : 197 1

Far Elio hy the Superinten(Ient of 1)ocutnents,IJ.N. tiovernment 1'rint1ng Odiee Washington, 1),C, 20402 IrIc. *140 SELECT COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION AND HUM.A r; EEDS GEORGE McGOVERN,South Dakota, Chairman ALLEN J. ELLENDER, Louisiana CHARLES H. PERCY, Illi HERMAN E. TALMADGE, Georgia MARLOW W. COOK, Ken.:.,k PHILIP A. HART, Michigan ROBERT DOLE, Kansas WALTER F. MONDALE, Minnesota HENRY BELLMON, Oklahoma EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts RICHARD SCHWEIKER Pennsylvania GAYLORD NELSON, Wisconsin ROBERT TAFT, JR., Ohic ALAN CRANSTON, California KioNtarni ScaLoessanG, Staff Director (11) CONTENTS

SUMMER FEEDING PROGRAM Friday, June 25, 1971

Page Opening statement of Senator McGovern, chairman 1513 WITNESSES IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER Gribbs, Roman S., mayor of the city of Detroit, Mich.; accompanied by John M. Amberger and William M. Nugent, mayor's staff; Dr. William Clexton, health commissioner, city of Detroit; aad James Oliver, mayor's Committee for Human Resource l3evelopment 1515 Gibson, Kenneth A. mayor of the city of Newark, N.J.; accompanied by Ira A. Jackson, administrative assistant 1517 Robles, Arnold, program administrator, Los Angeles County, Calif 1531 Koplan, Edward, program administrator, city of San Antonio, Tex 1533

USDA DECISION TO WITHHOLD FUNDS FOR SECTION 32 Wednesday, July 22, 1971

Opening statement of Senator Hart 1545 WITNESSES IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER Cunningham, Rev. William, director, FOCUS: HOPE--Detroit 1546 Josaitis, Eleanor, program coordinator, FOCUS: HOPEDetroit 1551 Jones, Dorinda, mayor's Committee for Human Resources, Detroit 1553 Magnuson, Senator Warren G., U.S. Senator from Washington 1557 Olsson, Philip, deputy assistant secretary; accompanied by Howard Davis, deputy administrator, U.S. Department of Agriculture 1561

APPENDIXES Appendix 1. Items pertinent to the hearing of June 25, 1971: Item 1Material submitted by the witnesses: From Mayor Gribbs, of Detroit 1573 From Mayor Gibson, of Newark 1580 From Mr. Koplan, of San Antonio 1581 From Mr. Robles, of Los Angeles 1588 (m) 3 IV Appendix 1.Conthnwd Item 2Material submitted by other than witnesses: Page From Senator Cook, of Kentucky 1590 From Assistant Secretary Lyng, of USDA Item 3Letter of interest: 1591 June 17, 1971: from Senator McGovern to Secretary Hardin 1593 From Georgia 1594 From Pennsylvania 1594 From New 'York 1595 From Senators Mondale and Ifinnphrey 1595 From 45 Senators 11519(7 From American Acadeym of Pediatrics July 22, 1971: from Assistant Secretary Lyng to SenatorMe- Govern 1598 Item 4Newspaper articles regarding Summer Feeding Program: The Christian Scientist Monitor: July 13, 1971Summer in the Ghetto The New York Times: 1605 July 8, 1071More Funds Sought for Lunch Program 1603 July 10, 1971Lunch Money 1604 July 11, 1971Four Million Pawns___ 1605 Free-Lunch Budget Ine -d by Nixon.. The Washington Post: 1605 June 18, 1971Cities Lose U.S. Funds for Summer Lunches..1599 June 26, 1971Food Program Cuts Seen Inciting Ghettos 1601 July 2, 1961Aides Vow To Hold Up Food Funds 1601 July 7, 1971Another Unkept Promise to the Poor 1602 July 9, 1971White Hquse Backs Free Lunch Project UPI release: 1604 June 25, 1971Hunger--Two Mayors Accuse Agriculture Department 1600 Append Ix 2. Items pertinent to the hearing of July 22, 1971: Item 1Material submitted by the witnesses: From Rev. William Cenningham, Detroit: HOPE 68 1607 From Senator Magnuson, of Washington Item 2Material submitted by other than witnesses: 1706 From Mrs. Doris L. Thornton, Cr_mmunity Health ServicesAd- ministration, Washington, D.0 171u From Joseph A. Walsh, director, Hospital Sales and Government Affairs, Mead Joh-son Laboratories, Evansville, Ind_ 1711 Lieuer of July 22,1971, from Sen. George McGovern, Chairman,.1elect, Conitnittvc on Nutrition and Human Needs__ 1711 -Report to Select. Committee on Nutrition and Ihnnen Needs_ 1712 Newsletter Supplenwnt, Dee. 15, 1970, Committeeon Mari- tion, American Academy of Pediatrics_ 1715 Prevention of Iron-DeKeieney Anemia iD Infants and Chil- drxrt of Preschool Age_ 1716 The Case for Iron Supplements in Infant Feeding Pegimens_ 1736 SUMMER FEEDING PROGRAM

FRIDAY, JUNE 25, 1971

U.S. SENATE) SELECT COMMITTED ON NUTRITION AND HUMAN NEEDS) Washhigton, D.C. The Select Committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 1318, of the New Senate Office Building, the Honorable George McGovern, chairman of the committee, presiding. Present: Senators McGovern, Cranston, Cook, and Bellmon. Staff members present : Kenneth Schlossberg, staff director; Nancy Amidei and Elizabeth P. Hottcl, professional staff. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR McGOVERN, CHAIRMAN Senator MCGOVERN. The committee will come to order. I would like to make a brief statement toopen this mon. :ng'..ear- ings. We have with us themayors o r -Detroit and Newark. These men and other may,,r. OS'S thi; uuntry were encouraged by the U.S. Department of Apiculture to develop and expand their programs to feed needy cAdren this summer. They have just been told by that same Department that they will actually receive littleor none of the money they were promised earlier they would receive. Their str---r is tiks story of cities across the Nation, cities whichcare about their ..bildryn and which were anxious to do whatever they could to ease the trains 4 summer in the urban areas of the country. We also _Avt prIgram administrators withus for this hearing this morning, tae men who are directly responsible for feeding children in Los Anp4t=s San Antonio. These are the men who negotiated for the feeding sites, food service contracts, theproposn Is, and the employees, :sad these are the men who nave just been told they will not have the money they need. to operate theprograms that they recently regotiated. I am tai.d that we also have some ,!liildren in the hearing room today who are visithrg Congress this morning, children who should receive meals in the District of Columbia but who will not be fed ifmoney is not made available immediately.

ADATISTRATION WITNESSES DECLINED TO TESTIFY I have not mentioned the presence of administration witnesses, because when we invited them to testify they declined to do so. One was too busy, another said it was not his ;responsibility, and the third claimed his office had not been notified. (1513) 1514 Unlike the mayors, the program administrators,and the children, the men wl,o might have made this moneyavailable and have made this hearing unnecessary seemed to havenothing at stake and so, for various reasons, declined to attend thishearing. The Office of Manage- ment and Budget was willing enough towithhold the needed funds but not to appear in public hearings to answerfor their actions. The story of the summer feeding programhas been so confused and so ineptly handled, Ithink it is little wonder that the menresponsible for this aifficulty did not want to showtheir faces. The Department of Agriculture announced this week that itwr-ild spend only $32 million for the entire year for the specialfood service program. That announcement came despite the Department's ownadmission in a letter to Senator Talmadge and to methat requests for the summer alone will total nearly $27 million,leaving on-ly $5 million for all of the rest of the year. Moreover, theDepartment acknowledged that funds used last year would not be availablethis year. The answer of the Department is tofund cities at last year's level and allow only for what theydescribe as "mcderate program expansion." However polite the language, the answeris the same : Cities that were promised moneywill not get it; children who werepromised meals will not be fed. I fink we should all keep in mind thatthis summer feeding pro- grar.egan as an effort tohelp cities survive difficult summers.This snmulor gives everyindication of being as difficult as anyin the past. Broken promises to hungry- childrenand jobless teenagers canonly add to the potential for trouble. Now, that is the reason for this emergencyhearing this morning to prevail on the AgricultureDepartment, the Office of Management and Budget, and the White House, to keepthe commitments that were made and to spend the relatively small sum of moneyrequired. We fvre talking about only roughly $15 millionbeyond what the Department has now indicated. The Congress hasclearly given the PLuthority to use the extra money. This is certainly notime to be pennywise and pound- fool ish. I just want to add one brief announcement.I would like to express myclisappointment that the administration did not see fit to send anyone to represent its positionthis morning. I personally find it difficult to .believe that no one among theresponsible officials could find time to be here today. On behalf of Assistant Secretary Richard Lyng ofthe Department of Agriculture, he did say he would meet with meprivately at a time more convenient to him to discussthis matter. want to announce that the transcriptof this hearing will be sent to" Mr. Lyng's office as soon as it is available, and ourmeeting, hope- fully next week, will cidl for a point-by-point responseto whatever is recounted here by the mayors and other officials to betestifying. I certainly do not intena to let this issue restuntil money promised to the cities by the Department ofAgriculture has been made av,ailable. Senator Cook, any statements you would like tomake before we continue 1515 Senator Coox. No, thankyou. Senator McGovEux. If Mayor Gibson and Mayor Gribbs willcome forward and bring any ofyour assistants with you, we will be glad to hear your statements. STATEMENT OF HON. ROMAN S. G RIBES, MAYOROF THE CITY OF DETROIT, MICH.; ACCOMPANIED BY JOHN M.AMBERGER AND WILLIAM M. NUGENT, MAYOR'S STAFF; DR.WILLIAM CLEXTON, HEALTH COMMISSIONER, CITY OF DETROIT; AND JAMES OLIVEIt, MAYOR'S COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RESOURCEDEVELOPMENT Mayor GEIBBS. Mr. Chairman, Tam Roman Gribbs, mayor of the city of Detroit. I want to thank the committeeand you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testif3r this morning. I am joined here today by John M. Ambergerand William M. Nugent of my staff, by Dr. William Clexton, Detroit'sHealth Com- missioner, and. Mr. James Oliver, the directorof the Mayor's Com- mittee for Human Resources Development, the isters our poverty program. agency which admin- We are here on a matter of utmosturgency. There are nearly a half million young people between theages of 6 and 21 in my city. Nearly 100,000 of them are poor, and most of them receive theironly full and complete meal during the 9 months of the school hinch program. year in the school USDA URGED TRIPLIN43 PROGRAM To insure that such youngsters continueto receive adequate meals .during the summer, Congress 3years ago provided the special food service program wilich lastsummer enable43 us to feed 21;,000 poor youth ever): day. Ourprogram was widely acclaimed as a national model. Regional officials of the Departmentof Agriculture urged us to triple its capacity, toserve 75,000 youngsters every day. Being somewhat more cautious,we determined that we would try to servo 50,000 youngstersevery day this year. We were assured by Agriculture officials that Federal funds would as many as 75,000 meals a day. be available to us for Mr. Chairman, letme tell you what it means to operate a program -of this size very briefly, if Imay. One does not merely take $1.5 million in Federal funds toa local store and buy food to be scattered throughout the city. Rather,we must undergo a very lengthy and complex planning process which inour city involves more than 2,000 people in addition to the 50,000 to be served. It involves the organization of recreationpro.grams at more than 200 sites throughout the city, communicationwith the 50.000 youngsters to be served, and with more than 1,600 local citizens whohave volunteered to staff the pi ogram, Wecannot simply turn this programon and off as one would turna faucet. We were not informed therewere any financial problems until about June 8, when the USDA regional office statedthey could not formally approve our application since no fundswere available. Alerted to the problem last Wednesday, June 16, boththe Senate and House of Rep- 1516 resentatives have expeditedlegislation concerning the service program. Andboth bodies have approved special food legislation which gives the stopgap funding programs if he wishes. Secretary of Agriculturefreedom to fund. Our "D Day" for the June. Despite frequentstart of this programwas the twenty-first of fall, winter, and spring,contact by the city of Detroitduring the past by Federal officials. June 21 came and went withoutfinal approval

CommoN CaUNCII: ADVANCED$1001000 However, because of theneed, the Detroit Common vanced $100,000, hopingfor reimbursement, Council ad- start the programon time that we would tonot make lose sure that we could youngsters as school close'd, all contact with the hungry. to insure that kids wouldnot go The Federal Governmenthas left us holdiner the bag.They have urged us to man the servinglines and then, in al'ect, they the kitchen. They havetold us now that have closed even as many youngsters we will ue fortunate to serve to do so, they said. as we served lasc year. We will be fortunate Mr.Chairman, we have asked for$1.3 million, yet the Department of Agriculture claims theentire State of Michigan is $636,000, which, ofcourse is simply not true. seeking only This is not strictlya Detroit problem. In the past fewdays, members of my staff have checkedthroughout the country. Weunderstand that three 'Texas cities aloneare seeking more than $900,000 insummer feeding money, yet Agriculturelists the entire State of Texasas requesting only $115,000. Chicagois seeking $2.5 million for itsprogram, yet Agriculture lists theentire State as needing only $1.9 million. Senator MCGOVERN. Mayor Gribbs,can you supply for the recordif not this morning, in the iixtfew daysthe requests thatare known to yon from the various citiesyou have referred to and what the De- partment clainied it to be? Doyou have the information inyour files? Mayor Graltils, We havemost of it today, and whatwe don't have we will be pleased to supply as quicklyas we can get them. Senator MCGOVERN. It wouldseem incredible to me that you testify here that your city askedfor $1.3 million and theDepartment still claims that the entirerequest for the State of Michigan $600,000. I thinkwe ought to have the discrepancies laid is around so we can take it up with the Department. on the record* Mayor Gramas. I wi'l bevery pleased to provide that, sir. This pattern I indicated isrepeated through the country. A. sub- sequent survey by my stag inclose cooperation with the U.S. Con- ference of Mayors and theNational League of Cities indicatedthat the Department of Agriculturehas proposed programs throughout the country for fiscalyear 1972 to the tune of $46.9 million, $30.6 million of whichare to take place beginning. July 1. Mr. Chairman, I have enoughtrouble managing thevery complex affairs of the city of Detroit.We have no time to developprograms proposed by the Department ofAgriculture which they haveno intention of implementing. ThisDepartment has fallen down disastrously in its management of thisprogram. *See Appendix 1, p. 1574. 1517 CREDITS CONGRESS FOR ACTION It is to your credit, sir, and and in the House of Representativesto that of your colleagues in the Senate permit us to use $135 million of that you have moved rapidlyto people this summer. section 32 money to feed theyoung We understand that the administrationintends to place a limit of $32 million on spending for this specialfood service program throughout the year. That isa limit of $32 million against promisedor pro- poSed-programs of $46.9 million. Suchintransigence with regard to spending followingas it does the duplicitous performance by the De- partment of Agriculture, demonstrates, ture's total lack of commitment. in our judgment, Agricul- Mr. Chairman and members ofthe committeee, time hasnow run out. What we urgently neednow is immediate utilization by the Agri- culture administration officials of thefunds that have been made available to them throughyour recent actions. I respectfully urge this distinguishedbody to do all within itspower to the end that we in Detroit andothers throughout the country will be able to feedour poor and hungry youngsters at least good meal 'a day pursuant to the one you, Mr. Chairman. clear intent of Congres. Thank Senator MCGOVERN. Thankyou very much, Mayor Gribbs. I think you spelled c-.1t the issue as clearly and forcefully to do, and Senator Cook and I as it is possible but I would like to hear first frommay have questions here a little later, you for questions. Mayor Gibson and come back to STATEMENT OF HON. KENNETH A.GIBSON, MAYOR OF THE CITY OF NEWARK, N.J.; ACCOMPANIED BY IRA A. JACKSON, ADMIN- ISTRATIVE ASSISTANT Mayor GIBSON. Thankyou, Senator McGovern and Senator Cook. We have comeand Isay "we" because, to my right, is my administrative assistant, Mr. Ira Jacksonwehave come to testify 'andwe welcome the opportunity to speak beforethis hearing. We haveap- peared before several congressiomilcommittees over the last we have appeared to testify about some basic human needs in theyear of Newark. city We have spoken to you and Congress aboutthe need for adequate health care andwe have talked about the ravages of drug abuse and about the need to economically revitalizeour city so that people can find dignity and meaningful employment. In all of this, we have talked 'about what ought to do, what new the Federal Government human rights are insured.programs Congress must enact so that basic Today, however,we come before you to urge continuation 'andex- pansion of an existingprogram, a program 'which is designed to feed 27,000 children in the city of Newark thissummer. Many of these childrenare undernourished. That is a basic fact of our welfare system, which allots 32 cents per meal for themore than 55,000 children on public welfare in the city of of New Jersey cuts in welfare will Newark. Recent State amount even more. reduce this 'already inadequate, 1518 The summer foocl program will provide lunch andtwo snacks, which is almost two-thirds of the basic minimum dietaryrequirements for those growing children. It is a minimalprogram at best, running only through the summer months for onlya small number of the undernourished children in Newark and only provir.:ingpart of their minimum daily needs. This spring we urged communitygroups to organize themselves to apply for funds to administer thisprogram. We did this at the urging of those who had been stimulated by Federal officials. USDA STATIsTics ComPLETELYix Ennon Thirty-six grassroo's organization,. have applied for abnost$1 million in funding to date. We have applied for $970,000for this program, and yet the USDA statistics indicate that the whole State of New Jersey has applied for only $350,000. On the assurances of Federal and State representatives,we applied for this money. We have ready 79 neighborhoodcenters to serve lunches and snacks for a 45-day period, beginningon July 6. I must point out here that :Ntewark'sprogram last year, 1970, was a very small program, and we are being told, or it is being hinted, that we may be able to serve only those who were involved in theprogram last year. I didn't take office until July 1, 1970, andI don't believe that the childrc_i of Newark should be penalizedfor the inefficiencies of the previous administration. We are applying for a relatively substantialprogram, and we believe that we should receive the fullprogram that we have applied for. Most of us have becomo accustomed to the broken promisesof the Federal Government, but cutbacks in thisprogram will hit us especially hard and it is especially cruel toour inner city residents. You know that the poor of our cities have the same aspiration for their childrenas you Senator: have for your own children, only thepoor cannot tAke for granted the physical and mental growth of theiryoung people. MA Liwrarrio N Is YE A R ROUND I know that many ofyou are concerned 'about the effects of this action on the cities this summer. But I am tired of hearing ofprograms designed to keep flu ,. cities cool during thesunmier months. We walk the streets of Newark during the long cold winters andwe witnesq, 12 months a year, tlw effects of malnutritionand lost opportnnity and alienation. It must be emphasized that thisprogram is not a wish or a proposal or a bill which you gentlemen are deliberating. It. isa public law enacted by Congress. The Congress hasseen tit to authorize and appropriate money for this effort. The Federal and Stateagencies encouraged the localgroups to apply because the money was there, and yet at the last moment, in a policy decision which atonce thwarts the will of Congress and frustrates reasonable expectationsand condemns these children to thesame inadequate diet, the administration has arbitrarily held up themoney. The hypocrisy and cruelty of this action, inthe light of deliberations to.azithorme billions of dollars tosave failing aerospace corporations, is incomprehensible. 0 1519 Our children areour most precious human resource, and yet their bas:c welfareis sacrificed to the rhetoricof a balanced budget. We have been speaking about the need to reorder prioritiesin America, but this specific example demonstrates that rhetoricmust give way to decisive action now. HOPEFULLYADMINISTRATION JUST CONFUSED I would like to think that the confusionin Washington indicates- that the admihistration has its signalscrossed. I would like to think that the intent of Congress wouldnot be willfully denied by theagen- cies responsible for just administeringprograms. I would like to think that thisparticular program whichwe applied for only after Federal initiativeis not just another cruel hoaxtor the "Newarks" and other major cities ofour country. Thank you. Senator MCGOVERN. Thank statement. you very much, Mayor Gibson, foryour Mayor Gribbs, I knowyou were personally responsible for:thereso- lution introduced at last week'smeeting of the .Conference ofMayors in Philadelphiaon this issue. I wonder if you could just summarizefor us what you see as the view of themayors at that conference and the country on this particularproblem. across Mayor GRILIBS. Mr. Chairmanthere was unanimityon the point of view that Mayor Gibson andI liave expressed herefirston the need, second on the point of the availabilityof funds and the high priorityof the program. The mayors' reactionwas that it is unthinkable that such a resolution is necessary, when we and the young. are talking about feeding thepoor The mayors that had not meeivedor been aware of the bad news were literally shocked. Some of us had advancenotice because we had representatives workingon it here, in the city, and otherareas; and we immediately did whatwe could best dounanimously adopta resolution. I have acopy of the resolution here before me, Senator, if it isnot in the record- We could submit itfor the record. Senator McGovEnx. Without objection,I would like to have that copy of the resolution becomea part of the hearing record.* Mayor Galena. Thankyou, sir. Senator MCGt)VERN. Mavo.. Gibson,I wonder if I could direct this question to you. I think all ofus are ti,ware that the mayors ina .4elise are out on the firing line, outon the frontlines, in closer contactevery day with the public than those ofus hero in Washington. We aware, I am sure, of the growing skepticism are also general on the question of whether about the Covernmentill ments to the citizens of this country.we can really keep our commit- Is NOT MIS DEvELormENTHA1t3IFUL? Is it not a fact thatn development of this kind, where largenum- bers of pe3pleare led to believe that theplograms are forthcoming. and then suddenly do notsee it come off, has a most harmfuland dams wing effecton public attitudes toward the Governmentand the faith ..of the peoplein their elected leaders and in those whoare responsible for administering theseprograms? See Appendix 1, p. 1573. 11 1520 Mayor GIBSON'. Yes, sir. Senator, we are in the firing line in cities like Newark, and my problem is particularly acute because of the quality of life in the city of Newark-. We have to perform. The people are not just going to accept the fact thatthey have a, mayor or they have Representatives who in theory represent them in. Washington unless they see some results. When we come to the citizem, the local groups, and eilcourage them to apply for Federal fundsas we have done in this case ; we have encouraged 79 neighborhood citizen groups to be developed to receive the Ilinch program; we have sat, down with people ancl had them write out proposals, and they spent many, many hours in writing out proposals so they could develop neighborhood programs for their children ; now we are saying, after all of the bureaucratic red- tape that we made them go through in making application forthese fundsafter telling them that the money was there, then that money does not exist, they are not going to, at, the first step, come to -Washington. The first step will be city hall in Newark and, quite frankly, what I will have to do is find a way to get them down to Washington, but I cannot really explain this, and I don't think any mayor is going tobe able to explain this problem. Mayor Gnruns. Mr. Chairman, if I may add on that point to this extent: In an effort to not disappoint those that had reason to expect this helpthe youngsters and the voluntary help and the parents and the poor in our communityin an effort not t;) disappoint them on the failure of this program to be funded adequately, in effect what I have to do as mayor, even though we have our present. budget startingthis fiscal year many million dollars in the red and out of balance at the moment, and facing even that kind of budget, I asked the Common Council of the C'-f-y of Detroit, as indicated in mv comments, to appropriate $100,000 to start the program on time in tile hope that we would be reimbursed, in thc hope that we can continue to maintain contact with those that had been promised and led to believe and to continue the organization that had been programed to provide the v,luntary services so that we eould have a maximum use ofthe dollar with the maximum of the food tlmt we have. LOCAL GOVERNMENT RELIES ON INTENT OF CONGRESS So the Common Council, in effect, has, and we have risked $100,000 on the expeetiti.ion that the intent ofCongress would he followeJ and the funds wonld be provided. We need the progratm that. badly. Senator NIcGrovEii.. I would like to ask both of the mayors, be rore I defer to Senator Cook, this question : As I understand it. most of these youngfiters will be fed in recreation programs of one kind or another. that this is a part of a total pro.Tram. And what will you de now with those programs : Will you cancel out ? Suppose this money is not forthcoming. Will you go ahead with the recreation programs without the food, or does everything get canceled or part of it canceled? hrow does it work out in practice, going on the assumption we can't break loose these funds that the Congress authorized ? 12 Mayor GIBSON. We in Newark, our recreational programs. WeSenator, will have to through with recreationalprograms and that is,cannot of just abandonthet.'c)-(3 established see in Newark. I woad like to course, not what I would like to gram, but whatever see a inore extensive recreationalpro- Our real problem weis goinghave proposed we willcarry out. and the children have to be, now, makingsure that the parents on our recreationalcontinued faith inus, and we will have tocarry times dealing with theprogram, but we are going to havevery ditlieult tin. daytime. dietary requirementsof t hese childrenduring Mayor GRIBBS. With that question ? your permission, may Dr. Clextonrespond to Senator McGovunN. Yes. lir. CI.Exrox. Alt% Chairman, sites last week, and we began recreationalprograms at 30 tinue those recreationalmoney w;ll go to 99 locations. Wewill try tocon- tmit's very successful programs but, aswas shown last year in De- attracts and motivatesprogram, the the food is theglue. Thelunch is what to the recreational children to participatearid look forward procrram. programs that aro the basicaspects of the total Stjnator tions? 'Wt.:GOVERN. Thankyou very much. Senator Cook,any ques- Senator Coon,. Yes, thankyou. Mayor Gribbs, what you recive last year in thisprogram ? allotment did Dr. CLExTorr. $490,000Federal money, and the total east of theprogram, which was about $025,000.that was 80 percentof Senator Coos. Doyou remember what total when receiving the$490,000 ? amount you requested Dr. CLEXPON. Whatwo applied for? Senator Coos. Yes. Dr. Cr....E2c1'on. Lastyear we told the USDAwe could not possibly because theprogram was developed at the lastminutefeedmore than 25,000 childrena day. They advised us to apply,and the application will show that at theirencouragement, we applied for75,000 lunches a day in order to set aside fundsthat were available incase something exceptional happened thatwe could go beyondour expectations. Senator Coos. In other words,your application last that you could feed 75,000? year indicated CI.ExTort. That is what the Senator Coos. Now, the USDA.application was for,yes. (i6:.3 last year. Is that correct? says that applicationwas for $502,- )r. Ciawrox. Weare talking about. the Senator COOK. Yes. summer of 1070 ? Dr. CiExTo.-. As Isay, the figures of the number of childrenactually on the application is for 75,000 childrena day, or 75,000 lunchesa e -ty. The dollars, however, spoketo what we feltwe could actually perform. Senator COOK. So therewas really no comparison between Dr. CLEXTON. That istrue. the two? Senator Coos. Doyou recall what your application stated Dr. CI:EXTON. Our application this year ? day. for this year is for 50,000lunches a Senator Coos. At whatti mount of money ? 13 1522 Dr. CLEXTON. It would recjuire $1.3 million in Federal funds; the total program would be about $1.7 million. Senator Cooic. When did you file your application for $1.3 million, do you recall ? APPLICAT/ON FILED IN MAY Dr. Cunx?roisr. I think it was sometime during the middle of May, sir. _Senator Coon. FF110 mayor's statement recalls that all during the winter and fall months efforts were being made; and yet application came in for $1.3 million, after the May 21 wrap-up date. That is why I wondered, if there had been discussions all during the winter relative to this program with the USDA, why did the Detroit application not get in until after the date the USDA had scheduled to make a det erminat ion of t hese allocations. Dr. CLEXTON. As to chronological events, after the program last summer, there was continuous communication between myself, asad- ministrator of the program, and the USDA officials on, first of all, writing the report describing how the program had gone because they wanted to use it for a model for the other cities around the country. Then, in December, there was a conference here in Washington, at which we were represented, on the summer lunch programs of the various cities in the country. From that period on, there were continuous discussions among Detroit officials and regional officials about expandincr Detroit's program. In April we were dismayed by the publication of Federal guidelines which prohibited the consideration of volunteers' services as a portion of the required local matching contribution. So, in our continuous discussions then, it was stated that if we could gain the use of voluntary helplthere would be no further obstacles to expanding the program. That si why the application was not put in until we won the battle of revising the USDA regulations to allow voluntary help, because our program was based on the use of voluntary help. Until it was allowed, we couldn't apply with integrity. Voluntary help is the "in-kind" contribution local matching. Senator Comm. The voluntarylAelp in the city of Detroit is part of the contribution of the city ? Dr. Cunx'roN. About 70 percent. Senator Cooic. About 70 percent of Detroit's contribution ? Dr. CrxxroN. Yes. Senator COOK. ID other words, that 70 percent of the balance ofthe cant ributi on does not really represent taxdollars of the city of Detroit but voluntary help ? Dr. Cumx7corT. Exactly. Senator, may I ask aquestion ? Senator Comm. Yes. Dr. CLEXTON. Did you use May 21 asthough it was a deadline? Senator Comic. It was the wrap-up datedesignated by the USDA. Dr. Cr-ExTorr. Well, I have had so many negotiations and so many discussions with the Department of Agricultureofficials that I might have forgotten it. But I don't remember itsbeing emphasized. Senator Coox. This was the date I wasgiven. However, may I add that conceivably you will be able to get morefunds; but, I think the 14 1523 Department has indicated thatall of theseprograms will be funded at the same level thissummer as they were funded lastsummer. Dr. CLEXTON. I hope that iscorrect. We have not really been posiuive assuranceeven of that. given Senator CooK. Inyour instance, this is a lot better than the Newark, in that they madea request for $000,000, and lastcity of their requestwas only $7,155. So, they summer parison, your problem is are in real trouble. By com- mayor of Newark. peanuts compared to the problemof the

$7,000 WON 'T HELP UNPILLEDOBLIGATIONS Mayor Gn3so-N. Imust point out here, Senator, get this $7,000, because we would rather not of these neighborhoodmy problem will be in trying to deal withall $7,000? centers and groups and how doyou distribute Senator COOK. There wouldbe no wayyou could, Mr. Mayor, and regardless of whatyour date is, you could always get $7,100from your cit-v council. It is difficultto get $100,000, but not $7,100. Senator MCGOVERN.Senator Bellmon,any questions I Mayor Gninns. SenatorCook, first may 1 giveyou some figures from your State that were acquired bymy. staff ? We are told by Miss Rollins of the school lunchprogram division, directorate of pupilservices, Kentucky :,,tatei)epartment of Education, thatKentucky requested $1,006,784 for fiscalyear 1972 operations of the specialfood service program ; and for seinereason the Department of Agriculturelists that request,your State's request, as $397,500.There is a variance again that appears in thefigures for your State. Senator COOK. Mr. Chairman,before Senator Bellmon I think it is importantto understand and realize takes over, problem, and also I thinkit is interesting to the significance of the Therefore, I have figuresI would like tonote how far we havecome. staff on the committeeprepared. put into the record thatmy A comparison of thefigures shows that in thesection for the school lunch program, therewas $154.7 rrillion spent in 1968 and the1971 estimate is $225 million; for school lunch in 1968 therewas $4.8 million spent and the 1971 estimateis $356.4 ; and for the breakfast program in 1968 there was $2 millionspent and in 1971 it is estimated as $15 million; for the equipment in1968 there was spent $736,000 in the 1971 estimnate itis $15 million. and Section 6 commodities is feeding had up from $55 million to $64.3 million.Special $20.7 million.no appropriation in 1968 and in. 1971 itis estimated at The summer special feedings, ofwhich weare concerned with today, had no funds at all in1968, and started with $600,000 the 1971 estimatewas set at $81/2 million. in 1969, and I think these figuresare important in that they indicate the that has been made inthis field.. progress Senator McGovERw. a part of the record.*Without objection, those figureswill be made Senator Bellmon. *See Appendixp. 1590. 1524 Senator BELLMON. Thviak you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask tli9 mayors what percent Df the total school lunch money is used for summer feedings in each of your cities. Mayor GIBSON. Senator, I really can't give you that answer precisely. We have about 18 schools to Joe running summer programs this year, as opposed to close to 70 elementary schools. That is a kind of relative percentage, and the summer school program will run close to 8 or 10 weeks. Senator BELLMON. DO you have in Newark available funds for free 43. reduced-cost lunches for children who are in the independent schools ? Mayor GmsoN. Yes, Senator BELLMON. But those programs are run separately from the other preceding programs ? Mayor GIBSON. Yes, sir. Wir AnE PROGRAMS SEPARATE? Senator BELUMGW. Is there some reason why they are separate? Mayor GnisoN. Well, I think the basic reason is that our educational system is operated by a separate board of education. The city itself cioes not run our educational system. 'We havea separate board of education. They have their own budget. We supply a portion of that budget. Another portion conies from the New Jersey State aid to education. So their budget problem is dealing primarily with education. How- ever, this lunch program we are talking about here will deal with a city of Newark operated program dealing specifically or mostly with recreation. Senator BELL3ION. Are you short of funds for the school lunch program for the regular summer school ? Mayor Gmsoisr. No, sir. That is budgeted for the school year. That was part of the regular educational budget that extends and includes the summer program. Senator BELL-MON. Is there, by chalice, any surplus in that fund? Mayor GIBSON. No, sir. We are having a very difficult struggle with my board of education about what they consider an additional need from the city of Newark, and I am saying they are going to pare down the costs, so there is no surplus. We are presently having a fight over $5 million. Senator COOK. They know what it is like to have their costs cut like the Federal Government has to sometimes cut in its programs? Mayor GIBSON. Yes. Senator BELLMON. HOW large a contribution does the city of Newark make to the regular School Lunch Program ? Afayor Ginsolc. It is not contributed for specifically the School Lunch Program. What we do is put in $50 million to $60 milliontins year, $56 million included in the normal educational budgetand the eiluca- tional budget runs approximately $80 million, and the city of New- ark, puts in a large portion of the educational needs for the city, and the school lunch program is part of it, including the summer program. Senator BELLMON. Do you happen to know how much the school system gets from the Federal Government for the School Lunch Program ? 18 1525 Mayor GIBSON. I can't give you the exact figure butwe can provide it.* Senator BELLimix. I would appreciate it. Iam curious why we don't somehow or another blend the two programs, andwe can get it later. Mayor Gribbs, now can you tell us about the situationin Detroit ? DETROIT'S SITUATION SIMILARTO NEWARK Mayor GR111118. It is similar to Newark's situation. In the first place, the board of education is a separate legal entity and operatessepa- rately ; and, second, they have only a few schoolsopen in the summer, and this year it is fewer schools becam4e they havea fiscal problem of great magnitude, because there are ve y few classes being made available in the summer. Thus, the city last summer and thissummer intends to pick up where the school progi am leaves off and feed the youngsters. Thatis why it is most important that the transitions be made right when school is out, and that is why the city of Detroit advancedthe $100,000so we could hang onto the kids and integrate them intoa recreational and summer lunch program without losing them and without the great expense of making it known and finding those .that are hungry, and picking up quickly right at the day the school is out. Senator BELLMON. Do the cities supporta program with these meals at the school facilities, schoolhouses ? Mayor GRIMM No, Senator. Meals are provided mostly atrecrea- tional or community centers throughout the city. As I recall,we have planned that the program be conducted atmore than 200 different sites. Senator BELLMON. Do you have to build separate kitchen facilities? Dr. CLEXTON. It is a cold-lunch program. Mayor Gmans. Box lunch. Dr. CLEXTON. USDA class A lunch. Senator BELLMON. Do you see any reason why these twoprofframs the summer programs and school lanchprogramscoulenot be mero-ed together ? CLEXTON. Senator, in our discussions with USDA officials, the reason they are negative about the special food service programs, the summer lunch program, is not a question of money. The USDA officials told me repeatedly the reason theyare not in favor of this program being expanded is because it was abused in some cities lastyear. They felt the regulations were not adhered to. Our position has been, from the beginning of this discussion: USDA, monitor your programs and regulations so they are adhered to. De- troit adhered to them last year. Don't punish us by not allowing us to have the Program again, when we complied with your regulations, because somebody else abused them. Senator BELLmoisr. I was thinking moreor less from the standpoint of the students who have been accustomed toa school lunch for 9 months a year, going to school and receivinga reduced-cost lunch, and then suddenly th-e school is closed and heis expected to find some other place to go, playground or some other location; he might be considerably confused. *See Appendix 1, p. 1580. 5S-R54-71pt. 6-2 1526 Dr. CLEXTOINT. That is absolutely correct. Many of our community .organizations that we plug in use the school playground as the site for recreational activities for the same kids that go to that school. In fact, in Detroit this summer most of the schools, the buildings themselves, are closed because of lack of funds to pay the janitors and keep the building open, so we just use the playgrounds themselves through a community organization in the neighborhood. Senator BELLMON. I would also like to suggest it might be easier for the program to be funded and administered and be watched over, if this is a problem, to avoid waste, and perhaps some misuse of funds, if it could all bewhat I am saying is have a 12-month program rather than one of 9 months and 3 months and put it all in the same program. Mayor GRIBBS. It could well be done by the board of education, assuming they would be able to finance an "in kind" contribution. Most of our "in kind" contribution is voluntary help. Again, the city budget, as well as the board of education budget, has a serious deficit problem, and thus there will be some resistance. None- theless, last year we jumped in there and took advantage of the program to feed those that had to be fed, and we are continuing to do so this year. If administratively it makes it easier or more efficient. for the board of education to do so, we have no objection at all. Senator MCGOVERN. Will you yield there just a moment ? I wanted to ask Dr. Clexton to comment further on your statement the USDA people have been somewhat negative about the program because of benefici- aries in so-Tie of the citiest and I understood Mayor Gribbs tosay the Department officials urged you to expand the program, and how does that square with what you just said about their being critical ofan expansion of the program ? DETROIT'S PROGRAM WAS MODEL Dr. CLEXTON. They urged Detroit to expand the program because it was, they felt, a model of how to run the program within their regulations. Senator MCGOVERN. Well, is the current cutback in theprogram that produced this crisis that we are talking about here this morningis that a result of USDA's skepticism about theway the program was operated in other cities? Dr. CLEXTON. I can only give you my interpretation of it. It is obviously not due to a lack of money. There are funds in section 32 that have been unused and could havelmen or can be used. The reaction I get from USDA officials, both regional and in Wash- ington, especially in Washington, was that theywere not in support of the proo.ram because of its abuse last summerin various cities. Senaror MCGOVERN. Thatis not like any explanation I haveseen from the Department. The strong impression I have is thatthe Budget Bureau has put a lid on the spending and has told the Department of Agriculture : While the fundswere authorized and appropriated by Congress and are available,as you say, that the Department can't spend them and it is a matter of money; and maybe I am wrong on that, but that is the strong impression I have had of theexplanations that have been made for these cutbacks. In other words, this is the first time I heardany Department of Agriculture person had said that tiet are dissatisfied with the admin- 1527 istration of the program. I thought it was purelya matter of a budget squeeze. Dr. CLEXTON. I was told by Washington USDA officials thatone city abused the regulations to the extent they had made $400,000. Senator Coos.. What city was this ? Dr. CLEXTON. I do not .know. I don't remember. That citywas not identified. WHAT IS REAL USDA REASON ? Senator McGovERN. I think it is important that the committee get to the bottom of this, and perhaps these are the questions thatwe need to take up with the Department next week, because either the budget is squeezed or is not, and, if it is, it is an entirely differentmatter from saying they are dissatisfied with operation of theprogram. But if it is the latter that is at fault, then certainlya city like Detroit or others that are trying to operate this program,as you say, should not be penalized. Mr. NUGENT. May I comment on that ? Senator MCGOVERN. Yes. Mr. NUGENT. As a whole, the Department of Agriculture might be said to be ambivalent toward the special food serviceprogram. Re- gional officials enthusiastically and almost unrestrainedly sold the program. Some Washington officials were dissatisfied with its administration in previous years and took steps which would have cut back the program. And the Federal eminence, gris, the Office of Manage- ment and Budget, strongly opposed the program's expansion for budgetary reasons. Somehow, however, OMB's reluctance to spend apparently was never conveyed to Agriculture's regional officials who were actively selling the program. Our conversations with Edward J. Hekman, administrator of Agri- culture's Food and Nutrition Service, and Herbert Rorex, director of the Service's Child Nutrition Division, show their dissatisfactionto be concentrated on the matter of voluntary services. Forus thi.3 was a crucial issue. As Dr. Clexton indicated earlier, last yeara major portion of our required local contribution was voluntary services.Therp3 was no doubt, even in Agriculture's mind, as to the validity of the claims for voluntary services. Agriculture officials praisedour fecordkeeping in that regard. According to Hekman and Rorex, however, suchwas not the case elsewhere in the country. They indicated that other cities had proposed to use voluntary services as the required local contribution but,once their programs were funded by the Federal Government, omittedany involvement of volunteers. This reduced the size of these cities'programs and left the Federal Government paying the entire east. Agriculture's Inspector General discovered this abuse of theprogram, whichI must repeatdid not occur in Detroit, brought it to Hekman's attention, and urged him to curb the abuse. GUIDELINES CHANGED INSTEAD OF ENFORCED Rather than police the existing, fair, and practical guidelines, Hek- man issued new guidelines which prohibited the consideration of volunteer labor as a portion of the required local contribution. ' 19 1528 If those guidelines had stood,they would have gutted the in Detroit andmany r,thor financially hard-13ressed citi. program however, Agriculture reconsidered Fortunately, now accepts the evaluation of volunteerits position on volunteer matchand local match. services as a contributionto Simultaneously, the Office of had decided arbitrafilyto limitManagement the special food and Budget apparently an annual budget of $20,775,000, and obviouslyservice program to that figure for thesummer portion of the program.somewhat less than Thus, in both the volunteerservices and overall budgetaryaspects of the .03gram, the Federal Government could bedescribed as dis- satisfieqwith any expansion of theprogram. But regional officials obviouslywere satisfied with the program; they were urging its rapid andsubstantial expansion. Knowing that the special foodservice program had cash surpluses on hand ae the close of previous fiscalyears, regional Agriculture officials aggressively sold theprogram, thus to insure that money available this year would be entirelyused. Let me read to you,very briefly, from a memorandum from the Chicago regional supervisor sponsors : of child nutritionprograms to potential * * * we want to reach summer programs or day caremany centers more which children. Do you know ofany non-profit ance with food costs? Cash reimbursement,will 1;e in need of financial assist- are provided, along with technical assistanceas well as federally donate0 foods, of any, Please contact the USDA ** * and guidance * * * Ifyou know Such zealousness in but I think Agriculturean attemptpicked to feed poor youth iscommendable, oversold the program. up a little too much momentum and Just how much the Departmentoversold theprogram is virtually impossible to say. The problemis similar to that of wrestle an elephant; you can't quite get on top of thea mousewhole trying to The difficulty appears to bein Agriculture's thing. porting system. I didn'tcome here to be criticalmanagement of the Department and re- all we are trying to do is feedour -0, oung people. But we have been ; able to determine the dimensionof the problem. un- ACCURATE COST FIGURESUNAVAILABLE The problem first surfaced the Conference of Mayors 10 days ago, whilewe were attending that it would be financiallyin Philadelphia, whenAgriculture revealed upon levels. At the Conferenceunable to fundprograms at the agreed- throughout the country and and since, we Faye contactedmayors of education to determinehave been in touch with Statedepartments ures, nor do we seem able tothe aggregate need. Wecan't get those fig- The $46.9 million figureget them from Agriculture. total need for the countrywe used today as an approximationof the ments of the Food and Nutritionwas developed by contrasting variousdoen- figures with information Service, and further comparingthose aroimd the country. -feceived from mayors' officesand statehouses 20 1529 And the $46.9 million is not crepancies a re being discovered.an all-inclusive figure ; evenmore dis- cy, which Mayor Gribbs mentionedFor forexample, the $600,000 discrepan- this morning ; it is not included in Kentucky, came to light only Nobody seems to have the the $46.9 million. problem is, but the least correct figures. I don't know whatthe demand for the we can do is get the figures sowe know the full that, from whatprogram. Then, if funds are insufficient,say so. But And as one finalwe point, have Mr.heard, does not appear to be thecase. the Federal Government gatherChairman, I would like tosuggest that June, so that this sort of information wellprior to gram in the streetswe might and moreplaygrounds. effectively plan and implementthe pro- best time to plan forsummer 1972. Perhaps this fall would be the Senator MCGOVERN. Iagree. I cannot understand how the cities be expected to do their jobsand administer can have no idea. how much programs effectively if they grams are to start. And Imoney would willlike be available until the day thepro- that we find out whether to say that I consider it important grams is a shortage ofour problem over thesummer feeding pro- partment is just dissatisfied.money, a budget squeeze, or whetherthe De- I think, Mayor Gribbsand Mayor Gibson, ifyou can furnish to the committeeany copies of correspondenceyou have that will indicate the efforton the part of the Department of Agricultureto expand this program so we get some indicationof whether pledges whether the citieswere urged to move ahead were made and be important toput it in the record*. Is it possibleon this, I think it would spondenCe can be given ? that such corre- VERBAL PLEDGES HARDTO DOCUMENT Mayor GIBSON. What however, I would likeweto pointhave inout writing that we will be glad toyrovide; munications have been verbal many of the urging com- ings, and I find that telephone calls and instructionsat meet- already know, sometimes whenyou try to document things you exist. you will end up very short because thoseletters don't Senator MCGOVERN. There isno question you were urged by regional officials of the Departmentof Agriculture to expandthis program substantially thissummer and then a few days agowere told that funds were not available that is substantiallyrighi, ? Mayor Granns. ?That iscorrect, Senato-. In Clexton advisesme, most of the conversationsour case as well, Dr. or in conference, very little in writing. were over the telephone to present. What we have we will be pleased Senator McGovERN. SenatorBellmon, I didn't Senator BELL3roiv. I haveone other line. I ammean curious to hold whatthe floor. the attitude of the USDA isregarding theuse of 0E0 guidelines for volunteer services, and doyou have any knowledge of whether these two agenciesare generally using the same guidelines ?or not *See Appendix 1, p. 1579. 21 15311

Mr. %rm. Again,I cannot speak definitivelyabout that. How- ever, I believe they arenow using the same guidelinesand guidelines which, by the way, will apparently be applied governmentwide.We recently received fromthe Office of Managementand Budgeta draft copy of principles for the determinationof "in kind" contributions and local shares of Federalprograms. That was dated June 10, this year. That statement of principles comingfrom OMB indicates that voluntary services will beincluded.

NEED ONE STANDARDGUIDELINE

Senator Biumox. Itseems if we had just one standardset of guidelines for all Federalagencies, it might. getaway from criticism that was raised t kit t he program has been abused.It could bewe are using di fferent sta nda rds t o eviduate t he services. 31r. NIAIENT. OMBseems to be in the process of doing it, Senator. Assistant Director DwightInk, there, is developing it. Senator Brwtos. I think itmight be worthy of thecommittee's determining, to make certainOE0 and USDAare together in the deal. Senator McGovratx. Yes. Senator BELLMON. Mr. Chairman,those are all the questionsI have. Senator McGovraN, MayorGribbe. Mayor GRIM. Mr. ChaIrman,I have been handedtwo communications that I would liketo call to your attention,at least three paragraphs ofone, a letter from R. J. Nelson, Supervisorof Child Nutri- tion Program, headlined:"Subject: Summer Programs,"and it is to potential sponsors, Special FoodService Programs. Unfortunately. the Minn rtmont nf Anvinislinrw. 1.-1-:a_2 _ 1531

Senator Mc Gomm. The two final witnesses are Mr.Robles of Los Angeles and Mr. Koplan of San Antonio, two programadministrators, and we are very anxious to hear from them rrw. Mr. Robles, do you want to lead it off?

STATEMENT OP ARNOLD ROBLES, PROGRAMADMINISTRATOR, LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CAM,

Mr. Ronms. I, too, was in receipt of the letter. Icalled the number and I spoke to a representative of Mr. Nelson and wasushered to a name in Washington, USDA,and then sent to regional USDA, San Francisco. This was approximately the first part of April that I was inreceipt of the letter, it sounded so good that I made a numberof phone calls, and it was indicated to me that USDA regionalwanted to become associated with the program in Los Angeles County.

CITIES UNIFIER FOR COMMON CAUSE

I took a testing of the communities within Los AngelesCounty, of which we have 77 incorporated cities. Much to my amazement, this was one of the few times that mostof these cities all unified themselves behind one common cense. I then contacted USDA again, regional, and said: Yes, we were definitely interested; yes, we wanted to do something about it. In turn, they suggested that I involve the Department ofEducation, State of California, since they are in receipt of the funds. I contacted Mr. Hemphill ut that time and spoke to his assistant, ,. . 1 1 s 1532

We started out. Wenotified agencies, in front of we spoke to cities, and I have me letters fromvarious programs, suchas the Headstart program, Mexicanprogram, universities, et up--this cetera. Wesoon totaled was on May 21we totaledour figures, and they to 272,000 plus. came up I contacted Mr.Bradley. Thiswas on May 26. 1 have said: Dear Mr. Robles: an answer. He Thank you for callingFriday to giNe an up-to-date on your anticipated estimate of the participants summer feedingprogram. It Is obvious excellent job of you have done mi promoting thisprogram since present estimates tkipation of 273,000 indicate a par- children per day. Wehave advisedour Washington, D.C., otlice of thisparticipation fora lune') and supplement of 30 and 10 at a reimbursementrate cents, respectively, for10 weViiti, whichwould run approximately $100.000per day or million for the entire funds situationwill he made, summer program. A reviewof the aml they will adviseus as soon as pwslide. Now. thatWIN May N. Wewere hoping to start the middle of Jmie, but program in the we concede that. timewas running short. I tinued to callMr. Bradley con- to attempt to obtainan answer. He couldn't al yeme one. He suggested thatI contact, Mr.Rorexand this USDA, Washington. wes on June 1 I spoke to Mr.Rorex, asking himfor a commitment. on funds. Ile saidhe did not have the gertip. I said: fund commitmentsat fin- Well, I am involved with 273,000 units, and I needsome kind of answer formy people. What wouldyou do if you were inmy shoes?

WHAT USDA S.110To Do ! 1533

Department of Education said: We have already committed foron- going programs$200,00q..Alithq $600,000.--leavinga remainder for the summer programs for thetilte of California of $203,000, which would be about 2 days' oPeratiolig for our program alone in the county of Los Angeles. We are In dire hee4 and we do need help. Thank you. Senator 'MCGOVERN. Than): 3r,snil very pinch, Mr. Robles. I think before we question you, Ivo scIll ilettr Mr. I(-oplan's statement andcome back to you.

STATEMENT OF EDWAI1P 0041, i'llOGRAM ADMINISTRATOR, CM of Aram Trc,

Mr. v. Thank Yiiu.)111, Chaironin. The city of San Antonio has been involved in a Progralui for the younosters in the summertime in one form or alintlwr since 1968, and funhding sources have been OEO for the 196S Ngram, and for 1969we were able to work out some negotiutiw W/th l'SDA for expanding theprogram, but our program ruts al WagS V°tie of just providina the food supplement to the youngstelOV'e hiJ ilever felt thatwecoilldget into the financial commitment of.brovidWIlie noon meal and two fimil supplements of the more ambitious pryatus. This year we began negotiatlos with the Department of Agricul- ture on our standard suPplobent In'ogram in February. I madea visit to the regional office at 111t we discussed the possibility of the city of San AntonioenterIng into a noon meal type of arrange- L ;mt. The question of how nnieli tlunepartinent would provide for this moo! noinn ii nh1111\..clit,fi../1 fim.1 1534

PHONE CONVERSATIONSGIVE ASSITRANCE I was in a quandary as to whetherto apply for the iimd cookiesor apply for the standard milk noon meal ; and tSDA,again in conversation, assuredus that the a phone noon meal. money would be availablefor the I wls incontact with the Youth Coordinatorof the city of homa City,Mr. Roosevelt Okla- Turner, and headvisedine of guidelines that he had fromUSDA that spelled out this 80-20 situationand the fluestion ofinkind. He sentme a copy of this, and which these guidelines were dated May 18 andwere received in of that month. my dice the latterpart Senator McGann.Maywe have that material?*

GUIDELINES REFERTo OMB CIRCVLAR A-87 Mr, ROMAN.Yes, sir;you may. These guidelines to Office of make reference Management andBudget CircularA-87, which standard circularthat deals with is the stand it. the non-Federalshare,as I under- The city ofSan Antonio felt 20 on, and we had something thento baseour 80- we felt we couldgo with a program and it would noon meal and the supplement cost approximathly$200,000a month, Federal share, tocarry out thisprogram. The Department of Agricultureagainwe had been in telephone communicationwith them and that explained whatour situationwas and cur request would befor approximately said this $200,000a month. They was entirely reasonableand they concurred 1;,... _ is . with it and. i4Iva 1535

The San Antonio Special Food Program will be provided to all children attending the program in the disadvantaged areas at no cost. The City requires financial assistance for the cost of obtaining the food, and operating cost in lieu of reimbursement for meals. The City understands this financial assistance is not to exceed 80 percent of the operating cost of the program. The City of San Antonio also understands for the purpose of determining the 80 percentum factor, that the City will use established standard procedure in conjunction with A-87 as it applies to this program. The overall program operated by the City will be based essentially on operation of the summer '70 program, and there will be approximately 95 neighborhood- based centers with an average daily attendance of 20,000 children. The program will operate from June 7, '71, to August 13, '71. This schedule could be set back one week ; however, the overall operating period will be approximately 50 days, The average cost per meal and supplement have not been let for bid because of the State law and City charter. However, the anticipated food and operational cost wIll be 05 cents per child. The City of San Antonio is exiremely interested in being able to provide this program as outlined in the request for our children.The City feels that it is vitally important to the health and well-being of the children in the summer as well as serving as an important supplement tothe nutritional base given to these children during the year in the School Lunch Program. I must point out because of financial as well as budgetarylimitations, the City of San Antonio can participate in the above outlined programonly if approved for financial assistance on an 80-20 basis. Should you require additional information or statistics on theSan Antonio Program, please contact Edward Koplan, and I am sae that the Department of Agriculture shares my enthusiasm for the positive benefits of this program that this program will provide for the children of San Antonio. Now, based on what we were told by the Department ofAgriculture in a letter of June 4, ,vhich says the San Antonio programwill be approved, I went to the city council and asked that an ordinancebe , .1 , ^AnI _ 1 thAAA AAA . 1.1s.. 1536

We 11, when we received this, we had suppliers whowere sitting there and looking at the program andwe had commitments that we had to make as a city for the full term of the project, and then, basedupon the meeting thatwas held in Philadelphia, at which our mayor was in attendance, the city of San Antonio has had to just pullup on the program and wait and see what is, in fact, going to happen with the legislation. This isour position. Senator McGovERN. Thank youvery much, Mr. Koplan. I hope we can have all of that material, that you referred to, made a part of the record.* Mr. KOPLAN. Yes,you may. Senator MCGOVERN. I want to welcome Senator Cranston,who is now sitting in on the comudttee, being the Senator from California. Mr, Robles,were the families notifiedthat is, children, their fami- liesthat thissummer feeding program would be available on the standard basis for the summer? Mr. ROBLES. Yes, in most of the smalleragencies, notificationwas given to the parents. Senator COOK. Areyou saying that you got out almost 300,000 notices ? Mr. ROBLES. No; I mean in the smaller agencies which involve maybe 20 to 50 to 200 lunches, they notified theparents, not our particular department.

CO3DIMIENTS MADE To ENLARGE PROGRAM

W?, did not a general notification to individuals, butwe did commit ,ourselves to the city parkand recreation department, and 1537

Mr. ROBLES. Yes, and, as you kw- Senator Cranston, lastyear the county of Los Angeles was not invo-;d in the program. It was only after contact by USDA that we became involved. Toour surprise, it just took off. Senator CRANSTON. They specifically toldyou it would be available and you should notify your people that it would be available, is that correct? Mr. ROBLES. Yes; this is the reason we brought together theagen- cies and the other cities and also had USDA make the announcement to them. Senator CuNTsToN. Mr. Koplan, is that true inyour community? Mr. KOPLAN. Yes, sir, that is correct. I might point out, Senator Cranston, it was much harder to sell the established city departments on the practicability of this type of program than it was to sell the various Federal agencies. Now the purchase department and fintmce department and the legal department and all of the rest of the city departments involved in putting it togetherare saying, "I told you so," and maybe it is true. Senator McGovEnx. Mr. Koplan, isn't it going to be that muchmore difficult now, if we cannot restore the promisedmoney, to sell thesc programs in the future or other federally financed programs? Mr. Komor. Well, I think that people whoare opposed to the Fed- eral funding, Senator,can point their finger down the line and say, "Well, you know, this is just anotherone of those things. The cities have been built up to this point andeveryone is ready to expect the program, and then the next thing we know the program is not there."

WiTrum MA'VTPT T .TrQThrrnunrwr 1538

the various citydepartments sat down and said: Well, if we could get that commitment, maybewe can run a part of a program. So we then,our finance people, contacted the Departmentof Agri- culture regional office andsaid ; Ifwe encumbered this $200,000 and don't getany more money, we can stillrun a part of the program. Will you let us do this ? We were told: No, we couldn't do that. We said: Well, if we give a purchase order for thismoney and buy this amount of foodto be delivered ata future date, can we do that ? Wewere told : No, we couldn't do that; it had to be spent on a daily basis as allocatedor would have to go back to the Treasury. Now, this is sort of likehanginga grape over our head and saying, "Here it is, butyou can't have it." I don't understandthe logic. Senator McGovEnN. I think it, is frustratingto Congress whenwe make these fundsavailableand there isno doubt in my mind that Congress intendedan expansion of thisprogram and made the funds available. For whateverconsolation itmay IA, we share the frustration, or at least I do,very strongly. I amvery much hopeful the Department will reconsiderthis matter and theOffice of Management and Budget will reconsiderit sowe can get on with the Mr. Rom& Senator, program. one of the byproducts of theprogram that we were looking at was: In dealing with the private pames that were going to sector, the com- perform the actualservice, all the employees new were to be from the disadvantagedareas, all subcontracts were to be given to catering firms in the minorityareas, which would help produce fundsfor those particularareas.

FUND Loss CREATESADDITIONAL PROBLEMS Mr. KOPLAN. Senator, we are going to operate our standard recreation program, and we have nothing like Los Angeles. We have 23 different community-based agencies that we work with, the city subcontracts with them for the operation of the program. I have been a youth coorclinator for San Antonio for 4 years and have had to tell many of these agencies, "No, no, no" many times. So what I intend to do, and maybe I shouldn't say this, but I intend to help each agency make direct application to the Department of Agriculture and let the Department of Agriolture tell the agencies "No." I have been telling them "No" for 4 years, and now it is about time that somebody else told them "No."

No Fool) DURING 8-Houn PROGRAM That is what we intend to do. We will still have a program and the youngsters will still be there but without the benefit of food, and our programs operate on an 8-hour day, some of the programs however, start at noon and run into the evening hours, when some of the older children can parLipate ; but ale youngsters, the little children, 6, 7, 8, 10 years old, they come early in the morning and they will stay all day, and if we don't provide something for them to eat, they just won't eat and this is exactly the situation we have. Senator MCGOVERN. Senator Bellmon, any questions ? Senator BELLMON. I would like to raise the question with you gentlemen that Iraised earlier in questioning the mayors, and that is : Does it really help us to have both of these programsthe one for the 9 months of the year and then the summer feeding programsseparately ? The reason I ask this question is because it seems to me to be rather iinnermsary and nerlums inefficient and certainly a disservice tn the 1540

WHEN DOES HUNGER TAKEHOLIDAY?

Mr. Korwc. That wouldcertainly be an ideal situation.As it stands now, it is almost like saying that kidsstop getting hungry when school lets out, unless you apply for funds in thesummer months, and that is not true. We have thesame auestion on Saturdays and Sundayswith USDA. whenwe asked them this question about"What happens to the hunuer of the children on Saturdays and Sundays?" . SLatorBELLMON. Well, Iam not sure that this is a problem just with the USDA, and Iam not so sure that Congress is cognizantof all of the problems, and perhapswe have failed in this kind of authorization in the requirementsthat have to be placedon USDA. Now I would like to askanother question. The city ofLos Angeles has been in the business ofconducting summer recreationalprograms, I amSure, fur many years; is that right? Mr. ROBLES. Yes. Senator BELLMON. Now, priorto the time that USDAgot into the freesummer feeding program, didyou provide the food for the children that participated inthe recreationalprogram ? Mr. Rom. Onlyon special occasiors, not through theUSDA. This is the firstyear the city has become involved in theprogram. Senator BEI,LMON. The feedingaspect is an addvd attractionto the summer recreational program ? Mr. Roam Thatis right. The programs are only to beoffered in the disadvantagedareas. Senator BELLMON. Areyou speaking of the recreationprogram or feeding program ? Mr. ROUES. The feedingprogram in conjunction with therecrea- tionprogram. 1541

Senator CRANSTON. When wereyou first encouraged by theUSDA to get goingon this program ? Mr. Bonus. Aboutsince the first part of April. Senator CRANSTON. Who was it thatspecifically contactedyou and told you of limitson the program? Mr. ROBLES. Iwas contacted by the department southern region, of education of the a Mrs. Van Meter, and at thattime, I receiveda letter from the USDA,which is theone the mayor spoke about. Senator CRANSTON.When wereyou informed the money wouldn't be available afterall ? Mr. ROBLES. About10 days ago. Senator CRANSTON.WhO toldyou that ? Mr. ROBLES. I received a call from Mr. Heinphill's officeMr. Weber calledme and told me at that time they had received$863,000 for the total commitmentto the State of California, of which $600,000had already been committedfor ongoi4programs. I then called Mr. Bradley of USDAregional to confirmthe figure. Senator CRANSTON. How did they explainthe factyou were encouraged toannounce the program ? Mr. ROBLES. Of course Mr. Bradley and Mr.Weber said this isour proportionate amount ofthe $20 million-plus country and, based allocated for the entire on last year's consumption,our share was qs stated. Senator CRANSTON. Didthey explainwhy they thought there would be enough originally money available foryou to run thesummer feedingprogram in Los Angeles ?

PUSHED PROGRAM ToUTILIZE APPROPRIATION

Aro, 154') Senator CRANSTON. 273,000 is not the total is it ? number that need help, Ronr.us. No. Senator CuAws-roN. I Tow many do need help ? l itonLES. eStiniate, t hrough records that EYOA ON er 600.0no. maintains, Senator CuANs-rox. So weare reaching a bit less than halk of the need v even wi t Ii t lie .273,000, andwe are Inelry to get t Roma.-.5. Bight. Senator (71:ANsTo:sr. I have been making to get . genera 1 community I ogetlier With leaders or the m....xienn-Americanleailers of the connininity ILlid part tenlarly to tlV to developa common approach to some of the problems we share which will affect the wholecommunity. I'd be interested in your opinionon what impact you think there may be in the Mexican-American communityif we do not finda way to keep the program going? What will the reactionbe ? IfunT PEOPLE SELDOM FoRGET my. iltoitt,Es. I feel that xith the peopleI have heel). ,,vorkitig With in those areas. they. ofcourse, will1 eel onee again they have been led down 1 be primrose path by the FederalCovernment with prOlnises and statements and theseare not going to be fulfilled. The majority of the this part ien la r programtgroups. he I leadstgrassroots groups that we work with in which are as grassroots art groups. Casa 1fitrvilla groups. ple, it, is hard for thern toas forget. you can getand when you hurt thesepeo- Senator MCGOVERN. Willyou yield there ? I think Mr. ICoplan ought to respond to that same question wh hreferencu to the impact disadvant afred groups in San Antonio. on the lfr. Kort.AN. Senator, it would be difficultfor me to say exactly how many eould possibly be avrilablefor this type of program because I don't have the statistics available, but to giveyou an example, the model neighborhoodarea of the eity has 110.000 people in it, and about 76,000 of thoseare youngsters, so I would say that everv the youngsters that live in that one of progranis. area would certainly qualify ?or these lint more importsmt than that,this is a program that, ina Small Way, We haVe tried toNNork Wit Willi that ito IL and I he specialnut ri- t lona! c(alkiest that we hatl put togetherfor us. The youngstev- have, for a period of -I years. learned that thiswould be available for them. and it has becomean inte.orral part of the prog.ram. 'The children look forward to this :ype of thin., just likethey hmk forward to field trips. It is just that the t programsthe recreation and nutrition pro- gramsjust ean't be divorced fromeaeh other. and this, itseems to me. is what we keep trying to do. 'We keeptrying to say, "Okay, we are 4-ri-inr, to try to solve this problem butforget the rest of the problems."' 1 thillkwe have to look at youngsters asa client group to Serve and We have to serve themas a client group with all of the needs they have. If we charge inand put a tremendousarnowit of emphasis on recreation and forgetthe other aspects, what good will it do What good will it doto have a reercation program if the children

r% 4IL1 1;143 are undernourished and can'ttill:0 part in the sports activities we provide; it does not make sense. So the impact, I think, is like cutting the prograni in half us far as I am concerned. Senator ( 'usxs-ri)N-. What will be the consequence in both of your communities i f the program is pared back in terms of canceling progr!tins !wilt around availability of food; fer example,how many recre- at It Ma 1 programs W.i_ ll 1)011i:111s Calletled Mit ill t 1115 ease? CI JILIMEN NEED 14.1.71.1, 1'HOGRA3LNoT PARTIAL Mr. KovEAN. For the city of San Antonio, no program will be ennuVied beCii u ie fMni Ii;is al ways I well part but not all ot the program. It would be like saying, "We are not going to havesoftball, badullinton, and field trips, but, you can have arts and crafts." The centers will still operate, because the centers have to operate. 'There has to be something; we are not a highl) industrialized city and besides, I don't think you ought to put every youngster in tlie world to work ; I think they ought to have an opportunity to be children for a while. Senator Cit.-Ns-F(4N. They would have softball and the other recreational activities but lack food? Mr. KOPLAN. Yes; the disappointment, I think, would be the big factor, but as far as the operating nrograms, they will operate, because t hey are funded out (if the I)epartment Lubor and will continue to operate. Mr. Rowers. We have saale iwograms that probably will cease to exist. and probably one of the most important ones in our area is the Headstart program. The lleadstart iwograin has no funds for summer operations. They normally discontinue operations for the summer month:-3. But, this N-ear, we felt, with the fend program, that neadstart would operate unaer a volunteer-type organization, provided that they could obtain the food as part of their proo-ram. which was a large factor last summer. It cosi them so touch money la..t summer to operate where they had to buy t In! food in order to exist, that they didn't frel they could do it t his year. So this meaosnit probably for 0,000 youngsters, the Ifeadstart program will not operate this slimmer, along with many GI' the other grassroot s progra ins t hat a re Only in exist enee ring t he school yea rs. Senater CHANsTeN. I have beeu talking to an io 111(.1 ics coach in the ghetto areas here in Washington. who coaches young kids, and the coach says he can't get excellent performance tali of the kids up Ii, t heir full capacity because of .their poor diets in a great many cases and, in some cases. when the diets arc so poor, the kids just. don't have I he enei:gy even to compete. There really is no justification for this in a Nation with F-uch an nbundamp ef food. Thank von very. very much. Senator McGoyEnx. Thank you, Mr. Robles and :Vir. Koplan. We appreciate your testimony. The committee is in recess, subject to the call of the Chair. (Whereupon, at 12. noon, the Select Committee was recessed, to reconvene ac 'ee.call of the Chair.) USDA DECISION TO WITHHOLDFUNDS FOR SECTION 32

WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1971

U.S. SENATE, SELECT COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION AND HUMAN NEEDS, The Select Committee TIT a8hington, D.C. 5302, of the New Senatemet Office at 9 :30 a.m., pursuant to call, inroom McGovern, chairman of the committee,Building, the Honorable George Present : Senators McGovern and presiding. Staff members present : KennethHart. Nancy Am idei, professional staff. Schlossberg, staff director; and, OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATORHART Senator IlArer. The committee willbe in order. The chairman of the committee isdelayed byas all ofus discover the evils as well as the goods ofthe telephone system; a loner-distance Pall. He has asked thatwe begin the hearing. While I regretvery much that at the moment I wouldnot be able to introduce the firstgroup of witnesses to Senator McGovern,I am nonetheless delighted that the chance to functionas the chairman. I have The committee welcomes three mony will. I am sure, be useful inpersons persuading from Michiganthe whose testi- hope, the Department of Agricultureto Congressand, I in the pursuit of the goal that aggressively move forward that there be no starvation. Nvf. all make z,peeches about : Insuring I speak these words of welcome Committee for Humati Resourcesto Miss Dorinda Jones of the mayor's ningham, d i rector cif Project Development; Father William Cun- Eleanoe .Tosaitis. Ploa.4e : TOPE, and his assist ant, For the recordbut alsocome for those to t he witness table right in front here. each of the of us who are here this morning I usa that in theitnesses precise, that the committee welcomes ista. dedicatedand have been involved deeply.very Now literal sensecommunity leader. They the meeting, and now to present.I am delighted to be able, first,to open people. They have been the principalto our chairinan three extraordinary supplemental food program. energizeis, really, in Detroit's VOLUNTARV CC'MMIINITV ACTION ISIMPRESSIVE I am just one of many who havebeen enormously impk-essed bythe voluntav community action that thegroups in Detroit have b,-en able to mobilize in getting goods to hungrypeople there. In Detroit, volun- te-rs handle packaging and delivering andtransportation and the !Mt' 1540 numerous other details involved in operating food assistance programs. In_ addition. under the leadership of Father Cuninpiham, Project FOCUS : HOPE organized a sustained effective publicity letter writ- jug campaign toget Federal supoort to continue the supplemental food program and expand the help to more hungry mothers and children. I speak from recent personal experience because part of that campaign of his was directed at inc. The appeal was made very effectively. It persuaded my staff and myself of the importance of their cause. The upshot was that the D -froit supplemental food program got the necess.-.,:y Federal support from 0E0 to continue its operation of distribution for another year but the efforts to get more -food to serve additional mothers and children seemed to get nowhere with the Department of Agriculture. Other areas, we are told,face thesame problent. So, to assure adequate resources, you, Mr. Chairman, and I joined in proposing a special amendment to authorize the Secretar3r of Agri- culture to spend an additional $20 million from section 32 funds for supplemental food programs this year: $16 million in the agricultural appropriation bill. There is $::;i; million. there. The Senate and the House promptly acted on passage of the bill. Tlie bills were signed into law the end of Julie. Hopefidly this:I dc; rail funding authority willeasethe food problems in areas ham"ait b.y inflation and unemployment. Many people in need repot' -diy are being miseed by ongoing food and welfare piograms. Certainly the tighter food stamp regulations are bound to work hardships on niany families with young children. I do now urge h.ut. theDepartment of Agriculture tiEe this special authority to supply more supplemental food where it is needed. Beyond that, I would like to :..ake this opportunity again to urge -i,hat we proceed to plan realistically for the future so that people who are genuinely in need no longer will be left without help as far as food is concerned, victims of their Government's failure to make delivery on its promises.I am convince(l that t he work of groupslike those we welcome this morning, relire;-4enting the I )etrolt community, are essential ingredients I 17 we are going to get, any answer to tbe question of how to guarantee access io full delivery of Government assistance. I :tin delighted that the committee and Congress en T1 bear from Father Caumingluun, from Miss Jones and from Mrs. josait is. I am proud to preser them to 3,ou. Senator MCG-ovERN. Thank you very much. Senator rt. I apologize for my late arrival. We are pleased to have these witnesses. You may proceed in any way you see fit. STATEMENT OF REV. WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, DIRECTOR, FOCUS: HOPEDETROIT Reverend CUNNING] I AM. Thank you, first, Senator Tfart for time support you have given us in Detroit. Senator McGovern,t1.3program called supplemental food and supplemental feeding program is one the name of which we have somewhat changed. Many public people in the Detroit area see this as surplus food. In order to underscore the real purpose of the program, we have called it in the Detroit area the food prescription program. 37 1547 Essentially it is a medical program. It is under the direction of clinics in the Detroit area. The food, therefore, is medically prescribed, and it should not be read then as simply a food surplus or supplemental food program in that sense. 1 am pa irrfully aware of the food nt.t.ds of schoohtge children, of the elderly, of the working poor, and of the unemployed in oar community. It is impossible to pick out, a part,i(.illar grottp as the hungry group in our Detroit area. We cannot TI,4Y ,,urselvc.,, to select the deserving poor, or to program conditions and requ retnev. before a hungry man can eat. Our group maintains thatand I think this is an important considerationfood. like warmth, clothing, housing, medicine, and dignity, are inalienable rights of all human beings. We acknw. /ledge that for thousands of years the world lacked food, and men built protective devices, in the words of Margaret Mead: "To shield himself from viewing the miseries of the starving." cotIvr_AINTAINS r A MONSTROUS IMMORALITY" :Cow that in this country food spills from the wealth of our Nation, and we restrict huge sources of food to keep from inundating the market, it is grossly innnoral that so many millions herenot to speak of our brothers and sisters abroadare starving. The protective callousness that permits shuffling of pilot programs, partial solutions, and gradual successes, maintains a monstrous immorality in this Nation. We are talking specifically here about a program that affects pregnant women, and children through the age of 5. We are particUlarly interested, in this program because it involves irreparable, irreversible effects. In the Detroit area, our nutritionist studies at Hutzel Hospital, and case histories from the Detroit General Hospital pediatrics department, point up the severe need, in a city which has considered itself wealthy, to feed large numbers of people. It is estimatedand conservatively estimatedin the Detroit area that we have 53,000 people in the category of mothers and children under 5 who are severely malnourished. That is a staggering figure. I say it is a modest, estimate,. Yesterday morning, some Detroiters knew that we were .toming here to add.ress ourselves to this tribunal. The bead of pediatrics at Detroit General Hospital called, and she asked me to relay this infor- ination to you : Presently at Detroit General there are three children suffering classic rickets. Slue bad Just spoken With a mother who brought a youngster in from a family of 10. The youngster was 3 years old, suffering from severe rickets. The child was brought in not because of the rickets but because of a laceration. The nurse and the doctor diagnosed the rickets and told the mother: "We have to keep this baby." The mother said, "But all my other kids look funny, too. All of my other kids have legs shaped like that. I don't want this youngster to be any different from the rest of my kids." She related a case among the dozens presently in Detroit General of children suffering from severe anemia. STARVING MOTH ER A ND MALNOURISHED CHILD She talked about a 10-year-old pregnant mother who was visiting her child brought in because the child was suffering !apse of con- sciousness. The motherand, God, this is shockingthe mother was eating the baby's trays. The nurses, lir on discovering the mother was 1548 eating a malnourished liver two trays to child's trays, in theirown shock began to de- This nurse relatedthe room for each meal. they are hungv. to me that nobodycomes to the hospital because into contact withShe said, "IVeare used to that stuff. We onlycome come for other reasons."starving people in thecity of Detroit whenthey One of the great side has been that effects of the prescriptionfeedingprogram p:,ople have come toour nmternity and infantcare clinics to get food, b.2causethey have heard thatthat is the place where can get food allotments. Whenthey come, the doctors you check out, the otherproblems and do considerable and nursescon I-he health of'Detroit's verypoor. things to upgrade 1 want to talkabout how thisprogram succeeded in Detroit why it succeeded.I do not want thisto sound like and description ef somethingthat we made work. a personal, pompous worked in the cityof Detr it was that The way thisprogram the programwas going down the drain onelast nutritionist pleaded that was no budget setupamonstrosity in itselfeitherNovember because there of the foodor delivery of the food. for the storage 30-Por5 ND LOADS FOR PREGNANT WOME The foodconies in cartons weighing nant motherwas being asked to bf.ardupwards of 30 pounds. Apreg- cartonor two or three ifher childrena bus, pick up her 30-pound carry these cartons to her were given allotmentsand 3,500 people in the lmme. While theprogram was projected to possibleto pick thosecity of Detroit, itwas impossibleor next, to im- None of us who iscartons up. wife or a pregnant middle classcan conceive of askinga pregnant mother to pickup anything heavier than 5pounds, or even to do he familyshopping witha station wagon. Yet this is what we expected ofpeople because theywere poor. When we receivedthat knowledge,we sent out an appeal to the, thonsands of volunteerswho belong toan organization called FOCUS 1TOPE, which isdedicated to : to the Detroitmaternity andracial infant justice, andwe askedpeople togo records from thecente-..s, which containcare the centers so that all of the pants, be given tous. names of certified partici- IVe called and droveto the honu-s of all the why they werenot picking up their food. participants to inquire No way;no transportation. No The ma jority of instances : Within 3 months' way to pick tip the heavy cartons. 3,500, and presentlytime.that i,rogramgrew to its full projection of our wrists slapped forthe goincr program is beyondits projection. Wehad and we are delivering beyond the 3.500. Weare now at 4.f100, it was failing. surplus commoditiesfrom the program when At the present time, malnourished mothers andour infant eare centers have waitinglists of not be part of this younr.sters throu0-1-1 theage of 5. who can- contacted repeatedly.program. The Department ofAgriculture has been have met with The Government, agenciesin the city of Detroit no response. We asked for 500increase some morithago. We received absolutelyno response from the Department11f Agricul- 3 9 1549 ture. Weare now being told that thereare other programs. As Senator Hart alluded, throughhundreds and hundreds andhundreds of volunteers we lia.re written letters,have requested answers, andwe get back from Agriculturestereotyped answers; actuallymimeographed sheets over several signatures.The same answer : otherprograms. There is an allusion to thestamp program and how it has increased 115 or so percent. in the cityof Detroit. But thevery dates givenand t he mendacity ofthis isappallingthe very datesgiven are those dates when the General Mototsstrike was in effect and when.the TjAW- C TO managed to get Detrcit strikers on the stamp roles. Thoseare the statistics Ixiimg used to justifynot covering starving mothers and kids of our city. I cannot believethat Agriculture does not knowthat. What we are saying about thisDet.-rlit program is that it is building a constituency of andfor the poor. Wenow have 10,000 volunteers, many of them suburbanites, who willnot brook the sidestepping and the lethargyand, inmany cases, the open mendacityof sources which refuse to unleash the Federal thousands starve. richness of this country while We are saying thatpersons have a right to eat if they,are hungry. There need beno other conditions. And a government whichsays that one must justify his right to food ifhe is hungry is morally anach- ronisticin fact, morallyCro-Magnon. We are askingsome specific questions. My report contains and statistics, butwe are asking those specific questions thisexamples, and we feel thatwe must cro back from this tribunalparticularlymorning with the representatives ofthe Department of Agriculture herewith some kind of answer to the constituency ofthe poor in Detroit. WHo JUSTIFIES FEEDING ONESTARVING13 We want to know: Will the Department of Agriculture becom- mitted to sending food to Detroitto feed the 18,000 projected for this year? We can handle that nmnber,and more than that nmnber. The one obstruction remaios the Department ofAgriculture at this point. Will t.hey agree to send supplemcittalfood for the entire 5A,000 of Detroirs 4-stimated needor do they feel that they can justify feeding only 7 percent of our malnourishedand justify the concomitant decisions thar result from that selectivity. morally. Ii want a moralanswer. I do not want a biireaucraticanswer. I do not want a statisticalanswer, I want to know if they feel that they justify feedin, less than those whoneed by our statistics. can Second, will the Department ofAgriculture insure adequate funds for local storage and distributionof supplemental food? We have wit- nessed too manyprograms that have been programed to fail; that come off with bugling and trumpeting of what done, and essential ingredients great things will be Federal funds be provided throughare left out of the program. Or that Opportunity for the year coming. TIEW or the Office of Economic Third, will the Department ofAgriculture include in the foodpre- scription program the variety ofrichly nutritional food currently included in the commodity distributionprogram? Capriciously and arbitrarily Agriculture hascut out of this program scrambledegg mix, 4 0 "i5J0 peanut butterand do thE 3e men andwomen who cross something off a list know what it means to a 4-year-old in the city of Detroit who is hungry, who rips opena box and finds this month there is no peanut butter because somebody hassome slick way of working with another program and saying: "Oh, well, that is provided in other programs." It is not provided in another program for this kid. All ofthe commodities are needed; all are wanted. EVEN THE HUNGRY SIIARE THEIR FOOD For instance, can we take a hard look at the authorizationrates ? Why can't a mother have eight cans ofmeat instead of one car of meat? Who is going to quibble about the fact that she isoroino-to feed somebody else over the age of 5 with that cannedmeat ?'Wht-C, in this room would have ushered th--.t 16-year-old pregnant mother out of the hospital room when shewas eating her starving kid's food? Or would we all have done what the nurses didbring another tray ? Who is going to say : "Are you against any of theseprog-rams on the basis that some of this food is being shared by hungry peoDle?" Finally, will the Department of Agriculture withdraw itsrecent exclusion of preschool childrenages 1 through 5 from the supplemental food program? They have announcedthat this is the case across this country. Whether it is thecase in Detroit or not, we plead for the rest of the Nation. The kids 1 through 5 are also starving and theyare included under no otherprogram that we know ofexcept, in some places, the commodity proo-ram. whichwe do not have. It is no longer any goocrto ta'lk about thestamp program. Less than 10 percent of those who are involved in the food prescriptionprogram in Detroit are in the stampprogram. We are tired to pain of havino- people talk to us about the stampprogram. For the most part, onry lower middle class folkscan be on that stamp program, any way you look at it. It shows a crass ignorance of shoppingconditions in our innercity to suggest that the stampprogram there helps anybody at all. I have talked to Agriculture about this. I have saidto them that in the innercity of Detroit, inan area of 250,000 people, v -e now have six chainstores. In the city of Birmingham,we have eight chainstores serving 24.000 people. A&P and Wrigley'sare both closing two more stores. ASA' slates another five stores for closing. "Ewr Timm TAKE Busns" Innercity people whouse stamps have to go to stores where they pay 40 percent more for their groceries, completely off-setting savings of the stamps. When I mentioned this to Agriculture, withwitnesses, we were toldthis is reminiscent of the famous French Queen who helpcd tip off a revolution"Let them take that this can happen. buses." There is no way Let me end by asking you to read these things. Ifthere is anything more we can anss-c-r from the city of Detroit, we would be. glad to. I am afraid if I continue Iam going to lapse into paranoia, because at this point the immorality in this country is justso monstrous that we can no longer live with it. 1551 I must say that I have not known until quite recently, Senator, the extent of this need. I am appalled and I will not restnor will I allow the 10,000 present volunteers of FOCUS : HOPE to restuntil we have a solution. And we are impatient people, because I do not think justice should have any quality of patience. Mrs. Josaitis is far more involved in this than I and, perhaps, she or Mrs. Jones would like to add or subtract. Senator MCGOVERN. Thank you very much, Father Cunningham. Mrs. Josaitis ? STATEMENT OF ELEANOR JOSAITIS, PROGRAM COORDINATOR, FOCUS : HOPEDETROIT Mrs. JosArris. Thfu,k you, Senator. I just caine through five States on vacation in the Smoky Mountains. I saw gorgeous highways, beautiful scenery, and forg-t, all about the problems in Detroit for 5 days. When I get home, I won't forget the problems. I have been delivering food. I have been picking up the mothers. I have been going to a warehouse on Saturday afternoon and have watched them packaging the food and I am very much aware of the fact it is needed. When I am pregnant, the first thing that I am told is : Eat the proper diet. Watch what I pick up. Take care of myself. Eat the right foods. When I pick up the mothers, it makes me painfully aware that when ycai are poor you do not stand a chance. Pick up the 32 pounds of food and carry it home. It is very disturbing. I want the program to continue. I do not want to feed only 7 percent of the folks in Detroit that need it. I want to take care of the 53,000, and the children that are there. I have seen iL I have seen the things that the father has talked about ; about the mother that is eating off the child's tray. I have listened to the woman. When we had the volunteers, we divided hem into groups and asked them to go and pick up the mother .. who had no means of transportation. You cannot put two women in a ear for 3 hours and not have them talk about some of the other problems that they are confronted with. The poor housing, the jobs, ftck of food, the lack of knowledge of where. to go to get the help tha needed. One of the beautiful things about this program is that it does not only take, care of the. welfare mother, the ADC mother, the working poor. It takes care of the uneducated, too. It takes care of the 17-year- old girl that is going to say : "No, I like Coca-Cola so I am going to give my baby Coca-Cola." or "I do not have any money so I will give the baby sugar and water so he will stop crying." When the mother is pregnant and goes into a clinic, she sees a doctor who turns her over to a dietitian, who says : "You need additional food to have a healthy baby." Instead of giving this mother a prescription for an antibiotic, he gives her a food prescription. The mother goes out; she has the prescription in her hand but what will she do withitThere is one industrial warehouse and she lives miles from there. 4 2 1552

VOLUNTEERS MAIZE PROGRAM WOIL:ABLE This is where the volvnteerscome in. The volunteer goes and picks Up the mother, along wik,h hercoupon book, delivers her to the center and takes her back homeagain. The volunteersare people that, No. 1, have time to spare; No.2, have a car ; No. 3, theyare concerned. And they are learning,too. They are learning, perhaps for thefirs time, what it is liketo be poor. They can walk in somebodyelse's shoes or feel a part of helpingsomeone else. They pick up the mother, take her to the center, talkwith her, become involved with her,help her solve some of her otherproblems, and can say to her: "You are really not helping this baby by givingit sugar and, water. You shald the, food. You shoulduse it." take "The baby don't like milk." Pet milk. The older children don't likePet "Do you knowyou could make ice cream out of it ?" "Have you ever madepudding ?" "You know, you should you up." take this child back for shots. I will pick When this volunteer hearsa program will be stopped and cut out because of lack of funds,she becomes very irritated, andshe is the woman that writes the letter. Not thepoor woman ; the woman that has made it. Shesays : "You will not cut out this program."She becomes angry. She is the spokesmanfor the poor. It isan educational process on both sides. Thepoor woman is certainly benefiting by the woman that picks her up and drives her, but is going to understand when the woman that made it hungry or complains. She willthis woman screams aboutstamps or is will be able to go back into theunderstand, and she is thewoman who "Hey, there are hungry people."greater suburban community andsay : It is not like driving downan expressway, where you do notsee anything, but the beautifulscenery. Drive on tside street and see what it is like. As Isay, coming through five States I would have just forgotten all about itbecause it was beautiful. I thought are no problems. But if I take two roads off there see it. the expressway, then I Do WE STARVE CInLDREN AGE2-5 ? That is what I am confronted about it. We do not with in Detroit. Weare concerned feeding :1 r;00 people wantwhen the program to stop. Wecannot talk about be fed. We cannot talk aboutwe know we have 53,000 people that needlo children up to 1, and stopping a program and onlygiving it to tell me that children betweennot giving it to children of 5. Areyou going to care of them ? The school lunch2 and program? 5 are not hungry? Whowill take get under that. They are not eligible to This mother leavesa clinic after she talked to the dietitian andhe said : Now,you want a healthy baby, you give himthis, this, and this. She goes out of the hospitaland goes to hercorner store to buy it and she does not have Gerber'sor Heinz to choose from. She does not have meat and vegetable to pick from. Shehas one thing. Shemay be told to pick up a can of Pet Milk. Inthe suburban areasyou can pick up 43 1553 milk for 16 centsa can. In the city, in some can. You will be told to buy ED famil withareas, you pay 26 cents a you have it already mixed with iron in it. In the citystores that is 1 day's supplyratherwater and will pay 69 cents for it price so the mother than the grocer stocking itat a lower do not do this. can take it home and mix it withwater. Now, they %-ould be glad toanswer any questions that I might. Senator MCGOVERN. Thankyou very much, Mrs. Josaitis. Now Miss Jones,can we hear from you ? STATEMENT OF DORINDA JONES,MAYOR'S COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RESOURCES, DETROIT Miss JoNEs. Thankyon Senator McGovern. Needless to say, we certainly pressed by Father Cunninghamshare the concern thathas been ex- Detroit who are experiencingand 1Irs. Josaitis for thepeople in nutrition. the problems of bringerand mal- What I have been askedto do is to share with you theprocess by which this program hasworked over the lastye..r. As Father Cun- ningham has said, it hasbeen estimated that thereare approximately 53,000 persons in Detroit,including pi.9.gnantwomen, mothers of infants, and pmschool childrenwho are Li neid ofa high protein diet but are unable to afford thecost necessary to maintainone. At this time, the Mayor'sCommittee for Human Resources ment, the Salvation Army,FOCUS : HOPE, volunteersDevelop- United Presbyterian Women, from the troit maternity and infantthe League of Catholic Women,the De- Federal and private care project and others are combining workers to provide highlyresources along with staff services andvolunteer persons within the city of Detroit.nutritious foods to 3,500 of the53,000 needy This program departments. was set up under the auspices oftwo Federal The Department of Agriculture the Office of Economic provides the high quAlity foods and. tration, handling, and distribution.Opportunity provides the fundsfor adminis- We feel that, the system setup in Detroit has been efficient and.are confident that it can 'be expandedwithout loss of efficiencyor effective- ness. We have learned a lot from theprocess of operating this p,..ogram over the past year that we really did not knowor that we were not sufficiently aware of at the earlyplanning stages of the project. PROBLEMS ARE TWOFOLD The problems aswe see it are twofold : getting the food fied people and getting people to the quali- separately. to the food. I will discuss the procedures All agencies serving the mental food program and therepoor have been informed of the supple- paper as well as neighborhood publications.has been publicity in the dailynews- Word of Lhe program has beendisz-,eminated theough the advisory committees of .MCIIRD, publichealth nurses, welfare social workers, the Visiting -Nurse Association, 'iindother conummitygoups 44 1554 In order to be eligible for the program as structured in Detroit, one must be pregnant or have delivered within 1 year, be declared by a doctor as needing a diet supplemented by high protein food, and be medically indigent. Preschool aged children are also eligible if they meet conditions two and three. Eligibility for the program is determined by medical personnel in. the participating clinics, who write food prescriptions for the individuals and refer them to the program. Arrangements are then made for food pickups, utilizing volunteers to provide transportationif necessary. Food is picked up as prescribed at any .of .several pickup points. The food itself .arrives by boxcar from the Department of Agricul- ture in bulk- form. It is then taken to the warehouse and inventoried. Volunteers then repackage the food into family-sized .packages and it is taken to the distribution points for distribution to persons in the program. As I said before, the system is efficient and effective and could be expanded with little trouble. IIisrowr OF DETROIT PROGRAM Let me discuss now 'a brief history of the program in Detroit. In 1969, the Salvation Army volunteered to provide the resources necessary to distribute USDA. food to patientsin the Detroit, maternity and infant care project who were in need of a nutritionally sound diet but did not have sufficient income to buy the high. protein, foods included within that diet. The Salvation Army operated the program for 1 year and served 500 persons. In 1970, it became obvious that the Salvation Army could no longer carry the burden of the program by itself 'and MCHRD wasrequested to provide funding. I might add that this request came to the mayor's committee after several other possible sources had been explored and found to be unfruitful. The regimml office of the 0E0 granted MCHRD $56,285 to operate a 14-month progrtun serving 3,500 j)ions. The grant year becaffic!, effective on Juiy 1, 1970, and continues through August 31 of this year. We have recently received approval of a $101,000 grant from OEO which will expand the program to serve 10,000-18,000 through August 1972,, dependig upon USDA. willingness to increase the amount of food .available to needy persons in Detroit. FOCUS : HOPE, a nonprofit organi2:ation entered the progrtun in December 1970, providing volunteer services and later serving as the coordinating agency for other volunteers. We feel that there is no question that we have the necessary ma- chinery and expertise to handle an expanded program. lICHRD is geared to handle programs directed to the poor and has been. doing that for a pBriod of more than 6 years. Our experience with the supplemental food program as well as other programs has convinced us that an expanded program can be handled adequately by the agencief_now involved. ia a 1 555 WI DE, COM IVNII Y- BASED Surroirr think itis important that the fact be brought out of the wide, community-based support of this program in Detroit. We have the support. of publie, private, laisiness, and social organizations,many of whom are not directly affected by theprogram but realize how vital a program it, is. Our support comes not. Only front inner city groups but from suburban groups as well. This support. hascome I hrough the magnificent effort of : 1101)E. We, in Detroit, are able, and eager to get on with the task of providing in uch-ni.vded high-protein food to additional needypersons highly vithe-rable to the evils of malnutrition. We recognize the task as an importantone. We hope that others will ronsider it, equallyas important and provide the impetus that will bring a(lditional help to those. in I )etroit who needus. Thank you. Senato.. NfcGoveux. Thank you very nitwit,iss Jones. I want to say to all three of the witnesses that in my opinion it is the kind of humane and conapassnate concern thatyou people and others like you have demonstrated over the past few years that has kept this hunger isAue alive. and eeabled us to make the progresswe have made. G-oodness knows, we Int ve a long ways t(to before anyone is going to be satisfied t hat We won the battle against. hunger, but the gains that have been made, in my opinion, to a great extent can be attrilmted to people like yourselves who kept up this fight and haveseen it firsthand where pogple live. It is most helpful to the committee to get reports of this kind that are presented with so !h personal insight and force. We want to thank you for your testimony. There are just, a couple of questions I wanted to direct. beforewe call Senator Magimsz,n, who is here to testifyon another aspect of this program. Of the estimAed 53,000 people that N-ou referred to, Father Cimningham, have any of these actually been declared eligible for the program? That is, have been declaredas eligible recipients? I am not quite clear Imw. that 53,000 figurewas arrived at. 'Reverend CI.IN NI NOM% M. First. of all, the 53,000 figure was arrived at through the lleadstart program originally ; the numbers of children who were part of that program in its early stages in Detroit.. That 53,000, therefore, is, as I stated, Senator, a very eonservative ostimate. At the present time thereare waiting lists at all our maternity and infant care centers or vooph, wh,) have been .certiedOr people who wish to bo certified but who cannot. receive food. There are hea If It centers in t he cif y of Detroit, clinics and hospitals one of our ntajor hospitals in the city, the Detroit General that cannot cert i fy. There are innercity do, tors who would like to eerti fy. There are tloctors in what might be called thepoor communities sulmrban to Det reit who wonld like to certify people who the:. know to be very poor and malnutritioned and eoula well be ecrtAied for the program. We cannot do that. 1.5.56 Senator McChwEaN. You are actually turning away people whoyou mow are eligible? CAN NOT I NeLunu.TI I EnE Is No Foon Reverend CUNN INort.tm. We are putting people on waiting lists, but we are turnher away. There are, as I say, some very angry people in hosi)ita is and clinics in Detroit, who feel they should lw part' of the program. We cannot include them bOCaitSe WO (10 lit ve I he rood. Senator McGovrkx. Tlw argument is often presented as you know, that the food stamp programsupposed to cover people that we cannot reach with this program. 1tal:e it from what all of you said here this morning that that simply doessi't work out. M praet ice in reaehing tile very poor partic. larly. Reverend ClUN NINti J IA M. ,I am perpetually amazed by !am- ple who talk of the food stamp, gram in terms of their inexperience. I ineludcA a longer st ndy for yon--it is not in this report--which surveys the stores in the city of Detroit following the riot, of 1967. That, study has been made more current; and with eaeh restudy of that, survey of stores in the city of Detroit, the picture becomes more bleak. We are working on that and hope to do something about it. The head of the Economies Department of the University of Detroit, who is a member of the statisticians' imion, which I addresseda year ago, heard me talk on the stamp program, and I mentioned this fact that, I mention t9 so many others: Stamps in the city of Detroit lose any kind of effect of subsidizing-the_ poor uLan:s (Whir because he has to pay so much more for his groeeries in that, city, because tile landlocked pow: can go nowhere else but to the smaller independent stores where they, for whatever reasons one might hear--most of them mythshave to pay 40 percent more for their gro(!e ries. Senator McGovErm. Which has the effect of cancel iug out the bonus. Reverend CUNNINGHAM. Completely. I want to say, this person- -she won the support of the stat isticians said : "So what? They did not, pay for the stamps what, the groceries areorth anyway, so why shouldn't, they have to pay more for the groceries?" It. is this kind of logic that, leaves one wondering about. the Afad-1 Tatter society that we are living in. I am waiting for rabbits to start talking with this kind of logic. This is what we get from USDA. Senator 14T;oveaN. You made reference to the need for more money for storage 11'141 distributi, n. Supposing the Department. aclually came up with mere food. Thnt. is, if food input at least. were subst.ant ially increased. Ciadd Detroit find the money for storage and distribution ? Reverend (71-NNI Nei IAM. Detroit currently has---and will have for the next year--suflicient funds to handle up to 16,000 units. Let me say I ran prorn;se that FOCUS HOPE will handle it with local funds. with anythieg we can get our hends On, including the very rich re- Soil roelz ot. vohmteers, ,who have, at this point, put 60,(00 hours into this program. ..--;enat( McGoVERN. So the tlity-t nrgent thing is to gel the food. 4 7 1557

1.7.S11.1. MusT CommiTFool) ALT, Reverend CuNNINWL1M. Department of AgrieultureWe can handleany amount of -food thatthe as a right in justice. eau give us. But whatwe are demanding as an inalienable right ofthe poor, is that I his food committedfrom Agriculturetoday to feed all we have Senator McGovEnx.There is no qiwst ionin my mind thatthe 5000. intent of theC(mgress iiihis legislation it was the rodaccd, whichwas p;ISSed by Congress,that Senator Hartand 1 $20 hit lion, niRlthat_ it was intended to providean zuhlitional supphmentel foodneeds in that that fund beused to provide I thu goingo be very anxiousareas to precisely like I heDetroit situation. to about how they see what Departmentollieials have We do want are interpreting theact. to thank pal. .1 wishwe had 1 inie formore yiestions, but your entirereport will be read andstudied by the .f am very hopt.iiithat -ihrough this committee. loose additionalsupport. hearing todaywe can break Mrs. jos.wris. Whenwe talk about food very few pii,N,s that people stamps in Detroit.there v re Seeond, if they on stamps ean go toI)hIiChaSe their stamps. to get the most torpay their the high prices forthe stamps andthey want dollar, they willget a jitney servik.:and pay to i.45 to take them intosuburban areas toget better buys. The hm there is thatthe stores wouldnot honor the food prob- Woman goes all through thecheckout line and thenstamps, so the Senator McGoyFlix.Why don't they has know theycan he honored at any storehonor the foodstamps? You by the Deparinent.of Agriculture. that is certified forthe program Mrs JosArris. Th,_!yare not honored in the suburban something weare wm.king on right stores. That is supermarkets where now. As a matter of fact,larger tion to them. you can get the hest bargains,will payno atten- Senator -McGovEnx.Thank you testimony. very much. We appreciateyour Senator Magnuson,we would be pleased to liNir ill any wayyou wish. from you. Proceed STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARREN G. MAGNUSON,U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON Arr. Chairman, members man, i f 1 am permitted, beforeof the winmit.tee,I might say, Mr.Chair- these people leave, thatdid not. hear all of their testimony,but I heard enougliof it. to realize that stamp pi obltm, which is wl-at.I am going to talk tin Seattle as whereyou talked about. about., is thesame in I am going to try andstress to the distinguished Scrith Dakota that the chairman from aim ealleusly that the foodAgriculture Departmentjust insists adamantly everybody. stamp program is "It." Thistakes care of And it just does not. The same problem exists in our town,where we have thelargest unemploymentnow in the United States. Butyou have enough there, too, so I am glad to be ableto follow you. 4 8 7o,4 0--4 1558 lir. Chairman, I want to, this morning, present to this committee a. situation. that you are probably somewhat familiar with but, from what I heard from the Detroit people, it seems to be somewhat typical. I have a statement here, because I want the re-cord to be very clear on this: and if you will bear with me, I will be about 10 minutes with it Senator MeGlovEnN. Proceed in any way you wish, Senator. Senator MAGNUSON. For years, Americans have been hearing that other Americans were suffering from lninger and malnutrition: This con LIII i ttee knows that story well, for it has been compiling theevidence for more than 2 years. This Congress has listened to that story and, as you know, has taken important action to write a new ending to that story. -USDA Itrt-scs To HEAR, FEF:u, ACKNOWLEDGE TIIE MTN But the executive agency charged by Congress with the responsibility of rrioviding an adequate diet to hungry Americansthe De- partment of Agriculturehas apparently nc:, heard that sthry. Nor is it prepared to implement legislation passed byCongress to feed hungry people. Andmost intolerable of allit even refuses to listen to the st-Gry or to acknowledge the existence of hungry people. They just za,y they are not there. I make these critieisms, Mr. Chairman, based on a meeting which I and other members of the Washington congressional delegation had last Thursday in my otlice with Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Lyng. We called Mr. Lyng to my office. Mr. Chairman, to ask that the Department implement Public Law 92-32, passed by Congress on Jniie 30, and, more specifically, to implement section 6 of that law, for which you and Senator Hart are primarily responsible, and the Con- gress approved it. The committee, of course, is fully aware of section 6 of this new law: but, for the sake of a clear record, let me briefly summarize that section. It authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to use $20 million of section 32 fundsand I quote from the law itself : To provide 4 * * an adequnte diet to needy children and low-income persons determined by the Secretary of Agriculture to be suffering, through no fault of their own, from general and continued hunger resulting from insufficient food. That is what you two p`.; in thebill. Furthermore, :11e language ol :-(,etion 6 makes it perfectly clear that. the addition e.food assistance it authorizes can be made available to areas which also have food stamp programs, or to needychildren already participating in t he sehool him ii program. Isploreover, the law also authorizes t he Secretary to pay the administrative costs incurred by State or local agencies which administer this additional food assistance. SECTION 6 Pnovinrs $2( A1mr.m.7, 1.A1r. Chairman, when you and Senator tiart introduced the amend- men --which became section 6to provide the $20 million, youstressed the high unemployment and severe economic conditions in many parts of the country, wh4ch made such assistancc necessary. I support that idea entirely. 4 9 1559 This $20 millionwhich, of course, is only a very minute portion of the $700 million in section 32 .fundsshould be allocated by the Department of Agrieidture to the areas of the highest and mostpro- longed unemployment. And it should be allocated inways that best acconunodate local programs and capabilities. You heard before about capabilities of people to do this. Although the supplemental food program was one of your immediate concerm-, the la iiguage which you. used in writing se,!tion 6 is flexible enongh to authorizea vv. riety of fom.l assistance efforts, if they want to do it. Officia ls inmy State, for example, are drafting proposals to use section 6 hinds to imike the food stamp program available to more families, as wellas to improve and expand existing supplemental feeding efforts with both food packages and food vouchem These supplemental efforts would be directed specifically to assisting pregnant women andyoung children who are especially vulnerable to malnutrition. Mr. Chairman, it was with section 6 of the new law in mind that we asked Air. Lyn g. to meet with us last. week. And it was in an effort to hnpress upon him the need for this additional food n:.sistance only hi our States but in other States that we told him about : That a voluntary food bank program '11 Seattle, organized by churches and supplied by voluntary donations of groceries, is feeding 8,000 persons every week ; That organizers of that program estimate they could feed up to 20,000 needy people every week if they hi.enough food; That, there are 97,000 unempleyed people in the Seattle area, making its current unemployment. rate 15.2 percent, the highest of any of the ISO major labor market areas in the Nation; That there are 164,000 unemployed people in the State, making its unadjusted unemployment level 11.6 percent and its seasonally adjusted rate 12.5 percent; and That visitors from other States tell us they have never visited any other place where foodjust plain ordinary foodwas sucka con- stant concern of so many. In response to these stark facts and our ph as that the Department use the :'-;'20 mill leof section 32 funds authorized for additiend food assistance programs in section 6, Mr. Lyng had two responses. Both negative. US I3A FLATLY 11 EJ EcTs PEE A First, he fhttly rejected our pleas to implement section 6, despite the fact that, it ean be considered no less than a cong, ,ssional mandate for executive action. Second, he expressed the Department's hieini opinion that there are, in fact, no hungry people in my S4:ate who cannot now afford to purchase food stamps. That's an old story, it ? That opinion, Mr. Lyng informed us, was basedupon a Department survey of Washington. Mr. Chairman, to the best of my 1,nowledge, the only USDA otlieI to "survey" my State was one man from the Department's regional office in San Francisco who spent, in Seattle last month, talking to some State people and his ow, ,ple. and probably was sent up with instructions beforehand. I will guaraii- tee that. I cannot prove ibut I will guarantee that it is true if you put him mu oath. 50 1560 The Department apparently assumes that this 2-day visit bv one official to one part of Washington affords it an understandirm- o'f the needs of hungry people in my State, wldch is more complete trian that held by all of the State's elected representatives; its newspapers, which have Actailed the tragedy of hunger in numerous news stories; and its citizens, who write to me daily to express tlir disgust with an adininistration which will not feed hungry people. Mr. Chairman, I reject that assm.-iption. And I reject the Depart- ment's conclusion that the food stamp program alone is ircptif.g or ean meet tlw needs of all the hungry people in my State despite the fact that it is experiencing unemployment starkly reminiscent of the 1930's. As early as 1969, a survey of the food stamp program- prepared, I believe, for this connnitteeestimated that, 164,000 households or about i42.000 individuak were then potentially eligible for the food stamp program. Mr. ( 'ha irman, in 1969 unemployment in Washington State never rose above 5,9 lwrcent. Today, it is 11.6 percent-16.5 in Kings Countyalmost double the 1969 peak. If 164,000 households were potentially eligible for food stamps in 1969, when the unemployment rate was half of the present rate, I should think that about twice as many would be eligible now when unemployment has doubled. And yet. we find that there, are only9o,nuoWashington households or about 263.000 individualsreceiving fond stamps today. Something is wrong. Instead of doubling it, it is now cut to 50 pereent of those receiving it. cce N-T AFFORD TO PARTICIPATE" Furthermore, families which were once using food stamps are now being forced to drop out of the program because they can no longer fford to participate in it. The Seattle Times reported a poll of families using the church-sponsored food hapi:s which showed that 3S percent of them -nad originally been receiving food st:-,!ils but can no longer afford them. Increasingly. the answer given ov hungry people not using food stamps is that tlwy simply cannot afford to buy them. Even those -families able to purchase food stamps find their basic nutritional neeik are not being adequately met. As this committee knows, a family of four receives stamps worth only $106 per :nonth. Yet evell the Department of Agriculture acknowledges that at least $134 per month is needed for an adelnate diet. And that's pretty skimpy. Recipients in Seattle. which has the fourth highest, cost, or living and the, highest unemployment ill the Nation, 11-1 this $106 limit both inadequate and unrealistic. liaising the moat hiy allotint Ili bV only $2 Nvan't belp. FOOD STAMPS. NOT EN01.7(; I I Assistant Seeretarv Lyng also argued in our meeting last Thursday that food stamps are only a diet sni.plement. and should not be viewed as a form of inconw maintenance. I..Tnforttuiatel:, Mr. Chairman, ithe inkist of those semantics, Mr. Lyng overlooked tile fact. that thousands of unemployed people in my State have no "basic diet" to supplement. 51 1561 They start from rothing. Food stampsare their diettheir entire dietapd food. stamps are simply not enouglt, despite the fact that the Washington State food stamp pmgrarn has consistently been praised as a model program. Mr. Chairman that is the conclusion which I and other members of the Washingeon congressional delegation reachedas far back as last December-7 months ago. And for 7 monthswe have been urging the Agriculture Department to acton that fact. In December, we urged the Secretary to expand statewide the food supplement program or the pilot food certificate programeach operating on. a very limited basis ina single county in Washington. In January, the Secretary responded by asserting that the food stamp prcigrain could provide for all hungry Americans. Afterre- peating the same request and receivine- thesame answer from the Derirtment, I sent a member ofmystaff7together witha State welfP re official, to meet with the Administrator of the Department's Food and Nutrition Service. Once more. the Departmentwas urged to expand either the supplement foodproo-ram or the pilot food certificate program. And once more the Depa7rtment refused. The Department, it seems, ha. concludedon the basisof anot.ler survey"that the food certificate program is an ineffectiveone which .should not be expanded. Some officialssay it was a good program with its narrow scope. In fact, the committee knows the Departmentsurvey included only two of the five pilot projects. In May, I joined withmany members of the committee and with .other Senators to protest that the proposed foodstamp regulations would eliminate many needy Washington citizensincludingmany .of the elderlyfrom the aiready inadequate foodstamp program. Also in May, Mr. Chairman, I urged that the fiscalyear 197° . appropriation for the food stampprogram be raised and joined in co- sponsoring your proposed food stamp bill, S. 1778. In 'Tune, I asked the Secretary to solicit specif.crecommendations from the regional officer who made that "2-daysurvey" of Seattle r.; to how additior al food assistance could be made available tomy State. Just a few weeks ago, I joined with other Senatorsto obtain the release of funds for the summer lunchpmgram. Last Thursday I met with Assistant Secretary Lyng. P.L. 92-32 TO NOR HI)1;1" -USDA That afternoon, after the disappointiegmeeI I IP with "Air. Lyng, Senate !:lopted In a mend went to the agrieuihtre appropriations hill, reemphasizing that itwas the intent nf the Congress in passing Public Law 92-32 that $20 million in seetion :If?, fundsbe used to implement commodity distributionprograms in areas where there is excessive unemploymem even if they havc foodst amp programs. And today I have come,re to present once more the case for additional food assistance tr Washington State. You heardthis story before the callousness. I am .ata loss to know what to do about it. Public La w ;12- and especially section 6demonstrates the Con- gress' a wit Pell of these people and its desire to feed them. 1 562 My amendment to the agricultu . e appropriations hill underscores that awarei,,.; and that desire. It is absolukly illtOlCFl)le that the Dep9 rtn lent. of Agriculture refuses to acknowledge these hungry people-9mi refuses to act upon the mandate whieli Congress has given it in the MeGovern-TTart section of Public Law 92-32, which the Senate reaffirmed last Thursday in unanimously passinp- my amendment to the Ap-riculture appropriations bill. They just do not . orn to want to reeop-ilize -facts. They have the food. We have $700 million in section 3'2, 1u11d:4.1 know some of it is allocated but, in these spots, they surely could find nut how they could go ahead and get some food distribution. Last year they had an orange crop failure in Florida because of a freeze. That is the onl time they reached a decision to feed hungry migrant workers -under section 3-2. I say an economic disaster is just as bad as this. This is true in many sections. I was pleased but amazed to hear part of the Detroit story today. suppose you could multiply that all over the country. I appreciate this opportunity to present this record to the committee and T have some statistics and some tragic case histories that indicate the Food Stamp Program is not adequate and I would like permission to put them in the record.* Senator MCGOVERN. Withont objection they will be received. Senator MAo7c-lTsoN. Those are typical. I thank the chairman for his long devotion to this problem under many odds. I have tried to support you every time I can in this matter oil the Senate floor and I jast have to do something about this; if necessary, to present an amendment to my own HEW bill. I know I will have your support and that of the meinlwrs of this commitee to i? wet this enwrLreney. USDA SAT'S IliiEBE TS No Iluxonri But look at the callousness of the Department of Agriculture in saying that there is no hunger, and if there is, let them go to the food stamp program, whether they can afford it or not, when all the facts show that they do not go. Look at the statistics in Seattle. I think we have a challenge to do something about it. I know that you prodded then-i a long time. I have, too. I have attended many conferences with departments in my time -around the Senate and the House, and this with the Secretary is one of the most amazing ones I ever encountered. Instead of sa ing they will fry and see what they can do about it, they just flatly say there is no problem out there, or secoml, if there isdespite all of thesefacts the food stamp program will take eare of it. This is not the fitet at all. I thank you, Mr. Chajrma . Senator MCGOVERN. Sell:d or Magnuson. I want to return the thanks you have extended to this committee to you because thereis no one over the last 21/, years that this committee has been operating whose support was any more consistent Oulu yours in trying to expand these programs. vonflix e., p. 17011. 1503 you will recall whenwe first created this committee backin 196b, that the argument madenot only bysome people in the executive braneh buteven here in the Congresswas that there was not anybody at an in the country whowas hungry. There were particularly bers in the other bodywho just denied it. They Mem- address of anybodywe could ti lid who was hungry.wanted the name and Senator AIAGNUSON. They,-ould takea plane and go clown witha basket and feed them.1Lauglit.(,)-.1 Senator AfcGovi:uN. Atleat :I think faction of the Congressof the we demonstrated to the satis- in the executive branch', States and most of thepeople trition in this dirt. therewas widespread hunger and malnu- lot of it to dealcountry with. of the most painful kind,and we still havea But all I can tellyou is tha',do not thinkwe are ever going to get on top of thisprogram unless you continue the kindof probing and pushing thatyou have undertaken, and I thinkthe rest of us to have to continue inthat vein. It always are going to put an end to lmngerin the richest amazes me why it is so hard larly whenwe have more food than country in the world, particu- have all theseprograms. we know what to do with andwe

WARE I lOUSE FULLLETVOLUNTEERS DisTru NETTE Senator MAGNUSON. Ifwe did not have the food, that wouldbe one thing. Butwe have. There is a warehouseout in Seattle filled with food sittino- there fordistribution. And Ieven told Lyng, who represer4ed Harem---Iguess Hardin did not want tocome. We were going to tell him a few thingsbut he bad a priorengagement. I said : "Even if think it would betoo much to distribute, this you tribute it all free." church group will dis- Senator MCGOVERN. Inother v _wds, if the the food out there,the people there would Department would get distributed. find some way of gettingit Senator MAnNusoN. Thereare volunteers galore to get the job :Senator ArcelovEnzsr. You Im.vethe same situation done. ningham testifiedto. as lieverend Cun- Senator MAGNUSON. Thankyou. I do not want to takemore of your time but I wantedthe opportunity to presentthis. Senator MCGOVPRN.We have two officials herefrom the Depart- ment of Agriculture.You are welcome to sit would like to participate. with the committee ifyou Senator MAGNUSON. Well1 have to 0-0up and .finish KW appropriation witnesses andget that re'.y.'-literewe bill over $:-2 billionfor rehabilitat spending in that spendimr that n, the nutritio.t i)art of it. Weare of the triingson the Department of Rehabilitation.N--(1:-ition is one you ,ieee. It is not only just the physicallyhandicappe-l. And xce cannotget the Departmento release food that That is part ofrehabilitation. have gf)t. Senator McGovEnx. I think on an emergency or disaster hnsisyour point about makino- food availAb'e tain level has where anemploymerit reachesa ce.-- you as a possiblssome pruposal. real merit. It is one I wouldlike to explore with 1.1;64 Senator MAGNU3N. Why not Are we going to keep it there'?Tinder section 32, 1T knowa lot of the funds are allocr.ted, butany humane general council of theDepartment of Agriculture tion 32, finda way to feed people. could, withinsec- Senator McC,"IERN. 1 have no doubt about that. Senator MAGNUSON. If hehad an ounce of humaneness body, if he hasa legal body he could do it. [Laughter.]in his legal Thank you, ...Air. Chairman. Seriator ICGOVERN. Thankyou Senator. Mr. Olsson is D3puty AssistantSecretary of t'U.S. Department of .'8..griculture and Mr.Davis is the Deputy Administratorof Food and NutritioA. Service,a longtime official ih the Department ofAgri- culture. We would be pleasedto hear from you gentlemen.

STATEMENT 'OF DEPUTY ASSISTANTSECRETARY PHILIP OLSSON; ACCOMPANIED BY HOWARD DAVIS,DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. DEPARTMENT OFAGRICULTURE Mr. OLSSON. Mr. Chairman, Iam pleased to have the opportunityto appear this morning to discuss the U.S.Department of Agriculture's supplemental foodprogram. This is a program designedto supply additional supplemental foodsto pregnant women and infants. You had originally askedthe Administrator of .:.heFoqd and Nu- trition Service, Mr. EdwardHekman to be with youthismorning. I am here because Mr. Hekman is keepinga longstanding commitment to address a school food serviceseminal- at Kansas State University. The Deputy Administratorof the Food and Nutrition Service, Howard Davis, is withme this morning. Mr. Yon have particularlyasked for our commentson that sec6on of Public Law 92-32, signedonly 3 weeksago, which authorizes the use of $20 million in fundsfrom section 32 of the .act of August24, 1935, for the supplementalfood program. Last week, during itsconsidera- tion of th,!, fiscal 1912 agricultural,environmental, andco-asumer protection appropriation bill,H.R. 9270, the Senate adoptedan amendment which, if accepted by theHOLIS3 would allow these funds used in additionto other funds in the budget requested to be mental feeding. for supple- The Department's fis.:al1972 appropriation request includes_a total of $16.4 million forsupplemental feeding. This ,amount will allow program to operate at approximately the the are presently 326 projects operating withsame level as.last year. There participants. approximately 200,000

DEPARTMENT QUESTIONS PROGRAM'SEFFI;CTI VENESS The Department hadnot requested funds to expand supplemental feeding in the currentyear because a nurnber of quescions have arisep about the program's effectivenessin achieving its stated goal. There are also valid cv !;itions about the high.costs involved. In view of these questions, the Department has laimchedpilot projects in fiveareas to determine whethera certificate plan allowing the purchase of milk and formula is more effective than the deliveryo commodities. These pilot r- r- 1565 certificate programs are beir.g subjected to intensive analysis and evaluation. To date oue studies indicate that supplemental feeding is not satis- faztorily reaching sufficient numbers of the targetgroup. The additional food is sometimes shared by the whole family rather than used by the mother or infant. The supplemental program often duplicates benefits thatare already being supplied by a USDA family feedingprogram, either food stamps or commodity distribution. Efforts spent expanding the family feeding programs benefit the whole family and providea. far more adequete range of nutritional assistance. The sitpple .,.ental program is cunibersome to 'administer. it is usually operated in eoopenaion with local public health facilities. These facilities often_ do not have the space, and health. personnel do not have the time, to administer the program electively. Although public health officials are entirely in favor of efforts to supply better nutrition to expectant mothers and inftmts. the. demands on their time frequently make it necessary and perhaps more practical for them to refer eligible families to the local family feeding program. DISTRICT PAYING 40% FOR ADMINISTRATION The supplemental food program is alsoexpensve to administer locally. In Washington, D.C., theDistrict government is paying $450,000 to administer a program which delivers commodities valued at, about $1.2 million. Certainly many program drawbacks can be overcome by excellent loual administration. However, supplemental feeding isa less than perfect delivery system. It is not unusual to finda needy expectant mother, sometimes with another infant, expected to lughome a 40- pound pacl, age of Government commodities, perhapson a bus. The whole structure and adequacy of USDA food assistance has changed dramatically since the supplementalprogram was first introduced in late 1968. At that tle the food stamp program was reaching approximately 3 million people with benefits totaling $250 million per year. Today there are morethanthree timesas many food.stamp participants and this year benefits will rise to eight times the fiscal 1969 level. The current budget is over $2billion. In early 1969, there were more than 400 counties without food assistance programs. By mid-1970 all but 10 counties in the country were operating or had requested a food program. In the past 2 years nearly 300 counties have trans rerred from the ee,nmodityprogram to roodsi.,amps, andyet partioi! ation in the cow Aies that remain is 3.7 million, up 200,000 from t1:e 3.5 million who participated in the commodity program. 2 years ap-o. Free and reduced price school lunches reaeliedmore than 7.3 million children this past May,a 3.5 million increase oeer th( 3.8 million needy cbildren who were being reached in the scheolyear ending in June 1969. The administration and tL Congress have shareda commitment to comprehensive expansion of food assistancecomprellensiveexpan- sion to ebrnmate hunger and malnutrition. The delivery systems have 1366 been expanded. We are working to make them even better. These comprehensive delivery .systems help to minimize the need for supplemental delivery systems. USDA DECISION BASED ON CALL STUDY In an effort to find an effective alternative to delivery of supplemental coin!:dity packaoes, USDA_ has initiated five pilot programs testing the us:, of speciar certificates which may be used to purchase milk, formula, and iron fortified cereal. This pilot program w.:Is reviewed in a study led by Dr. David Call of Cornell University. The Cal l study indicates that the certificate program may not be doino- what, we had hoped it would. The study found few statisticallysignifi- cant differences between program participants and cmtrol o-roups. As a result of the Call study, the Department has decided notto expand the certificate program, but will continue the present pilot programs and test further to see if this plan can show significant benefits over a longer ter n. The largest of the pilots operates in Chicago. .Assistant Secretary Lyng recently met with Dr. Deton Brooks Chicao-o's Com- missioner of Human Resources, members of the staff of ''Go-iernor Ogilvie, and other interested people to discuss the study results. Fur- ther analysis of the Chicago pilot project is being planned. Because of the problems we have encountered with commodities, and because the pilot certificate program has not, thus far, offer( ' satisfactory alternative, the Department has decided to continue operate the program at its present level. We do not, at this time intend to Ilr?, the authority provided by section 6 of Public Law 92-32. When a decision is made reo-arding the future course of this program, we shall advise thiscommittee immediately. Senator McGovEuN. :A:yIr. Davis, do you have any comments, or were you here just to respond to questions ? Mr. DAVIS. No, sir ; I am here to respond to questions. Senator MCGOVERN. Mr. Olsson, the question has been raised about the administrative costs of this program. Isn't it true that OEO has been paying most of those costs? Mr. Otzso-N. In some areas, I believe tilat. OEO funds have been pay- .ino- these local administrative costs. enator MCGOVERN. Wherevel there is a food stamp program in operation ; is that not the situation ? Mr. DAVIS. Not in every case, Mr. Chairman, but their funds have been used extensively. Senator MCGOVERN. That has been a formula that has taken the burden off the USDA budget, has it not, in coverino- the costs of the administration? Mr. DAVIS. Well, we. have not providing any administr.,ive funds under this program, to theates and communities. Other Fed- eral funds 0E0 funds. have been used in many instances. Senator MCGOVERN. N;ow, Father Cunningham testified. here awhile ago, and the two women who were. with him, as did Senator Magnu- son, that if they could get food in areas like Detroit and Seattle, they would take care of getting it out. They would find the volunteers in churches and civic groups of various kinds. It seems to ine that it is 1567 aw rimy lord for the.Department to make :1 case that they are going to run into a lot, or adininila rat ive costsin tlw program. I%yr have t he food available and you have acongressional authorization with $2o million available to meet what, seemed to nie tobe a rather broad ran!re of food needs, whydela -you take vdvantage or these local grotip. that are anxiousand willing to go ahead and put this food int () t he hands or hungry peop:c 7sDA I LEAsEo To coopEn.vrE wyntVoLuNTEER GROUrs Mr. 01,ssoN. Stma tor, we are very pleasect to workwith local groups; and where volioiteer act,ivity is of the caliber thatReverend. Cunning- ham described in Detroit, we aro anxious to cooperate. I know that there are similar volunteer groupsin, as Senator Mag- nuson suggested, Seattleand San Diego, Calif., and other places around the country. We do feel that perhapsthe most effective way that these volunteers can assist is in helping withoutreach and expansion o f the basic family food program. The supplemental effort is a sm.tll effort. Itis an effort that creates great problems of administration. ReverendCumiingham described the efforts necessary to Overcome the problem weboth cited in our testimony of the woman expected to lug home thepackage- winch is too heavy. The food stamps, anyone Call carryhome. We feel with the expansion of the food stamp programandit has expwNled-----t hat these prohlems ran be met. Senator McGovvits. But if you are willing to usethese groups for expanding the food distribution operation, I,do not understand the severe limitation on the mountof food that is made av.ailable. How Call even the bestmotivated volunteers, the most compassionatepeople of the kind who testified here today,expand the program if yon hold down the amount of food on such a basis?This is the thing I cannot understand. CrrEs ()Tin:a I'itouit.kms you 14'.:kti 1.Y Mr. Or.ssos. In the supplemental feeding program,the food package is designed to meet the various special needs of aspecial target group. ft is calculated to do that forinfants and pregnant women. A larger package Nvonld meet larer needs; but wefeel that. when you get, into the realm of largerticersds, the family feeding programs can and do meet I hese nerds. This is whatthey have been designed to do, aud this is what we hope thew will achieve. Senator MCGOVERN. Nit recognizingtheir limited amottot of funds, here is $20 million that has beenauthorized and appropriated by the Congress. Why aren't we at leastusing up to that amount that is avail- :toleAdmittedly, it is a mode3t program, butit is even more modest when you do not use it. As I understandit., the money is there and has been impounded; it is not being used inthe way the Congress intended. Mr. OLSSON. I dO not believe thatit has been impounded, sir, but we requested $16.-1 million to continue the programat its present level of openition because of some of theconsiderations that I outlined in my testimony. 52 raS FEur No Nem rye reeenam ESP1NS.ICEV We feel, Mr. Chairman, that this is the only level of opeTat ionthat we can justify on the merits of the program atthe present time. If we felt that it s'honld linv e been expaeded, We would have come to the Congress and requested funds for further expansion. We appreciate the fact that you and Senator Hart feel that there is some need for its expansion. Senator McGovatx. I dc not know how that can even be argued. on heard the testimony of these people here from just two cities. We (mild have brought people in from other parts of the country. How can you really listen to this kind of tPstimony ? Senator Magnuson is a long-experienced, and knowledgeable public servant. He did not come here jut yesterday. He is not a manwho is quick to crusade on something unless there is a basis for it. I thinkhe documented here in the evidc,,ce they presented that they have ades- perate situation in Seattle among unemployed people. Thefact that those people a year ago were living in some degree of comfort, were earning good. money, does not make it any easier to accept the factthat they have bean unemployed now for a considerable period oftime and cannot feed their families. The same thingapplies to these people that we heard about in Detroit. It seems to methe case is clear that there is urgent need there, and to talk about holding back onthis program until real need is demonstrated just misses the whole point. DOESN'T AGREE WITTI IlyrnmetrraTiox OP LAW lfr. OLSSON. Mr. Chairman, there is a supplementalfeeding program for pregnant women and infants operating in theSeattle-King County area. At this time it isauthorized to reach up to 1,500 participants. Currently participation is running somewhat under 500.So there is a mother and infant program operating there. I believe thatSenator Magnuson has suggested that the authority of sectionbe used for purposes going beyond the programsfor mothers end infants. Senator McGovrirs. He quoted from the law,itself, which says in section that the funds are to provide an adequatediet to needy children and low-income persons determined by theSecretary of Agri- eull tire I o I te St I fferi lig through no fault of their ownfrom general tied eontinued hnnger resulting from insufliHent food. I agreewith S01111101' Magnuson tha.. that is rather broad language,where you could use existing authority to expand this pogram. It isperfectly understand- able why pregnant mothers find needy childrenwould lw the target of this program. but it also refers to low-income personswho, through no fault of their own, cue hungry. Mr. OrssoN. I would agree with yon. Senator.that the latiLrnage it s. face is very broad. I do recall that whenSenatorHen. Nvin) was the subcommittee chairman, reported on thislegislation, he referred to this as the program for pregnant womenand infants and indicated that was perhaps t he general intent of the committee. Too DirriCrrx ron SECRETARY To DETERMINE think there is a ftirther problem in the languacre of that section. That is. that it would reqiiire that the SecretaryoeAgriculture make a finding that theselow-income persons are sufi'ering from continued 5 9 15130 hui43.er and malnutrition through no fault of their ow». If I hey are low income and eligible for a food stamp allotment,which, by law. must provide a nutritionally adequato diet, theSecretary would find it very difficult to then say that through no fault of their ownthey were sutTering from hunger. Senator 7.NIcGovEux. Even on that basis, Mr. Ols:-on, wehad testimony here that Detroit luis 53,000people who would qualify, even under the definitions you made of this supplemental food program. I would certainly hope that the Departmentwould take another look at needs like that, befrn.e deciding not to usethe miale. that has been made available. If you have .53,000 people who qualify underthis program in Detroit and you areonly reaching 4,000 or 5,000, that does not seem to me to be a very impressiverecord. We have a rolleall on but I am going to take ust.afew minutes here until the warning bell rings to go into another matterthat all the witnesses have r.-ferred to here tGday, and that is theineffectiveness of the Food Stamp Program in reaching needypeople. NEW FOOD STAMP REGULATIONS I understand the Department is briefing the pressright now on the new regulations. Isn't it afact, Mr. Olsson, that in these final regulations that are now being explained to the press you arestill going to eliminate some 350,000 people who are old or blind ordisabled on the grounds that they are receiving other kinds of benefitsand therefore are not entitled to foodstamps? Mr. Or,ssow. I believeMr. Davis perhaps can conect me onthis, Mr. Chairmanthat the regulations willallow all participants in public assistance programsthat would be aid to theaged, blind, disabled, as well as aid to those with dependentchildrento be eligible for food stamp assistance. Mr. DAvis. That is correct. There would beautomatic eligibility for publics assistance recipients. This is quite a drasticchange from our original proposed regulation. Senator MCGOVERN. Now I run delightedwith that because I was, as you know, very muchdistressed about these initial proposals to knock out the blind and the d'_iabled. I thinkthat is a tremendous improvement over what the Department had originallycontemplated. I wonder, does that include theAFDC families also under that langua.ge? Mr. DAVIS. Yes, Si r. Senator MCGOVERN. Now there is anotherthing that I was very much concerned about in the way the regulations wereinitially presented for consideration, and that is thataccording to our calculations, they had the effect of reducing benefits for some2 million people. Admittedly there are others who would improvetheir situation but a couple million peoplewould be virtually eliminated f-om the program, especially in areaslike New York City. What is the situation with reference to those people? Mr. DAVIS. Well. these things are awfullydifficult to estimate, but according to our best estimates, there are several verypositive elements in the new regulation. No. 1, there have beenconsiderable comments on the fact that there are anumber of people who cannot afford the food stamps. We estimate that under the newregulations, which pro- 60 1570 vide free coupons to those with very little or no income, that there will be approxnnately 900,000 participants WhO Will receive their food stamps free under the new regulation, whore formerly they had to pay a token charge for them. In addition, we antieipate that due to the higher eligibility levels over what. many States now have, that there will be an additional 1.7 million persons eligible for the food -stamp program thitt were irevionsly ineligibleunder our current program, and there will he abont 7 million persons who will receive increased benefits under the new regulation.

PERIIAPS AftwoN Wouhn IZEurivE LEss Now we hasten to add that on the negative there still would be perhaps 'as many as 2 million persons in the, higher eligibility levels that might receive somewhat less than they have under the present program. But on balance, the thrust ofthe new legislation that the Congress enacted, and our new regulations, is to put more emphasis on t'ie very poor, to give increased benefits to very poor, to bring more the poor into the program nnd to bold 'harmless as many present participants as_possible. Senator MCGOVERN. Well, the staff of flue committee estimated on the basis of these original guidelines that there would be some 2 million people. who would probably drop out of the program under these new regulations on the grounds that the cost to them of participating is raised and the level of benefits for them would be reduced, and that the net value would have the effect of making some 2 million people reach a judgment that the program no longer was sufficiently attractive to participate. I wonder if you gentlemen could provide the committee with copies of the new guidelines and the interpretations. You do not happen to have those with you ? Mr. Orsso.N. I regret I do not. We can certainly get them up here very quickly. Mr. DAvis. I have a set that is not necessarily the finalprinted copy with me. Senator McGovERN, I would like very much to see the faial guidelines. We 'are pressed for time here this morning. Mr, DANIS, Those should have been delivered to your office by now, Mr. Chairman. We sent. a special messenger to your office wilTh them. Senator McGovmiN. Well, I do hope that the guidelines would not prove to be disappointing at atime. when 'the Congress has been trying to expand this program. As you know, I tim not happy with the food stamp bill wepassed last year. It did represent. consiaerable improvement over our present program but we lost some of themajor gains that had been written into the Senate version of thelegislation. I hate to predict this, but I am afraid we are still aoing tohave several million people in this country who do not, findthat program a veryworkable one for them. I think the testimony from the witnesses here thismorning will bear that_ out. I am going to have to go to the Senate floor and respond to arollcall that has been in progress about 15 minutes now but wewill look at 1371 these new regulations with great careand perhaps we will want to talk to members of the Department again a,little later on. Mr. OLSSON. We thank youfor the opportunity to appearhere. ,Senator MCGOVERN. I do hopethat, the net result of these hearings this morning will be to promptthe Department, to take anotherclose and searching look at thesupplemental feeding program. I want to say in all candor OW. I do notbelieve the intention that SenatorHart and I had in mind was that theprinciples only of that program becarried out. We intended that as a programto meet the needs ofhungry people and it was our hope that someimagination would be used in the way the prograPit is administered. Mr. OLSSON. I am sure youwill be pleased that Senator Hart'sstaff has arranged for us to meetlater today with ReverendCunningham and his people. I know I ampleased. We do want to workthese problems out. Senator MCGovERN. Maybe youcould take anotlr look atSenator Magnuson's request at the sametime. Thank you very much. The committee is in recess,subject to the call of the Chair. (Whereupon, at 11 :25 a.m., theSelect Committee was recessed, to reconvene at the callof the Cha )

62 APPENDIXES

Appendix 1 ITEMS PERTINENT TOTHE HF ALI/TNG OF ,TUNE25, 3971

Item IMaterial Submittedby the Witnesses I.NYMMI=NOI FROM MAYOR GRIBBS, OFDETROIT CrrY or DETEorr, June 14, 1971. Hon. WILLIAM D. FORD, The HO litie of Representatives,Cannon House Office Building, lVashington, D.C. of a resolution passed on iSaturdayafternoon by DEAR BILL : Attached is a copy Confeeenee of Mayors. As you the ResolutionsCommittee of the United States mo y know, I am amember of the ResolutionsCommittee. Other members of the Committee present and joiningin the unanimous vote are listed on aseparate sheet. Conference is scheduled to considerthis and The entire membership of the this resolution will other resolutions ohWednesday morning ; it is expected that receive the resoundingapproval of the membership. I ampassing it to you in case you wish to useit with respect to tomorrowmorning's meeting with the Education and Labor Conimittee. provided lunches each day for25,000 poor As yen may know, last summerthis we program. This year we arehoping to feed youngsters in Detroit through reauthorizatir a of the 50,000 poor youngsters daily.Essential to this pvogram I Child Nutrition Act of 1966 as youfeel it should be amended. We very much appreciate yourassistance in this matter. lf I or myetaff can be of any assistance to you,please contact me untilWednesday noon in Phila- delphia at the Bellvue-StratfordHotel, 215/735-0700, Room 901. Sincerely, ROMAN S. GRIDRA, Mayor. Crry Or DETROIT, June 14, 1971. Whereas, the Speclal Food ServiceProgram (SPSP) of theDepartinent of Agriculture's .Food and NutritionService has enabled citygovernments to feed daily hundreds of thousands of youngpeople every summer, and Whereas, the SFSP provides manyof these poor youngsterstheir sole nutri- And tious meal each day during the summer,for this programa portionof the Child ,Whereas, the authorizing legislation as of June 30, 1971, and Nutrition Act of 1966 as amendedexpires for fund- Whereas, the Food and NutritionSc:viee now has on hand requests ing of special food programs inthe amount of $31 millionand expects more, and Now, Therefore, be it resolvedthat the United StatesConference of Mayors urges the Congress toimmediately pass authorizinglegislation to extend, subject to modifications, theChild Nutrition Act of 1966, and Be it further resolved thatappropriate action be taken bythe Congress to proride funding equal to the proposedauthorization of $32 million forthe SI SP, and as possi- Be it further resolved that theCongress complete such action as soon ble, in no event later than June30, 1971, so as ro enablethe Nathan's cities to continue to provide nutritiousmeals daily to the Nation's pooryouth. (1573n el 5 8-8 5 4-71--pt. 6-5 1574

MEMBERS OF THE RESOLUTIONS COM MITTEE, U.S. CONFEIMNCE OF MAYORS (Present and voting unanimously for the Special Food Service Program Resolution) Carl IL Stokes, Cleveland, Ohio; Thomas .1. D'Alesandro, III,Baltimore, Mary- land ; Joseph L. Alioto, San Francisco, California ; Lloyd M.Allen, South Bend, Indiana ;Robert B. Blackwell, Highland Park, Michigan ; Frank NV. Burke, Louisville, Kentucky ; John Driggs, l'hoenix, Arizona ; Peter F.Flaherty, Pitts- burgh, Pennsylvania ; Roman S. Gribbs, Detroit,Michigan ; Moon Landrieu, New Orleans, Louisiana ; Paul W. Lattimore, Auburn, NewYork ; Patience S. Latting, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma ; John V. Lindsay, NewYork City, New York ; Henry NV. Maier, Milwaukee, Wisconsin ; Sam Massell,Atlanta, Georgia ; Hans G. Tanzler, Jr., Jacksonville, Florida ; Wesley C. -Uhlman,-Seattle, Wash- ington ; Louie Welch, Hoeston, Texas ; Keven H. White, Iloston,Massachusetts ; Robert M. Wilson, Costa Mesa, California.

CITY OF DETROIT, WASHINGTON OFFICE, July 1,1071. MOH. GEORGE MCGOVERN, Chairman, Select Committee on Nutrition and HumanNeeds,U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR tiEN AToR McGOVERN : When 'Ainyor Ron, on S. Gribbstestified befor the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs on Friday, 25 June 197,., he noted that the total demand for Federal funds to feed poor youththis summer was far in excess of that r.nnounced by the Departmentof Agriculture. Mayor Gribbs said that his staff had estimated the demand to be $30.6 million for summer 1971 and $46.9 million for Fiscal Year 1972.The manner in which those figures were calculated is described below and is herewith submitted for the record as you requested. 1. Begin with two documents (enclosed) obtained from the.Child Nutrition Division of the Food and Nutrition Service of the Department of Agriculture. One, labeled "Sumner," shows in its three columns the state-by-statetotals of programs applied for by 21 May 1971 (column 1), programs applied for between 21. May and 18 June 1971 (column 2), and the total nrograms requested for the JulyAugust portion of summer 1971 (column 3). Also tleluded are marginal notes (not added by Agriculture) indicating specific states' and cities' known requests. The second .document, labeled "Fiscal Year 1972," lists in its third column the total costs, presumably including the amounts for the July Angust portion of summer 1971, for Fiscal Year 1972 of the Special Food Service Program. 2. The FY 1972 paper indicates a total need of $37,630,877, while the summer paper shows a summer need of $26,556,717. The difference between the two is $11.074,160presumably this is the amount Agriculture felt was needed for yen r-round progra ms. 3. Resolve actual inconsistencies between the two documents. For eyample, the FT 72 paper shows Alabama as requesting $397,000 for the whole year, but the suinmer paper shows the State requesting $545,000 lust for July and August. Thus, assuming the summer paper to be true, Alabama must need at least $545,000 for FY 72. When all such inconsistencies are so resolved, the FY 72 total becomes $41.128.857. 4. Resolve probable inconsistencies. The FY 72 paper apparently does not inrinde the applications received between 21 May and 18 June. When these figures are included (as in 3 above), the FY 72 total becomes $42,865,877. This, less the stated summer need of $26,556.717, yields a minimum year-round (non-summer) need of $16,309,160. 5. However. the Agriculture statement of snmmer need is obviously incorrect in many cases. For example. it lists the entire State of Michigan as having requested 8630.000 for JulyAugust 1971. Rut Detroit alone asked_ $1.3 million for this period. Spot checks around the Country uncovered several similar anoma- lies. When correction was made for these known errors. the summer need was calculated to he at least $30,643,615. This, when added to the year-round (non- summer) need of $16.309,160 calculated in 4 above, yields the $46,942,775 ($46.9 million) referred to by Mayor Gribbs. You should be aware, hOwever: that these calculations were completed at-

2 :30 p.m., Thursday, 24 June 1971, . the day before the hearings. Between that 6 4 1575 thne and the start of the hearings at 10 a.m.,25 June 1971, we learned of several million in additional inconsistencies. One such additional inconsistency wasoffered by Mayor Gribbs at the testi- znony. Immediately prior to themeeting we learned from the Kentucky State Department of Education that Kentucky'sFY 72 request was in exeess of $1 million; yet Agriculture showed theState as having requested only $397,000. A final, corrected listing will be supplied as anAddendum to this statement. Also enclosed are two Food and NutritionService documents received by De- troit officials in the course of theiryear-long negotiations with AgricOture over the summer program. You hadasked the dates of various Agriculture pro- nouncements: you v.ill note thatAgriculture's communications are muldted. You will also note the very aggressivelypromotive nature of the letter from the supervisor of child NutritionPrograms to potential sponsors oftunmer feeding programs. This sensible andwell-intentioned concern for reaching the Nation's poor youngsters characterized theseries of contacts between Detroit and Agriculture regional-officepersonnel. Apparently, however, the concern of regional officials is not felt in theFood and Nutrition Service's Washington Office. I trust this information willassist your inrestigations of Agriculture's efforts to feed the Nation's poor youth.If we may be of any further assistance to you, please let me know. Sincerely, WILLTAM M.NIJOENT, Specia/ Assistant to the Mayor. EnclosureS. SUMMER (JULY-AUGUST 1971) FEEDINGPROGRAM UNDER THE SPECIAL FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM INDICATED COST AND DEFICIT, BY STATES

Indicated cost Sampling of Su p9le- known kiddi- Initial 1 mental 2 Totaltional requests State

Northoast: ;52, 000 ;52, 000 Connecticut 22, 400 22, 400 Delaware ... 1, 214, 000 1, 214. 000 Dirtrict of Columbia 78, 180 78, 180 Maine 790, 222 790, 222 ;1,065,81 6 Maryland 199, 507 199, 507 Massachusetts 7, 216 7, 216 New Hampshire 380, 000 380, 000 1,500,000 NewJersey 1, 897, 000 ;2,250,000 h., 147, 000 New York 1, 305. 322 1, 305. 322 Pennsylvania 26, 031 26, 031 Rhode Island 2, 419 2, 419 Vermont 152, 320 152, 320 West Virginia 6, 126, 617 2,250,000 8, 376, 617 2,565,816 Subtotal

Southeast: 25, 000 520,000 545, 000 Alabama 590, 000 590, 000 Florida 1, 360, 000 1, 360, 000 Georgia 588 Kentucky 121,172, 931 Mississippi 270, 000 270 000 PuertoRicoNorth Carolina ...... South Carnlina 800, 000 880100,, 000000 Tennessee 810, COO Virginia Virgin Islands ...... 4,339,503 520,000 4. 859, 503 2.030,000 Subtotal

Midwest: 1, 908, C80 1, 908, 080 Illinois. 75, 078 75, 078 90.000 90, 000 Iowa 636, 600 636. 600 1,330,000 Michigan__ 77,558 77,558 .. Minnesota 393,148 393, 148 Missouri 83. 732 83, 732 Nebraska 5. 800 5, 800 North Dakota_ 181, 759_ 181, 759 ...... Ohio 30, 000 30,000 South Dakota 84, 000 84, 000 .. Wisconsin t 3,665,755 3, 565, 755 1,330,000 Subtotal 15N

SUMMER (1ULY-AUGUST 1971) FEEDING PROGRAM UNDERTI1E SPECIAL FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM INDICATED COST AND DEFICIT, BY STATES-Continued

Indicated cost Samplingof Supple- knownaddi- mental 2 Totaltiondlrequests State Initial t

Southwest: 27, 370 27, 370 Arkansas 320, 600 320, 000 Colorado . 11, 000 Kansa, 11, 000 647, 900 525,000 1,172, 905 Louisiana 45, 336 45, 336 New Mexico 168, 000 420,000 538, 000 Oklahoma _ 115, 000 919,000 Teyas 115, 000 2, 919,000 Subtotal 1,334, 60G 945,000 279, 60-6

Western: 0 Alaska 46, 434 Arizona 46, 434 5,082, 130 2,000,000 . 7,082, 130 California 7, 260 7, 260 Guam 6, OK Hawaii . 6, 000 15, 373 15, 373 Idaho 5, 235 Montana 5, 223 11, 857 11, 857 Nevada . 70, 500 Oregon 70, 500 Samoa, American 18, 500 Utah 18, 500 208, 896 208, 896 212,200 Washington 3, 050 Wyoming 3, 050 2,000,000 1,475, 236 212,200 Subtotal 5,475, 236 000 26,556, 717 3 4,086,893 Total 20,841, 717 5,715,

Submitted by deadline date of May 21, 1971. 2 Submitted between May 22 and June 18, 1971. $ Plus $26,556,717; total known $30,643,615.

FISCAL YEAR 1972-SPECIAL FOOD SERVICE PROGRAMFOR CHILDREN

Funds available tentative projected For fiscal Apportion- Fiscal year year 1971 ment fiscal 1972 pro- operations year 1972 gram costs State

Islortt.aast: 132, 957 232,.000 Connecticut.. 164, 466 98, 358 78, 953 135, 012 Dalawa re 1, 430, 000 District of Columbia 105, 253 112, 253 136, 891 134, 006 141, 692 Maine 731, 037 229, 011 956,1138 Maryland 436, 463 248, 512 719, 507 Massachusetts 87, 347 77, 607 63, 728 New Hampshire 415, 954 286, 850 758, 000 New Jersey 652, 166 857, 337 2, 577, 000 New York 304, 761 767, 823 Z 021, 710 Pennsylvania 82, 745 99, 537 ,'65, 263 Rhode Islahd _ 56, 858 84, 082 59, 555 Vermont _ 349, 927 380, 947 284, 320 West Virginia 4, 222, 171 3, 569, 540 9, 474, 825 Subtotal _

Southeast: 233, 425 816, 003 297, 000 Alabama. 784, 161 620, 209 1, 022, 112 Florida 1, 206, 321 885, 483 2, 701, 024 Georgia ?.75, 108 665, 43a 397, 588 Kentucky_ _ . 259, 528 795, 224 336, 931 Mississippi 994. 301 1, 116, 064 911, 152 North Caroliaa 250, 001 3114, 300 Puerto Rico 450, 828 701, 090 758, 784 South Carolina I, 025, 456 784, 560 1, 512, 652 Tennessee_. 653, 092 643, 937 1, 583, 504 Vitilinia 16, 442 4, 382 21, 084 Virgin Islands 6, 148, 663 7, 421, 690 9, 641, 831 Subtotal 66 1577

Continued FISCAL YEAR 1972-SPECIAL FOODSERVICE PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN-

Funds available tentative projected

For fiscal Apportion- Fiscal year year 1971 ment fisca. 1972 pros operations year 1972 gram cost- State

Midwest: 1, 586, 490 627, 090 7, 587, 280 Illinois Vi, 737 347. 392 542, 526 I nclia na 231, 605 318, 165 286, 800 Iowa _ 867, 908 530, 132 982. 600 Michiran 596. 295 343, 488 841, 434 Minnesota 850, 6718 595, 038 1, 029, 148 Missouri 175, 717 190, 481 175, 732 Nebraska 46, 794 138, 310 41, 800 North Dakota 860, 197 629, 820 1, 077, 759 Ohio 35, 061 155, 445 50. 400 South Dakula 414, 100 293, 622 704, 000 Wisconsin 6, OP., 543 4, 078, 984 8,319,479 Subtotal _ _ __....

Southwest: 174, 229 522, 579 264, 090 Arimnsas. 202, 750 1:82, 941 320, OM Colorado 116, 023 713,127 III, 000 Kansas 775, 691 736, 524 I, 127, 900 . Louisiana 150, 636 190, 414 207, 856 I New Mexico 320, 660 357, 641 393, 220 Oklahoma 1, 264, 278 1, 492, 707 655, 000 Texas 3, 004, 277 3, 695, 943 3, 479, 046 Sut,total _ ., Western: 9, 375 68, 525 4, 000 Alaska 154. 244 195, 570 244, 434 Arizona 737, 440 853, 437 5, 541, 950 California 5, 909 9, 462 13, 460 Guam 81, 09: 87, 934 34, 000 Hawaii 46, 786 103. 171 74, 237 Idaho_ 36, 655 11.:_., 811 51, 636 Montaaa 52, 553 62, 584 55, 417 Nevada_ 147, 391 143, 790 194, 564 Oregon 2, 133 3, 693 Samoa, American 23, 607 98, 5!...9 42, 796 Utah 231, 510 189, 961 434, 552 Washington : 4, 351 71, 680 24, 650 Wyoming 1, 567, 940 2, 017, 853 6, 715, 696 Subtotal 21525, 594 20, 775, 010 37, 630, 877 Total -

SPECIAL FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM-KNOWNVOLUME OF REQUts S

Balance of Total need July-August fisc;.i year fiscal year 1971 1972 1972

Northeast region: $52, 000 $180, 000 $232, 000 Connecticut 22, 400 113, 612 136, 012 Delaware 1, 214, 000 216, 000 1, 430, 000 Distrie, of Columbia 78, 180 63, 512 141, 692 Maine 1, 000, 000 165, 816 1, 165, 816 MARYLAND 199, 507 520, 000 719, 507 Massachusetts 7, 216 56, 512 63, 728 New Hampshire 1.700, 000 408, 000 2, 108, 000 NEW JERSEY 4, 147, 000 680, 000 4, 827, 000 New York 1, 305, 322 716, 388 2, 021, 710 Pennsylvania 26, 031 39, 232 65, 263 Rhode Island 2, 419 57, 316 59, 555 Vermont 152, 320 132, 000 284, 320 West Virginia 9, 906, 395 3, 348. ''08 13, 254, 603 Regional total 67 1

SPECIAL FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM KNOWN VOLLINIFOF REQUESTS Continued

Balance of Total need July-August fiscal year fiscal year 1971 1972 1972

Southeast region: Alabama 545, 000 372, 000 917,000 Florida 590. 300 432, 112 1, 022, 112 Georgia* I, 360, 090 1, 341, 024 2. 701, 024 KENTUCKY 730. 784 276, 000 1 1, 006, 874 Mississippi . 172, 931 164, 000 336,931 North Carolina 270,000 641, 152 911, 152 Puerto Rico 0 0 0 Jouth Carolina* 189. 984 568, 800 758, 784 Tennessee 80, 000 712, 652 1. 512, G52 VIRGINIA* Z. 500, 000 773, 504 3, 273, 504 Vi run Islands' 0 21. 084 21,084 ...... _ . . _ - Regional total 7. 1 58, 699 5, 302, 32d 12. 461, 027 Midwest region: ILLINOIS. 2. 599. 090 321. 590 2. 821, 590 Indiana 75, 078 467. 448 542, 526 lowa 90. COO 1%. 80r; 786.800 MICHIGAN I. 330.000 346.000 1. 62(., 000 MINNESOTA. I; 315, 512 1 1, 355.660 1 2.171.172 Missour. 393. 148 635. 900 1.029, 048 Nebraska-...... _ ..... 83, 732 92. 000 175, 732 North Dakota 5, 800 36.000 41,800 Ohio* 181. 759 896.000 1. 077. 759 SOUTH DA kOTA. 82. 000 20. 400 102. 400 Wisconsin* 84. 000 62C. 000 704,006 Regional tctal 5,641. 629 4.987. 798 10, 628. 827 Southwm, regian: Arkansas' 27. 370 236. 720 264,090 Colorado 700, 000 320. 000 520,000 )(antes. II, 000 100. GOO 111,000 LOUISIANA. I, 172. svo 480. 000 1. 652,9)0 New Mexico 4. 336 162. 520 207.856

1) kLAHOMA ...... 58d. 000 225. i00 Ri3, 200 TEXAS. 1, 265. OW 74o. OCO ... ,1,000 Regionzi total 3, 399, 606 7. 264. 441 5. 574. 046 Western region: Alasx n .. 0 4 (MI 4. fill0 Ariroja 4e, 411 1914. noo ,^44. 4 14 CALIFORNIA 7. CR,. Iiti 459, 870 7, ',11, V.& Guam ...... 6 200 7. 7(..,t) 13. 46P Hawaii 5. ono 2s. ono 34, cf10 Idaho' 15 373 58. 138) 74, /.17 filonta,la 5, 726 45, 4013 51. 6;0 liesda' 1; 857 Orezen 70, ;30 i2-1, t&t.

Sarr,,a . 0 0 o Ulan 18, 500 24. 296 42, 796 WAS.II fiGT011 212, 200 225, 656 437.856 Wyr-ti: g 3. 050 21, S/30 24. 650 Trutt terniories_ C 0 0 Regional total 7, 477, 4E0 1, 241,t.".?0 8. 719. 000 -. _ _ National total. 33, 493, 209 17. 144,194 50.637, 503

1 Figer*s are precise. received from State departments of aelte..al.on_ Figure represents demand for let quar'er of fiscal 1972 (i.e., July, August. and Seploimberl. Notes: Local sponsOrs In States Marked with an asterisk apply for funding directly to USDA regional offices; sponsors In otimarked States ap_ply to a State agency (usually the school-lunch division of the State education depai tment), which in turn applies for the State total to the USDA regional office. The State handles the program in 30 Slates; the remaining 20 (uterisked) apply directly. Due to the administrative arrangement noted in the previous paragraph and limitations ut staff, no effort was made to comprehensively canvass the Nation for program requests. Hence, the figures above are conservative. Where estimates were usae, lowest reliable figures were used: States listed in capital letters are those in which information listed differs substanbatly from USDA figures. Those States in upper and lower case letters were not specifically contacted; the information for them comes basically from USDAthrough USDA dila hos boon corrected for obvious iaconsistencies, For eumple, where USDA figures showed a Meer demand for summer alone than for the entire lista 1 year, the fiscal year figure was Increased to at least the amount needed for the summer.

CE 1579

U.S. DEPARTNfENT AcaUCCI.TEIcE, FOoD AND NC:TRH-lox SERVICE. MIDWEST REGIos.i.r., (1EVICE, C h fI0, Subject : Summer Programs. To : Potential Sponsors Special FoodService Programs. The United State Department of .Agriculture'sSpecial Food Ser- ice Program for Children was established to assistin improving the notritionnl status of pre-school nnd school-age children. During thepast year. vy have assisted, with their food service programs, dny care c.eeters,settlement lmuses, and recreation centers which provide day eare for childtenfrom low income areas or from areas with many working mothers. Of 32T Midwestern programs, 172 were"summer only" programs. Sponsors werY.M.C.A.'s, churches, nmth Opportunity Programs,universities, school dist _cts, park dist-lets and welfare departments.They were all concerned with the needs of children for supervised activityand nutritious meals during non- school months. Again, this summer, we want to reach many morechildren. Do you know of any non-profit summer programs orday care eenters which will be in needof finanelal assistsnee with food costs? Cashreimbursement, as well as federally donated foods. are provided, along withtechnical assistance and guidance. We are interested in iunking contact with summerday camps, child care centers, park programs, and educational andrecreationol venters which may qualify. If you know If any. please contact theUSDA, Spee Food Service Program for Children sit 5O South Clark Street,Chicago, loinois 00405, or phone 312 353-6657 or 312-2.1-6658. Sincerely, It. J. NEtsox. Supervisor, Child Nutrition Programa.

U.S. DEPARTMENT Or ADRWITI,TI-RE. FOOD AND NUTUITION SERVICE, Waahington, D.C. Goidelinesfor the SpecialFood ServiVrogram for ChildrenSum- mer of 1971. To : Regional I flreetors. Several quest Ions.raked in resnom:e to oor February4, 1971, subject guide- Roes particulnrly onthe "Snr:; assistnnee" servire instituthms.prompt this supplementing memorandum. The questions we are receiving all concernthe problem of determining the cost of program operations in those situationswhere n program sponsor, usually ti unit of city government. eontracts withthe Regional Offiee or a State agency to operate a summer feeding program andcoordinntes or arranges to get the job clone by contracting for prepared meals tobe delivered at. selected serving sites. Usually the supervision, actual serving of themeals, and clean-up of refuse is handled by arrangements with other cooperating groups orvolunteers. Such sittiations nre quite different fromestablished year-ronnd programs, and we must use unusual techniquesto aceomplish program older-tires,Le., the delivery of nutritious meals to participants In anorderly, sanitary manner. Our February 4 guidelines stressed all of thesepoints and they should be kept clearly in mind in organizing and operating programsduring the coming summer. Nfany of the questions being submitted reinte todoenmenting or establishing an audit trail of the cost of programoperations. esPeeinlly when severe economic need exists and the sponsor is approved forassistance under the "up to R(lek of t4,tal operating costs" provision, (Section225,10(e) of the regulations). In many such cases, program sponsors nre requestingconsideration of an allowable credit VII- "in kind" contributions, i.e.. food,volunteer personal services, etc., in establishing total program costs. for use asthe base to which the allowable percentage figure is to be applied.Parenthetically, it does not always have to be the full 80 percent. We have used 03I1 . (BOB) Circular No. A-87,Principles; for Determining Costa Applicable to Grants nnd Contracts with Stateand Local Governments,. for 69 guidance !ri this matter. Selected paragraphsof Circular A-87 are paraphrased herein and are to be followed by RegionalOffices and State agencies in making decisions on allowable costs for this type of operation.However, the remaining contents of Circular No. A-87 are not applicable.Only the content of this memo is to be used for guidance in these situations. COMPOSITION OF 00ST 1. Total cost of program operations iscomprised of allowable direct cost incident to program operations and allowable indirect costs. 2. Allowable Direct Coatb.Out-of-pocket costs to the sPonsorin the operation of the program for the food, its preparation, itsdelivery to the site of feeding the children, its service, the supervision of thefeeding and clean-up thereafter, including disposal of refuse. 8. Allowable Indirect 008t8. (a ) Cost of normal- administrative services of thesponsor's administra tive staff to carry out full-thne or part-time duties related to theoperation or administration of the Special Food Service Program. (b) Cost of part-time or full-time persolmel and support servicessupplied by other units of the city government to the Special Food ServiceProgram. 4. Limitationii.Allowable costs ior personnel services shall belimited to tile salaries of personnel that have been relieved of other duties (full-time orpart- time) and assigned speeifi e. duties that are essential to the satisfactory operation of the Special Food Serviee Program, 5. Unalloi,able ljonts.Bad debts, contributions to a contingency reserve, contributions of cash, or food, or volunteer personnel services, entertainment, tines and penalties, interest on loans, etc. Baset1 on the audits of a few of last Summer's programs, we must emplidflze.in the strongest terms possible, that the cost of program operations must lie documented andnn audit trail must be available to verify such costs. Further. related arrangements and agreements must be worked out drier to opening (4 the fmal service. Finaily, performanee must be eheeked to the extent neeessary to insnre awleque te recordkeeping, as well us the service of weals, as outlined in our hruary 4 gaidelines. It will be necessary that you and the State agencies provide such program sponsors with spoeint instructions relative to the submission of claims Nit' rlm- not exceNI 80 pereent ot7 the total cost. of program operation, I.e., the stun total e04 of operotlon, w!thlie naderstanding that Ow allowable reimbursement shall not exceed 80 pereent of the total cost of program operation, i.e., the somtotal of the allowable direct and indirect program costs. In view of this speeial handling, Regional Oflice-administered service institutions of this type would be exempt from the automated claims processing system. These claims should be proeessed by Regional Office personnel and forwarded here to the Finanee Division for payment as in the pest. All other claims from service institutions will be forwatded directly from the sponsor to the Finance Division for automatic data processing. Except for the last paragraph, please pass this information on to the State agencies in your Region.

FROM MAYOR GIBSON, OF NEWARK Federal contribution, July 1970 to May 1971 Type "A" luneb program $1,822,033.09 Special milk progrtun 92,248.37 Breakfastprogram 127,075.85 Total 2,101,352.11 1581 FROM MR. KOPLAN, OFSAN ANTONIO DEPARTMEUT OP AGRICULTURE, Suityrer, FOOD AND NUTRsourtIv:Esr Ria.toN, Tt.r., April 12, 1971. Mr. EDwARD E. Kort.AN, coi,rainator, Youth Resources.Human Resources, Cil:t Antonio, .&au Antonio,Tex. Subject : San Antonio SummerRecreation Programs. conversation last Friday DEAR MR. KoeLAN : Thiswill confirm our telephone the proposed recrea- concerning Special Food ServiceProgram assistance for 1!(al pi.ogvants in the SunAntonio area.Service Program during the stimmerof 1071 t;uldetines for the Special Fowl other items in theguidelines it is Were reeently providedto our (Mice. Among regulations or the enabling cicar that under noeireulustanvcs do the program total. As we discussed legishd ion permit the ilepartnientto fund the program in costmay Ipaid Cor by the Departmentnnder 80Y('; of the total food service'However., this should be necessaryonly in the neediest certain circuu)slauees. institution is approved forSW/c. assistance, the differ- of eass. V)."fou a service cash by tbe pl.ograin sponsor.This might in- ete ''r must be made unand in other costs relatt 11 toie food service opera- chile Ca. cost or food. labor be ttotfi for the s:..itsor':.12.0% share. tio:t. In-kind assistance may notapproved for 80% assistance, itwould hot be IC Ow food service operation is agreements. possible to provide Nonfoodi*..ssistance under concurrent program III o:ber words. the Departmentis not able to provide 75% ofthe sponsor's 20% !-ht.co t of provid'm: the food::,,rvb.e. Department. will he e trust that the assistancewhich can be pro...ided by the adequate to insure a more extensivefood service to the smnmerrecreation pro- gratin: to be conducted inthe San Antonio area. We Jilsowould Ube to see consideration given to Mr. Smith'sproposal as stated in his March19 letter. This may be the initial Wortto Involve more local supportfor an adequate food service program lit summer recrenion activ it les. We appreciate the courtesiesextended to Mr. Laney hind myselfaril please feel free :o t:ontact our ()dice if we maybe of any further assistance in thismatter. Very truly ;ours, Josx, A. AcosTA, A el min Islra Child Nutria, .,utrums.

FOOD AND Ni. SOU , .IWET REGIoN, Dallas, Tex., 3fay 18, 1971. Subject : Guidelines for the SpecialFood Service Program forCnildreuSum- tiler of' 1071. To : All State Directors (ChildNutrition Programs) - Several questions, raised in responseto our February 9, 1971 subjectguide- lines, particularly on the -80%assistance" service institutions, promptthis supplementing memorandum. The qtwstions we are rccel,.ing all concernthe problem of determining the cost of program operations inthose sitartions where a program sponsor, usually a unit of city government, contractswhit toe Regional Office or a state agency to operate a summer feeding proqramand coordinates or arranges to get thejob done by contracting for preparedmeals to be delivered at selected serving sites. I.7.41ta1ly the supervision, actualserving of the meals, and clean-up of refuseis handled by arrangements with othercooperat ng groups or volunteers. Such situations are quite different from estblished year-round programs, end we must use unusualtechniques to accom lish programobjectives,i.e., the delivery of nutritious meals toparticipantin an orderly, sa.nitary manner. 15S2 Our February 9 guidelines stressed all of these points and they should be kept clearly in .-nind in organizing and operating programs durin,4 the coining slimmer. Many of the questions being submitted rebite to documenting or establishing an audit trail of the cost of program operations. espeeially when severe e(onomic need exists and the sponsor is approved for assistance under the "al) to 80% of total operating costs" provision, (Section 225.19(e) of the r(gulations). In many such cases, program sponsors are requesting eonsideration of an allowable credit for "in kind" coutributions, i.e., food, volunteer personal services, etc., in establishing total program costs, for use as the Imse to which the allowable percentage figure is to be applied. Parenthetically, it does not always have to be the full 80 percent. We have used Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-87, Principles for Determining Costs Applicable to Grants nod Contracts with State and Local Governments, for guidance in this matter. Selected paragraphs of Circular A-87 are paraphrased herein and are to be follow cd by Regional Offices and state agencies in makhig decisions on allowable for this type of operation. How- ever, the remaining contents of Circular N. A-87 are not applieable. Only the content of this memo is to be used for g111:.0 in these situations. cOMFOSITION O ('WT 1. Total cost of program operationR is col ,e(1 of allowable direct cost dent to program operations aid allowable r-ct costs. 2. Allowable Direct Co8t8.Out-of-pocket To the sponsor in the operation of the program for the food, its preparatith delivery to the site of feeding the children. its service, the supervision of, feeding and elean-up thereafter, including disposal of refuse. 3. Allow thle Im lima Costs. (a) Cost of normal administrative services of the sponsor's administrative stnff to carry out fnll-time or part-time flIties related to the operation or administration of the Special Food Service Prc 'am. (h) Cost of part-time or fall-time person' A and support services supplied by other twits of the eity governinda to the f4,riFood Service Program. 4. Limitations.Allowable costs for pers-'et services shall be limited to the salaries of personnel tlmt have been relievedf other duties (full-time or part- time) and assigned sperific duties that are essential to the satisfactory operation of the Spedal Food Service Program. 5. Unallowable Costs.---lind debts, cgmtributioas to a coutingency reserve, contributions of ea sh, or food, Or volunteer personal -orvIces, entertainment, fines and penalties. interest or loans, ete. Based on the audits of a few of last summer's pr.)gratns. .inist emphasize. In the strongest terms potssible, that the cost of prognoperations unist be dommiented and an audit trail must be avaqable to such costs. Further. related arrangements and agreements must be worked out prior to opening of the food service. Finally. performance nmst Ite ebeeked to the extent lecossary to insure adequate recordkeeping, as well as the service of meals, as outlined in our February 9 guidelines, It will be necessary that state agencies provide such program sponsors with spedal instructions relative to the submission of claims for reimbursement. Re- hnbursement shall be based on an assigned percentage of the total cost of operation, with the understanding that the allowable reimbursement shall not exceed 80 percent of the total cost of program operation, i.e., the sum total of the allowable direet and indirect program costs. GENE E. Goon. Superviffor, Child Nutrition Programs.

(U.S. Department of Agriculture. Consumer and Marketing Service, Commlner rood Programs] AGREEMENTSPECIA,L POOG SERVICE PROGRAM FOR C HILDRENSUM M ER PROGR A M S Name and Address of Sponsoring Agency (Street No.. RFD No., City, State and ZIP ('ode). The same as entered on application, Form CFP-81. City of San Antonio, P.O. Box 8066, San Antonio, Texas 71-2(14 t".% 1583

Agreement No. 4802952051001 In order to effectuate the purpose of Section 13 of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751-1760), as amended, and the regulations governing the Special rood Service Program for Children issued thereunder (hereinafter referre(l to as the "Program"), the United States Department of Agriculture (hereinafter referred to as the "Department") and the Sponsoring Ageney (hereinafter referred to as the "Sponsor"), whose name and address appear above, acting on behalf of each service institution listed on Schedule A of this agreement, cove- nant and agree as follows; TIIE DEPARTMENT AGREES THAT to the extent of funds available, it shall reimburse the Sponsor in connection with meals served to children in the service institutions listed in Schedule A during the period hereinafter stated. During any summer season, the amount of reimbursement for meals on lwhalf of each service instituticn shall not exceed the lesser of (1) an amount equal to the number of meals, by types, served to children, multiplied by the rates assigned by the Department as shown on Schedule A, or such other rate as lthly be subsequently assigned by the Department. or (2) the cost of obtaining food. If the service institution has been approved to receive operating cost financial assistance in lieu of reimbursement for meal, the amount of financial assistance will not exceed 80 per centum of the operating cost of the Program. THE SPONSOR REPRESENTS AND WARRANTS THAT it is (1) the governing body responsible for the administration of the service institution or institutions listed on Schedule A of this agreement, or (2) it is a nonprofit agency that is exempt from income tax under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, to which the service institutions listed on Schedule A have delegated authority for the operation of their food service: and in order to qualify for reimbursement under this agreement, in conducting the food service in the service institutions listed in Schedule A it will : 1. Operate a nonprofit food service using all of the income therefrom solely for the operation or improvement of such service, except such income shall not be used to purchase land, to acquire or construct buildings, or to make alter- ations of existing buildings ; 2. Serve meals which meet the minimum nutritional requirements specified in Schednle B of this agreement, during a period designated as the attendance period by the service institution ; eaell meal as a unit (If twmls are priced separately) ; Supply meals without cost or at a reduced price to all children who are de_ terwined by the service Institut 7pn to he unable to pay the full price ; 5. Furnish a written statement of the policy followed in making determinations as to who receives free or reduced price food service. Such policy, to the extent practicable, shall he established in consultation with public welfare and health agencies, arid shall be consistent with the guidelines issued by the Secretary on this subject ; G. Make no physical segregation of or discrimination against any child because of his inability to pay the full price of the meals ; 7. Claim reimbursement for the types of meals provided to children at the rates specified in Schedule A of this agreement or at such other rate as the Department may subsequently assign, or on an operating cost basis, if approved; 8. Submit claims for reimbursement in accordance with procedures established by the Department ; 9. Maintain, in the stoirage, preparation and service of food, proper sanitation and health standards in conformance with all applicable State and local laws and regulations; 10. Purchase, in as large quantities as may be efficiently utilized in the Pro- gram, the foods designated as plentiful by the Department 11. Accept and use, in as large quantities as can beefficiently utilized in the Program, foods offered as a donation by the Department 12. Maintain necessary facilities for storing,preparing and serving food ; or utilize existing school food serviee facilities ; 13. Maintain full and accurate records of the 'Program, includingthose set forth on page 2 of this agreement, and retain such records for a periodof three years and three months after the end of the fiscal year to which theypertain ; 14. Upon request, make all accounts and records pertaining tothe Program

0-41 1584 available to the Department and the General Accounting Office for audit or al- ministrative review at a reasonable time and place. The sponsor hereby certifies that each of the service institutions 'Listed on Schedule A of this agreement is nonprofit and exemtp from Federal theome tax under the Internsl Revenue Code, as amended. The sponsor assures the Department that it is in compliance with and will comply with all requirements imposed by or pursuant to, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the nondiscrimination regulations of the Department, as now or here- after amended (7 CFR Part 15), to the end that no person in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from partici- patien in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under, the Program. Federal financial assistance under this agreement is extended in re- liance on the representation made herein as to nondiscrimination. This nondiscrimination assurance shall obligate the sponsor as long as assstanee is provided herennder or it retains possession a any assistance otherwise provided by the Department. In case of failure of the sponsor to comply with this nondiscrimination assurance, the United States has the right to seel;: its enforcement by judicial or other means. The department and sponsor mutually agree that : 1. Schednle A on Page 3 hereof, listing service Institut ons approved by the Department, shall be a part of this agreement ; 2. Service institutions may Added or deleted freal Schedule A as need arises and the references here, Schedule A shall J.:;deemed to include such sched-ale as sup:amnented and tti. ;cd ; 3. The Department shall promptly notify the Sesnsor of any change in the minimum nterC requirements or in the assigned re.:es of reimbursement ( which appear on Sch- (-title A) or in other approved rlimbursement. The Department $hall not Innleny change !n the minimum meol requirements to become effective in less t hn CO tys after publication of notice hereof ; 5. No Member or Delegate to Congress. sr Resident Commissioner, shall he admitted to tins share or part of this agrersuent or to any benefit that may arise therefrom ;but this provision shall ncr be construed to extend to this ngree- men t if made with a. corporation for its general benefit : 0. For the purpos.e of this agreement, the following terms shall mean, respectively : (a )Service bildifu lion : Afeam a private, nonprofit thstitntion, or a public n ::11(11 :IS :1 child day-f e center, settlement house, or recreation ren- ter, which providJs day cure, er other child care where obits ' tained in re:;idence, for &Ilidrc a from areas in which p, ,ns c::ist or areas in which there are high concentrations of worsins motlurs, The term "rvice institution" iscludes a private, nonprofit institution or a public institution that develo7ss a special summer program providing for children from such nreas food service slar to that available to children under the National School Lunch or School Breakfast Programs during the school year, and in- clinics a private. nonprofit institution or a public institution providing day-care serviees for handicapped children from such areas. (b) Cost of Obtaining Food: Menus the cost of obtaining agricultural Pom- modifies and otber foods for consumption by children. Such eosts may include, in addition to the purchase price of agricelltural commodities and other foods. the cost of proces:.imr. distributing, transporting, storing or handling of ary food purchased for, or donated to, the Program. (c) Fiscal Year: Means a period of twelve calendar months beginning with July 1 of any calendar year and ending with June 30 of the following calerular year. (d) Meal: "Nivans food which is served to children during their attendance at a service institution and which meets the nutritional requirementsof Schedule B attached hereto. (e) Operating Cost: Means the cost of obtaining, preparing, and servingfood. 7. This Agreement shall be effective, for the period commencing the 7th day of June. 1071, and ending the 18th day of August, 1971; if this period.extends into tt,second fiSeal year (that is, if it begins on or before June 30 and ends on or after July 1) the Department's, agreement- to reimburse the sponsorIs conditioned upon the continued availability of funds appropriated for_Special Irood Service Program for Children purposes for such first fiscal year or upon the appropriation of funds by the Congress for such second fiscal yearin a sufficient amount, and no legal liability on the part of thegovernment for the 7 4, 1585 shall have payment of any money shall arise unless and. until such appropriation beenprovided. (Do not complete this seCtion.), This Agre.ement 'may Le terminated upon: 'tpa (10) days writtennotice on the apart 'of.either party hereto, and the Department niftyternibmte this Agreement immediately after receipt of evidence that the terms and.conditions of this Agreement tind of the' regulatiOns governing the Program.haye not been fully rOmillicid-' With by the SPonser..- Any terminationOf thiS Agreement by the De- partment 'shall' be Ih accord-wieth. applicable lawsand regulationa No termina- tion orelpiration of flak -.Agreement,however, shall affect t,he obligation of the ,Rlionsot. to ,maint'ain Pmd-retain' records 'and totimake such records available 'for audit:' ' -",' S. The terms of this shim not be InOili(led er changed .in any way ahelythan by the consent in writhig of both partieshereto., 9. The repOrting and/or recordlceepingrequirCments contained herein have been approved by the Bureau of theBudget in' accordance with the 1?edera1 Re-

ports Act'of.719.1.4. . . RECORDEEEPING ,EEQVIREME:STS The institution must keep fun and accurate records respectingits food service to serve asbasis for the elnirn for reimburement" and for audit andreview par- poses. The records tube kept include the following : 1

1. Tlea1s. . .

, (a) ,Dally number Of meals served to children; by type of meal. (b). Daily number Of 'meals served free or at reduced price tochildren, by type

of menl. . (c) Daily number of meals served to adults, by type of meal. . 2.proiirdin, Income (Receipt's). (a) From childreni.payments. t Yvon). Fetier,i INti,:,barseinetit. (e) .iororn adults' payments. ( d) From :111 otbpr <4(mrces, inc.dn !t2,-' to th, (Supported. by i1.voice:4, receipis, or otlo ;choice ot e.s.pcylit ( a ) For food, (b)14 or labor. (e) AI other expenditures, inolnding repayment oC loans tothe I), I'alue of Donations to Program. a) DAnal d fw_d, exclusive of fonds donated by the Department. t b) Donnted services. c) All donations other than food and services. GERALD C. HENOREL, City Manager Sun Antonio. T May 27, :971. ,ThFF. A. ACOSTA. IThi ixtra tire Officer Nutrition Pro1l-r1.*. June 1971. CITY OF SAN ANICEMP, San .1ntonio, Tem., Jutc- 1971. Mr. GENE1 E. Goon, Supervisor, Child Nutrition Programs, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Southwest Region, Balta.?,Tex. DEAR Mu. GOOD : The City of San Antanio is makingapplication liymeans or this letter and the attached executed agreementforms for a special-ziod service Rummer program. This program willbe operated by the City in the digalvantaged areas of the community. These areaswill be designated by the City Thpartments involved in the overall summer effort and inconjunction with the loundaries established by the Community Action Agency and TheModelCities 1-parrinent. This program will be operated on behalf of the etildrenattending- Ile summer enrichment programs. The food services program willprovide a n n meal, as 1586 described in Schedule "B" of the attached agreement and a supletnental food serving as described in the same schedule. The San Antonio Special Food Service Program will be provided to all childreu attending programs in the disadvantaged areas at no cost. The City requires financial assistance for the cost of obtaining food and operating costs in lieu of reimbursement for meals. The City understands that this financial asAstance will not exeeed 80 per centum of the operating cost of the program. The City of San Antonio also understands that for the purpose of determining the 80 per centum factor, it, the City will use established city audit procedures in conjunction with the Office of Management and Budget Circular No. A-87 as it applies o ,) this program. The overall progra, that will be operated by the City will be based essentially on the operation of the summer1970program. There will be approximately95 neighborhood based centers with an aTerage daily attendance of 20,000-children. The program will orerate from June 7, 1971, until August 13, 1971. This schedule could be set back one week ; however, the overall operating period will be approximately 50 days. The average cost per meal and supplement has been let tor bid because of state law and city charter. However, the anticipated food and operational cost will be Sixty-fire cents (Mt) per child per day. The City of Antonio is extremely interested in being able to provide the program as outlined hi this request for our children. The City feels that it is vitally important to the health and well-being of the children in the summer as well as serving as an important supplement to the nutritional base given these 'children during the year in the school lunch program. I must point mit that because of financial as well as budgetary limitations the City of San Antonio can participate in the above outlined program onlyif approval for fintuicial assistance is given on the 80- 20 basis. Should you require additional information or statistics on the San Antonio prO!'roln, please contactMr. Edward Koplan of our Division of Youth Services. I tim sure the Department of Agriculture shares myenthusiasm tor the very positive benefit this program will provide to the childrenof San Antonio. Sincerely, GERALD C. ITENCKKL, City Manager. JUNI.; 4, 1971.. chaim.o C. IlEyckEr City )1,7'mq/or, City of San Avtonio, !San Antonio, Tex. Subject :Special Food Service Program AssistanceSanAntonio Summer Recre- ation PropTam. DEARMu.HENCKEt.:This is in reference to the Special Food ServiceProgram forms submitted for the City of San AntonioSummer Recreation uctivity which involves approximately 20 timusand childrenduring June 7 through August 13. A review of the participation formsand your accompanying June 1 letter appeared to be in ordertherefore, the program agreement for your summer recreation activ ivy will he approved for80 percent finaneial assistance for it's food service. The remaining- 20 percentwill be paid for by the Program sponsor. Formal notification of approval alai the sponsor's copyof the participation forms, will be provided the latter part of nextweek. As explained to Mr. Ed Koplan,Speeial Food Service Program funds are assured through June 3() and your requestfor arproximately $200,000 for pro- will be approved. However, this will alsoadvise gram operations (hiring June Special Food Service Program) For Children that the present legislation for'the requested legislation expires June 30,1971.The Department of Agriculture has to continue the Special Food ServiceProgram beginning' July1, 1971and has ineluded funds for the program inthe 1972 Fiscal Year budget request. We will, of course, contact sponsorswhich operate after June 30. 1971, as soon as further information concerning thecontinuation of the program Is made available to this office. We will look forward to assisting theCity of San Antonio in providing an improved food serviee for the childrenattending it's recrention program this sununer. Very truly yours, p JOSE A. ACOSTA, Administrative Officer, Child Nutrition Program4. 1587

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE, SOUTHWEST REGION, Dallas. Tex., June 15, 1971. Mr. GiatAum C. HENCKEL, City Manager, City of San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex. Agreement No. 4802952051001 Subject: Official Notice of ApprovalSpecial FoodService ProgramSummer Program-80% Assistance. DE:ta Ma. IIENCREr.V.nelosed is the official "Notice of Approval", approving your centers to participate in the.Special Food Service Program during the 1971 summer recreation season. Reimbursement may be claimed for meals or meal supplementsserved to ciiirditen only during the period shown in Item 7 of the Special FoodService Program Agreement. If there will be any change in. thebeginning anti/or eliding dates of the recreation program period (Item 7),this office must be notified immediately.Important: This will also advise that the present legislationfor the Special Food Service Program for Children expiresJune 30, 1971. The Department has requested legislation to contihue the Special FoodService Program beginning July 1, 1071 and has included funds for the programain the 1972 Fiscal Year budget request. In the event that the programis continued, we will contact sponsors which operate afterJune 30, 1971 as soon as practicable after July 1, 1971. Please refer to Item 7 of the agreementfor more detailed information. Please file the enclosed program forms withall otlier records pertaining to the Special Food Service Program.All program records must be maintained for three years and three monthsafter the end of the fiscal year (June 30) to which they pertain. As previously discussed with you,approval of 80% assistance under the Special Food Service Program is quitedifferent from the type of assistance provided established year-round programs thereforeit is highly important to fully document all eligible program expenditures.The following items are provided for your benefit in determining thespecific costs which are eligible to be considered for the sponsor's 20% share. 1. Total cost of program operationsis comprised of allowable direct cost incident to program operations andallowable indirect costs. 2. Allowable Direct Costs.Out-of-pocketcosts to the -qmonsor in the operation of the program for the food, its preparation,its delivery to the site of feeding the children, its service, thesupervision of the feeding and clean-up thereafter, including disposal of refuse. 3. Allowable Indirect Costs. (a) Cost of normal administrative servicesof the spousor's administrative staff to carry out full-time or part-timeduties related to the operation or administration of the Special Food Service Program. (b) Cost of part-time or full-time personneland support services supplied by other units of the city governe-tent tothe Special FeTAI Service Program. 4. Limitation,s.Allowable costs for personnelservices shall be limited to the salaries of personnel that have been relievedof other duties (full-time or part- time) and assigned specific duties that areessential to the satisfactory operation of the Special Food Service Program. Any costs or other expenses not covered or included inthe above information must be approved by the Regional Office before thesecosts may be considered as part of the sponsor's 20% share.Please bear in mind that all allowable direct and indirect program costs must be carefully documented tosubstantiate the sponsor's share of program costs. We are enclosing a sample time sheet which may be used to document labor expenses by the sponsor.. You will notethat the sample time sheet includes such items as date, number of hours worked, rate perhour, space for signature and certification by appropriate official of the sponsor. Please refer to the official Notice of Approval for the meal or meal offerings :hich have been approved for reimbursement. Prior approval must be obtained from the Regional Office for reimbursement-Or meal offerings not shown on the official Notice of Approval. Please refer tci sponsor's copy of the Special Food "I "7/ 1588 Service Program agreement forthe minimum meal and mealsupplement requirements for the food serviee' offered tothe children in attendance at your recreation centers: Please review the centers onSchedule A of the agreement and submitthe complete name and addrefita of nnycenters which have been omitted. Mr.Koplan indicated tint a revised list wouldbe submitted as soon as: the full summer recreation program plans are completed. We plan to schedule an on site visitby a Regional 'Office 'representative in the very near future. In themeantime, should you have nny questions orneed any .further ;information.copeerning..the. 80%,,it.ssjsp nge.,beg pxpvided to $our program, please contact this office. Very truly yours. Josx A. ACosTA, Administrative Officer, Child Nutrition Programs.

FROM MR.: ROBLES, OF LOS ANGELES , UNIT4T4 STATES DEPARTMENT OF' AGRICULTURE, FOOD' :AND NtiTurrION SEnv/CE, . . Ali:MIMI:3T REGIONAL! OFFICE, Chicago, Ill. To : Potential Sponsor of Special .FoodService Program for Children. . Ti.e. United States Department of Agriculture'SSpecial Food Service 'Program for Children- was established to assist iniMPraVing the nutritional status of preschool and Sehool-age children. 'During the-past year,we have assisted, with their food service-programs, day care centers,settlethent honses, ,and recreation centers which Provide day' care :or children from lowincome areas or from areas With ruany"Wórking Mothers. ',Jash reimbursement,- aswell as' federally donated foods, are available, along with technical assistance andguidanae. Of 696 ifidWestern PrOgrams operating in 1,969,454 'were "summer only" programs."Sponsors were Y.M.C.A.'s, churehes, ..-Vbuth OPportunity Programs,uni-. verSities, school districts, park districts' and Welfare departments. They*ere all concerned with the needs of children for supervised activity and nutritious meats dining' tion-:school months. This summer, we want to reach many more children. IfyoUr school district is planning 'to operate a summer program which does notgive academie credit, but is meant to enrich a child's summer vaeatiOn -exepriencethrough' a planned program of aCtivities, then yon may be interested inapplying for assistance-with your food service through the' Special Food SerVice Progrnm. It is'important that-yon underktand that the' Special FoodService Program is in no way intended to replace the School Lunch Program,but is meant td Supple- ment it in those programs which would not b,e otherwise eligible forassistance. We are intere_ited in making contact 'With- summer day camps, child care centers, park programs and educational and recreational centersWhich may qualify. If you are planning to instable such a program, or know of anyother public -or private nonprofit OrganilatiOn which might bepotential sponsors of such programs, Plense &ntact the USDA, Special FoodSeririce Program for Children at 536 South Clark Street, Chicaeo, Illinois 60605, or phone 312-353-6662. Sincerely, R. J.'NEiSON, " ; SuPervisor, Child Nitillaoh..-Prevgrarn. J,5§9 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE, WESTERN REGION, San Francisco, Calif.,Map 26, 1971. M. ARNOLD ROBLES, Director of Parks and Recreation, Los Angei.ls, Calif. DEAR Ma. ROBLES : Thank..you forcalling me lat-rt Friday to give anup-to-date estimate of participation on.yoUrantieipated summer feeding program.It is obvious you have done an excellentjob of promoting the program sincepresent estimates indicate a participation of273,000 children per day. We haveadvised our Washington, D.C. Offiee of thisparticipation for a lunch and supplement(at a reimbursement rate of 300 and 100respectively) for ten weeks, which would run approximately $100,000 per day or fivemillion dollars for the entire summer program. A reveiw of the fund.situation will be made, and they will advise us as soon as possible. Thank you again for your intéresc andcooperation. Sincerely yours; JAM BRADLEY, 'Supervisor, Child 11744rition Program.

79 58-854-71pt. 6-43 Item 2-Material Submitted by Other Than Witnesses FROM SENATOR COOK, OF KENTUCKY FEEDING PROGRAMS Fiscal year Milk school lunch Sec. 4 school lunch Sec. 11 2 Breakfast Equipment administrative expenses State commodities Sec. 6 feedingSpecial Summer feedingspecial CA 1967 _ $104, 000, ODD $147, 600, 000154, 700. COO $1, 900, 000 $572, 000 $689. 000 $57, 900, 00055, 500, 000 19721371197019691968 _.(budget(estimated). request) . . 104,104. WO.000,000. 000 (3) 225,168,161. 000,180, 500, 000 000 356,356,132, 400, 000,400, 000 00042, 000, 0004. 800. 000 15,10, 15,000,800, 000.000 OCO 0005,2, 500,000. 000 16.10. 15,600,200,110.000 000, WO000 000 736, 000 3.1. 700,500,0003. 500,000 000$530,000 64, 62,300,103. 300, 000 000 32.$1, 20.000,600, 700, 000 0007, 303, 000 $6, 000. 0008,1, 600.500, 000(4) forfull freeprice and luncbes. reduced*SecI Sec. price 11 4 lunches. schoolschool lunchlunch isis generalspecial cashassistance a ssistance pins sec. used 32 to lunds. reimburse Used ail to lunches supplement -free, reimbursement reduced, and milk program as in theIa Undetermined. Nopast, budget if Congress request votes but on to June appropriate 17, 1971, funds USDA for announcedthis purpose. that they will continue to operate the 1591

Total, all programs (includingspecial feeding programs) Amount Fiscal year $307. 5M 196T 319. 7M 1968 387. 6M 1969 502. 5M 1970 1971 (estimate) 803. 2.14. 1972 (budget request) 814. 7M Total (excluding speofal feeding programs) Amount Fiscal year $307. 5M 1967 319. 7M 1968 386. OM 1969 495. 2M 1970 1971 (estimate) 782. 5M 1972 (budget request) 782. 7M

FROM ASSISTANT SECRETARY LYNG,OF USDA. JUNE 23, 1971. Hon. GEORGE MCGOVERN, Chairman, Select COMmitteC on Nutrition andHuman Needs, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.O. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you for yourletter of June 21 requesting me to appear before yourCommittee this Friday to discuss funding for summerfeeding programs. Because of a previous engagement I amnot free at the time you suggest. Per- haps we eau arrange a mutuallyconvenient time as early as possible next year. I am enclosing a letter to ChairmanTahnadge, Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, and a press release issued yesterdayoutlining our request to the Senate Appropriations Committee for an additional$11,225.900 for the Special Food Service Programs for Children. I believe thisshould substantially solve the problem. Sincerely. RICHARD LYNG, Assistant Secretary. Enclosures. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, Washington, DX., June 22, 1971. I ion. 1 1 En MA N E. TALM A DGE, Chairman. Committec on Agriculture and Forestry, U.S. Senate, Dtatt MR. CHAIRMAN: You have requestedinformation for use during Con- ference Committee consideration of Wt.5251. The following am tcrial summarizes Ole fiscal 1971 and 1972 funding situationfor both in-sebool feeding Programs and forthe non-school program for children in day-care centers and summer programs. IN-SCHOOL PROGRAMS Additional funds for the 1971 school lunch and otherschool feeding progriuns are not nev(k.d. The1).partment was able to reposition available funds to met every State's iquest for funds for special assistance for freeand reduced price lunches and for other priority needs. Some nonpriority requests were not met. TilPserequests genet illy involved the transfer of funds reserve'l for needychildren to increase reimbursement assistance for nonneedy children or requests for morenonfood (equipment) funds than the Department believed theStatett could effectively spend in the remainder of the fiscal year. The 197'2 budget request is sufficient to .permitabout a 10 percent therease in the total number of school lunches andin the number of free and reduced

81 1502 price lunches, at the average rates of reimbursement contentplated IIIhe 1972 budget request. These contemplated rates are an average oe 5 cents undersiT 4. and an average of 30 cents under section 11 special assistance for free and reduced price lumhes. 'IL is not possible to give the Co muittee absolute assurance at this time that the school lunch budget request will he sufficient to meet all needs. If, when we el t. information on fiscal year 1972 participation, additimed funds appear necest,;11.y, we %MI Consider a suppiNnental7equestto insure that needy children la pi.r- tleipating schools eoatinue to have aeeoss to a free or redueed priee lunch. Available 1971I !Inds for the Special Food Serviee (non-m hool) Program mil. recently repositioned among the States. After this reapportionment, a total of 14 States needed an additional $1.2 millkm to complete their 19i1 programs. We will be able to meet this renmining need for 1971 funds front the section 32 funds made available lit our 1971 Appropriations Act. The 14 States have been.notifiet1 that-the additional $1.2 be made available.

, Funding for the 1972 non-school feeding program does present.a. problem. A number of States have requested summer assistance substantially in exeuss of the apportionments they can expect under the applicable formula .contalued litSet - tion. 1 (b) (2) of the National School Lunch Act. Requests re;zeivedirffitt St;' es for tundk for the JulySeptenflier quarter alone total $:.:6.t1 million. This is $1.8 million more than the $20.8 million requested in USILVs budget for all .ton-s( heel feeding programs for the full 1972 fiscal scar. Last year'S total ontlays. On -sumater ProgramS were $5.8 'Million. ut,!(.ene States summer outlays in fiscal 1971 were in excess of statutory apportiona.ents. These extra costs were financed by reapportioning funds not used.in other Stales during fiscal 1970. The.e reapportioned funds made possiblelarge summer programs in cities such as Chicago, Detroit and the District of Columbia. This year there are no unspent funds to reallocate and the requestS for snelt funds'hre ma, h larger than last year. The following table shows formula allocations and summer program 'requests for the four States that are facing tlw largest defkits :

Full year 1972 Sufr,i or state formula share 'requ,:sts

California , - $863,437 $7,082, 130 New York 887,887 4,117,000 Illinois 627,090 1,908, U80 Georgia 858,483 1,361 f_WO

In order to extend the benefits of summer programs to the max!inum possible degree this summer, we are asking the Congress in our Appropriation 11111, to transfer an additional $11,225,000 Of section 32 funds from uommodity programs. This will bring 11Sca1 1972 outlays for non-school feeding up to the 11110'4)1.1mq level of $32 million. If Congress approves, we propose to provide every State with at least the amount of funds provided for last summer's programs. We intend to distribute the ,.flninitql noditional funds on an equitable basis to provide support for moderate program expansion. While section 32 funds for nonschool feeding would be made available by H.R. 5257, we prefer to obtain these funds by the regular appropriation process. We have asked the Senate Appropriations Committee to provide an additional $11,225,000 in section 32 authority for this purpose. We anticipate favorable action prior to July 1. Sincerely, RfenAnn LYNG. 3Letters of Interest

JUNE 17, 1971.

Hon. CLIFFORD M. HARDIN, (wretory, LS. Departme» tof Agriculture, WaNhington, D.C. week the House ofRepresentatives authorized you DE,ut MR. SECRETARY : Last under Section 32 tomeet needs to nse up to $50,000,000of the funds availableyesterday, the SenateAgriculture arismg in the child nutritionprograms. Juit blank check farther. Effectively,they banded you a Committee went one step job. and said that it now was upto you to do the necessary House Ordinarily, I would wait uutilthe ConferenceCommittee between the But this is not anordinary set of circumstances and Senate had met and acted. the money needed tofeed needy chil- nor an ordinaryauthorization. At utate Is that are dren this summer in our cities acrossthe Dation, many in programs June 21. It is also not anordinary set of cir- scheAded to begin next Monday,few short weeks ago,reprseutatives of your cumstances because until just a the states and cities toexpand their bopartment were actively encouraging children as they could. For sammer feeding programsto reach as many needy ust this Spring, in a meetingattended by all of the 77cities of Los representative said : "You getthe kids and we'll get the Ant:eles County, your they expect to money." Aad Los Angeles County"got the kids." Tills summer at a cost of $5,000,000.Just this week they were feed 273,000 children each day, that the entire state ofCalifornia would told. again by your representatives, sustain their cro- cuive only $803,000. Los Angeles'share would not be able to gram for more than a fewdays. of the Mayor's staff were Chicago provides a similarexample. There, members programs to reach morechildren this year than also encouraged to expaml theirthe city was preparedto feed an average of last% After considerable effort city. The total cost of the 05.0,0 children each day in350 sites throughout the $2,500,000, whieh they hadbeen told to expect. Then 1i1.0;:rant would he about the entire state of Illinoiswould be allocated just this week, they were told thatSouth Dakota, a special effortto feed Indian only $200,000. In my own State of would have to be children on reservations like theRosebud and Wounded Knee ndoned. The smite story can be told ofTrenton, Detroit, Dallas, St.Louis, Baltimore, and cities throughont thenation. Resimnslhlo Atlanta, Newark, Tit Ilnluissee, expand their pro- city alcials were encouragedby USDA representatives to grams and were given firm assurancesthat the money would beavailable. Con- tapped to provide the local eashcontribution traets were let. City budgets werejobs. Food service companies werehired. required. Teenagers were promised these Then, just one week from thescheduled opening date of the programs, said that there would be no moneyfor summer feed- same USDA representativesto understand such seeminglycontradictory being programs. It is difficult the same doss that havior. It is particularlydifficult to understand because on in the USDA regionaloffices were informing the citiesthat your representatives representatives here in Washington wereassuring the there wasn't any money, Committee that there was no problemfinding members of the Senate AgricultureAssistant Secretary Lyng has now eventestified the money for the programs. happy to be able to report on three separateoccasions this year that: "We are that we have been able tomeet demonstrated needs foradditional funds this yea r." Time is short, Mr. Secretary.As you no doubt recall, the summerfeeding programs were one partof the Congressional responseto the desperation and frustration that had eruptedin bitter riots during the summersof 1066 and 1067. (lfi93) ,f8 3 1594

This summer, as for two years, the so reeding programs would not only provide food for needy youngsters, but would provide Jobs for teenagers us well. The impact that might be expected :Is the word spreads round the cities was not lost on members of your own dep.irtment. In their own words: In summary, because of summer strife and metropolitan problems, the Speial Food service Program for Children has become 1111 important dimension of smnmer programs throughout the nation and under our current apportiomnent formula and btulget restrictions, Section 32 block grants are neeesary if we respond to this need. Because of the hnportant role and soeial impact thk program has on endeavors of this nature, considerable rmetion will he forth- eolning in the event funds are not available. III liddition, ve anticipate a grimed swell of public opinion that could very well affect the renetion to the sula)lemental appropriations bill now in the Senate." Mr. Secretary, what the House and Senate have authorized you to do is something that you have always had the authority to do. Our actiom; 'merely mider- score our belief that your department has a responsibility to honor the commitments, verbal as well as written, which have been made. The National Conference of Mayors, meeting in Philadelphia, 'went tocon- siderable effort to alert their Senators of the pressing need for innuMiate action on the summer feeding programs. They are all too aware o.2 thr "Important role and social impat" of sueh tt program. The cities have been quiet. To reward that tranquility by eliminating the programs on whieh that quiessence, in part, depends would only write large the idea all too often believed; that government will respond not to responsible action but only to riots. I believe this to be a matter of the utmost urgency. Your department solicited the expansion of the programs, your department assured Congress that it would be able to meet all Its obligations. Only three days remain for that to become a reality. Sincerely, GEonar Mc Gomm, Chairman.

FROM GEORGIA HOUSTON COUNTY COM MI*NITY Amos rouNem. WAI:SD ROBINS, GA.lane 16, if07.1. lion. Gkottoz NieGovrax, U.S.Senator, Old Senate Building. Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: We wish to appeal to you for help in reinstating the slimmer lunch lirogrn m which has abruptly been caneeled by the Buram of Manage- ment and Badger. This progra III1,4 designed to feed needy eldhliPti during the sooner when no other linwh program Is a Many volunteer8 have worizeil long and laird to premtre forI liI pregram. lii llonston County alone. Il.000 children expect to be fed Monday. Because of no WA ming of this calweintion until all plans and publicity were vomplete, these children will go hungry and the public will lose oil eonIldenve in the Federal Government's l'oneern for the welfare of the needy. We earnestly solieit your i.amport and fel confident that through your attions the needy wilt be cared for in our Nation. RONALD now LA N D. Chairman.

FROM PENNSYLVANIA CITY OF PHILADELPHIA; June 24, 1071. THE SENATE NUTRITION COMMITTEE, Senate Annex Building, Washington, D.C. GENTLEMEN: I was deeply distnrbed ,o learn that Philadelphia's special Smn- mer Food Program allocation would not be forthcoming fer the summer of 1071 This program was higldy successful-Mist sumnwr. when over 30,000 disadvantaged youth were served a lunh. In, far too nutny instanms, this lunch was the ouly nutritional meal these youngsters reeeived during the day. 8 4 1595 od and Nutrition Divi- The City of Philadelphia,working with the State J Regional Office hadmeetings, early as March of this sion and the officials in attemlance had i,iii encouraged, by both year, where those City the Special Summer Food the State and the U.S.D.A.,to make application for Program. IL S. Tate, we strongly urgethe Senate Nutrition On behalf of Mayor James for lunches for 30,000 Committee to do whateveris in its power to seek funds disadvantaged youth in the Cityof Philadelphia for the summerof 1971 sincerely yours, FRED T. COMETO, Managing Director,

FROM NEW YORE:

SenatorGEORGE MCGOVERN, Chairman, U.S. Senate. estimated that 3.5 million dollarswould be neces- New York State officials have in New York City. This sary for summerfeeding programs for Poor children city. As you know, would provide 100,000 luncheseach day and 150 jobs in our HR 5257 has now been agreed onby both the House the conference report on by the President. the billwould authorize the and Senate, and if it is approvedsection 32 funos of up to 35million dollars Department of Agriculture to use other funds appropriated this year and 100 milliondollars in 1972 in addition to meals for needy children. Yourefforts to see that these for free and reduced price will be greatly appreciated. funds are utilized by the Department JOHN V. LINDSAY.

FROM SENATORS MONDALEAND HUMPHREY U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON L %MOB ANDPI/RUC WELFARE. Washington, D.C., June 25, 1971. Hon.CLIFFORD M. HARDIN, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. informed by NAB DIR. SECRETARY: Recently,cities all Over the country were your Department that therewould not be adequate funds forthe Special Food Service Program for Children.Asa result, hundreds ofthousands of children they had been promised by localofficials. are being denied meals that children are benefitting from fiscal 1971 In our state of Minnesota about 50,000 with an funds. A total of $305,000 wasprovided for the Minnesota program, additional $301,00o requested. For fiscal '72, the planscall for up to 500,000 children to he served in both yearround and speelal expanded summer programs, The anticipated dollar amount for fiscal1972 is $1.5 million. Tbe Department's request for this program infiscal 1972 was $20.7 million the same as this year, and totallyinadequate to meet the need. Indeed, the estimate of the League of CitiesNationalConference of Mayorspresented to the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and "InmanNeedsis that at least $47.9 million is needed. I3oth houses of the Congress have made clear theirintention that this program receive adequate funds. The necessaryfunds are available to you under Section 32. Therefore, we respectfully requeit that youtake immediate steps to insure that the financial requirements of this progrirl aremet_ Too many children are already goinghungry.'e ean not permit any more to be made the victims of budgetarymismanagemiat or bureaucratic indiffer- e nee. With warmest regards. Sincerely, WALTER F. MONDALE, U.S. Senate. HIYBERT H. HUMPIIREY 85 U.S. Senate. 1596

FROM 45 U.S. SENATORS JULY 2, ion. lion, GEORGE SHULTZ, Dircetor, feu of Management and Budget, Executive Office of the Pres Went, Washingten, D.C. DEAR Ma. SHULTZ : We are writing to ask your immediate reconsideration of the funding being made available for this year's summer child feeding programs. These programs, authorised under the National School Lunch Act, provide nutritious meals for thousands of needy children in our urban areas. Early this week the DepartmeLt of Agriculture announced that it would alio- eate $18,1 million for the summer feeding programi, noting that this represented a three-fold increase over last summer. It is a matter of g-1:n ye concern to usthat this figure represents $15.0 million leSs than what is needed to insure full funding for the summer feeding programs. We are concerned that millions of children in New York and Newark, in San Antonio and Los Angeles, in Minneapolis and Indianapol... and hi many other cities throughout the nation will not be fed this summer, as they had.been promised. The Department of Agriculture has publicly acknowledged that, as of June 18, it had received requests from cities and state for smnmer feeding programs totalling $26.6 million. However, we believe that this total does not reflect the latest estimates, A more recent survey conducted by the National Le:tgueof CitiesU.S. Conference of Mayors revealed that s,nan,er reque..sts actuallytotal $33.0 million. It is from . this second estimate that we derive the need for an additional $15.0 million. It is not as if our cities and states had acted without Department of Agricul- titre support or promise of full funding. As you are no doubt aware, the expansion in the smnmer feeding programs this year is a direet result of. DepartmentOf Agriculture promotion in cities and states across the nation. Our cities were urged to expand their efforts and were Promised that the necessary moneywould be forthcoming. Programs were planned in full faith that the Departmentof Agriculture would stand behind its promise of ftmkt Moreover, when some question arose as to whether sufficient money wasmig"tli acted swiftly to provide both the spending authority and funds. Lost week the Congress specineally authorized the Secretary of Agricultureto spend up to $100 million from Seetion 32 funds (customs recaipts) on thisyear's summer programs, in addition to whatever funds mightbe included in the Depart- ment of Atzriculture appropriation bill. As Senator Talmadge, Chahananof the Senate Agricultnre Committee, expressed it. .. thebill we have reported, authorises the Secretary of Agriculture to use Section 22 flinds in any amount (subsequently set at $35 milHou for FY 1971 and $100 million for FY 1972) necessary to keep this program going beyond ;Tune 30. The Committee ineinded this provision because of the practical certainty that the appropriation for the Department of Agriculture for Fiscal Year1972 will not he Ilassed before Jnly 1, a n d because of the probability that insufficientfunds will be provided by a continuing resolution. . Givenall of these circumstances, there would seem to we to be no basis for the concern now manifested in many city halls about a cut-off of money for the suimner nutrition program." That was the expressed intent of the Senate and the House. We were aware that the regular appropriations process might not be completed in time, and might notbecause it began before the funding crisis was made knownprovide as much as would be required. It was the firm intent of the Congressthat the Secretary of Agriculture be given clear direction as to the use of Section 32 funds with respect to this program. Congress intended that the summer prOgrams he Immediately and fully funded. This matter is one of the greatest urgency. We respectfully request that full funding of the summer feeding programs be reconsidered in the light of Congres- siorril action. Sincerely. Clifford P. Case, Birch Bayh, .T. Glenn Beall, Jr., Lloyd 'Bentsen, Ed- ward W. BroOke, James L. Buckley, Lawton Chiles, Marlow W. Cook, Alan Cranston, Thomas F. Eagleton, Mike Gravel, Fred R. Harris, Philip, A. Hart, ranee Hartke, Mark 0. Hatfield, Ernest F. Hollings, Harold H. Hughes. Hubert H. Humphrey. Daniel K. Inouye, Henry Jackson, Jacob K. Javits, B. Everett Jordan, Ed- 8 6, 1597

ward M. Kennedy, Warren Maganson, ("dathi; Jr., George S. McGovern, Walter P. Mondale, Jo:-pph Mei. oya, Frank E. Moss, Edmund S. Muskie, Gaylord Nelse .Bol.!tek. wood, John 0. Pastore, Clariborne Pell, Charles It Pi-my, iam Proxmire, Abraham Ribicoff, Richard Schweiker, I..B. Spoug, jr., Adlai E. Stevenson III, Stuart Symiron. I ,h rt Taft, Jr., John V. Tunney, Lowell P.'Weicker, ,Tr..;a1 A. Williams.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF TIIE PRESIDENT, OFFICE OF MANAMIENT AND BUDGET, TVashington, D.C., July 8, 107 Hon. CLIFFORD P. CASE, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR CASE Thank you for your July 2 letter concerningthe sr-timer child feeding program (non-school). As .you know, the President last week signed E.R. 5257,and we have aiicly Initiated the steps necessary to fund all of the applications'received from cities and states for this program, which as you say amount to some$33 million. We earlier had concurred with the Department of ,Agriculturein increasing last year's program threefold up to a total of $18.1 million. There isconsiderable reason to believe .on the basis of lastyear's experience, that many states will not utilize the full amounts available to them, and there isfurther concern, which the Department of Agriculture has quite properly expressed,that such rapid expansion of a program such as this can lead to abuses of the program.Unfortun- ately too, the Program is not focused, as we believe itshould be, so that truly needy children receive the maximum benefits. Nevertheless, because of the President's very strong feeling thatneedy children should have fully adequate and nutritious meals, we agreewith the De- partment of Agriculture that the applications from thevarious cities and states should be accepted and approved, and we are cooperatingwith the Department of Agriculture to provide the necessary funds, includingSection 32 funds, to accomplish this. We will also work closely with the Departmentto ensure that the program will be administered in accordance with theintent of the Congress, and that abuses are minimized. We also have in mind, asdoes the Department, the importance of proceeding rapidly, so that the fullbenefits of the program will be realized this summer as intended. Sincerely, GLOROE P. SHULTZ, Director.

FROM AMERICAN ACADEM V 01.0 PEDIATIZICS .TUNE 29, 197l. Hon. CLIFFORD M. HARDIN, Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agricukure, Washington,D.C. DEAR MR. SECRETARY : The American Academy ofPediatrics, the national organization of board certified physicianscaring for children, was most disturbed to hear that cities across the nation are beingdenied promised funds for the operation of Special Food Service Programsduring the summer of 1971. In light of the President's commitment thatall needy children receive a free or reduced price lunch by Thanksgiving of .1970, theAcademy finds the present withholding of funds indefensible. Many children servedby the Special Food Service Pro- gram are already undernourishedand should not be deprived the one nutritious meal served them daily. A hungry child cannot realize hisfull potential or maxi- mally benefit from the day's activities. It is our understanding that moneyis available under Section 32 of the Agri- culture Act of 1935, at the discretion of theSecretary of Agriculture, for such emergencies as uently exist. Although this fund has beentraditionally re- served for other purposes, we think it InOstappropriate that it be used for the relief of the Special Food Service Program atthis time. In addition to the $32 1598 million already allotted, an additional$1,1 million is needed for the full operation of this vital program. Both Houses ofCongress have expeditiously passed legislation althorizing you to use Seetion 32funds for the relief of the child nutrition prolruns. We see this legislation as simplyunderscoring the firm intent that child nutrition programscontinue to expand and reach needy children. If the Administration is sincere in itscommitment to feed the hungry children .of this nation, we are confident that thiscrisis situation will be quickly and equitably resolved. The American Academy of Pediatrics, onbehalf of the nation's children, sincerely urges that theAdministration release the necessary monies for the continued operation and expansion of the summerSpecial rood .Service Program. Sincerely yours, ROBERT G. FRAZIER, M.D. Executive Director.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, D.C., July 22, 1971. 1-lon. GEORGE MeGovEaN, Chairman, Select Committee on Nutrition and HumanNeeds, U.S. Senate. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : Your June 17 letter to SecretaryHardin concerning the status of the Special Food Service Program for Childrenhas been referred to me for reply. As you know, the Department as of June 28 had allocated$18,144,665 to the States for their summer feeding programs. On July 12 theDepartment allocated an additional $11,822,776, from Section32 funds to the States for their programs. This latter distribution was based on a July 10-11 re-checkof t.he fund requests of the States and cities as of the June 30 cutoff date.Based on the re-check we believe that all fund requests have nowbeen covered. Accordingly, a total of $29,967,441 has now been allocated tothe States for the summer feeding program. This is approximately fivetimes the amount used for summer programs in 1970 and should permit a substantialexpansion of these programa. A press release and allocation table Isenclosed for your information. The Committee's interest and support of child nutrition programs are appreciated. Sincerely, RICHARD LYNG, Assistant Secretary.

8 8 Item 4Newspaper ArticlesRegarding Summer Feeding Program

(The Washington Post, June 13,19711 CITIES LOSE U.S. FUNDS FORSUMMER LUNCHES By Nick Kots country The Agriculture Department hasinformed big cities throughout the that they will not receive expectedfunds to feed hundreds ofthousands of poor children this summer. The children were to receive freemeals, starting next week, under afederally supported summer program to feed poorchildren In day care and recreation programs. During tbeschool year, the children are helped by thenational school lunch program. City officials in Baltimore, Detroit,Los Angeles and other cities chargedin interviews yesterday that the departmenthas precipitated a crisis in ghetto areas by reneging on promises of food aid. Agriculture Department officials said11 cities, including Washington,D.C., have planned programs for 425,000children at a federal cost of $11million, while only $4.7 million is available to fund summerprograms throughout thecountry. The District has planned a $1 million programfor 50,000 children but is scheduled to receive only $145,000 for both summerand :;u11-year programs. Sea. George S. McGovern (D-S.D.)disclosed therisis in summer lunch programs and askedAgriculture Secretary Clifford Hard. In to takeimmediate action to meet the problem. Richard Lyng, assistant secretary ofagriculture, acknowledged in an interview that needed funds are not availableand that department officialsimproperly promised such funds to the cities. "I just don't see how we can satisfythe requests of all these cities," Lyngsaid. "It's a major problem and I don't have animmediate solution to it. Some of our people simply didn't face up to the budgetary rx4blems soon enough. We lune to have budgetary discipline in these things." Among cities informed this week of sharpcutbacks in expected funds are : l3altimore, which planned to start feeding40,000 children next Monday at a federal cost of $1 million. USDA has saidthat :-.11 of Maryland will receive only $265,000 for year-round programs as well as summer programs. Chicago, which planned to feed 60,000 children,beginning June 28, at a federal cost of more than $1.2 million. Chicagois now scheduled to receive only $185,000. Los Angeles, which planned to feed morethan 200,000 children with $5 million in federal aid, has been informed thatall California will aet only $8413,000. Detroit, which planned a $1.3 million programfor C0,000 children, will have to share in Michigan's total allocation of$500,000. The U.S. Conference of Mayors, in aresolution at its national convention, asked Congress to pass legislation immediatelyto meet the needs of all city lunch programs. "This is incredible," said Deton Brooks,commissioner of Chicago's department of human resources. "They droppedthis on us 10 days before the programis to start. HoW are we going to feed thesekids?" Baltimore Mayor Thomas D'AlesandroIII, said : "Our situation is desperate. We don'thave the money and the kids are going to be out there in the streets. Wehad a good.program last year ond were promised support for a better one this summer. .1 Arnold Robles, coordinator for theyouth advisory council of Greater Los Angeles, said he has hesitated to inform65 community organizations that (1599) 89 1600 promised funds will not be deliveredto feed 273,000 childrenbeginning July 1. "I'll have to bar my doors and put on asteel hat," he said. "This isjust ter- those kids." ribleone more broken promise to badly under- The -funding mixup apparentlyoccurred because USDA officials estimated funds needed to fulfillfederal obligations on theyear-round feeding program that ends June 30,and failed to consider itspledges for new funds starting July 1. amount as this The Nixon administration hasrequested $20.7 million, the same year for both summer andyear-round programs under theout-of-school feeding programs of the Child NutritionAct. liv- According to law, these funds aredistributed on the basis of poor children ing in the 50 states. TheAgriculture Department avoided asimilar crisis last year by redistributingfunds not used by other states,However, the department has run out of current fiscal yearfunds and thus cannot meet theimmediate 1. needs of big cities beginning July expand City .efficials throughout the countrysaid tha department told them to their programs this summer.Assistant Secretary Lyng said helearned 'of the fund problein only two Weeks ago.Lyng then ordered his subordinatesto tell cities their expectations could notbe met.

[UPI Release, June 25, 1071] HUNGERTWO MAYORS ACCUSEAGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT . WashingtonTwo big city mayorsthe accused. Agriculture .DePartment today of reneging; on promises to financefeeding, programs for ghetto children,raNiig the threat that,millions will gohungry this summer. The .accusationa were leveled byMayor Roman S. Gribbs of Detroit,Mich., and Kenneth A. Gibson of Newark,N.J. "The Federal Government has left usholding the bag. They have urged us to man the serving lines andthen in effect have closed the.kitchen," Gribbs told the Senate Hunger Subcommittee. "The hypocrisy and cruelty of thisaction, in the light of deliberations to authorize millions of dollars to save failing aerospacecorporations, is incomprehensible. Oarchildren .are our most precious bunion resource,yet their basic welfare is sacrificed to the rhetoric of a balancedbudget," said Newark Mayer Kenneth A. Gibson. "It seeins to 'me this is really outrageousif we can't get the release of these funds for this fealing program," said Sen.George McGovern, D-S.D., chairman of the subcommittee. Congress authorized special feeding programsfor out-of-school children in 1968. But the proaTam did not get underwayuntil 1971 when $20.7 million was appropriated, $5.3 million of which wasearmarked for sammer programs. Few cities toOk adavntage of It'howeVer,because they were either unaware of it or did not have. the 20 percnt -matchingMoney reqUired. De *reit devised a program, though, that was acclaimed bythe:USDA, which then tirf,ed other cities to make appileation for funds, assuringthem they Would be available. By the Department's own figureS, applications arenew on file totalling $29.6 million. But while USDA field agents were urging the cities topartitipate to expand the program, the administration sought only the sameamount$5.S mullion for this year. McGovern said he estimated there were requests' for atleast- $32 million on file. Cities across the country moved to expandand informed their poor people there would be free or reduced cost meals availablefor their children this summer. Detroit more than doubled' its program.from feeding 25;000 last year to an anticipated 50,000 this ven-r; ,ät 'a rost ine.ren se .from$400.009 to- $1.9, Newark moved to expand from a pilot ,$7,100 preilect.last yearto 'ona feeding 27,000 this year at, a cost of $970;0001:Los Angelesgeared up to,' feed '301,000, bUt under USDA'plans;,there will; be onlsi about $200,000available for the' entire State of California, or just enough to. ruu the Los Angeles programfor two days. 9 1601 etPer fnuds forthe pro- The USDA has agreed totransfer $11.2 million frwa That would raisethe money availllble to$1.1' millionfar gram, but no more. file. short of the $26 millionin applications already on Ono Pusage, expected :.,nticipating such a situation,Congress has ready fot the USDA to use all themontv it 0410 for the sum- next week, a bill to permit lir_Olddbot have to be appro- mer feeding programupto $185 million. This money collected on im- priated. It would comefrom a fund known as."Section ;Ill," te.;<° ported agricultureproducts. Agriculture, 1/4 informed Sen. Rut Richard Lyng,Assistant Secretary of Committee, Herman E, Talnuffige, DGa.,chairman of the SenateAgklcultok the USDA doesn't want to usethis money. "We 'prefer to obtain thesefunds from the regulaCapAtoPtlations process," Lyng wrote Talmadge.

[The Washington Post, June20, 1971] FOOD PROGRAM CUTSSEEN INCITI1 44arlioTTots charged yesterday thatt On administration Officials of four large cities P3' rellefing oh itspromise has contributed to possibletension in urban ghettos feeding programs for poorcllilafen. to expand federal summer On, Natrition, whose The officiala appeared beforethe Senate .Select Cominitteethis is really out- chairman. George McGovern(D-S.D.) said, "It seem0 to ttie rageousii we Can't get release of these funds." 1:rouse's Office McGovern said adequate fundinghas been blocked ig tPe of Management and Budget. legislatiim thit.Lorizing the Agri- Congress has virtuallycompleted action on funds, but the tura Department to spend morethan $100 million of avnipinle department has said it will spend'Only $32 10.at Pt million less cities. , . than the amounts requested by 1Ij nvitation to testify In noting that Agricifitureand budget officials refuSed McGovern said.: "The story041we stahmer feeding pro- at yesterday's:hearing, little Wonder the grams has been. so confusedand so ineptly, handled La It men responsible for thedifficulty do not want to sbotp'thor Wes." this week, increased' A4 /!etit1,enfor funds from The Agriculture Department hod mayors' pro- $20.7 Million to $32 million'following the first coxigreasiovi, tests. Assistant Secretary RichardLing: said these Plnk, Oil permit cities to and have "modekate, p/.0gralu,expansion." Maintain last ,year's program levelsthe administratio0 will be forcedto con- 'However, a department source said week author- sider spending more Moneywhen Congreis complete actioa,40t izinghigger Outlays. The.program, authorized by the ChildNutrition;'t_,proodts 80 per cent federal aid to feed poor children inday care and sumther l'ecreatinuPrograms. Offidals from Los Angeles, Detroit, SanAntonio Itucl N'ONVark testified that Agriculture Department officials encouragedthem to plan vilstly expanded summer. feeding programs, and thenat the last moment told tPeta.loney was not aVailable. "If we don't receive thuds' we aregeing tO have a tnighe hot Summer," said Arnold Robles, a Los Angeles official.'Hesaid' coinnittoity kionps had been promised a 10-week, $5 milliOn programfor 273,000 chIldrè, bzfl tlint available federal funds would be exhausted in lust twodaYS. ' NeWark MaYor Kenneth GibSOn .said : "Theineoliftrility a_,fad ernelty of this action, in the light of deliberations to authorize m1liNn0, Ofnollars to rive failing aerospace corporations, is incomprehensible.Our' qii'dreTA are our most precious human resource, yet .their basic welfare issaCrificSd to the rhetoric of a balanced budget." 0111.o. [The Washington Post, July 2, 1-0713 AIDES VOW TO IfOLD UPFOPP By Nick Sotz

.1 PreSident yeSterday signed two lawsautlintiOlbg the Agriculture De- partment to spend more for hard-presseksummerfeedizig Pl'ograms. But other administration officials continued toinsistIth* wotOd tiot alleod all the money. 1602 Congress passed the two bills after city officials throughout the country protested that the Agriculture Department had reneged on promises to expand summer feeding in day care and recreation centers. The Child Nutrition Act provides that the federal government pay SO percent of the cost of these city-run programs for poor children. (Ine new law is an emergency appropriation giving USDA an additional $17 million. USDA says it will spend this money. The other law authorizes USDA to spend $35 million already available to the department from Customs Bureau revenue. Richard Lyng. 1111 assistant secretary of Agriculture, told the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition again yesterday that USDA would not spend this money. Senators led by George McGovern (1)-S.D.) and city nmyors haveinsisted that USDA needs to spend at least $15 million more to meetcommitments made earlier to the cities. Sen. Clifford Case (R-N.J.) yesterday initiated an appeal toCeorge Shultz, director of the White Iieuse's Office of Management and Budget,for the additional $11; million, ("use had 35 senators as cosigners of a letter to Shultz."Congress intended that the summer programs he immediately and fullyfunded," wrote Case, who noted that most programs are now starting."Thbi matter is one of the greatest urgency." The 11 Republican cosigners included New YorkConservative :Tames Buckley. New York City is seeking several million more inlunch funds.

IFmtit the Wnslithgton Post. July T. 19711 ANOTHER UNKEPT PROMISE TO THE PODR If the government should have learned anythingby now about its relations with the nation's poor, it is that big promises and smalldeliveries plainly dou r work. What's more, when the promises don't conicthrough, there is not only the original problem unsolved but a new one created: the anger andresentment of the poor. Earlier this year, of:Mats from the Department of Agriculture encouraged a number of large cities, Washington included, to expand its summer feeding programs in day care and recreation centers; the children there are ones who tinnily, the school year are helped by the national school lunch program. In effect, and even in the reported words of one federal official, the Department nf Agriculture told the cities, "you get the kids and we'll get the money." The cities got the kids. In mid-June, with the hopes of the cities raised highnot to meation the feelings of well-being had by the ehildrenAgrieulture said the money would not be coming. Mayors and city officials are long used to federal bungling, especially when checks are passed out to the poorer citizens, but this pull-back was too much. "The incongruity and cruelty of this action is incomprehensible," said Mayor Kenneth Gibson of Newark. a city which planned to feed children at a federal VOA of $950,000 but now must share in the $321.000 assigned to all of New Jersey, In Los Angeles. where more than 200,000 children were planned for with $ r, million In feciertil nid and which now must share $708.000 that all California will get, an official said, "This is just terriblo---one more broken promise to the kids." That might be the bad end of the story there, but it drags on. After the city officials throughout the country protested, Congress, in unusual speed and generosity, passed legislation that wound authorize the Department f Agricul- ture to spend more money for the summer feeding programsat least $15 million to meet the earlier promises. Last week, an assistant secretary told the Senate Select commitUse on Nutrition that the department would not spend the money. obviously. neither the department not the Nixon Administration can be forced to distribute money they do not wish to. The administration defends itself by saying it is spending three times as much in this area as last year. This is fine, 5 2 1603 but the increase is not unusual in a new program the cities arejust learning about. Nor does it do much for the many children that city officials saycould be fed if Agriculture would spend what Congress has authorized. Another$15 million would go far not only to get the Job done but to keep a promise. This is not a liberal or coeservative, Democratie or ltcpublictin issue. Forty senators eo-signed a letter from Sen. Clifford Case (H-N.J.) appealing to the Office of Management rind Budget Director George Shultz to relense the money promised by the government. As we are alrea(ly well into the summer, it wonhl be thought that the Department of Agriculture would be glnd to havethis solid congressional support. Not only does it now have authorization to spend the necessary money, but a way is found for officials to saveface and stnnd behind their word. Looking beyond this particular summer, the believability of the government may be as crucial an issue ns feeding hungry children.

(The New York Times. July 8, 1071) MORFI FUNDS SOUGHT FOR LUNCH PROGRAM Wnshington, July 7--Forty Senators urged the Nixon Administration today to release Immediately at least $1.5-million in ridditional funds they said was promi3ed to cities for summer free lunch programs. They sent a letter to George 1'. Shultz, director of the Office of Management nnd Budget, accusing the Department of Agricultnre of reneging on a commitment to citices tieross the country to provide funds for mummer feeding programs this year. On une 28, otle week nfter Congress hed authorlzed it to spend $32-millIon and $.1UO-mi11ion "if needed" to fund the programs, the tiepartment annotmeed that its budge '.for the programs would be $18.1-million. Program requests from the citieslargely inner city areastotaled more than nit-million. the Agrieuiture Department said. But a survey by the National League of Cities put the total amount of the requests at. $33-mil1ion. "We nre concerned that millions a children in New York and Newark, in San Antonio and Los Angeles. in Minnenpolle and Indiannpolis and in rnany other cities throughout the nation will not be fed," the Senators' letter rend. The letter, written by Senator Clifford P. Case, Republienn of New Jersey, carried the signatures of liberal and conservative Senators from both parties. including Senators James C. Buckley and Jacob K. Jayne, Republicans of New York. Summer feeding programs nre expected to involve about 2 million youngsters enrolled in various school nnd dny-camp activities. Last year, tlw program cost $5.8-million for July nnd August alone. according to the Agriculture Depnrtment, and, at its peak, provided meals for about 564.- 000 children. The summer feeding program is an extension of a federally supplementnl program that. operntes during the school year. About 24.4 million children pnrtici- patted in the regular lunch program, with nearly one-third receiving their meals free or at reduced prima. Philip C. Olsson, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Department of Agrieul- ture. enlled the $18.1-million budget for the Hummer lunch program "ndequnte because it nssures that each state will be table to opernte programs at least nt the level they did inst year and for some. at 10 times the level." Ire added : "A review of the management of Ina year'a programs indicated to UR that programs expanded beyond this level would only be eounter-productive because of ndministrative problems." Stnte and local organizers of summer feeding programs have also criticized the Department of Agriculture for refusing to spend more. contending that they were told, In effect : "Yon get the khls: we'll get the money." Many deiniely populated states received considerably lest; thrin they nntielpated under the department's compliented formula for approprintiong funds for the progrem. California. for oxample. asked for $7-million and New York requested $4.1- million. brt they were granted $708.300 and $072,000, respectively. 1-9 3 1604 [The Washington Post, July 9, 19711 WHITE DOUSE BACKS FREE LUNCH PROJECT The Nixon administration yesterday reversed an earlier decision and agreed to meet the requests of cities for expanded summer feeding programsfor poor George Shultz, director of the White House's Office of Management and Budget, Informed Senator Clifford Case (R-N.J.) that the administration will spend an additienni $15 million to insure that cities can carry outtheir plans to feed several million poor children in day care and recreation programs. The federal government pays 80.per cent of the costs of these programs, which provide a summer substitute for poor children who normally get free meals from the National School Lunch Program. More than 40 senators and mayors from throughout the country have protested the last two weeks that the Agriculture Department had reneged on an earlier promise to fund the expanded programs. Following the protests, Congress authorized the administration to fend all requests in full, but the Agriculture Department still refused to spend an extra $15 million. Shultz said the administration will now meet the total requegts for $33 miNion, thereby permitting cities including Los Angeles, New York, Newark, and Minne- apolis to carry out their intended feeding plans. Shultz wrote Ce.,:e that the administration changed its mind "because of the President's very strong feeling phi.t needy children should have fully adequate and nutritious meals." Nevertheless, Shultz said he shared the concern of USDA that too rapid ox- Pa tedon "can lead to abuses of the program" and thatbenefits bad not: been focused sufficiently on the truly needy. The fending mixtm was first publicized by Sen. George McGovern (D-N.D.). Action came after Case, joined by 39 other senators and Republican Senate Leader Hugh Scott protested to Shultz. Said Cage: "I'm gratified that the administration reconsidered this matt.-,r and thnt millions of needy children will be fed this summer as Congress in- tendd ane Hs the Department of Agriculture originally promised."

[The New York Times, July 10. 19711 LUNC!t MOSEY A hungry child is an unanswerable argument. Whether in Pakistan or the Bronx. a maluourished child is a reproach to adults and to their mistaken Vet budgetnry considerations, administrative tidiness and other adult worries j.f,et in tbe way of perceiving that elementary truth. Thus a DeputyAt* lb.:t- aut Seeretary of the Department of Agriculture explains why his agencywante to spend only intlf the moneyauthorized by Congress for a free lunch program this summer for children : "A review of the management of last year's programs indicated to us that pro::nuna expanded beyond this level wonld only be counterproductivebecause fof administrative problems." Toc proposed summer experiment is a new adaptation of the normal- Ftehool lunch program. A suecess last summer when nearly 600,000 childrenparticipated, it was to be expanded this year to cover two million youngsters. Because ofthis rapid expansion and because a wide variety of day eare centers, dar camps, e..hoots and community organizations is involved, there are indeed "administrative problems." lint that is hardly sufficient reason to penalize these children ['rim !ow-income city families. Led by Senator Case, Republican of New Jery, 45 Senators from both parties appealed to George Shultz, Director of the Office of Mnuagementand leeleet. to overrule the Agriculture Department and spend the full $33 million authorized by Congress. The wisdom of their appeal was as clear as a child's yoke. Mr. Shultz has agreed to restore the 4unds. Compassion and common sen*e have prevailed. .0 46 1605 [The New York Times, July 11, 1971] FOUR MILLION PAWNS In the middle were nearly 4 million needy children in thenation's cities. The question : How much would it cost to give them freelunches this summer at schools, day-care centers and day camps? The citiesthemselves asked the Federal Government for $20-minion. The National League of Cities did a survey and came up with $33-million. The Congressauthorized the Department of Agriculture to spend $32-million for the free lunch program and another$100- million "if needed." At the end of June, however, the Department of Agriculture came upwith its own estimate of $18.1-million, "adequate," saidDeputy Assistant Secretary Philip C. Olsson, "because it assures that each state will beable to operate programs at least at the level they did last year and,for some, at 10 times the level." Last week, 45 Senatorsliberals and conservatives,Republicans and Demo- cratssent a letter to George 1'. Shultz, director of the Officeof Management and Budget, accusing the Department of Agriculture ofreneging on a commitment and urging that at least $15-million in additionalfunds be released Im- mediately. "We are concerned that millions of children ... will notbe fed." And on Friday, the Department bowed, announcing thatthe $15-million extra would be provided for the lunch program.

[The New York Times, July 11, 1071] FREE-LUNCH BUDGET INCREASED BY NIXON Washington, July 10Yielding to press-__re from city and stateofficials and a bipartisan group of Senators, the Nixon Administration hasannounced that it will increase the budget of the summer free lunch programby $15-million. The Agriculture Department announced June 28 that,despite requests from states totaling $33-million, it would operate the program on an$18.1-million budget. Congress had authorized the agency to spend $32-million to helpfeed about 3.7 million youngsters and up to $100-million "ifnecessary" to operate the program. The department said it had decided to limitfunding of the program because "over-expansion would be counterproductive." Today, the White House made public a letter to SenatorClifford P. Case, Republican of New Jersey, from George P. Shultz, director of theOffice of Man- agement and Budget, saying that the Administration haddecided to authorize $15-million more for the lunch program because of the "President's verystrong feeling that needy children should have fully adequate andnutritious meals."

!The Christian Science Monitor, July 13, 1971) SUMMER IN THE GHETTO America's big city ne.:white ghettos are under more than theusual miasmic smog of pressure-cooker poverty this summer, as aresult of several unhappy factors. Item: The federal government has once again fallen short onpromises made and not kept. One example, the summer feeding programsin dar care and recreation centers, for which funds were promised earlier this yearby the Department of Agriculture, only to be yanked back after many citieshad gone ahead with planned programs. Compounding its miscalculation, theDepartment of Agricul- ture turned down the emergency $15 million votedby Congress to help it make good on the DA's promise. Item: The program of "expanded opportunity for thedisadvantaged youth" promised by President. Nixon early in June, including 824,000jobs in federally supported programs. and 2.8 million recreational opportunities, maynot be able to deliver to hard-pressed big cities which. want the programsbut cannot afford them. l'iscally short cities are Cutting back on recreational programsand tbe jobs 1606 costs are a key item in the cities'fiscal plight, that go with them. Soaring welfarelagging economy. and are themselves a product of thealways, is felt in high unemploymentfigures ; Item : The economic slack, asmostly by the poor. The NationalUrban League which in turn, as always, is felt blacks by midsummer, 600,000 ofthem forecasts up to one million unemployedblack teenagers ketween 16 and 19 yearsreached in the cities. Joblessness among the already 33.8 percent in June even before allschools had let out, exacerbatingtheir way volatile ghetto atmosphere. Add tothat some 60,000 black veterans on home from Vietnam, and the potentialfor trouble is clear. this year, ac- Item : Hard-pressed states arecutting back on welfare benefits states cording to a confidential federal surveyleaked to the press. Among the making such cutbacks, at a timewhen demands are greater than ever,are such traditional leaders in welfareexpansion as New York andMinnesota, as well as populous New Jersey and California. The impact of all these factorswill vary from city to city, depending onpartic- ular circumstances. But manywill be in a similar bind asNewark, which had planned to feed children under a$980,000 federal grant. Instead, the 60percent black city will share one-third thatamount with the entire state ofNew Jersey, leading black Mayor KennethGibson to anguish over the"incongruity and cruelty" of the DA decision. Economic slack across the countryis causing a financial pinch to theaffluent, but the true "incongruity andcruelty" is that as always it is the poorwho bear the brunt, living as they do at thetail end of the economic gravy train. Appendix 2 ITEMS PERTINENT TO THE HEARING OF JULY 22, 1971

Item 1Material Submitted by the Witnesses

FROM REV. WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, DETROIT (1607) 1608 This report summarizes a comprehensive conmarhon study of grocery TABLE OF CONTENTS and drug prices and services prepared by Focus: HOPE, Inc. THE REASON An hwestimation of popuke anger wiit the innermarketplace city 3 THE AREA Maps indicating homogeneous grouping of sections of 5 THE ORGANIZATION Metropolitantexture and Detroit oruwal by income population density, racial 17 Staff,AdditionalHistory volunteers of Focus: projects HOPE for racial justice: education,signs legislation,of support THE METHOD TheConsumer Future Survey 29 Grocery Survey Goals, training of worken, survey design, extentreaction of survey,of grocers, interviews with survey leaden, ChartSancle camp:wing surveys of availability inner city chains,cf chains independents in citycornercopy and suburb:. ofone stores, survey suburban form, team chains survey and Independents ConclusionsGraphsReactions cawing from from store grocery grocers, conditions, survey local press personnelof and goods quality The HOPE Food and Drug Survey was encouraged and funded by New Detroit, Ten Dollar Grocery Basket, comparison graphs, interviewswith staff, conclusion Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTINUED SHOPPING IN SOMEONE ELSE'S SHOES Concluding remarks on the state of the inner city 87 1114 'AUG SURVEY marketplace 91 CD MEAT SURVEY Prescription survey, survey form for drug stores,graph comparison on across-the-counter goods, corclusion 103 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Method, result, interviews, comparison chart on spoilage 109 LIST OF STORES SURVEYED 113 LIST OF TABLES MapsDetroit Subcommunity Data 137- 14 SuburbanGrocery Communities Survey Data 4215 -46 ComparisonSample Surveys of Facilities on Price and Comparison Quality of Goods 51-5571-73 pit ChainGrocery Frequency Basket Per Comparisons Population 7976 -81 Drug ItemsStore SurveyPrice Comparison 9294 MeatPrescription Spoilage Price Chart Comparisons 97106 SOCIETY HE LIVENOTDOESTHAT WILLHOPEWITH IVATIBLY 2ct0 FEARWITHLIVE THEnation'swhyDo the is itpoor worseso? REASON reallyThese race pay questiorariot morewhich for erupted groceries in and *up? reached peak importance following the Detroit on July 23, 1967. If this is true, astheIn ainnera Detroit wellmajor citydocumented Freecause dwellers Press, of theblamed study anger civil conducted grocerywith local stores bybusiness Detroit's where people they was disturbance. Roughly 54% of Detroit's Urban League and felt they were listed drugtreatedMany stores. unfairly.grocery storesA sizeable and drug minority stores of were 26% blamed neighbwhood looted and burned. Out- pressedrefusedtedsiders people. wondered anyit this Morelonger way: why. likely to"The Perhapssuffer it evilswas injustice. theit was swift the Alexis solution despairing de Tocquevilleof aanger people ex- which are endured with Fotience as of a frustra- who be Detroit'slongentertained as they poor ofare have escaping inevitable, hope. from seem them." intolerable as soon as a hope can 3

0 / ThIr MN: I. (Itmens tom a. So.to massta:Staissg till I iffr'"12:2ur St Oak Stu inumor. rOol .".n."4 Nit.:711 MI it47-116ilic %AA LUC /%1. TM WAD Or nvo Grosse Po,nte I oolf rillgitri. \urOsse Pvti Park vosse Pxte Poo., t o Con TRI-COUNTY AREA MAP 7 THEofThe thatHighlandsurvey dm; comprhe and data, AREAParic, food the the Horntromdc,survey city metropolitan of encompassed Detroit and area.was forty divided two Forthe suburbanaccurateentire into city five cornmunitiescorrelation of rrmior Detroit, havethingvqniences notless. alreody theyAnd seethey been in are the paying willing suburbs. for to it. payThey for refuse the improvement, ta accept any- if they Black,classifications: Low-Middle Very IncomePoor, Low White, Income Middle Black, Inane Mier: White. la Income facilities,NegroessectionThe MIDDLE surrounding whoquality INCOME"have of goods themade BLACK University andit." areaprkes of covers Detroithere witha . hig'nly the lowerresidential It is curious to compare shopping These ore the $8,000,mediantextueSince thewas annualOVer suburban not $10,000, aincome: consideration. communities Ursderand Over $6,000, The are $12,000. suburbs nearly all are white, classified racial by rrer $6,000, Over LOWincome MIDDLE Blacks INCOMEand comparable WHITE whites. designates a large section of VMSFor accurate divided intocorrelotion five major or survey data, the City of Detroit clessifications. The following mips whitegenerallyNortheastthe peopleLOW blue Detroit. INCOME of collarthis area workersBLACKS hove withan and immense strong the MIDDLE immigrant pride inINCOME home cultures. ownership BLACKS, Like People here rend to be less =bile. They are includeTheand largelegends all core the identify poor,area designotA orthe even five sectioro.the VERY poorest, POOR of doesDetroit. not, of course, But it TheandINCOME extremethe fine WHITE. upkeepNorthwes; ofGenerally, theirboundaries property. these of Detroit are people are labelled who have MIDDLE a high whitesectionfamil4es.rt.presents or since Mexican, We the in did largest some not though casesattemptcontinucus the the overallto subcommunity give stretch percentageracial of very description will low isbe incomepredominantly predominant!), to this suburbantheinvestment remnant counterparts in of their the homes, city'sof comparable affluent who are white. income, somewhat and older who representthan their highBlack. paprIation The main density consideration and the low of medianthis VERY income. POOR sector Is the * B*cause the Hope Consumer Surveymajor chain was astores cereus and of athe heavy sampling of large sized DepressingareasThecenters LOW on the INCOMIof poverty eastmost and BLACKcolcernis notwest the designationduringsides main of thecharacter the civil coverscity disturbanceswhich of thosethese were twoneighborhoods, oflarge July, '67. the subcommunitiesemusindependents, tract number, thatit was and were necessary group fairly the homogeneous to census tag the trocts stores in popu-into by Theseofbut, opporr rat'oer, Ore mity, the a growing people and a who strorgrestlessness, 'want sense the SOMe ofdernonds self-deter kinds for ofrination complete shopping and equality con- pride. asof identifyingLargelationa trend. density,groupings an exceptional mean such income, as these store and prevent here racial and the texture there posslility . THE ORGANIZATION FOCUS : HOPES INC. darFocus. after the HOPE Kerner began Commission March 6, 1968,puHiched its Report on only one year ago, three Civil toFocusing be done, thct yet concern so little is seems difficult to because work. so much needs stemDisorder.bothtwo the Catholic white fearFocus: ondthat priests Summer black,was mountingwho needed Hope originateda dramatic from Gnd imaginative :ign felt the need for immediate action io in Metropolitan Detroit. tin frustration of People, The need for dramatic action, symbolic gesture and CD urbs,Onof hope. March were 6,called 300 topeop;e, a meeting black of andconcern white, at Sacredfrom the Heart city Sem- and sub- consistent commitments mcst te new awareness, us to fresh thinking riots,inary. Focus: HOPE wrote to those men and women: In the gloom of those dark months Following"In our cities the summertoday there is fear and confusion, sensitive and complete involvement. rumor upon rumor. We must never say that it is too late, for hope is our greatest asset when things look daik ar,-; For some it means an entrenchment: ior others it provokes the question: 'What can I do?' doom offer inaction. can be our greatesr strength when It ic better that we act now, than the prophets of for all it becomes a matter for real concern. not c t all." 19 EDUCATION A MUST Following the HOPE Sermons and home discussions, a Rally of Hope WhiteKerneraboutbanites Detroiters Black Reportwandered Pawer-a were allegation obout buying new the ofslogan guns, burningWhite sothen, were Rocism. of Detroit stores, they worried ond they resented the Itblacks. was time White to teach subur- wosandforthe coiled Dr. Interorgonization Martin for Faith Easter Luther Action ofSundoy, that King, Council. roily. Jr. HOPE The rally was Aprif 14, 1968, hy Focus: HOPE and developedresponsible into a memorial for the initiation aboutpeopletimenever racism inwas heard Detroit short. ond the and prejudke word Troy and and Center fear from their pulpits. Tensions were and hypocrisy. Many hodLine ond Dearborn Heights building; overA housing the Jeffries task force developed from thr; concern Expressway demolition. HOPE brought local groups Servik_s and Store Represent- of HOPE volunteers citizens,Onfor March the 55 first 11, priests offive o threedaysmet ot afterday Franklin training the first meeting with 300 interested sessionSettlement on racism, in attitudinolLake Orion centralatives.intoInvestigations contact city housing with Neighborhoodover ond severol the thousonds weeks Lego( indicated of disploced, thot o Interests quickly broadened to the generol for resole to low partialdetzrioration and immediate oflow incorna families. changetalkThey abo..t andheord the the newsmen Kerner city. These Report. and men were psychologists and sociologists and picked for their courage, ir.elligence radicals withCrisisincomesolution local of families.wasUrban housing the Housing rehobilitionAttendonce interests in Denver, ond of ot existing thethe Colorado,FHA Notionol housing !et to as rhe -.Ian for rehabilitating Conference on the well a< meetings decision that servicesandArchbishopity. ability During in 178to speok.Deardenthe parishes next They informed threeof were Greaterweeks Detroit. they Onwould March speak oll12, atof 1968 ollthe the pastors about the crashexcited men, conscious of their Sundoy responsibil- in 1969,1,000 Focus:homes HOPEutilizing would the 221 provide h Section c of the Federal Housing Act. Aownprogrom press spokesmen. release and asked described them to that program: introduce the visiting priests os his SUPPORT FOR THE BAILEY FAMILY trainingpresentation"Involved for wcs 55 and priestseducation home on meetings. thefor clergynature After and of prejudice threelaity, days pulpit decision:In early April, they 1968were Coradogoing to Baileysell their aod house his and move wife reoched a painful from all forand concentrating5,000 attituchnot people change, on ot the the Urbon U.a training of CrisisD. and Memorial Building,assembly was heldAarch 24, 31 andBlock Power. stonedwhiteintothe Warren. firsttheir day $25,000house, Thethey paint-srmayeciBaileys andranch their home, were eight aresidentstheir rociallyyear gorage mixed old daughter, Pamela, movedof Warren barrossed them, door with insults, couple, ond from ofDetror.,AprilSermon up 17to presertations125600,000ir 178 ir theCatholic with suburbs), were 85-90,000 parishes given reoceing on (53 in a people of oll faiths tlle City congregationof schoolwhileOn Petitioneach Aprilhurling day 12, of hoteful teams Support1968, wordsof C Warrento be and circulated ...othersthreats atfollowedthrough the Fridoy, Hope volunteers drew up a all the churches frightened child. little Pomela to 20 oresentelcn."involved ir home mer rings following the sermon Warren. Coiled a Voice of Support, it reoa: Michigan."In June, At 1967, thct time,the Bailey because family Mr. moved Bailey into was Warren, a countByREQUIREU Eastervotes. The'68 LEGISLATION supporters Blue Ribbon of opower State ployFair hodHousing foiled Bill in beganthe former to menthadprcgromNegro, to has be of neversomestopped ho,Tossment, ceased,people by police intaking at the first action. community mony so strong Butforms the organizedthat and harrass- it causing coordinatorsRepresentatives.Ryan,legislature. Focus: throughoutHOPE Under drew the Wayne, directionup Profiles Oakland of ofHouse all andthe Majority StoteMacomb Senators Leader counties. andWilliom An Cells of volunteers were pulled together under area We,fomily,untold who griefso oremuch and citizens soher-tache that of they Warren, to haveoll members recognizingdecided ofto thismove. that cur full passed.calls,ofestimated their and Lansing 6,000delegate representatives volunteers trips to laboredLansing. through to Thesupp3rt home State orvisits, Foirchange telegrams,Howing the mind Bill phone Its passage was not a great step, but its failure would have nowfeelwouldsupport thatto bepublicly has it a is tragedy beennever ask lacking, themtoofor ourlate to feelcommunity. reconsiderto actthat and their and wouldFurther, leaving stay like with we ship.ordincncesSeveralconfirmed The of followingthe in severalimcgecells letterdeveloped ofareas white from including racism a by Shelby HOPE inSouthfield theTownship began black workingand community. Community Shelby on localTown- openingWeus.the Wewant prejudice will up them try,of Warrento cwcnd be Christian bigotryour to neighbors,all shown people, people, them toof to bewhatever onovercome a soport many of race, the occasions. Council officer reflects their enthusiasm and endurance: whichourselvesnotiono!;ty affects to or overcome ourcreed. American We the pledgedread sociery, disease that sa we thatof will rocism all dedicate may Fr. Wink.. GM. ohom NovemberUtica,119115 Miotioon 27, %airyWW1 V. Constitutionlh,e in the declare dignity andas the equality right of which every God man." and our NetDermeit.2701Sand Fo W.Heart bAketip,,Oticeoe Semi, nry Cortieckwt: Two Osmond five hundred men and women signed this statement toelateSoilingly petoev with Shelby Mums. ow omnetto bileietopea Om Coweil exerbory end wince mot on&rive inmete..01at. I es on the Utioe-Fiballin o. umectemlel memo whichthe wasMaconsb then published Daily Press, in full and page the ads Michigan in the Royal Cntholic. Oak Tribune, Nationc1 enThFair bird(Iola* Mooing.Wok ofolSciteva Owthis Cotwil roe, end bomevo,re ior ewe your yen excellent it 0.7, to thank rob vor ot rn. Caorn;t nat featuredmagazines the and Warren other major- Bailey newspapers Affair. picked up the story; JZT Themosfwiecentime :we bonnem leIN one ill sriloot vete white. egeintt tn oval 44W1 Fol.Wades. dPlowing Uttur undo- ;MOW.. toBaileys,For stay; matey forit waswho the acommunitysigned, symbolic it was gesture of Warrenthe first strong courageousit was enough a confrontation to step; encourage for the with them whenmewl>,maybeWm it,we ow mell beve cows Ow ow it hoe Itno* jut, to ort limn nook err Vnit SoOw ....butbe rove ow totwee,mom be ont little Imormr"...eor o ruedlip.d inantimm.Wen War antqww n knewrelationsconscience new pride; and that correnunity those moved who many affairshad churchheckled groups. congregrations little Those Pamela who signedand to initiate thrown the humansupport in God it ow tom." Calos..hybeansincerly, C, Wino, leleiees Commit". rocks knew shame. Warren was not healed but it found Hope. 21

OFfN SUPPORT FOR RACIAL JUSTICE is tentative--hopeful: the hands are not joined but reaching out advertisingandBumper there stickers are their those or vim lapel people in badges what who they areare constitutionallytheconsider subjectSome opposecl of a manyrinky-dink,protesters to jokes, may loud- be pure, but whiteon towcrdboth and sides oneblack cfanother, communities, finger tipsan the sign indicates the expectotion barely touchire5. Theexpectation word based on genuine action of both the HOPE dealmanymouthed,Drivers oc are courage Madisonhiding with HOFE behindto Avenuelet stickerspeople a manner. know on their cars thin rationalization. where you stand on the race issue. have been stopped It takes a gcod problemand sincere, that enthusiastichave mounted efforts to crisis. towards solving the specific ulatedby the orpolice, harassed questioned at work, and suspected or ridicsiled at stop lights,awful congrat- lot that can be done to toasted by their neighbors. 80,000As of the stickers Spring and of 1%9, buttons. Focus: From car HOPE volunteers have distributed overboards and bumpersexecutive to classrooms and otherscontributeFor manyknow to peoplewhereracial justicewethere *Ind, is and not and peace,an letting others know where we stand but all of us can let bigotry and tooffices,refrigerator other HOPE cities doors, andsigns states. to have factory spread bulletin Human relation grouse in throughout Metropolitan Detroit Iowa have adopted the Royal Oak, HOPE Theunwillingmay HOPEbe the but sign mute says occeptance. a lot, The difference h a cannvnity between open black and white hands speak of rhe expectation,Southfield,sign for theirJackson, and symbol, action and beyond Davenport, realizing that hope is the words. product of honest brotherhood22 of races, not brotherhood achieved, but one that SYNOPSIS OF THE PERMANEt1T STAFF OF FOCUS: HOPE, INC. ParishSacredWilliamCo-Directors from HeartT. Cunningham, 1955-58, Seminary, on waspresentlythe lowerassistant Speecheast pastor side, and whereat Drama St. Catherine's he Directordeveloped at ConsumerCunningham Survny, and Fraser.and presently Mrs. Josaitis heads thewas Hope Co-Chairman Consumer ofProgram. the Hope on Commitfreonneighborhood.communityEducational Human Re onprograms panels Educationlotions, One andof andFr. the forumswhereCunningham worked founders forthroughout on a oftheperiod servedthe growing Archbishops theof as seven metropolitan Chairmancrisis years of Committee the ofhe area,changingthe worked BusinessJerroluResearch Administration Reisman, and Development former from VISTA New Coordirotor Yorkvolunteer, University. received Previous an M.A. job in Fr.atanatomydefinko all Cunningham of the of racism.Projectissues organized ofCommittment housing, a Community education, Series. Retreat employment Pn.. and the Fr. Cunningham gave the conch.ding conference In the p . ;or moniederal years newReismanCo.experience N.Y.,fv)using researched and includes program statistical stockand for directed low marketanalyst income the analyst with data families. ATTAC, processiogwith the JamesDetroit. on HOPE Dines Mr. ofretreat, Hoperetreats.thecouples, problems anVolunteers intensive college of the madeand formation community high their school originaland as sensitivity students. the social responsibility commitment Acouse, major was ofpurpose uson to all. thesepresent Hundredsof the VOLUNTEER WORK FORCE SpanishAllMaterials JeromeSaints speaking atParishes R. Sacred Frose,, Detroiters from Heart presently 1957 Seminary, in to 1957,teacher 1960. was and and assistant was Coordinator involved at St. in ofBoniface planning Instructionai and the Fr. Fraser worked with homesoldofhasMost bumper all meetings. provided economicpeople stickers, needchallengingNo ond one ond to educational conbe oct.K1 given workestimate as forsomething resourcebackgrounds thousands the thousands and to of do--ahost ond black of couplesfaiths.specific hours and white Volunteers thatfor job. peopleHOPE andchaplainResearchHuman served Affairs onof Committee. Youngthe Deportment State Christian Boord He was of Workersfor the involved Library Detroit and andin Archdiocese, Christiancommunity Material Family Development. affairs serving Movement, groups, on its Focus:fullymassivezealous attempted. HOPE, andeducational talented 178 Within parishes program,volunteer two weeksheld the leaders orgonefational largest following expended of its the kind meetings announcementin everplanning success- with the HOPE of on Heurban has environment, been active inand numerous taught courses conferences, on Social institutes Problems. and seminars raceinvitingcontacted.coordinators crisis all ondcorners, Block ond to resource oby Sundayof block, every personnel. eveningond faith, door to home the Thousandsto doorSunday meeting. the of sermonward host wentcouples on outthe were offorMrs.Administrative the the Eleanor ChristianArchbishop's Josaitis, Assistant Mothers Committee Parish coordimitor on Human and Relations, deanery past representative president , coordinator of the Community Retreat Thousandslatingtypists, survey ond worked clerks. forms on the to computerconsumer datasurvey: sheets. shoppers, Key pinchcomputer operators, men, Hundreds labored through the night trans- andMovement, mother Areaof five Coordinator children, initiated for United Focus: Foundation, Hope with suburban Frs. wife gotechnologistsdoctors .erous writing response. ond prescriptions experts from for the the food drug and survey, drug industriesdozens of gave 23 But the ultimate in responso is whAn people begin to develop their acrossof Commerce, the country local as universities well as and Federal authorities who have high schools, and colleges wereofwhoown independent laterprogroms. born assumed out of HOPEhuman first positions steps relations in the groups Suburban in had a hand in training most of the priests token with Focus: HOPE. Modeled after Southfield Ministerial Association parishes and communitiesAction Centers. Scores alreadyvoicedare being their been preparedinterest. contacted. Localfor theSpecial food and profiles drug on inner major chains. organization have city stores therequestedFrederickheld churchesHope 2 one EducationalSch1otz,the day offormat trainingMs Presidentdenominotion. of Program, thesession Focus: of thefor HOPE theAmerican clergy program Drs. Arthur Cryns and Franklin of thatLutheran area. Church, Bishop to be used in all uspoorFocus: to doin HOPE thesomething central is not about citysatisfied by documenting market place.the problems we uncovered. It becomes compelling for the plight of the bytrainingSweig Ford developed Foundation.for religious the HOPEleaders. Program The for Cryns-Sweig project was funded Clergy into a more extensive THE FUTURErealisticWhat do expectation.we hope to do? HOPE What expects are our to provide: plans? Hope is built on ConsumerOneCONSUMER of the Survey.several SURVEY actionThe purpose programs of this surveybegun by 403 by Focus:women HOPE in the was the (I) ofdemands theThe community. ability of our to volunteers remain responsive and to the to needs the aboutcity and supermarkets, suburbs was smallto answer grocery stores (1) Do the poor pay more? unequivocally the following questions and pharmacies: (3)(2) An inPmgramsimmediate the consumer to attack eliminate survey. on theproblems housing defined crisis (3)(2) AreDoesinner facilities skin c.ity color andand affect suburban products service? shoppe-,?equal for (4) theJobsfor theuse for poor.of hardcore, this massive local housing unemployed, program and as with TheBlack consumer in grocery survey stares exposed and some pharmacies. of the injustices for the poor ond White women from The following recommendations were made at blackclout, members.to stimulate trade unions into accepting the request of the slidehandBinringhom,Task presentotionthe Forces; appalling Taylor, the of conditionsConsumer Decrbornsurvey findings Advisoryonoof Grosse has shopping in the central city. AConvention sponsored by the been mode to New DetroitthroughoutPointe learned the firstState of exploratory,ItNew should Detroit be noted Incorporated,rather that than these directive. which recommendations assisted in were funding t'oe survey. tentative and localMichigan.U.A.W.;24 government Business The completed groups,and Professional the report Better in groups Businessbook form Bureau, will be sent to Chamber Sincein serious the recommendations and, apparently, were fruitful made, dialog Focus: with Hope an Ad Hoc has engaged theandpharmaceuticalPharmacy Associated representative Study Food profession. of Committee,Dealers major Meetingsgoodhave comprising chains,made have arrangements and beenthe representatives major held officersfarwith discussing owners of the - Discussions withon pharmaceutical majorthead hocdirection officers committee of of associations: Dean phannacist has Martinbeen groupsset UnderBarr up ofrepresenting from Wayne the metro-state, the asinoends thethe surveyfindings to issue findings on a progressfollow-up and specific report surveys, onrecommendations. these in the negotiations, near future. Focus: as wellA. HOPE Education professionalPreeminentpricespolitan and area across-the-ccunter in torole preliminary discuss of the wideprescriptionist talks variations drugstore ocis been and insupplies. the prescription his co- - Publication and distributionbeenSURVEY; received of pre-publication HOPE from CONSUMERS government orders agencies,have already univer- possiblypharmacieshistory.interest Suggested in w'thconjunction in Very the Poorwasdoctor with theand in aestablishing Low thesmall patientsIncome neighborhood of Block medical ethical areas, Consumeracrosssities, religious the problemsnation. and humanof the poor relations presented groups to the B. Negotiation clinic. group,andwhiteproblems will community: churchbe kept af thegroup, current a central slide schools, to show cityinform shopperhas etc., human been of along prepared therelutions with - Continued negotiationsofalreadystares thepilferooe mythsand beenwith Associated and aboutmajorheld personnel with blackchain Food major buyinggrocery Dealers:rapport, chains power, totomeetings dispel initiatepatron some haveren- requestssuburbs.partDiscussionsrecommendations in the forTo survey, thisareiate beingservice.we particularly haveappropriate led hadby trained severalthose to the ladies from hundred group. thowhc took C. Continuing Survey Services stores,ovat!onmanagers and of existing the and hiring dishio structures, of supervisors. Black thepersonnel, building especially of new - Support through surveyConsumerBetter data Business ofAdvisory such Bureau, group Council, Coloredas the CMI Peoples Rights Commission,Time, the andfoodFocus: willand provide drug HOPE prices the willogress communitr,through keep ascurrent monthly it is with made. its samplea information report surveys on on MCHRD.ChamberisIndividual preparing of Commerce, profiles from infor survey Departmentmajor datachoins: a of profile Focus:Agriculture of HOPE and D. Consumer Action Line Conversations with hundrech of people during willsurveyors.andconditionindividual bedetailing given of produce, storestheonly subjective to for the meats, each store comments chain, bins,official notingfloors, ofof the prices,etc. chain This information is classified and tomightThereprices, hovethe hearwassurvey services,a telephone alsosuch revealed the complaints. quality frustration seMce a andgreat toFocus: availabilityof heardeal not HOPEintendscomplaintsofknowing discontent of goods. who of with concerned. correction.to properinvestigation,shoppers agencies of foods and for andrefer cther drugs, the investigation substantiated make an immediate and complaint 25 I ; nittlkMONIONIC NOM k ' rosivefs' a. : / S,41 , 3 I FOCUSING A irg//, CONCERNDIffICULT THAT IS BECAUSE NEEDSMUCH TO'0 0$ DONE BE LITTIE SO WORKSEEMS YETbr1111TO THE ETHOD GROCERYdesignedA Ravi), to seek ond oocwenteda crew SURVEY by nuture,orbwers the to Consumer Survey was these questions: andcf;inond cha:rt flee prockcesibvrbs, :es stores, rhot ',emskiependents wereindependents, area recorded wide, in the aandbetween inter corner typical grocery list city andchoins suburbs, in the and inner corner Citygroceries. The price shoppe 2. What;. What is rhe it the quality relJtion of food of inner ovoilable cityto too; totheir suburban couoterpots? and drvg pricesthe inner city, grocerieswhkh cznk the best inner be explainedcity provide in prkes and percentages. thrst port of the consumer surve In addition, the objectives of the surveyespecially mat ond fresh predict, relative to oction program were the suburbs, relateinteNiewsAnother the part process among e the oftheconsumer organizing directors survey orc .urvey 'otus: is better and described in raped HOPE. These interviews its effect on thetous.h on the I , follows: ro involve suburban women and inner city block women produce,inconsistenciesvolunteers ond cs servicewell in pricing,as discriminationthe areas quality shopped. control within They ;n meat eyewitness account of why chain stores. The and fresh andinc Volelargeavg stores.buying stores inor thesurveying inner city situat:on, and suburbia both food comparing small poorpowerstheirrorviews poor might in pay cityore pay more, includedgovernment much but leu notas toa only constructive QS on C. and the food industryreceive of ways higher in which quality. Om iticism to the larger 2. To provide on opportunity for suburbantheaware women disadvantaged of the marked areas with their difference! in the buying patterns of affluent home areas. to become TrainiNTRAINING: for the FOCUS: Focus: HOPEHOPE FOOD food and AND drug survey was DRUG SURVEY designed 3. fe develop racially mixed tearmbyre*, whopow to gay Inform more. the publk at forge of would act or a spealrersthe reasons why the requestonti-pover'yCenterand executed (ATTAC), of M. workers. oyRoberta the a federally Area The McB4de, trainingTrainirg funded program training was agency Educationaland Technkal Coordinator Assistance of the initiated at the far Mkhigan's DetroitprogramTo accomplish and was Me initiated these suburbs goals to wife equip an dividedintensive, into areas rhe shoppers with a survey technique. profersional troinirg either by rare or ConsumerATTAC Research has hod Council.considerable experience both in research.the Consumer In 1966 meonirgfulcouldincome L: in processed order prnfile that ofin material buyingcomputers, gotheredand andsellieg reassembled habits. to from area survey sileets provide a withchains.ATTACEducation Imo( ccordinoted neighborhoodfield and ina survey organizetiorts ofdesign the A and & P This svey re.ulted in meetings of directed reword improving and Bi-Lo supermarketsupereorker officials dentsmetropolironMajor in th, chaim suburbs area and wee where independent compred such with stores the in some cornperisons were pglble, The the inner city and chains and indepen- andTheconditions cothnnu-'qorncy forregular'y shoppers centen conducts whichand heightening coverclasses consumer meal planning and budgeting welfare comparative shoving,in schools, settlement houses awareness. stchrsdecimated of the Ion-competitive by the ri.sts was corner investigoted. grocery Besides pricing grocery located in area: ondco-ep ADC and incomes. wholcale buying, 31 appoximotelyOn Apil 1, 1968, 400 ATTAC housewives was informed planna toby beFocus, involved HOPE in thethat survey. B. 2. ChildrenI. sent to do shoppingunsophisticatedInability shoppers to underdo corporison pressure shopping ConsumerandHo If theof the other 'womenernearch hail were Council. suburbusinnercity Many mown of the center latter redhod through c'reo,ty the rem; ted by Focus: HOPE, April 18, the discussion focused on the survey itself, its C. Lock adequate refrigeration ond freezer some. orgonizotion.ortendel :answer education clams coot:I:noted by Wr. McBrick's functions crid key points. I, Funcforts of a Survey This inclu*d: discussionthe viewedneed ft, period.tho f: food fltn After and lunchdrug surveythe 22 trainersinApil Dehti.. 16, seise:led ThenEdifier the Curminghorfrom group the sec .t to the membled group on The Poor Pay Move, whicn 'ullowed by a C.B.A. To bring to light Lmexpected informationTo influenceTo 'Novick Jorge precise numbers information of people Ivintroductorylorgr the group block (orond orientation. the whIte basis housewives, of aptitude who and hod interest), many misconceptionshod their It was in poet a get-acquainted session E.D. Tocommunity educatemake pecple involvementthe canvassers aware of each others' problems - APOaboot Il, one IiNe another. 22 tremens met at ATTAC heodquarters, In A. What to look for inKind this of survey service (number of checkout counters, COold buying potter% , includedthis session the 'Ix), (*Hawing: were briefed mom/ extensively of the poor. The outline fo, :Ile discussion i the needs 2.I. length of lines, etc.)PocicogingCleanliness 1. Why Do the Poor Poy Morel B. 3.1. Variance in pricy of onWithinNumber item a ofstore avoi'able carts B.A. SociollyBak needs created wont,1. 1. ShelterFood C. 2. vertisedNorntwr of sole itemsWithin actually a chain available when ad- 2.1, WantsWaitsond creoted embodkd attitudes throu9h in moriem advert,,ing ArNricon voioes /VI Vi, te last full training day, the troinees engaged in D. Manager - is he polite and he!pful E.o. CreditPopularity buying of preporerl foods Lo..uries that have evolved inn, necessities; practicedrole p'aying deaiing old reviewed with situations a dummy like: survey form. The woven C CO1mit to a limited shopping areaof lock because of money or tromportation Con, tC, , 2.I. TaxPoor being quality runy goods up twice or service. or incorrect amounts II. 2. Scene ChorocterisUs of the Poor IrmerNeighbothood city supermarkets 'caner stores' shownBeing o-. occusedcosh regis.er of shoplifting. tope. 32 A, Knrylow income usually fixed though living costs The training was upplemented with talks by several °snide (ATTAC1 discussed evaluation one measurement discussed the legal techniques. ofresource Health, petiole. discussed Miss the Janis following: Lyle, e nutritionist (rom the Bawd IapectsAttorneys Jr legal of aid theHenry in survey. case Clecge of Surveyors cod )erry were Clay harassment, such as arrest "on suspicion"advhed to disclose the names of spon- given a number to call Wilco ino;11....g fort I. a. Packaged Food Read labels soringof shoplifting.survey organizations, form. They were if req but not to show the b.d.c. Checxck.ckCheck weightbeam'size names basketlargerthe ;weny group. (it arousedtwo The trainers womenless conductedsuspic;onL were cautioned oriento not to I ion towry sessions a always use a lorg. handoog for the 2. e. Meats Check prices, with the above in mind folded(to cid 1:SVOiCiPfl of shoplifting), to keep the survey . ge poser attracts attc rim), ond to leave the they were reminded to form b.to. pinfeathersChickenHot dogs - ch.ck - oll color,beef or neorneu, 1,,,m; and bruises podc and storeorlook ifpriers; C".'edbehind of to the do topprooluct, so. row In addition, or layer of goods for varying quality ri.c. Pam - well ChoiceBeef - check grade, ask if not marked strecked with lean SURThe Food and Crug Surveys were designed Y DESIGNERS with the assistaece UtilityStandardGood of 16 orgonizotions. These were Commission on Community relations (Sharon Brown) . Homburgs,. - non:tore Commercial tried in conned goods) than 30% fat MarketingDetroit ReseorchCity Planning Deparr.aent, Commission(Dr. Ito) University (John Lowe)of Detroit 3, Nth goods b.a. PartonLettuce - -check check for for softness wilting, decay ReoumeTronsoatot and ion Dodds and Land Inc. (WilliamUseAlex Study R.Kennedy) (WilliamLuedden) Hardy, I. a. Conned Goods Check brand, weight, grode (A,B,C) whether DepartmentMunalDetroit Housing Rsference of Report Commission Library and Information b. whatIngredlentliquid is is mostly Hist older or contained onheavy contents in conof can dennmIncs UnitedMayor'sDetroit Community Committee Urban Leooue Servicesfor Human Resources Develcpment Mr. Latin,concksctod of the U. A.in Colifania.W., Mrs. Theresa di:cased a survey he recently Cox, from the Bureau MichiganU.A.W.Detroit Civil Council Local Rights 174 of Commission Organizations structureof Labor Stot aed condicted surveys. cs, evlained haw Mr. Lutherher Flonnogonnffice determined prng Newtruster Detrit, Housing Inc. and Redevelopment Commission 3? TAFffl INTERVIEW BETWEEN JERROLD REISMAN howEduc sbe coukt use some mon.ty that she hod left cwer from ker Consumerion Program. I hod a meeting with Mrs. McBride ot Wayne H'STORYAN OF CONSUMER 5URVEY. FR. CUNNINGHAM CONCERNING EARLY Stateweon kr pricesalso lunch needed of and meat told reasonable and her where that pficeswhat we could weon drugs.needed get quality Three nOw meat dayswas andinformation foods, before I went and thecrdinatarto speak sub rcs toat ARoberta,St. ith Peter a drug we Clover store went Settlement thatinto wouldthe suburbs sellHouse us and drugswe throughmode and aprescrip- thecontact coin toloftions orescriptic-sproof at d;sccunt. that we were getting a real'A.' savings--and Y.:Bride our basic problem was getting the information an But we didn't have ony information on the pr.ces ing)contactprices, cr Awith 4ty couple ATTACtc of weeks ton the after third I floormet withof the Roberta building McBride, where I Iwos ..ad a e that our survey was going to start soon ond it wos work- wasinvolvedgoingcame 6.4' to be Mrs.ino, an it.to Minionthe1,e1r, drugs cnd and Mr. I toldCarat) then+ and I wouldI like to go and The first time I came to Sacred Heart Seminarynonize the training. believe Mrs. Cies. They be andconsu,Mr.Fr. Cuin Reirrnar,Mrs. ing Minion ham will atyou Sacred tell us Heart somet Seminary? hing about Was your your work involvement with the survey from that stole w-en you first met with Mr. Carney assigne,...1OnMr. ReismanJune 6th to 1%7, Protestant I became Community a Vista Ser Volunteer ices ond, in spec Detroit. i;ically. to .e ond Roosevelt. One oi the I was he Mr.particularly Reisman in the plan of the survey? werethingsorgani:otionMW paying the peiVr7eded 7:c for which milk there while is onVMS in M other a cheaper are..s :eopinn,ice were puyin5 F.,..cavse of some conflicts .riith ',:testant Services ond the for foods. They f2c hoursAt theizations thatfirst wouldmeeting attended, be we involved. and discussed there About was the an20 type op,people of trainirg from differentand organ- Jhcussion about the survey. the number of 43cProtestor, or 49c. r hove manneronity in which Organizetionn inthe the or7 area--not 'nay over had theondemanded the values oF th.the ceople refused the-np organ-but dboutdirectionThey discussedthe ofmeeting the 'JAW.the was sutvc, Onean argument that of the went things that on inthe tl.ot California survey stood would outunder in show my mind the bascrr ly s, wources on tl-e agreementing with AT.. co-.'ps, I t fronsferedSa in order to tothe use Ma): my ",rise as I -:Tn-ated to, that just work or co-ops. ComHttee highe.youthat ar..ces;v, the x1'.11 small bet,out independent them since out they werestores owrnI in the by inner black city proprietors, (harped of business. No consideration was given to Id r wads with community groups, speaking with them, givirg I transferred to them them pcirgouthe donirr; h;g1rer the prices meeting. for oneThey owner's didn't considerprofit. +' .se owners might be doing. I tried to bring that People sverethat the people were orininf -. . .on OS o what other co-ops were doing.e assisted !Rai ond th,ough contacts that I mide rr starting 5 to 7 co-cps in the city Aert, chl e to Around complaHs that are generally heard in the inner city. Well, :9her prices, the meat was bod--just o whole line of 34 N'orcr, wns :lred to sped,. tc Mrs. Roberto Mr rde ok,rrr from tha., t'r.4 hod other planned meetings at 903 W. Grand to build houses. Some whnit wasup, ondinvolved this tookin the several Survey in (fACHRO Headquarters). Gene Loren days. People went out and California, helped us set from the UAW, actually ofpeople theaver, people who and might theystill woM gothod together ato give money picnic on July 4th. On all ofwhen the theinner training oily arose. sessions were these occasions surveyedonthe Aprilmost the 16.:orrmon items when we weights had on and the survey oround 400 people, ot brands. Next was the first meetirg slheetleast, to shoN showed. we hod I would Fr.tLe Cunninghamdiscussions of the problems of the side-effects of the withoutpeoplelike to soy aidanybody thatto have the knewing sortoriginal of aabout idea secret wasit. survey,And to we come have thirty or fotty just to get the prices up with 400 surveyMr. theReisman, likeinner the cityyou coming peoplementioned and some problem, and even the beginningstogether of the suburban areasthe recognition now by some end of theof some reactionthepeople. audience Wewas showed juste xis great. amazed the film, The by the facts, and the mood and Poor Pay More. The people in the city?offriendships.ladies subuthon Did of inneryou w.menDid Feel city you tothat noticedo any theysomething were excited about about the problems particular enthusiasm an the part helping to solve of the Fr. CunninghamparticularlyAfter your term on the with Survey. Vista, you came to wc4 ,,,;4) Focus, liOPE, some of these inner city problems? Yes that's heit, and my Riamon first toll Is t et up the assignments of Yes,Mr, Reismon They were anxious to do more than we asked. choir,ree stores.'awn and Vista we rolorcodedwere anxious them to do on as mops. Viet hod the list of some of =oh a possibk the stores from the different Some of my friends Id together workDidFr. Cunningham you on programs?ct any time after the survey ask them to continue tr.; emerallywe hadot one obact worked o'clock a until a.m. midnight.) We pave our week to cosign the stores. We picking nut the stores. (The w.sole staffworked till twelvefirst assignments Mr. Yes.Reisman The ladies were completely surprised from the very That poor pay more peoplesuccess,ot the (JAW cont as fatHellIngether, as on the Vistas and peeple were April 24, and I think we hod an concerned. Wefrom had the r.ren sleUrbi 400 were talking immediate asactuallymoment they were shockedthey started them, this program. watching the movie, "The Poor I was watching the They were almost in a state peoples' facesPay More." I withjust same what of weret'oe inner on durirog elty peeple ond werepeoele go t. together ond they spoke the training sessions, it was ahout some of the problems just amazed. after, wner, It wasn't ofhad shockpaid seer 1009'0 at the some film more ofseveral the for times. furniture and the salesman justthings that come out, that peopleccmingpeople were suburbantho' vere peoplegoing or.was the greatest think this wos on imp. I think that just the reoction ste success,0: getting 'mg that those I have seen. As I from the people soout enthusiastic; toand da saying something those r,ow it was almost a guilt feeling sincethings. they hadn't aone I don't know why the onythingthat they in the wonted almost every said,needclothestogether. for to help Somesorre and ofof people thethe ionli people were lies; it was fromgiving the suburbs names startedof suburban to 9; recontact shown that there was a anddaypast. ofdurirg Some the weekthe of drugthe for 'arveyfour or some ladies have come ond worked five hours. During the meat survey day.ladies have come into the office three re f,vt times in one 35 Hay 6, ISA GILOCelie S zoom Dix mon IN NW Th SICOND MONT PAS! Sivir MIMI= Fogs 3 Has anyone bothcrred to tell these women the ht Betweendifference a betwebisupennatiet a supermarket and a man-and.pop and a party grocery, store: ME POOR results.Did the wcoten Unfortunately, ask? this will probably turn outWe are all in favor of a survey that produces handfulning. In ofthe independents inner city, the who poor expect are dealing troubleDO with ever/ Let'saPAY gtt that outMORE! of the way right at the begin- inaccuracy.aimedlike so btmany arousing other noblepublic efforts, and merely be indignation based on theysecond,overhead can who afford paydetermines it, exorbitant and who their chargerates prices. for accordingly. insurance, when Their Chainscannotfilled. But getwill itadequatenot will build not inbepolice a filledpotential protection as longriot area.or as insurance. retailersThere is a gap in the inner city that ought to be hook.whostores otter But n the thesetime-payments inner aren't city food with as retailers. frankly a fisherman inflated offers prices They'rea not price-gougevs. We have seen some athey fair are trial. being Newspapers unjustly accused were once and accusedwill not receive of un-This survey has upset many retailers, who feel vademonth's supermarkets witch-hunt, throLtiout which saw Detroit 400 hotewivesand th,., Thesub- in- above is offered in mild protest against last ment?Phetheyfairly foodreportswaying Will industry thefactually, public pot.s be opinion chmkaccorded and without thein some ladies'the sameprejudice. crimes. report fair Today treat-thor- Will vealed,and,urbs. althoughThey they intended undoubtedly their tofindings prove did thatprovehave the it.not poorIf yeta determined pay been more re Weoughly hope instead so. of angrily denouncing thc industry?However, the food industry is being placed in groupthey of could people find setinnumerable out to prove sources the worldof supply is flat.We do, however, eagerly await the results of a:curate?gltthe trial-by-jury?position Did of ayou witch, Consider, first and sit :ifv,msince ldir. whenwith is year responsible did surveywitches more knowl- "Whattheir survey, stores and wai hope the itsurvey answers taken such in? questions Were theas: you?price?edgemembers about How of manyour the industry foodtruly inclusti)knowledgeable and what tc really people determines helped 36 PurPose?surveyblack-operated dont on HA' inner-city basis of co-ops like.c.tt, covered? in store sizeWas the and iadies, your halos are slipping. If your answers are as I suspect, then for shame The followirse copy of a letter hem the Me.,or of Detroit to Mr. . rrotivesofEdward Greater andDeeb, De.roit, planned Executive h rise a concise ofDirector the survey. of opemisal of the wpm us, tho Assoc ined Food Dealers ATTAC instructors who then supervised the training of the 400 Mr. Edwatd Deeb, Executive Director June 11, 1968 universityconsumerhousewives. edecatededucation Half of housewives,theclass trainers at were many members of of a six Wayne, and the ether half were whorl are professional month Detroit,434Associated W. Eight Michigan Food Mile Dealers Rood 4t220 of Getate. Detroit Thepersons. 400 surveyors were given intensive training in the use of Door Mr. Deeb, interest in the experiencethe survey in shopping form. An for additionol food and coreideration drugs. is their life-time of fundedfoodThank ond you by dr./ theTor survey Newyour Detroitletterbeing of cnnducted Committee, Moy 22 exprexing by One of the FOCUS: HOPE, and 1111.101" goals hastakenThe beencredibility in the given development of to thethe surveydescription of the is fir''-ersurvey of stores: enhanced form. their size, function,Every considerationby the care of theprices,shopping project foci:Nes, orpsiences.was to qualityhove In inner-city ofthe goods, procns, and the women ore ?ersoniel, and the possible suburban women share studying beingandthe location. programmed community. The computerizoticnby the data processing of the experts variable from across factors is diffrencesthe shopper. in service based on stare location and the color of findingsIt is my unaerstandinewith intereste... 'at groups FOCUS: such HOPE as:The Associated plans to share its Food Dealers, wasTheinvolvement A..,or'sdesign< Committee ond was conducted in thefor Hurnntraining Resources of the surveyors. by the Area Trainisg and Technical for Adult Education,Development% a The training serveCommission.Beard theof Commerce, best Such interest responsible Better of the Business community. use of Bureau fhe doto and acquired the Federal Trade should Assistanceaunit delegate of the Center oqencyUniversity's of the of University Division Centerof MCHRD and is responsible for training Urban Extension. ATTAC is Consultants involved writeIf yet me.have any further questions, please &I rot hesitate to wrrecommunitytegolUm experts ted Services. Autoorgonizatiore from Workers, the Among Board oriented COMM& this graup group. were several of Health, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Research Council and Neighborhood professional home S' cerely, ecoromish and foud insperrors. by experienced JI1C;sjb tayor The instruction of the tnainers was performed 37 SURVEYTAPEOAND INTERVIEW FR.FRPARATION, CUNNINGHAM BETWEEN ELEANORCONCERNING JOSAITIS WhatFr. Cunningham went into the preparation of course? that`reMrs. it afternoon. was.1%04 They They were ha,.: not been aware instruc that they were going to shop that we would not tell goMrs. intoIt losaitiswoi training the responsibility these women, of ATTAC They contacted to do the researchthe different that would prepared.them beforehand when they were going to shop, but to come organizationorganizations;this type wellof theytraining. possessed met ATTAC with of them. knowledge is a ATTACbonified in orderby group its to nature ofpresent teachers, is on wasThereFr. Cunningham the seemed reason to for be not kind telling of an the air ladies of mystery in advance about all this. What when they mentandsocial dietary ir workers, the cityprofessionals oftechnologists, Detroit wysin ord... ort food L. to ejrnlomists, serve by Human the homeiarger Resource economists,community Develop- wouldMrs. shop Josaitis and for not giving them oll the surveys at once? i`J fessionolipt a program people thPn to Focus:1-1K was.% brought as in earlir in order to cresentin such areas as education. fhts group of highly talentedtroininr pro- program lor trainers who thisstore'sWe dirlsurvey. ornot the want This independents theis why managers the towomen know and foodthernsjIveswhen dealers we were did or goingthenot chainhas,e to do any Fr.would Cunningham then train the women. or theidea day. what stores they were going to be assigned or the time ThesecndAt this hod pointwoman completed ATTAC wre totraininghod troi- put the thein some'larger women 227 hod, who hours .4 would ladies, on theact the surveyas 403trainers. However,toFr. be Cunningham a the survey. sto., did know generally that there was going It was announced through the news media, Lswomen, where wi, and when the training took place? were to be the comparative .hoppers. Can you tell whichhonest.But the they survey Would weren't ran. you given The mind thesecrecy going time andbackkept the thefor number asurvey moment ofcomparatively weeks to the over ,MCHRD locatedTheMrs. initialJosaitis at 903 training West for Grond 4:1,, ftrainers therrcelv-s took place at It lasted From April 16 surveyproveis well itself. what prepared, one assumes. unless it Whatis carefully kind of scrutinized, proof can we it cangive easily Surveys are very impartont tools. Unless a survey toHallth,ough eoch local classroomApril 174, 19. Then with ontwo April train:Is. 22, Eachall 400 training women session met at UAW Twenty dive to thirty women were assigned properljyouthe public r:eporevalidated? thct the the survey?Were survey there prepared professional by Focus: people HOFE to was help Fr.lasted 0 nninghom two hours a day for a period of three days. Mrs. Josaitiswould have to read the list of credits that include the ATTAC discussioningSo tl:n classroom following along th withr. the film "iSe Poor Pay Mnre, in total the ladies hoi opproximotely six bours of .oin- they hod nine hours training in and the staffLoshelp along Angeto us with .sbecause underMr. Gene thehe had auspicesLoren just of completed ofthe the UAW. United a groceryHe Auto was Workers. surveysuch a in ladies?afternoonpreparation of forthe the last survey. training The session. first survey Was this took a placesurprise the to very the 39 Fr. Cunningham Mrs.Margie Josaitis Benson from ATTAC, who is one of the trainers. discussion;heI'm veryrecord, much trial'Jut aware insuedwould that youduring youmind the are telling preparation gi us g to include something about the of this survey. e survey in AndFr. Cunningham where did yu,; two shop? We Mrs.were Jasoitis trying to determine wiTt both the Negro shopper and Mrs.It Jcsaitiswos a super market, a chain in Dearborn. whulewewhite would skpperday. buy. Meals would We - breakfast, buy. We formed a list of what we would buy would determinelunch, what dinner, quantity and soap powder for a DearbornFr. Cunningham fcr the record is an di white community. It has andarticlesW,. rice. Lorenfirs After ,,ve look wouldrrAing at it buy. and the asked initial draftWe of the included, survey forwe example, hadhim to gritsjust punch holes in it. highlya reputation racist whitein community. of the survey? ,ese parts and across Did you have any events in the USA a being a Mr.Fr. Cunningham Loren was a kind of a dtvil's advocate. WeMrs.your had shoppingJosaitis decided that we would split the survey. She took the Difficult,Mrs, Josaitis hut very helpful. wouldthelost ask door.two the pages, same Iquestion.,. took the first We two. separated I asked, for eumple, if one We also agreed that we o' the stock boys would when we came in WosFr. Mr. Cunningham Loren finally satisfied with the results of your survey? stockaskedtell me boy thewhere was:am. the veryquestions. cereal polite svcr.,, andThe courteous, responseor different canned goods. She that I T fromand thetF answerdifferently, that there ofYes,Mrs. the Josaitishe things was. weBut aid we in had drawing to up be satisfied ourselves. the survey was to tenm one wasshe receivedno questio- was not the same. about it. We were treat, outourselves conduct,.4and did for the a ;ust trial,survey. 6, the the Thestaff individuoi, ot ATTAC sc first two surveys were to be half of the stoff went out and myself. We went theTheMrs.Fr. Cunninghamstore factBenson that would sheis aindicate wouldvery attractive be treated thatdifferently this was by wholly personnel on ;he basis lady, and very well educated. of in as individuols.Fr. Cunningham Mrs.color. Josaitis Is that right? agroceries,You team had of contemplated two run individually, running white and Block shoppers, inner city three general surveys of the last of the three done by and suburban ThisOne was of our the observation. things that we changed after doing this survey shoopers.independently,prototype So uf at your this and survey.time then in your the third time shoppedYou shopper' the survey the survey twice with Mrs. Josaitis?Reparation you made a paperwas just c ass the woys way thewe survey was changed and pit it lengthways. written; instead of putting It was the 40 in team. Who did yips, team up toeasier admit and that it Ilooked was nervous like it was during a shopping the survey. list. I saw peopleI'll have Andthey showwere themasked the to top leave, of the just survey to leave wh :hodetly had Focus: and not HOPE to argue. watching me. Fr.stamped Cunningham on it, not to show them the survey. soTheFr. youCunningham survey changed looked the so famat highly of visiblethe survey thot itto moJe mare you easily embarassed, disguise partknownThey of were athroughout large r viers education of tie the Arcl:diacese Focus:program HOPE conducted at this team time. which They was were o in all the parishes Mrs.it. Josaitis thatSoin the the generally Archdioce.se credentials the ladies of so the that were ladies it waswelcomed were a well clear. bypubliched the Would r.....,agers youorganization. ray or DidFr.We Cunningham triedyou changeto moke any it as of easy lite itemsas possib on the list as a result of your Mrs.tolerated Josaitis by them? Mrs.wrvey? Josaitis usor1 would couldand then saycare some tolerated. less ofwho the Manywe women were. of werethem Some askeddid of not to notice the vsemen them just followed leave the store. t\j, d O quantityboard. ant We sizes did rstsaikarwe r change agreed manv onitems. everythingof across the things we did after the team come bock was to check the whetWereFr. Cunningham theythe lodies were :oing.instructed to go to the monoger and tell him doneSoFr. Cunninghamthot your your homework test shopping well. of Can the suryou . tell nwt any indicated that you had immediate NoMrs. they Josaitis were not. Just J go ;-to the store and price the probkrns for thearber lodies? where You they must could call if they ran into have left a telephone troubles. thebagitems Negro. and ond without leave. aThey coat were if possiLle. instructed This to was go ain protectionwithout a hand- for ladiesAMn. few Josaitis ofwere the asked problems to have that thethey stores. nit into We were hod that three some telephone of the ThereFr. Cunninglyrn is o possibility in certain rtores that a Negro lady could werocaiis hereond what at the we office were wanting doing in to the know stores. what our credentials be accusedMrs. Josaitis of loitering because she was shopping o list? manoger,WereFr. the Cunningham orlodies assistant i.ratructed rnanogers? on how to tolk to the sur,r-r market buyYes.for for Many them. thei, af own the familieswomen attheme the same lye: in time. doing the survey would This made it easier TheyMrr. were Josoitis asked to try to get information if possible, but if 41 SMPIESRVEY INSTRUCTIONS FCR SURVEY PROCEDURES: TeamName Mate: 1968. ShopaddressedPleose nt the complete store envelope the surveythat is includedono return listed on this sheet Monday, Moy 20, in your survey kit. immediately in the self- Please AddressTelephone Thankmake sure you thefor envelopeyour patience, is sealed help before mai lirg .and cooperation. Weplease need sign your below. he)p in a few continuing surv- if you con Store AddressNome AddussX "41 AbovePlease Average check Economic cord' 'on Average of neighborhood store. Below Average AvailableTelephone Transportation VeryRcc Poor icl Description of Neighborhood Rcce Block Changing or Integrated White JoonEleanor Boisvert Josaitis 42 rON-S14.1 :OWL Css. VS AC 4( ,479.4 Of ,70/411,71, . Css..11.1.1.1 4Cs. ton. ai Saw S An. 2 ownsA Dowtono,o 1 toonon GO 'goo .Nd z,, C., .7.K. COO be. NM, .41 Coe Irse v. CAW Solos :Airy FICCsk rs I dex.1 7 .1 4.41414.D, At . ; *. Cs. Igis Gso. Al.. A Ofts.es N.."14 DapCO0 poi sr.... op: 7. . 4.11 P. 4.90. GOCDS 4 A. r1Nbsol Cx0s, sl.c. vs.s. Co. 7.,tsMa. 5 b. D... C... cs.a. c... yaw . 4C./.1, p.. 12 as . rat n 14... CM.clao. VV. lb. 111.4 3 lb. CM. SON 711,041-05 L CANNED GCCOS `Amp ix*, ar. D. AL 3 A. 1.. 44 74. 44444 air4.'6. . A.A.. . I...., 4104 14 / 47. .s.AsslasbLL. V.C.o s CP. Moo sosst1 .44 74/4 De,. go 41. .444.. ont 4.4 A. A. 13 ea ad. 1 14. Vt.% POP S.... Irv, N.7 1.44.4Con., .4. 1 14.2.. jos. Pis. RA 1 A. .. .14, Soh NO. Sc... 04 "2 Pew. am. 43 HI Hi I 1 illMII IIL.

I I I I I I 1 I II 111111H1111111111

t 1 1 1 'Id HHHI HH

1111111 I

I I 121 111111 II

tlal11 11

A i21s;I o 1 , F STATISTICS - CONSUMERS SURVEY 108 31 TOTALCHAININDEKNDENT STORES SURVEYEDIN STORES DETROIT IN IN DETROIT DETROIT 170 32 STORESINDEPENDENTCHAIN SURVEYED STORES STORES IN IN SUBURB'S SUBURBS IN SUBURBS 341 TOTAL STORES SURVEYED IN DETROIT-SUBURBS 633253380 SURVEYSSURVEYSTOTAL IN COMPLETED DETROITIN strauRas SURVEYS 403620 44 VOLUNTEERBRANDSDIFFERENT SURVEYED ITEMS SHOPPERS SURVEYED 45 GROCERY SURVEY ITEMS WITH NUMBER OF BRANDS FOUND FOR EACH ITEM iTTEMSBreod VARIETY OF BRANDS 30 AMIMMOINPIIMIN=11111 PorkITEMS & Beans VARIETY OF BRANDS 2518 HotApplesBacon Dogs PackagedUn-packoged 443114 7 CatsupPeachesBabyPeanut food Butter (Meat) 191B 3 OleoEgosMilkPotatoes 383814 8 EnfamilSimilacBaby food (iron)(without (vegeab)es) Iron) 3 CheeseCornSugarFlour Meal 211016 3 CoffeeEnfamilCoffeeMilk (evaporated)(regular) (without (instant) iron) 191915 CA3 CerealRiceGr Cerealits (sugar) (plain) 13 752 TeaOrangePork Chops juke (frozen) 2314 0-6 TomatoeOrangeSoopShortening powder Drink juke 20261915 RoundChuckFrying RoastSteak Chicken wholecut up CornTomatoes (whole) 26 SoftTotal Drinks Items 44 .TotcdBrws 620 46 Fr. Cunningham ANDTAPED FR. CUNNINGHAM INTERVIEW BETWEEN CONCERNING ELEANOR TEAM JOSAITIS do,theThere clericswhat may would werehave notyoubeen there. do check in Whata situz:ionout wouldpoints like thephysically that? :uburbon present woman but SURVEY wosupthe the I to storewould onlythe and checkstore not load stond thatout up counterwas intwo line avoiloble carts norand with wouldlet to themmerchandise, me I waitI sitwool-. there. that long.pull lowillsthem I would If itthraugh conducted?WouldTheFr. thi.d Cunningham you sirvey tell me of sofsonsething ermarkets about was that,done how by teams was that of women. survey DoFr.do itCunninghamyou consistently feel that inneruntil thecity policy women oF werethe store that changed.militant? And do innerYes,Mrt . on Josaithcity the early third in ptriey the morning the subs.mban and picked woman up hercome teammote, into the youwith feelthe the that store? suburban their First experience women,discuss mightinthe this conditioning changesurvey, theirin ofteem attitudethe shoppinginner toward city women. erect,astoreand cup slwpped thotshoppedof coffee, she the wouldthe ther Ntgro suburban bothnornally wornan's went Ooze, shop immediately wee then at. first. Theystopped They tostoppd the ondshopped suburbon hadand lunch hodthe veryserviceIMrs. thinkslow andJosaitis thein makingthe inner lock city comments of womanshopping tohas carts.the been monoger, conditioned ony comment to the poor I think she would be children,thanat theI think grocery suburban andthat shopping athe friendship lody's suburban -home. about developed woman politicsThey attolked betwee-and this husbands timeof many,Fmn thing;women.ond other thisdoesn'tat all. and have would six -mmentthink or seven nothing about stores of it. itto or drive would to sonot s:re make is just any used to First of all, she's subject to shop at this store, she I thirk one of the odvantages of shopping Asconvenientpeople quiteJerry in amenfioned, ihedhtance to innergo to ondacity thesupermarket, thatdo shopping have the service a carts need,that Blockshalone thatnot the it makehave isr, some toit difficult driveby fe:. displays.were newnot and the modern. service Subu was completelyJ suburban different area is that in that she the cr stares I think this survey is going to inci,e her mnre vacal. have air conditioning'd see the and difference and to shoplinecart,into perhapso andin store the then innerand forty after wait city.five I tendo minutes ormy fiFteen shopping, in order minutes Ito have get for through toa shoppingstand the in It's very frustrating for me to walk before,experienceswithOre ofvs the wasond things thatis cansdous she that said I noticed ofthis the hod servicein beena Negro sheone -,csmorisof getting.her greatesr working She She's watchirg het prices more cvefully than bodycheckthethat up out. cartI incannot fineThenback while push throughi rnd I my emptyout thecort when myline through, groceriesI again.get up that I'm to and I the usedhave then check toto push shoppingbock out every- in oneU.beis going Andto woman get it's out the the who ofbetter someher storted wayservice. with workingto the drive suburban on a littlethe survey women.bit further with We usif needhave who She's becoming more aware of becausetl,e suburban I'm not areaconditioned and would to it.not tolerate this. But it's weeksaid and it was followed so interesting the study that through sFe hos completion. come back week after 47 making the lorger community aware of the differences in ThisFr. higherfoundduringCunningham reminds thethethan mepticecourse the of ofadvertizedthe ofthe wom4athe chicken survey you in told the me refrigerotor about, sale. Do you want to relate found a sole on chicken and tenwIla cents qualityMrs.any otherand Josaitis store suggestions? conditions. Do you have ony other plans or ThisMrs.that forwomanJosoitis us, please? went into the surescuket and saw that the chicken itexploinassociationI wouldknown somehope or door that oftheenough the owrmrswe situations could complaining af thesenegotiate that chain wemaybe withfound. stores theythe andfood perhaps If we makew'll change dealers theodvertizedprl-echanged butcher on inthe aboutthe the rest price. rwer it. of He theSheat took49c chicken stood wosher packagesomorked 59c, of so there and he wouldn't change the she went up and stood at the chicken ond she asked theirhopelessIFr. have policy. Cunninghom been as alreadyland and assured real estote that seem the situation to seems be awfully high in somewhat cherkprice.through out counter with chicken and for to two go hours to the told any one butcher and he'd change the thot came thebuildopportunitya city new and a supermorket. store larger for because thesechains people afdemand lack toof comeoroom certoin or expensiveomount It doesn't seem to me thct there is much into oreos of the city and reol estate.of space for Mrs.WasFr. Cunningham thisJosaitis a suburban lady? ThisMrs.thot's mightJosaitis 300 be, feet I can't thot's argue what that they're because going ifto they stick war by. a fit lot builtOneFr.Yes. Cunninghom aofIt frustrationwas.the criticisms in inner you might ci , women? get: do Doyou you think think that thotyou by areortheI cterecan't more freezers nowunderstand beautiful and so fixthat displays themwhy they they up areand can't more teke efficient, bring out workwith a with coat the of storepoint, thzy change hove the smaller stores that better unrestbesendingshowing more we themthemrestless, alreody bockthe outerthat haveto their you're city in own oursuburban just city.stores aiding Do experience that you and they see abetting are any going possibility tho and then by socialto right there. stondIMrs.of think progress? Josoitis together the women or make ore corning their demands bock with known a hope that thotthey if they will be mentionedDoFr.fulfilled. Cunninghamyou plan which any action is the yourselfvse of a besidestroker's the bure,-) nne you've or a already movie? aboutHaving48 their the ladiesexperiences go thrcughout seems tolarge be aoreas very effective way of the city tolking of SURVEY RESULTS SAMPLE SURVEY OF INNER CITY INDEPENDENT STORES STORE A STORE 8 STORE STORE STORE STORE STORE STORE MILK,ITEMS PURCHASED1/2 gal. .49.89 1.06 .54 .99.62 .89.57 *.64 .59.99 .59.99 .66.88 CRISCO,SOAP POWDER,31 Blue Cheer (giant) .89 .93 .53.89 .55.89 * .69.89 .64.89 .55.98 PETPEANUT MILK, BUTTER, 13 oz. Skippy 12 oz. 47.19 .19.65 .19.73 .19.67 .79.21 .20 .69.20 .69.19 COFFEE,SUGAR, Dorrino Maxwell 5 House lbs. 1 lb. .89.67.29 .69.29 .93.25 .93.25 .95 .29 .29.89 .29.89 PORKLETTUCE*Denotes & BEANS, not Campbell's available 16 oz. .19 .21 .21 .18 .21' .13 .19 .19 .65 - .79 .49 - .66 51 IITEMSSAMPLE PURCHASED SURVEY OF INNER CITY CHAIN STORES STORE A STORE STORE STORE STORE STORE STORE STORE STORE CRISCO,MILK, 1/2 31 gal. .74 .69.53 .77.51 .77.51 .75.54 .51.77 .73.51 .73.51 .73.52 SOAP POWDER, BlueOxydol Cheer (giant) (giant) .81 .7968 * *i .78.68 *.68 *.68 *.68 .68 PETPEANUT MILK, 13 BUTTER, oz. Skippy 12 oz. .16* .1645 *.1779 *.39 .16 .16.39 .38.16 .16.38 .16.39 SUGAR,COFFEE, Domino Maxwell 5 lbs. House 1 lb. .72.59 .74.5? *.75 .61.75 .69.56 .69.55 .57.69 .56.69 .58.69 LETTUCEPORK & BEANS, Campbells 16 oz. .29.14 .29.14 .27 .15.29 .19 .13.29 .13.19 .13.19 .13.28 *Denoes oot suoi loble .68 .38 - .45 .16 - .17 52 .51 - .54 .55 - .61 SAMPLE SURVEY OF INNER CITY SMALL CORNER GROCERY STORES ITEMS STORE A STORE B STORE C STORE D CHEER,CRISCO, giant 3 0 $1.05 1.05 .98.89 1.05 .49 1.09 .97 SUGAR,PET MILK, 5 lbs.13 oz. .79.23 .75.19 .75.20 .22.76 COFFEE,MILK, 1/2 1 gal. lb. 1.00 .71 .89.66 .99.59 .95.58 PEANUTPORK & BEANS,BUTTER, 16 skippy oz. 12 oz. .49.26 .55.21 .53.29 .48.25 TAXTOTAL $5.81 .23 $5.33 .21 $5.61 .22 $5.52 .22 .79 - .75 $1.00 - .89 S1.05 - .89 $1.09 - .98 .23 - .19 .71 - .58 .2? - .21 53 SAMPLE SURVEY OF SUBURBAN CHAIN AND INDEPENDENT STORES MILK,ITEMS PURCHASED1/2 gal. CHAIN FARMINGTON.51 INDEP. .50 CHAIN .51 UVONIA !NOE .48 CHAIN .53 SOUTHFIELD CPAIN 1NDEP. .51 .51 CHAIN INDEP. CHAIN INDEP..51 TAYLOR .53 .50 TROY .51 SOAPCRISCO, POWDER, 3. illve Chow (giant) .68.75 .79 .68.77 .69 .78.74 .68.75 .71.88 .68.77 .99 .69 .89.95 PETPEANUT MI1K, BUTTER, 13 oz. SItIppy 12 os. .16.39 .20.47 .16.39 ..49 h. .16.47 .16.1? 4/69.t7 .17.39 2/459, .1639 2419.49 SUGAR,COFFEE, Domino Maxwell S lbs. House 1 lb. .69.57 .$4.69 .69.55 .79.55 .59.69 .69.49 .77.63 .75.61 .89.75 .69.58 .89.69 PORKLETTUCE & BEANS, Compbelh 16 oz. .13.25 .?S.19 .13.29 .15 .14.29 .13.19 .17.29 ..29 5 .22.39 .13.25 .39 'Denotes nal available .51 - .68 .20 - .16 .99 - .69 .89 - .69 54 .53 - .48 .75 - .49 .22 - .13 PRICE COMPAKSON P .ntage of Percentage of Percentage or heir, StoresSuburbs(price) Independent Subutin(prke) InJependentInner City (mica) Above Suburboa IndependentInner City Above SuburbanIndependentInner Ci'y Chain SrnaII Grocery or Co,'Ier Store Inner City (price) Above SuburbanSmall Grocery Inner City Chain CRISCO,MILK, 1/2 3 gol. bs. .74.51 .94.52 .96.59 15% 2% 23%16% 1.04 .64 25%41% CHEEP.,SKIPPY, giant 12oz. .70.40 .48.80 .56.92 15%17% 30%40% .51.98 /IC&28% SUGAR,PET MILK, 5 Ibs. 13 oz. .57.16 .66.19 .20.70 6%5% 23%25% .76.21 33%31% COFFEE, 1 lb. .70 84 .91 26:, 30% 8% .94 34% - PORKLETTUCE AND BEANS, 16 oi .14.26 .18.56 - .4036 .23.19 (22%) 6% 36% .25 79%

.64 - .51 .9B - .70 .21 - .16 55 0 1-1 704 , .i , Discrknirotion in servke is the most GROCERY harmful single factor in deter-SURVEY FACTS Mr. Hermon Smith, Jet Food Corporation President, and a nationally differencemininggroce,1 why in when the chain poor competitive store pay pricesmore. as well as chains are located nearby, the frequency Since there iso measureable the prices of independent thethatacknowledged homeBlock thanpeople authoritydo insuburban our largeon the whites. cities grocery spend He explains meee diets because a larger percentoge habits of Negroes, clairs thatfor Blacks food consumedeat out in of chainWhen stores chaim to are o wecificabsent, populationthe corner grocer; is very importnnt. store becomes the Fe-in rite vet., poor of Blacksmaintains12%less, andmore work area for myth,manually. less groceries fastidiousbased Mr. thanon Smith storeabout do whites. volume,estimated Yet major that whites in suburbia buy that Negroes spend chain management dominantpeanutoho:yescommunities. source butter upwards ofThis volume of kind30% ofshoppirgmore corner forgrocery, many eggs, and shortening. than a chain for such staples as milk, As an example, when milk almost non-competitive, Tapemore groceriesinterviews than with Blacks inner incity the city. Black women demorstroted grocersellsviinity at withothe will chain zharge stores 71 lor -50 - 52 cents o chain competition or a large independent 73 cents for o half gallon of milk. half gallon, the corner in the Crisco thosewhenthat a possible,interviewedmajority of and them named preferably shopped a particular in outside the suburbs. Many of chain store nearby, their neighborhood there because qt e9VV.120 - 73 cents -$1.10. for a 3 pound con in the supermarkets, sells for inconditionofand the stated suburbspersonnel, of that the near they store, or where neverthe but poor theyorthey rarelyproduce, !hopped sh6pped or worked. * in the somebod meats, chain or the InnerlargeIt is critical, statesand central andtherefore, chain city chain facilitiesto provide shams all tero corn to I that ore mn smaller .t : competitive.olderwith adequate than their holi the size. volume.Such practice When indicated they con, why inrer inner city women shop chain stores are k ting the suburbs suburbansizes.Smaller sisters,When stores store consequently offer size less is service,computed much less voriet with avc , :tuper economyen , the white ationfor their of theweekly Hope rrojor survey grocery is the supply. erection of existing structures and A majorof high recommend- quality verysuburbs pcor could or be said to hove 500% more low income blacks. c1- than the equipment.supermarkets, and the renovation study by Charles groceriesthemBig Chain by stating thatpolicy the that ackrowledges white the poor and low income suburbanites. Undoubtedly, the major these discriminatiors, but excuses Block buy 30% less dosylvania, notS.Do Goodman, thepay concludes Poormore Pay becauseProfessor fromMore?, athey of1967, Marketing,shop on at competitive limited sampling that "the poor University of Penn- stores, withchains the reach myth this abbut conclusion blocks ond on thetheir basis buying of store attitudes. volume, coupled going outside their residence area to do so if necessary." 57 comments.COMMENTS OF LADY SURVEYORS ... MarketHad to waitin very 40 minutespoor condition. for a cart. Very dirty, also odor. Shelves CHAIN STORE - CITY poorlyShopping stocked. carts veryVery bad little condition. meat out. Not Hamburger many carts. very fatty. Shelves Veryfairlynot neat. fewclean. brandsMeat Store counter to shouldchoose and be from. meats closed. Shelves rotten. poorly The employer stocked. Price ThePrices store are hasvery on hard odor. to read.There was a guard on duty in the store. muchfrozenof vegetables fat foods on fresh small. and meats. fruit Frozen higher and than fresh other fish stores. dry and Amount old. Too of `....)con tco fat and not well cured. gvordnotEntrance go tobeyond watch is usually check-out until filledcar is counters,with brought, unopened so or largea carry-out stock. .:-ders Basket usuallymust corts hove require< cana OrangeHadSmoked tojuice ask ham cans Manager. soaked were not in water.marked Only nor wereone automatic apples, potatoes. door at entrance. He then asked what I was doing. Exit Floorsshoweda tip for were fresha repeat clean meot--good service. but boldly appearance in need of but repoir. mo price in evidence. Milk is never marked. Meat counter Thisdoor smollstarted store to clost really before was inone very wos poor completely condition. out. Ian 10 ycai go a-d it sure is in I had the hadI entered to follow store other: and didto the not lot find to one get availablea cart. The cart personnel . was Customers inpoor all conditirorecs. !he n- 11.E; -ne. I ' 5 owateclNteerls byrepairs wte adcourteous renovation helpfulfresh.Poor and price courteous. listing. Meat counter stunk; chicken not very Lots of open packoges ond bent cam, Shelves need im- selection.Thepersonnel. stock boy wouldn't help you look for items--very poor Meatprovement.(many counter broken messy. bogs). Flour, Broken sugar eggs and in butter bottom b of b : very messy and, as a TheThisEmpty managerstore boxesis never is helpfulstocked really and in clean. aisles;courteous. Cleaned dented Shelves cons;once everyhardlywere not E:eany stocked. yeors.carts. Aislessheresult, couldn't narrowstore hodsmell ond a clutteredveryit because bad withodor. of lengthstock Asked boxes. of the time oleo, spent and in she the said store. andThe manogementcooperative. and employes at this store ore always pleasant 59 CHAIN STORE - CITY doingisThe Block assistont there. and askedShe manager told her him inwho a and rather is whitehe rudewalked approached way away. what sheMrs. was H. who The thebeingManager's store dcubtful was approach neither af my was reply, inner in aaskedcity sneaky nor a suburban.few manner, questions, impressed The express me asline remarked that it.askedmanager, Henot wished usheard the who sameabout us is block,luck. thing.cur Mrs.project He Gates was and very woswas polite gladthe onlyandto be saidwh"e he woman hod then approoched both of us and educated about boys.extendedin order halfway to obtain towards a basket. the rear, progressed slowly, no stock I observed potential customers trailing departing customers in theShoppingus store.together Several carts and not getting shoppers available. into loaked the car strangely together. at the two af StookqualityPoor selection an okay. shelves Poorly and looked quality marked low; of meats, prkes,no boys lockpoor ...vailable. afselection brand No names. af carts produce, TrafficandCustomers dirty. pattern Produceseemed terrible. more fair Recentlyto curious poor. thunItems remodeled. personnel. in freezer Store sticky was to crowded handle. Thereopenavailable. merchandise was Frozen a parking foodnor lot priced. case but there very messy.were no Package signs indicating broken- this ofAll the of thecans shopping hod prices carts on werethem; inand the the parking ones thatlot. did hod two Ver./ few ofemployeeswas a lotthe of store's articles. were lot. very ThereThe uncooperative store is no on carry-out the andwIwIle didn't service was know filthy. and there are the prices Most articles The Thereor tlweeoff waslately, different no but waiting on prices. a atbusy check-out day as asSaturday the business you have has droppedto wait some- tlxne.thehadno basketscanned more The than fruittatomatoes use oneis veryto price bringand expensive onPet your !Sem Milk groceries and becauseand no very toend I yourhodpoor. to bentacar. reasonThe cons, cashier to especially examine shopcartstimes but tohalfcannot carry an hour.groceriesbe ta Shoppingen past to parking the carts check-out lot are and plentiful car. counter. in store Onlj totwo Shelvesstore.was very Foorly nice but stocked; that is thequiN only a few good dented thing ons.I can Lack say af name for the showedI was stoppeddoing, him thewho by headingmanoge. I was, and of on the whothree survey, I was representing. occasions. He asked what he was very helpful; After I brands.Minimalin front of selection goods. Cartonsof goods. of goods in almost all aisles. Prices not marked on goods but only mocked on signs managerwantedAlerted to asked know staff ifinif otherproduce stores and were general being stock. surveyed. he could help--wanted to see the survey. Another TookWill not me cash two baursChrysler and pay thirty checks minutes to pay including for food. check out time. 60 CHAINEverything STORE was- SUBURBS in apple pie order. Manager was very nice. He Bought o Borden Cream r on sale, lorge package 19c, got it mewonted Everythingout. Heto know suggested was if he Ok. couldI should So Ihelp. cortinued. have One of the clerks had pointed let my presence be known. Shoppedchargedhome, it was regulorFor moldyone price hour on and fifteen minutes. Wca observed but not ..istoke.--cheerfully corrected. )ught o special corn flakes, was attentionWhen I brought he blamed differences incompetent in prices help. on formula to the manager's Nostopped--wow--what one approached us an In experience. the store although we did get several I hoppened to overhear AislesIEverything found were the wider storein top not large condition. cluttered--store crsd well spaced. is about There two was years no evidenceold. of Mrs.Butoneunpleasant that ofHomell the was personnellooks was oll. fromtheThe only sayexperiencethe Blockpersonnel."I think woman there's was arin two theinteresting ofstore them and checking."one. several Agoin, orewerecrowding rocks hard for condition.to damagedfind. Some However, goods damaged and prices day cans old were were baking not on wellgoc-' :hely,- marked and There oshoppers whiteA woman very looked nice shopping strangely store, ,3nd friendly,at the leoving circumstance beautiful together. location, of a not all mer- Black woman and chainsproblemsThe andarea independent is existing olrnost inoversatur.ted the stores. inner No city. withevidence shopping of ony cente checkMrs.chondise Royal, for her although wos groceries marked a stranger (personal). but it was to the earlyMany area, for of thewca produce.iterm allowed were to cosh o shoppersawareThe inner theof prices. problemcity woman of highs, (Black) prices that wein these shopped stores with war If oll inner city women were as sop' -y beoted wasfilledunmarked, neat in with in ondmost another some respects ofite,a items and to hidewhichthe personnel the they deficiency. normally were friendly carried The stare were and theAsinsolved the farsame. suburbsas in theshort Possibly store whereorder. goes,there she wewasworks, found more because prices of a selection pricesand conditiom there in the of s. -urbon This woman does much of her ,eaper.ch cooperative.Ihelpful. found the survey very interesting. The personnel were very pricescutsstore.the were Theweretwo instorebefore relatively the case.on putting E. the GrandAfter themsame making !coked in In their the the good twoseparate above stores) but notenvelopesstatemer as mc C1'' I compc- -at makespientyStore overoll ofrne personnel glod gave that appearance butI do not not neathave af and beingto shop clean. heavily there. Condition stocked, Store oislesof w:th floors ore =ging. To my surprise, hems were cheaper in the sub narrowtremely and high cluttered making with maneuvers extra displays. of baskets Corners hard. are piled ex- 61 INDEPENDENT STORE - CITY INDEPENDENT STORE - SUBURBS Meatsdirty.89c sale a Sole lb. price sole; prices noton notpockageindicated. stamped indicated Example: on cons. at round990 o lb. steak Floor was Thisonlylittletype store supermarketcomplaintcriticism. oppeared Thewas to. mehelpthat to the seemed be prices a good helpfulwere example not and marked of honest a on -- a my For what it is intended to be I could Find small As requestedPersonnelI walked out, reasonextremely the frommanager cooperative. me on said who I Customerswasthink conducting it's and the survey. rather hopele2. salesman smallCourteousNo percentage prices marked pleasant of the on merchandise.service. shelf edge. Caters Several to wealthy items area. no price mark. Offers MajorityLadyGood ot luck, counter of prices you'll was weren'tneed rude it.when rnorked, asking ehher what on we the were article or in doing. fnod.free, good Fine delivery.fresh meat. Carries expensive brands, some gourmet explained and front.!le hos very gond lc: vico int a small market. He and his wiie heOwner felt)rr the itinquired was first a trip very as to to goodthe the store noture survey. the of manager my businem--I was very rude and Thefob.operate prices the ore market not marked together on ond any I ofthink the itenm. His pikes ore also very reosonable for a they do a wonderful small market. 'sasked very menasty to leave.to the Thischildren time that , he come was courteous.in shopping. The manoger percentMilk was of not customers priced and ore employes Negro. didn't know the price. Large noirritation mark ondwastore ! ,ere being hodwas isto not unablenot examine crowded--a a wide to find range the private choiceprices. everything on all sides. Storeof brondsbakery and justthe chiefinside entrance. Much stock hod ,c.ry ? , Sawarands no wereinspection marked marks on bottom on ony of package con. Many meats. cans Most were shoppers dented. They only hast 15 ccf Olpff min IOU Is fl. [4:4 f11-0 hereProjectwere (ADCwhite & Crystoll Mo.ners)middle-age. Beach Welfare, Area--eif Orchard People living in Lakeside Housing Lake Rood shop 63 Grocers Sabah Major ...... and Joseph Dobish By RICHARD A. RYhN IOW Xrps and the Mar amoreand suburban th money e. fact store for that theowner. his same wholesaler prcducts chargesthan be does himgrocers tell their side toturn getbe away carryingInvolved. and don'ta gunThey're tell or aanyone. switchblade. afraid Theythe thief don't might want ceriespercent. than sutarbealtes, aftca as muchAInner as recent 20 city sumresidents conducted pay more by thefor theirCatholic gro- haveinsurance any waslooting, caneelled. burning Just or windowcancelled."YOU breedng. I didn't KNOW," he said, "after the riots my someonethat problem. shoplifting If someone they tell in thea store manager "BUTthere about seesIN ME SUBURBS they don't have inArchdiocese The Detroit ofNers Detroit says andso. published"SureSo Thursday dos I Sabahhave to Najor, charge an moreinner thanclty grocer. a chain ingsurance."Ea hismy insurance insurance reinstated company but he cut was offNajor one my of rid thein- that he finally succeeded in hav- forit. Peoplethieves. in the seburbs want to get"SinceShopping involved." 1956 carts, we have too, averaged are a major 100 attraction shopping mita.Strikestore inSuper tbe sabrbs,"Market, 8410 Najor, Woodward, owner of franklythe Lucky ad- dowhofortunate have are not itfew. they able are to getpaying insurance triple ator allquadruple"There or if they are many store owners in the art..; (Thecartuscarts 845 for stolen$5 each. us, recovery wea And year," have whenfee he to is said.thepay required police $5 "Those to dobyget cartsrecovercity it back." ordi- cost a profiturbs.a bellow' thanEven lotthey with more do." my than higher anybody's prices, I inmake"BUT the MYsub-less OVERHEAD, risks and loosen are pricethe rates range, they Najordid before said, the is riots."the high AMMERnumber of MAJOR REASON for the higher nance.)from his desk drawer. NAIR PULLED OUT a stack of checks Insistspeople he who has on absolutely least afford no other to pay recourse. them.Najor But knows he be charges higher prices to the "Westorethefts know triessuffered tofor walk a by fact hiscut that store. with some something," of the people"One he outsaid. we of every 10 customers we get in this ratacan't a collect clitzk cback they can go to the"Look person's at ter.," he said.and "All collect bad checks. the money. We In the suburbs most tbem. In the suburbs if a store forrates additional employes including privateHe guards, licks off sevral ream for the higher insurance, pilferage, bad checks, need see in here all the time ...re thieves.""Our customers may see a shoplifter but they 'e are buying their own homes. (tIIKluik Do Pare 1:11) 65 1657

iIii! 1 $1111 'Tit 111.121iVii V: 191 I: git11110111itia 4. isj;IfillAlirli Inl% PIO4/1! J-riall1;11filiiiivillii -641:91; eatliiAlii co $.4 ii w iitlibilliViliftaq © 44 vari wil r1.1; Iii.ripiiie 713 2 t 1%4 211041 .. 1141; !1!11/114t 1:; !IA-giiii &Ali ' "FiEiri .1-7i i'llgh 111:;. til l'-'-i x.iilliEz:m1- lliallifix4 ...., ...,. pi i EA-1 0 .E.oil:N.41;w pig i-h! glo ii; Iiii Kt! qi Al!ii Irtmaadlai ithwia © 2 WO b R Vti "InE A 11111 HailliMiz iig %.1 liFilif 41 thisli 1111v co)a diihlII!!ii:iiPillilVil 1.2a igv 1.-- tlitifili Ili IN*0 L.) 411,14 m 4Jdtill A t'owI i C.), ii. it. 11 1 i 111 I ail rti 2 Ridielifirli Jill4c.; 1 cn 1 ni mho a.E14 , $4 Mu, vilalvi All; m vs I 42) L tip rilin, rsil ii. CO ""a Ilea! 1104 "'hi cg I Val 221111%ffil4 i 3444:1 PI1144 up 1-Es imii f2eilitliii Pi a a 0 1ji ,S I/ I:1111101Jfils!la .1 .z td!11-1111118 Ifili!iiiti i : ; 4 lidu urbil 1.4 1 1 an airila iiiii/liggfillli I A* 4.) I 21'1 1111 19 mall W 1 ...FN.Lot. 611 a i ,I! C14.4= if 1:111111:1 Pi k1;114 E. 3 0:ilgtrifil ;11ii,I 4ca. taligli; Pi !Ha!' o wiz 3:i pill) En tgrace...lawn! tilli, 147. AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER As We See it DERICK DANIELS. Encutiue &Mu LEE WILLS, President end Publisher Vetroit -free Vass JOHN S. KNIGHT, Ed Ilona! Chairman FRANK ANGELO. Memel Ing Editor JOHN B. OUCH. V. P. and Genital Menseer SARK ETHRIDGE JR.. Eno Self-Help and Study 4-A NNW d every morning by Knight Ne11114Per %tc., 321 Lafayette ON& Nova, stimisan 45231 FRIDAY. SEPTEMBER, 6, 1968 habitsdes in ofthe the Inner people City who ITthat IS live the PLAIN there shopping toleaveCan those who buyCut groce. Food Costs ithigher is possible for the topersonal make out Andservice pretty although they well render, theirif you prices are necessarily forof dinner, Thisan isn't. evenMg from to laziness. fetch home Many a bag of theof stuff mentbetterby the can inpresent the do Innersomething authorities City. The about to make health meat shopping depart- which intheymuch the shop to Inner be ire desired. City,not always and AndA the lotthegrt of st.reportplaces Detroiter's. ofwhere the however, do not live storescustomersshop carefully. don't of pay both attention. the supersBut Peop:e a andlarge the normally proportion corner of the Inner City store.workwithoutInner theyCity Where a motherstather,are inboth no and are panntsmood aftersupporting to a:ea cope day at childrenhomeofwith bard the it a...was slow in foundother afternoon words,to have and on a findthehighIt might outway bacterial who todo spoilage. iswell savingcount to spot-check stores on CIO sumerDetroitCatholictiEs, education Int.,tomes Archdiocese showing as and a shocker, better theof Detroit needshopping for to Newcon-fee& preferof lesseriknownname brands,They labels although are is notcompetitive. the careful quolity about what's in sea- ticsoundis stilldesirability. judgmentsdoubtful if of they price,A freezer quality isand a rare diet& household appliance e able to make a littleEvenmake money a it trained easier by turning accountant to pickThe off outdrive the has the coolers.to trouble bestmore buys.uniform now packaging will bothCity. forSupermarkets display of goodsthere require are and a few lotfor supermarketsofparking. space, in the Inner much,buy.son, but and tho therefore Inner City Thewhat shoppers arcIdocese is usually often the report best didn't go into it againforceddon'tin much haveraises to ofbuy therefrigerators the on Inner cost.a day-to-day City. at Some basis, families which all, and are ingbetterfiguring people t uyout thanto whether make another. Thetheir one bigger dollars can problems,of stretch peas isand however, a are teach- competition.where.Better profits Peon can leperhapsFurther, are used thebe to madecorner them, else- storesthey offer strenuous potatoes,roni:inclineddon't andbread,pay to fatsporkattention loadgrits, corn,up chops, to on beansproper carbohydrates salt and diet pork. maca- and are onlies food, to spend Wise 40 spending percentIt of iswould their not cash uncommondo much income to for Inner City fami- writeto eat anda more figure. balanced WeWe are arediet. teaching teaching people people how to read, manydistancesometimescan get of credittheir of their customers in customers'many ofdo them, not homes, have which cars. and is They are within sulking ticefurther of sendingcompounded childrenTheir by the downfinancial common to the and storeprac- dietary problems are stores.manget them referred out of whatto as an "indenture" Therearchdiocese are some tospokes- their things which can be done andforhow them. spend to qualify less. for jobs,We can and also where teach to themlook how to eat better 67 16FoundThe Innerto Pay City More Poor THE WALL STREET JOURNAL,Fddsh Sestestmr A Ina DetroitFor Food Area ThanStuiy Discloses OthersDrugSuburban Costs Vary Enn More Prices Cheaper; much more tor basic neceathiesDIMWITIs than the It more trueBy s'."'4L4,311117JorYtti.that poor people pay Staff Rooter andtan! aroma!immediateof 013 Detroit.ford !Me stores from and the 166 foodThe pharmacies fortmtly. release ofEdward in the Rimy brought It tmder apeoplestudy.market lost of Almay prices bread lodependest be theycharged could asmner buymuch cilyfor as 25 39food cents cents stores In tor a 49 cents, according to the madeshoppirgprosperous! here. aurvey Its finding, of food indicate stores Yes, andthat pharmames peopleaccording liv- to a manly. comparison- of butassociativeFoodDeets, bad Dealers been had spurned.of offered Greater H. to Detroit. chargedhelp with noted that the the thatsurvey sur. Ins executive director of the Associated Meresuburbanenmple, pronouneed. eupermaziet. charged A 1112suburban tot Ata dugbthtle pharmacies chain. of prowrip. for the disparities were even storeswhich6% morecityWritheing In area atpoor, When deinare than innermere food it suparmarketsthey comes cityprevalent stores areas lo thanIndependent pay In do thean tuber. averagepayinner foccizo% spectnerrty clty only tood Intended store aperatitem to arotwe and and la alarm that re-themunity."Ignored factors that have a hewing on in. PWAlion surmytranquilizers. thoppere At werean Liner charged Acity spokesman thugal for store, identical tor the food dealers conceded tionsdependentlymore thenthe t theymettles owned Would betweenfood II storethey timer shoppedInThe the suretycity auburba at prices analso In found that on drug prescrip- waspricesthated tooludlogfound bybeteg computer, that charged eggs, a typical I. bread, for thitemthe milk, Amongsarne arqpIng tut. itvms. the other survey list It sta- findings, 'Mich were tab- wide disparity In the is500%hignerWilierthat greater inner higherprice'. Insurance andcity Hutthan themerchants he In ratmthreat also suburban "arenoted of charge robbe:-,often thatmots, tomewhatcoats MO% pilfering were to is con- nmethreeend er.these product.times with ) Iwhatinner outlying the city suburbanite residentseras canThe bepaying pays evensurvey forse great. much tethe one as of the most elaborate to mimeplescostcome Items an suburb averagethet en ofavenge 31021 Troy, of In In;MOO.A the thside middle-In-inner !lading city theof the Minty to that the thates/My "evenpaying preeent" if more they he It(inner wouldn'tsaid. city food jutlfyA seminarian etoresi this kind were otwho In- beaded the survey said dioctheIseedbe undertaken byand the cC admialithred Detroit.dteluemprolit Si any a group metropolitan by theR.of 401 DetroitCatholic women, area. (llama. Arch-Fund. both orHills,pirwwealthy Detroit, baaket a prestigiousalso colt ofhave ltenurperchasedVEIL to upper-ineome pay more. Spec&The lw suburb Bloomfieldsame examples ehop.north of higher prices In the la- poortablinhmentmaselvecrement be launched contemnerIn prim"'of Immediately, pharmacy education to-ripeThe asks program study for in "verythe carries fores- poor the rtommendations the =itsonahopping,black of alWayne White, AfterStale spimt speciellyelvcatty two morithe traintng they In givenlemoyed comport- by a gallontter city ot include milk compared charges atwith Tr commoncents for super.a half renovatetirosand pmaith old!deckmajor dothe fordvan" chains end calls to build for new needle. and 111 the tIZIR city. 68 store conditions § How do the poor pay more? In actual price - yes. But even if the andmightprice yet werebuy the steakthe the Black steak same, at shopperthe in the samethe poor same likely price pay chainwill as more. paya - same more, price, because same her company, suburban white woman, she An inner city Block lady steak banTheis notlittle answerchain as to fresh, do may as with because tobe howprice. only the 85% herThe poor steak ediblesteak pay is more whichinnot the trimmed is some isdramatic, 95% aschain edible well and in . theitin has asubur- city. pleasantnessabilityFreshnessBlock of payservices, of more meats,of decor thancourtesy conditim - the all arewhite of of personnel,ways canned suburbanite. in which goods the ond poor produce, cleanliness of floors, and the avail- 014 representandThethe servicefollowing three the shoppingbehveen accumulatedgraphs citycompareexperiences. and suburban quality Elsewhere of stores. produce, inThese this store study evaluations conditions we have estimates of our 403 surveyors over ments.Mostincluded rewarding some of in the this shopper's section ofcomments. the survey were the team com- In the third investigation of chains and large independents degreeupInBlock to almostshop below ladies on every suburbanone from daycategory the stores.city andof the white critique, ladies the from city the store suburbs both c suburban and an inner city store. fell a full teamed 70 PARKING 0 CARTS WINDOWS EXCELLENT Ii FAIR 441 A. 0 '4 A. 44 0 44V AL? 71 OVER $8,000 WHITE

BLACK CHAIN ND NCI POOORMEAvy OEV viii#101it/A IND:CHAIN INDEPENDtENT

OVER co $8,000 WHITE NDI BLACK El CHAIN AND * INCOME POOR LOW INDEPENDENT VERY CHAIN

INDEPEND 41/4.

OVER HITE$8,000 'Os0 ,mml BLACK A?c, CHAIN AND INCOME 1 FOOR ERY 44"fr444111 LVOW .t4.4644.004.A041 f(LV4"1.111111 CHAIN

.,1,4,'""t`INDEPENDEIT INDEPENDENT 710 41000 A% 4: A f. 9 ;Pg4V/ 41;1107.41 Wdr

6.410 °°0 Ff4/ Are/ A A1/19.4)

°Aq--''`ipvgaN, r Ar

0 O 3 O 2 154 VERYCHAIN POOR STORES PER 10,000 PEOPLE 0.6 STORES PER 10,000 PEOPLE LOW -INCOME MIDDLE BLACK INCOME WHITE 0 85 STORES1.13 STORES FfR 10,000 FfR FEOPLE 10,000 FEOPLE MIDDLE INCOME WHITEBLACK 0.71 STORES1.22 STORES PER 10,000 KR 10,000 FEOPLE FEOPLE SUBURBS / INCOME FROM S6 - 8,000 / 1.51 STORES FER 10,000 FEOPLE SUBURBS / INCOME FROMABOVE S8- $10,000 10,000/ / 1.781.39 STORESSTORES FERFER 10,000 FEOPLE TOTHIS 10,003 CHART FEOPLE COMPARES FROM THE THE NUMBER VERY POOR OF CHAIN TO THE STORES MORE AVAILABLE AFFLUENT. 76 CONSUMER SURVEY FACTS storeTheIn thein proportion close city or proximity, in ofthe chain suburbs, the stores prices if toa choininpopulation that store stort is hastend far noless to otherbe than higher. chain the theaveragemeatsThe stores quality in qualitythe in oftheinner service, inpoor highercity areas choinsstore income charge conclitiln, and ond independentsmore. suburban shelf goods, stores, is not produce evenup to thoughthe and muchstoresstoreneeds for largerforof 17,000the the thanVery white persons. yheirPoor suburbs. andcity Chains counterparfs.Low Income provide Block over areas--about twice the number one of In addition, suburban chains are andBlack1"Customer suburban areas areas. pilferageof our Wherecities, in grocery ondthere is stores areoften more isless children, high, than and in gerlrallywhite no higher in ghetto or osisSince less compored therewith a are withconsequent fewer suburban chain 3% chains. stores to 5% inhigher the inner cost incity, grocery competition prices costlyinBlack grocery theft areas is stores.perpetrated have moreBut this children,by isadults." not thepilferage major istheft more problem; of o problem more soburbanpoorIn independent may chains.pay up stores to 15% averaged more than across the pricethe areas of groceries of the city, in the personnel."store'sallegation"Where internal of higher customer problems theft pilferagerates such areas poorisreported usually management in a innercover-up city or theft stores,for theby the maychoinsSince pay many and from largeof 20%the independents poor to 40% must more shop are for in not theirthe available, corner groceries. grocery the very because poor qualitythanBlock foods. do shoppers whites. tendBlack to shoppers buy more tendfood tocorm:1)&361e buy brand names in the homeor higher therebyoreas,Since manythe further option inner decreasing to city buy stores economy the are purchasing smiler sized itemsthan power the may storesof not the be poor.in present,other 1Hermancorroborated T. Smith, President, by interviews _:at with national chain security officers. Food Corporation. information 77 QUANTI 2 HOTITEMSBACON,BP1AD, DOGS, 1 sliced, 11/4 lb., lb. pociccged 1loaves lb. 2 MILKGREENAPPLES,POTATOES, 1/2 BEANS, pacicaged, gal. 10 1 lbs.lb., 5 lbs. fresh $10 2 SUOMI,FLOUR,OLEO,EGGS, 5 dozenlbs. 15 lb.lbs. %NI GROCERY 23 PORKGIANTSHORTENING, ANDSOAP BEANS, PC7WDER, 3 lbs. 1 lb. 3can lbs. 1 oz. BASKET COFFEE,CATSUP,CORN,FEANUT whole regular 1 BUTTER,lb., kernel, 4 1 oz., lb. 1bottle lb., 21 oz.,oz. jar variationscity,Grocery and in Betbetweenprices List among Shopped chains suburbs, and from independents. betweenconverter suburbs sheets andto show 79 INDEPENDANT STORES IN SELECTED AREAS POPULATION EARNING OVER $12,000 I POPULATION EARNINGPOPULATION OVER $10,000 EARNING OVER $8,000 $12.811$12.81$12.81 I POPULATIONPOPULATION EARNING EARNING OVER OVER $6,000 $5,000 $12.381 $14.12( C,r1 POPULATION EARNING OVER $4,000 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 $14.501 14 15 so. AVERAGE DOLLARS PAID FOR SELECTED SHOPPING LIST COMMON TO ALL STORES AVERAGE $12.71 NON-BLACK 80 CHAIN STORES IN SELECTED AREAS 1 ROSEVILLE LIVONIA 91.4E4 DEARBORNBIRMINGHAM $11.34 $12.31 TDFTIO7n1FaEI1 DETROITTROY MIDDLE INCOME INCOME BLACK 'YHITE $17 $11.51 CO 'DETROIT VERY POORDETROIT LESS POOR BLACK --717571 $11.651 $11.811 S 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 AVERAGE DOLLARS PAID FOR SELECTED SHOPPING LIST COMMON TO ALL STORES 81 aboutwasn'tinner some the city same asof thethey quality things were and thatin theinner were subudx, city going people because on. Thedidn't thepeople complain :reneger in the managerinnerTheyI know city can himself. storesthat send the were thingsmanager not bock as just critical, if they can't havenot criticize only a reason. the the people fcod He theyadmitted but get.the I have some background in the food industry and MotFr.that. Cunningham did he say the reason was for transferring meat, say to an Mr.innerIf Reisman it city wasn't store, selling from in an the outside suburbs? city store? I don't recall whether he Fr. Cunningham becausedidn'tdefinitecame answer;outthe about andpeople admittedafterthat. would about that. canplain. a half hour, He caneall of outa sudden and was he came I asked hm this in the beginning but he they couldn't sell it the next day, sanewhatof theWhen heatedof officials that the discussion? surveydiscussion of one was of the atnewly one largs point.completed, chains Would and we I rememberhad contact a withsome- one I believe it grew out of the fact that you like to recall outFr.meat and Cunningham wasjust beingsaid, "yestransferred). I'll admit things were being done" (i .e., first.anger,*official,one of the wasin largea helpingdiscussion chain with manone-..., with the him.computer from Maybe the sheets, sameyou can chainand talk I asbelieve about this himyouThe discussion with the store manager hinged on whether city.a myth,On another that food Survey, (meat) a definitewas not statement being transferred was mode into that the this inner was In any case this survey comended that the stores claimed DoandItores.from you meats remember to innerthe suburbs that? city stores. or outer city areas were iumsporting produce I think that was the contention. IMr. thinkbe Reisman itdone. thatwould they cost could too much get outto transport of it in one the way.goods. They will admit This could not weinnerThe wouldn'tMr. manager city Reisman findstores. anywas Wedifferences totally hod negative a discussion between toward suburbanand after storesthat he and the us. His view was that came out theyaround.thatIf inonecan an Therefore, alwayspart area doesn't they use if canthat meatsell sendas in is ana shipped meatcertain excuse. around, cnea,from From one ifthey that meat store candiscussion, isn't toship anotherselling. it andHe admitted82 also admitted that moot that was the beingservices shipped weren't into the the inner same in the city. thingsabout awere week being later shipped. I met with somebody else, and asked if Fr. Cunningham manWeaFr. don't isgreat Cunningham an wont executivepart toof identify the in three a largethis or somebody four states around Michigan and waschain, who hod experience over about building serviceselse by name but this notstore,mentionedThat being trip the did as conditionsomething eventuatewell paid of about or theand as meat. the beforejudiciously personnel, we get theto this trip, Was this a result of personnel chosen in the inner condition of the the executive of oneandadvised ofshipping the an larger store produce policies,chains and in sowould the on. city. know lie was a well informed executive Maintenancewereneededcity stores more better ascritical wasin butchers. the notas suburbs? to as the well store done managers in some of these People were more demanding and patrons Remember his remarks? The suburbs and maintenance. inner city Mr. andReismanHe what was stores the one should who clecidedbe painted, what and should lie didn't have the final decision but what equipment would bebe put into stoles he was next in Reisman,needstores, to because turn would the there lightsyou talkwas down about a and your refrigeration trip off early. need to keep the profits up. Thus the which came about on the store conditions? Mr. betweenwereline.changed.the being prices the changed. managerin the store The and could surprising this befellow. raised The by manager the manager lie denied that dumping was going on, thing was the difference that the prices hod said in the Yes.Mr.invitation Reisrnan We metfrom out this on gentleman, Grand River to seein one some of theirof stores and we store,aprice, price and that ifthe another they other could storefellow not gave raise said that managers hadthem the competition. maximum That was cnetheir price- They could lower that as far as our back.the(Eleanor freezersstores, We Josaitis, went check and aroundstore thisanything roomsman, the firstthatand and storemyself)we in thewanted and meat hod he to.departmentpermission We hod thrown us off could go in to go intoin the ofmeatdifference. theisn't testing, inner as good Thecity the storeseotcutiveand bacteria doesn't because contentcome keep theout thewos refrigerationand meot going said as cold. te be higher in some in these storesHe also said andfirsta littleAnd stormit was bit the bythathard equipment telling we to keepwent us was cleantothat was bod, and a thirt)bad the store. storear forty wasThe years he wanteA us to know that this smoll andfloor crowded. wca concreteoldthe first wouldathat couple in naturollyorder of hours to save be a dayhighlr. electricity, so they shut the meat would be warm and the bacteria the equipment off for departmentbunchequipment of andbananas. that we came stopped We :nto asked of this the the state. prcduce manager bananas and there was a bod We went to the produce how long the he hod never tokeepingHeFr. keep Cunninghamalso as ntmrioned,the the old new refrigeration onesas I recall, and unitstherefore something it abaut clean. They weren't as easy would aid the bacterial the problem of askedwhenseenbananas bananasthe the werebananas price there.like of thosethatfreeze. The before. bananas, produce He hod managerneverand he seen said explained it theyduring were summer. 14 a It usually happens in the winter I Mr.growth. Reisman ond he was managerdistinction.pricedpound. bananas And could I asked get which in how were come alsout they ibo were a poundthere This fellow who was taking us around said that the trouble since it's against the policy of the in with the regular was no disnxbedWe had a aboutdiscussion it and with offered him forto takea few us hours, on a trip to his stores. inchain the storessome binto dofor this--to a different sell price.two different That was qualities uf any the first incident. item 83 DidFr. Cunningism youy011 ratite ratio difference the conelon in ofthe the upkeep produce, of stem porticularly from one meats? area of mentGenerallyMt. Reionen h much the older store . in fie ire*r city is much older and the equip- So the pelity of the meat isn't as good. Yes.Mr.the cityReisman We so did. another, Before or the we concOtion wet out, Iof hod conned rood goods? one of the sneer afraidtheI think men. tothis tel.feed was Sense itbrcught to oftheir the out rins.meat by the tested worsen so poor themelves that the when women we did were takewhatdotted.on which the the Sccars polkythe we off lady went wasthe coemented shelvesonInto dented this and sere.that are, put the andthem can he in inhad a thebox told stores and me mark werethat thethey I hod asked the executive peoplement--theMr.Fr. Cunmirghom Reisman, from type the it of suburbanwould stores seem that area theythe shoppirg people shop at. meatget You vsed in mentioned the to theirinner environ-city that cons,Andsomeoneplat Jam,so more as toactuallywe than eat went homthe cownd draticolly,average. kw denied that The slue,since con.aisles i itpointed The weremid fad be justout could dangercus linedall the be with dentedspoiled. for discriminatingthotstoreswauIdn'tteithcru. in didn't a survey measure attitude like Whot thi;one up on to thethey their of port the have Ponied of good inner seen thingsof city meat.of theshoppers? it theWould inner more cityyou say illness.obviouslysaedented or the careAlso, consdevious. at same thewere reputeof A rusted. the dente; conspia, cm andlocked that if thil likeh rusted wasn't they couldhad bod been encugh,couse there lt seen to me that they were somethetoDo light youstores, of theirthink these or complaint thatthe shopping conditionwomen on conditions? in the of the theservices inner shelf %at city ormaterial, wouldthestores cleanliness byyour could bringing thought change of be the(savvierfor theaaress year, jobe of wasn't thethis the dirt storethe doing onsupervisor could them a pope get was should injob. sotrouble Hethick. do. said and He thethe said thhsupervisor the was the one of of WellMr.co that? Reisman ihe people in the inner city clen't hove the power to W.11Fr. the Cunninghom an inner city store, Me. Reisman? rememberspecialdo the.throughout Wetreatment, on hove the the tripseveral butco-ops, we that wereladies won'twho told thatgo change ainto storywe the hovethe that Inner slate contactht a citypolicy. Grosse withecia and get I Fr.Ye.*. RolstonCunningham it wa in the Neon of the inner city. wouldat theimmediatelyPointe Detroit become store, News, o Krohafeature woven, told action articlethem whze to thatimpin Wand the eitherve Detroit thewas they cond:tion in Newt. fixa very it upAndof good thator they it positionstore. choirscityencesDid across wereyov between find lenthe thewellcity, the there skees keptthe itwere thon thisseemed gentlemansomethe storesthat cleat-cut, the showedin storesthe dramatic cutlying you in the of thisinnerdiffer-areas? large thestoresthatYou carts pave.can't so outthat doThey of thatyou thedo incan't dox.such the take innerYouthings carts concity, as hardlycut,pui because barsadd walk youup people in throughcan't some don't even ofwith have theget 84 a bog of ceoceries. ThewFr. Cunningham stores do conplain, ones that 6on't heve corn oval loble way37% the4cs personnel40% just bytreat the the way people they handle- the penconel. The puttirg on displays, that don't leaving tsvo commenttheftresultor those and of that theirvandalismto make aren't vying on keeping is tothat, so balance highMr the . inReisman? staretheir tise upstore.books, as Do that you the hove rate any well, that this is a of or threeFr.try Cunninghamto prices fool onpeople, one single putting on correct prices. Not bottle. usFirstMr. around, Reitman of ell, that we werea chain told does by thisnot choin store executive firm a policy on how much theit who took andwouldThethis therespect be wouldvokme rt'ected that be or the in-usiness managerhis personnel that hos the for and :tore the to people wouldthe community hebe dealsdoing? with and ne of the ways to improve conditions of the stores Fr.singleIs allowed Cormineum stare. in ony area, that they have one policy for eoch beMr. a Yes,Reisman bod itmanager, depends and on thewould manager be pax in no my matter opinion. where He hecould went. just onlycity,supervisicaMr. billion,whitebut I wouldpeople? hI indon't these guen Didknow cleohe thatyou what theobserve that largethe are ratio many representedchoke' of Negro white major managers inand personnelthe is inner Block in theIfFr. he Cunninghompeople is a person with whom that is he a victimdeals would of racism, reflect his that. attitude toward MastMr.these Reisman surveysare white. that you mode? ItMr. makes Reform it much worse, I think you get that feeling in the store. CA onotherDoFr. Curminemmyou country,feel that tothine to speak, magus tnot feel there that attivele they ore towards working in the Mr.Jerry,Fr. Cunningham Reisman do you have any comments you would like to odd? Mr.withneighborhoods Reitman respect to incleanliness, which they courtesy, work affects etc? their policy in the store couldpackose.theyYes. put put on. uplhe In odispky theonly store thing of by toiletwas my that neighborhood,paper, in each there oF were thea chain rollsten rolls store,there in were aIt we just in reference to Om typs of display the manager attitudedecidecleanWell, something and orI don't makehow thinkwell likeit dirty. hethat.thai does weA monoger,hishal job,enough will depending contacteither make withon his thethem store to I know from my contact with managers itwerecentshail was the payingcheaper. on normal sole. 70% And wither to what80% of moreittissues. came for outAnd the to the was price that was just a few thing that looked like the people in New York City that they could increase the sales of the store 85 SHOPPING IN SOMEONE ELSE'S SHOES shoppers?Are facilities and predicts equal for inner city and suburban cr: cateringto poy for to it.the community, and they (the Blacks) are The focts indicote that the Block ond the poor are willing ditionedargued.Discrimination Whitetheaselves inpeople service to generallythink strangely that andthe enough wealthy;affluent hos peoplemewingroNly been have also con- usuallyfoct,already Black brandpaying shoppers nomes, as much tend according or to more buy them ato higher Mr. the Smith. gradewhite suburbanite.of groceries, In technologically°estheticallymints.witites, Vs tught Itite lighted,templeto titillatir.g have expect *wired, laver to the aslots, stockedsuburban imagination with with supermorketthe special mostfrom meatcurrent foods to depcm- andirprove- be bright, menDoreflectSmith's the hr'st Profasor Par&serrations ttiot Pay the Charles More? poor about will UniversityS. the Goodman'sshop habits a storeof of Pennsylvania, wellthe some Black documented ghetto shopper study distonce away to 1967. Both Whenmem HOPE to check-aut. %Jambe, shaman went to the Detroit inner city they storevolume.get ignoringbetter offers Store price thansuch volume and tostudies the quality. relates by, cod Largecastinues more chainto theto base managementquality its andservices prices co a store hobits oro given community. insists on store)ondforinitially the white cmd poxFound wince theand condltloraconsequesil the shozcirf Block. 'good together Notcareful untilenough", savtinyin the a city team that of as facilities, is,shopping well good as goods, enougha (a Blocksuburban buyingMr. hobitsSmith ofinsists the Black that chain who purchase monogement more is groceries ignoring consume-the real poorweekangryand personnel andin and a antivated,shwa militant. didwhere the Wouldthe thewhite aisles point a whiteshown were was peeling,narrow,react. Thoir the refrigeration reaction was wco lady from Birmingham shop eoch Aare she hod to marketscredii.adgroceriesable in the decline toin heme the whiteouterin than volume citycoinro.mity.do whiteor with suburban consequentsuburbanites, Meanwhile stores lessening withbut inner orethe city buyinghighof servicesuper- - volume these pointhornwelt in all-vAittwas line tco for Grosse narrowa cart Pointethat to allow hod shop onea arta wheelstore to pan, wherestuck? or wilere the Wculd high a check-out overly ladysteel Likewise,remarkable myths example obout of crime the self-fulfilling in Block areas prophecy. still support the stanchionscar,Dearbornendowed come ancemded showers kap,back, lug and hod theher make to exitsgroceries squeeze the like a fromthrcaghBerlIn the Wall sideways? check-out to that Would to her a several trips frce store to parking Onlymore,rationaletendering o particularlyHoudini of the poorer grocerycould theservice. ger connamityexpene a cart"Everyonc out for of r!,arling ',mowsa Del,oit higherBlack inner people prices city store, ond shopping carts - for borbecues," steal thelot beau*hittingwhite westthemselvescols werebegan not into theburn.allowed shopping And outside? where shoes does of their a shopper inner-city go sisters, grocerysqueezingsomeposts comnunity andtime, it through past but the mustwhich themenacing facecheck-out the facts,public eye facts pointofis the orstore over pc the also coming to know: whi:h it has known for licemon. The steel barrier whenMr.is generallyshe Hemp, burns? Smith,white To theand Presirknt marager, un.oncerned. of of Jet course, Food whoCorporation, in the inner IA cit.; Black SUBMANOFBLACK NO MOREPEOPLE MUTE CUSTOMER AND SHOPPERS. POOR PILFERAGE PEOPLE ARE THAN GUILTY THE hoshirreelf, the solelays shoppingthat 'the Blackfacilities carerranity as the suburbonite, will be restive new, LPtil it spacious TOAND BE BLACK CONSUMED SHOPPERS IN THE SKND HOME. MORE ON FOOD 87 dramatic.comporisonstoreAn essential conditions, of port these 01services, thefactors survey personnel, between asked inner the and shopper cityquality and to oFsuburbs evuluate produce. was The Whitethechains shoppers filth, or the bodon the smell teom of survey,meat ond some the shoppingdepressing in inner-cityphysical con- independents for the first time, were often appolled by out,In some the rumbercases the of ratingcheck-out was objective:points available. the exoct Other time ratingsFor check- were surveyedIndition addition moreof the tothon stores. the Forty inner small city largeindependents, independents, the so-called HOPE shopperscorner qualityonethein negative). terms evaluation(udgment a comparative As vns wasin the in correlated favor price quality: ofcomparison the with excellent,store the withincome section threegood, and of offirmotives foir,this color poorstudy, texture Osere tothe poorThegenerallystores corner people or "momthe store hod worst and Frequentlyno observed,pop"other stores. place wos but inindigenousCorner therewhich werestore to shop.to extenuotingconditionsthe community:An example were factors. is poorInof general,the areas neighborhood. chainfell at andleast independent o full classification grocery beneathstores in the Black suburban cnd burnedstoressurroundingthe Brewster-Douglas or out large during area, independents. hasthe Housing'67more :lots than (The andProject 25,000 onlythe which,people lorge families, independentwith refuse itsand immediateto no permit cloinwas Cu chainsor moreindition the was affluent ofsuburban goodfloors white to was independent,falr, ratedcounterpart. and excellentin city cleanliness independentsFor in example,the suburban of floors ranwhile fair chainin the centralto con-poor.and citygood cnoirnisofthe thethe former corner immobileor forge proprietor store. independents poor andto rebuild.) those were who The to send comeonly therecourse Into children the neighborhood,for to many shop But there seems fo be no question that if I marked contrastto good; produceProduce independents andand binbin qualityconditions in the averaged suburban in suburban good overoged tochains foir For averagedexcellent. excellent In emptor.oremoded,mony running of cndthe corneroutfoolishly of patiencestores expensive would with way disappearthe "Chaldeanof buying as a groceries. vestethic" giol, of caveatout-Negroes independents.fairCentralcentral and citypoorcity ctoins, wirdawas compared and conditions only with foir excellent ond for Forkingthe incentral suburbon focilities city chainsindependent. fell between and community.Small merchants For instance, must begin merchants to restudy are their incredibly position obtuse in the Block DentedmovingWhile suburbon cans,items, scene inner-city choins punctured, frequently cloins renoinedreported hod soles onpractically onthe dented shelves. no cans sales. or slow areherwhen 21first the! or name younger think insures that and calling athey worm aare Black relationship. more mon interested or womanThe inmajority respect by his of orthan Blacks chainsA and independentssevere was and the heavilylock of clearlyrepeated marked comment prices. of the city shoppers in both inadequateItfriendship moy take services with onother whites. of the fire chains, in Detroit independents to clean out and the corner unequal stores, and onentsand thePrices noin theclerk.effort werecity wasDented hod !tamed made no cons,prices oneto erase illegibleovermarked, themother, orincorrect but confusing the or severalshopper prices. pricing, were Manyhod to legibleolong independ- depend askingbut the Why?next fire should not leave the white mon or the merchant awith inner infra*, 88city produce shoppers. ond mot meats were the major observations drugsurveg SA LE SURVEY CONSOW SLIMY Nat of testae*. MI W.IX11011, CHICAGO /KM II.VD 64706 FOCUS HOFF Nag of Slat Surety ityeedi Doh Itoasia lime of of Stow, Shan Seniee crouG 111005 FFICF 0111113AVAIL/KID/ SIlLS OF Klee am me owe boot? kr,fIessia's A.04, Coo o Su. t6I2 1.61.6 Ith. JoyWe&ordery1 usday SoGWoy16onsIey ally Sada AM*Faso SAMSOH ol- Yeaels4 - 12 es. Le. CosIs &livery avoileble? oree be noshed on e bus 1.6e? Yes NoNo : Fepeolirol 24 Tales4,661s. AlawSal - DidI. Ifee yo, Fork tee ittyo p`ootocist, ototlable? Om 1or? YeeYet NoNo Mn-Goy 3os, Con yet, toed. e "amiss sow o plotieocitt? preloany? YesYet No Ykit661selio Vtoond, - Op* rmtpi12 Iet, to. 14 theWm sloductOwe eN, ood .01, to" we ol it? O. ;knot ist stow Yes No Coosa 10 cep NodAso; lot,i61 of ra.lg Nes. Yds No OW,I ADoe Gloat 66,116pleV;e6.6o SIs. ewe HoeSoda clew WY *It MI.? Yes No Lloo00,1 Sem Dodos+ - MeosIows6 - IF es. A:sles EXCELLENT GOOD rm. Pool Nemo*Hool ad Haketee Skold., SlonDance Coma - 6 so- 4 oe. toeFlagSteck the ammo! es lo ifkienry Ike Fla Eigieed vivo ifte dote? 92 across-the-counter drugs in the city ForandThe thesuburbsfullowiny 17 items for graph 9priced items comparing by is HOPEa dean shoppersindication the average of price price difference. suburban thug stores was overvariationHere, 17%. betweenas in the citygrocery drug comparison, sives and dhcrimination is not limited figureta price. in heavily.Condition of store, and quality of goods and service complained that products citywornwhichOne stores largepackaging, it called ofdrug rhe back firm somewere toin thechoin. warehouse,Detroit area marked for removal and later found in inner because of age or shelf hodManyRarely to ask of werethe the price innerprices for city labeledeach drug product instores inner and have city accept drug stores. cancelled or cut bock the cleric's answer. HOPE shoppers expensiveorprescription corner variety remedies services stores for so headaches, that they are specializing in patent medicines and colds, paor fittingpredominantly shoes and 3quor outlets hove been retained, the pharmacistslippingmanyadequately teeth. inner keeps Where citystocked, a pharmochtssmall prescription without cubby is halepatient toservices in the records. rear The hustle beoch balls, tronsistor of the store, in- main job for radios,nessMore and andthan toiletries, availability price differences, at ofat% goods, mark discrimination up. and service by personnel anger and in stare condition, fresh- thefrustrate poor thecondition inner cityof inner shopper. city stores More thon any shocked suburban surveyors. of discrimination in other single item, withdifferencecentralThe followingthe city all is whitechains generallygraphs suburbs. and show aindependents. full the grade consistency lower Note in the thatcity asthe compared margin of VERY % ABOVE POOR % ABOVE INCOMEMIDDLE % ABOVE SUBURBS PEPTO-BISMOL,DRUG ITEMS liquid $POOR .64 SUBURBS 5% S .63 BLACK SUBURBS 3% SBLACK .63 SUBURBS 3% $ .61 VICKSMAALOX,12 VAPORUB oz. 3 1/2 oz. $$1.32 .93 38% 3% $$1,20 .99 25% 9% $1.06$1.15 20%16% $ .91.96 CONTAC,RMITUSSIN 10 COUGH cops SYRUP, 14 oz. $1.49$1.07 38% 2% ¶1.45$1.29 34%23% $1.46$1.35 35%29% $1.08$1.05 COLGATE,1 A DAY giantMULTIPLE size VITAMINS, 25 cops S$ .98.87 61% 4% S .71.98 31% 4% $$1.05 .58 12% 7% $S .54.94 LISTERINE MOUTHWASH, 14 oz. S1.17 36%29% $1.10 31%21% S1.14 39%25% $ .91 AVERAGENOXEMA PERCENTMEDICATED ABOVEACROSS-THE-COUNTER SKIN SUBURBS CREAM, OF 4oz. GOODS $ .8;,' 24% $ .77 20% $ .82 21% $ .59 115 ao DRUG STORES ININ SUBURBS DETROIT 155 TOTAL SURVEYSSTORES 94 DRUG STORE - CITY DRUG STORE - SUBURBS The store for the most port was so junky that I had trouble finding cok for help. The Theboth store brand was and very sizes well were kept available. and stocked. The personnelA large were selection very of druggistthe $othatdrugs I 1.asIreferred had I needed left been aloneme a to tocustomer price.to the get owner So over I hcdof athe periodto store the prices with some help. of twenty three years, chain. I told him rhethecot rteousstarecounter was and where the helpful. keeping the customer of many must The only thing I wish were changed about non-prescription items askbehind to see them. This includedrubs and cough and cold ScreeMaly shelves item they were only empty. hod one Store of. seemed very low on stock. sruPssuchThe items above as vitamins,is in the Community laxatives, body Medical Hospital and is the size incidentsI waited until Ftevious Monday to today to Fill butthe feltcourtesy it necescry to is the onlypart. store on the I hove seen witness coe so of 4Busand by 4.hosline, none yes. of Forking, the drug okay.store itemsCourtesy was It is clean but the pharmacist only listed. No delivery. shown. fills prescriptions inwayI could openRoyal home giveshelves. Oak for onstudents Towtehip, /westThere repyt. is They no This carry store a attending Frost cnd Oak Pork High wio defivery service from 3 to 4 so all large supply of candy stocked live alwaysThis is aexplains good store the medicationFor serrice andor prescription it is very clean. Pharmacisthe has filled. marestoresorcllyowner personnel *on and twothrow rest Negrocan the of be thechildren yamon store guard co and slam personnel usepeople derogatory comtitutes tams a andmob and the agairet these youngsters. Any the door locked. Today filledcourteousFrom elsewhere.previews and experiencemy However, Family dock(I know the ,estthis of asked me to get our prescriptions pharmacist is not verythe store is very acceptable. we I15no know yearexception. they olds are looking noisey the and candy more over. so in Having a a I hove yet to see anything mote than token cur business fromcrowd. The usuol child this oge 13, 14, Ithis"niggcr tried store to get survey as out" a result thisFollowed. drug of these store We actions. and have the manager informea me that everythinghe would not at leto discountme or anyone and that's eke survey it. his store, that he sold 95 prescriptionsurvey andirstructedIn critical this first of totheprescription roleplay. price, ma purchaseThe matter white for May 11, the shoppersshopper werehow was reasonableto be well cl.essed the tyke Thethe second following prescription, record of theshowing rescription her doctor's survey prescription order.andis from the ourname file. of the buyingremainseemed. thedocile The first blackand prescription, passive, shopper rat wasthe questioning shoppercasually was dressed, irstructcd tothe price. After instructed to price shopper.anmajorDeleted independent, The chain. in drug this editionstores the store areis the designatedis name of the"chain" store If it is the only shore of a chain surveyed or designated "independent". if a part of one really DRUG SURVEY PIESCIIPTIONS MIDDLE OF CHANGING AIM - MAY II, 1961 AUG 0917EY POMP/IONS 94NøClTY.M*YI 1960 FNALIAACY RACE 61400196 PITHO NOWM IRMAIPACY 1ACE MA MUM MI. 0040 NOV. A $2.65Prko INDEPENDENT 52.75191co 30No. 52.30Pike ChAININDPENDENT VI $4.50SCSI 3029 12.501/.40 INDEpENDENT $1.7252.75 30 30 1 .9151.01 CHAIN 13.3454.07$3.25 30 /2.59$7.59 INDEPENDENT lw 13.4053.6051.72 30 52.2552.1: INCPENDENT vo 54 .25 39 30 52,5012.30 INVENDENT 13.40 30 52.0052.25 664 INDEPENDENT i4.3013.95$3.95 30 52.50$2.50 DRuG SuIvEy - PRESCRIPTIONS INOPENDEN/ $3.3053.30$3.95 CP;990 30 32.5012.25 51.11991AN - MAY II, 1964 10, INDEPANOENT VI 13,9033.59 30 53 11.8951.81 11169.1AACY 9ACE Prk6 LIBRIUM No, CATHO NOMA 52.00PHoo INDEPENDENT $6,90/3,30 33 30 13.0)13.01 INDEPENDENTIPOPENDENT $2.7923.50 30XI $1.49 INDEPENDENT $3.1113.11 30 30 12.23$2.29 1NDPENDENTINDEPENDENT 52.9553,25 3010 51.75$1.79 INDEPENDENT VI1 1 $4.0352.50 II30 12 .1552.50 INDEPENDENTENDPENDINT 52.47$3.60 30 30 51.4952.25 INDEPENDENTINDEPENDP/1 53,1033.03 30 51.4951.50 99 DWG 51.11090 - 110011PIIONS ! ,05f 24, 1968 In this second prescription survey of June 24th, the roll-playing was pHAIIMAC 5, RAC! INNIS (III ISTRACVCONI DARVON COHPUND 66 reversed.time the black Tetracycline buyer was was well pruchosed dressed andaryl Dorvonwas critical was ofpriced. the price, This COM W $1.50Rico 12No, 5508ROA and the white buyer dressed casually and remained passive. INMPI NIN NI 52.25 12 51,8051,8. 80 withThe curious Black results. buyer also was sent to a number of ssaurban pharmacies In most of the suburban drug stores the critical INDEPIND.NI V11 NO IONGER HANDLING PAISCRIPTIONS Black buyer paid less for her prescription than the passive white buyer. INDIPIND1NTINDIPINDI NI I N,oP,,oI,owdNO PRELCI 1PT 1 ONS UNTIL KO P.M. Nol Paced remainedIn the firm,inner regardless city, the patterns of her dress of discrimination or complaint. against the Block buyer In a few instances, INDEPENDENT W 52.50 12 5 $1,50 RP the well dressed white buyer pakl more in the inner city. Here is a INDEPENDENT W 52.955 .84.64 12 51.955 .88 thesampling store namestrom our are files deleted, of the arxl secorxl the majorprescription chain is purchase. simply labeled Again, INDIPENDE8J1 NO53.95 PRESCRIPTION DEPAR IMENT II 51.95 "chain". MUG SURVEY - 08E5C8395I0445 INDEPENDENT IW o 53.0053. 00 12 53.0053.30 SUOUSBAN 3.1245 74. 1968 INDEPENDENT w 52.15$2.50 12N 51.9551.95 1118I9,5C5 SACS PaceTETRACYCLINE No. PriceDARvON C OMP MIND 65 M4DEPENDENT W 52.40 12 51.03 INDEPENDENT o 51.4351.87 1132 51.4251.50 INDEPENDENT 51.9552.40 12 51.$1,40 40 INDEPENDENT o $1,4051 ,40 12 11.8051. 10 INDEPENDENT 94wo 51.9552.00 12II 51.751245 INDEPENDENT 96 51.5951.78 12 51.3051.44 INDOINDENI WI 52.4052.00 12 51,E051.75 INDEPENDENT W $1.5951.59 2 2 $1,3051.40 CHAININDEPENDENT IVI $1.501215 17 51.75 CHAIN II 51.9551:15 12II 11.95 abilityWhile thereof prescription was no specific drug stores study relativeconducted to population, on the avail- CHAIN Ww $1.8011.95 12 52.0551.95 as was done with supermarkets, it is clear that such CHAIN 52.05$1.93 12II $1.9551.69 andservices low incomeare becoming Black areasincreasingly of Detroit. rare in the very poor Prescription services CRUM 51.95 12 IS 51.50 innerin some city stores pr.,:iption have beenpurchaser diminished may orfind eliminated. a cbior of The drug CHAIN $2.099.09 It17 $1.9557.39 .15 tali Drugstores stores impossible. that sell Competition liquor continue is nearly to flourish, non-existent. and boost o variety that is nonpareil with the best suburbs. 101 May 11, 1%8 ThirtyThirtyJune eisid 24, nine women1968 moan perchouni purchased thirty thirty eight Fesaiptions nire prescriptions of Tetrocychne and picaâ thirty nine prescriptions of Librium and prked thirty e;ght prescriptions of Ortho Novum. oi Damon Ccrapourd. AIN LOW EVERY PRICE CASE WAS THE NEVER HIGHEST FOUND PRICE IN WAS THE FOUND IN VERYTHE INNER POOR CITY.OR LOW INCOME BLACK APEA5. PRESCRIPTIONFRESCRIPTION SURVEY PURCHASED TOTALVARIATION PRICE PRICEIN ONE VARIATION CHAIN PRICEONEIN ONE VARIATION CHAIN STORE OF La Tetracyclinevivo lOmp, 30 0.025, cops. 12 caps. $1,72$ .84 - 6.00 - 3.95 52.0954.25 - 1.503.24 54.07$4.07S1.50- - 3.753.34 OrthoPRESCRIPTIONDarvon Nowa, Comp:end 2mr., PRICED 20 0.065, pins 12 caps. 51.01$ .88 - 3.00 - 3.00 $1.3952.59 - 1.082.40

102 1690

MEAT SURVEY MEAT SURVEY Spoilagetesting. was chosen as one of the major indkatie measures of meut Dr. Warner used Dr. James Joy's widely accered test for :urveybySince the theongeneral rne...a.charge grocery Hamburger,that inner survey, city 70% it.nacit was lean isdecided poorand quality to undertake wos substantiated a 30% fat - minimum special spoiledthroughAccordingmeat spoilage: ifthe the tc. blended waterDr. Joy's drained meat, test, thethrough freshermore the distilled it extract iS. Meat water is belowis that "eu..r" posses30 or Extract Release Volume Detectior of Meat Spoilage. mill i- Method-standardstra-ofer Shopper: under to Sacred Michigan would ileart low,buy Seminory thewas hamburger, chosen where as Dr. the and Peter common refrigerate Warner, meat it durirg chemist, sample. 34leters, mill deters. "borderlire" from 30-33 millileters, and "good" is above wouldEachafar;by stare,direct techniciansmeat purchaser,the sample loborotory knew was time, thetested testing. storeand within then fromThe thirty cede meatwhich minuteslabeled p3cicage the meat ofso purchasewas thatwas identifiedonly moment, labor- purchased. testingTheRESULT majority very OF THE fresh,of outer MEAT 51 city millileters SURVEY and suburban and higher, chain whereas stores sell 85% hamburger of the thepackagedcenterand la)erstested of theindicatedin ot loyers, package.least two thenwide times,if fourvariationsthe tests testerwith thewere observedin freshness.plug mode sample thatto determine extracted from the hamburger was whether the centertheHamburger centralcity chains city,testing test only poorly below 4% was nccounted 51 millileters.found in for the 8% outer of the city total and suburbs. sampling of EXTRACT RELEASE VOLUME DETECTION OF MEAT SPOILAGE 1. TooloceFold Ice the intoo portionround the funnel.filter cf meat paper from according the center to ofthe the diagram and sample. 5. blendingThespout. meat cup, is and added the and cylinder blerded placed for exactly below twothe minutesfunnel and 2.3. Set"ones"-hundreds" the sliding bor. bar,The weigh 20meat for. o is theyour added "tens," balance in smalland to to 0,oantities 5 for on the the until 6. thisThethen time, mixturethe mixture the is cylinder allowed is added is to removed drainto the for filter and fifteen poperthe ,eleasedminut:-.. in the funnel. At Distiltedthe 25pointer gram water swings sample is added freely. required to You the for glassnow the have test.cylinder approximately until the goodpoorborJerlinevolume of the30-33 extract mt. is read. belowabove 30 34mi. ml . 1C44. 100 ml . mork is reached. The water is added to the allMrs. thinktheFr. Josoitis, Cunningham attihxles of themselves at of this the time wanenas privateI would were detectives, like in testingto know or the generallyas meat. one orticle Did what they in Fr.That'sMrs. Cunningham rire:T. GROCEES'tofind catch the attitudestores? SFOTLIGHT was one put of it, a ttatwitch this hunt. was a witch hunt. Do you Thot they were out Mrs.asDo Josaitis ayou policy. have any irecatioi that sane stores just sold bad meat Mrs.cometestingNo, Josoitis not up tint atwith the all. o women goal sample were anythingof meat and but sadhappy when when we wecame would up I did not feel at ony time during this meat WouldFr.One Cunningham store it occur hod tobad you meat ,hat 1ir in suchtimes. a store the women would have meatbodawith meatrefrigerator in ait poorwaswe were tokensample. ond sod thenfrom aboutWhen anotherthem, it.we stamped wouldwoman find waswith a givenstorea number, that meatstocked put in to test Also when the women brought their ItMrs.noticed might Josaitis thishove ano been reported turned the in but store one to ofauthorities? the problems that the weremeatwosso Jerrywasthat from. badtheReisman prrchaser we didn't and OWwantmyself. not the necessarily women to knowtest the what meat. store it The only people that knew which stores tested pcorly If the testscity hos on theis that meat. they do not have the help to conduct - or to run thatcoFr. there':unningharn tested was poorly- clearly to an protect effort totheir guard reputation the stores, from even these those waren. toionalHowFr. that Cunr.ingharr oohelp conclasion. you and know facilities that the for city testing does nest? not have How sufficient did you profess-come Mrs.aThe serJosaitis attitudes vice to the of thecommunity women generallyrather ti on was to tocatch perform a particular a se-vice, store. secondtoldWeMrs. ',moochedus Josaitis thatthing at they that the toldtimecity usand they that asked did the not testthem hove required for the help personnel a onblender this ond and and they the wereJunefirstfhe one tested4th meat on and Maysurveythree, the 27th, final four was onethe and conducted secondwas five Junetimes. one six 6th. slayswas Now the in asome28th, row. oftheWe the third did stores the TheFr.that Cunningham theCity city af Detroit only owned which one is so blender. in,.-rested in the quality of ,nears moyThisFr. Cunningham hoveinsured carried that eochmeat Yore aver gotfrom a Saturdayvery fair test to Monday in cases and where didn't they Howinabilitythethat testingpass interestinq. to over ofsufficiently meat? the tables This test ofis mealourone peo)le of fur the spoilage hasreasons only in givenone this blendei city.far rher for noti-ave reolly a shipment be the soleof fresh test meat by which that the they Monday were groded. test then would 105 MEAT TESTING MAY 27TH 11 WOMEN -- 11 SAMPLES (MONDAY) JUNEJUNE 4TH 6TH 12 WOMEN -- 12 SAMPLES (TUESDAY)(THURSDAY) MAYJUNE 28TH 3R0 17 WOMEN - - (TUESDAY) I / SAMPLES .113Ni 7TH 9 WOMEN -- g SAMPLES (FR10 AY ) TOTAL MEAT TESTING 11 WOMEN -- 11 SAMPLES (MONDAY) 74 14 WOMEN -- 4 S VOLES MEAT SPOILAGE TEST Excellent51 + ml. 34 - 50 Good . 30 - 38 Borderline m 29 - 0 ml. Poor 2920CENTRAL IndependentsChains CITY Chains 15% 80% 5% 0% OUTER CITY TotalIndependent 16%17% 66%72% 4%3% 14% 8% 5 Chains1 Independent Chains 60% 20% 20% 0% 0% SUBURBS TotalIndependent 50% 0% 100% 33% 17% 0% 13 Chains 6 Independents ChainsIndependent 46% 0% 83%54% 0% 17%0% 106 Total 32% 63% 0% 5% mentionedMrs.Fr. Cunningham Josaitis, something you're the about expert your on trip meat through ond thetesting, chain you stores ond Mrs.throughYes Josaitis they the did stares know and we werewe had coming. three runs.He had permission to take us atorsthingswillthe and youtour insome teH ledthe us bystockof somethingthe rooms thingsexecutive. of youabout these found You stores? waivedthere? Perhapso signal someabout of meat: the your excursions into the refriger- if theyThisFr. Cunningham left would that be there rather ond patent didn't admission count an yourof violation intelligent of store policy, Mrs.foundIn Josaitisone opened particular packages store they of hamburger imd a large dropped bin in the into back this ondbin, we Mrs.therebyobservance Josnitis overlooked or they hadU. been doing this rather frequently ond withalsoWas freshveal fresh patties meat. meat andNow going just we toancould be assortment ground come tothrough of our meat own with thrown conclusion. this? in along butThisFr. he would Cunninghamwas notbe theable conclusion to give me I anwould answer. come to. I questioned it YesMrs.Fr. TheCunningham inJosaitis omeat large was bin. all dumped together.? Mrs.wosthisDo Josaitis you executive,priced. have ony in theother woy aiticism produce that wos you handled voiced orot thethat way time it to Mrs.DidFr. you Josoitis Cunningham ask the executive about this who was leading your tour? Fr. jammedICunningham did notice with the cartons stock ondspoce crates. was unbelievably small ond the aisle wo DidYes, ha and say unfortunately anything ot heall ?wos unable toCunningham give us ony answers. Yes,Mrs.Did you Josoitisond make his answer ony observation wos, 'We aboutjust don't the have the room. We use way things were stocked? men'HeMrs. man said Josaitis couldhe really get didn'tin t:ouble know if whathe wos this going was doingto blend here it ond the wostakeIall know the onlymy availablethat coffee one it chairI hadbreuk room ondto inworkpossible. not that enoughin dinky that particularspacespace into the sitstore dawn back and Iwhere would had tothere be Those are just the conditions." Fr.this.together. Cunningham But he did say that on occasion o meat man moy do up TheFr.very working Cunningham depressed. conditions were very depressing. Would it affect Yes.Mrs.So your Josaitis tour guide as honest enough to admit that. YesMrs.the personnel thisJosaitis is my infeeling the store? an it. beingThisFr. Cunninghamleft is outdirectly there. contrary Did they to knowine policy. you were Apparently coming theto the meat stare? wos Okay,Fr. Cuntsinghom thank you. 107 andA last the word nearly must 1000 be sakivolunteers for the whogenerosity accomplished and dedkation the many of themenial 403 ono men professional and women jobs who shopped the survey, that brought the study to comp!etion.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SPECIAL A CKNOW LED GE MENTS FOCUS: HOPE STAFF FR. WILLIAM T. CUNNINGHAM ROBERTA403 VOLUNTEER MCBRIDE SHOPPERS ELEANOR JOSAITIS, ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT FR. JEROME R. FRASER CO-DIRECTORS WILLIAMJEFFDENNISSR. M.-,RY RABEN SNYDER WALKER SCHULTZ, H.V M. MARYJOSEPHINEJERROLD STEPHENSON, REISMAN, GILLARD, RESEARCH SECRETARY SECRETARY DIREC.TOR VISTAJULIEMARY KLEPPINVOLUNTEERSSTEPHENSON ROBERT AKAMATSU CONSUMERTHERESA RESEARCHROSINSKI, SECRETARY ADVISORY COUNCIL AGNES M. BRYANT, PRESIDENT ROBERTFRANZGEORGIAMARY BINGHAMBROWN AND PRESCOTT PAULA LAZARUS ESTHERRUSSELLROBERTA SHAPIRO, FEURY,MC BRIDE, VICE-FRESIDENT CORRESPONDING VICE-PRESIDENT SECRETARY DICKRAYCARIDOMINICPATRICIA AND JOHNSONSZA30 DADABODONNAMC MANN BILLINGSLEY CONSUMERS SURVEY TASK FORCE FR.JOANELEANOR WILLIAM BOISVERT, JOSAITIS, T. CUNNINGHAM CO-CHAIRMAN CO-CHAIRMAN RALPHWILLIAMJOSEPHINESACRED AUGUSTYNIAK HEART AND AND NORITA SEMINARY PHYLLIS FRCKA STUDENTSCOLLINI JERROLD REISMAN WILLIAMLAWRENCEFABIANROBERT STEMPIEN GELL RYAN ANL PATRICIA CANJAR MARIEWILLIAMANTHONYDONALD ORESTI SCHINDLERJOSAITIS BADALUCO, I.B.M. 109 TRAINING AND COORDINATION ROBERTASSISTANCEAREA TRAINING GELL CENTER AND TECHNICAL ROBERTACONSUMER MC RESEARCH BRIDE ADVISORY COUNCIL MISSBOARD LYLES OF HEALTH DOROTHYGILBERTLUTHER FLANAGANMADDOX MINION FOCUSAGNES SUMMERBRYANT HOFE THERESABUREAU OF FOX LABOR STATISTICS NIMRODZORAEDDIE CIERSB. CARNEYJOE FR.JERROLDJOANELEANOR WH.LIAM BOISVERT REISMMsi JOSAITIS T. CUNNINGHAM EUGENEU.A.W. LOREN SUSIEDOROTHYMARGIE HENDRIX BENSON DEWBERRY ATTORNEYLEGAL SERVICES HENRY CLEAGE MICHIGANA.T.T.A.C.LUTHER CREDITCONSULTANTFLANAGAN UNION LEAGUE MARYJESSIEETHELJAMES ANNEDILLARD COSBY WILSON CONHEIM ATTORNEY JERRY CLAY ESTHER K. SHAPIRO WAYNEACADEMIC STATE RESOURCES UNIVERSITY U OF D COMPUTOR DEPARTMENT MR.DR. HAMILTONGILBERT MADDOX STILLWELL, DEAN OF URBAN EXTENSION MRS.MR.U OF WILLIAM DLILLIAN SOCIOLOGY TROMBLEYBAUDER DEPARTMENT VERYUNIVERSITYMR. ROBERT REVEREND OFGELL DETROIT MALCOLM CARRON SACREDFR.MSGR. ARTHUR HEART FRANCIS SCHAFFRANSEMINARY X CANFIELD 110MR.DEAN MICHAEL LAWRENCE CANJAR CANJAR MR.DR. ANDRE PETER POUX WARNER STATISTICAL RESEARCH DRUG AND MEAT SURVEY COMMISSIONMARKETING OF RESEARCH COMMUNITY DEPAPAMENT tzLATIONS U (S.OF D (DR. RIKUMA ITO) ;ON BR)WN) GLADYSMEAT SURVEY CHALMERS, HOME ECONOMICS CONSULTANT, TRANSPORTATIONDETROIT CITY PLANNING AND LAND COMMISSION USE STUDY (JOHN (WILLIAM LOWE) HARDY , ALEX KENNEDY) DR.DR. PETER JAMES WARNER, JAY, WAYNE SACRED STATE HEART UNIVERSITY SEWNARY DEPARTMENT OF PUBUC HEALTH REAUMEMUNICIPALDETROIT AND HOUSING REFERINCEDODDS INC.COMMISSION LIBRARY (WIWAM R. LUEDDEPS1 SALLYDRUG POUX, SURVEY NUTRITION COORDINATOR, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH UNITEDMAYOR'SDEPARTMEMT COMMUNITY COMMITTEE OF REPORTING swim FOR HUMAN INFCRMATION SOUES DEVELOPMENT ROBERTHUTZELDETROIT HOSPITALDE CITY DECKER, HOSPITAL HERMAN KIEFER RESEARCH U.A.W.MICHIGANDETROIT LOCAL URBAN COUNCIL CML 174 LEAGUERIGHTS OF ORGANIZATIONS COMMISSION DALLANST.DR. MARGUERITE, PAUL KAMINSKI, EISENSTEIN FIIARMACIST, MEAD-JOHNSON ST. MARY'S HOSPITAL INOTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT COMMISSION DATA FICCESSIt. DR. CHARLESELMER KOZORA HERMESWRIGHT JEFFW I DENNISI LIAM RABEN SNYDER WALKER SISTERSMARY APF11STEPHENSON OF I.H.M. HERMANCONSULTANT T. SMITH JOSEROBERTFRANK FH O'BRIEN hOGANGELL HOPEDOMIIST. JOSEPH VOWNTEERS!ICAN SISTERS SISTERS WILLIAMPRESIDENT, SCHINDLER,ALTIMORE, JET FOOD NEWCORPORATION MARYLAND DETROIT, INC. STA! F AND STUDENTS OF SACRED HEART SEMINARY PHOTOGRAPHYPATRICKWILLIAM GOSSMAN SIROIS 1698

Is3 1699

01- SiIf l 3/ tglsl f 3_2 31_2. A_ fll Iq 1 ill AJ 41111 Ill I ] 1- 1 A: 1 4f4I .-16 - I1 g 14-A :'` 1 A"If 4if 1 a :_a i31 g ,Ra 3 r 111a.a f I :_ a.a I 111 g Iii hi .1 i5 184 LIST OF CHAIN & INDEPENDENT GROCERY STORES SURVEYED BY THE SUBURBS. ALLENOWN PAUVMS Ilirmno155WHOW. 14.orm Imo 1161. DCOWN ANIOIN STORES Dobson6203Ova L 01.4111miori Arm% EASTOWN ST mum 011S FEMALECHMNSTOIES HANTRALCKCHA/N STORS foamHUNTINGTON Ads% WOODS OWN STOLES LIVONIA Alba22130A L P Pork W. Oran D. wl11141%1kmboboo&Wm*. 4 Moyle Dmatorso10125A L I Ion Mee To. Damborn21045Doontem Michl., HAW Wool. Ew1707Fswor DOW E. Act% En* Milo heneble411A L W.I Niao Milo HammackWOIll.la liel5ecok INKS111Ibronoon2020 Coolkio Wm& 31501A I P Jay L. Allon1309A P. F FmkLarbrmid 1.21MING40.44irormotra SEMIS DonlonA &II1533 Fowl Ia. 3433 Telegraph W. Maks* Ere151C0Lamm% Domit ha 14101ollsy keneble430F. JadesW. Nino Milo limmaockG. 11402 Corant/Gmvin Seen Weld,II-Lo 1 a wides.61, Livonia34103A I P ArmArbas ie. AIM,Iymee 14540Pork Ma% SomIstiold tirMobsooF.11411 Marko S. Wroolool 22511A L I Abellon 6200Una%Doak. Ow & boded FARMINGTONCHAIN VOUS GARDENCHAJN SIMCIO HASAVAMCKINDEFENDEN1 STOK2 Istwormai*apesIWO o.r7 no UmeraA 4 P 3303 roro I. AllonW00% 15411Pork SoOdisla Iliminotomhasay'sIN S. Nein Mow, Md. Cherlw,Damborn2S1C0Debar Van, -/Ioock Owls.2:131hatryDots. Smommloat Tologrotrnimoice EmsAroan29335A L I Orchod Ida Gob.31301A L P Jay City Rd. Mamma9225Ado Fool J. Corm b&sm302VPacker% Omny4i11 Unarno:-LoHmorth/Faminglan Albs,Writ by% 1555Park S. Fed 1744Owl. W.Madre Mob VOWEmma W. Amk's Outor Ddro DOJHOINCHAN 5111415 NIGH'S FolgoolowMamaA L I MileMallobeII 4244Arno /Amman Jack's 141. Hosnarndr4901Ado Fool Jas. Carom ALINCOLN PALK P 31X0Orabo Elm Mrla/Morrimo AWN11431PENDEN1 PAM STOWS 604Vlookria S.Inmlnohnotimbolma Womband Ekast DombonFWOWbrimI4001 lodes TalarnO DramsV335A L P W. HoiaMs %ma ForMoon233VA Formiroantd. P Garelm23115FaroeGarin FordJadesCity Ory Id. HammockErtainfIrmakinNokOonkeed Strom Frog.%Lincoln3901 fan Poe Urania27451FemmeLboria Scloroloalt Jades I15141Dorm% ,11. Pork toorso Dan at Rob OWNBLOOMFIELD STC4E5 HILLS Damborn143355mMes W. Wool Dartorn25625A 4, I Ay 14Makts Feminism33230Form Emirs J.L. Milo G.10355*Wes W. Warm CHAINlimn SIOLES WOODS wl42147%2025Lincoln Fan b. Pork NSWFos.. PlmombAct% KCHAIN IKLEY. 51045 3603A & IW. 144444 OwoloomKAI.H.1IS$25 Mitlion Am. 11645A L ? N . TWIN& 24065Gaol Scott Ordord Lao GIMEOWN STOI1 MINH 5 WOODS [by KamONOChatham Woad.It ally/Woodland Lincoln1555 foo Poe Limnia54572For. Jades W. Fim WIG faddy./11244 I. Elorm WI. {WOW2512AIlloomliold I. IWoodnord Nab Hals 0.,4,,..,230015.4.4% Menlo Dobson2511:0Owls.Nab. HoletasVoles., Holokft Fanalow37930Gm*Fawley. Sean WadlobaIt G.NOVFavor Pointe ModJades Farm.Harm19233 Jost", 14mpaWomb Lincoln3760 Fan Poe 29510Fast Act%W. Samn MI6 11MINGIMMCHAN STO1IS CLAWSONCOLAJN STORES Omsk.22$11%WW1 hoth4rAuo., Dosokons4orCrom Mom kaft Hdolns Famiolan31533K.9.'s Gainct thor Como1019It.w... lesoimalPointe Vlooth HAVERINDEPENDENT WOODS ST0115 lioaMo2105E.1mat W Sam . &mon Mao IlinanOam555 S. Adam I I Clams.1241 W. forloan WULP INAIIOININDEMNDENT VOHS Domiorn11203Eatkais Volk. Haigkr. romiagat2543IKnsms's Gard tom G. PadreIWOKNEW. MockWoods Harps,2091Feed ErdreMed Wads 3 LWODie29253Gram Sean Plowth Id. brrnbelaor305K remer% W . Wel* CEmpor% Immo1119 W. fordo. /Alb Doontmas1952SW 11144 Wanmitlilismy MAN ACcfroan/ADodos.A L P inHonalos Dab FemMomn27500Ph4l.is Gnad tiros GramWrighes19231 Palms /maWoods HIGHLANDCHAIN S10115 10,15 L1ronra17X0941967% Famingom td. 725 E.RHO.% Idaplo td. TimmyP.M.% /Ai lo/Sophomon MCPImm's MimsFood AkArat CHAIN SIPES FAIMINGIONINDEED:DIM 510115 GROSSEINDEPENDENT pawn w000s STOLES SoarsA IL P1115014.1 Ammo 7901 29504Orrigloe's W Smarr Milo Lembeho Clam. Donlon DoranOblioADIAYTON Highway Plans PLAJNS and Nom P FeminatoW. Growlt00% brormarkot Grano21020Roslyn Mac HAINMake k Woo* waterhboklovt12647 tbonlw Park Lbw:a 115 1701

il 111 11 111 in Ill 1111 I 11 -I I F Hi ii 11111ilit lit ill Ili III J i

1 1 I 1 1 ij i 1 g il i al 1 j tj if ii .41 ili i C AI Ili 1il ii: :ifl Sii i'01 ill

I Iiiii i_Ii IIti 11 ill ill!li Ili hi til iI lil ill lil 1

Pi3/21) Ai 9! 1 i .4 I ii! Ir;I, ill i* II 10

[ =

.1, .11, ; Ili ifl i ! i;1 ]1]

f= ill IIill i III

t 11 . II

1id lil J11 ill ! ill fil ii) m ! ill i ii;

f f It Ifill ill if t m c ill III ni ill ;, )!. ii; II/ 1g6 58-854 0--.71 -pt. LIST OF DRUGS STORES SURVEYED IN DIT M..G MIES CITY. 11. covbel 1"AV Iva, h.q.C..4. 4 .1.. %raw'Or*!123 L. COW,10 11 A,A.,* tv C-t $3I I...W. IVO0..O... C.:, 1,1 0," Sow L.* AAA0.. ISI$31.G"rws. Rh Dm" tr MIL ,Lt We. f Sew. W. 1Dia we C.4. 4 Oe.o.C010444Comives)0. IN 9040 :tr.L 81 "'TM'. PoLLOc,11C... 6Lp - ***11, MrlCit.1Ma S10,10. i G... 9.1 I. t ve- t Sew. We & L t SoLv.41. Ille.GLi Dn. lv :12 1...n73 m. D.,418 Fen L..110 :Sy Cos. Co. I.. 41 ma. V2 041:e.... MOO 4713S...Ink .1010,COS.&040 ',Ante N. laiorn Ces. roDOu AAMA61 DIv. IVANor I. .111.14:01 04. 117 LIST OF DRUG5 :r0RES SURVEYED BY SUBURBS .5. '5 . ,. :,-5,5 %A.,I 7, ,..,L5 te.,...,,,.. :1,4,1a N... ,J...... h.. o 1.11110 DI.a. F....v.. u. Mt51"411/4Z44-1N LI,. c.,,, "AXT55 0.1.,s.4;.o,r,17.,-...,7., G.,. C...... WAG i ..., . a .. , 0 77I' C.a1....0 NA,oeco N.J.., .,...... km. Ncea...(J'1.,1,11 Zaa, ;id, W. . :t - - ..r.- ,.,. aa f : , , 1,...7. 1.5,..ot7 f (1P5...1,1f 14.:*i_t_.....j1I-We...v.IIN:7 Cs..., ...mot 51 *1454 5.CWF:, Row.110,1...... , S. 44.4... LipNov., a5...... , Mt .. OW ii.e e F,...... -...... Cr.. I. .55.1 ...at.. 7310 ".Wasekeal P...... " 14.4.....: t hae Der 141350Air. N., Wow S10. (wad, Cay, a,.,,Va. 4...... ,. ,_,,....5.0.t. 1.. at WO: f : t 4 :a, . ',.' ...a.t....0.1...... a Waaa. Cla O. 41....war Ow 14.4...i. .44/I w.a. al 5.02. Pler,. ode St. Cia.VIP Sax.Data, :5:.e4 leder4..44t7737 weada..1 ',a..., Yana.IOW I 4. 4 a '....SIMA,. Arab..... ke 4,,,,,,iI' )S4..1.. ,,..s. w'ai0 00011D,y. f :a..,,,....,,,,,,I ell' . I , a...., ' .,, 't. I. J... Nup-.16.0 0 . 50.0.0. CAOSS4...... 111 . fs,... PI 0.4 7 Miad 1.45.Oul5fIll Vaasa, Si.71245 CIsa Kat. ftwas tP46.041II.. D.J. OWW. Ca W4. (few.,0, 4..5, .' .... 5 ham. 44.'FM 1, ate,. I WM 1...... imams Day liana, 4 .11.1 pa,...77444 Waal,. RPM 77I5 VI%new% Mow Ammar 115411/aansid.. F. 1...1. Ka WC)A..0,11 44- Wo -00, s ar ha I4. a .., la ... :.. 5 , :,.. 71.4 F a; :44551:wawa.IMO 11471..St...... 4 aaaw W.,...we ., Gaw ROWF. Immo Vint IAA.Lam 73:114.4,va. 11,04.SE1004.41Comv....,445ILARD tel. / 'Legrevl W.*14Y(011 ,.....I IOW I f -,,.. WM I.F1.7-F' R. 4. 4 ,e,C.a. 4 .:, a ..(5 4:101.5.71.,..1:.:4'.1 pt. War - Near4.11, ww0.144, Moat. Ci, GMC444Cowie1....,.. CRY h. Sena taste.Ow,Cra,...... MII Min 11407_WOSoma, 44....7.. Dar 11.4,tedware1.444VD Dow S. "olapark 4341ModalWarr 4 , da, I aa a.l. W.., 7 47. at . Wer* I. :II -...... sc ". 5..7.....:wawa.,SX,14...1 O.,... Y. Cm..?W.*lioas , %we% C.,OW 7.174(07.77NWGar. 5,, Dav. ourOtat 114,,...114...1.4's Nags A. Oaa,iall Woo224101..... Wserasvi.!MAP 7740.11I, 1.... We le.217.h.. N, a -.. , W :e 1 r ;`...... ,. ..., .,,.. ... ,..... trial 41 ...2111' ,...... '. .'5110". ,.. 7 .n...... ' Da,. ....CAP..17140(4, Co,N NO Sara.,leamol. CageNA WYWOOMW.... 74714.MR7.4.1 tame Da" Wray.Uwe Dar OW ka.... )16°,4 RII 1....,...s...... a.Alia. ....e. 4.wa r'arr..,a1la,' I4 4.4 a a, I.4.5'5.54 C wai 1 f",, ' C...,.....23' ' 5 v 55 is. t'...... 1. :MO ::':widaraf,... A CIA. : sip nore :warFoR te Ca, I...Kr 40.011044Uww.40.S.. wi " at$00444t KOOS 1,,,..tipare.OD ler.1 N. 44...NO So*, lople72ASNape le....114. no"wan.a. 5. C..7..7.074.,..,. 00 ti I w ,..... law. -. 0,7 ..,.15,/ 1 50044.. Ca...HUN! Cat WOODS IPS Ravi7 A. I ae.a..a.PO W tontetss it. 22152Merrn't 690.4 Da, Uwe .....116501, co o - ,...... 1O: :,1 4.taetaa / 7 : . ,..a... :vas,ja. '11'...... cameo' aiet t15,2225. . 4 WawaNoraE. a me Vaal,.%wawa. (W. likammayMolar. %Pl. 4044Wil f :re, :-1 7..,5 : ',.e..- ".., r "( !WA,.....' -....77:-.4.-- aUt..,. - . , r i OF ..,- SC .. 'Tara, f mow Vs.roil ,-.....4 La. 75041 44 1 HUICa...A . Ma. IN, Slat 74704 I., Nap $ ..a ...... I, -,.. . 4 , '4,, w' : ,..2 . 6 . bel ....1. a...n 0.5. wave.ICa.....hea's avhatt Wool Cr... 7.15w4w.Maiala Seaigeadia Dnq Fa*. 041Neoaafie NH *was31404 22 ..IL . V' 4. '44,nreM.-- 5. . o I o ...a , ...van,1,14 AA Ca.,NaraMISS Nowa 54.,... ar& , 140.t:ClwaAida. 1./tawireaa OW*. Wanner Oa/Ha*Nawavale.", 16444... II Ca. Oa, as. k.57, an!, a7..0a o LaW. raw Ie. 118 soageot DETROIT. P. 0. DOETOOD PS IIITORIN. INC. MayPui,Rt.% 28, William1969 T. Cunningham Z DIME el 101111110P., May 28, 1969 we:' as the other chains, has been occupied in 27.'1Detroit,Focca:Rev. West William SummerMichiganChicago T. CunninghamHopeBoulevard 48206 3. Programsunemployedfoodtraiting to teachdollars programs for the wisely many poor for canyears.how the be tounderemployed created.spend their and andI appreciateexpressDear drug Father store my the viewsCunningham:industries ofiportunity ss a on representative you Consumer have extended Study, of the Focus: tosupermarket me to weandPrograms can reasonably such as expect these some can be return undertaken on the investmentonly so long as 4. Shuttle servicemight be for provided. those with no transportation Someness.jobareHope controllingbitter convenience, 68.of the reminde.rsSonic criticisms and of the followingcleanliness to criticisms,conveniently ut. in up the and company becauseretail ccu.-tesy avoid trade policiesrecognition they isthat needed. are aof bettertrue, fair- of dollarwe1967-1968.last make. sale nine Wein years 1964-1965 have have onlyofits, ranged toa slimafter.099 from margin taxes,per adollar high forfor the saleerrorof 1.4ltsupermarket in -- pernet chain over the f--ileedherefactual too toproblems is successfully a reminder of doing communicate that business we in the inour retail the problems inner trade city, haveto thcand wardwantopportunity.Again, to thank dofurther better. you a Fatherhealthy We are Cunningham City willing of Detroit. and foreager giving to moveme this for- Borman's, Inc., as well as the other chains, caninnerfessionalmethodologyWhile and citythe should statisticians,consumersexpertise of helpthe studyof to do the assolve have mayaconsumer businessman these reallie open problemsproblems. research to questionI recognize and and that bythe chainspro-that Worthwhile Sincerely, considerations might be: I. ""nr commitments ty chains to open unilsdespitein the inner higher city land, of Detroit building, can insurancebe made anti PH:my PaulPresident Borman 2. With theseavailable,manageroperating units, additional jobcosts.elen opportunities though supervision our company,will becoireand as Le. 1 Additional270 I W. copies Chicago of this Blvd., Detroit, Mkhigan, survey may ae purchrsed 48206. Phone 313-10.8-2700. from Focus: HOPE , Inc. 1 CopyrightbePermission obtained 1969. to from reprint Focus:HOPE, or Inc: copy information contained in this book may IMIIIMIMPII11111k GRAPHIC DESIGN / WILLIAM AND NORITA FRU/A 1706 FROM SBNATOR MAGNUSON, OF WASHINGTON

The following statistics and case histories indicate that the food stamp program is not adequate to meet existing needs. FOOD BANK STATISTICS, AS OF MAY 16, 1971

Number Actually estimated reported I

Computerized figures: People served 157,400 85,096 Cases of food 34,840 16,658

Represents 54 percent. SAMPLING FROM 4 KEY CENTERS, 23,685 PEOPLE Iln perenntl

May 16, 1971 Feb. 12, 1971

Government assistance inadequate 52.0 23. 2 Waiting for Government assistance (PA. FS unemployment) 20.5 16. 4 Referred by Government agency 6.7 5. 7 Children 5-/ 44. 5 Unemployment compensation expired 2.2 2. 0

PERSONS SERVED-7 FOOD RANKS

Jan. 10 Feb. 7 Apr. 4 Apr. 11 Apr. 18 Apr. 25

Capitol Hill 1 533 833 1, 254 1, 038 1, 212 University._ 138 432 266 567 528 419 Kent 135 33 91 97 141 176 Eiu rien 142 173 150 296 Ballard 57 70 298 329 Fremont 240 274 532 371 347 ______Des Moines 51 34 61 29 85 94

INENEZER P.,M171, CAPITOL HILL, INTERVIEWED IrY NATION' fON ER MMis a disabled lady on Public Assistance. He-r check was cut by $10.00 a month and her food stamp ,:ost was reduced from $18.00 to $12.00. 'She is now reo2iving $170.00 a month to live on. .She was just barely making it before. F/M s a di.abled lady who was finally forced to quit her job because she has diabetes and is 1,1sing her vision. She has only been on welfare for three months, but has found toodto trips. too expensive. Mrs. BRET is a eapable lady who has tried very hard to make it. She has seven children at and one child at home part time. Before she went te work she was receiving Aid to Dependent Children at $430.00 per month_ She got a state zrainee job which raised her income to $600.00 a month. She Was also attending school iA 'Seattle Coinmunity College. .She could not get adequate care for :ler children and they had severa' accidents. ,She finally liad to quit work but stayed in school because she felt dai .. was the only way out of what she called her "deadend" situatioil.. Shortly after quitting her Job, her check was cut fom $430 to $380. She gets $180 worth of food stamps for $110. She has teenage ehil- dren who eat a lot, and she is knowledgenbi- of nutrition. She just can't make it on $380 a month. She mos vice-president of Western Washington Headstart Parents and President of Selut' -King County Head Start Policy Connell. JULY 20, 1971. The people to whom our Food Bank has given food can be broridly classified into two major groups: (1) those who have applied or are receiving publio assistance; and (2) unemployed. Exulaples of those in these two categories will be described below. 1 91 1707 (Inoue 1 Mrs. G. is an o_ iderly woman living alone. Prior to the reduction in welfare payments, she was receiving approximately $100 per month of which she was paying about $100 (maximum rental allowance). The reduction in rentai allowance reduced her welfare check to $10.7. So, she had almost no money left for food after paying her rent. She had applied for low cost housing, but until site could relocate, she had to have some food assistance. She received food several times and thus avoided starvation. Mrs. D. receives $105 Social Security pension. By living in low cost housing, she manage.; to get by. Last week when she cashed her Social Security cheek, a man followed her out of the store, put a knife to her throat and tookher money. She had no money left for food. Until her check arrives the first of next month, she had to have some food help. Mr. D. is receiving welfare allowance of $140 per month. He is a diabetic and also has a medical problem of pancreaitis which requires his taking an anti-acid daily. The ant-acid approved by the Welfare Dept. is c,ustipating, so he has to buy another brand which costs $2.00 per day for the amount he n,..,eds. After paying for his medication, rit, and other expenses, he has almost no money left for food. The Food Bank has been assisting him regularly. Mrs. M. is a divorcee receiving Aid to Dependent Children support. She has five children to support as well as paying house rent and other living expenses. She budgets her money as well as could be expected, but frequently has little or no money for food a week or so before the end of the month. The FoodBank has given her and her family assistance several times. Mr. and Mrs. W. have applied for welfare assistance, including food stamps. However, before they could receive their first check, they had no money to buy food. The Welfare Dept. arranged to pay for housing in a low-cost apartment hotel, but could not pay for food. The Food Bank was asked to provide help. GROUP n Mr. and Mrs. C. have four childre:.. He tu :been receiving unemployment compensation which has recently expired. Bei:1A unable to qualify for public assistance other than food stamps, they have very little money to buy food or even to buy food stamps. They have contacte(l the Food Bank for food assistance several times. KEN BAXTER, Coordinator, Magnotki. Food Bank.

I )1.:N NY I 'ARK Pool)iL1.1s; IcAIR, 1 IABOLO BAN NE Started at the end of Nov., -970. At first they were serving mostly singlguys between the ages of 18 and 50 who were referred to them by the Firs.c Ave. Service Club. They are serving more and more families. Food stamps are too expensive for these people and to have a chunk of mom.,y at one time is next to impossible. Matny of the meit are unable to get public assistance because they are considered able bodied, but most of them cannot get more than casual labor to meet the hand to mouth needs. Commodities woi Id help these people. Those men also have a hard time gett:ng food stamps because they lack cooking Neighbors in Need provides one day's foodvalued ut about $f.100. Wholesale food is pti-ehased with ft eekly contrilmtions from the areas 9 cloirches. This amount i. usually aronnd $500$600, and will buy one day's food. (me days fowl comes from food eontrilmtions from the areas 9 churches. is a single fellow, 43 years old, who ii:es in downtown Seattle and is unable1. to get work. He ims usually worked as a laborer. He is linable to get publie assistance because lie is between 18 and 50 and is able bodied. He does get fowl stamps sometimes but doesn't always have the amount needed to buy them. Ho depends heavily on the food center, usually once a week. 2. Mrs. W. is about 48 years old. She lives in and manages a cheap hotel on 1st Avenue. She has a room and is paid $50.00 a month. She is caring for a three year old girl left in her charge. She would rathe,: try to hiake it enher own instead of trying for public assistance. It is doubtful shecould get it any- 1708 way since the child is not hers. She has come to the Food Center three times and probably will have to continue coining because only three days supply is distributed due to the high numbers of people in need. 3. Mr. and Mrs. N.J.Mr. N.J. is 54 years old and Mrs. N.J. is in her mid 40's. They have three cbildrentwo teenagers, one eleven orwelve. Mr. N.J. had been injured at work and was attempting to get industrial accident insurance butas having many complications getting through all this red tape. His wife has respiratory trouble and is unable to work. They were provideil 1?noug1) food for a few days and given the location of the Food Center neare. Lem. It was obvious that Mr. N J.'s pride was hurt. He had held off asking they were down to nely :nothing. He expressed disbelief that he would ever be in the position that IR anti his family were in now. HIGH POINT FOOD. BANK-MARLENE JOH' BON They have been in existence for four years and served 150 families in 1969, 300 in 1970 and is currently serving over 100 families per month. Information is taken over the phone and a week's supply of food is delivered to the family's residence. Fifty-six families have been served during the last two weeks. The following is a small sampling of cases coming in during the last two week period : 1. Mr. & Mrs. B., a West Seattle family of five. They ran out of food and needed help until the first unemployment check was received. a Mr. V. H. of West Seattle. Two families moved together to share expenses. Eleven people living under one roof. One family would te receiving unemployment check in two to three weeks. No information on the other family. V. H. called again this morning. He had received food stamp authorization, but still needed help until unemployment check was received. He should have receiT,ed emergency food stamps. 3. A. J., West Seattle family of six with two small babies ; one six months old and one fourteen months old. Needed milk for children. Family is receiving public assistance but ls finding it .nadequate. 4. P. K.Mother with child has just moved from California to West Seattle. She was on public assistance but had not received check since moving. SEATTLE MENTAL HEALTH CLIN -WALK-IN CLIENT J. D. came to SMIll to get help in getting food. He receives a monthly welfare check of $141.00. He normally spends $100.00 on rent, $10.00 for food stamps and has $31.00 left to meet other needs. He had incurred additional debts because he had been sick with hepatitis. He was unable to meet the food stamp price. He had just purchased one dozen eggs for 28 cents and had 10 centz left in his pocket. He said that be wished lie could get commodities like he had in Oregon. UrawasrrY Foon BANKDIcac PETLUSON Dick Peterson, the coordinator of the University Food Bank could not give specific cases because they only ask for the person's name, address and if he is participating in any public assistant programs. They try to inform people of programs that might help them. They have served 3,800 people in the last six weeks. Last week in less than eight hours they served 572 people. uesday's food is provided by seven churches in the University area. Wednesday's food is provided by FOCUS. Thursday's food is bought with money donations from the seven churches. The tunount averages from $300 to $500 weekly. Between $7,000 and $9,000 has been donated since the food bank opened in December 15,1970. CENTRAL FOOD BANK-PEGGY MAYEI 1. NBL, a former mental patient just out of the state hospital four months, had been found a house in South Seattle by a caseworker, I guess which she found inconvenient because she had to come to Capitol Hill for many services she could receive. After velfare cuts, she Only had an allowance of S50 a month for rent. A volunteer for FIZH took her to look at rooms. They saw rats crawling across floors and a lot of dirt. They found her a place on 8th and Pine. She shares'lath with twenty people, and has a funny quirk of wanting a daily bath. Many Limes inn 1709 there is vomit in the bath tub. She needed food from the food bank IN hen she first came to them. It is feared that she will be back in aninstitution in ^ short time. 2. M.D. unemployment expired. He came in only twice to the foodbank. Shortly thereafter he found xork and now brings food into the food bank twice a week. 3. B.L. is currently a non-drinking alcoholic. She has a son at FortWarden (juvenile center). Shc and two men who all had gone to A.A. together for cure decided to try to rent a house together to cut expenses. Her social workertold her she would not get her son back if sae rented the house with her twofriends. She cannot afford food stamps. 4. Mr. B.W. was layed off at Todd Shipyards. He has been out of astew's' job for sixteen months. He got sick and had to have mouth surgery and wasunable to collect his unemployment. He got Medicaid. His wife has tried tofind work but is unskilled. They lost their home anei Because he was able to find casual labor, he had to go every month for recee 'on for food stamps. FISH neople thought maybe the wife could get food stan 'hey were told that as long f:s she lived with her husband she could not. Item 2Material Submitted by OtherThan Witnesses

FROM MRS. DORIS L. THORNTON

COM MIDNITY HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D.C., September 10, 1971. Hon. GFORGE S. MCGOVERN, Chairman, Senate Select Committee on Nut:ion. and Human Needs, U.S. SenatL,, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN : The Supplemental FoodDivision, Washington, D.C. recently received a copy of Phil Olsson's testimonybefore the Senate Sraect Com- mittee on Nutrition and Er.rn Needs on July 22,1971. In his testimony Mr. Food Program's effective- i Olsson expressed reservations about the Supplementalto supply additional foods to pregnaut , ness in achieving its stated goal which is women and infants and preschool children,the high costs involved in administering the program, and the inability of the proirram toreach sufficient numbers of the target group. I would like to address.yself to these three points as they relate i.r.% the Supplemental Food Programin the District of Columbia, which is the largest program in the United Stat.3.s. It is difficult to evaluate food assistance programs. Althoughthe Food Stamp Program provides a fatally with greater purchasing power. no one caninsure if the products purchased are high in nutritive value and food tire necessary and the Fupplemental Food Program provides these programs. The reason for implementing the Supplemoutal Food Program was toprovide extra foods te, pregnant women, inthnts and preschool -rhildren as the importance of an adequate diet during these periods is especially recognized.Approxi- mately 40,000 bags of Supplemental Food are distributed to pregnant and post imrtum women, infants and e!ildren in the District of '.7o1um1)ia for the month of August. Infant mortality rates for the District of Columbia were 29/1600 in 1968 and 1969: later figures are not available 11.41111 the vital statistics branch of the Community Health Services Administration although the infant Mor- tality rate is expected to drop. The Supplemental Food Program budget for Fiscal Year 1972 is 450,000 however these monies do not go totally to administrating the delivery of United States Delmrtment of Agriculture commodities as was inferred in M. Olsson's testimony. The Supplemental Food Division initialed nutAtional counseling in Well Baby Clinics in the District of Columbia. rr h e Dvision also prepares educational materials, presents leetnre and conducts discussions in the fields of nutrition, food preparation and consumer education to mothers of children in Day Care Centers. to Honiemakers Services. Inc.. and countless other community groups in the eommunity which are not sta.vicpd urill,,r other programs. Indi- viduals not receiving health care are lomted and toll ,f. the services available to them. incinding the Supiileznental Food Program. This summer the Supple- mental Food Division participated in Tlealth Day at Kennedy Playground by distributing educational materials and alerting individuals as to bow they clmld participate. Further promotion of the program was made in conji.nction with the Load Mobile Testing; Unit, eireniating in the Model eitit'a Ivea. and the Summer inAi:, Parks programs. .-Niass inudia. T.V.. radio (Spanish and English) alai newspapers arc used to educate the pnblic about nutrition and sound buying praetices. Supplemental Foods were used last year as a vehicle for teaching nutrition in junior and senior highs; this was thought to be especially beneficial to pregnant teenagers remaining in s(diools. It is evident that our educational programs are varied. Several publientions are available in SpanTsh and another publication is :.urriintly being teanslated in7Chirn:ze. The Sumnemental Food Program keeps informed over thirty nutritionists, employed by the District of Columbia gove,ament on Sun lemental Food Program changes and supplies I.9. (1710) 1711 them with nutrition education materials to distribute to their patientd. 14 all our ventures we educate individuals in the field of food and nutrition as well as inform individuals about the Supplemental Food Program. As for Mr. Olsson's statement that Supplemental Food may not be reaching tii >. target group but may ip fact be shared by the entire family, my only comment is that it is unrealistic to think Putt any family will prepare two meals, one containing Supplemental Food and the other containing food purchased from the grocery store. It is reasonable to assume however that with the use of Supple- mental Food more food is available to the family and thus the pregnant women and yeung children will be benefitted. As to the inconvenience of pregnant women transporting hoine heavy bags, this is true also in the supermarket. At one distribution center Red Cross volunteers do provide rides home for pati.uits with Supplemental Food on designated days. A. mobile distribution center, which is used in some ...rrams would also facilitate delivery of Supplemental Foods. I thank you for reviewing this lengthy letter but thought it imperative for the Senate Select Committee ori Nutritio:, and Human Needs to have another view- point of the Supplemental Food Program in the District of Columbia. Sincerely yours, Mrs. Doms L. THORNTON, Chief, Supplemental Food Division.

FROM JOSEPH A. WALSH

MEAD JOHNSON LABORATORIES, Evansville, Ind , July 23, 1971. Hon. GEORGE MCGOVERN, Chairman, Select Committee on Nutrition. and Haman Weeds, U.S. genatc, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MCGOVERN : Attached is a Report to the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs that you requested. I trust this is the informao n and recommendation you 1:.ui in mind to be read into your bearing record. If there is any further information that you need, we will be only too happy to supply it. Sincerely, JosE?Ir A. 1,,-ALSII, Director, Hospital and Govcrnmeat Affairs. Enclosures. U.S. SENATE, SELECT COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION AND HUMAN NFIEDS, Washington, D.C., July 22, 1971. Mr. JOSEPH A. 1N. ALSII, .wetor. Hospital Sales and Government Affairs, j.ad Johnson Laboratories, Evansvilk, Ind. DEAR Mn. Wittsn : The Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, which I chair, conducted a one-day bearing into the Supplement Food Peogram for groups at high idsk to malnutrition : pregnant d lactating women, and young children. I understnial from my staff that you have had direct experimee with the program in the course of developing iron-enriched and other infant formula prepa rations. It would be very helpful to the Committee if you cculd submit, for the record, a brief account of your observations of the Supplemental Food 13rogran1 and even some of the possible moditi ations that you fed. might improve the administration of the program. I believe the perspective of a business concern would be particularly useful in light of the administrative cliff. 'ulties encountered in the program. I understand how valuable your time must be and wish to thank you in advance for any effort this may entail on your part. Sincerely, GEoRaE Mc GOVIMN, 19e Chairman. 1712 REPORT TO SELECT COMINifTTEE ON NUTRITION AND ilUMAN NEEDS BY OSEPH A. W ALSII, DIRECTOR, HOSPITAL SALES AND GOVERN MENT AFT %las, MEAD JOHNSON LABORATORIES, EVAN S VILLE, IND. In recent years, there has been a great deal of discussion on the nutritional needs of children and the existence of malnutrition in the. United States as it relates to infants and children. The recent preliminary report by HEW on the 10-state nutritional survey indicates the vitamin and iron deficiencies that exist in the States surveyed. These preliminary datn compiled showed that iron deficiency nnemia was found in as many as 42 percent of the people examined in Louisiana and that 26 percent of the children from ages 1 to 6 were deficient in vitamin A in South Carolina. In 1970 HEW published a booklet* authored by Samuel J. Fomon, M.D. titled. "Prevention of Iron Deficiency Anemia in Infants and Children of Pre- school Age." Dr. Fomon states, "Iron-deficiency anemia is almost certainly the most prevale nt. nutritional disorder among infants and children in the U.S." He further states, "Prevention is feasible and the group primarily affected eau be readily identified as children between 6 to 24 months of age. The question is not whether iron-deficiency anemia can be prevented but rather which approaches to prevention are mopractical. The importance of a fully adeq-aate diet is self-evident." This opinion concerning iron deficiency has, with few exceptions, general acceptance by the medical community. The American Academy of Pediatrics on December 15, 1970 published in the Academy Journal a statement** by their Committee on Nutrition recommend- ing the use of iron-fertified foiulas for infants from birth to 12 months of age. The area that is of most co-.rn to physicians and scientists in nutritional research is the effect that malnution has on mental growth and development. While this area needs further clinical investigation, there has been a great deal published in literature concerning this subject. Myron Winiek, M.D., in the May 1969 issue of The Journal of Pediatrics :tatex, -The complex of socioeconomic evils, which includes malnutrition tends to produce retarded development." He suggests, "More data must be collected. but th evidence is becoming more and more weigh , .tat malnutrition in infancy permanently affects the minds of the children who h,ve been afflicted. The details have still to be worked out. How much undernutlition? What kind? When, if ever, is the brain no longer susceptible? How severe is the retardation? In other words, the degree is still an open question, but certainl-- severe mainutri: a .1 of young infants will produce significant brain dn wage." Prom evidence that is present, it would seem appropriae that an infant feeding program be developed that would supply free tormula with iron to those infants who are born to families at or below the poverty level, At present there are only a few Federal programs that supply free formula with iron to infants born into poverty families : 1. USDA-Supplemental Food Program.This program is presently supplying evaporated milk but will purchase a formula product with iron in the next few months. 2. USDA-Pdot Food Certificate Program. 3. 0E0-Emergency Food Program. 4. Model Citiea Program.Formula program is included as part of the health component of the Baltimore program. 5. USPHSC.D.C.'s Nutritional Program.Funding of this program is very limited. None of these above programs adequately fills the need for an infant feeding program for needy infants. The USDA Supplemental Food program Is in the process of ratrehttaing iron-fortified formula products to replace evaporated milk. The irot ,d formula product will be made available in the Supplemental Food la withiu a few months. Thisn'Iduct will contain a USDA label and wiL.e distributed through the USDA Supplemental Food Depots. This will necessitate the mother going to the depot to receive a ease of formula weight 26 lbs.and then carrying or transportincr it th her hnme. The administrative cost to supply a formula in this manner is also a consideration. See following, p. See following, p. 197 1713 The USDA's Pilot Food Certificate Programreally seems to offer the best possibility as far as distribution of a formulaproduct to the mother is concerned. Food certificates are distributedto mothers. These certificates are redeemable through food and drug retail outlets.These stores are generally close to her home aml op,ei from earlymoLning to late evenings. The Food Certificate program allows the mother achoice of formula. She is able to purchasethe product she Is familiar with, or the one herinfant was fed in the hospital, a consideration which Is usually the decidingfactor with most mothers in forizula selection, The problem with the FoodCertificate program, which wits tested in Chicago is that it allowed the mother a choice of : 1. Unflavored whole nailfortified with vitamin ; 2. Low fat milk fortified with vitamins Aand D ; 3. Skimmed milk fortified with vitamins Aand D; 4. Nonfat dry milk fortified with vitaminsA and D ; 5. Evaporated milk ; 0. Concentrated liquid or powderedinfant formula "preferably" enriched with iron; or 7. Instant precooked infant cereal"preferably" enriched with iron. By allowing such a wide selection ofproducts, it is quite obvious that a mother whose knowledge of nutrition is verylimited, may be thoroughly confused. She probably would prefer to purchase whole milk so theentire family could benet from the food certificates. The recentlypublished report on the Food Certificate program indicates the objective ofsupplying tron-enriched formula to this group was not met. An additional reasonfor this failure (not acknowledged in the re- Port) could well be due to theProgram's "official food list" thatmerely stated an infant formula "preferably"with iron be used. A 1966 study of Iron Deficiency Anemiain Chicago by Morten Andelman and Bernard Sered, showed that 76 percent ofthe el.lidrn studied had hemoglobins of iess than 10 gin, per 100 nil, of bloodand were therefore anemic. This study was conducted in the same areaof Chicago where the FoodCertificate program operates. Based on the findings of theAndelman and Sered studies, the Food Certificate program should only include aniron-fortified formula. There have been other program efforts to meetthe nutritional needs of poor infants. For example, severel Public Health programsin various parts of the country have been using OECI EmergencyFood Program funds to purchase iron- fortified formula products for theimpoverished infants in their community. While Emergency Food program funds arenot normally used for the direct purchase of formule, it has been found necessarythat these programs use 0E0 Emergency Food funds for infant formula purchaseswhen no other source of funding for such a program is availablein their areas. This program makes direct purchase of the formula productand distributes It to the mothereither through a clinic, home delivery, or depots.The same problems of formula product distribution to the mother exist with this program asmentioned with the Food Supplement programs. Also the cost of programadministration may be very high. The Model Cities program inBaltimore is supplying iron-fortified formulato hiffints born within the Model Cities Area.In this program, the Baltimore Health Department purchases formula and distributesft directly to the recipient's reei- dence. The administrative (spst of this programwas $96.001 or 45% of thetotal budget of $212,134 (1970 budget.) Thisadministrative cost would appear to be ex- ceedingly high . The Nutritional Program under theCenter for Disease Control (of the U.S. Public Health Service) is in the processof funding an infant formula program in Queens, New York. Details at thistime are not known. No otherinfant feeding formula program is currently beingfunded by C.D.C. The experiences of theaforementioned programs highlightthree major problems associated with current infantfeeding programs : 1. Distribution of products to themoth2r. 2. 'High administrative costs. 3. The Mellhood that the motherwill not choose to buy aniron-fortified formula. It would appear that these threeproblems could be resolved byusing the existing methods of distributionfoodand drug retail stores, and by using a Food Certificate or Formula Stampthat could only be redeemedfor an iron- fort!fied formula product. Theretailers could redeem these FormulaStamps through the same redemption channelsused for Food Stamps or PostOffices. 198 1714

Any successful formula program wouldinvolve hospitals as well as all Public Health AgenciesFederal, State, countyand city. On discharge from the hospital, a mother could be supplied aFormula Stamp or fitamps good for a 39-day supply of iron-fortified infantformula. She would be tulvisedor an appointment arrangedthat she is to visitthe Baby Health Station in her area approximately 30 days after discharge for afirst month's cheek of the infant. At, that time she Nrould also receive, inaddition to the physical examination of the infant, another supply of l!'ormula Stampsrood far another niontles supply of formula. This clinic and formula tie-inwould not only assure the infant's receiving a healthy nutritfonal start duringthe first year, but would also increase the opportunity for a properimmunization program and co:Itinuous preventive itenith eare for these socio-eeonomnieallydeprived infants. Any good programa also requires tinintensive educational campaign which in- elmaies parents. public health and professionalpersonnel. It should likewise contain a prenatal program. It is awellknown fact that birth weights of infants born to undernourished mothers aregenerally lowerand there is a high incidence of premature infantsthan thoseof infants born to mothers of good nutritiomil status, Devel-pment of thebrain and other vital organs of the fetus is delayed by poor nutrition in pregnancy,especially during the last trimester in which growth needs aro the greatest.Fetal stores of protein, vitamins and minerals may also be decreased if the motheris malnourished. Wherever they exist, Maternal and InfantCare Projects could be automat- ically included in such a program to assure propernutrition during the prenatal period. In tin infant feeding program,consideration should also be given to the child who may be allergic to milk. Over rive ofthe Infants in the U.S. do not tolerate eow's milk formulas well, and requiremilk substitnte formulas. The nutritional development of these infants depends on theavailability of a sound milk substitute formula. It is necessary that theseformulas be Included in infant feeding programs to assure the allergic infant of agood nutritional start. The milk substItute formulas could be purchased withthe Formula Stamps at the authorization of health professionals. The infant feeding cost for the program describedwould be approximately $126-$150 per baby per year for a concentrated liquidiron-fortified infant formula product. (Hypoallergenic formulas would beslightly higher in cost.) This cost per baby appears to be insignificantwhen compared to the benefits. The children would have a better opportunity for normal growthand development, and sub- sequent intellectual achievement. The first y;nr isobviously extremely crucial for the proper development of thesesoeioeconomically deprived infants. Every effort snould be made to achieve good nutritionand thus avoid Irreversible dam- age effecting the future learning andwork ability of these infants, BIBLIPORAPB Y 1. Prevention of Iron-Deficiency Anemia inInfants and Children of Preschool Age. Fouion, Samuel J., M.D., I !ENVPublication. 1970. 2. iron-Fortlfled Formulas. NewsletterSupplement, Committee on Nutrition, American Academy or Pedla I rlvs, Deremiwr 15.1970, 3. Malnutrition and Brain Development.Winick, Myron. M.D., The journal of Pediatrics, Vol. 74, No. 5, (ini, 11K19. 5. Utilization of Dietary Iron by Term Infantn.Andehnan, Morten B. M.D., Sered, Bernard R.. M.D., Amer. J. Dis. Child, Vol. III. 45,1960. 5. The Case for Iron Supplements in InfantFeeding Regimens. Filer, Lloyd J., Jr., Hospital Proetice, Vol. (I, 79, 1971.

199 1715

Newsletter Supplement - December 15, 1970

COMMITTEE STATEMENT Committee on Nutrition American Academy of Pediatrics

IRON-FORTIFIED FORMULAS

Considerable public unit profes- Inits recent statement on iron, substituted al the time of gletitvst the (*inmate(' on Nutredon empha- iresi nesit and highest prevalence of sorial odu cot ion about the use of of iron-fort,.fied, iron-deficiency ((news. The infant's iron-fortified milk would be nec- sizedthevalue essary to assure its Use, proprietary milk formulas for the pre- dietisusunlly deficientilliron, Unktisotherfoodssr. carefully vention of iron-deficiency anemia of The knowledge andmeans to infancy. Ikapite this recoemamda- selectedtoinsureadequateiron prevent iron deficiency as a nignifi- tion. the most recent marketing in- intake, rant pediatric problem are available formation available to the Committee Since the major dada* component 11010 . A cifirst step in dealing with shows that MON! thes 70 percent of during infancy is mill:, two courses this major public hcoltn concern. theproprietaryformulas currently of action should be taken: proprietary formulas, whcn used for Prescribedby physicians do not infantfeeding, should he iron- contain ridded iron. I 'ed la tr ic inn s andother health profesrtionals should engage in a fortified. The reasons for eintinuing routine program of public tidte:ationto use of formules not fortified with convir.ceAmtvican mothersto ironarenotentirelyclear. One providetheirinfantawitha COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION reason may be that some physicians source of dietary ion. This can L. J. Filer, Jr.. M.D.. Chairman still believe iron additives increase achieved by continuing an be Lewis A. Harness. N.D. the incidence of feeding problems or iron-fortified formula as long as gastrointestinal disturbances. Tnere Richard B. Ceeliltdoern. the infant is bottle fol. told then Malcolm A. Holliday, M.D. is no documented evidence that this iron. eixti fled us ing thesame Robert W. Miller. M.D. is a significant problem. formula as beverage milk along Donoigh O'Brien, M.D. with the usual solid foods until 'TheCommittee strongly recom- Howard A. Pearson, M.D. mends when proprietary formulas are the infant is at least 12 months Charles R. Scriver. M.D. prescribedthatiron-supplemented of age. William H. Weil, Jr.. M.D. formulae be used routinely as the 2.Iron-fortified fluid whole milk or Charles F. Whitten. M.D. standard that is. that this be the evaporated milk should be made COIsultants rule rather than the exception. There available for infantfeeding. Jocquin Cravioto, M.D., M.P.H. seems to be little justification for Although iron-fortified, fluid 0. L. Kline. Ph.D. continued general use of proprietary wholomilkissold ina few formulas not fortified with iron. Tlie localities, this type of milk has Committee is fully awnre that only a not met with widespread accept- small percentage of American infants ance. This lack of acceptance ale fed proPrietary formulas after ii has been due, in part, to the months of age. Fluid whet,!talk objectionable color changes seen ((evh dable.inbottleicrc; or when the milk be treed in cooking evaporated milk, bah of ohich con- or in coffee and to the acceler- tent oaly trace tinvorits of iron, tin. ated nitoof developmentof rancidityinpasteurized whole Coaurnittevon \utritioo:Iron milk.However.thisobjection helmet, and requirements in infancy. should not deter the use of this Pe dial ricn, 43:13-1 ,1909. type of milk for infant feeding.

,1, con,liw, St ATOM'S AtieWnly of P.31.11., UNCI JoKr.on, 15'O

200 1716

PREVENTION OF IRON-DEFICIENCY ANEMIA IN INFANTS AND CHILDREN OF PRESCHOOL AGE

201 1717

PREVENTION OF IRON-DEFICIENCY ANEMIA IN INFANTS ANDCHILDREN OF PRESCHOOLAGE

Samuel J. Fomon, M.D. (Medical Consultant In Nutrition, Maternal and Child Health Service)

Department of Pediatrics College of Medicine UniversityofIowa

IRON-DEFICIENCY MIA isalmost certainly the most prevalei -tritional disorder among infants and children ine United States.Etiology is known, prevention icasible, and the group primarily affected can breadily identified as those between 6 and 24 mo hs of age.The question is not whether iron-deficiencyanemia can be prevented but rather which approachesto prevention are most practical. Theimportance of a fully adequate diet is self-evident;that this booklet empha-

202

58-854 0----71Dt. 6----14 1718

sizes iron nutritional status should not obscure the importance of striving for adequate intakes of all essential nutrients. Definition of anemia For purposes of this '1no1 1ct, anemia isarbi- trarily defined as a state in which the concentration of hemoglobin is less than 10.0 gm./100 ml. of blood or the hematocrit is less than 31. The ar- bitrary nature of this definition should be stressed and it may be noted that various other concentrations of hemoglobin have been proposed. Thus, the Committee on Nutrition of the American Academy of Pediatrics states that "hemoglobin levels as low as 11 gm./100 ml., and hematocrits as low as 33% . .. should be considered `normar." Similarly, n WHO Scientific Group on Nutritional Anemias (1968) has recommended that hemoglobin concentrations less than 11.0 gm./100 ml. be used to define anemia in children from age 6 months to 6 years (but greater concentrations for older individuals). A value of 10.0 gm./100 ml. has been chosen as a reference point for this publication because more reports in the literature provide data on frequency of hemoglobin concentrations belov, 10.0 gm./100 ml. than below any other arbitrarily assigred value. If anemia is hypochromic and microcytic, it is reasonable to assume thatitis caused by iron deficiency. However, development of morphologic changes in the erythrocytes appears to be a less

9oa 1710 sensitive index than otheravailable measurements, including plasma iron, iron-bindingcapacity and percent saturation of transferrin.Recommended methods for these determinations aregiven in the Appendix. Prevalence of anemia Anemia as defined above (concentrationof hemoglobin less than 10.0 grn./100ml.) is frequently encountered among infants and youngchildren of low socioeconomic status.Although itis seen less frequently among infantsof similar age cared for by private practitioners in manygeographic areas, iron-deficiencyanemia is probably the most frequentnutritional deficiency diseasein these children also. Two reviews (Fomon, 1967a; Filer,1969) and several recent reports of surveys haveprovided evidence that iron-deficiency anemia is commonin some localities in the UnitedStates and relatively uncommon in others. Table Isummarizes the more important recent studies. The relation ofprevalence to age is well demonstratedby data from projects providingComprehensiveHealthServices(or Children and Youth: anemia wasfound in 28.5% of 1- to 2-year-old children,in 9.2% of 2- to 3- year-old children and 2.8% of3- to 6-year-old children (Systems DevelopmentProject,1968). Among Negro childreninWashington,D.C., Gutelius (1969) found anemia in46% of 6- to 23- month-old children and in 12% of 2- to5-year-old

204 1720 children. The great variability in prevalence of anemia in various parts of the United States is apparent from a comparison of data for infants from low incomefamiliesinlargemet,-opolitancenters (Andelman ar:d Sered, 1966; Systems Development Project, 1968; Gutelius, 1969) with data for infants and young children in rural areas of Iowa (Kripke and Sanders, 1970).The prevalence of anemia among 4- to 6-year-cld children enrolled in Head Start programs in five cities was found by Pearson et al. (1967) to ranr,;... from 0.6% in Hous- ton to 7.7% in Augusta.

Possible reasons for widespread occurrence An erroneous belief exists among many physicians and nutritionists that iron is not absorbed before 2 or 3 months of age and that therefore it is useless to give iron during the first months of life.In fact, iron is absorbed efficiently by young infants (Garby and SO lin, 1959; Gorten et 1963) and subsequently (by 3 to 4 months of age) is utilized in formation of hemoglobin. There is lack of awareness among professional workers as well as parents that mcst unfortified foods provide rather limited amounts of iron (Table II). For practical purposes, iron-fortified foods for infants are limited to certain commercially prepared formulas (Table IL and cereals (Table III). Infants in the United States are less commonly fed iron-fortified formulas or cereals after 6 months

203 1721 of age than before that age (Fomon, 1967b). Experience in several parts of the country indicates that many parents are unlikely to carry out a program of daily administrationof medicinal iron. Milk, a poor source of iron (Table II), is rather frequently fed to infants in extremely large quantities to the exclusion of iron-fortified foodsand other foods. Approaches to the problem Although certain infants can be identified as being at unusual risk with respect to development of iron deficiency, it is by no means possible to identifyallsuchinfants.Therefore,effortsat prevention require a two-fold approach: (1) special measures directed at infants who can beidentified as likely to develop iron-deficiency anemia,and (2) measures directed at all other infants, forwhom average daily intakes of iron from one month to 18 months of age should be no less than 6 mg. Because it is unlikely that most infants will receive the recommended amounts of iron from natural foods (Table II), prevention of iron-deficiency anemia requires regular administration of medicinal iron or of iron-fortified foods. Sources of iron Milk and formula:Human milk and cow's milk are poor sources of iron (Table H).Infant

206 1722 formulas supplemented with iron (generally_to the extent of 8 to 12 mg. per quart) will provide 6 mg. of iron in the amount consumed by 1- to 2-month- old infants (average intake about 700 ml.); older infants consuming greater quantities of formula will generally receive more than 6 mg. of iron from this source. Strained and junior foods:Commercially prepared strained and junior foods for infants are combinations of the specified food with water and frequently with additional carbohydrate(starch and/or sucrose). Therefore, the concentration of iron in a strained or junicr food will usually be less per unit of weight than would be true for the corresponding food not prepared for infants. For example, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Hand- book #8 (1963) lists beef chuck, choice grade, cooked, braised or pot-roasted (81% lean, 19% fat) as containing 494% water and 3.3 mg of iron per 100 gm. The section on baby foods of this Hand- book lists strained beef as containing 80c: water and 2.0 mg. of iron per 100 grn. The figures for the iron content of various strained and junior foods in Table II represent a summary of data from booklets supplied by the manufacturers. Cereal:Since most dry infant cereals provide 50 to 70 mg. of elemental iron per 100 gm. (14 to 20 mg. per ounce of dry cereal), slightly less than one-half ounce of dry cereal (5-6 tablespoons) or three ounces of a cereal-milk mixture as it is usually fed, will provide 7 to 10 mg. of iron (Table

207 III).Itis important to note thatcommercially available wet-packed strainedcereal-fruit combinations are either unfortified with iron orfortified to a lesser extent than are the dry cereals(Table III). Most cereals that require cooking(e.g., farina, oatmeal, rice, grits) are not fortifiedwith iron or are fortified atextremely low levels.However, "Quick" and "Instant" Cream ofWheat are fortified with iron to nearly the sameextent as are he dry infant cereals. One-half ounceof dry "Ouick" or "Instant" Cream of Wheat(1 tbsp.) or 3Wa oz. (6-8 tbsp.) of the cookedcereal provides 6 mg. of iron. Although a 1- to 2-month-old infant isunlikely to consume sufficient cereal toprovide 6 mg. of iron daily, by :bout 4 months of age hewill readily consume such an amount.If the infant continues to receive cereal daily, iron fromthis source plus the small amounts present in manyother foods will assure an everage daily intake of 6 mg.through the first 18 months of life. IV..,41cfnsi Iron:For infants who do not receive iron-fortified l'oods beginning at 4 to 6weeks of age, medicinal iron,preferably ferrous sulfate, is recommended in dosage to provide atleast 6 mg. of elemental iron daily.

Recommendations The intake of iron recommendedhere (average of 6 mg. daily from age I to18 mo iths) is somewhat less than that proposed bythe Food and Nu-

208 1724

Atkin Board (1968) or the Committee on Nutri- on of the American Academy of Pediatrics (1969). The Food and Nutrition Board has recommended , mg. of elemental iron daily during the first 2 .1nonths of life, 10 mg. daily from age 2 to 6 months and 15 mg. daily from 6 months to 3 ictirs.The Committee on Nutrition has stated thatI mg./kg./day to a maximum oi 15 mg. "if begun at an appropriate time with respect to initial iron endowment, will provide sufficient iron to maintain normal hemoglobin values in most infants."If hemoglobin corcentrations of infants are to be maintained at or above 11.0 Fn/100 ml. (the goal of the Committee on Nutrition), larger intakes of iron will be necessary than if concentrations are to be maintained at or above 10.0 gtn./100 ml. as suggested here. Much depends on the age at which dietary supplementation with iron is begun and how regularly this supplementation is provided. Thus, an average intake of 6 mg. of iron daily from age one month will provide a total intqke of approximately 2,000 mg. of iron by age 14 .,unths. If the diet has not been supplemented with iron during the first four months of life, approximately 8 mg. of iron daily between 4 and 12 months would be required to achieve the same (2,000 mg.) total intake. With these considerations in mind, the following specific recommendations are offered: I . A massive educationaleffortshould be undertaken to reach all levels of professional and ancillaryworkerswhocounselparentsand,

209 1725 through use of mass media, toreach parents themselves. 2.Recommendations regarding diet of infants and preschool children shouldinclude consideration of need for iron. 3. Vigorous efforts should be made to urge parents to feed iron-fortifiedfoods to infants and toddlers. Infantsidentifiedaslikelyto developiron- deficiency anemia:Infants of low birth weight (less than 2.5 kg.), those ofmultiple births (twfro, triplets, etc.) and possibly thoseborn to motlers with several recent pregnancies, are proneto develop iron-deficiency anemia aneiwill require more intensive preventive measures thanwill be needed for the remainder of the infantpopulation. In addition, anemia among infants andtoddlers is known to be endemic in certainlocakies, perhaps reflect- ing low body stores of iron of the womenof child- bearing age.'Infan'..; in these groups should receive 10 to 15 mg. of elemental irondaily, the level of intake being adjusted on thebasis of determinations of hemoglobin and/or hematoerit every2 or 3 months, Use of medicinal ironwill often be nemsary to achieve therequired intakes. MI other infants:Iron-fortified foods (i.e., iron- fortified formula or cereal) cr medicinaliron should be introduced into the diets of allinfants by 4 to 6

The importance of mMernal iron deficiency Inthe production of iron-deficiency anemia in the infant remains a matterof controversy (Oski and Neiman. 1966).

210 1726 weeks of age and continued until at least 18 months of age. If this recommendation is followed, ave:age daily intakcs of 6 mg. of elemental iron daily sho ild be adequate to maintain concentrations of hemoglobin at or above 10.0 gm./100 ml. Application to maternal and child health programs The major effortinthe prevention of iron- deficiency anemia in infants and young children should be an intensive educational campaign which includes both professional workers and parents. The need of the infant and child of preschool age for iron should be stated repeatedly and in different ways. The role of iron-fortified formulas and iron-fortified cerealsinthe prevention of iron- deficiency anemia nceds to be emphasized. In the case of infants of needy families, who are at special risk of developing iron-deficiency anemia, the provision or distribution of iron-fortified formulas,iron-fortifiedcerealsor medkinaliron should be considered. For adequate evaluation of a program, baseline data about the prevalence of iron-deficiency anemia should be collected even before educational or other activities are initiated. Data on ct tions of hemoglobin of infants and small 4--- should be collected through well-child clinics, pediatric clinics, crippled children clinics, children and youth projects, maternity and infant care projects, clinical mental retardation programs and other spe-

211 1T)7

incidence of anemia cialprojects. In addition, among infants andchildren admitted tohospitals in various geographic areasshould be determined. After instituting the proposedprogram of prevention, subsequentdeterminations of hemoglobin concentration will permit assessmentof its effective- ness. Information about infantfeedIng practices among low-income families withhigh incidence of iron- deficiency anemia should becollected.

212 1728

Table I PREVALENCE OF

Age NtImber of Percent Location (yr.) Children Anemic * Chicago < 2 446 (76) C&Y Projects ** 1-2 1,813 28.5 Washington, D.C. 1/2-2 226 46 Iowa 1/2-3 583 4 C&Y Projects ** 2-3 1,245 9.2 Brooklyn < 5 1,159 25.5 Tennessee < 6 15,681

Mississippi 1-5 Low income 210 24 Higher income 342 12 Washington. D.C. 2-5 189 12 C&Y Projects 3-6 3,153 2.8 Head Start 4-6 7,000 Houston 0.6 Jacksonville 1.7 Gainesville 2.8 Chicago 4.5 Augusta 7.7

Concentration of,hemoalobin less than 10,0 gm./100m1. or hematocrit less than 31. Comprehensive Care for Children and Youth Projects.

2 13 1729

IRON-DIFFICIENCY ANEMIA

Reference Comment Andelman & Sered, 1966 Repeated testing of same infant Systems Development Project, 1968 Gutelius, 1969 Kripke & Sanders, 1970 Rural areas Systems Development Project, 1968 Hillmart k Smith, 1968 Hutches '968 Rural areas; 20.9% had hematocrits less thun 32

Owen et al., 1969

Gutelius, 1969 Systems Development Project, 1968 Pearoon. 1967

214 IRON CONTENT 01 ":OMMERCIALLY R. (OR FOODS FOR INFANTS Table II PREPARED STRAINED AND * Meats Liver and a few otbt.,s (mg.1100 gm. of food) Elemental Iron 4-6 Cil Egg Yolks Most meats 2-31-2 .-7.1 Vegetables"Dinners" ** Vegetable-meatHigh meat < 1 oco MilkFruits ** HumanCow's < 0.11< 0.1 100infants gm. is generally#8 Iron(1963)see lessA content fewthan varieties amount text.of commercially indicatedof vegetables in prepared and fruits strained and provide 1-2 mg. of iron per U.S.D.A. Handbook junior foods for Table HI IRON CONTENT OF CEREALS Elemental Iron (mg.) Cr)Pole16Z OtherWetIron-fortifiedQuick packed, cereals, or Instant strainedinfant dry, 1/2 Creamcereals, cereal-fru:toz.* of dry, Wheat, 1/2 combinations oz.* dry, 1/2 oz.* (100 gm.) 7-101 6 0.56 cerealwith as 61/2 feuparts oz. (assuming of of milk). dry cereal that willI part provide by weight approximately cf dry areal 100 is gm. mixed (31/2 oz.) of 1732

APPENDIX Laboratory Methods It is recommended that the concentration of hemoglobin be determinedbythecyanmethemoglobinmethod (ICNND, 1963), and that the hematocrit (0'3rien et al., 1968) be determined. A mean corpuscular hemoglobin concentration of less than 31 gm./100 ml. of packed ,crythrocytes indicates !lypochromia. Determinations of ir an concentration and iron-binding capacity in serum or plasma are also useful and can be done by micro methods. Plasma or serum iron and iron- binding capacity may be determired by the method of Fischer and Price(1964).Concentrations of iron in plasma or serum less than 60 pg./100 ml. suggest iron deficiency (Hillman and Hende :son, 1969). Values abv.- 360 ps./100 ml. are considered abnormal (Bainton and Finch, 1964) although the range of normel differs somewhat from one laboratory to another. Percent saturation of transferrin is determined by di- viding plasma iron by total iron-binding capacity and multiplying the result by 100.It has been suggested (BaintonaridFinch, 1964; Smith.1970)thatpercent saturation ok transferrin less than 16 indicates that availability of iron has become a limiting factor in erythropoiesis.Further studies on this point are desirable.

217 1733

REFERENCES

Andelman, M.B., and Sered, B.R.:Utilization of Dietary Iron by Term Infants.Am.J.Dis.Child., 111;45-55, 1966. Bainton, D.F., and Finch, C.A.: TheDiagnosis of Iron- Deficiency Anemia. Am.J.Med. 37:62-70, 1964. Committee on Nutrition, American Academy ofPedi- atrics: Iron Balance and Requirements inInfancy. Pediatrics 43:134-142, 1969. Filer, L.J., Jr.:The USA TodayIs It Free of Public Health Nutrition Problems? Anemia,A.J.P.H. 59: 327-338, 1969. Fischer, D.S., and Price, D.C.: A Simple SerumIron MethodUsingtheNewSensitiveChromogen Tripyridyl-s-triazine. Clin.Chem. 10:21, 1964. Fomon, S.J.:Infant Nutritinn. Philadelphia, W.B. Saun- ers Company, 1967, (a) pp.166-169; (b) pp. 5-7, 72-178. Food and Nutrition Board: Recommended DietaryAllow- ances,PublicationNo.1694.Washington,D.C., National Academy of Sciences-NationalResearch Council, 7th Edition, 1968. Garby, L., and Sjölin, S.: Absorption of Labelled Ironin Infants Less Than Three Months Old. Acta.Paediat. Scand. 48(Supp1.117): 24-28, 1959. Gorten, M.K., Hepner, R., and Workman, J.B.:Iron Metabolism in Premature Infants, I. Absorptionand Utilization of Iron as Measured by IsotopeStudies. J. Pediat. 63:1063-1067, 1963.

218 1734

Gutelius, M.F.: The Problem of Iron Deficiency Anemia in Preschool Negro Children. A.J.P.H. 59:290-295, 1969. Hillman, R.S., and Henderson, P.A.: Control of Marrow Production by the Level of Iron Supply. J.Clin.Invcst. 48:454-460, 1969. Hillman, R.W., and Smith, H.S.: Hemoglobin Patterns in Low-Income Families.Pub.Health Rep. 83:61-67, 1968. Hutcheson, R.H., Jr.:Iron Deficiency Anemia in Tennes- see Among Rural Poor Children. Pub.Health Rep. 83:939-943, 1968. Interdepartmental Committee on Nutrition for National Defense. Manual for Nutrition Surveys, 2nd Edition, Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963, p.115. Kripke, S.S., and Sanders, E.:Prevalence of Iron-Defi- ciency Anemia Among Infants and Young Children Seen at Rural Ambulatory Clinics. Am.J.Clin.Nutr. 23:716-724, 1970. O'Brien, D., Ibbott, F.A., and Rodgerson, D.O.: Labora- tory Manual of Pediatric Micro-Biochemical Tech- niques, 4th Edition, New York, Harper and Row Publishers Inc., 1968, p. 187. Owen, G.M., Garry, P.J., Kram, K.M., Nelsen, C.E., and Montalvo, I.M.:Nutritional Status of Mississippi Preschool Children. A Pilot Study. Arn.l.Clin.Nutz. 22:1444-1458, 1969. Oski, P.A., and Neiman, J.L.: Hematologic Problems in the Newborn. Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders Co., 1966, pp. 24-25.

.21"S 1735

Pearson, H.A., Abrams, I., Fernbach, DJ., Gylan, S.P., and Hahn, D.A.: Anemia in Preschool Children in the United States of America. Pediat.Res. 1:169-172, 1967. Smith, N.J.:Personal communication, 1970. Systems Development Project Study Series No. 8-9(1d): Hemoglobin-Hematocrit Charts and Tables. Poverty Area Children. Systems Development Project, Uni- versity of Minnesota, September, 1968. U.S. Department of Agriculture: Composition of Foods. Agriculture Handbook No.8. Washington, D.C., U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1963. World Health Organization. -Nutritional Anemias. Report of a WHO Scientific Group. Technical Report Series No. 405, Geneva, World Health Organization, 1968. 1736

The Case for IronSupplements in Infant FeedingRegimens

LLOYD J. FILER, JR.University of Iowa

Reprinted from Hospital Practice June., 1971 WI. 6 No. 6 Pp. 79-92

CoPOSh, 0V1 h IIopiIIP14f lit@Comp.,

221 1737 'The Case forIron Supplements in InfantFeeding Regimens rt1.FR. .ra.University of Iowa

The case rests on findings in numerousstudies: That not only the premature butthe term, not only the poor but the prosperous,infant is at high risk of iron deficiency befor.: the end of the first year of life; thatiron supplementsdelivered by routes other than formula are ineffective; and thatwell before overt anemia is detected, iron lack may have significantly depressedtissue metabolism as well as blood oxygen transport.

Although hypochromic, microcytic anemia is considered maternal Iron status has little effect. Augmenting iron and instores of already well-nourished mothersduring pregnancy the hallmark of severe nutritional iron deficiency newborn infant no advantage. Other deed, as rule, iron deficiency is recognized only when appears to give it lasts long enough to cause significant anemia concern experiments. in which a tagging dose of radioactive iron has been given topregnantwomen, suggest that even in over iron deficiency as primarily ahematologic problem iron is adequate. may be delaying recognition of itsbroader Implications. an iron-deficient woman, transfer of Recent observations indicate that anemia is but one ex- Evidently the developing fetus is highly efficient Para- pression, albeit an important one, of more generalized site in chi* regard. More definitive studies are still needed eninfanta born to frankly anemic mothers; and other fac- problems attributable to nutritional iron deficiency- Some in initial hem- of these other consequences have been only partiallyde- tors' that might account for the variability oglobin levels also need to be more precisely defined. fined thus far; it is clear, however, that by the timeinade- infancy are quate hemoglobin synthesis has produced significant The hematologic changes that ensue in early now better understood. In the weeksfollowing birth, the degree of anemia, the iron deficiency is already well ad- high vanced. Even if iron deficiency were not the most preva- hemoglobin level declines steadily from its initial lent nutritional deficiency state in the country today, these point and the number of erythrocytes declines ProPor- recent findings lend new urgency to detecting it asearly tionately; the decrease is attributable both to lack of ery- simple thropoiesis at this time an.: co the brief life span of fetal in life as it is likely to occur. They also suggest that red cells (usually from 70 to 75 days vs a normal span measures can be instituted early tc prevent irondeficiency normal adjust- from developing. of 140). Neonatal hentolysis occurring as little ment to the increased availabilityof oxygen after birth At birth, tissue stores of iron contribute relatively releases a substantial amount of iron that la storedfor to an infant's iron endowment; the preponderanceis in of this the circulating hemoglobin. Thus the factors mostcrucial later use when erythropoiesis resumes. The size in determining iron endowment re those contributing to reserve and the time and rate at which itis utilized have circulating hemoglobin mass. Since blood volume and, been alio +en to depend on the size of the initialhemoglobin hence, hemoglobin mass are a functom of body we.ght, mass. total body iron depends first on birthwelght; the otherkey In the term infant, recovery from this early phase usu- shows ally begins at about two months with the initiationof factor is hemoglobin level at birth, which normally erythropolesis. In the premature infant, the physiologic considerable variability. Cord blood determinations have the indicated a hemoglobin range of horn less than 14 gm/ anemia usually persists longer, partly because of around smaller initial hemoglobin mass but even more becauseof 100 mi to 22 gin.- 100 ml and hematocrits from the rapid growth rate, which may be double ortriple that 50% to close to 80*. Differences between these extremes there may reflect differences in body iron amounting to asmuch of the term infant during this period. With growth as 50 mg. In the past it was thought that maternal iron status might underlie this variability; there was some evidence Dr. Filer is Need Johstiors Professor ofPediatric Nutrition et that infants born of iron-deficient mother* had reduced the Vsalotrawy of /owe and Chairman of the Comenitier eaNunn- hernogiobin mass. Mcst studies, however, indicate that tier.. American Academsy of Pediatrics.

222 1738

is of courne a concomitant expansionhemoglobin levels may remain de adequate intake of exogenous Iron. of vascular volume and hence a dilu-pressed for four months or more; by Infants at greatest risk of develop- tion of hemoglobin mass. Although this time, the iron stores present at ing iron deficiency include both the much of weight gain in the first birth and augmented by iron releasedlow-birthweight group and term in- f ew montof life is relatively avascu- from red cells during the early weeks fants with unusually low hemoglobin lar adipose tissue, this growth carries of life are likely to have been ex- levels- Fetal-maternal transfusion or with it an increased need for iron tohausted. The second fall in hemoglo- excessive blood loss at delivery mzy maintain adequate hemoglobin syn- bin concentration, which begins in the be the basis for some loth eases; thesis. Skeletal muscle growth adds fourth or fifth month, may thus pro-others remin unexplained. The pos- to the need because of its iron-contain- ceed totrue hypochromic. microcy- sibility of iron deficiency anemia in ing myoglobin component. The net tic anemia unless steps are taken to such infanta, particularly in the low- result In the premature infant is thatPrevent or correct it by providing an birthweight group, is generally appreciated and the need for routine administration of exogenous iron in some Iron Recpoirements During First Year of Life form has become accepted medical practice. However, accumulating evi- Weight Hb lion Tissue Iron Total iron dence that the term infant may also 7 be at riskand may require similar protection against nutritional iron de- ficiencyhas yet to be duly appre- ciatedIt stands to reason that this 16 - 41 4 -.1_ft might be the caae, since in both term 5 and low-weight infants the growth ; 44. - rate is fastest during the first year; hence the need for iron would be treater than at any later time. 4 A measure of the problem is revealed in the incidence of iron deficiency anemia among infants likely to be nutritionally deprived. Surveys of 3 both urban and rural poor consistently IC show a high incidence of iron defi- 2 ciency anemia. In disadvantaged population iv New York City, Hough- ton et al. fount.? that 41.5% of infants Tams Premature had low hemogic.hin levels at one year of ageas did 22.6% of children be- Assuming 12.3 gm/100 nil as the optima/ hernagiolan concentration at one year of age, tween one and three years of age. In other body iron content would have increased *Moe birth at the rates shown in the a study at the Washington, D.C., graph; apecific wanes ere given in the table below (data from Schubnan). Although both Children's Hospital, 28.9% of infants germ end premature infants have a birth Hb of 19.0, the prensature's total iron U. of hadlowhemoglobinlevelsnot course. lower. To achieve the assumed optimal results would require the term baby to counting the most severely affected make tip an iron 'Wade' of 150 nig, the premature a deficit of 236 nag. On a daily basis children, who had been singled out the term baby thus has an iron requirement of 0.43 mg. the premature el 0.65 mg.andtreated.InruralTennessee, Hutcheson et al. tested for iron deficiency in some 15,000 infants and children attending public health clinics. Anemia, 1.11 evidenced by low 4444k.44,14 hematocritlevel,waspresentin -414001004;Y:e.4*.; .1..:444-1!..1,0414-44.41111169'14-!:: 515.3% of white infants and In SIM gliiii+4:*4-44:: 14,"441-r*A4' of nonwhites at one year of ge. Oiltetatilliout (MO '14.* Amonginfantsattendingpublic tseaqintelliA 1"-W health clinics in Chicago, Andelman 14, and Sered found clinical evidence of anemia in fully 76% of a newborn-to- le-month-old group. Even such a high proportion of iron-deScient infants turns out to be far from atypical when ,!(IIIIIIekt.:fats le *IRS rewrite of other surveys are reviewed. One inference drawn from ouch studies is that nutritional iron deficiency is a problem limited to certain 1739

infant popLiations, anti that for those 1-11 in more fortunate Circumstances the iron need is readily met by an ordi- 17 nary diet. While it is true that efforts to define the extent of iron deficiency 16 in the pediatric age group have been 15 largely confined to disadvantaged pop- 14 ulations, the limited information that is available suggests that the problem may be More general than that. -g 13 A California study several years ago by Sturgeon and coworkers indicated that some 8% of term infants t 12 developed signs of iron deficiency anemia during the first year of life. None of the families concerned were 11 disadvantaged; all infants were under pediatric supervision and followed a recommended dietary regimen. In a 10 national study of Preschool children by Owen et al., the incidence of iron deficiency anemia among infants and 9 young children was approximately 6%. In a study of some 600 infants and young children in Iowa, few of 16 18 them economically deprived, Kripke 0 2 4 8 12 14 and Sanders found evidence of iron Age In Months. deficiency anemia in about 4%. WHOM Lk 5. Prwaeged V 5. Disadvantaged IIMMM Ps kit,tani Calculating from even the lowest Although rural Pakistani infants may be assumed to be no lessdisadvantaged than poo. of these figures puta considerable Anseriaan infanta, their hemoglobin concentrations at IS months arehigher. Presumably number of children at risk: Among their lower growth rate, attributable to lower caloric and proteinintake, prevents to some 10 million children under the some extent the dilution of hemoglobin mass thataccompanies growth and weight gain. age of three, the number with some degree of anemia Might well be in sitive index of an infant's iron status. excess of 400,000. and ferritin, are fi.rst to be affected: a Interest in detecting evidence of It should be noted, too, th.it in most bone marrow biopsy, if done, shows iron deficiency earlier in its course studies of iron deficiency. sine.:.* has little or no stored iron in marrow or been defined in t.-rms vf a hem sg.obin other reticuloendothelial tissue. This reflects the growing recognition that concentration beisw 10 g.../ 1OD ml is followed by a decreaae in serum anemia is pretty much the end point 0; a hematocrit less than 31%. Put iton level and a concomitant increase in a process the early effects of which, from the outset this value was arbi. in serum iron-binding capacity, re- while still subtle, are not innocuous trarily assigned; according to current sulting in decreased transferrin satu- During the time the hemoglobin level thinking, the reference point might ration. Generally, transferrin satura- still indicates only minimal compro- well be set somewhat higher. As the tion of less than 15% has been con- mise of blood oxygen transport there American Academy ofpediatrics. sidered indicative of iron depletion; may already be significant conse- Committee on Nutrition recently ex- workers in the field now suggest that quences in other tissues and organ presaed it: "Between 3 and 18 months transferrin saturation less than 16% systems. is an indication that availability ol Over the years, nutritional studies of lige. a hemoglobin of about 12 pm/ iron has become a limiting factor In in both humans and animals have 100 ml, or a hematocrit of 3e1%, may crythropoiesis. At this level most pa- mggested that lack of iron early in be conSidered optimal. Hemoglo- tients studira have a hemoglobin of life might affect development of the bin levels as low as 11 grn/100 mi brain and nervous system; the ques- and hernstocrits as low as 33% ... at least 11 grn/100 ml and ahema- normal." A toerit of at least 33%. Development tion was never definitively tested. In a should be considered of morphologic abnormalities in ery- recent study on this point. Howell and World Health Organization Scientific coworkers in Philadelphia evaluated Group on Nutritional At.ternias recom- throcytes,, including rnicrocytosis and chil- mends that hemoglobin concentra. hypochromia, are not likely to occur some 45 iron-deficient preschool tion of less than 11 gm/100 ml be until iron deficiency has persisted for dren in a high-poverty area. (Hemo- used to define anemia in children from some time; hence other measurements, globin levels were between 9.0 and age six months to six years. including plasma iron. iron-binding 10.5 gni/100 nil: children with lower In progressive ir00 depletion the capacity, and percent saturatiOn of levels, immediately treated, were not storage forms of iron. hemosniderin transferrin, are considered more sen- avaUable for the study.) A series of

224 1740

iron from exogenous sources showed Response of Cytochrome C to Iron that with every peak increasein growth rate a parallel increase oc- 100 curred inrate of iron absorption. These key experiments were per. formed by Gorten et al. in Baltimore, who also showed that utilization of absorbed bran for hemoglobin synthesis depends on bone marrow activity i.e., reticulocytosisand I. triggered by a dilution of hemoglobin mass secondary to growth and weight gain. In comparing hematologic findings among different groups of young children,theseinvestigators found a lower mean hemoglobin concentration in a disadvantaged group in Baltimore 0 than among rural infants in Pakistan Brain Heart Diaphragm Kidney muscle presum7tbly just as disadvantaged. Analysis disclosed that the higher 100 mean hemoglobin concentrationin Pakistr infants derived from a reduced -ate of growth attributable to a lower calorie and protein intake; this prevented dilution of the hemoglobin mass to the same degree and kept their hemoglobin levels higher. Despite evidence that absorption and utilization of iron is growth dependent, it still remains to be proved that limiting iron intake interferes withgrowth.Recent longitudinal studies in this country have linked 0 8 growth limitation more to overall nu- o 2 4 6 tritional deficiency than to iron defi- Days ciency per se, but more information is NM. traeseine .1.1.1 Muscle Hem-nlobin Concentration needed. The association of iron deficiency with infection also requires fur- Iron defwiency has been shown to depress tissue concentrations of hemsproteins, such by as the cytochromes. that are essential to cellular metabolism. Graph at top indicates definition.Earlystudies leueb of cytochrome C foundin ratsfedan iron-deficientdiet as compared with control ther.McKay more than 40 years ago indi- valuesin normallyfed rata.Allowergraphe.ows, addingIronto the diet reuerts cated a higher incidence of infection cytochrome C to normal rather promptly intheintestine (hemoglobin concentration in children with iron deficiency; sev- alsoreturnsto normal), but recovet y In muscle is slow(data from Daman ) eral more recent workers have concurred, but others repors no difference. The fact that infection can pro- psychomet:c tests to assess learning rection of the iron deficiency appeared duce a secondary hemolytic anemia, ability s as given each child; a non- to eliminate them. frequently superimposed on an iron deficient sibling close inagewas sim- It is not suggested that learning deficiency anemia, makes it difficult ilarly tested. Scores on standard in- disability among the poor can be at- to clarify the issue. It has not been telligence tests were about equal for tributed solely to nutritional iron de- demonstrated that infection may be the study children and their controls; ficiency, but surely the fact that be- wecipitated by iron deficiency. however, tests of attentiveness and in- havioral differences could be recorded terest, critical to any learning task, adds import to the iron deficiency Currently, interest is focused re ealed significant impairment problem. on more subtle cellular effects of iron among the iron.deficient. When the The possibility of physical growth lack in various organ systems. Since deficiency was corrected, learning pat- impairment because of iron deficiency red cell abnormalities due to iron defi- terns improved. Inanother study, was first considered some years ago ciency are readily treatable, it has Sulzer and coworker. at Tulane Uni. but dismissed as unlikely, in view of been assumed that other cells respond crafty evaluated learning perform. evidence that the iron-deficient infwit to treatment in a similar manner. ance in iron-deficient children attend- appyared to follow a normal growth Rut when cell tyPes are claaliilled ac- ing a Head Start program. Measur- pattern except for a tendency to obes- cording to rate of proliferation and able deficits were found; again, cor- ity. Then studies of absorption of life span, the possibility of sharp dif-

225 1741

Egrrfs of hoot dcrwirocy 4O niyortmlium hare horn Itudind worrey tron4Ockat not (lower diertrou micsugraph ); deo, in Goodman. Warshaw. and Millman, hi niswardium from a rat thr irori-defwient rot. plumy mitochoadria Masa, arra. with only led a compkir chef ad111. (mp), the mitochondria aad myofihrih a angle- lirainaz mcmbrane austrOd 4 Ow *mid doable nava- liar.- an onierly arranXemeld o4 ia myacardium from a. bazar. scar ir h (Pvtliat Res 4:219. 251. lei% by permisaaa

226 f 1742

cJgs, erezmitm-1-...11..J11 pre,etarx e,f irma deficir.Piry NI 11 cried! by that- man and CZoodf on h.:, -.an hone matron- crythroldastn tr .... a 1"WI Chad; fIgnall. alpair- criIlimacrophage es grmi.lif 1- ls (c:) sri. ert,thae_11 11(, and erythm- hrtntyerythr0blast:4r are normal in xi., orect appcarroare. Note difference in ery.throbtalitie nett at samealltignifierrtinnf nonrant-rh-ficient child (e-c,acr). Am, ,fir'atev enlarged, :ramennues swollen ger % I or reti area, lila milteteh .Wu- Higher-I rietc caf rate late eryorsroblast fr o .4patient rhot- ) thaws large grmping of Iniinelarn- arm,. us, almarandity is,lisvg type. .4 cell ttildsol 35:4:50 1-310:1, 3tt70). fere-nces arises. Rapidly renewing cell itopulations, a.. ht blood, are highly susceptible to iron deficiency, but they also apparently have the greatest p.3- tential for repair. Where there is little cellproliferatiten,re-pit:cementb.: normal cellsisless readily accomplished and the effects of iron deficiency could be. more persistent. On this basis, the deteineental effects tor iron deficiency may he quite important: lron-containing lteme proteins are a component of all body cells and vitalintracellular enzyme functions depend tan their continued presence. Thereas hemoginbini..conerned with nxygen transport to tile Cells. the ntitocl .drial brine proteins are nec- essar y.for utilization nf oxygen to produce cellular energy. nther cyto- chr .... es in the endoplasmic reticultim appear tn functbni in catabolism of endogenous enmpoundss and entsly ad treed drugs. Studif.%by CI:Oyler ct ni and by [lender more Ilan a decade ago dent- :nonratedtita CVS"chr osidase systems were II 1FeCtVd iniroc- ciency. Currently. TInilmart and ca- vern-keen in California hair- been seeking more precise data on how cyto- ,a,,,n,cs and other heme protehas are affected lty irt.rt dencienc)it, tissues other than blood. It has been shown exper:mentally that moderate iron depletion during a brief peric-4 of rapid growth causes profound depression in r -47 tissue heme protein concentrations. In newborn ruts so treated, rytnchrome - C is reduced by utmost 4071 in intes- 1116 trz tinal mucosa and skeletal mascle: at this time growth is not stunted and 227 0 0 0 0 0 9 00 00 00 00 00 0 I:411i at! ro 0 t t N,00 1 fi) N r PIv NNI° r hi 4: iroi i tN ME ig1100 nuns iii01110 inn= ilgilpri ,mm 0 040,0; V0. 000041140z1VW1104

I . 4 : no 4;°:1w 4"'°OmMOrlq47;i010::104 Mr:(04 M: 13Tg 40 0 Woht "d40: :PlOil rrPi ; 4W4i;"1°1° °401611i111011h) :r4171" FI"Vi° 10 0110:0,q0::10 30 D140 0:V4i0;H 5,00" .41;70;1:eOrli OW :0 Tol 40;0 6. :6113q.03* 14 NO. 411 i0E0000100°.0 Chil6"fgi; 0:0-1:Npqt%0:51i;110,04..04: 0 1.0. OLIO.' 01:00 41" 41) 411:04"10:04 F:5)101$3:::"; 1010.11:1100 l'0075;4'" .1:0065 ' 1 0 n, Crnow°,40 11140MP:win VT011:4VW104 "Vit1,0 ,1, MO

m 040° Ponbl ;Aigi.M1 ;"(0,40(00:0'; 1.44"40011° li::4:6 od:5:10:qp:Owv140405:4A4 ;11/ *104 zonnoq6cititZ00011 p iwn44P1 714,1; .00VX IMF;4101610f 4040(4:1*/10;140, q:40004 V13°111:10°IN610,04:FOPI:!+°.°;:t:I.:;05'10/ 44°10Fi;I:1W6 ::31P1Nm °:4110; mYteW:i':VriV:":'(4 p 0 ,711 'Cf (in "00Ww140 ::10'"lt014134V1:04.:ww:V1p.°.V 1 1 30'0':0Mw011giiii:Vi VON' 1":111 Pt<'A:r10: AZ!t/Pts'4411°U

OVAE1M11'44 ';'".1 44WIMO idE01110,4"y0 (1//:Vill1W w' PTI160 WI WO:304/%4 :1;111,41/oi 4:5,10410q 3+1" 5,0Pim tP 40,W,1!..q04:5;p01.0 01;001I: 1"04g;1 !IV 1'4 0 V."'d ti'l :;111PPII: i4.° Iliro." 04:11: m10.11411 ,° 10 00170'V,',1: ,:.0111 10 diN"I'M do°0W6 ';'weVn0C"Ings ; "i::41010 "051;11Vd°,0001 '4010,6 Z 00*(10W05.::C,00 110

%OffillOW,,,,DP;ii?b:Wpq ?re'',1:1014cloto`wineo:,,nI ,,..110:.01. .14", mliii,-,0 /4 I I 1744

Mean Hemoglobin Concentration vented in low-weight infants by die- 12.5 tary iron supplementation. For example, the Baltimore group 12.0 studied the relationship of dietary7 iron, growth, and rate of iron utiliza- 11.5 tion in two groups of low-weight infants, one of which was fed an iron- 11.0 fortified formula providing 12 mg of 10.5 iron per quart and the other the same formula without added iron. Strained 10.0 and solid foods were added to the diet 3 6 9 12 15 18 of each group on the same schedule. Mean Serum Iron Both groups showed a similar early 110 drop in hemoglobin concentrations, but from the 14th week of life cn, the 100 infants receiving the fortified formula had significantly higher mean hemo- 90 globin concentrations than the control 80 group.Hemoglobinconcentrations lower than 9 gm/100 ml occurred in 70 only 5.4% of treated infants, as com-2 pared with 26.5% of control infants. 60 This difference would have been even greater if control infants had not been 50 dropped from the study to receive 40 treatmentaothey developed anemia 3 6 9 12 15 18 (as 54% did by the age of six months). Mean Transferrin Saturation Moreover, at 48 weeks only 39% 30 of infanta who were not fed iron- containing formula could be consid- 25 ered free from iron depletion, while _A no iron deficiency anemia had developed in any child fed the fortified 20 formula. When infants who became anemic were treated by being placed on the iron-containing formula, *he 15 mean quantity of iron utilized by them for hemoglobin formation was 0.62 10 Infaday as compared with 0.15 mg/ day previously, a finding consistent with the increased rates of absorption 0 3 6 9 12 15 18 and utilization previously oix;erved in Age Inmonths the isotopic studies. Clinical observations in full-tnn Group I Formula IMO Group ii Formula Group III infants add weight to these conclu- With Added Fe WithoutAdded Fe 111.1Whole milk sions:For example, in inner city Anemia To compare the effects of the type of milk Group I consumed on the Ironnutritionof normal Normal infante. Hunter in Seattle followed 88 chil- drenfor18 months. Croups 1 and II received the same proprietary formula either with or without added iron; Group 111, Group 8 Sideropenia homogenised whole cow's milk. No other specific feeding instructions were even the mothers. Iron deficiency was defined IAnemia as an lib concentration below 11 gm/100 ml on two consecutive visits after As Group III Sideropenia months of age phis sideropenia, or as a Normal tnnuferrin saturation below 153. Incidence of iron defiessney during the course of the 0 20 40 60 80 100 study is shown in the bar graph. Percent 1745

foods until the infant is at least 12 Chicago, Andelman and Set ed fed in- Logically, some form of milk would fants an iron-containing formula tor seem the suitable vehicle for dietary months of age." iron enrichment in infancy and, in- That cow's milk, often introduced the first six to nine months of life; very early in life, adversely affects solid foods were introduced according deed, iron-containing proprietary milk to standard pediatric practice. All formulas have been available for more iron nutrition is now well established. than a decade But they have never The high-protein, low-iron content of were followed for ;8 months, by cow's milk appears to interfere with which time anemia had developed in gained much favor among physicians ofiron;also, 9% (as compared with the 76% pre in part because of the lingering bePef biologicavailability that iron binding by phosphate-, in enteric blood loss appears to be asso- viously noted who developed iron defi- ow's milkingestion. ciency anemia ). Interestingly, at one milk renders the ironunavailable. ciatedwith This could scarcely be true, or studies Radioisotope studies done as long as a year of age hemoglobin concentrations decade ago indicated excessive enteric in infanta started on the iron-enriched withiron-fortifiedmilk formulas formula in the hospita, "early start- such as those citedwould not have blood loss in some iron-deficient in- consistently shown imnrov.d iron nu- fants; according to re-ent work by ers," were significantly higher than Lahey et al., milk-induced blood loss those in infanta started on iron-con- trition. But some beliefs die hard. occurred in folly 50% of a group of taining formulas at the time of their According to a recent survey by the Pediatrics' infants with iron deficiency and ane- first clinic visit. American Academy of mia. Allergic gastroct.teritis due to In a Seattle studySmith and Hunter Committee on Nutrition, less than milk intolerance has been cited as a followed three comparable groups of 30% of milk formula:, currently pre- possible mechanism, but this remains term infants from birth to 18 months scribed by U.S. physislans contain added iron, despite earlier "committee an open question. Whethermilk- of age: Little or no anemia appeared induced blood loss is a common prob- in infants on an iron-supplemented recommendations to physizians em- formula; there was a significantly phasizing the value of formula iron lem also needs to be resolved. If a enrichment. The complaint that iron substantial number of infants do so greater incidence in infants fed a non- react, iron enrichment of fluid whole formula,andtwice additives increase incidence of gastro- supplemented intestinal distress is sometimes cited milkmightbe ine v isablesince again as much in infants on homogen- in explanation, although there Is no chronic blood loss coul:i override the ized milk. In all three groups iron in- nutritional benefit. If not, iron-fortified take from all sources provided at least evidence that this is a significant clinical problem. More typically, since nu- fluid milk, whole or evaporated, could 1 mg/kg/day, the currently recom- meet iron needs during the latter part mended intake for term infants. (For tritional iron deficiency of the degree prematures and others with special commonly seen is rarely life-threaten- of the first year. Such milk is now needs the recommendation is for 2 ing, it is assigned fairly low priority sold in a few localities. Resistance to among health problems. Tothe ex- wider distribution of iron-enriched mg/ kg/day. ) evaporated milk isassociated with From such studics has come impor- tent that it is recognized as important, color changes seen when the milk is tant practical information on preven- it is tho-sght to be limited only to severely deprived children. As has been used in cooking or in coffee; addition tion of iron deficiency anemia. First, of iron accelerates rancidity in pas- it has been shown that the efficiency suggested, this may be too limited a view. For more privileged infanta, too, teurized whole milk. Perhaps a proof absorption of various forms of die- fessional and public education pro- tary iron depends greatly on the food iron lack may well he the most common nutritional deficiency. gram could reduce some of these in which the iron is contained. A typi- objections. cal portion of iron-enriched cereal may In its most recent advisory, issued Clearly, the occurrence of nutri- fulfill an infant's daily iron require- late last year, the academy's nutrition committee "strongly" recommended tional iron deficiency in the pediatric ment but still not meet his needs be- age group warrants greater concern cause of poor absorption of the iron that iron-supplemented formulas be among physicians in practice; it war- used for cereal enrichment. One proof used "as the rule rather than thc cx- ception" whenever proprietary milk rants even more concern among phy- is that iron enri .hment of infant cere- sicians and others involved in public als has brought no decrease in the in- formulas are prescribed. "There seems programs. Experience with cidence of nutritional iron deficiency. to be little justification for continued health general use of proprietary formulas othernutritionaldeficiencies has According to nutrition research, notfortified with iron," committee shown that once they are acknowl- iron in the form of ferrous salts is the members concurred. edged us public health problems the Moreover, since in practice propri- chances [toe good that theywill be most readily absorbed; unfortunately, dealt with effectively. This was cer- this is TILt the form presently used in etary milk formulas are rarely used products. Sodium beyond the first six months o. f life, the tainly the case in control of rickets enriching cereal committee also called for aeduca- and scurvy, accomplished by dietary ferricpyrophosphateandreduced protectthepublic iron, the forms generally used in this tional effort on the Part of lediatei- programs that cians and other health prof- zsionals against the relevant vitamin deficien- country,arerelativelypooriron cies. Acknowledging nutritional iron sources.Moreover,evenifthey to convince mothers "to continue use public weren't, infant dietary surveys indi- of an iron-fortifled formula as long as deiciencyasasignificant an infant is bottle-fed, and then use health problem among infants and cate that actually only a small portion young exiduren is thus a crucial first of daily caloric intake in the first sev- the same iron-fortified formula as bev- eral months is in the form of cereal. erage milk along with the usualsolid step toward its elimination.

230