• Amendment of George-Deen Act.
• Authorized $34 million for programs specified in the George-Deen Act.
• Flexible on how funds could be used; state boards could use whatever funds were deemed necessary within each of four fields of vocational education.
• Funds made available for salary and expenses for state director of vocational education and vocational counselors.
• Funds made available for the following: 
• training and work experience programs; 
• out of school youth (Indicated federal funds could be used to support travel associated with the Future Farmers of America and the New Farmers of America);
• purchase or rental of equipment for vocational instruction (teacher training, guidance, & research).

An Analysis of the George-Barden Act 

Public Law 586 amends the George-Deen Act of 1936, designed "to provide for the further development of vocational education in the several states and territories." In the 1947 revision of the Statement of Policies, Bulletin No. I., the U.S. Office of Education says, "The chief characteristic of the George-Barden Act as contrasted with previous vocational education legislation is flexibility. Some of the specific limitations on the use of funds were omitted from this Act and provisions were included to allow for new phases of work." It might well have been added that certain activities, which previously developed under administrative approval, were given legislative status under this Act, for example, supervision of the activities of the Future Farmers of America and the New Farmers of America by teachers of agriculture, and the providing of training programs for apprentices. 

The most important respects in which the George-Barden Act differs from the Smith-Hughes and George-Deen Acts are: 

1. The George-Barden Act provides one appropriation for each of the four service fields and no separate appropriation for teacher training. This same procedure was followed in the case of distributive education in the George-Deen Act. A state makes its own determination of the proportion of the allotment in a given field to be used for teacher training. 
2.  Federal funds under the George-Barden Act may be used for maintenance of administration and supervision. Under the George-Deen Act federal funds could not be used for administration and only for salaries and expenses in supervision. The Smith-Hughes Act allows for salaries of supervisors of agriculture only. 
3.  Under the George-Barden Act federal funds may be used for purchase or rental of equipment and supplies for vocational instruction. Section 17 of the Smith-Hughes Act concludes with the sentence, "No portion of any moneys appropriated under this Act for the benefit of the states shall be applied directly or indirectly, to the purchase, erection, preservation, or repair of any building (or buildings) or equipment." 
4.  The George-Barden Act, in Section 7, and the George-Deen Act, in Section 6, provide that "the appropriations made under authority of this Act shall be subject to the same conditions and limitations as the appropriations made to carry out the Smith-Hughes Act; except that . . . @5 and here four exceptions almost identical in the two Acts follow. The George-Barden Act adds a fifth exception, namely, "pre-employment schools and classes organized for persons over eighteen years of age or who have left the full-time school may be operated for less than nine months per year and less than thirty hours per week and without the requirement that a minimum of 50 per centum of the time must be given to shop work on a useful or productive basis." Section 11 of the Smith-Hughes Act says that "such schools or classes giving instruction to persons who have not entered upon employment shall require that at least half of the time of such instruction be given to practical work on a useful or productive basis, such instruction to extend over not less than nine months per year and not than thirty hours per week."