‘ . . 1.1 " ‘ , . ....\ “ I h£fl§§§if31 I . IIBIR 1 I ".' “‘1‘. OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MKTERIALS: Place in book return to remove charge from circulation records A STUDY OF THE EFFICIENCY OF THE INGRAM COUNTY (MICHIGAN) EMERGENCY RELIEF ADM NISTRATION AS MEASURED IN TERMS OF CLIENTS' ATTITUDES TOWARD SPECIFIC TECHNIQUES AND PROCEDURES Thesis for the Degree of M. A. Michigan State College Leah Genevieve Stewart 1938 TH E515 Chapter 1. 11. 111. IV. V1. V11. V111. X. SUPP MAT ”R1 L» CONTENTS 3N PP” ,ZQQ Introduction The Changing Philosophy of Social WOrk: The Development of Public Assistance Programs PART 1 SOURCE AND ORGANIZATION OF DATA The Organization of the Ingham County Emergency Relief Administration: The Intake Department Methodology Employed PART 11 ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Attitudes of Clients toward Certain Administrative Techniques Analysis or the Opinions of Clients toward Certain Case Work Techniques The Reactions of Clients to Certain Public welfare Policies Hoe the Client Reacts to Certain Characteristics of the Visitor The Influence of the Relief Process on the Attitudes of Clients Summary of Results and Interpretation Recommendations 115922 1-111 Page 1-3 4-14 15-20 21—26 27-54 35-44 45-51 52-62 63-65 66-69 APPENDIX 11. CONTENTS Forms in Use by the Ingham.County Emergency Relief Administration. See Folder Table 1. The Part of Each.Multiple Choice Question 70-71 Receiving the Highest Percentage of Votes from the Total Number or Questionnaires Returned; the Particular Item in Each Question Approved by the Ingham County ERA; and the Specific Part of Each Question Approved by Experts; by Sub-groups Table 11. Crude Totals and Percentages Computed from 72-91 the Questionnaires, Question by Question BIBLIOGRAPHY 92-97 ACKNOWLEDGENENTS The writer wishes to express her appreciation to Dr. Ernest Bouldin Harper, Head of the Department of Sociology, Michigan State College, for his helpful criticism, to Norman W. Kunkle, Administrator of the Ingham County Emergency Relief Administration, for permission to collect and release the data, and to Erwin T. Guenther, former Intake Supervisor of the Ingham County Emergency Relief Administration, for necessary material and sugeestions. INTRODUCTIUN In the words of the old darky person, "The world do move." Not only the techniques of our culture are changing but also the basic philosophy itself underlying this culture. The rise of our gigantic industrial system has ushered in a whole series of economic and social crises which we have been compelled to handle as emergencies and Which we have attempted to solve in a more or less trial and error fashion. If this method has proven wasteful in time and material resources, it has been most fruitful in providing primary eXperience for a great mass of humanity and has served as a vivid and intensive instrument in modifying personality and crystalizing attitudes in this large group. As one crisis followed another, so one innovation in social organi- zation followed another until now we find ourselves uprooted from our old accepted philosOphy and in the birth-pangs of a new. We begin to wonder how many of our social leaders are following the evolution of the new concepts and the direction and extent to which public Opinion is being swayed by them. One of the great problems arising out of this chaos was that of un- employment. As the numbers mounted and the need for human sustenance in- creased, government agencies recognized that individuals, neighborhoods, and communities, were caught in a giant whirlpool from which they were helpless to escape. To meet this problem the Federal Emergency Relief Ad- ministration was organiZed to provide the necessities of life,--organized as an emergency agency which came to assume, as the depression continued from one month to the next, the characteristics of a permanent institution. Out of the program, there gradually developed a skeleton outline of welfare policies, some of them based on accepted social work techniques, ii some on the exigencies of the times. These policies, one by one, were evaluated and accepted, or Opposed, by large groups of people who became the experimental agents of the period. The crisis presumably is past but the problem of rehabilitating not only individuals, but a great human culture remains. There is still the problem of appraising the tools we have been utilizing in terms of the basic philosoPhy we wish to perpetuate. It is the purpose of this paper to present the results of a detailed study of the city cases of the Ingham County Relief Commission as repre- sentative of the greater whole, the State Emergency Relief Administration and the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. It is the writer's contention that it is possible to measure certain aspects of the efficiency of the Emergency Relief Administration in terms of the reaction of the client to the agency techniques employed and policies advocated, particularly in regard to administrative and case work proced- ure.. By efficiency is meant not only a satisfied client, but also a pro- gressive one--a solving of the relief problem in terms of the highest community ideal of service and rehabilitation as well as a reasonable per capita cost. An efficient relief commission not only feeds its client but educates him. A relief public, conscious of its problem, socialized in its approach, cooperating with its commission, is indicative of an efficient organization. It's the writer‘s contention that this consciousness, socialization, and co- Operation, can be objectively measured in terms of the client's reaction to the specific techniques and policies of the agency,--these policies having been previously evaluated by some other measure. The writer has arbitrarily iii chosen the consensus among social workers and public administration experts as expressed in their writings as that measure. The clients' Opinions were secured by questionnaires. Chapter One briefly discusses the forces behind the changing philosophy of social work. This is essential to a basic understanding of the conditioning factors operating on both the organization and the individual. Part One gives a general description of the population composition of Michigan together with a specific description of the relief agency under which this group has derived its direct experience. The method by which the results were obtained is explained and includes: 1. An evaluation of techniques, attitudes, and policies in terms of the consensus of social workers and public administration experts. 2. A description of the questionnaire employed together with the method by which it was issued, and the results compiled. 3. An evaluation of the validity of the method. Part Two attempts an interpretation of results in terms of the practices and policies of the agency as the client sees them. It further attempts an evaluation of the agency and the degree of social- ization of its clientele in terms of the Opinions of experts. Chapter Ten summarizes the recommendations resulting from the study. CHAPTER I _ E CHANGING PHILOSOPHY OF SOCIAL WORK: DEVELOPHYET OF PUBLIC ASSISTAi"i E emanate, Approximately 2000 years ago the Christian concept of social responsi- bility was born. Christ's injunction, “Do Ye unto others as Ye would they should do unto you," was simply stated and by the early Christian Church simply carried out. Contacts were primary, the relationship "face to face" and the Spirit simple neighborliness. If a friend lacked material goods his companions in a more or less family Spirit "balanced the budget." With the growth of Christianity, contacts become secondary and of necessity the movement became institutionalized. The philosophy of relief giving became modified. The oeliever gave to save his soul---gave indis- criminately to transient and friend alike, Paralleling this deve10pment was the practice of relief giving by the guilds to needy members. As these practices grew and controls became more and more remote, abuses Sprung up. then they became serious enough to attract the attention of civil authority, goverment was forced toattempt some regulation of the matter. Stringent laws were passed in an effort to correct the abuses. Later the attitude toward the poor was modified.under the individualistic doctrine of the industrial revolution, since this phiIOSOphy taught that man created his own des.iny. Uplift and reform movements were Sponsored as propaganda rather than from any deep-seated sense of social reSponsi- bility to the poor. The theory of rugged individualism with its "laissez faire” policies, which developed about this time, was particularly suited to the early de- velopment of America. But as our wealthy frontier vanished with advancing settlers and as the problems of a developing industrial society began to overshadow the agricultural pattern, it was inevitable that this theory should come in conflict with the social implications of our democratic ideal. This thing that was an individual responsibility has become a social one and the political organization has recognized more and more its responsi- ibility for providing adequate economic security for these victims of our economic system, the unemployed. The local political units attempted at first to meet their own un- employment problem, but the number increased so rapidly that the load be- came heavier than they could bear and state aid was imperative. Applica- tions continued to pour in and soon the States were unable to handle the situation. Later the Federal Government was forced into actions. The Federal Government first made loans to the states through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, but when this plan proved inadequate, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration was organized to supply sufficient funds for the states to Operate. The Civil Works Administra— tion was started to give work to the unemployed but proved too expensive. The Works Progress Administration took its place, furnishing employment to only those dependent unon public aid. In administering the WPA, the policy of the government has been to make it as much like private employment as possible. In reality, this has worked a hardship on the families on WPA since the budget scale is so low for com- mon labor that many of the larger families are unable to live on the wage, and they find it difficult to secure additional assistance from the relief agency. The hazard of unemployment in.Michigen (and the unemployed constitute by far the major relief problem) arises from its eute- motive industries in the urban areas, from its depleted lumbering and mining activities in the more northern areas, and from its financially pressed farmers. Dr. Willism.Hsber} formerly Adminis- trator or the State Emergency Relief Commission of Michigan, has com- piled figures on the extent of unemployment. He says that Michigan has a greater percentage of unemployed than any other state in the Union. In 1932, forty-three percent of the state's agricultural workers were unemployed and in 1933 nearly 46 percent as against 34.6 percent and 33.2 percent respectively in the United States. Michigan is subject, also, according to this writer to seasonal unemployment in which the semi-skilled and unskilled workers suffer most. A large percent of the population in Michigan has received help from the Emergency Relief Administration,eccording to the above writer. In 1935, the monthly average for the state was 12.6 percent of the popu- lation, the average cost per case $32.58, and the average cost per person $9.17. The problems of Ingham County, and Lansing in particular are those of the usual automotive center. The county had a total pepulation of 116,627 in 1930, and of that number 73 percent were classified as urban. Seventy-six percent of the people are under 50. Of a total population of 116,627, the city of Lansing comprises 78,397. 1 Haber, William & Paul L. Stanchfield: The problem of economic insecurity in.Michigsn: A preliminary study or the place of unemployment insurance and other diplomatic measures for economic security in a state plan for Michigan. 1936. Lansing, Michigan. PART 1 SOURCE AND ORGAHIZATIOH OF DATA CHAPTER II THE ORGANIZATIOK OF THE IIGEAH COUKTY EMERGENCY RELIEF A..IiIIITIS'i‘}1ATIOII: TE? IITTAI’? DEPARTMEIT The Ingham County Relief AdminiStration at the time the study was made was administered by a commission of three members, one appointed from the Board of Aldermen from the city of lensing. and two appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Ingham County. of whom the third was approved by the State. The commission, in turn. appointed an administrator who was responsible for the administration of relief together with the establishing of policy. jointly with the commission. The caseworx staff at that time consisted of a case wori director. a case work supervisor, and an intake supervisor who was also a supervisor of Aid to Dependent Children. There were four intaie woraers. ten city visitors, and four county visitors. Inasmuch as dhe intake department is more comprehensive in its methods and approach and more direct in its influence in defining client Opinion, the investigation was made through this department. and the procedure will be described in detail. 'This is necessary for a proper understanding of the reSponses made by the clients to the items in the Questionnaire. Neither the foreign born or colored present a major problem as their incidence inthe county is rather low in comparison with other industrial centers. As this study is based on figures from Lens ng and Lansing Township, we will briefly review the public welfare situation here at the beginning of the depression. Lansing Township was administering its relief through 4 U] the township supervisor in the traditional way. It happened that this supervisor was alert to the industrial situation and attempted to meet needs as adequately as possible with his limited funds. As a result, client attitudes in this district toward relief giving was cooperative and sym— pathetic. The city of Lansing at the beginning of the depression was administer- ing public assistance through a welfare committee. This committee, com- posed of seven to nine members, was appointed by the mayor and approved by the council. The mayor then appointed a director who was also approved by the council but, thereafter, was responsible to the committee. The staff itself consisted of a chief and a group of investigators. There was no intake department as such. A clerk took brief notes from the applicant, "cleared“ the case for records of previous contacts, and turned it over for investigation to the district investigator. He, in turn, made a home call and established eligibility for relief. Records were inadequate, consisting of a mimeographed form on which were checked family composition, income, expenses, and the recommendation for relief of the visitor. Groceries and clothing were distributed through a commissary. There were many complaints from clients who objected to the publicity it gave them. Others objected to the quality of the food, and to the limited food choice. The chief inadequacy of the entire system mentioned above existed in the attitude of the personnel toward the clients they served. They were rather "hard-boiled" and abusive and though the final order might be adequate it was an ordeal to secure it. By the spring of 1933, most of the local political units in Ingham County had borrowed heavily from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation and ON were anxious to conform to FEBA regulations for financial assistance. consequently, in the summer of 1933, the Ingham County ERA was organized and included all but four rural townships and the city of East Lansing. Except for minor changes, the general pattern of the case work division then inaugerated has remained the same. The intake visitor is allowed to issue any type of relief which the agency offers. The worker also handles applications for Aid to Dependent Children, Aid to the Blind, and makes the initial investigation for Old Age Assistance, if time permits. In case of the latter, the information- is turned over to the Old Age Assistance Bureau where the investigation is completed. The first two funds are administered by the commission. In general the purposes of the Intake Department are as follows: 1. To establish the client's need for relief. 2. To establish the client's place of legal settlement. 3. To gather face sheet information. h, To take employment history and financial information. 5. To make all contacts with outside agencies in the establishing of his need for relief, or other agency service. 6. To refer the client to the proper social agency in case his need does not come within the duties of this agency. 7. To complete the agency record and turn it over to the district visitor. 8. To certify to the various national employment agencies, such as WPA, National Youth Administration, and Civilian Conservation Corps. 9. To authorize Aid to the Blind or Dependent Children. 10. To set the relief pace. 11. To establish "rapport". 12. To interpret the organization to the client. 13. To assist the family to uncover and utilize hidden resources. 1M. To provide adequate minimum relief. The present arrangement of the Intake Department was put into effect in the Spring of 1935. In this set-up, the visitor holds two office inter- views and makes a home call. The client comes into the office and make his wants known to the receptionist. She takes his name and address, in duplicate, on an application slip and indicates thereon the nature of his request. The man is sent to the waiting room for an interview as soon as his turn arrives. The slip is sent to the file room where the name is cleared for previous contacts. If the agency has had previous contacts with the man, his case record together with the slip is sent to the Intake Department. If he has never applied before his slip is marked "new" and is returned to the Intake Department. The intake clerk makes out the clearing house slip and the case is then arranged numerically for an interview. If the client is returning for a second interview, that is to say his case is pending, the intake application file card made out at the con- clusion of the first interview, is attached to the case record to designate that the case goes to its former worker. As mentioned above first applicants are subject to three interviews: two office interviews and one home call. This procedure may vary in detail in the case of emergencies, but otherwise all clients follow the same routine. At the first interview, face sheei information is taken. With some intake workers,it is customary to fill out this face sheet at the end of the interview and with others at the beginning. Most of the workers, however, state to the client that this is purely statistical information which is required and fill it out as a matter of routine. While filling out this form, it is usually possible to get a good idea of the problems of the family and to establish some "rapport". If it becomes apparent that the client is hestitant about giving these facts and finds it somewhat of a strain, it is 1 See appendix 1 on forms-application file card. 2 Ibid— face sheet. often discarded as routine business and incorporated into the interview proper under a normal sequence. During the conversation the worker usually jots down notes under their proper headings on a dictation outlin: provided. She does this at natural breaks in the conversation. The content of the interview includes the complete employment history of the employable members of the family together with their earnings (ver- ified) for the past year and the date and amount of their last three pay checks. At this interview,the client is advised that a work report will be necessary and it is decided whether the client or the worker is to make the contact. Often it is secured by telephone while the client waits. All in- formation regarding legal settlement is taken so that verification can be made at once. He is asked to bring in legal documents, or written state- ments from friends, landlords or employers which will verify his residence. It has been the policy of this organization, also, to take a rather complete social history and this is usually done in the first interview. At the conclusion of this discussion, should the visitor wish to refuse the client, the budget is figured and compared with the earnings. If the earnings are sufficient the worker may refuse the case at this point, other- wise, financial paper: are issued to the client. He is requested to fill them out carefully, and return them later by appointment together with his receipts to verify the statements that he has made on his financial report. This report must be given under his signature and usually includes a liability clause in case of fraud. This return visit constitutes the second office interview. Between the first office interview and the second one, contacts with employers, relatives, and other interested parties are made. When the client returns, this information should.be available for discussion. The 1 Ibid. Dictation outline 2 Ibid- Applicant's financial record. and instruction sheet. financial report of the client is checked with the receipts which he brings in. Any discrepancies between his statements and the legal documents are discussed frankly until satisfactory accounting is given. If, at the conclusion of this interview the visitor still feels that the man is eligible for relief, she promises to call at a specified time, and the client is advised that if his case is accepted assistance will be given at that time. At the home visit,the budget is discussed with the family. If the family seems unable to adjust to relief standards, it is necessary for the visitor to explain how the needs of the family can be met by suggesting certain foods and food combinations which may be utilized. Often at the home interview further information comes to light which indicates that the family does not really need relief. In that case, the client can be refused an order and the application rejected. If granted an order for groceries, the client is told where it may be cashed, and how long it must last. Clothing needs are carefully checked. It is not necessary for the visitor to act as a detective but it is customary for her to ask to see the shoes they have before an order is given. As a usual thing the housewife is more than willing to exPlain in concrete fashion the needs of the budget and the visitor is also able to gather some conclusions as to the standard of living which the family is maintaining. and to estimate their needs in terms of it. At the conclusion of the home visit the case is turned over to the district worker. In case of emergencies,the visitor makes a home call. At that time she may take a complete interview making out the financial sheets and check- ing all receipts, or she may make a first interview and leave the financial papers for the client to bring in to the office later, at which time the relief will be issued. lO Grocery orders are very rarely written in the office. If the situation is so urgent as to call for an order on the day that the client is in the office, it is usually customary for the intake worker to promise a visit at once. Interviewing periods are so arranged that it is possible for the same visitor to continue the case throughout the three contacts. The procedure for securing this result is that of alternating interviewing periods. The visitor is in the office on the mornings of one week and in the afternoons of the next. This alternating arrangement gives a half day each second week entirely free for dictation and other office duties. At the end of the first interview, the client is advised when he is to return. These return interviews must be crowded in with the first applications on the half days that the worker spends in the office for interviewing purposes. There are several definite intake policies established in the Ingham County ERA. The worker usually insists that the husband make the applica- tion. The motives behind this request are varied. In the first place the primary consideration of the relief agency is a financial one. Since. the husband is the bread winner of the family, he is better informed as to the income and the possibilities of employment than is the wife. For this reason the worker prefers to interview him. It is true that the wife usually knows more about the expenditures of the income than the husband. However, this agency gives the financial sheets to the applicant who in turn takes them home and fills them out. It is possible for both the husband and wife to pool their information at this time. When the papers are re- turned the visitor can readily determine the sources where the money has been spent by the financial statement and the receipts brought in. To require the husband to come in the office reduces certain compet- itive practices. For example, this agency discovered that more and more 11 women were making the application bringing in their small children and babies with them, and were using the children to secure an immediate inter- view since the intake worker was inclined to see them at once, out of turn, rather than listen to "little Mary" scream for an hour or two. The first prerequiste of any able bodied applicant is that he apply for work at the National Reemployment Service before his application is completed. Following this contact, the client must present his reg- istration card in verification of the fact that he has really been to the office. Often, the visitor calls the employment office while the client is in the room to see what tyne of work is Open and to make sure that the client does not refuse available work when it is offered. When it seems advisable a note is sent to the National Reemployment Service asking that they sign it, if they have not offered the man employment. This agency has secured splendid cooperation in this matter. Non-resident single men or resident homeless men are referred to the Bureau for Homeless Men, and their problems are not included in the dis— cussion in this paper. Resident single men with shelter furnished and single women, resident or non-resident, are under this agency's super- vision. Unmarried, able-bodied persons in times of normal demand are not accepted for relief but are referred to the employment agency. In the winter, it is often necessary to consider their applications for a short period of time. Exceptions to policies are rarely made by the intake worker, but should this occur, they are carefully explained as exceptions to the client so that he will not attempt to proceed on a similar basis in the future. This agency feels that the more the client is taken into confidence re- garding policies and problems in administering relief the more cooperation i4 R) from the client, the agency can eXpect. The Intake Department has a definite policy regarding the liability for support of relatives. Single children living at home are asked to contribute one third of their income but are also included on the welfare budget. Married children or other near relatives are asked to contribute when their earning capacity indicates a possible reserve. Relatives whose earnings are obviously consumed by their own dependents are not called up- on unless there is some other social problem involved which they might assist in clearing up. This administratiwn has differed from many in regard to its policy relative to insurance. It has not required clients to request the cash surrender value of their policy where such a policy was of normal amount. They have insisted that clients make no payments while receiving aid, how- ever. Neither has the agency required the family to borrow on the cash surrender value of their policy. This agency feels that the typical relief client can barely meet his current expenses without attempting to pay up a series of back debts. Or- dinarily, clients are not allowed to make payment on debts while they are receiving aid. This includes alimony and furniture payments. In this situation, the case worker attempts to work out a mutual plan. Creditors have been c00perative in this, and have not repossessed household goods where the client has made an honest effort to pay while employed. This policy is facilitated by a careful eXplanation to each client of what it involves, namely, that any payment of debts while on a welfare budget in- directly amounts to a government payment on the same and encourages credit— ors to take every advantage and press their client to the extreme. It is the obligation of the intake worker to take Care of all needs the first two weeks and take care of any emergency that may deveIOp during 13 that time. Normally the intake worker handles any question that arises on the case until the record is dictated and turned over to the district worker. It is her duty to interpret the purposes of the organization and to explain its limitations. Any adjustments in standards of living are begun. The shock of these should logically fall upon the Intake Depart- ment and the readjustment worked out, or at least begun at this point. When the case is turned over to the district visitor as much "rapport" as possible between the client and the organization should have been estab- lished. The idea is that the district visitor have none of these past misunderstandings hanging over her head when she takes up the case. The administration maintains a local complaints department where any decision of the intake worker or the district worker may be evaluated and reconsidered in behalf of the client. Following such a contact, the client is usually referred bgck to the original worker for the actual readjust- ment. In case the decision of the workers are upheld, the client may appeal himself to the state department. This is usually a futile move as the client is merely referred back to the local complaints department. It might be well at this point to give a brief description of the district visitor's contact with the client as she also leaves an impression on him and helps to formulate his attitudes. The visitor is obligated to make at least one call per month on her family. The discussion may cover any one or all of the topics included in a full intake interview. Ordin- arily, however, the visitor directs her efforts toward rehabilitation in the case of employable people, or towards social adjustment in permanent relief cases. The district visitor concentrates on therapeutic techniques while the intake worker must emphasize diagnostic interviewing. The district visitor must close all cases. If the intake worker 11+ wishes a case closed after his contacts, theoretically he must do it through the district visitor. With some visitors it is customary to notify the client that the case will be closed on such a date: with other visitors this notification is not customary. All orders are planned to be given in the home. However, the visitor is in the office for one hour in the morn- ing at which time the client may see him providing the need is urgent. There is lack of formulation of policy regarding this interview which often makes for misunderstanding and discontent where one visitor is more generous with his time than is another. CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY EXPLOYVL In this study the writer is basing her work on the theory that the client's contact with the functioning relief institution has modified his attitudes toward it. Furthermore, these attitudes, can be measured, in pert at least, in terms of the client's attitude toward the specific techniques and policies emnloyed by the institution in dealing with him. In attempting to measure the efficiency of the ERA in these terms, it was necessary to prepare some type of scale or questionnaire which would be broad enough to include the various techniques and policies with which the client had come in contact and at the same time allow him a expression of choice. Inasmuch as the intake interview carried to its completion was representative of the entire procedure in the organization it was decided to construct the questionnaire around the techniques, to- gether with all the policies which have been advocated, continued, and drOpped by the agency thus far. From this list a series of questions were prepared using the multiple choice technique, the latter being analyti- cal, yet also objective in its approach. The clients were asked to make only one choice under each question. The questionnaires were given to every apulicant coming thru the in- take department from March 1, 1937 to July 1, 1937. Emergency cases since they do not follow the usual routine were not included. The investigator emphasized the point that the results would not be disclosed to any worker in the relief administration, and that the answers would be considered. 15 strictly confidential. Unless it was possible to make this detailed explanation they were not issued, but the investigator called at the home later, eXplained the purpose of the project, left the questionnaire and asked that it be mailed. This was sometimes necessary as much of the study was made during the various strikes in the community,and on some days the office was so crowded it was impossible to make the necessary eXplanations and the questionnaire had to be given out later and returned by mail. There were 197 interviews made by the investigator during the period of the study. Out of the 197, fifteen clients moved away before it was possible to issue a questionnaire, leaving a total of 182 distributed. Of that number, 122 were given out and collected by the investigator through the main office, 50 were issued to the clients later at a home call and mailed back to the investigator,and 10 were left at the home by the visitor and were picked up by her at the time of a return visit. Of the 50 which were to be returned by mail, 19 were sent in, or 38 percent. Of the 10 given out and later called for,a11 were collected. Of the 122 issued in the office, 70 were returned, or 57 percent of the total. It is conceded that the accuracy of results is largely dependent upon the validity of the measuring device. Lundber: has defined the conditions of validity for this type of response as follows: 1. The familiarity of the reagent with the situation. 2. Conditions which do not inhibit response. To insure the first condition, the questionnaire was given at the conclusion of the second interview when the procedure because of its recent application must of necessity have been fresh in the client's mind. More- over the new client coming to the agency for the first time also had some experience on which to base his Opinion, brief and limited though it was. l Lundberg, George A.: Social research. Longmans, Green and Co. New York, London, Toronto. 1929. D. 97. 17 To remove inhibitory influences, the investigator explained that the questionnaire was to be returned at the conclusion of the home interview after the relief grant had been issued and the intake worker's contact had been terminated, that its return was to be voluntary-~that is the worker would not ask for it, that is need not be signed, that the contents of the questionnaire would not be given to the agency, and that it could be mailed if the client preferred. To measure internal consistency in the questionnaire, the writer com- puted the percentage of all cases voting on a given question receiving the most support, for the first 30 questionnaires turned in, those returned by mail, and the total number turned in. See Table 1. While the results were not perfect, they did indicate that there was no serious defect in the con— struction of the questionnaire except in question 9 and 16. In question 9 part 3which read "financial papers are business like but humiliating", overlapped with part 2,--"financial papers are fair and business like". A similar situation existed in question 16 on emotional reactions. Had the parts on security and insecurity been removed, results would have been more accurate, since those two items represent a slightly different approach. Apparent inconsistencies in the group, the first 30 turned in, are eXplained by the fact that the study was begun during the period of the strike. The first questionnaires returned were not as representative of the whole group for this reason as were the other two classifications. To further test the validity of the results, two correlations of the percentages on the part of each question receiving the highest vote was made: one between, the total cases turned in and the first 30 questionnaires returned, and the second between the total number of cases and the questionnaires returned by mail. Ezekiel's formula was used. The cor— relations were dll and.93 respectively. 1. THE PERCENTAGE OF ALL CASES FAVORING THE SPECIFIC PART OF EACH MULTIPLE CHOICE QUt‘STION PFTCFEIVITTG THE MOST SUPPORT FROL". THE CLIENT, BY TOTAL CUESTIOIIl-L'IARES TURNED IN, FIRST THIRTY QU‘TSTIOIETA HES 'I‘LIFJSED IN, AND THOSE RETU- ‘TED BY MAIL. -—.-.“-—~ Question Total First Thirty Questionnaires Questionnaires Questionnaires Returned Number Part Turned in. in. by Mail. 18 Having secured the data as accurately as possible, it was then necessary to devise some means of evaluating it. As an evaluating tool, the writer attempted to secure the consensus of social workers and public welfare administrators regarding the specific technique or policy, using this as a norm against which she measured the efficiency of the organization and the socialization of the client, the first in terms of practices, the second in terms of attitudes. Public welfare administrators, it appears, have given but little consideration to interviewing techniques rather de- voting their attention to basic policies and the philOSOphy of relief. After receiving an exhaustive bibliography, it was discovered that the Opinions of social workers for the most part coincide with the findings of Mary Richmond and Pauline Young and for this group the conclusions of these writers have been considered authoritative. In the field of public welfare administration the individual authors have been cited. Table 5*presents in outline form the concensus of social workers and public welfare administrators regarding the items in each question of the questionnaire. Where there was no consensus on any part of the question, this was also indicated as the writer attempted no arbitrary decisions. The data collected in the field was divided into ten groups for comparative purposes. The classification follows: 1. New cases,-~those applying for relief the first time. 2. Reopened cases,—-those who had had relief previous to this contact. 3. Families under 5 members,--does not include singles. h, Families of 5 members or over. (Family is here interpreted as those included on the one relief card) 5. Families where the head of the house was under 50 years old. 6. Families where the head of the house was 50 years old or over. 7. Families where the wage earner was on WPA or PWA, * See chart II at end of chapter. I‘d \O 8. Families where the wage earner was employed in private industry. 9, Aid to Dependent children recipients. 10, Problem cases,——defined as any case: (a) Where members of the sam appealed to the complaints office of Ingham County EPA or the State Welfare Department, wrote the President, appealed to the Governor or registered com— plaints at least three times in such manner. (b) Where a member came to the attention of public authorities as deliquent. (c) Where the member indulged in unsocial practices such as ex- treme laziness, refusing to work on wage relief, WPA, etc. (d) Where there was clinical evidence of feeble-mindedness, drunkeness or similar situations existing. These classifications were made by key on the schedule at the time of delivery and were unknown to the client. A statistical summary of re- sults was tabulated on the basis of these questionnaires? To facilitate interpretation in table 2, the percentage composition of each specific group interviewed in the study was computed in terms of the remaining groups,--namely, by size of family (five and over, and under five), by age of family head (fifty years and over, and under fifty), by type of employment (factory, and WPA), by relief classification (new cases, and reOpened cases), by problem cases, and by ADC cases. Well over 73 percent of all cases receiving aid are under fifty years old, 75 percent have families under five, 39 percent are on WPA. Ninety percent of the factory workers receiving assistance are under fifty, 6h percent have families of less than five, and 60 percent are re— Opened cases. Of the problem cases, 90 percent are under fifty years of age, 7“ percent have less than five in the family, 38 percent are on WPA, and 86 percent are reopened cases. Fifty-five percent of the ADC cases consist of families of five and over, However, this number is inaccurate 1 See appendix 2 for crude totals and percentages.Trble II II!:\ !I\ nugget 224$ Iiiw..<fi. (an...-...;n-u ts..'~.u,—- 4 zoom 7mm '~ «1“ “fl .:. . J.l.i...£'\.‘-.A.L.J 01‘ 1 ‘l'f‘TT ‘ " ’ ,WQTT'RTT'TIV .1 ~ .( \J-Jkt'uid. )‘ -Wn E; 7-3.5" ”a? Y , _ 'T‘ , VOTLQ. ’“’ THE ULVWEL / -1- “fl ,| ffl'" “H: n 9. T’Tm him. of) at! A: AND 1.41.. c" 71"" L.) {B‘- G‘IL‘J J? S O r»~....n w -rv-. -c..,——<_~ .u ,..v , . V- ‘7‘ —r1:v—::-0-_4-:'w:su‘ 1v ‘--¢rrcr:.rr\..vvv-—.-'-- ‘I-.“ Q” m... n hwy"..— w-w—v. m... ._.3__ x") 2.3. D 73“ }..h u-Q-c.4:.aa* ~»‘ .r-‘mv—g ‘ur.~:_-wo ”WT-“A‘s .- ‘~zsm—rvw aria-mm Social 8W0 hers and q R::? ction t: Qpest ion (Specific Procedure Approved) ~, .1- ,. 1'1 73 ,.,;nt3‘.n. in .A. a ‘rx _.-‘ ‘ A. frg9t1v839 fEJSTO‘S. ‘\ RJ‘ W f 1"» 1“,"‘Av 0 factor. and understanding. last re.ort. w m“. .me-wmgm-wrr—‘n -..- ct.“ Ignored. ___ “—7 , Controversial. Aid as last resort. pathetic and under« Sympathetic and under” "nding visitors. standing visitors. 72 TABLE II QUESTICN I —-——-———.—.—————1— 1 —————_———————_‘ Part A Part B Part C Classification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 33 3’4 1+2 1+3 ’ 23 23 hkiiled 3 16 1o 53 6 31 Schedules 5 5O 2 2O 3 3O Returned For 139w Cases 5 28 10 55 3 17 Iieopened Cases 26 36 19 38 19 26 Size of Family 1. Singles 3 M3 3 M3 1 1M 2. Under Five 19 39 19 39 11 22 3. Five and Over 3 17 9 5O 6 33 .Age 1. Under Fifty 23 3O 38 5O 15 20 2. Over Fifty 10 MG M 18 8 36 Employment 1. w. P. A. 13 32 19 M6 9 22 P. W. A. 2. Factory 9 32 11 39 8 29 Aid to Dependent 5 u2 h 33 3 25 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 6 29 12 57 3 1h 2. Domestic h 3 6 5o 2 17 3. Financial 2 22 6 67 1 11 QUESTION II 73 Part.A Part B Part C Cliassification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 814 56 2 2 12 12 Mailed 16 an 1 5 2 11 Schedules 9 9O 0 O 1 10 Returned For New Cases 16 90 o o 2 11 Reopened Cases 63 85 1 1 10 11% Size of Family 1. Singles 6 86 O O 1 1h 2. Under Five no 23 3 6 5 1o 3. Five and Over 16 89 O O 2 11 Age 1. Under Fifty 56 86 2 3 8 11 2. Over Fifty 13 82 o o 1+ 18 Employment 1. W. P. A. 35 88 1 2 H 10 P. W0 A. 2. Factory 25 89 O O 3 11 .Aid to Dependent 10 8M 1 8 1 8 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 17 81 2 10 2 9 2. Domestic 9 75 1 8 2 l7 3. Financial 8 89 1 11 O O QUESTION III Mi 1:: Part A 1 Part B Part C Part D Classification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 5 5 39 MO 8 8 M5 MY Mailed 1 6 8 tn 5 28 h 22 Schedules o o 2 2o 2 2o 6 6o Returned For iew Cases 0 o 7 39 7 39 h 22 Reopened Cases M 6 29 MO 5 7 3n M? Size of Family 1. Singles 1 1h h 57 1 1h 1 1h 2. Under Five u 8 19 39 5 10 21 u3 3. Five and o o 7 n1 0 o 10 59 Over Age 1. Under Fifty 2 2 32 M3 5 7 36 us 2. Over Fifty 3 13 7 32 3 1M 9 Mi Employment 1. w. P. A. 5 12 19 M6 3 8 1h 3h P. W. A. 2. Factory 0 O 12 h3 2 7 lh 5O Aid to Depend- 1 8 3 25 2 17 6 50 ent Children Problem Cases 1. Total 2 10 8 MO 2 10 8 MO 2. Domestic 2 18 5 M6 0 o u 36 3. Financial 0 o 3 33 2 22 n h5 7h QUESTION IV Part A Part B Part C Classification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 6 6 51 52 M1 M2 Mailed 2 10 10 53 7 37 Schedules 1 10 M Mo 5 5o Returned For New Cases 0 O 9 5O 9 5O Reopened doses 6 8 38 52 29 Mo Size of Family 1. Singles 0 O 5 71 2 29 2. Under Five 3 6 21 h} 25 51 3. Five and Over 2 11 10 56 6 33 Age 1. Under Fifty 6 8 38 5o 32 M2 2. Over Fifty O O 13 59 9 MI Employment 1. W. P. A. M 10 21 51 16 39 P. W. A. 2. Factory 0 O 18 6h 10 36 Aid to Dependent 1 8 h 3“ 7 58 Children Problem Cases 1. Total M 19 9 M3 8 38 2. Domestic l 8 6 5O 5 M2 3. Financial 3 33 3 33 3 33 QUESTION V Part A Part B Part C Classification 30. Per- 30. Per— No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Case Case Case Total Cases M8 50 5 5 MM M5 mailed 9 M7 3 16 7 37 Schedules 5 56 o o M MM Returned For New Cases 11 61 O O 7 39 Reonened Cases 33 NS M 5 35 “9 3178 of Family 1. Singles 3 5O 1 l7 2 33 2. Under Five ‘ 27 57 3 6 18 37 3. Five and Over» 7 39 l 6 10 55 Age 1. Under Fifty 32 M7 1 15 25 37 2. Over Fifty ll 53 3 1LL 7 33 Employment 1. w. P. A. 18 M6 2 5 19 M9 P. W. A. 2. Factory 16 59 1 M 10 37 Aid to Dependent 3 25 1 8 8 67 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 11 52 2 10 8 38 2. Domestic 8 67 1 8 3 25 3. Financial 3 33 1 11 5 56 QUESTION VI 77 Part A Part B Part C Part D Part E Classification No. lPer- No. Per- No. Per— No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent EOf cent of cent of cent Cases Cases ases Cases Cases Total Cases 76 78 7 7 2 2 O O 12 13 Mailed 16 8M 1 5 o O o o 2 11 Schedules 8 89 O O O O O O 1 ll Returned For New Cases 12 67 1 6 1 5 o o M 22 Reopened Cases 58 81 5 7 1 l O O 8 11 Size of Family 1. Singles 5 71 O O O O O O 2 29 2. Under Five 38 79 2 M 1 2 o o 7 15 3. Five and 15 83 2 11 o o o o 1 6 Over Age 1. Under Fifty 53 78 6 9 2 3 0 O 7 10 2. Over Fifty 16 76 o O o o o O 5 2M Employment 1. w. P. A. 32 8M 1 o o o o 5 13 P. W. A. 2. Factory 23 85 l M 1 M o o 2 7 Aid to Depend- 10 82 1 8 O O O O l 8 ent Children Problem Cases 1. Total 1M 67 3 1M 1 5 2 10 1 5 2. Domestic 9 7h 1 8 l 8 1 8 O O 3. Financial 5 56 2 22 O O 2 22 O O QUESTION IX Pert A Part B Part C Part D Part E Classification No. Per— No. Per— No. Per- No. Per— No. Per- of cent of cent of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 10 11 23 2M 20 21 M0 M3 1 1 nailed 3 16 lo 32 5 26 5 26 o o Schedules O o 3 3O 2 20 M Mo 1 10 Returned For New Cases 1 7 3 20 M 27 7 M7 0 o Reopened Cases 8 11 18 25 15 21 31 L2 1 1 Size of Family 1. Singles 0 O 5 71 2 29 O O O O 2. Under Five 6 12 13 27 11 22 19 39 O O 3. Five and 1 6 3 17 6 33 7 39 1 6 Over Age 1. Under Fifty 8 11 13 18 18 25 33 M6 O o 2. Over Fifty 2 9 10 M5 2 9 7 32 1 5 Employment 1. w. P. A. 5 13 11 28 7 18 16 Mo 1 3 P. w. A. 2. Factory 2 8 7 28 9 36 7 28 O O Aid to Depend- 3 25 1 8 o o 8 67 o o ent Children Problem Cases 1. Total 3 1M M 19 5 2M 8 3g 1 5 2. Domestic 1 8 M 33 3 25 3 2 1 8 3. Financial 2 22 O O 2 22 5 5 O O QUESTION x Part A Part B Part C Classification No. "FEE: No. Per- No. Per— of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total ceses 39 9M 2 2 M M Mailed 17 89 1 5 ' 1 5 Schedules 9 9O 0 O 1 10 Returned For New Cases 1M 93 O o 1 7 Reopened Cases 69 93 2 3 3 M Size of Family 1. Singles 6 86 1 1M 0 O 2. Under Five M5 96 O O 2 N 3. Five and Over 16 89 o o 2 11 Age 1. Under Fifty 7O 96 1 l 2 3 2. Over Fifty 19 86 1 5 2 9 Employment 1. W. P. A. 38 93 1 2 2 P. W. A. 2. Factory 2M 96 O O l M Aid to Dependent 12 100 O O O 0 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 18 86 1 5 2 lo 2. Domestic 10 8 l 8 l 8 3. Financial 8 89 O O 1 ll QUESTION XI fi=p Part A Part B Part C Part D Classification No. Per— No. Per— No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 11 12 9 lo 63 69 8 9 Mailed 3 16 1 5 1M 7M 1 5 Schedules l 10 1 10 6 6O 2 2O Returned For New Cases 0 O O O 13 100 O O Reopened Cases 9 l2 8 11 MS 67 7 10 Size of Family 1. Singles 2 29 1 1M 3 M3 1 1M 2. Under Five 6 13 5 11 31 69 3 7 3. Five and 1 6 1 6 13 81 1 6 Over Age 1. Under Fifty 6 9 7 lo 51 7M 5 7 2. Over Fifty 5 23 2 9 12 55 3 1M Employment 1. w. P. A. 6 15 5 13 25 6M 3 8 P. W. A. 2. Factory 3 1M 2 9 17 77 O O Aid to Depend— l 8 1 8 9 75 l 8 ent Children Problem Cases 1. Total 2 lo 3 1M 13 62 3 1M 2. Domestic l 8 O O 9 75 2 17 3. Financial 1 ll 3 33 M MM 1 11 82 QUESTION XII Part A Part B Part C l Classification No. 1 Per— No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total Cases M7 52 lo 11 33 37 Failed Cases 11 61 1 6 6 33 Schedules 7 78 1 11 1 ll Returned For New Cases 6 Mo 1 7 8 53 ReOpened Cases 38 55 9 l3 2? 32 Size of Family 1. Singles 2 29 f 3 M3 2 29 2. Under Five 27 6O 5 ll 13 29 3. Over Five 7 M7 2 13 6 MO Age 1. Under Fifty 30 M8 7 8 13 2M 39 2. Over Fifty 12 6O ' 2 lo 6 30 Employment I l. 8. P. A. 21 55 6 16 11 29 P. w. A. 2. Factory 11 M8 5 22 7 3O Aid to Denendent 6 5O 1 8 5 M2 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 13 62 2 lo 6 29 2. Domestic 9 75 O O 3 25 3. Financial M MM 2 22 3 33 83 QUESTION XIII F==—— - mi— -—:—J r ”fir—=1 Part A Part B Part C Part D Classification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Cases Total Cases M3 M7 12 13 28 31 8 9 Mailed 6 33 3 l7 6 33 3 17 Schedules 1 11 2 22 6 67 o o Returned For law Cases 7 50 M 29 3 21 o o Reopened Cases 33 M6 8 11 23 32 7 10 Size of Family 1. Singles 3 M3 2 29 1 1h 1 1h 2. Under Five 16 36 7 16 16 36 6 13 3. Five and 13 76 o o M 2M 0 0 Over Age 1. Under Fifty 31 M9 7 11 21 33 M 6 2. Over Fifty 7 35 5 25 5 25 3 15 Employment 1. w. P. A. 15 MI 6 16 12 32 M 11 P. W. A. 2. Factory 15 60 M 16 5 2o 1 M Aid to Depend- 3 27 O O 7 6h 1 9 ent Problem Cases 1. Total 8 38 2 lo 10 M8 1 5 2. Domestic h 3 1 8 6 5O 1 9 3. Financial M M 1 11 M MM 0 o QUESTION XIV Part A Part B Part C Part D Classification No. Per— No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- Of cent of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 8 8 15 16 6O 63 12 13 Mailed O O 6 32 13 68 O O Schedules O O 1 11 8 89 O O Returned For New Cases 0 O 2 13 11 73 2 13 Reopened Cases 8 11 9 12 ”7 6h 10 1“ Size of Family 1. Singles 1 1M M 57 2 29 O O 2. Under Five 3 7 8 18 29 6M 5 11 3. Five and O O 1 6 15 83 2 11 Over Age 1. Under Fiftfi 6 8 10 1M M8 66 9 12 2. Over Fifty 2 9 5 23 12 55 3 1M Employment 1. w. P. A. 1 3 7 18 26 68 M 11 P. W. A. 2. Factory 0 O 1 M 21 8M 3 12 Aid to Depend- O O 2 l7 9 75 1 8 ent Children Problem Cases 1. Total 1 5 M 19 10 M8 6 29 2. Domestic 1 8 1 8 7 58 3 25 3. Financial 0 O 3 33 3 33 3 33 QUESTION xv =3— W Part A Part B Part C Part D Classification No. Per— No. Per— No. Per— No. Per- Of cent of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 1 1 12 13 76 82 U h Mailed O o M 22 1M 78 O O Schedules O O 3 3O 7 70 O O Returned For New Cases 0 O O O 16 9M 1 6 Reopened Cases 1 l 10 1M 56 80 3 M Size of Family 1. Singles 0 O 1 17 5 83 O O 2. Under Five 1 2 7 15 36 77 3 6 3. Five and O O 2 12 15 88 O 0 Over Age 1. Under Fifty 1 2 8 12 53 so M 6 2. Over Fifty O O 3 16 16 8M O 0 Employment 1. w. P. A. l 3 3 8 32 8M 2 P. W. A. 2. Factory 0 O 2 7 2M 89 1 M Aid to Dependent 1 8 O O 10 83 1 8 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 1 5 1 5 17 81 2 10 2. Domestic O O 1 8 9 75 2 l7 3. Financial 1 11 O O 8 9O 0 O 09 0‘1 CHESTICN XVII Part A Part B Part C Classification No. Per— NO. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 22 23 22 23 51 5M Mailed Cases 5 2S 6 33 7 39 Schedules Returned 3 3O 2 20 5 50 For New Cases M 2M 5 29 8 M7 ReOpened Cases 17 2h 15 21 MO 56 Size of Family 1. Singles 1 1M 2 29 M 57 2. Under Five 1M 2 13 27 22 M5 3. Over Five 3 18 3 18 11 65 Age 1. Under Fifty 16 2M 11 17 39 59 2. Over Fifty 5 2M 8 38 8 38 Employment 1. w. P. A. 11 28 12 31 16 M1 P. W. A. 2. Factory 6 22 6 22 15 56 Aid to Dependent 3 27 3 27 5 M5 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 6 29 6 29 9 h} 2. Domestic 6 50 2 17 N 33 3. Financial 0 O h MM 5 56 1U“STION XVIII Part A Classification No Per- N Per- Per— Of cent O cent cent 9 i ii Total Cases 62 71 16 3 13 A Mailed IO 63 19 i 19 l Schedules 6 67 11 22 Returned For New Cases 1M 88 O 13 Reopened Cases M5 68 21 10 Size of Family 1. Singles 1 1M 29 M 57 2. Under Five 32 3 1M 6 1M 3. Five and Over 13 76 18 l 6 Age 1. Under Fifty M7 76 16 5 8 2. Over Fifty 12 67 17 3 17 Employment 1. W. P. A. 25 70 1M 1M P. W. A. 2. Factory 19 76 M 20 Aid to Dependent 6 55 27 18 Children Problem Cases 7 1. Total 13 68 5 26 7 5 2. Domestic 10 91 1 9 , O 3. Financial 3 3 h MM i 22 CQ \0 ---—o— ~ - m‘ «-94.... ---.-. — “ma — - m~u . -—.—-—-—-.“ Q’fSTICN XIX Part.A Part B Part C Classification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per- of cent of cent of cent Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 7 8 71 77 1M 15 Mailed 1 5 16 8M 2 11 Schedules l 11 U MM h MM Returned For New Cases 1 6 IO 63 5 31 Reopened Cases 5 7 56 81 8 12 Size of Family 1. Singles 0 O 6 86 1 1M 2. Under Five 2 M 3H 7H 10 22 3. Five and Over 3 19 11 69 2 13 Age 1. Under Fifty 5 8 51 78 9 1M 2. Over Fifty 1 5 1M 7M M 21 Employment 1. W. P. A. 3 8 31 79 13 P. W. A. 2. Factory 3 12 19 73 M 15 Aid to Dependent l 8 8 67 3 25 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 2 10 1M 67 5 2M 2. Domestic 1 8 8 67 3 25 3. Financial 1 11 6 67 2 22 90 QUESTION XX Part A Part B Part C Classification No. Per- No. Per- No. Per— of cent to Cent of cent 'Cases Cases Cases Total Cases 3 3 76 8M 12 13 Mailed O o 13 76 M 2M Schedules O O 8 80 2 2O Returned For New Cases 0 O 15 9M 1 6 Reopened Cases 3 M 55 8O 11 16 Size of Family 1. Singles 0 O 7 lOO O O 2. Under Five 3 7 36 78 7 l5 3. Five and Over O O 13 76 2 2M Age 1. Under Fifty 2 3 51 82 9 15 2. Over Fifty 1 5 18 86 2 10 Employment 1. w. P. A. 3 8 28 76 6 16 P. W. A. 2. Factory 0 O 21 8M M 16 Aid to Dependent O O 10 91 1 9 Children Problem Cases 1. Total 2 11 1M 7M 3 16 2. Domestic l 9 7 6M 3 27 3. Financial 1 13 7 88 O O 91 BIELIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Allport, Gordon W.: A handbook of social psychology. Mass: Clark University Press. 1935. Attitudes, Chapter 17, pp. 798-8hh. Bain, Read: The impersonal confession and social research. Journal of Applied Sociology, ix: 356-361, May 1925. Bakke, Edward Wright: The unemployed man: A social study. New York: E. P. Dutton and Co., Inc. 193“. Bingham, W. V. and B. V. Moore: How to interview? Revised edition. New York: Harper Brothers. 193M. Bingham, Walter Van Dyke: The personal interview studied by means of analysis and eXperiment. Journal of Social Forces, vii: 530-533, June 1929. Bishop, Julia Ann,: The initial interview in the social case work organ— ization. Student Thesis, 1935. Boggs, Marjorie: Present trends in the case worker’s role in treatment. The Family, xiii: 155—162, July 1932. Book, Mary Virginia: As the Andrews family sees it. The Family, xiv: 307-710. The Family, xiv: 307-310, January 193U. Berton, Viennie: Partnership in relief giving. The Family, xiv: 302-3oM, January 1933. Bowen, Ruth: Class notes in supervised field work. 1932-1933. Unpublished. Breckinridge, SOphronisba Preston: Public welfare administration in the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1927. Brisley, Mary: An attempt to articulate processes. The Family. : 157-161, October 192M. Buell, J. Bradley: Interviews. interviewers and interviewing. The Family. vi: 86-90. May'1925. Burgess, E. W.: Statistics and case studies as methods of sociological research. Sociology and Social Research. xii: 103-120, November- December 1927. Cannon, Mary A., and Philip Klein, (Editors): Social case work. New York: Columbia University Press, 1933. Coffin, E.: Harvest of despair. Commonweal. xxiv: 503-50h, September 25, 1936. Clow, L. B.: The art of helping: through the interview. The Family. vi: 129- 132, 1926. Colcord. Joanna 0.: Emergency work relief as carried out in twenty-six American communities, 1930-1931, With suggestions for setting up a program. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1922. Colcord. Joanna C.: A study of the technique of the social case work inter- view. Journal of Social Forces. vii: 519-526, June 1929. Coy, Harold: An intake department. The Family. xiii: 8—10, March 1932. Dewey, John: Democracy and education. New York: The MacMillan Co., 192M. Douglas, Paul Howard: The problem of unemployment. New York: MacMillan Co., 193M. Edwards, Ada: The intake desk. The Family. xiii: 11-12, March 1932. Elmer, M. C.: Family adjustment and social change. New York: Farrar, 1932. Fry, C. L.: Technique of social investigation. New York: Harper Brothers, 193%. Gartland, Ruth: The child, the parent and the agency. The Family. xiii: 75- 80. May 1937. Gelhorn, Martha: The trouble I've seen. New York: William Morrow and Co., 1936. G. 8.: How do we behave in other peOples' houses? Survey. lxix: 218-219, June 1933. Haber, Wm., and Paul L. Stanchfield: The problem of economic insecurity in Michigan: A preliminary study of the place of unemployment insurance, and other systematic measures for economic security in a state plan in Michigan. Lansing, Michigan, 1936. Hader, J. J. and Eduard C. Lindeman: Dynamic social research. New York: Harcourt Brace and Co., 1933. Chapter 9. Hagood, Margaret Jarman: Some contributions of psychology to social case work. Social Forces. xv: 512-519, May 1937. Hall, Oliver Milton: Attitudes and unemployment: A comparison of the opinion and attitudes of employed men. New York. 1929 Robson, John Atkenson: Rationalization and.unemployment: An economic dilemma. London: G. Allen and Urwin, Ltd. 1930. Hodson, Wm.: Unemployment relief. Social Work Year Book, 1937. Hopkins, H. L.: Future of relief. New Republic. xc: 7-10, February 10, 1937. Ingham County Relief Commission Records. Jarrett, Mary 6.: Need for research in social case work by experienced social case workers who are themselves doing case work. Journal of Social Forces. iii: 668-669, May 1925. Kahn, Dorothy 0.: Experiment in selective intake in a family society. The Family. xiii: 3—8, March 1932. Kahn, D. 0.: What is worth saving in this business of relief. Survey. lxxiii: 38-39. February 1937. Karpf, M. J.: The scientific basis of case work. New York: Columbia University Press, 1931. Kirkpatrick, William Heald and John Dewey: The educational frontier. New York: The Century 00.. 1933. Larson, Myrtle Blanck: Techniques in interviewing. Student Thesis. Municipal University of Omaha, 1936. Lawrence, Samuel C.: Interviewing in criminal research. The Social Service Review. xi: 66-77. Levey, Beatrice 2.: The extent of the intake interview. The Family. iv: 268- 271, December 1923. Lynd, Robert S.. and Helen M. Lynd: Middletown in transition. New York: Harcourt Brace & 00.. 1937., Marcus, Grace F.: Some aSpects of relief in family casework. Charity Org-nization Society of New York, 1929. Meriam, Lewis: Frontiers of public administration and public welfare. The Social Service Review. xi: 26-32, Michigan Emergency Relief Administration Monthly Bulletins. 1937. Moore, Bruce V.: The interview in social and industrial research. Journal of Social Forces. vii: 445-452, June 1936. Mueller. John E.: Some social characteristics of the urban relief pepulation. Social Forces. xv: 64-70. October 1936. Myrick, Helen L.: The non-verbal elements in the interview. Journal of Social Forces. vi: 561-564. New WPA set up, new type of unemployment relief progran being cooked up. Nation. cxliv: 287-288, March 18, 1937. Odum, Howard W., and Katherine Jocher: An introduction to social research. New York: Henry Holt and 00.. 1929. Chapter 13. Odum, Howard W.: Systems of public welfare. Chapel Hill. University of North Carolina, 1925. Park, Robert E.: The signifance of social research in social service. Journal of Applied Sociology. viii: 263-267, May-June 1924. Personal Interviews with: Erwin Guenther, Intake Supervisor, Ingham County E. R. A. 1933-'36 / Elizabeth Taylor, Case Supervisor, Ingham County E. R. A. Norman Kunkle, Administrator E. R. A. Ada Freeman, Michigan State E. R. A. Porter: The organization and administration of public relief agencies. Family Welfare Assoc. of America, New York. Potter, Frances M.: Subjective elements in interviewing. The Survey. lix: 226-227, November 1927. Queen, Stuart A.: Can interviews be described objectively? Journal of Social Forces. vii: 528-530, June 1929. Queen, Stuart A.: Social interaction in the interview. Journal of Social Forces. vi: 5M5-553, June 1928. Relief Riddle. Survey. lxxiii: 1M, January 1937. Richmond, Mary E.: Social diagnosis. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1917. Richmond, Mary E.: What is social case work? New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1922. Rice, Stuart A.: Contagious bias in the interview. The American Journal of Sociology. xxxv: N20-M23, November 1929. Robinson, Virginia: Some difficulties in analyzing social interaction in the interview. Social Forces. vi: 558-561, 1928. Sears, Amelia: Outline of the first interview. Proceedings of the National Conference of Social Work. Sletto, Raymond: The construction of personality scales by the criterion of internal consistency. Hanover, N. H. Sociological Press, 1937. Springer, G.: Off again, relief, on again. Survey. lxxii: 355-358, December 1936. Sutherland, Edwin H.: Principles of criminology. Chicago: J. B. Lippincott Co., 192M. \O ‘4 Sutherland, E. H.: Is experimentation in case work desireable? Journal of Social Forces. vi: 567-569, 1928. Thompson, P. W.: Man without work. Canadian Forum. xvi: 15-16, December 1936. Tuttle, Harold: The social basis of education. College City of New York, 1935. wannamaker, Claudia: Social treatment from the standpoint of the client. The Family. vi: 31-36, April 1925. warner, Amos Griswold, Stuart Alfred Queen, and Ernest Bouldin Harper: American charities and social work. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co., 1930. Weads, Margaret: Recent procedures in taking applications. The Family. xiii: 168-173, July 1932. Webb, Beatrice: My apprenticeship. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1926. What relief did to us. American Mercury. xxxviii: 27h-283. July 1936. Wilcox, Jerome Kear: Unemployment relief documents: Guide to the official publications and releases of FERA and the M8 relief agencies, 193”. New York: H. W. Wilson Company 1936. Williams, James Nickel: Human aspects of unemployment and relief. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1933. Young, Pauline: Interviewing in social work. New York and London: McGraw— Hill Book Co., Inc.. 1935. .. @1910 , U'- 1493 ng 41 "l a *. I n “4.3 9 bk 2 . _<:OI_O>Z mabam CZ_“V%c? . Vi... . ,J.' , :4. ell"; J. 3 Cl C‘ T .i I "2“”. ,2 _. _. NHICHGANSTATEUNIVERSITY LIIEBRARI /2 S E 2: Form No. 1 ,/:’S , E‘s! 1“ r ’ I l 312“ (firm e CASE RECORD CARD ' 303,.l99 14 Date of First Applicati0n____-_____-___-_.___._ . . _ Case 9No. Check Status: Single Married Separated Divorced Deserted Last Name .. Other Spellings, Aliases - MONTHLY RENT D ATE MOVED TO ADDRESS AT THE TIME OF FIRST NUMBER OF OR PAYMENTS NAME AND ADDRESS OF LANDLORD OR THIS ADDRESS APPLICATION AND NEW ADDRESS ROOMS ON PROPERTY HOLDER OF MORTGAGE Resident Familyi. , _ Number of Persons , Relief Group RCSIdent Person V . . -7 , -- County- , ., , *Transient 'IT—eiiv‘fi',"Ci-t§f Rural Loeéility) MEMBERS OF HOUSEHOLD—IMMEDIATE FAMILY FIRST NAME DATE OF PLACE OF BIRTH, PRESENT OCCUPATION OR REGULAR EDUCATION CHRONIC DISABIL- COUNTY, CITY, STATE UNEMPLOYED TRADE “£38135?“ ITY, IF ANY M :1 n Woman (Include maiden name) Single 1 _____________________________________________ children at home: 2 8 OTHERS IN HOUSEHOLD-.v—INCLUDINC MARRIED CHILDREN AT HOME AND OTHER RELATIVES, LODGERS, AND BOARDERS REL \TIONSHIP TO FAMILY WEEKLY FULL NAME w ‘ OR PERSON OCCUPATION CONTRIBUTION PLACE OF LEGAL SETTLEMENT NATURALIZATION MARRIAGE MILITARY SERVICE County Man Woman _______________ wrransient: Residing in State less than one year, PREVIOUS ADDRESSES ADDRESSES PREVIOUS TO FIRST APPLICATION CITY OR TOWN (Street and Number) CHILDREN AWAY FROM HOME AND OTHER RELATIVES (Includes all persons legally responsible for support of family) RELATIONSHIP KNOWN To NUMBER OF NAME ADDRESS TO AGENCY DEPENDENTS EMPLOYED LAST THREE STEADY JOBS OF EACH WORKING MEMBER OF FAMILY EMPLOYERS STATEMENT NAME OF MEMBER OF EMPLOYER ADDRESS DATE KIND OF JOB FAMILY Date Report—Satisfactory, Began Ended Checked Unsatisfactory, Fair. Church .............................. Religion i- -- GAN STAT1E UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES III II III I II 31293 chily Address ITEMS Ittnt [2 mi BE Il. ()ther Debts Loans 033149 9183 III III I I FINANCIAL SHEET M . in Fomiiy INDEBTFDNES 53 AND CURRENT I)2.?v .- Last Payment .A m t Rental Due Altitude “I Landlord Period (, overed Guarantor Asnui Due Peri od . t overed . I___ _____V_M Date Needed Bill I t)“ ed I Address .Am'i Due ; " UNDER. imguiéifend Cox—leéit' I I I I I If NUMEBER . , . _ ...- Crc lztor Address Items EXPENSE '" "“ ‘Dzite Incurred Inghom County Welfare Relief Commission i Source of Information -. Equipment I) Iid I Am't 14:1“! " I)? te Lust Paid I I I I Last Paymer t Balance —Date I Am’t' Original Am't Due Attitude and Comment I What I Security Company Addres: Taken I Last Payment Date Am’t I Am't I Reg.Pa},"1I Bal. Ori' inalI Due A'mt I Attitude and (eminent Insurance Attitude and Comment Clothing License No. Loan Urgent Needs Payments VI'hen Purchased RESOURCES W'ages Wage Earner ReIationship Pay Dates Earnings .A m't Contributed Other Income Sou rce th Next Date Last Rec'd PIa‘e'ment Frequency of Pay't. Amount Tenants or Boarders l‘evularitv of , I IPaymeht. Date Last Paid Am’a‘ Full Rent AIn'I Being; Paid Bank Account or Securities Ban k or Firm B: k P» 't Address IBank) .Am‘t or Value ”I ”n” TOT All Source of Information 6 617L130 CSZL 8 | 1 I! H I! :J SEIHVHBI'] ALISHBAINH alViS NVSIHOIW " Av . ’ Q ’ . '. .‘ ‘1‘ a. _ v _V e INSTRUCTION JHEET Case ADDRESS All insurance policies (active and lapsed), stocks, bonds, or any Other securities you or any member of yo our iamily may holdo Deed or contract on all property you or a.ny member of your family living in the home 1a;l have, and the last rece ate for payments, also your last tax receipts, if 5: ,i-m ,¢ fig tomobile title and payment books Your last receipts for payment on a.ll debts to aether with your Pdegnt bOOKSv if any. have or have had a ban: account, bring your bank books and a signed ' from your banrcr stating if your account is closed or if it is and the amount of your balance. late and ulfce of your last steady employnent, L~ date you were laid off.and the a:1:0u nt OI your 1 st pay, tete Kild. of odd jobs you hav: been no ing in Fe months, together Mt your average Vtcxiy eariin 8. Statement of the :inds of worn in which you are skilled, if any. The nam1 s of all married children, if any, and all other relatives to whom we may refer, either within or without the State of Michigan, who know of your circumstances or who may be in a position to furnish relief for you. ‘ Nance of previous husbands 0r wives, (1 dates and places of death or divorce. Nanes oi children by previous marriages, .4" I hereby Sp_cci1i a1lly authorize any Neti onal Bank or StateB Banking Institution, any Postm aster or Manager of any United States Postal Sa ivings Account, any Insurance Company, business Iirm or individual to iurnish to the Emergency Relief Commission, or to its authorized ageiits 2nd investigators, any and all inforzm itiOfl in rcs13ect to any deposits, acc0W1nt money or other personal property owned by , or or ingf; to, or held for, me or any nember of my family, and also in ram C2_7 rjifitfiAtiQCf-‘S , ,7 , fl ; C38h_ Sheep _, Cagnnedifood 7 , , _ _ , : (Elle:- _lanrl d’k'w L1'33T'4‘21 "' rm!“ Ivtortgagcs 1 Amount ' Interest Holder i 5 a! '2 g g 2‘ Othtr ‘0'“‘MM‘TCLW ‘9'“ ‘ ‘ ‘1 "mlilt‘lli- '_ hmflrllufl 318. mid!- {.10. .‘A‘ ~ \‘b?’ Farm Chattel on Stock Chattel ~ ~ ' W -‘ ~ - ,, h on Equip. Did you make application for loans from Farm Loan Banks or Finance Compames? (Specrfy) Other FOR: .,.'_. xr')‘ x W TOTAL 1§I"%’“"‘l Feed ' wry—mm l 309C; LOANS m ,__9_th9}'__ _ I I Date Amount I Interest “’21:; Loan Granted ‘? —-- Finance - silagef__L2§n_ 'fiThrougl IV:h_a_t__15r_genc_y 7 Farm Insurance “mm M Suffblfltk “' ‘ ‘V ‘ Other 11!. want: .21; WKWWJW . 2," AMA: l