HOUSING AND THE HUMAN HABITAT: AN EXAMINATION OF THE UNIVERSITIES' ROLE POTENTIAL Thesis for the Degree of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY OTTO FREDERICK KRAUSS 1971 ,t LIBRA 1‘; Michigan 33;; Ce University 2 .JC ABSTRACT HOUSING AND THE HUMAN HABITAT: AN EXAMINATION OF THE UNIVERSITIES' ROLE POTENTIAL BY Otto Frederick Krauss Housing is a complex human need. It comprises much more than the often simple artifact commonly thought of. It is the environment, the human habitat, an important element of human ecology. Over time man has created insti- tutions to satisfy his needs, in this instance to supply housing and also overcome housing problems which have existed through the ages, and which became intensified with industrialization, urbanization, population growth, migration and rising living standards. In modern society housing is viewed more as a right than a privilege. In support of this principle ever more massive legislation has been enacted, in particular to provide fiscal and monetary means. The basic policy was expressed in the 1949 Housing Act: ". . . a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family," and it has since been expanded upon. Programs Otto Frederick Krauss instituted to implement such a policy have fallen far short of targets pointing to inadequacies in the institutional arrangements. Causes of failure appear, among others, as resource deficiencies including knowledge, information and skills. This can in part be attributed to lack of incentives and neglect by the institutions which exist for the purpose of researching, developing, organizing and disseminating knowledge and to teach necessary skills. Enormous resources go into many kinds of research, but not into housing, the human habitat and human ecology. Prob— lem areas range far and wide. They may be related to the humanities, technology, economics, law, health, education, politics or simply understanding the problems and compre- hending what the human needs and desires really are. This being so, begs the logical question: what about the centers of knowledge, the colleges and universities? Yet, these institutions have had only a negligible role. It has fallen to the dominant interest groups which have tra- ditionally controlled and operated the system of landowner- ship and development, brokerage, construction, finance, property management and such institutions. The wide-latitude and multi-disciplinary nature of the subject is not ready-made for universities organized around single disciplines. Multi-university approaches, indicated for many aspects of the problem, have been found cumbersome due to the structure and philosophies of these Otto Frederick Krauss institutions. That they can change, adapt and accommodate national needs is written in history. No significant amount of research in housing has been or is being done by the universities. Related course content is substantial but scattered and is in need of coordination, packaging, expansion and of a mechanism which can be instrumental in the establishment of a mean- ingful program. The concept "human ecology" looks like a logical framework and should be used to integrate all of the related disciplines. The systems approach and the systems management concept are recommended as a most likely productive method. The faculties and administration inter- viewed expressed the opinion that the universities should be concerned with the subject because of the known effects on human development, health and well-being. The students appear to rate housing relatively high among national problems and express interest in the pursuit of study and careers in this field, but more inquiry is needed to sup- port conclusions. The future professionals in the housing field are seen emerging from an undergraduate curriculum which has provided them with a full range of liberal to professional education opportunities. He or she may be a generalist or specialist or both, depending on the program chosen, a program which would have included clinical experience. Graduate study is for the scholar who will by his part aim Otto Frederick Krauss at developing the housing field into a viable discipline embracing all of the disciplines which play a role. Seen emerging from these graduate programs are professional specialists with a broad general liberal background, researchers, practitioners, leaders and teachers. Agencies in the field strongly encourage the uni- versities to get on with the task. Indications are that funding for research, graduate student support and other efforts can be obtained. Professional opportunities do in fact exist, but the field being in its infancy currently has aspects of unfamiliarity. Larger corporate enterprise has recently entered the sector creating demand for management-technical skills. Attending to the human needs as a primary goal is very important and new. The national need unquestionably exists under a favorable public policy climate. Long overdue is a major thrust on the part of the universities accepting respon- sibility for developing a body of knowledge, teaching and supplying solid information to users and decisionmakers concerned with the macro-environment, human habitat and the micro-environment, which we call housing. Policy changes and careful, more detailed exploration, planning and program development are recommended. HOUSING AND THE HUMAN HABITAT: AN EXAMINATION OF THE UNIVERSITIES' ROLE POTENTIAL BY Otto Frederick Krauss A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Human Environment and Design 1971 COpyright by OTTO FREDERICK KRAUSS 1971 ACKNOWLEDGMENT This thesis is the outcome of a challenge originally posed by Dr. Robert R. Rice, Chairman of the Department of Human Environment and Design, and Professor Gertrude Nygren of the same department. The question was, how can the university take a greater part in solving housing problems through education and other university efforts. The author, while not wholly unfamiliar with the subject, was reim- pressed by how complex the field really is and, as a conse- quence, how difficult it is for the university, as presently structured, to deal with the subject in a meaningful and productive way.* Yet, this very situation provided an oppor- tunity to learn a great deal. Nearly one hundred people, deans, department chair- men, faculty, Extension personnel, plus a number of persons outside of the University interested or influential in housing affairs gave generously of their time and ideas. It is not practical to mention all of the names here. Some persons, where it is appropriate, are identified through the references. A complete listing of university people who did contribute to the study is given in Appendices I and II. This thesis is in a large measure a reflection of the ii thoughts and ideas expressed by them. For example, the original concept "housing" was enlarged into "human habitat" upon the suggestion of a substantial number of interviewees. This widened the scope of the project to a great degree. Few will argue that the study of the human habitat is a worthwhile endeavor. But only the individuals, who make up society, can judge whether any effort to improve the environment has succeeded. On these grounds it is well to omit any presentations of bouquets. Many have contrib— uted and helped, especially Jenny, the better half, through her good humor and infinite patience. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF FIGURES O O O O O O O O O O O 0 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS. . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITION OF HOUSING . . . . Chapter I. II. III. IV. VI. VII. HOUSING PROBLEMS AND FEDERAL INTERVENTION. A CLOSER LOOK AT THE NINETEEN SIXTIES: THE POLITICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION . . . THE SEARCH FOR MORE KNOWLEDGE. . . '. . Some Historical Background . . . . . The Current Situation. . . . . . . ONE PROBLEM: THE ECONOMICS OF HOUSING. . ANOTHER PROBLEM: HUMAN NEEDS IN HOUSING . THE UNITERSITY. . . . . . . . . . Instrument of National Policy?. . . . The Academic Institution and the Professional College . . . . . . Multi-Discipline . . . . . . . . Multi-University . . . . . . . . MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY . . . . . . Search for Information . . . . . . History of Housing Activities at MSU. . The Inventory As Summarized From the Interviews. . . . . . . . . . iv Page vi vii viii 11 22 22 35 47 65. 76' 76 82 88 91 94 94 99 106 Chapter College of Human Medicine . . . . College of Business . . . . . . College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. . . . . . . . College of Engineering . . . College of Communication Arts. College of Social Sciences. . College of Education. . . . College of Arts and Letters . College of Human Ecology . . . Institute for Community DeveloPment Continuing Education Service . . Conferences. . . . . Institute of Urban Affairs. . . Other Elements Needed For a Housing View from the Outside of MSU. . . Program at MSU. . . . . . Michigan State Housing DeveloPment Authority. . . . . . . . . Michigan State Department of Commerce Levitt Building Systems. . . . . Lansing Housing Commission. . . . Social Services Branch, Region IV of HUD. . . . . . . . . . . Status of Housing Programs at Other Universities . . . . . . . Housing Research at MSU . . . . . MSU Philosophy . . . . . . . . VIII. PROFESSIONAL OPPORTUNITIES . . . . . IX. RECOMMENDATION FOR PROGRAM PLANNING IN HOUSING AND THE HUMAN HABITAT AT MSU . . X. CONCLUDING SUMMARY . . . . . . . . BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES Page 107 108 111 113 115 116 120 122 123 125 125 125 126 128 134 135 136 137 137 139 140 144 145 147 154 157 163 168 LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Federally Funded Housing Research Through HUD O O O O O O O O O O O O O 4 2 II. Breakdown of Interviews by Department and College at Michigan State University . . 97 vi Figure I. II. III. IV. LIST OF FIGURES Page How Housing Costs Accumulate . . . . . . 54 Residential Construction as a Percent of Gross National Product . . . . . . . 59 All Construction in the U.S. as a Percent of Gross National Product . . . . . . . 61 Housing and Human Habitat Higher Education and Professional Career Relationships . . 151 vii AID AOMA BOCA CIT DOD FFRDC FHA FNMA GNP GSA HEW HHFA HUD MIT MSHDA MSU NAHB NAHRO NASA LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Atomic Energy Commission Agency for International Development Apartment Owners and Management Association of America Building Officials Conferences of America Civilian Industrial Technology Program U.S. Department of Defense Federally Funded Research and Development Centers Federal Housing Administration Federal National Mortgage Association Gross National Product General Services Administration U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare Housing and Home Finance Agency U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Massachusetts Institute of Technology Michigan State Housing Development Authority Michigan State University National Association of Home Builders National Association of Housing and RedeveIOpment Officials National Aeronautics and Space Administration viii NIH NSF OEO OST PO PWA USDA USDC USDI USDL USDT VA National Institutes of Health National Science Foundation Office of Economic Opportunity Office of Science and Technology U.S. Post Office Department Public Works Administration Resettlement Administration Research and Development Reconstruction Finance Corporation Tennessee Valley Authority U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Department of Commerce U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Labor U.S. Department of Transportation Veterans Administration Works Progress Administration World War I World War II ix INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITION OF HOUSING Population growth and migration, the impact of technology, the decline of the central cities, aging of the housing stock, all combined with massive social change, have produced housing problems of large proportions. Asso- ciated phenomena have been only marginally understood, which is one of the major reasons why really satisfactory solutions have been so elusive. Society is in need of more and better housing. Man, over time, has created insti- tutions to attend to these needs. But, as can be seen in the first few chapters of this thesis, the performance of these institutions cannot be given a high mark. How the colleges and universities might contribute to improvement in the performance of these institutions, and so better serve human needs in housing, constitutes the core of this inquiry. The nature of the colleges and universities pre— cludes direct participation in most of the decision-making processes which concern housing. However, they are in a position to acquire and also to disseminate knowledge and information for use by the people as individuals or groups through their institutions as they formulate policies and make decisions. Because of the scope of the subject it was found impractical to resort to the customary routines for a master's thesis. This is not, therefore, a highly struc— tured study with findings sufficiently conclusive to direct a full action program by a university. The subject as defined in this introduction is simply too large to deal with within the limits of a thesis. Several approaches were considered before it was decided that a broad, explora- tory investigation appeared as the best method to illuminate housing issues relevant to the university and its client- groups. The logical sources of information were thought to be university faculty and administrative personnel, students, officials in public administration, housing industry managers, professional organizations, government reports, newspapers and periodicals and the relevant pub- lished literature. These sources were drawn upon freely in order to bring together as much information as might be useful for the stated purposes of this thesis. While the information so collected ranges far and wide, it should be pointed out that conclusions lean more heavily on interviews with people who have concern or interest in housing, pre- dominantly university people. Admittedly, the approach chosen does not follow a strict scientific research method- ology, yet the report should be valid considering the limitations of a thesis. Hopefully, others will find this work helpful in determining the type of data required as a basis for more comprehensive recommendations. For prac- tical reasons this work is confined largely to Michigan State University and the State of Michigan. The answer to the question, what should be the role of the university in housing, is, at the same time, simple and exceedingly complicated. The simple role is the tra- ditional one of the Land-Grant University: research, edu- cation and public service. Unfortunately, housing problems as they exist in the real world are very complex and there- fore have defied the simple role approach. Housing is shaped and produced by many institutions, most often long before the individual consumer enters the process. Housing values lie deep in the fabric of society and are bound by culture and other forces. The purpose of this thesis is to describe major factors affecting the current housing situation and to suggest a direction for further exploration in defining the role of the universities. Housing, as it will be referred to, is the HUMAN HABITAT. This meaning extends far beyond thinking of hous- ing as a physical artifact or a "container which packages people." HUMAN refers to individuals, families, social units and organizations, their experiences, sensitivities, values, aspirations and dreams. HABITAT means all of the physical, natural and man-made environment used by the people in the context of a cultural, institutional, eco- logical and biological framework, which may be political, social, economic, technological and esthetic in nature. HUMAN HABITAT is conceived of as a system comprising all of these elements. We can also call this the "human ecological system." The definition is obviously much broader than simply identifying housing as one of the three basic human needs: food, clothing and shelter. It is the human environment. If housing were a strictly technological issue, there would be no point in writing this thesis. The col- 1eges and universities, in fact, all of the institutions involved, have worked and over the years have developed certain housing technologies into strong disciplines. For this reason there is little to be gained by giving much time and space to this particular area. However, housing as defined, is not the exclusive province of technology. Recognizing that housing problems arise out of human needs and considering housing as an environment brings into play many aspects which must be dealt with if housing is ever to be substantially improved. A number of the problems and their relationships to professional and scientific disci- plines, as well as to education and research, will be touched upon in this thesis. We are confronted with a complex system, which we have not yet learned how to manage. We can identify the system. How to improve the function of the system, that is, how to improve man's living habitat through a role of leadership assumed by the universities, is an overriding challenge, a challenge not only for the universities, but for all of society. CHAPTER I HOUSING PROBLEMS AND FEDERAL INTERVENTION Housing problems have existed since time immemorial. The pilgrims, when they first settled on these shores, encountered them. In the mid- and latter 19th century, that is, during the high tides of immigration, housing con- ditions in the eastern cities were described as horrible.1 These conditions fostered an awakening of a social con- science which brought pressures for reform and regulation. At the turn of the 20th century one could see signs of slow improvement. Dislocations caused by WWI and the Great Depression created additional housing problems so severe that during the early 1930's the Federal Government inter- vened for the first time by creating new institutions to ameliorate the plight of many people. These institutions provided for monetary and fiscal mechanisms and later during the 1930's, other newly created institutions 1Catherine Bauer, Modern Housing (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1934), pp. 7, 20,TT1 . . the real problems of urban congestion were brought forth by the Industrial Revo- lution in the 19th Century. . . . during the 19th Century human environment was debased to about its lowest level." provided for the beginning of a federally sponsored public housing program. WWII made its own demands (as had been the case during WWI) on the Federal Government to take a hand in providing housing for war-workers as they migrated to the areas where military efforts and war production were concentrated. A return to peacetime conditions, high rates of family formation, rapid population growth, ris- ing living standards, put new strains on the institu- tional arrangements which society had created to supply shelter. And so came the landmark Housing Act of 1949, when the Congress of the United States declared: ". . . Realization as soon as feasible . . . of a decent home and a suitable living environment for every American family." Housing now had become a social, if not a political institution in addition to being an artifact, or simply shelter. There was a limited body of knowledge, too meager to tell anyone how to achieve the goal legislated by Congress. It is not surprising then that the ensuing trial and error methods employed brought many disappoint- ments at great cost, cost not only in money resources but also in human and social failures. One need name only Public Housing where the program produced only a fraction of the target number of units projected by Congress. This was fortunate in that many of the housing projects turned out to be fiascos in an economic, human and social sense. Rising standards of living and commensurate upward scaling of expectancies further increased pressures for more adequate housing through more intervention by the Federal Government. Obviously this came about because other institutions had failed in this mission. And Government did try to respond generously with frequent revisions and amendments to the various housing acts enacted since 1937. The 1960's were a period of active experimentation and more legislation (Housing Acts of 1961, 1964, 1965, 1966) culminating in the Housing Act of 1968, which President Johnson called "the most farsighted, the most comprehensive, the most massive housing program in 3 all American history." In this Act, referring back to the 1949 Act and the goal of "a decent home . . . ," one can read: Congress finds that this goal has not been fully realized for many of the nation's lower income families; that this is a matter of grave national concern; that there exist in the public and private sector of the 2For an illustration see Detroit Free Press Editorial Section describing current conditions in Public Housing in Detroit. Detroit Free Press, March 28, 1971. 3Remarks of the President at the signing of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as reported in the Membership Newsletter of National Housing Conference, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, August, 1968. Economy the resources and capabilities necessary to the full realization of this goal. For the first time Congress laid down quantitative housing goals, 26 million additional housing units by 1978, which could be used in measuring later performance. It was the dissatisfaction with the performance of public and private housing programs which led to this legislation. HUD Secretary Romney's "Operation Break- through," authorized by the new legislation, may be viewed as a desperation move on the part of the Federal Government because the established institutions, left to their own devices, had failed in their mission. After all, the financial mechanisms to support housing production had been amply provided for by the Government. But things are no longer that simple. Whether the singly applied remedies will do the job remains to be seen. There are doubts. Yet, housing has come to mean much more than shelter, a place to live. It reaches into neighborhood and community as a living environment for human beings. With these broadened considerations and pushed by a different administration, Congress last year produced the 1970 Housing and Urban Development Act which went still farther than the 1968 Act, and its abbreviated successor, the 1969 Act. The 1970 Act introduced new concepts for 4Public Law 90-448, Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, 90th Congress, 2nd Session, August 1, 1968. 10 dealing with the problem. This legislation will be dealt with later on in this thesis as it gives implied direction to the orientation and role of the university. Reading through all of the legislation mentioned is viewing the history of extensive social change and how we, as a society, view housing on a national scale. Yet, it seems that to close the gap between promise and fulfillment, more knowledge, more information, improved management, skills and administrative procedures are needed, as well as new philosophical perspectives. To better understand this, and to prepare for looking at possibilities for improving or modifying what is, one has to look at events which led up to the 1968, 1969 and 1970 Acts in more detail. CHAPTER II A CLOSER LOOK AT THE NINETEEN SIXTIES: THE POLITICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION After three decades of Government intervention and involvement in housing, from the 1930's to about 1960, new forces were emerging. These were to exert great influence on the shaping of public policy. Dissatisfaction with what had been accomplished was one of many manifestations. Growing social unrest was another. Government policy had encouraged, if not subsidized, the growth of middle-class suburbia to the detriment of the cities. Forced dislo- cation of families which were in the way of government projects had become a social and economic tragedy. Segre- gation, partly as an outcome of these programs, was increas- ing. Urban problems had become more visible and severe, while those affected became more vocal. Urban renewal, that is physical renewal, became looked upon with suspicion. Those who were supposed to have been helped often were worse off as a result of renewal. A new social concern for the welfare of all people, particularly the under- privileged, was emerging and housing had become central to these issues. 11 12 The outcome was that housing policies during the 1960's became a mirror of American values in conflict. Very evident was the political process of bargaining, fol- lowed by accommodation and the pursuit of inconsistent ends, of bureaucratic units planning their interests above those of presidents and the nation as a whole. Some of these conflicts are described by the Committee of Economic Development in Toward a New Housing Policy: --Housing as the most visible confrontation between civil rights and prOperty rights. "A man's home is his castle" is a deeply held belief in America. Run- ning counter to this is the principle that everyone should have a fair chance at good jobs, schools and homes. --Urban Renewal was intended to "save our cities." From what? And for whom? It was during the sixties that resistance mounted to the displacement of poor families and disproportionate numbers of negro house- holds to make space for commercial developments and apartments to be occupied by upper—income, and pre- dominantly white families. --Public housing officials argued for the expansion of their program, convinced that segregation by income and race was not too high a price to pay for "better" shelter for the poor. --If suburbanites wanted to insulate themselves socially and fiscally from the inner city, that was not the business of the Federal Housing Administration. Theirs was a mortgage operation, self-supporting in its own right. Why change social custom? These were some of the inherited idiologies and programs of the housing policy makers under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, who added their own ideas, responded to the 5Extracted from Morton J. Schussheim, Toward a New Housing Policy, the Legacies of the Sixties, CED Supple- mentary Paper No. 29 (New York: Committee of Economic Development, 1969), pp. 2, 3. 13 political pressures, shaped policies and hOped to build a better record, and so came new directions. These were normally guided by available demographic and economic data, but more often by emotional, moral and ethical consider- ations. The United States Department of Housing and Urban DevelOpment (HUD) was created through an Act of Congress after a number of tries and began its mission in 1966. Its predecessor had been HHFA, the Housing and Home Finance Agency, whose Administrator, Robert C. Weaver, became the first black man to hold cabinet office as Secretary of the new department. Housing and urban development had so been given a top ranking in national affairs, which was a mighty step forward. For our purposes in this thesis one should go back about 100 years when the United States Department of Agri- culture (USDA) came into being. Hand in hand with the event came the enactment of the Morrill Act, creating the Land- Grant Colleges. This marked the beginning of a new era when academic institutions became involved in serving national needs as a public service function. History has recorded the successes as well as some failures. In his- toric perspective it can be loudly said that these insti- tutions have adapted to change as dictated by the times.6 6For an excellent history see Edward D. Eddy, Jr., Colleges for our Land and Time, the Land-Grant Idea in American EducatiOn (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1956). 14 One has to wonder why a similar beneficial relationship between the HUD concept and the universities was over- looked. And so perhaps was the giving of cabinet status to HUD only a lesser step forward. Picking up the earlier thread, knowledge and experience useful for intelligently dealing with the hous- ing issues was very limited. Research concerned with hous- ing problems had long been neglected. To illustrate, federal expenditures for Research and Development (R & D) in 1966 were 15.3 billion dollars of which HUD spent about 323,000 dollars, obviously a tiny fraction of the entire research effort.7 This will be discussed in more detail in Chapter III. Unrest, riots and general dissatisfaction spawned a situation so critical that President Johnson, among other efforts, ordered two major thrusts to develop information and goals for use as a basis for future legislative action. One such action created is what became known as the Douglas Commission. Its purpose was to study building codes, zon- ing, local and federal tax policies and development stan- dards, to provide knowledge useful in dealing with slums, urban growth, sprawl and blight, and to insure decent and durable housing. The Commission went into operation early 7Statistical Abstract of the U.S., 1970 (Washington, D.C.: U.Sl Government Printing Office, 1970), p. 520. U.S. Budget for 1968 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968), p. 276. 15 in 1967, did a most comprehensive job, resulting in a monumental document supported by nineteen substantial research reports. Forty separate research projects were undertaken.8 The other major work was that of the Kaiser Com- mittee commissioned to look into the question: How can private enterprise build housing for the urban poor, and. how can the nation build and rebuild the city slums? The Kaiser Committee employed a large number of consultants and more than a dozen subcontractors in the performance of its task. It produced a number of recommendations underlining the complexities and highlighting the many 9 Both efforts played a major role in the writing unknowns. of the 1968 Housing Act already mentioned. The numerical goals incorporated in the Act came out of the Kaiser Report. It is interesting to note that in the same year a third and similarly monumental work, The People Left Behind, A Report on Rural Poverty, was presented to Congress. It included sixteen major research papers and extensively 8House Document No. 91-34, Building theAmerican Cit , Report of the National Commission on Urban Probiems eaded by Senator Paul H. Douglas to the Congress and to the President of the United States (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968). 9The President's Committee on Urban Housing, headed by Edgar F. Kaiser, A Decent Home (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968). 16 referred to housing problems in rural areas.10 The Douglas and Kaiser Reports primarily dealt with the housing problem of the cities, while the Rural Poverty Report examined the two major social upheavals, the aftermath of agricultural industrialization and the results of helter—skelter out- migration to the cities. There was yet a fourth major document: Urban and 11 Rural America: Policies for Future Growth, which dealt with growth in the metr0politan areas, migration, Negro population, rural pOpulation, metropolitan disparities, p0pulation projections and economic growth. These elements were examined by local, state and regional areas while making assessments of potential consequences. The 1970 Housing Act makes an attempt, among other provisions, to further improve the supply of housing through various incentives. It should be noted that in the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970, the government sup- plied enough funds to cover 58 per cent of the mortgage 12 loans made in that year, an alltime high. The 1970 Act 10The_§e9_ple Left Behind, Rural Poverty in the United States, Report by the President's National Advisory Commission on Rural Poverty (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968). 11A Commission Report, Urbanand Rural America, Policies for Future Growth, Advisory CommiSsion on Inter- governmental Relations (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968). 12Wall Street Journal, Feb. 12, 1971, pp. 1, 2. 17 dealt with many more aspects of housing than did any of its predecessors. Title VII of the Act should receive particu- lar note as an innovation. The concept embodied in this Title ties housing into urban growth and community develop- ment. Here is a rundown of the various titles contained in the 1970 Act: Title I. Mortgage Credit II. Urban Renewal and Housing Assistance Pro- grams III. Model Cities and Metropolitan Development Programs IV. Open-Space Land V. Research and Technology VI. Crime Insurance VII. Urban Growth and New Community Development Act of 1970 A. Development of National Growth Policy B. Development of New Communities including a Community Development Corporation C. Development and National Urban Growth Patterns D. Development of Inner City Areas VIII. Farm Housing IX. Liability of FNMA, Advice and Assistance with Respect to Housing for Low and Moderate Income Families, Administrative Powers of Secretary, Savings and Loan Associations, etc. It was also during the 1960's that several states provided for institutional mechanisms to increase the supply of low and moderate income housing. Michigan Act No. 346 of 1966 creating the Michigan State Housing 18 Development Authority (MSHDA) is one example. At least twelve other states are now active, some more, some less. The state of New York is now involved on a large scale.13 The local housing authorities and commissions must also be mentioned. Organized during and since the 1930's their primary function has generally been limited by law to administer public or special housing projects. During the 1960's, as a result of increasing demand and enabling legislation, these authorities and commissions became numerous, many of them big operations with large staffs and a wide range of responsibilities. The above illustrates further how far we have come in government intervention in housing. The 1970-1971 United States Budget refers to the housing activities under the label: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING. Proposed budget allocation amounts to 1.8 per cent of the total United States Budget. In 1961 it was .2 per cent.14 Whether the capabilities and skills exist to deal with the problem on this expanded scale is another question, a question related to the subject of this thesis. l3State Sources of Financing for Housing, from a paper delivered by Tom Forester Lord, Housing Program Director, Institute for Urban Studies, University of Houston at the Convention of the National Association of Home- builders, Houston, Texas, Jan. 17, 1971. 14Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budgets, The U.S. Budget in Brief, Fiscal Year 1972 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, I971), p. 43. 19 The business community and especially non—profit organizations have also become more actively interested in housing during the 1960's. Non-profit sponsors of low and moderate income housing projects began to proliferate. These were made up of church groups, labor unions and other voluntary organizations. They were often ill-equipped to plan, organize and particularly to manage the projects they were sponsoring. Consequently, they had to engage personnel or service agencies to perform these functions. However, such demands could not be readily met, because past edu— cation and training in this field had been a void. To over- come the problem, quickie-type training programs were organ- ized by several interested organizations to at least pro- vide for a minimum of the required skills. Emphasis has been placed on the federal role in housing. This is not to say that the local scene can be passed over. In fact, it can be said, that government efforts to accommodate needs at the local level are of equal, if not greater importance, and perhaps they are even more difficult to achieve. Here is where we come face to face with ordinances, codes, regulations and the informally organized practices and conventions. In some cases state enabling acts are also a problem. While there has been some progress during the 1960's in improving the various restrictions and limitations on housing subject to local control, much more needs to be done. More knowledge and 20 information along with greater degree of employed profes- sionalism would help. For example, it is now generally conceded that performance codes would be far superior to the conventional specification codes governing construction. Unfortunately, institution of and the administration of performance codes requires skills of the kind which can only come out of higher education programs. Policy makers during the 1960's began to face up to the realities of the functions and needs of central cities, the interdependence of developmental activities in metrOpolitan areas and the imperfection in the urban land market. At the same time, there was a recognition of the need to modernize the governmental machinery at all levels.15 An attempt has been made in the foregoing questions, observations, statements and references to describe the political environment in which the university must find and define its proper role. Four decades of federal legislation have spelled out national housing policy through numerous housing acts and programs. Coupled with corresponding pro- grams at state and local government levels we are now con- fronted with scale and complexity of large dimensions. Frequency of revisions in these programs confound the prob- lem. The programs require continuous and expert evaluation 15Schussheim, 92° cit., pp. 1, 2. 21 and interpretation of the information. Such information should be efficiently useful to public officials, non-profit or limited-profit sponsors, private developers, profes- sional housing managers. It should also be readily avail- able to students in urban affairs and housing, and finally, to concerned citizens, the housing consumers. Success in federal and other housing programs will depend largely on the human resources engaged in the development of these programs and their effective implemen- tation. In depth understanding of the problems is a pre- requisite. These capabilities do not grow on trees. Much more thought and attention has to be given to the role of education in the development of these human resources. While national policy has generally accorded strong support to education, specific allocation of resources to the Study of housing, as broadly defined, is difficult to find. .I III i ‘1'!- .;|‘lIIEIII.IIIIII~f [llIlllll’IIli-‘Ill. a ui?.ii[£ftll.‘fiii}ll CHAPTER III THE SEARCH FOR MORE KNOWLEDGE Some Historical Background For most of us it is difficult to believe that there should exist a dearth of knowledge and information on the subject of housing. Such a response is conditioned by a situation where we all are "experts," expertise derived from direct experience and other often very non-academic sources. This comes about because housing touches everyone continuously at all stages of the life cycle. In this process we tend to see housing in the narrowest sense. We stand ready to defend our own decisions, right or wrong, good or bad, be it from an ecological, technological or societal point of view. As already mentioned in this thesis, the material part of housing decisions is in fact in the hands of institutions. At both levels, individual or institution, most of the decisions made are based upon these personal subjective experiences and intuitions. The obvious limitations are man's ultimate wisdom plus the state of available knowledge and information. Few would argue that more of the latter would not bring about more enlightened decisions and actions. 22 23 Man has studied and theorized about his housing and the environment. Rarely have such studies been carried through to the point of building a comprehensive body of knowledge supported by empirical or scientific evidence. There are hypotheses which seem to indicate that housing may be the major determinant of man's attitudes, his life styles, his health and social well-being. The literature is abundant with all kinds of examples of such observations. They are generally done from the point of View of one discipline. Multi-disciplinary comprehensiveness is notably absent. There is no science of housing or the environment. For example, as we discuss new communities and new towns as a matter of national need demanding inno- vation and invention, we do it without recourse to a sub- stantial body of knowledge. When our legislators, as des- cribed in Chapters I and II, have to deal with housing prob- lems on a national scale, they have little more to go on but their wisdom influenced by opinions, convictions, prejudices and pressures from special interests. One can only wonder when one discovers that all construction represents roughly 10 per cent of our Gross National Product (GNP), and residential construction is roughly 3 per cent, large components indeed, why there is such a limited scientific and technological base, why the "knowledge explosion" of recent times has not embraced housing. The answer to this question is probably as 24 complex as the housing issue itself. To better understand the problem of lagging research, understand why universities have made only marginal contributions, one should look at the entire history of inquiry, R & D, experimentation and demonstration as it pertains to our field of interest. One can easily find agreement that to build a body of knowledge requires research and testing. It is neces- sary not only to the technology of building housing units and towns as artifacts and engineering systems, but also as a contribution to the process of building environments for human beings, assembling communities with concern for sociological, political, economic, esthetic, ecological and cultural considerations. Since the subject represents a huge system, there needs to be research in the application of systems science itself. Five decades of research experience in isolated areas tells us that we could do a great deal more by adapting methods employed in other large tasks where innovation and coordination have brought about such rapid progress. "In 1940, the 20th Century Fund began a survey of the housing situation in the U. S. No authoritative study of the housing problem had ever been made . . ." one reads in the foreword to American Housing, by economist Miles L. Colean.l6 The survey completed in 1943 relates how l6Miles L. Colean, American_Housing, Problems and Prospects (New York: 20th Century Fund, 1949). 25 one of the first housing research projects was assigned to the National Bureau of Standards (now an agency of the United States Department of Commerce), which, as the name implies, set out to research problems of standards and codes. These codes became the basis for many hundreds of municipal building ordinances and the like. It was then as now a problem of reconciling engineering with social ideals and economic realities. The exact wording of specifications was troublesome and there were problems in making allowances for regional differences such as Florida hurricanes, California earthquakes and northern New England snowloads to be reckoned with. The Bureau researched sim- plification of a variety of manufactured products and pro- cesses, as well as types of zoning laws and mechanics lien laws. Efforts by the Bureau to look into other areas foundered because of lack of funds, probably due in part to the Great Depression. The American Standards Association took over some of the Bureau's work, but these efforts were not extensive. The advent of the federal housing agencies during the 1930's and their administrative dependence on standards and codes brought the Bureau back into action. But the Bureau had no means with which to force adoption of standards or coordinate them on a national scale. The Building Officials Conferences of America (BOCA) stepped in to take over some of this function. 26 By the latter 1930's it had become clear, however, that the central position of the Federal Government was an ideal clearing house for best current thought and practice in building. In 1935 the Division of Economics and Statis- tics of the then newly created Federal Housing Administration (FHA, later HHFA) saw the need for information in the house building industry. They set about to collect data on real estate transactions, housing construction activities and market factors. It would not be correct, therefore, to say cate- gorically that there has been no research in housing. What is true perhaps is that many diverse organizations and people have studied individual problems by bits and pieces without producing adequate payoffs in terms of the whole. The President's Conference on Home Building and Home Owner- ship held at Washington, D. C. in 1932 in various reports mentioned ". . . agencies carrying on housing research and education include the Extension Service of the USDA, Better Homes in America, American Farm Bureau Foundation, National Grange, and agricultural journals.17 The Corporation of Housing Agencies in 1935 listed many departments. Some of those included were the FHA, Resettlement Administration (RA), Housing Division of the Public Works Administration (PWA), Reconstruction Finance 17Reports were distributed by Better Homes in America, West Lafayette, Indiana. 27 Corporation (RFC), Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA), National Bureau of Standards (Nat.Bu.Stds), Works Progress Administration (pr) .18 Most of the organizations dealing with housing excepting the National Bureau of Standards and the agricultural groups were new then. This prompts the question, how could they have developed the needed extensive research capabilities in a matter of a few years? One event of note as it relates to housing research was "Greenbelt Towns," a project of the RA. Three such towns were actually built during the period following principles proposed by Ebenezer Howard around the turn of the century. These towns contained innovations in living accommodations, even though the primary motivation at the time was make-work for jobless construction workers. The social stresses from 1929 on through the 1930's stimulated a flood of writings and reports on housing and related social conditions. For example, Davies lists 283 separate items in a bibliography.19 The 20th Century Fund study by Colean noted that between 1935 and 1940 federal expenditures for research totaled 852,000 dollars, mostly for creation and operation 18Corporation of Housing Agencies, National Asso- ciation of Housing Officials, Bulletin No. 64, August 15, 1935, p. 3. 19Joseph Earl Davies, Fundamentals of Housing Study, A Determination of Factors Basic to an Understanding of Americanggusing Problems—TNew York: ColumBia University, TeaEhers CoiIege, Bureau of Publications, 1938). 28 of a Forest Products Laboratory. Research expenditures for the USDA 1938/1939 were given as 20 million dollars.20 The study makes a point of the inability to advance techniques on many fronts concurrently, that the components of the industry are too diffuse and too limited in their interests to undertake jointly the kind of research needed. A few independent organizations, Purdue University, the John B. Pierce Foundation and the Bemis Foundation are mentioned as having made some contributions.21 World War II and its aftermath seems to have left housing research as an orphan when one considers the tech- nological and other advances of the era. The landmark Housing Act of 1949 already mentioned was to provide for research in housing (in addition to research in metropolitan growth and urban problems), but the politically powerful building construction and real estate interests managed to sandbag it as they later did the Civilian Industrial Tech- nology Program (CIT) of the Department of Commerce 22, 23 (USDC). Beyer commented in 1965 "that recent develop- ment of building materials shows a bright future but leaves 20 21 Colean, op, cit., p. 165. Ibid., p. 164. 22Glenn H. Beyer, Housingand Society (New York: McMillan Co., 1965), p. 212. 23Civilian Technology, "Opposition in Congress and Industry Leads to Major Realignment of Program," Science, CILIII (February, 1964), 660, 661. 29 much desired from the standpoint of improving livability and reducing costs." He went on to say "few are willing to risk funds on long-term research." "Firm by firm research and product development have meant that new, bet- ter and less expensive approaches have not been developed for the structure as a whole. Advances in one group that might hurt the other group precludes combining research effort."24 Few of the complex problems of housing fall neatly into scientific disciplines; most, if not all, are multi- disciplinary and overlap diverse fields of knowledge. Beyer names nature, technology, money, law, man, design and construction in a single statement.25 The "home" building industry, through the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), did make some effort to incorporate new building technologies by sponsoring the building of demonstration houses. These were to bring in new designs, materials and methods. Various universities (architecture departments), notably the Massachusetts Insti- tute of Technology (MIT), handled the individual projects. One such house was built in Okemos, Michigan, together with Michigan State University (MSU). Whether any worthwhile benefits came out of these ventures has never been deter- mined. 24Beyer, op. cit., p. 490. 25Ibid., pp. 211, 212. 30 In 1960 Dr. Robert C. Weaver, the Administrator of the HHFA asked Resources For The Future, a non-profit cor- poration for research and education in the development, conservation and use of natural resources, to examine urban research needs and to suggest an approach to the establish- ment of a national program of research in housing and urban development. The Director of the Regional Studies and Urban Economic Program of Resources For The Future did such a study. The report covered four topics: (1) Needed: A National Program of Research, (2) The Scope of Urban Research, (3) Organizing a Nationwide Program of Research, and (4) Implementation. The study declared, that . . . there is no satisfactory research base and urges an extensive national program of urban research. If the latter is to contribute substantially to the nation's efforts in housing and urban development, it must have a scope of activities comparable to the significant research programs in agriculture, health and space tech- nology. These pr0posed steps are listed in the study: 1. A full system of research ranging from basic to applied. 2. Improvement of existing data and development of new data. 3. Support of training programs to meet evolving man- power needs. 4. Support of experimental projects to try out promis- ing ideas in housing and urban development on a small scale. 31 . . 26 5. Encouragement of urban exten81on serVice. Further conclusions drawn were that . . . leadership and financial assistance from the Federal Government are needed in urban research because of the nationwide character and severity of urban prob- lems. A truly national program of research should be designed to assist all levels of government, as well as private groups. Three foci are called for: (l) assist metropolitan research units with metrowide or local problems, (2) assistance to the states for statewide research and urban extension service, and (3) a federal government program covering policy research, improve- ment of nationally collected data, national framework studies and projections, grants to assist university research and training programs, and finally, major 27 research efforts in transportation and construction. Specifically recommended are (1) basic research to USDA and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), (2) training and manpower development with fellowships and scholarships to researchers, (3) "central" research, (4) applied and problem-solving research, (5) data services, (6) extension and demon- stration, and (7) experimentation. The report spoke of how the local government and private groups would be encouraged to establish metro research units (ZOO-odd), how the states would establish research units and extension services and how the HHFA would set up a semi-independent "National Urban Institute" to direct programs of grants to universities for basic research and training and to carry out "framework research." The 26Harvey S. Perloff, A National Program of Research in Hogging and Urban Development, THe_Major Requirements and a Suggested Approach, a Resources ForiTHe Future Staff Study (Washington, D.C.: Resources For The Future, Inc., 1961), p. l. 27 28 Ibid’l pp. 1] 20 Ibid., pp. 8' 90 32 whole program was recommended to be conducted in stages and guided by an advisory committee appointed by the Adminis- trator of HHFA. The program was to be funded at 1 1/2 per cent of expenditures for urban renewal and public housing, as had then similarly been the practice in the United States highway program. Further funding was to be derived from extending Section 701 of the Housing Act (providing for planning grants) to cover research. These additional pro- posed responsibilities were used as an argument to give HHFA cabinet status.29 In the context of this writing one must again ask the obvious question: Why were the colleges and univer- sities not given a greater role in these plans, especially the Land-Grant institutions? The question arises when thinking of efforts like agriculture, health and space pro- grams. Or, why were the National Science Foundation (NSF) and other government agencies not tuned into it? At any rate, nothing much happened for several years. In 1964-1965, in line with President Johnson's "Great Society" philosophy, Weaver with MIT Professor Robert C. Wood (later Undersecretary of HUD under Secretary Weaver) and others proposed a "Demonstration City" program to Congress. The program originally contemplated desig- nating a small number of cities, perhaps six to eight, in 291bid., p. 2. 33 which to test the effect of a "total attack" approach. As recently reported, The Johnson White House, familiar with the workings of Congress, saw only political disaster in such a limi- tation, and presented a program that would affect many cities. This won enactment by a narrow margin during the fall of 1966.30 "Demonstration," after the urban explosions of the time, became "Model" and the Model Cities program became a vehicle to pump resources and hope into 150 pockets of urban misery. What was intended for research, experimentation and demon- stration became something else. Research was again left unsupported. The earliest Budget Message by the President with real emphasis given to housing-related research is one pre- sented to Congress on January 24, 1967 for fiscal year 1968: One of the most serious difficulties in solving city problems is our inadequate knowledge about the root and nature of these problems. I urge that sufficient funds be provided the Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ment to start a systematic research effort to acquire needed information on the causes and possible solutions31 for the housing and urban problems which we face today. The 1970 Housing Act does provide for research and demonstration as did the 1968 Act: 30Monroe W. Karmin, "A Not-So-Model Cities Program," Wall Street Journal, Editorial Page, February 26, 1971. 31The Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Year ending June 30, 1968 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office), p. 26. 34 . . . to encourage large-scale experimentation in the use of new technologies, methods and materials with a view toward the ultimate mass-production in housing and related facilities, . . . subject to (1) local building regulations, or where (2) necessary variations can be granted.32 To carry out this program, Section 504 provided for an experimental Housing Allowance Program to underwrite dif- ferences between 25 per cent of low-income families' income and a fair market rental value of the experimental units. There is no provision for monitoring or for the study of the experiences resulting from the arrangement. The ambi- guity of some of this legislation is demonstrated in another section of the same Act, where one reads: . . . will (1) help maintain a diversified, local home building industry, (2) increase the capability of all segments of the home building industry, including both small and large producers, to participate through an increased supply of building sites at reasonable costs and through improved technology, in producing a large volume of well-designed, inexpensive housing, and (3) encourage broad participation by the home building industry, particularly small builders.33 On the one hand we try to rationalize mass production, on the other hand we talk about preserving the "small builders." We are trying to have the best of two worlds. 32Public Law 91-609, 9lst Congress, H.R. 19436, Dec. 21, 1970, Housing and Urban Development Act, Section 501 and Section 502 a) and b). 33Ibid., Section 722. 35 The Current Situation Progress is being made in that there are increasing research activities. For 1966 and 1967 respectively, the United States Government R & D Reports Indices list one project each year under the heading of Housing. In 1968 the referred-to index lists 73 projects, in 1969 105 proj- ects and in 1970 195 projects.34 HUD in June 1970 reported 465 ongoing research projects in the following categories: User Needs and Design (47), Production (31), Materials (142), Codes and Standards (22), Labor (5), Planning and Land DevelOpment (14), Utilities (16), Institutional and Economic Aspects (26), Legal (2), Structural Design and Foundations (190). The projects were given to federal government agencies, universities (most often engineering colleges), non-profit institutions including state and local government, their agencies and housing authorities.35 It should be pointed out that research, even on this rela- tively small scale, is noteworthy in that activity has accelerated since 1968. 34U.S. Government R & D Reports Index, U.S. Depart- ment of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, Institute of Applied Technology (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966 through 1970). 35Catalogue of Federallprunded Housing and Building Research and Technology, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970). 36 Federal government agencies supporting research projects in housing are the USDA, Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), USDC, United States Department of Defense (DOD), Office of Economic Opportunity (OEO), General Services Administration (GSA), Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW), United States Department of Labor (USDL), Post Office Department (PO), Veterans Administration (VA). Coordination currently is in the hands of an ad hoc Inter- agency Committee on Housing Research and Building Technol- ogy, Office of Science and Technology (OST). Its report mentions . . . now that national attention has been focused on the availability of housing, housing costs, building systems design and the efficiency of the building indus- try in general, the growing demand for improved per- formance, higher quality and increased output through- out the housing and building construction sector is the currently primary reason for the increasing federal commitment to housing research and technology.36 But it is well not to lose sight of the relation- ship of these recent housing research efforts to all R & D activities. The National Science Foundation has, as one of its responsibilities, to collect and publish data on R & D and scientific activities for the entire nation. Review of such data shows that expenditures for the account of our subject, namely housing, are insignificant. What little was 36HousingResearch and Building Technology Activi- ties of the Federal Government, Executive Office of the Pfesident, Office of Science and Technology (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970). 37 reported was either classified with something else or lumped into a miscellaneous category. For example, the USDA for many years has spent a tiny fraction of its budget on housing, family living and ancillary problems, and yet this does not show in the reports. There are four performers of R & D and scientific inquiry: (l) the Federal Government, (2) the universities, (3) private industry, and (4) non—profit institutions which include, for our purposes, state and local government and their authorities, agencies and commissions. Sponsors are (1) the Federal Government, (2) the universities and col- leges, (3) private business and industry, (4) foundations and other non-profit groups, and (5) the state and local government, their authorities, agencies and commissions. R & D in the United States runs currently at about 2.7 per cent of GNP, lowest since its peak of over 3 per cent in 1964. Annual growth in R & D expenditures has been about 4.6 per cent for the 1966-1971 period against a growth in GNP of 6.9 per cent. Federal dollars spent on R & D have been declining, while non-federal dollars spent have been rising (see Appendix SF-l, a graph which displays R & D funding patterns). The outlook through 1980 is shown on a chart, Appendix SF-2, indicating maintenance of, if not accelerating growth, in R & D funding.37 37National Patterns of R & D Resources, Funds and Manpgwer in tHe U.S. 1953-1971, NationaI Science Foundation, NSF 70-46 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970). 38 Full-time-equivalent scientists and engineers employed in R & D by sector have been tabulated and may be referred to in Appendix SF-3. This table shows that the number of people engaged in this effort has been continu- ously rising, from 236,000 in 1954 to an estimated 555,000 in 1969. Of special note is the increase in the number of full-time-equivalent graduate students receiving stipends and engaged in R & D efforts rising from 4,800 to 18,000 during the same period (absolute numbers are substantially larger).38 One may refer to Appendix SF-4 for other highlights on colleges and universities. Here can be seen that total expenditures for institutions of higher learning have enjoyed continuing accelerated growth, while R & D perform- ance by these institutions has had a diminishing growth rate. Three-fifths of the funding for R & D performance for colleges and universities comes from the Federal Government. Major sources have been HEW, the NSF and DOD, with three-fourths of the R & D funds. The three largest recipients were MIT, Stanford and Harvard Universities. Of particular note is that during the 1966-1971 period education expenditures rose at a 13 per cent annual rate while R & D performances at the colleges and universities rose at an only 6 per cent rate, which is negative growth 381bid. 39 considering the rise in costs.39 For our purposes here it is important to realize that almost all education-related funding comes from HEW or NSF, while HUD in principle engages in or funds research endeavors connected with the building and construction technologies. Only Congress could change this policy. The distribution of federal research funds for R a D and other scientific activities may be found in National Science Foundation publication, NSF 70-38.40 Appendix chart SF-S explains that 10 per cent is done by colleges and universities plus an additional 5 per cent by the thirty-seven federally funded R & D Centers (FFRDC's) administered by universities. The same chart also shows that 90 per cent of the federally funded research is spon- sored by DOD, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), ABC and HEW, the latter includes the National Science Foundation. Developments in federal R & D funding are explained by Appendix SF—6. Here one can see how federally funded R & D as a per cent of the total federal budget in 1940 was 0.8 per cent, rose to 12.6 per cent in 1965 and now stands at 8 per cent. How current funding is 391bid. 40Federal Funds for Research, Development and Other Scientific Activities, F1sca1’Year 1969,1970 and 1971. Survey of Science Resource Series, National Science Foun- dation, NSF 70- 38, Volume XIX (Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1970). 40 divided for basic research, applied research, development and research-plant can also be seen in Appendix SF-6. Exactly where housing research could be fitted into these categories would have to be investigated in further detail. "Operation Breakthrough" would no doubt be clas- sified as "development." How nine agencies obtained 98 per cent of the federal research dollar can be seen in Appendix SF-7. These agencies are DOD, NASA, AEC, HEW, the United States Department of Transportation (USDT), NSF, USDA, the United States Department of Interior (USDI), OEO, USDC and the VA. Appendix SF—8 illustrates federal R & D funding by states for the year 1969. Michigan ranked twenty-second, while ranking seventh in population, seventh in personal income and fourth in federal taxes paid. Housing does not appear among the major performing agencies and their sources of federal funds as can be seen on Appendix chart SF-9. Then finally HUD does show up, see Appendix chart SF-lO where we note commitments of 26.2 million dollars in total R & D obligations for Fiscal Year 1970. This is about 1 per cent of the HUD budget. The R & D allocation divides 83 per cent for applied research and 17 per cent for development. This research is listed as performed by industry 52 per cent, other 23 per cent, non-profit institutions 11 per cent and federal intermural 9 per cent. The "other" means largely colleges and universities at roughly 6 million dollars.41 411bid. 41 Since HUD is primarily concerned with housing, it may be well to take a look at the HUD budget situation in recent years. This is illustrated on Table I. Clearly, Congress is increasing federal commitments to housing research. As explained elsewhere, Congress and the federal system limit expenditures by HUD to mostly technology- related fields. The federal establishment engages 275,000 people in R & D and scientific activities. These are classified as scientists, engineers and technical personnel. Of this number HUD lists 2,275. If the categories are limited to scientific personnel and engineers only, then 161,000 are so classified, of which 900 belong to HUD.42 As we look at the distribution of the nation's R & D by performers we see that in 1968 it was divided as follows: industry 69 per cent, the federal government 14 per cent and colleges and universities 10 per cent. Feder— ally Funded R & D Centers (FFRDC) administered by univer- sities and other non-profit institutions took the remainder. Note, Michigan is not among the states which have FFRDCs. The sources of funds which finance R & D throughout the nation are: federal government 60 per cent, industry 42Scientific, Technical and Health Personnel in Ehe Federal Government 1969, NatiOnal Science Foundation, NSF 70-44 TWashington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970), Tables on pp. 2, 10, 12, 13, 14. See Appendix SF-ll through -15. 42 TABLE I FEDERALLV FUHDED HOUSING RESEARCH THROUGH HUD Budget Authority In MIIIIons of Dollars (ApproprIstIons) Model CItles Programs not Included. FY '05 ea 67 1963 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 .375A .387E 1.55 .337A .3875 1.55 .397A .755 .755 so (1) .75A .55 205 as (2) .5A 105 205 70 10A ‘HE 25E 71(3) (4) 11A 23E 55E 72 (4) 10A 515 45E The U.S. Budget In any one year Ilsts yearly amounts tor a three-year perlod. Thls ls shown horlzontally dbposlte the year a new Budget ls presented. The earllest tlgure Is actual and deslgnated 'A'. The two tIgures tollowlng are estimates and deslgnated 'E’. 1963—1966 data Is HHFA. 1967 on Is HUD (I) (2) (3) (4) now Includes Urban StudIes along wlth Houslng Research now called Urban Technology and Research tlgures used by NSF dmer. They are 1969 A = 18.2, 1970 E = 26.2 and 1971 E = 26.2 MIIIIon dollars Major part accounted tor by OPERATION BREAKTHROUGH estlmated at 17 Mllllon dollars for FY 1971 IOURCEO - U.S. Budgets end the" Appendlces tor the FY's shown. - .Nstlonsl Science Foundstlon. Federal Funds tor Research Development and other Scientltlc Actlvltles. FY’s tees. 1010. 1071. Vol. XIX NSF 70-38. p. 108 43 36 per cent, colleges and universities 3 per cent. Funding of R & D by industry has been rising for many years. Com- panies now finance over 50 per cent of their R & D them- selves with the federal funding declining. Whatever effort may be related to housing does not show up on any listing by industry category, because it is relatively small.43 State government and agencies also perform in sci- ence where 50 per cent of the R & D is concentrated in two areas, Health and Hospitals. Other areas are natural resources, highways and education. If defense, space and atomic energy are excluded, activities of the states paral- lel the federal ones. Michigan is again not a leader with only 2 per cent of the national total. Housing is not men- tioned, some housing expenditures, if any, may be buried in "other" category. In 1968 R & D expenditures by the states were 155 million dollars with 9 per cent performed by col- leges and universities.44 43Research and Development in Industry 1268, Funds 1968 Scientists and Engineers, National Science Foundation, NSF 70-29 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970), Charts pp. 2, 5, 7, 17, Tables pp. 25, 26. See Appendix SF-16 through -21. 44Research and Devglopment in State Government Agencies, Fiscal Years 1967, 1968. National Science Foun- dation, NSF 70-22 (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970), Table p. 2, Chart p. 3, Table p. 4, Charts pp. 5, 7, 8, 10, Table p. 18, Chart p. 20, Table p. 22. See Appendix SF-22 through -31. 44 Federal support for academic science which includes R & D enjoyed continuous year-to-year increases until 1966, when it leveled off. Since costs have been rising, this means a decline in absolute terms. Support for the feder- ally financed R & D Centers at the universities has also been declining. As mentioned before, none of these Centers are in Michigan. The principle agencies which are reported to do 97 per cent of the funding are the USDA, DOD, HEW, USDC, USDI, AEC, NSF and NASA. Three per cent only comes from a remaining group made up of HUD, USDL, OEO, USDT and the Agency for International Development (AID). It can also be seen that in a listing of federal support to the one hundred colleges and universities receiving the largest amounts in Fiscal Year 1969, the University of Michigan ranked third, Michigan State University twenty-ninth and Wayne State University thirty-second. By far the largest amounts came from HEW.45 A good deal of space has been taken in trying to relate all past and current research and scientific efforts in the nation to that which goes for housing and the human habitat. The objective was to illustrate how the search for new knowledge in housing has been a negligible affair when compared with research in other fields. One would 45Federal Support to Universities, Colle es, Fiscal Year 1969, National Science Foundation, NSF 70-27 (Washing- ton, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1970), Graph p. 3, Tables pp. 4, 16. See Appendix SF-32 through -34. 45 prefer to make a case in a more direct way, but no one really knows what the relatively small expenditures actually amount to. Much of it is hopelessly clouded by poor defi- nition and scattering of industry segments throughout the various R & D expenditure accounting systems. Guesses are that probably 300 to 400 million dollars per year are cur- rently devoted to building- and construction-related R & D, virtually all of it by manufacturers and producers of pri- mary building products.46 More information is simply not to be had. HUD or the NSF should be directed by Congress to assemble such information and report on it periodically. Only in that way would we know that progress is being made, if any. One can conclude that, considering the housing problem, the size of the industry and the fact that on the average more than one-fourth of the family lifetime expendi- tures go into housing and household operation, housing is being shortchanged. The colleges and universities in par- ticular may be singled out by the evidence, so may the State of Michigan, and so Michigan State University. Research and scientific inquiry are assumed to be a good part of the teaching and learning process and so it would follow in logic that the present effectiveness of the 46Gerald M. McCue, William R. Ewald, Jr., and the Midwest Research Institute, Creating the Human Environment, a Report of the American Institute ofiArchitects (UrBEna, Ill: University of Illinois Press, 1970). p. 170. 46 process can be questioned as long as there is a dearth of research Opportunity. This is particularly true in the housing field where practical experience concurrent with study appears most essential. The nature of the housing system, its huge dimensions, the many diverse effects on all kinds of people and their varied environments, make it a compelling reason that the search for more knowledge be organized, as we have done with other large national-level missions and tasks. Recognized must be that because of the conditions described, there is a shortage of institutions, researchers and teachers to do the job. This points to quality and effi- ciency problems as the hopefully foreseen build-up occurs, underlining a role for education. The universities should be able to organize and coordinate a large part of the task. Only they can process the products of research for maximum utilization and dissemination. Defining and understanding the problems has to come first and here is where the uni- versities are ideally situated. The thrust has to be toward an ever improving living environment for all people where other interests are subordinated. All this, admittedly, is no small chore. CHAPTER IV ONE PROBLEM: THE ECONOMICS OF HOUSING In testimony before the Banking and Currency Com- mittee of the United States House of Representatives on March 3, 1970, Secretary Romney of HUD said that "80% of the American people can not afford to buy and maintain a 47 O O I This 13 a most ser1ous new home at today's prices." indictment of a society, which has over time created insti- tutions to provide housing for its people. There are many known causes of the failure, and much more that we simply do not understand. The same section from which Secretary Romney was quoted goes on to say that: . . . it is found that federal programs aggravated the situation, that for example, farm subsidy programs threw hundreds of thousands of small farmers and share- croppers out of work, that federal farm programs as well as highway, urban renewal and other programs have accelerated the need for housing. In another part of the same section one reads: . . . too often the federal housing programs appear to be aimed at reviving a lagging construction industry rather than serving the needs of ill—housed families. 47Promises to Keep, Housing Need and Federal Fail- ure in Rural Amgrigg,§elect Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, U.S. Senate (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govern- ment Printing Office, 1971), p. 7. 47 48 According to the official national goal, every American household which does not enjoy "a decent home and a suitable living environment . . ." has a housing problem. Indications are that there exist many such problems, yet we have little good comprehensive data to go on. When we inventory numbers of units, as a part of census operations, we crudely differentiate by very inadequate measure between standard and substandard. In doing so, we often fail to convey the appalling living conditions, filth, degradation, squalor, overcrowding, personal danger and insecurity, which millions of housing units are causing in both our cities and rural areas. Concealed also may be spaces where children are attacked by rats, suffer mental retardation from eating leadpaint and become ill from the unhealthy conditions brought on by crowding. Failure of landlords to provide adequate heat and keep plumbing in working order is rarely accounted for.48 While interest in these socio-economic problems of housing has increased substantially since about 1930, fueled by the human miseries of the Great Depression, one can seriously question why there should not have been a great deal more progress. The most confounding factor has been the continuous rise in living standards and associated expectancies. 48Anthony Downs, Urban Problems and Prospects (Chicago: Markham Publishing Co., 1970), pp. 115, 116. 49 There have been substantial amounts of literature used in support of some proposed government action, but most of it, like the census data, has been based on narrow and subjective observations. Much less has been organized around systematic analysis. The root source of any housing problem is misunderstanding its cause. For example, we have never come to grips with the question: what respective part of the nation's and communities' resources and what respec- tive part of personal resources should be allocated to housing. These are macro-economic issues versus the micro- economic problems with which individuals and families are confronted. The latter problems come in two parts. One is cost of the housing in the market place, that is, cost of occupancy, whether owned or rented, plus cost of operation including depreciation. The other part is ability of occupants to afford these costs, that is, to have adequate means for the allocation of resources to provide a family unit with "decent" housing. This premise assumes that "decent" housing is wanted in preference to other forms of consumption; different priorities would create different sets of conditions. It appears that the equation of the two parts: cost versus purchasing power, needs a great deal more study, especially for the informed consideration of subsidies. In 1937 Chawner, writing on the subject of building costs, had this to say: 50 . . . gradually rising prices of building materials, and even greater increases in wage rates in the build- ing trades, over long periods of time, have substantially increased building costs during the last two or three decades. This situation appears unchanged if not worsened by 1965 when Beyer wrote: "One of the most serious housing problems is the constantly rising cost of construction" and he cited two cost indices. One was the E. H. Boeckh Construction Cost Index for single family residences rising from 107.7 in 1950 to 139.7 in 1960 (1947-1949 = 100), and the Con- sumers Price Index for housing rising from 106.1 to 131.5 during the same period. Beyer goes on to show that indices for food, apparel and highway construction rose at a far lesser rate and asks the question whether our homes are . that much better than our food, clothing or highways. In other words, has the quality of what we buy for our housing dollar increased so much more than what we buy with other dollars? He doubts it.50 If Beyer were to look at these indices again today he would be shocked to see that housing costs have con- tinued to rise disproportionately. Using 1957-1959 as 100, 49Lowell Chawner, Jr., "Economic Factors Related to Residential Building," American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, The Annals, Current Development in Housipg, Vol. 190 (March, 1937), 30. 50Beyer, 9p. cit., pp. 490, 491. 51 the 1970 index for Homeownership Cost stood at 154.4, while the index for all items was at 135.3.51 When HUD Secretary Romney in 1970 said, 80 per cent of the people can not afford decent housing, he was not telling the people anything new. He merely underlined by public statement a situation of long existence, a situation perhaps getting worse. To illustrate, Mayer, Wright, and Mumford in 1934 said: Prior to 1929, a new dwelling, which barely met decent standards, was a luxury which one third of the popu- lation could not afford; today (1934), such luxury is beyond the purchasing power of at least one half of the population.5 In 1937 another writer, Shire, said: . . . two-thirds of the population can not afford new homes and must live in the "hand-me-downs" of the upper third.5 One could go on and draw many parallels between the 1930's and the present. The gap between cost and purchas- ing power appears to be widening, that is, if Mr. Romney's statement can be taken as valid appraisal of the situation. 5J'The Consumer Price Index for December 1970, U.S. Department of Labor (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1971), p. 14. 52Albert Mayer, Henry Wright, and Lewis Mumford, "New Homes for a New Deal," The New Republic, February 14, 21, 28, and March 7, 1934, p. 23. 53A. C. Shire, "The Industrial Organization of Hous- ing, Its Methods and Costs," American Academy of Political and Social Science, The Annals, Current Development in Hous- igg, Vol. 190 (March, 1937), 37. 52 This is not because people are allocating a smaller portion of personal consumption expenditures to housing and house- hold operation. Unfortunately, we do not have good time- series data on this phenomenon. The per cent of personal consumption expenditures going into housing in 1950 was 27.2 and in 1960 it was 29.5. The 1960-61 survey was a benchmark survey, none has been made since. In 1967 the United States Department of Labor surveyed a small sample of four-person families and a sample of retired couples.54 One can reasonably suspect from an examination of housing costs contained in these latter survey data that the share of housing and household operation expenditures out of total personal consumption expenditures has further increased. How much personal choice people have exercised must be assumed as unknown. The average lay person sees housing production costs made up of land, materials, labor and money, when in fact they are a part of a large system in which costs accu- mulate from a great many components. This is well illustrated by a systems diagram, Figure I, taken from a 54Handbook of Labor Statistics 1970, U.S. Depart- ment of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 133 and Tables following (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office), pp. 321-330. 53 report which accompanied the Douglas Commission Report.55' 56' 55Elsie Eaves, How the Many Costs of Housing Fit Together, Prepared for the National CommiSsion on UrEEn Problems, Research Report No. 16, 1969. 56House Document No. 91-34, pp. cit. 54 FIGURE I. How Housing Costs Accumulate Real Estate Local Government Land Developers LAND Permits. Recording Zone,'Code Variances Legal Services Banks: F. NANCE Government. direct - bonds appro- Commercial Savings prlations Mortgage Companies Mortgage insurance, guarantees Savings a Loan Assns. Subsidies: Interest rates, land Insurance Companies Tax abatement Other Accelerated Depreciation DESIGN Architects Manufacturers Prefabricated Houses, Mobile Homes Engineers Turnkey PRODUCTION a MANUFACTURE Contractors CONSTRUCTION #— r-i Materials _ Equipment _ Supplies 1\ \ JIL J # f I 00""80‘0'8 DOVOIOPOIS Ix DISTRIBUTION — Local Dealers Home Builders I 7‘ Materials- Equipment -Supplies (Own Forces - Subcontracts) Building Contractors (Own Forces — Subcontracts) _ Building Brokers 3 S X r LABOR (Subcontract - Limited 0 F) N r On-Site Oil-Site Subcontractors OPERATION Site improvement, Excavation. Foundation I I Steel Erection Plastering O R nt r Cogcrsteu PaintingSDecorating wner e ° recas n Prestressfng “WI” —' T I Masonry Ornamental Metal 3"” Brick Sheet Metal 0"“ 3"V'“ t n ._.- :3: Fuel - Heat ----‘ Blocks Electrical Water - Sewers ._ _ _ _ Carpentry a Millwork Plumlne Gas " — " Electricit --‘—" Glass A Glazing HeatingSVentlleting - y _I Air Conditioning 4~~~ L-—- 7‘ Rooting Elevator Repairs 8. Maint. I I Services ] " '- FHW: EAVES. ELBIE. HOW THE MANY COSTS OF HOUSING FIT TOGETHER Prepared tor the National Comrnlssion on Urban Problems Research Report no. 1969. p. 10. 55 As comprehensive as the diagram Figure I is, it does not show all of the functions necessary to house a community. Yet, it is the most thorough analysis of the elements contributing to housing costs which has been found to date. Miss Eaves' work could be the beginning of a use- ful textbook in housing economics. In addition to these factors, local conditions have to be taken into consideration as they vary from one place to another. To stress this point, Senator Douglas states in the foreword to the Eaves' report cited: There is surprisingly wide variation in housing costs from one part of the country to another, from one type of housigg to another, and from one builder to another. With the advent of industrialized housing this process is likely to become more complicated and more difficult to analyze. Family housing represents both a major long-term investment or commitment as well as a consumption good. In education, economics has traditionally been dealt with in the context of consumer information only, often as a part of Home Economics curricula. There are many texts in this area and housing is usually dispensed with in one chapter.58 S7Eaves, 2p. cit., Foreword. 58Arch. W. Toelstrup, The Consumer in American Soci- ety, Personal and Family Finances, 4th ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1970), devotes one chapter out of nineteen to housing: Chapter 10, A Home For Your Family. Leland J. Gordon and Stuart M. Lee, Economics for Consumers, 5th ed. (New York: American Book Co., 1967T, dévotes one out of twenty-seven chapters to housing. 56 Housing decisions have all kinds of implications and errors may be costly or impossible to rectify. The decisions also affect a great deal outside of the sphere of the individual or family unit. There are economic, as well as other impacts on neighborhood, community, trans- portation and education. It would appear then that this is a subject which could receive more attention from the education industry. Since family housing decisions are made over almost a life- time of the individual, there ought to be constant access to information from sources free of bias. The real estate, housebuilding and homefinancing industries cannot help but be prejudiced by their particular motivations and interests which are in conflict with those of the housing consumers. A Housing Specialist raised the question of why there are so few single family houses for rent. Is it because such units are a poor investment to begin with, or, is rising abandonment of rental housing property "due to being non-profitable" as reported by the Center for Commu- nity Change of the National Urban League a manifestation of 59, 60 similar problems? We don't know very much about what 59Carlton M. Edwards, Extension Specialist in Hous- ing, Agricultural Engineering Department, College of Agri- culture, Michigan State University, verbal communication. 60Hugh L. Morris, The State Journal, Lansing, Michigan, April 30, 1971. 57 kind of management practices have to be present for satis- factory operation of this type of housing. We should also research and study residential housing conservation prac- tices, as we have done for many years in agriculture and forestry. There are no "residential conservationists." "A housing stock once created is a community resource of great importance, and, in one way or another, is managed as a whole by the community," says Professor Smith.61 One unit affects another. In a similar vein one can raise another point related to education. Why do we not have housing economists as professionals with the skill and capabilities to study and deal with resources utilization in housing? Included in this subject could be land, land use, real estate, pro- duction, marketing, distribution, services, finance, insur- ance and for the great variety of housing configurations, taxation and family expenditure patterns. This by itself is indeed a large field and an ideal one for a university. Housing economics is an obvious necessity to guide any R & D effort. There are no known structured programs in ”housing economics," relating either the micro- to the macro-economic approaches or to determining the most bene- ficial utilization of resources. The recently published 61Wallace F. Smith, Housing, the Social and Ecgnomic Elements (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of Cali- fornia Press, 1970), Preface. 58 work by Smith mentioned above, Housing, the Social and Economic Aspects,62 discusses legal, social, financial and technological elements in housing. It represents one of the few theoretical treatments of the subject but requires prior preparation in economics. The role of inflation, as it affects housing, needs much more study. Its impact may prove to be more of a negative factor than is recognized. Offhand it would seem that the demand for large public and private investment makes acceleration of housing construction activities dependent upon low money costs and therefore low rates of inflation or economic stability. As previously mentioned, referring to the macro level of the problem, and important from the point of view of the United States economy, there is the longterm decline in the percent share of Gross National Product contributed by residential construction. After World War II this share peaked out in about 1950, and from then on it declined. See Figure II on the following page. It is rather difficult to understand, in view of the housing shortage on the one hand, and ever increasing activities on the part of the government on the other hand, that there should occur the phenomenon of a relatively diminishing production effort. 62Ibid. 59 .co 83 E0: omega: 2:; 0393500 3888 no: So 3:6: mm? a one, "who: 7.780 memoamm 2953520055113 mamzmo .3558 to .530 .9: . 6853 45.5.55 on: 8.: . 82 55152 295.25 5.: a 2:0 ac moans 2. _ _ _ _ mm _ _ _ _ 8 mm 83 __ mun—30...... 8329: 352.. 2325 32:1 2:. 233a POSOOKQ J J—detmzuhthh. a 9.512% 883mm .MOHUNm >m .§m04m>mn— QZ< 30.75me— Z— Qm>04m2m mam Billions of dollars 25 23 21 175 SF 11 Expenditures for education and RH) performance Universities and colleges highlights I]!]I|I]i[r]r[i]r]I]rji Avuene ennuel rates of growth 1963- 1953- 1961- 1966- 71 81 66 71 T0". ducetion 12 11 expenditures '5 '3 Universities and colleges 11810 1 2 14 17 6 performenee-y Total education expenditures —' for institutions of higher education Universities and colleges R810 performance 2/ :____J=;d==d=gfis~d--+—-T--u-”1‘”17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1953 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59 '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 '67 '68 '69 '70 '71 :jfixcludeeFFRDC'S. lest.) lest.) Source? Netnnel Scuence Foundation end Olfice of EduClan. pm...“ Basic research, by source of funds Research expenditures, by field vereoe ennue 1m 70 .— let“ of growth - 71- 51% 20% m ear. 3% 39121; 122'... 1: 3 Industry 7 2 Universities 15 8 r—_" ‘ C II 60 '- 0111:: profit institutions 8 ‘ wr Psychology Federal 40— //// Engineering Metnernetice Phyelcel end Socrei environmental 1’ 1— Universities and colleges Industry 20 "- Other nonprofit Inul'utlon’ 10 '- 0 1961 1966 1971 lest.) Scarce: Netionei Science Foundetion. NSF 704.16 Note: Four sources edd to lOO'lb for eech veer. Scurce Notional Sctence F oundetion. 176 . SF 5 Distribution of Federal obligations for research and development', FY 1970 (est) \ By Perlormer Industrial tirms " Federal intramural Unrversrties & colleges ilRDC's admin. by umversrtres Development Other nonproiit rnsirtutrons' Other $15.7 billion By Agency DOD 49% By Field oi Science 35.5 billion NASA Lite 28% AEC Engineering 29% J: 2 HEW .__~ a Physrcal 21% ‘ g c: Other Envrronmental 12% " Excludes R&D plant Other 10% " includes Federally Funded Research and Development Center: (FFRDC's) administered by this sector SOURCL; National ScrenCe inundation NSF 70-38 Federal obligations tor research, SF 6 development, and R80 plant 177 (Billions of will“) 18 $15.8 $15.7 315.6 15 -——i RESEARCH 12 fl 33.1 r...— Wiled 33.7 9 ——;. _ 1 l E‘s .. i“ i" ‘ .J‘i“ I ' DEF-3 ’. r: '. PDEVELOPMENT q, I ‘L. b‘_ ‘ - {79 H" ‘fafl. L (A): E‘::t. 3 « r. ‘ .1 .6 .— ‘r‘. *1 y.’ j ‘3‘“ r '_ .3 i. PLANT L ’ .‘fmn 4 3‘7 3' i 3.7 / r'~ l." ‘ 3.5 . .I r s .. .H‘ - W159 FY1970 FY1971 test.) test.) SOURCE: National Science Foundation NSF 70-38 FEDERAL OBLIGATIONS AND EXPENDITURES, FISCAL YEARS 1940-71 [Dollars in millions] Research. development, and R810 plant ‘ T t i . Fiscal years bugigaet [ Eggng; outlays b Obliga- Expendi- percent of tions tures total budget ouflays 1940 r $ 9.589 (r) $ 74 0.8 1941 13.980 W 198 1.4 1942 34,500 (r) 280 0.8 1943 78,909 (r) 602 0.8 1944 93.956 (') 1.377 1.5 1945 95,184 (r) 1.591 1.7 1946 61,738 (r) 918 1.5 1947 36,931 $ 691 900 2.4 1948 36.493 868 855 2.3 1949 40,570 1,105 1,082 2.7 1950 . 43.147 1,175 1.083 2.5 1951 , 45.797 1.812 1.301 2.8 1952--.. 67.962 2.194 1,816 2.7 1953 , _ 76.769 3.361 3.101 4.0 1954.. . 71,138 3,039 3,148 4.4 1955 68.503 2,745 3.308 4.8 1956 . . 70.461 3,267 3.446 4.9 1957 .. . 76,748 4,389 4,462 5.8 1958 ........ 82.575 4,906 4.991 6.0 1959. , 92.111 7,123 5,806 6.3 1960..-. 92.230 8.080 7,744 8.4 1961 97.802 9.607 9.284 9.5 1962. 106.830 11.069 10.381 9.7 1963. 111.314 13.663 11.999 10.8 1964,, ..... 118,585 15,324 14,707 12.4 1965... 118.431 15.746 14.889 12.6 1966. 134.654 16.179 16,018 11.9 1967 . 158.352 17.149 16,842 10.6 1968. 178.862 16.525 17.030 9.5 1969 r 184.556 16.306 16.348 8.9 1970 (estimated) 4 197.885 16.392 16,154 8.2 1971 (estimated) 4 200.771 16.198 16,161 8.0 ._ m . _.__. ._ .. . _ __.J _. ._ .- -._.J ....... “Beginning in fiscal year 1953 amounts for both obligations and ex- penditures include pay and allowance of military personnel in research and development. “"0utlays" include expenditures plus net lending. Data through fiscal year 1953 are in terms at the “Consolidated Cash Statement" and data beginning with fiscal year 1954 are in terms of the ”Unified Budget." For purposes oi providing trend information the data are considered to be reported on a generally comparable basis. r Not available. ‘These estimates are based on amounts shown in The Budget. 1971 subject to subsequent administrative action. Data for 1971, moreover, do not reflect congressional action. NOTE: R80 data for fiscal year 1952 and subsequent years are based on surveys of the National Science Foundation. Prior data were prepared by the Bureau of the Budget. Since the NSF surveys be an, agencies have submitted revised data when necessary to maintain istoricai compara- bility with reporting practices oi the latest perlod. 178 SF? Federal obligations for research, development, and R80 plant, by agency [Dollars in millions] Estimates Agency Aggy .___..___-_T.._ ._ _ 1970 1971 Total $16,306 $16,392 $16,198 Department of Defense .....-.-..._.._—-.. 7,890 7,931 7,788 National Aeronautics and Space Administration ........................ 4.018 3,830 3.307 Atomic Energy Commission .............. 1.708 1,722 1,560 Department of Health, Education. and Welfare 1.350 1.279 1,498 Department of Transportation ........ 234 369 495 National Science Foundation .......... 301 316 382 Department of Agriculture -.........-.--. 271 286 299 Department or the interior .2 .......... 222 241 264 Otiice of Economic Opportunity 71 121 203 Department of Commerce ..-.w........ 75 90 104 Veterans Administration .......... _ 54 56 68 Other agencies 112 151 230 Federal R80 obligations to performers, FY 1970 (est) FFRDC's administered by , . universities Federal Industrial Universities intramural iirms ' and colleges All other \ \ \ / 23% 58% 10% 5% 4% ' Includes Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC's) administered by industrial tirms SOURCE: National Science Foundation NSF 70-38 DISTRIBUTION OF FEDERAL RlsD OBLIGATIONS BY STATE COMPARED WITH 179 6.0L. ayasab‘ UIOtI’IbUtIOfl SF8 OTHER MEASUREs OF NATIONAL ACTIVITY, BY STATE, 18. Total Federal Population Total personal Total Federal State R810 obligations 1 income taxes. _Ranlt Percent RankJ Percent Rank 1 Percent Rank I Percent or total of total or total or total United States. total (in millions) -9- 515.355 202» 5742951 5175.777 oalliomis 1 27.94 1 9.53 1 11.15 2 5.45 New York ' 2 7.21 2 9.07 2 10.90 1 15.14 Maryland m..- 3 5.25 15 1.55 1_4 2.05 10 259 Florida 4 5.75 9 3.15 10 2.93 13 1.59 Massachusetts 5 5.05 10 2.71 9 3.04 9 2.90 New Jersey 5 4.52 s 3.54 5 4.12 s 3.54 fans 7 4.53 4 5.54 5 4.90 7 4.05 Pennsylvania 8 4.04 3 5.85 4 5.82 6 5.93 District at Columbia .. ....................... - 9 2.59 40 .40; 35 .52 . . Ohio 10 2.52 5 5.32 5 545 5 5.57 New Mexico ..-... 11 2.75 37 .43 41 .39 44 .15 Washington 12 245 22 “L 20 1.7_5 21 1.25 Alabama 13 2.33 21 1.75 25 1.22 25 .53 Virginia 14 1.55 13 2.31 15 2.07 15 1.45 Georgia 15 1.50 14 2.30 17 1.90 19 1.35 colorado 15 1.72 30 1.04 25 1.01 22 1.21 llllnols 17 1.54 5 5.4_7 3 5.41 3 7.72 Nevada 15 1.51 45 23 47 .27 45 .15 Connecticut 19 1.45 24 1.49 15 1.53 14 1.55 Tennessee 20 1.25 17 1.97 21 1.51 23 .95 fl Louisiana 21 1.12 19 1.85 22 1.42 25 .85 Michigan 22 1.09 7 4.34 7 4.55 4 7.55 Missouri 23 92 15 2.30 12 2.17 11 2.57 lndlana 24 7_1 12 253 11 2.54 15 1.75 Minnesota 25 55 20 1.53 19 1.50 17 1.70 wisoonsin - 25 .55 15 2.10 13 2.05 15 1.75 Arizona 27 .52 34 .54 31 .75 34 .35 ldaho 25 .45 42 .35 45 .2? 43 .19 Alaska 29 .45 51 .14 50 .17 50 .09 North Carolina 30 .35 11 2.55 15 2.03 12 2.21 Utah 31 .3T 35 Fz 35 .42 43 .21 Kansas 32 .25 29 1.15 25 1.10 :30 .52 Hawaii 33 25 41 .39 3'9 .41 39 .27 Greece 34 24 31 1.01 29 .95 29 .57 laws 35 .22 25 1.35 23 1.32 27 .75 Rhode island 35 .21 3‘9 .45 37 .45 33 .45 New Hampshire 37 .20 43 .36 42 .34 41 .23 Mississippi 35 17 2‘5 1.17 33 .70 35 .31 Kentucky 39 14 23 1.50 24 1.24 20 1.37 Oklahoma 40 13 27 1.27 27 1.05 24 .55 south Carolina 41 .11 25 1.33 To 94 Y .49 Delaware 42 .10 47 .27 44 29 2? .73 West Virslnla 43 .10 32* .90 E 54 37 .32 Maine 44 .09 38 .48 40 40 40 .24 Nebraska 45 .07 35 .72 T 71 31 $53— Vormont 45 .05 49 .22 T9 .19 45 .11 Montana 47 .05 44 .34 43 .29 45 .14 Arkansas 45 .05 32 .99 34 .5‘5 35 .34 North Dakota 49 .04 45 .30 45 .25 4‘9 .10 Wins 50 .04 50 .15 51 .15 51 .07 south Dakota 51 .03 45 .33 45 .27 47 .11 Outlying areas and offices abroad 2- — .37 — — — — —- 4.37 - includes individual income and employment taxes, corporation, excise, estate, and gift taxes (minus refunds). rsons stationed In the armed forces In each area. 5 includes ' included it Maryland tax figures ‘coiiactlone from and reiunds Zone. and in foreign countries. to 'u.s. taxpayers in Puerto Rico, canal Sources: U.S. Department of Commerce Populathe Estimates and Pre- lectiens, Series P-25, ii merce, Oiiice of Business Economics, Survey e April 1970; U.S. Treasury Report at the Secretary at the the Fiscal Year I“ use NSF 70-38 0. 435. Jan. 7. 1970 u to .3. Department of 00m- ilrreat lesleess, V0 Department, Statistical It's?“ "' "" m I.” edlsteAeneI ”arthneaeeaater 180 SF9 Federal R80 obligations to performers, by agency, FY 1970 (est.) industrial firms ' $9.1 billion 000 57% NASA 30 *-'-‘ AEC 8 Transp. 3 HEW 1 Other 1 Federal intramural $3.7 billion Interior Other MU: mbO‘iVNOg o\ Universities & coneges $1.5 billion Federal . HEW 44% R 5 0 "5* '5 obligations _" DOD 15 . NASA 7 $15.7 billion AEC 7 Other 12 FFRDC's admin. by universities $0.7 billion AEC 62% —- DOD 19 NASA 15 NSF 4 HEW 1 Other” $0.7 billion HEW 35% 000 34 - AEC 9 CEO 5 Transp. 4 Other 13 ' includes Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC's) administered by industry. ' includes other nonprofit institutions. F FRDC's administered by nonprofit institutions, other and toreign. Source: National Science Foundation NSF 70—38 .181 Federal Research. Development, and R&D Plant wmron mm... 2.82.... .>.c: me .00.... 3 .>.:: me 0.8. oo. 0.2.. mm 0.... we .>.:: oo. 02.. co. 03:. mm n ma N .............. o. 2 «2050005.... 0:1. 3 3005: .050 mm .050 mm .050 2 .050 D 0.0:. K .05... an 0.... mm .03... «a 0:1. 3 0.5:. on m. 00 MN is. 0.0m ...---ii..----i--.00..0:0.u 3.0.0.2500 .0 300.30 5.5.. 0 .55 on 5.5.. 2 6.0:. 00 2:: «N .:o..>:m N. 0.5:. mm 0:. he .u:. 0m .05 an 6:. o... 00 .m 5.. .i..-.-...--i.--.-5.25».SEE .0305. 0...>0::om ..00 .2: m f 0:. 3 £0.35 1 .>.:: 0 .0m if. 0. .>.:: 3 0.2.. mm .>.:: on 0.... mm .050 o" 0:: mu 6:. a. 0:. on 0.3:. mm .05 .0 0.0:. 8 62.2.... m0 03:. G mu on em I oduw ,iiii.--ili...8o. 22.00:. 05 .0 2.0.5.0000 a - (.2 2 0:. o. 0.0:. 2 .050 mm .050 mm .050 «w .30 on 0:. «m 2 m0 . «.3 «:0... (.2 N... .0... .0 .05 K 2.0.0300 :09: 0:0 050:0: .0 0:25.000: - S Ijqdd (.2 mm (.2 aw i r .. l... 0.3:. .0 .03 oo. .82. oo. .30 co. 03:. «o ......... .. 3 m 5. ...i: .06. ...................... 530.5563. 3.5000 .2000 .a.:: ca .050 2 .050 0. (.2 mm (.2 ow 0.3 on (.2 cm .050 cm 2:: mm dam 8 .>.:: F. N. no 0.5m -il..--....--..00.>.0m 5.08.3202 0:0 3.08 002...... 03:. 0 .>.:: o. (.2 Z 002...... (.2 o. (.z m. .>.:: 0.9. 5...: 3 002...... 002.... 002...... (.2 on 2.020.. 2 .>.:: nu £050... on (.2 on (.2 n0 2...: no .000 m: .>...: Q0 .08 on 5...: mm 3 an a ............... 0.8 .-..;.--...o.«00:uw .0 0050 (.2 3 .025 on (.2 m. (.2 3 (.2 0. .0... R 0...... a. .5... 0.4. .60 .20 0 .03... .N .>.:: an 2:: an 0.... cm .>.:: 3 05 00 .>.:: 0... a 3 mm 34.3 ............................ 5.00: S 00.3.00... .2330: (.2 3 .050 2 0:. a. .050 2 .000 m. .000 mu (.2 3 .82.. «a .5... mu 2.5.... 0. 0...... 8 5.0.... en .82. on .>.:: n... >.:: 00 00... on .>...: 0n 05 mm .>.c: Ev 3 mm um i ............. N02 203050.55 .2 5.00... .020! 0:0 000.200 5.00... 2.08.3 20.0000. 20.0000. 0» 0.0 o :82 :88 :88 :88 :88 :38 .06: 00:22 0.50: $5.5m.” . s... 3 2.00.03 .0 «c0203 .o 2.00.03 .0 2.00.05 ..o «50.0... 3 2.00.03 .58 2.9....5 a 0.05.2.0: 5 806.920.. a 005.0... .0 a 0.0.53.0: a 02.0.00 3 a 0.05.020: .o «:00 «so: is 50": GU—oc 50": 50...: “v.8 52.2 hem-2 Acomgamhfimu “COUiv aka a. ogm —Q° C°_n_>m330 DC. XOCOU( ...o.» 3 .03-.020 0:2. 002 .00....o .83. 20:50.00: :20000. 00.3.? 5.0000. 0.00: aceEoo.0>0: 0:0 20.0000. .Soh 0.02 aside”. 2..— ¢¢u> .20»...— .ww.02uu< swam..— u: “20:10:00 ad: ...0 002.222.0521". 20:! Odo—m 182 .8... 88.580 8.50 8.0 .m .b 8.. 8.188.. 88.00 18.12 328.. o0 .................. . . n S «0 a 0. 0 v u .00.. 0 30.... 000.0 000.0. ........................ 100800.032 0.0 ......... a. n 0« _ 0... 000 E 0. 00 00 _ 000.: 000.0 .38 00.0.0 00...... ............................ 1818...... 08 ......... «. m .« 3 2.0 8 8 00 «0 . 0.0.0.. 00«.« 08.00 00.... .250 ......... .53 .1088... .11.: E. 0.8.. « H 00 .00.. .0. 0:... .0... 0.0.0 ..«0.0 _ 000 00.... 000 08.00 00...... ...................... 18.8.9382 0.00 30 00 m «0... .00.. 000 000.0 «0.. 20.0 80.0 _ 000.. 08.0 000 3.00 03.00 .......................... 18.8.0... «00... 2.... 00 . 08.. 0.05 .00 80.0. 2.0.. «00.2 03.0 _ «00.. .8... 000 02...... 08.3. ................. 08...... 08 03.85000 ........................................................................................................................................................... 100.830.0002 «« .«. ......... . 3 : 0 . ......... 0 .« . ......... 8 00a ........................ .8183... «« a. ......... . . 0.. : 0 . ......... 0 a . ......... 8 03 ....................... 8.8.... 80.: 0 .................. m ........................... S ........................... a ......... .1. 00 .8 ................... 18.88882 00 ......... 0. . .................. . 00 0. .« 0 . :8 « 08. . 000 035 ........................ 18.8.2. 00 ......... 0. . .................. . 00 0. .« 0 08 « 00. . . :0 03 . « .......................... 8.08.... 0« .................. _ .................. 2 00 R0 « 000.. q ......... «8 ......... 08.0 0... .0 .................... .ao8.o.::oz 0 --------- .................. a 0 S« . 000 . ......... 0: ......... «0...« 000.0 ........................ 1818...... R .................................... o« 00 000 0 =05 w ......... .8. . ......... 02.0 000... -- ----------.300.uo..3 :00 300.0000 3 ......... 0. . .................. 0n ......... «. ......... n M ......... 0 ......... a 8 .................... .3:.08.oanoz 00: 00« .«a ._ 0. on 00... no 000 o. 000 . 000 S... «a. .00 08.0 ........................ 13.08.80 .3 00« 00.. . 00 00. . . 00 «.0 o. 80 000 a: . . 8. 000 000.0 ........................ 88.8 1.80 v ........................... 8 ......... a ......... a .00. . 08. . 0.0. a 00.. 00.. 2.0. 0. .................... 18.88.08... .0. .................. 8 8. 8. 0« 0 a. 8. .0 000. . So. a. 80 30.. . 08. R ........................ 18.83.... 2.. .................. _ 8 0: 8... 00 0 00 .05. .000 000.00 .0... «S... «00.... .................... 88.8 10.8.30 80 8 .00 a 0. v« t. .00 «0. .3 .00 0.. 03 8.0 000.0 .................... 18.88882 0... 00 00. .0 00 0. «0. So .0 00. .00 «00 .0 08.0 0.0.0 ........................ 18.8.2. 80 0: 30 00 0. a... 80 000. . 00. 30 00. .. 0.0. . .8 «a. .. a: .0. ............. 8.3.3. 08 8.018012 a: .................. a . 00 a 00 30.0 no. own man «00. 00 SN...“ 005.0 .................... 700.380.0002 80 0 ......... 0.0 0: «0 3 0.0.0 000.0 $0.0 08.« .00.. 0.... 000.: 80.8 ........................ 18.8.0... 00.. 0 ......... 000 08 00 00. 000.0 «2.0 5.0.0 ..«0.« 08.« 2.... .010. .0«..0 ...................... 088.8 .8130 .8... 30 30.. «.0 30 000.. 0.0 «00... 80.0 08.0. 000.0 08.00 80.0 80.00 a... .2. ...................... .388: 808.00 .3 .3. . « 00 .00. . .0. a: .0 .0. . . 0.0.0 80.0 000 00.... 80 000.00 00...... ............... 030...: 08 3:80.80 80 8 2.0 :0 0«. .0 3. .0... 0 80 08.0 0.0. . 20. : 8. . . 08.0 8... «0 ............................ 0008.90 00.... .00.. «.0 00 «00.. 0«« 000... 03.0 .00... 03.0 «0..« 08.0. 8.... 80.00 20.2. ........................ 2.8.8.2082 0.06 30 00 «0... .00.. 000 000.0 ««.. 20.0 80.0 000.. 08.0 80 3.00 03.00 ........................... 83.8... .8.« 03 .8; 03 «00 .00.. 80 :00 8.... .3... 08.0 .0000. .30 08.8 80.2. ............................ 3.08.00 000.0 03 00... 0o... . 0.0.. .«a. . 30.0 08.0 03.0. 30...: 0.2.0 00...0« .00.... 08.0. 000.00. .................. £80.08 0.... 3.08.90 03... 080 80.. .00.. «.0... 3.0 «00.0. ..«.: 80.: 02.3 08.0 0.8.: 30.0 08.00. 0:63 ............... .83 52338.. gable 160 05060000 00.00000 00: 8...... GE. 80.... on... SE. 880 .88: 888 400.2 8:8... Bum 83.8 0.... 000 18... 8.8. 0.1 820103.885 :4 800.5. .800 _ _ -..04 900.0 .3800 .00....00 :5. 58.0 300.3038: .3... 8.88 88.8 0. 8.5880 .80.... 2.. 0.. .388. 5.8.. .8 .1058. .8880! ..Hmw 182 $72. $2 .340 now-83600 8; ~35 .m .D 59: nofiavasoh 9.33% 1.93.52 "850m S .................. _ ~ ~ 2 S a 2 a 8 n 3»; a :3. 8....” 93.2 ........................ 18183882 3» ......... 2 ._ on ’ t on» 2. 2 3 8 _ 3...: «35 ~36“ 8o.» 32:. ............................ 1818.2m v8 ......... «a _ R 3 z.» 8 on S S V. «3.2 mag and» 2:... .25... ......... .38 .3888.— 5.8: Ra E; a _ a... 3*; a: 31° 52." as.» Roi _ on» «2.6 can «8.8 8.5.2. ...................... ~888382 as.“ «3 3 w «2; 3.: 3» 8a; «5. 2w.» can.» u «no; can.» o3 35.8 313 .......................... 1888p «Run E; 8 _ 8a; ~35 S... 80.3 as; «3.2 896 _ «on; Soc. now 35.1: 98.3. ................. “.31—23.38835." ..................................................................................... fl ................................................................ 18188882 2 SH ......... d . 3. 2 o g ......... v . a u ......... 8 as.“ ........................ 18182 «a 5 ......... w a 3 : c g ......... w a _ a ......... 8 3a ....................... 388 :35 n .................. m ........................... S ........................... fl ......... c: 8 as .................... 18183882 3 ......... 2 _ .................. a 8 a a a . :8 « 2o. 8 a8 3.3 ........................ 181.85 3 ......... S .................. g 3 2 a n w 8a a 33 E. 8".“ .......................... Dosagm ”a .................. _ .................. u a 3 2% a n3. g ._ ........ 2o ......... 98. n 03 . o .................... 18183332 . .................. m .................. a o :u d ‘3 ._ ........ E ......... «2.... an...” ........................ 18183..— S .................................... 8 8 So a to." _ ......... _ H8. a ......... 3%... 9.85 -- ----:.:-.39Eo.._3 8. 28.85 8 ......... 2 . .................. an ......... 2 ......... g M ........ o ......... o 8 .................... iogzagz «3 can so . h 8 as; 8 9: B as _ n8 :3 2: :3 8m... .. ....................... 1818.2.— :.o Sn :3 g N. 8 n2; 8 «2 2 8: 8» as; 2: 3a 8a... ........................ 8258 38m v .................. _ ......... 8 ......... a ......... a B... n So. d 2v. a o2. «2. 3o. 2 .................... 18188882 2: .................. _ 8 92 8a a a 2. 83 8: 89.3 .3 3.3 «8.2. ........................ 3°82 E .................. _ 8 o: 8a 3 m 8 5.... Sta 313 23 2b.“ «3.: .................... 8338 .8835 M So 8 Sn 7 a 2 3 E :3 «2 2a 3.... .2 Sn 8; 3a.... .................... 18188882 «8 8 x: S 8 2 «S as S q: to «8 8 8...... 3n.» ........................ 181885 8.. o: :3 3 2. on 8a 80. _ a: 3» n2 J 2.». ~ Sn «2 c. 2.1: -- - ----------8533. v8 838322 a: .................. us . co n 3 as.“ mom on.“ 5N 8o. 3 ha.“ 85.0 .................... ~303~o~aaoz 8n n ......... 2b a: «v 3 2b.» So; So.” coed So; a: «8.: “8.8 ........................ 1888.& we. a ......... 3... 8a 8 :2 31¢ «a.» to; 235 08.“ EL. 81: SN. 3 ...................... 8838 13223 58.“ .8 g; as 3‘ 8a; .5 «86 Bin 2a.: «86 89.3 Sn." "8.8 a: .2" ...................... 88:8 £383 Ra Ra. fl « S a. d 2: oz... 5.1— one.» 5... a8 3”.” 8a «8.8 unfit ............... v3.59. 8. 3:88am 8o 8 2h 8 ca 8 x: "2.. n 8» 8Q. m8. _ as. : o2 . g Sad 85. «a ............................ 8:83 85; Sn; «5 8 «8; can no»... a3... So.» a.» «24. «3.2 8v; 823 End: ........................ 348188382 as.“ 3: 3 «3; «3; «8 98.. «a» Sm.» 8n.» ”3.— RH." 93. 35.9. as...» ........................... p.885 :6.“ 8.. Sb; 9o 8» So; 8» ~56 HS.» 3.; owed "3.8 Sana 3.3 82:. ............................ 8583 81* 2a 33 8». H o8; Ga. _ 3o.» «2.... ”8.2 3a....— Rfio 85.3 Sod 98.2. «8. m2 .................. 8258 8. 3.583 a3... fiaé 5.; "8; as.” 3; «3.: 3%: 8a.: 2:..." ...Rd .25.: at; caudfi 31:.“ ............... 1.8 .15—38.. gala-o mull 963603 .82.an not .350 can and 09.. SE. 33m -88 888 49.2 8:83 Ban 838 5» non 38. 8:8 8.. 82.. .33885 :4 .389 .600 __ ‘ -3 984 $035 .398» we: 983 Egg EB «8383. 33938 E $5.86 383% 2: c.» 3.822“ <38: 38 .39358 .93ng HH mm .183 SP 12 —Percent distribution of scientists, engineers, and professional health personnel in the Federal Govern- ment, by occupational group and function, October 1969 Research Installa- Data col- Oceupational group Total, all Develop- contract Test and Con- Pro- tion. oper- lection, and series functions Research ment and grant evaluation Design struction duction ations and process- adminis- , main- ing. and tratlon tenance analysis Selectmen-deadlock“ personnel. Mal ........ 1111.0 13.9 15.4 .5 4.0 10.1 3.5 2.0 5.3 8.9 Scientific personnel ............. 100.0 22.9 9.7 .7 3.5 .0 .1 1.5 .0 15.1 Physical sciences ............. 1111.0 33.4 15.0 1.1 7.1 1.2 .3 .8 1.2 17.3 Mathematics and statistics".- 100.0 8.9 .4 20.2 2.3 .5 (I) .3 .7 40.4 Biologicalselencss ............ 1W.0 19.3 .5 1.0 .9 (I) (e) .l .2 .8 Social sciences (selected cate- .0218). ................... 100.0 17.5 1.0 .a ,4 (q .......... p) .1 22.3 Geocaphyandeartcgraphy"- 100.0 1.4 3.4 .1 .1 .8 .1 24.9 .1 42.8 Psychology .................. 100.0 25.5 0.7 1.0 3.1 .3 .................... (e) 1.3 Urban planning .............. 1111.0 1.3 3.9 .4 .......... 5.2 2.2 .................... 2.0 Engineeringpersonnel----------- 100.0 5.5 20.0 .3 5.5 18.9 0.0 3.0 9.7 3.2 Civil andrelated ............. MILO 2.5 1.7 ,-1 1.0 29.1 21.4 .1 3.8 0.1 Electrical and electronic ....... 100.0 3.0 31.0 .3 7.0 10.4 1.7 2.9 14.8 3.0 General endneering ........... 100.0 1.9 13.8 .5 5.0 11.2 4.9 3.9 13.4 3.0 Mechanical and related ....... 100.0 9.0 32.0 .2 8.8 18.9 1.5 4.3 8.4 1.4 Other cngineerlng.. .......... 100.0 11.4 12.0 .7 2.3 15.5 3.0 10.0 7.2 2.4 Health personnel. total... 100.0 2.4 .8 .5 .2 .................... (') (‘l 1-9 Health omcere ................. 100.0 0.0 2.5 .2 .1 ........................................ 3.8 Nurses ........................ 100. 0 . 1 . 1 (0) (4) .................... (‘) (‘l 1 ~ 2 All other ...................... 100.0 2.2 .3 2.4 .7 .............................. (‘) -9 Clinical ROD-Ill- ”owes Scientific Standards tory en- Natural counsel- Teaching Technical Other—not and and speci- lorcelnent resource ing. and Planning Manage- and assistance elsewhere technical fications and operations ancillary ment training and classified informa- licensing medical consultinz tion services Selentileandenginesrlng puseanel, total ........ 1.0 1.0 1.0 8.0 1.0 4.7 7.9 .4 4.5 _ - __ 5.0 Scientific personnel ............. 1.5 .5 2.0 16.0 2.0 4.1 0.0 .4 0.9 0.0 Physical sciences ............. 1.5 .7 1.1 .4 .8 2.1 8.9 .3 2.3 3.9 Mathematics andstatistics-.-- 1.0 .5 .2 0) (I) 4.2 3.8 .3 2.3 7.9 Biological sciences ............ .3 .2 4.0 44.4 .8 4.4 3.7 .3 13.0 5.5 Social sciences (selected cate- gorles) " ................... 3.0 .2 1.4 .4 4.7 14.3 4.7 1.1 12.0 15.3 Geographyand cartography--- 10.7 1.3 ---------- .0 .......... 2.0 5.0 1.0 .4 5.1 Psychology ------------------ (0 .2 (4) .......... 40.0 1.0 7.8 1.9 1.0 9.9 Urban planning ........................ 2.0 ---------- 9.1 __________ 39.7 9.9 ---------- 7.3 15.9 Ennmen' 'ng personnel ........... .0 1.4 1.0 .9 (.) 5.3 9.5 .3 2.4 4.1 Civil and related ------------- .1 .5 .5 2.1 .......... 15.7 5.0 .2 4.2 5.3 Electrical and electronic-..---- .0 1.1 1.7 .2 ---------- 1.0 7.4 .9 1.5 3.8 General endneering----------- 1.0 2.9 1.0 .1 0) 5.3 23.4 .2 2.7 4.7 Mechanical and related ------- .7 1.4 1.2 ---------- (9) .9 0.9 .1 1.0 2.5 Other endneu'lng ------------ .5 1.9 4.5 4.0 (O) 3.9 8.3 .1 4.0 --.. 0.0_ Healthpetsonnel. total--- (‘) .1 0.3 .......... 74.2 .1 4.7 1.1 ___§ .9 0.9 Health ofioers ----------------- .1 .2 15.0 ---------- 54.5 .2 11.1 .2 1.9 3.0 Nurses ---------------------------------------------------------------- 87.0 0) 1.0 1.0 .2 8.3 Allother ---------------------- .1 .2 8.4 ---------- 09.5 .3 4.5 .8 1.0 9.0 | Le- than .05 percent. sciences. " Includes social science. sociology. economics. foreign agricultural aflairs. history. manpower research analysis. and the anthropological eion data. Source: National Science Foundation. from U. 8. Civil Service Commis- NSF 704.11 1811 43:2. nmz "59E m ac ......... S : an 32 a ......... n : «3;. «« ~86 a: . «3.2 ............................. 35o :4. So ......... m « no a: 8 S 2 3 n«m.« «n 323 one... w8.«« ............................... 832 so ......... 2 2 2. 3« an S S «« «86 S 58.3 33 83.2" .................. .03-Ea £12. :00 n: .................. S S a: 8 n 8 o 3...; «a; o8... 84 «8.2 .......................... :88.- 51$ 2:. ......... 2 «« «a 3.." z. 2 8 «a «.2. : «E.« 38.3 08.... «2.3 .......... .33 concoct. .23: «.8 a2 8 x: «S B E. 3 25 Ba 3— «2 8 ...EJ n86 ..................... wet-.895 350 68 ha ......... 08 ban h 93 Gnu .805 :N 3 3 «4 hut-3 ”On-«N ................ @312 van 16338,. 8o 8 ......... v3 3 a! «an 8 m8. a can 3 _ no 8» 35d So. 2 ................... ant-.893 72390 «S « ......... a. as «a S«. n «8 «8. a «8 S «=- o« 38.2 8«.o« ............... 2838.0 E:- 33in 2» ea ......... on 2.» «a S«.« a: «3 8o.» «.8 o8.« t. ~85 892 ...................... .338 E: .30 3«« «9 8 «z; 85; 3.. «8.. «2. 3e.» coo-n «a; 98.” _ mg «8.2. 35.8 ................... .8882. unto-anew «« «S ......... a 8 a 4. n ......... n o a _ ......... 8 ««« ....................... «nae-a :35 3 ......... 2 .................. e 8 S «« o o3 « . 8a «3 «8.« .......................... 022.05 v .................................... 2 ..- 8« A no» ......... «a ......... 2K. « 8... n ............ 399330 v.2 33980 a; 8a 98 v 8 03 . u am Re 3 we won 03 - g a3 «no com-c ..... Loom—omens...- voaoonoav Become. zoom «2 v« a. 3n «« « 2. «2... :8.— 2«.2 Sn $«._ «2.3 .................... 883812865 own an a: on no 2 v2 «8 woo a: 80 8o 2. «8.... 3&6 ............. 83353. fine 85:83.32 32 a ......... 3« «n n 2 3... « an «3-« 2. «a... « :v. « 8m.» .............. 8828 13.an 550 on .................. mo .................. w Q2. a: 2 m an 3. no o3 . v on" . o ............................ 815nm o2 « ......... n3 ......... 3. 3 Se oz.” 8» 2N. 8. a 8w; 3...... ............ 8838 1393.. 1.85 3% .................. I H o: ......... «« Sa 02 «do @8- ~ 03. g 2b 3». « 3v . w ......................... bias—O we... a ......... Sn «2 2. 2 «86 ca; 3:” 8«.« a8; «2. 3.. = «5.8 ...................... 8828 1255 mac-N h: N8." 36 am can. u can «mm-m So.» can.” M86 moo-«N ham-N 80. 3 «no.2. ...................... 12309—8 ocflnomom 8m; 3a 33 «2.; 8o.— ooa; woo-«- 8«.o 53.2 «5.: :«6 «3.3 o8.« that. «3.9: ............... 1.8 .3538: . 0:18:55 ens ounces-cm 33 .32—ens not _ .543 can .31 09‘ ES. 846 -428 838 <32 3:83 3mm 83:5 . <> non 38. 8:8 2:. 95.3 1832580 :4 3 -800 .Ed. _ $2 .338 4.5- «.§ .328 .008 E .33.- .23 «as 323338 E ice-Essa 303.4 s: c.- ES-E. .33.- Be .353 guns- Bess-Semi ma mm 12 185 H.312. .mmz “Seam .33. coma-H.530 8.55m H15 .m .D 89: down—Each 833 1.33.2 3958 .8333 Hagan—can: 05 van 61513 no; «23938 5.3.3 in." 1.3.33.3- §8 .8383. .3333 6888 H88- 332: a . _ . u 8 ......... a a «« 3H _ n h ......... a « «8.. Hm «8.» M 8m 3:: . ............................. 35o 3. H8 ......... m « on «w _ «« . «H «H «« 3«.« 8 v8.3 8»; «3.3 ............................... 8.52 «3 ......... «H «H 8 SH 8 «H 2 8 «86 «a «3.2 8«.n «8.8 .................. H3532. £13 :50 ««H .................. S «H «2 8 H 2. H. HS... 3H.« «.86 «HH. «8.2 .......................... {88° £70m «Hm ......... «H 8 E on» H« ...H 3. 8 «.3. HH $«.« HH«.n« «S.» «2.3 .......... H83 .1538: £19: _ . 8» 8H 8 «2 H: «a «m m on 8« «3 EH HH« _ Hm H86 . Sod ..................... «grooanaozflo ««« «H ......... 3» «E « 8H. _ a: «36 «8 8 «a . 2. . HH«.H.H . H«o.«« ................ 3:8 Hz: H8338: v3 8 ......... «R 3 9H «Hm . 9: «SH «.8 «HH 8 8» H «26 m «86H ................... «ESaHuaoHfloaoo «S a ......... 2. «an E _ «HHH.H _ «S «8; «3 8 «a a w «2.2 . «3.8 ............... 03282» Hz: 358% S» v«« H 8 «.8 8H . 8«.« «2 «a «mad «8 8H.« «« . «25 m «86H ...................... H.332 .2: H50 n««.« 3.. «a «2; H$.H 3n _ o8... _ ««« «Hm.» «and 89H 83” _ 8» H25... «1...» ................... 758:8 «urzafiam _ «a HnH ......... H 3. HH o _ H ......... H. Ha H ......... on wvu ....................... «£5.43 :35 9 ......... cH .................. H on . «H H« « o8 « «HHH.H «8 a3.« .......................... QHonoim v .................................... a H. _ «H« H «3 ......... SH ......... «m«.« H «2..» ............ 23.—«ct: E: 33580 «.3 %« H8 « 8 8H; 8 . 23 2 8v 8» HHH.H «2 H8 82. ..... £81883 3.813 .838 38m «2 .................. 8 8H «8 3 . n 2. 2:6 81H 96.2 H8 '8; «8.2. .................... 8088.1on33m «Hm 8 «2 H» S 2 «2 W «8 H» «3 «3 «8 Ha «86 «:3 ............. 85.33. E: 833.25.: 8H H ......... 2: «H n v« u «8.« «« «8.« «HH HS « §.« H««.« .............. 88%.. 1353 .850 «n .................. «a .................. oH . 8« « RH 8 S «v «SJ 8«.« ............................ 813m «.2 « ......... 8H ......... on «n «3 «SJ H3 «2 S ......... 8H .« «Sam ............ 83%. 1012.. 1.380 ««« .................. 8H 8H ......... «« «8 8 3a 3«. H «3. H «8 8«.« «Rd ......................... «3:830 _ 8... a ......... «B 2H «v 3 «B.» Sui «3.» 8o.« «SH «H... «8.: H918 ...................... 88:8 135E H8.« 5 E: «3 a8 «2; 8n H«n.n H2.» H3... c8.» «E.«« H9.« 58.2 8&2 ...................... H.232.2H 05.83 «3; «Ho 2:; 3«.H 2m; H«o.H «3.... «86 «3;: at}: «2.0 8«.o« H3.« «8.2 «2.8H ............... 38.1538... Dir-933.60 ‘II 013603 82 «Hum .owwn waavooonm co m...” «Hm oom «wawwwon 85500 98 0.3.3 ham 186 SF 15 —l’crcenl distribution of Federal scientists, engineers, and professiomzl health personnel engaged primarily in research and development, by agency, October 1969 Scientific end engineering Proleeeionnl heelth Agency R&D personnel MD personnel Totnl Rene-rel: Development Tote! Reeeereh Development. All ngencies-----_-_-- .. ............. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Departmentof Defense ...... - ..... __--_. - 52.1 28.7 73.2 6.9 8.0 3.5 VeteransAdminietration ..... 1.8 3.7 .1 23.2 30.9 - Department of Agriculture .................. 10.3 21. l .5 11.2 8.4 19.4 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare 3.8 7.4 .5 55.4 49.2 74. 1 Departmentofthelnteriornr.-.. ._ ._ 8.1 15.4 1.5 .4 .5 ......... National Aeronautics and Space Administration [6.3 14 . 1 18.4 .5 .4 .9 DepertmentofCommerce-.-....- . 3.8 6.1 1.7 _ DepertmentofTreneportntion. ..... . -- 1.2 .9 1.7 .2 .3 ......... DepartmentofState------..----...--..--...._-.. (‘) -_ (“) - .................. _ Tennessee Valley Authority ...... . ................. - 1 (') .2 .............................. Atomic Energy Commission ................... .. - - .- .8 . 1 I .5 .2 .......... .9 Department of Labor ............................. .2 .4 . 1 .2 ............ .9 Department of Housing and Urban Development ...... (‘) . 1 (‘) (‘) .......... - -- All otherngencies ................................. 1.4 2.1 .7 1.8 2.3 .21 ‘ Lees then .05 percent. Source: National Science Foundntion from U. S. Civil Service Commie- Note: Percent detnil my not odd to 100.0 became of rounding. eion dete. NSF 70.1”. 187 SF 16 Distribution of the Nation’s neo funds, by performer and source, 1968 Total: 825.2 billion PERFORMER SOURCE . Other non rofit institutions' 4‘7 Universities - - - - o Associated FFRDC's 3%\ / p ° and colleges 3%\ Other nonprofit Institutlons l/o \ \\ Federal - - - Government Unwersnties and \ 14% coHeges \ 10% \ \\ Industry “ \ 0" Federal \ 36 "0 Government 6001) Industry 0‘ 69% 0 Data for Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC's) administered by industry and nonprofit Institutions are included in the totals for these two sectors. Scurce: National Science Foundation NSF 70—29 188 SF 17 Trends in funds for industrial R&D performance, 1953-68 Billions of dollars 18 -— l6— 14— 12— 10— 1953 '54 '55 ’58 ’51 ’58 '59 '60 '81 '62 ’63 '64 '65 '68 ’67 Source: National Science Foundation NSF 70-29 189 Company share 190 SF 19 Total, company and Federal funds for R&D performance as a percent of net sales in selected industries, 1967 and 1968 Percent 21— Federal Company 15— 3- ll 11 -- ”’7 It! 1981 1m 1”? 1980 I“? 1983 1”? 1“ Aircraft Electrical Professional Machinery and Equipment and Missiles and Scientific Communication instruments Source: National Science Foundation NSF 70-29 1931 1968 ALL INDUSTRY AVERAGE ifl'l ms 1”? 1”. Chemicals Motor Vehicles and Allied and Other Products Transportation Equ pmsnt 191 oNIuOF puma pgaencihooafioo 5 :35... 23 630333 .85 3.5265 moo— an dog-peach codewom 1.33.2 one an vegan-o 833 an speak o deotsfineuec ocean—con 850 no tone—.8 pee 85953:: 65:33:: ...coEnc—o>ev can £0.38 succeeds no :05. 38333095 “.3850 3 6082309 “cacao—280 van .0.— .ctuapa. uo cheer—nu 33 was $3 05 3 605.30 even. .0 go- £238.. coon-acihgfico ops—o5 no: op Sap can. aces—5936 ice—ooh do Sac age—093:. an @313. east 830- 53 even. no sea-Ema.” a 05 an 3030:. 35: 33.3 83:88 3:358 :33? posters.— «:08 3033390 025.8 3 cavemen.— Qdfl inc—25v pee cocoon: .35-3:: .3. 3:3 3 ova—o5 5:3 anon—:00 e 3 «Bi 3. m3 .w e 3%: .............................. 82 me omo.w an mam.m m mHe.o~ .............................. bem— oe w~«.p em «mm.m a“ www.mfi ............................ --com— me mvv.o mm cap.» a me.v~ .............................. mwa~ av ump.m am one.» a «Hm.m~ .............................. ace“ «a 3” .m mm 2.3. S 26.2 .............................. 32 we mmo.m on vmv.c a eev.- .............................. «mam 3 m8; 8 2&6 v 25.2 ............................ . 82 «v mme.e we ~wc.w a ecm.o~ .............................. cum“ 3. 3m.” mm n36 mu wad .............................. .32 av 03.” S amri a mwmd .............................. 83 «e can.” on mmm.¢ a“ amp.» .............................. sea” 3 RN . a 3 man . m av mow . c .............................. $3 an cev.u be cm~.u e~ cem.v ............................ .mma— S can . N we 9:. . H an 2.: . v ............................ s 33 5 8m . N» mm 33. . a» ............ one . m» .............................. 3mm .32» 28:68 33 .0 9808A— unacfld .53 go «898m 0555 EP: one-no assoc: acoocem use.» sheen-Eco 18v...— Qdfi 30,—. .3258 5 5:98 mbéfiaw 6988» ac decanters.“ fig 3333:.» sex 335x c.“ accessil ON mm 192 ‘ s - SF 21 -—-lv unds for Rd?!) performance, by industry and .9221: of company, 1956-~-68 [Dollars in millions] Industry and also SIC code ‘ 1956 19.57 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 l 1968 01 company Tatal .......................... 96.805 87 781 88.389 89.6”! $10,509 310.908 911.461 312.630 313.512.314.185 316.649 316.415817.496 — “'34—.- =:::;T‘:‘.1:3.‘..=I=;—3—1: '4'3-32 22g ;:—”_..- :....'.==='. £5—3—‘3"‘—"’. =::;. :3. =.=Lf_ L.=-.'.: :2' =:==== Distribution by Industry Food and kindred products. 20 64 74 R3 91 104 120 121 130 141 161 163 165 173 Textiles and apparel ....... 22, 23 (*1 15 251 so 311 so ea 30 32 as; 61 1.7 59 Lumber. wood products. and furniture _ ........ 24.25 1*) 14 12 12 1o 10 10 n 12 12 13 14 17 Paper and «mm rnducts.- 26 36 35 42 49 56 59 or. 59 71 77 88 .83 s1 lcals and al led ucts ............... 281 641 705 792 891 980 1.101 1 .175 1 .239 1.300 1,390 l .461 1.569 1.640 Industrial chemicals-.- 231 ‘92 460 503 653 600 666 706 733 809 870 932 9.55 1.004 1.025 Drugs and tm-dicinu. . 2113 94 104 128 154 162 180 19."- 216 238 274 31k 35"! 393 Other chemicals ...... 284-97. 289 87 98 111 137 15' 215 242 214 186 184 188] 2011 222 :::.:. :47. =32... .11: z==.':::‘:.m:.=z===.1 :".:...‘ :— ;.==.:..=': lm- .::. 2:.‘212‘ =32: 611:3—‘2- '_:. $117.: Potroleum refining and L extraction ............. 29. 13 182 211 246 2731 296 299 310 317 410 4:14 430 455 538 Rubber roducts .......... so 6) 107 as 115 121 155L 141 156 15:: 166 178 am: 229 800110. y. and glass hymn“ ......... _ ..... 821 ‘ 60 ‘ 69 ‘ 75 ‘ 81 an 88 96 1 110 117 128 156 )6? mary metals ........... 33 90 1014 131 152 177 177 171 183 191'. 2181 232 242 258 Ferrous metals and products 4 .......... 13:11-32. 33:35.. (‘1 64 so 34 102 93 97 106 11 128 139 135 196 Nonferrous metals and products. . balance 0133 (*1 u 51 68 75 79 74 77 79 85 93 107 117 J-*_.___..'--'--.-='_= ._.___ __::-:-:‘:=.____--— ”m2: 3:21;.- .::;:=..—_- :_-.: ' -:~ ...__- --- :=- 22.-a. -_..‘- -—-V=;- ==-_=- :12.-V:-_._-.:==s= Fabricated metal products. 34 116 135 162 138 145 130 146 153 148 145 154 163 173 Machinery..- ............ 35 543 669 731 930 949 901 914 955- 1.051 1.123 1.300 1.457 1.619 Iloctrical equipment and L l U eomnumicatton ......... 80.48 1.518 1 .804 1.969 2.329 2.532 3.483 2.639 2.866 2.952 3.168 8.686 3.798 4.038 Radio and TV receiv- lns equipment ...... 385 (‘) (‘) (‘1 (') (') (') (') (‘) (‘) (') 67 84 10: mmumcation { equime-nt and elec- mtgomti conizponcnta. . 366-67. 481 (7) 748! 868 1.162 1 .324 1.404 1.591 1.773l 1.837 1.918 2.149 2.241 2.332 er 9 ectr ca equipment ......... 361-64.:169 (‘1 1.056 1.1 1 1.167 1.203 1.079 1.0431 1.093 1.115 1,250 1.370 1.473 1.603 ”'_' = ==~ nm‘m: 32:12? m=w.:'."_ .32-=2: 1:; 2:.- -.::=.~-.-.= 3:; =7—:.:--'. . =zz..:=-.. Motor vehicles and other tation equip- ment“.-. .............. 871. 873-3312;, 088 707 356 856 884 936! 999 1.090 l.176 1.223 1.339 1.375 1.530 Aircraft and missiles- - . --. 972.19 2.188 2.574 2.609 8.090 3.514 3.829 4.042 4.712 6.055 6.098 6.447 5.570 5.651 Proloaslonsl and scientific Instruments ............ 88 200 249 294 809 329 297 309‘ 284 324 383 all! 492 690 Scientific and mech- anical meaauring lnstrumants ........ 981—82 97 189 I“ 159 150 119 101 70 73 76 761 85 Optical. surgical. ‘ photo raphic. and othsr nstnmlcnts" - 983~~87 103 110 138 150 169 1781 208 214 2. l 308 857 407 500 m ‘==:=:==~:z=:m w ..::::=.-.:.:: m...” .' tam °-_-:=. 3:7: :.:-_-.==: ’1’“ " "‘ "33 Other manulacturln; Industries .............. z1.27,s1. as (‘1 ca » 105 118 119 105 65 u so 51 u 75 as Nonmanulacturlng F ‘ ' lndustrles .............. 111—12.1447. (’1 (‘1 117 139 ms 194 234 2751 918| 332 490 546 678 , 40-47, 4947. 70-79. 89 ‘m '''''' 18:82.": -!— 3:52;: 3:1: Disln'buli'on by Site 0] Company (baud on numbsr o] mpbyas) Le. than 1.000 ...... . ................ 369 542 5326 546 581 612 633 619 632 659 621 887 723 1.000 to 4.999 ........................ ‘ 650 ‘ 632 642 740 892 949 990 1 .022 1.035 956 1 .043 1.01: 1 .070 :figfiffigfi; ----------------------- }‘ 6.686' c 6.557 7.215 8.332I 9.036 9.347 9.340 10.939 11.340 12.569 {1:1 333 .3 :35 u 2;; ‘ Industries. industry groups. and product fields shown separately in statistical tables are classified according to their Standard Industrial Classification Manual codes. Soc appendix A. lootnote 2. ‘ Not separately available but included in total. From: NSF 70-29 ‘ Estimated by the National Science Foundation. ‘ SIC codes 8391 and 3399 included in tho nunlcrrous metals and products group (or 1956 to l965. ‘ Included in the other electrical equipment group. SFZZ 193 ——Compurison of Sin/e ugrm-y urpemlifm'rs for rrxeurelz, development, and 1862]) plan! bet-ween fiscal years 1.065 and 1.068 [Dol Inns in thousands| Unitod Statue. total _ _ Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas State California . , ., . .............. Colorado ._ - .- , .. . - Con m-ci ic-ut 1)«-luwar¢-_ - . _ - . . Florida .. ---. Goorgin llnwnii Idaho Illinois Indiana 1own.--_-... Kansas..- . . - Kentucky --_--_ .. - Louisiana ...... Maine,. Maryland- Massachusetts-..--.--_.-- Michigan-._._._-. Minnesota ....................... _ ........ Mississippi - ____________________ Missouri-_ Montana. _ ........... _ Nohraska..-- -----. Novada..-- ----- New Hampshiro ...... NowJersoy --_._--.-------—_ ........... Now Maxim - -- . Now York. ._ North Carolina- - _ . . Nortthkota__. , __._ Ohio- . - Oklahoma Oregon . . Pi-nnsylvanin- - _. -. .. Rhoda Island South Carolina- _ _ ___________ South Dakota ............... . - - Tonnessee------ __ --i..---_- ...................... Vermont ............. . - ........................ Virginia. -_ _-_, Washington ......... _ Wont. Virginia ..... Wisconsin ........... - - . - . Wyoming ........................ 1964 $77 .1152 717 2,361 246 1141 11.1611 1 .1127 814 9 J .6516 1 .1651 767 .1011 :1 .1157 7:31 416 222 111‘“ 959 764 47.") 693 1.9421 1.117 1 .2112 2.3911 1211 17.1132 476 452 1.471 11218 7:15 :1, 8711 12m 259 537 2154 2 . 54 5 94 2 .397 1.527 844 1. 653 246 1968 $139,214 372 2 . 623 425 8:15 28 .926 1.11“?) 2.257 144 :1 .221 1.771 1.13137 3111 11.118 1.111314 1.7.5:: I .21-cm 2 .536 1,325 708 1.187 1.665 3 .457 2.3168 858 1.801 1 . 106 2167 82 269 3 . 1-18 832 111i . 14:16 7 .222 2101 2 . 841% 1.9115 1.2171 6.51511 | .1171: 5711 l’c-rt‘vn! change +106 --4H '11] +73 +145 +159 ‘1 6 +167 -1— 33:: l 1111 I 51 m7 .1102 | mx 1x2 mm + 480 +137 +38 —7 +150 +140 -+-71'l +112 —30 --25 +330 ——37 +41 +364 — 6 +550 +1"? +1 . '117 —— 1111 +1131 4 10:! | 37 .| 70; + 72:1 +121) —m +41 +175 +2.034 +1.092 +20 +115 +34 +47 +79 Avorngo annual growth rate, 1964 (SH 6 25.1 9 27.9 71.8 l7.4 10.9 21.1 19.2 21.2 113.2 421.11 55.2 30 -—1 25. «£93»:— 24. 15. 20 -—8 —6 madam 44 —10.7 3 46.8 -1.."i 59.7 19.9 117.4 -!1.7 17.9 111.4 113.11 15.2 1311.4 21.8 ~-:1 .4 28.11 114.9 8 N woe—oa- 0,—qu H... From: NSF 70-22 19h SF 23 Ten States leading in State agency R&D activities, FY1968 25F TOTAL FOR ALL 50 STATES: $159.2 " 110"“ g E: g E E a M E .— Michigan Washington Florida It! lem, 3) Includes R 8. 0 plant. Source: National Science Fowidalion NSF 70—22 195 SF 211- —Total State expenditures for all purposes, and State expendi- tures for research, development, and R&D plant, by functional area, fiscal year 1968 [Dollars in millionnl Totsl Ststc expenditures" RAD expenditures RsD ___“, “___”. _ ___,_ ___,n_-_ _,,,_,__ expenditures Function ss a percent Amount Percent Amount Percent of total expenditures Total ...... - ............ $57 , 273 100 $159 100 0 .3 Health and hospitals ______ , _____ 4,203 7 69 43 1.6 Natural resources ............... 1,225 2 49 25 3.3 Highways ..................... 11, 848 21 21 13 .2 Education ..................... 15, 297 27 16 10 . 1 Agriculture .................... 780 1 3 2 . 4 Police and corrections ........... l .412 2 3 2 .2 Financial administration and general control _______ . ....... 1 .329 2 2 .2 Public welfare .................. 8,649 15 2 1 (b) Allothers-__-_--------.---..--- 12,530 22 3 2 (b) - Excludes expenditures for higher educstion. These expenditures (88.982 million), sre excluded to mske the dsts comparable to the State sgency RtD Less thsn 0.1 percent. Source : NSF 70-22 dsts. 196 SF 25 118.0 expenditures of State agencies, by functional area and percent share of total, FY 1964 and 1968 Percent w _— 40 r—— D1964 ” .1968 30 — L. 20 1— 10 —— F' _L; _ .1 _l:h.1_r:-7._.=l_1.il1 Financial llesltll Police administration and Natural and and general Public All Year hospitals resource: Highways Education Agriculture corrections control welfare otllers 194 $26.09! 120.153 512.857 $1.411 $1,952 1 519 S 271 $3.371 $4.594 181 $88,510 $30,978 $20,400 ‘ 315.631 $2.994 $2.653 $2.417 $1.904 $3.117 Source: National Science Foundation [Dollars in thousands] NSF 70-22 197 SF 26 State agency R&D expenditures, by character of work, FY 1964 and 1968 Millions ol Dollars 160 *' I20 21% Development 50% Applied Research 20% Basic Research State agency R&D expenditures, by source of funds, FY 1968 TOTAL R&D EXPENDITURES: $155 million " Federal Funds $15.9 Other $3.3 NSF 70-22 a) L-cludcs RKD plmll Source: National Sr u-ncn furrndatmn SUurcr‘; Nalrmml Suvrlcv lnrrrlddlmu 1968 1964 NSF 70-22 SF27 198 Distribution of State agency 118-D expenditures. by field of science and performer, FY 1968 TOTAL R80 EXPENDITURES: $155 million " FIELD or screuce _ Engineering Biological W . ’0 ,. Cllnrcal ,~-’ / Medical Psychology / 7°" . / Q \ j 1 /, All Other ‘ 1- ; -, ,- zo; . ° Enmonmenlal 7 0'.) .1) LI! Muir's Fifi.“ plat-2. Sourc-r- National Science lwmmmn NSF 70—22 PERFORMER Intramural Unwersnlles x’ and , ' Colleges j 9"“ ,' Others ' . q, l r' ‘ Ir \\‘ f / \. ' —_ ’__L.'/' 199 SF 28 Six States leading in State agency R&D expenditures," by functional area, FY 1954 and 1968 Percent of total NORTH NEW YORK CALIFORNIA ILLINOIS CAROLINA TEXAS PENNSYLVANIA 0 5'0 10:0 0 5'0 loo 0 5'0 top 0 5'0 Iolo 0 5'0 10:0 o 50 10:0 l l . 1964 "an .... .0311.“ in“ :3 h _ Natural resources a I :1 i a: in Education P p - E Agriculture b) i I I Police 8. corrections :1 a 0) Financial administration b) L general control b) bl I ' Public welfare i] F3 All others b) D b b) b) J r a) Excludes RM) plant. 1:) less than 1%. Source: National Science Foundation NSF 70-22 200 SF 29 —State agency scientists and engineers engaged in research and development com- pared to State agency expenditures for re- search and development, by functional area, fiscal year 1968 .— Scientlnte RAD Function and expenditures - engineers Total .............. 3,733 $154.7 million Health and hospitals ....... Natural resources--- - - _ - - - - Highways ------------ _ - _ _ Education ________________ Agriculture --------------- Police and corrections ------ Financial administration and general control ...... Public welfare ____________ All others ............... e Excludes RoD plant. _— Percent distribution 37 34 10 10 l 2 2 1 2 43 25 13 10 2 2 From: NSF 70-22 201 SF 30 Comparison of State and local government R&D expenditures, by function STATE GOVERNMENT 3’ LOCAL GOVERNMENT b’ Percent Percent 50 40 30 70 IO 0 0 IO 20 3O 40 l I I l t runcnon I t I I Healtlr I hospitals Natural resources lliglrnays c) Education Police L corrections financial administration I general control Public welfare All otlters ‘” a) Based on 1968 data excluthim NM) plant. b) Based 011 1961631.) excluding RM) plant c) less than 0.5 pr-rtcnl rl) Stale fltlvt'fllmt‘lllin: Anni lllllll" (2"..l. ~rlltn-l (7",) Local guvurnnmntu: llml‘dlll! and lHlIJll n‘lll'Wdl (SW-l, arm-r. and sewage disposal (‘t"..l_ muiur up.“ utilities. (11",). nllto-r (2%) N 35‘ 7 O 22 Source; Natmnal Science inundation 202 0 Le- than 0.05 percent. '1 Outlying areas and offices abroad. State and local governments. 3p 31 —Geographic distribution of funds for research, development, and R&D plant of State, local, and Federal governments, by State [Dollars in thousands] State II Local 5 Federal - State Expenditures Percent Expenditures Percent Obligations Percent United States, total .................................... $159,214 100 $31,673 100 816,289,992 100 Alabama ............................... - .................... 372 . 2 ........................ 407 , 943 2 . 5 Alaska ................................ . ..................... 2,623 1.6 ________________________ 63.837 .4 Arizona ....... . .................... . ......................... 425 . 3 255 . 8 82 . 262 . 5 Arkansas ................................................... 835 . 5 ........................ 8.272 .1 California ................................................... 28 .926 18 . 2 8 .681 27 . 4 4 .390 .722 27 . 0 Colorado .................................................... 1.085 . 7 376 1 . 2 268 . 102 1 .6 Connecticut ................................................. 2 .257 1. 4 362 1 . 1 144.988 .9 Delaware .................................................... 84 .1 ........................ 14.380 .1 Florida ...................................................... 3.221 2.0 554 1.8 875,958 5.4 Georgia ..................................................... 1.771 1.1 64 .2 284.662 1.7 Hawaii ........................ . _____________________________ 1.667 1.0 59 .2 38.690 .2 Idaho ....................................................... 814 . 5 ........................ 74.412 . 5 Illinois ...................................................... 9.418 5.9 1.878 5.9 270,673 1.7 Indiana ..................................................... 1 .368 . 9 145 . 5 86 . 541 . 6 Iowa ........................................................ 1.752 1.1 154 .5 48.991 .3 Kansas ...................................................... ' 1.288 .8 169 .5 20.495 .1 Kentucky ___________________________________________________ 2.536 1 .6 54 .2 24.414 .1 Louisiana ................................................... 1 .325 . 8 92 .3 273 .932 1 . 7 Maine --------------------------------- _ .................... 708 . 4 ........................ 6 .060 (°) Maryland ................... - ................................ 1 . 187 . 7 1.703 5. 4 942 .555 5.8 Manachusetts _______________________________________________ 1 .665 l. 0 1 .244 3 . 9 840 .952 5.2 Michigan .................................................... 8.437 2.2 g? 2.6 $6,710 1.3 Minnesota ................................................... 2.868 1.5 243 .8 114.352 .7 Mini-1pm ................................................. 858 . 5 38 . 1 30 .214 .2 Ml-ourl .................................................. 1.801 1.1 250 .8 121.831 .8 Montana ____________________________________________________ 1 . 106 .7 ........................ 8 , 505 . 1 Nebraska ____________________________________________________ 367 . 2 ......................... 16 , 476 . 1 Nevada ------------------------------------- _ ________________ 82 .1 ........................ 234,598 1.4 New Hampshire ______________________________________________ 269 .2 .................... _ - - - 37 .220 .2 New Jersey ....................... _ .......................... 3.148 2.0 459 1.4 693,515 4.3 New Mexico ___________ - _____________________________________ 832 .5 34 .1 456.461 2.8 New York ................................................... 36.836 23.1 7.262 22.9 1,218,609 7.5 North Carolina ______________________________________________ 7 .222 4 .6 62 .2 66 .093 .4 North Dakota ............................................... 301 .2 ........................ 6,412 (°) Ohio ________________________________________________________ 2,846 1.8 515 1.6 674.292 4.1 Oklahoma ___________________________________________________ 1 .905 1 .2 13 (°) 24 .254 . 1 Oregon ______________________________________________________ 1 .371 .9 80 .3 37 .403 .2 Pennsylvania ________________________________________________ 6.820 4.3 2.676 8.5 634,871 3.9 Rhode Island ________________________________________________ 1 .070 .7 ........................ 32.018 .2 South Carolina ............................................... 570 .4 ........................ 20. 183 .1 South Dakota _________________________________ _ ______________ 511 .a ........................ 6.765 (e) Tense-es ___________________________________________________ 871 .2 263 . 8 210 . 817 1 .8 Texas ....................................................... 7.008 4.4 1.110 3.5 899,713 5.5 Utah ________________________________________________________ 2.006 1.3 49 .2 40.550 .2 Vermont ____________________________________________________ 608 . 4 ........................ 7 . 07 5 (ti) Virginia ..................................................... 2.875 1.8 232 .7 291.018 1.8 thlngton _________________________________________________ 8.281 2.1 170 .5 358.448 2.2 Welt Virsinis ................................................ 1,133 .7 ........................ 24.308 .1 Wisconsin ___________________________________________________ 2,428 1.5 792 2.5 117,968 .7 Wyomins .................................................... «o .a ........................ 6,600 (e) District of Columbia .................................................................. 804 2.5 457,681 2.8 Other 4 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 69.261 .4 P 1968 data. Norm—State and local data shown include funds provided by Federal 1' 1967 data. agendas: Federal data includes funds provided to all performers including From: NSF 70—22 203 Billions of Dollars 1.000,, . _ 1 ,- 1”" -__ -. . : 1 l ‘ -. i . ._._.- --:_ $932.3 1 - r ..... » ---ll----—-——~—1 - 1 Gross national product ~ - '---~— g... . ' .. - ___- ._..- .11.”..- .-._.._.. ......--.... .- - in?” - .- “2.11... .-_-.-...._..--_._- - _JL -.__.. 1» -- .2.-- -..L_.___.,.. _-..,..__..____ll. l T IF r1 3:? 32 l ula 2112:0111“ tier outfit—”‘f— TI’OI‘ldB in Federal 100 F‘... " -;-'. , ‘ ‘-:f':_":‘-“:.‘”‘.;" :: 1“" 7:221}? 7:127]. - .- . -1 .. . . - .-- 1..- -- . -. --.-. “1"" _— support of higher :"1‘" ‘1‘ .1. " ‘ “ ‘m " “‘ "T’:" -2 l---- — - -1.- . - ~—-. -- -—- ——-i»--- -. —- no — --———- -.— —. “068110" compared r- - »- ~ -- T .-,-,_-_-_-,-__--_- —-—--a= l with other economic ‘ “ ' ' ’ ' ’ ‘ " ’ l 5207; V . f1 ables 1mg - - Total higher education expenditures ’ I 10 - . - - - g . ..4 . - - . i , L ,_ 1 _ "" ' _f_ Federal obligations lnr higher education, ' i all programs (excl, rupnyohle Irrarrsl 515 t 824‘ f mleral itlrlrrialrons for academic science l 1 l l J l l953 1964 1965 1966 1967 1963 1969 .2! Protected Source: National Scrence Faundatiorr (CASE) Na 70.27 8933 —Federal obligations to 200 universities and colleges, by type of program and agency, fiscal years 1968—69 [Dollara in milliona] Depart» National Total, Depart- Atornic Depart- Depart- ment of Depart- Aero- National Program and year all ment of Energy ment of ment of Health, ment of nautiea Science Other - agencie- Agrl- Corn- Com- Defenae Education, the and Spnoe Foun- culture miaaion meroe and Interior Adminla- (lation Welfare tratlon Total Federal obligations: 1968 ...................... 31.413.0 3104.0 376.1 31.8 3218.0 3665.3 84.0 887.4 3256.8 ...... 1964 .................... 1,625.0 115.0 79.9 1.7 258.1 780.0 5.8 107.6 277.5 . 1965 ...................... 2,305.5 135.6 84.4 2.6 267.9 1,345.6 9.7 184.3 325.2 .......... 1966 ...................... 8,010.0 141.0 96.9 2.8 278.0 1,952.2 22.4 142.2 374.5 ........ 1967 ..................... 3,311.1 144.8 109.6 7.9 264.1 2,231.2 27.4 131.6 394.5 .......... 1968 ...................... 3,379.7 144.2 119.7 9.8 248.1 2,215.2 28.2 129.8 422.8 666.9 1969 ...................... 3,453.8 155.9 121.0 3.9 278.7 2,293.4 24.8 127.2 367.0 81.8 Academic adenoe obligations 1963 ...................... 1,328.5 104.0 76.1 1.8 218.0 581.0 3.8 87.4 256.8 -- 1964 ...................... 1,528.6 115.0 79.9 1.7 258.1 683.8 5.1 107.6 277.5 . 1965 ...................... 1,816.2 135.6 84.4 2.6 267.9 856.5 9.6 134.3 825.2 1966 ...................... 2,163.5 141.0 96.9 2.8 278.0 1,109.2 19.1 142.2 874.5 1967 ...................... 2,323.8 144.8 109.6 4.4 264.1 1,251.0 23.9 131.5 394.5 - -. 1968 ..................... 2,349.8 144.2 119.7 8.0 243.1 1,229.4 28.2 129.8 422.8 24.6 1969 ..................... 2,361.4 155.9 121.0 2.2 278.7 1,261.8 24.3 127.2 367.0 23.3 Relenrch Ind development: 1963 ...................... 829.5 40.6 68.3 1.5 218.0 832.9 3.8 59.8 104.6 -- 1964 ................. 975.6 47.5 70.5 1.1 258.1 399.2 5.0 78.2 115.8 - -- 1965 ...................... 1,095.0 59.1 74.8 2.1 267.9 441.9 9.5 100.6 139.2 ---- 1966 ...................... 1,252.1 62.9 83.2 2.1 278.0 507.8 18.7 107.4 192.5 ...... 1967 ..................... 1,324.1 64.0 89.7 3.4 264.1 577.0 23.9 109.0 193.1 ........ - 1968 ...................... 1,423.0 62.2 101.8 6.7 243.1 619.1 27.8 126.1 212.4 23.8 1969 ...................... 1,495.3 63.6 103.1 1.7 278.7 667.1 23.5 122.3 212.1 23.2 MD plant 1963 ...................... 106.9 ......... 2.6 .................... 39.2 .1 13.4 50.6 -- - 1964 ...................... 100.8 .......... 4.0 ................... 39.9 .......... 9.1 47.8 ...... 1965 ...................... 126.2 8.2 8.8 .................... 54.8 (b) 8.4 56.0 ...... 1966 ...................... 114.8 2.0 7.4 .................... 48.5 .2 7.4 49.8 - 1967 ...................... 116.7 2.0 13.8 .3 .......... 38.1 .......... 5.0 57.5 ...... 1968 ...................... 104.1 1.9 11.9 .2 .......... 36.9 .................... 53.2 - 1969 ...................... 57.4 1.2 11.4 .................... 20.5 .................. 24.2 Other adence activitlea: 1963 ...................... 893.1 63.4 5.3 .3 .......... 208.9 (1*) 14.1 101.1 1964 ...................... 452.2 67.5 5.4 .6 .......... 244.6 (5) 20.2 113.9 1965 ...................... 595.0 73.3 5.9 .6 .......... 359.8 (5) 25.4 130.1 - - 196' ...................... 796.6 76.1 6.3 .7 .......... 558.3 .2 27.3 132.7 1967 ...................... 883.0 78.8 6.2 .7 .......... 685.9 (5) 17.4 144.0 1968 ...................... 822.7 80.1 6.1 1.0 .......... 573.4 .4 3.7 157.2 .8 1969 ...................... 808.8 91.1 6.5 .5 (b) 574.1 .9 5.0 130.6 .1 Nonacienoe activitiea: 1968 ...................... 84.5 ........................................ 84.3 .2 _ 1964 ...................... 96.4 ........................................ 96.2 . _____ 1965 ...................... 489.8 (5) ............................. 489.1 .1 1966 ...................... 846.4 (5) .............................. 843.1 3.4 1967 ...................... 967.3 (5) .......... 3.5 .......... 980.2 3.5 1968 ...................... 1,029.9 .................... 1.8 .......... 985.8 .................... 42.3 1969 ...................... 1,091.9 .................... 1.8 (b) 1,031.6 .................... 58.5 ‘ Includea obligationa for the Departmenta of Houainc and Urban Development and LabOr and the Office of Economic Opportunity: the Department of Trnnaportatlon (1968 only) and the Agency for International Development (1969 only). 5 Le- than 850,000. SOURCE: National Science Foundation (CASE). NSF 70-27 205 .83 .5... BE .23 d: m 3... on. 22...? 5:2. mm... Eon... ............ we. .8. 2. .828 3.... an --:-...--._ 313 .1... -.------...--------:uE....a_4..o...Eezap .3. ............ 8m 2. 3....«u m3 26:11}... «8.3 .55 1:26:35...— nam-._53:a.:o5......ch .2. 3” 9...... S." 3. 8...... m3... ............ 26.. . _ mob...“ in... - ....................... .35 .9 5.83:5 .8 8 8.. m...» 8. .8... «2.. ............ mm... mm...4 STE ...5... .................... 3.83:5... .5 b.8325 ...n man 3.3 «mm wan 93.3 man.” 3 3.... En... mo..m« .65 ....................... 3.2...ch 26....— .3 SN mmoé :3. 3. v....« v3 ............ mm... ............ www.mu .U.Z - - - -E: _enanU-a:=o..aU 5.57. .o .3883...» .2” ...N. o...~ on... ma 3...... 3.2. ............ mm ............ «9.3 95o. ........................ «to. .o 359$... .3 ............ «no. new R93 «8 m... ..Lm....u 5.2 .---------------.--.-2......flcch32......» .8 3.. E... S - ............ 38.3.. a... ............ 8. ............ ”3.8 ..EE .................... 3.52.5 2.5. 24.3 a." ........ .2. as...“ «am... a... www.cu «5.. ac... mg a mom..." .299 ----...-----.-.---.--cva.o_o.v _o attain: .3 :3 2.3 3...; 8." v3.2 .3.“ a. 2...." 2.... 82...... .3. .................... .2335... 3.3.5.15 .o... m31. 3."; v a." 2...... 8.. ............ guru 5v... ”5.3 .552 ........ ..2 >. . 33m .5 . . 9.... 23.. am... 3» 393 mum on man .3... wmmdu .52 ................ 3.335332 .0 b.2353 .wu an. «2.4 SN ............ n.5,.” mafia ............ S... ............ 3......“ .32 .................... 5.23:5 gouging» ...N ............ 8.... mm... 3 3...... «3.. .2... a 3......" .5. ------:---:------._u.5..3....3.25:5 .3 m8 5.... war ............ mwnéu m2." ............ .m. .. ............ 2......" e20 ........... 3.83:5 2:33. 538.6 85 .3 u. we: 8. m. 3...." no...» ............. 3:... m .3... 0.2 .......................... 5.535 3.5 .E ............ mend .8... S. 2....» «cu... Smé 3......“ ...io -935 :ew...Eo=.au .o 3.89....5 .3 on. an. .m. ............ ”8.3 3 8 a. . 2......" .ud ........................ 5.52.... 2.53. d... .2... 33.» was; ............ at... .N gin ............ who ............ v3.8 .an ........... £58.10 Sufism .o 3.2%....5 ..N 3.... Se... 3.. ............ .oa.vu m2... ............ .2..." ............ mum...” ..Eoo ........................... 3.8.3:; 25 .8 ........ S. S. 3......" on 2......" .52 Shannen.c586..&2.o~uo=ou.3832... .m. .. mum... o3 ............ Sada Z... ............ «a...» ............ 3.13 5.2 .................... .3853. .0 3.52.5 .m. 23 «8... NB 3. 2m..." «8.. ............ 2.... PS...” «8.2. 3.5 ...................... .2535 «ii 3.5 u... E. 2...... mm» a... 48.... 3nd ............ 2.5.. new; .8..." 5.2 ......................... 3.2.2.5 ...58 .w. vmué vmm.v on: ............ $15 ova.» ............ .mmé N $043 in ................. «wag—hone?— uo ..Eflozcb .m. 8 .8... EN... ............ 2......» 8.... S 3..» ............ 2.2: .5 ...................... 38.5 3 5.53.5 .v. ..mu voad va .« 2.93 ommd vw 29.. N no. .3 62 .................. 3.2635... act—no: 3...... .2 «av «36 new .3 .vmd. 3...: 3 3m; .mm.v 30.3 .3 ............... 2395-325: .o 3.22;..9 .3 3.... 33.8 ”on 3 «3...» 3a.» «a 8.; ............ 83.3 .>.z ...................... 3.53.5 Uto... .52 .2 a... .8... Sufi an» 29...... SQN 3 «a... . mm...» «o. .3. .55... ............... -- - -3825: .o 3.8.63.5 .2 mum 3.. . .. 8m... Eh v3.8" Sn; an 8.. 03... 23.8 .Euo ........... 3.3.5-95510 .o 3.883.... .m o... 8...... «no... we... 8....N 3...... N. m: ............ 8m. S .55 ........................ 3.6.2.25 aces-em .m «9.... .3... 8.... ...3 3n. .n 3.... a..." we...» ...8... 3.... .n a...» ............ 33.32-52.883 .o b.8325 ... 3... mu»... 8.. 2. m3...” 2.»... .N 2.... v ............ 2.92 5.2 ..................... . 5593.5 «5.5.5 .3 3.. .84 33.6 ow. N... .2" awed an .3. v ............ $18 .an ......... 3.3:... 36.52.10 .0 3.8.33.5 .o ...m. 3...... awe Sm nuwév .26.... ............ mm...“ on. wand.» ...33 ................. £83333 .o 3.9.83.5 .v 3..-. «.34. 9...... 3.. Elm...” S». .. 8. 8.4% 8. luwlvr... ...me .................... 5. 2...: .o . . 5 .a 8.... v8... 5...... S. 813 8c... ............ v3.“ ............ 828 .32 ....................... 3.53.5 225.. .u an... new... now...” can 8...“. 38.3 «o. 23... ............ v8.8 6.2 - - -- ---fioficnoo... .o 8.53.... 8.82.3.3: .. «8.26 23.2.3 «2.. ...n v3.2a 8.1.3.. .» $3.33 «8....» «8.83 .86..» «3.5.13 ................ 83:8 c... 83.53.... 8. .8. .80... . :50 ...m... <3... 3:3... 3.... non 838.50 on... 23.3.8... 3o... 8% .3351... 1.5.8... .33 .o 3...... a: 3:33.... «.63 .33.. .83 $239. ‘3 .3582... .332 76.3355 5 5:09. 2: 53.5.36? 33:8 3.. 33833:: 2: 2: 8 88.83323 Esweek ~39ul. .zm mm 206 APPENDIX I. MSU faculty and staff present at initial meeting on September 29, 1970 College of Human Ecology - Robert R. Rice, Chairman Department of Human Environment and Design - Gertrude Nygren, Professor College of Agriculture - Jmmes'w. Goff, Director, School of Packaging -'William.B. Lloyd, Professor, Building Construction - Carlton M. Edwards, Professor, Agricultural Engineering, Extension Specialist in Housing - Raleigh Barlowe, Chairman, Department of Resource Development College of Engineering — Donald J. MOntgomery, Chairman, Department MMM - Henry Krause, Head. Engineering Instructional Services College of Social Science - Myles G. Boylan, Director, School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture - Sanford S. Farness, Professor of Urban Planning Grafton D. Trout, Professor, Sociology - Nancy Marshall, Professor, Psychology Institute for Community Development - Robert C. Anderson, Assistant Director 207 APPENDIX II Faculty and staff members of MSU interviewed between September 1970 and April 1971: College of Human Medicine Andrew D. Hunt, Jr., Dean Sandra A. Daugherty, Professor, Dept. of Medicine Robert F. Lewis, Professor, Dept. of Medicine Halter N. Mack, Professor Dept. of Microbiology and Public Health Lester F. wo1terink, Professor, Dept. of Physiology George W. Fairweather, Professor, Dept. of Psychology College of Business Kullervo Louhi, Dean Robert L. Blomstrom, Director, School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management Robert W. McIntosh, Professor, School of Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Management Carl E. Liedholm, Chairman, Dept. of Economics Mitchell Stengel, Associate Professor, Dept. of Economics E. Jerome McCarthy, Professor Dept. of Marketing and Transportation Administration R. Winston Oberg, Professor, Dept. of Management Eugene F. Dunham, Jr., Instructor, Dept. of Accounting and Financial Administration David I. Verway, Research Associate, Bureau of Business and Economic Research 208 APPENDIX II continued College of Agriculture and Natural Resources Lawrence L. Boger, Dean David Lee Armstrong, Director, Resident Instruction James T. Bonnen, Professor, Agricultural Economdcs Arthur‘Mauch, Professor, Agricultural Economics (retired) Alfred A. Schmid, Professor, Agricultural Econmmics James D. Shaffer, Professor, Agricultural Economics Warren H. Vincent, Professor, Agricultural Economics Alvin E. House, Assistant Professor, Agricultural Economics James S. Boyd, Professor, Agricultural Engineering Merle L. Esmay, Professor, Agricultural Engineering Arthur w. Farrall, Chairman, Agricultural Engineering (ret.) Carlton M. Edwards, Associate Professor, Agricultural Engineering Ben J. Holtman, Associate Professor. Agricultural Engineering Mason.E. Miller, Director, Institute for Extension Personnel Development James w. Goff, Director, School of Packaging William.B. Lloyd, Professor, School of Packaging, Building Construction Program Stanley E. Woell, Instructor, School of Packaging, Building Construction Program Louis F. Twardzik, Chairman, Park and Recreational Resources Eugene F. Dice, Assistant Professor, Park and Recreational Resources 209 APPENDIX II continued College of Agriculture and Natural Resources continued Raleigh.Barlowe, Chairman, Resource Development William J. Kimball, Professor, Resource Development George S. McIntyre, Director, COOperative Extension Service Lois H. Humphrey, Program.Director, Family Living Education, Cooperative Extension Service Denio A. Caul, Director, Extension Program, Cooperative Extension Service College of Engineering Donald J. Montgomery, Chairman, Dept. of Metallurgy, Mechanics and Materials Science Robert H. Little, Professor, Dept. of Metallurgy, Mechanics and materials Science Robert W. Summitt, Professor, Dept. of Metallurgy, Mechanics and Materials Science Herman E. Koenig, Chairman, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Systems Science Rita Zemach, Assistant Professor, Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Systems Science John H. Hoffman, Director, Division of Engineering Research George A. Coulman, Associate Professor, Division of Engineering Research College of Communication Arts Herbert J. Oyer, Chairman, Dept. of Audiology and speech.Sciences 210 APPENDIX II continued College of Education H. Paul Sweany, Professor, Dept. of Secondary Education and Curriculum C. Blair MacLean, Associate Professor, Dept. of Secondary Education and Curriculum Russell J. Kleis, Associate Professor, Dept. of Administration and Higher Education College of Human Ecology Jeanette A. Lee, Dean Robert R. Rice, Chairman, Dept. of Human Environment and Design Margaret Jacobson, Chairman, Dept. of Family and Child Sciences Carol w. Shaffer, Associate Professor, Dept. of Family and Child Sciences College of Social Sciences Myles G. Boylan, Director School of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture Charles W. Barr, Professor, Urban Planning Sanford S. Farness, Professor, Urban Planning Carl Goldschmidt, Associate Professor, Urban Planning Gwendolyn R. Andrew, Director Sheldon G. Lowry, Professor, Dept. of Sociology Christopher E. Sower, Professor, Dept. of Sociology Grafton D. Trout, Jr., Assistant Professor, Dept. of Sociology 211 APPENDIX II continued College of Social Sciences continued Leon H. weaver, Professor,“ Dept. of Police Administration and Public Safety Ronald J. Horvath, Assistant Professor, Dept; of Geography Carl E. Frost, Professor, Dept. of Psychology College of Arts and Letters Joseph J. Kuszai, Associate Professor, Dept.rof Art Robert 8. Alexander, Associate Professor, Dept. of Art Institute of Urban Affairs Robert L. Green, Director Adelbert Jones, Assistant Director Institute for Community Development Duane L. Gibson, Director Robert C. Anderson, Assistant Director University Public Services Floyd G. Parker, Director University Archives William H. Combs, Director 212 APPENDIX II continued University Administration John E. Nellor, Assistant to the Vice-President for Research and Development Elliott G. Ballard, Assistant to the President William R. Wilkie, Assistant to the President Paul L. Dressel, Director, Office of Institutional Research ”Mg 213 5', *flmgflfl ”*3 DEPARTMENT or HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT E %!|| w$§ H.” WASHINGTON, D. C. 20410 APPENDIX III OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY IN REPLY REFER TO: JAN 2 2. l9” Professor Gertrude Nygren College of Human Ecology Department of Human Environment and Design Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 48823 Dear Professor Nygren: Secretary Romney has asked me to reply to your letter of January 6, l97l regarding the interest at Michigan State in housing affairs. While reading about the curriculum content of your various colleges and the emphasis being placed on human ecology, we were reminded of some parallels at the Center for Housing and Environmental Studies, now a part of the New York State College of Human Ecology at Cornell University. Under the direction of the late Glenn H. Beyer, Cornell's curriculum and research evolved in a direction similar to yours. The magnitude of the housing and urban problems confronting the Nation and this Department is such that there can be no question about the need for more people with better training in housing affairs. At the present time we are particularly aware of the shortage of trained and capable people to manage housing projects for low— and moderate- income families. In considerable measure, the success or failure of such projects and the programs which produce them depends on the ability of individual project managers. We are hopeful that some of the major universities where there is a concern for housing and related problems may also see this need and introduce courses to help meet it. At first glance, it might seem that the education of housing project managers would call for narrow but specialized vocational training curricula such as those for hotel and real estate managers. However, it has been our observation that successful managers of rental housing projects for low- and moderate— income families have professional ability not only in finance and 211; APPENDIX III continued 2 property maintenance, but also in guidance counselling, recreation planning, problems of the youthful and elderly, and in welfare, health and sociology generally. They understand and know how to cupe with problems such as vandalism, truancy, crime and police- community relations. While recognizing the shortage of skilled housing project managers, we have not yet determined how to cope with the problem nor how our resources might best be used to increase the available SUpply. We would welcome your views and suggestions on this problem. Sincerely yours, fl?! .. (”J/M., Charles J. Orlebeke Deputy Under Secretary Positions Availlc ‘ ' . ‘ Positio 215 APPENDIX IV SALES and ‘ $9,, MARKETING EXEcumE ' ' o»,’e”i I, . HOUS'NG '0’ 40,000,, . . . . .. v I!‘ As a re of internal promotions, o - . e nation 5 470°», "'0’. °r J7 ° ~91 0 largest in -‘. . -- - . - -; . onies has a rare op- b- 07 .00 c portunity for an innovative and hard-driving Sales and (”Iii/0;- 6’s O’Oq'f’O/b. [If I # Marketing Director for our Illinois Division. Must be ° °I,° ’Og-p’o ”7 ‘ . . . ”to o ’o’ .e thoroughly fam111ar With all phases of new home sales 0 0r and merchandising. Successful candidate will have PO‘J‘VQO’WOC’W 020090.000 e0” 0 demonstrated ability to recruit, train and direct a pro- , ’60 ”ecoé’bcoog 4600/7,” pl fessional 20 man sales force. He will be totally re- ’6. 90 60 ’90 ’6,ch ’0, q sponsible for marketing program for volume single- > ‘9 ’53;- ° 600,00 1” ’0! 0’, . . . 9!] 0; a b °+ “a . 9. family and townhouse developments in moderate price J), " 0., Grab 16%,,”‘Iooo’op range. 0 J 6 V. // . ~ Excellent compensation program including profit shar- J°o ”Vg‘o/ogod 84% ing, health and life insurance and stock opportunity 4 . 05/ “0,,- 009° for sustained financial success combined with unique It 3 Ora,” potential for advancement in company with an ex- {J t I/ ' ceptional growth rate. Send resume and earnings his- 34%,. ,l’ 7/ tory to: o ‘00 \\ 30x, crass, TEE lVALL STREET JOURNAL Jltl71E»,fzq£a% 00.96.0/ Q1! ,0 #0 {It (0:10 /~ 9.9 e ’2 0 o ' A9 ' ‘9 MANAG l0 . 90 ff 6 . 0 o ‘. .00 Q), ’b 0’0 ’75 ‘0' (v) E R 3* ”’64,; %°0QW% *0 ofocgfl’o . *7 e t’e Q00; It“ $30,000 Range is.“ a», ”We," %“°Io%:c$,e’;’°sf;%* o Substantial, well-established enterprise with national repu- $30 (IQ/2&0 éQZIODIQbeQ tation seeks an aggressively-motivated land developer with, ' ”51;? 431904,“ [’09 potential for continued growth and participation. Responsible. O %% 6W! #0:,” for all current properties and future developmental proiects, ”4% g QQ,%QI’O ‘9‘ his primary attention will focus on the Great lakes and can-‘ h" . %% (0 «its» tral Florida territories for prospective shopping centers, golf ‘46 courses and residential communities; Capable of spotting ff? ( I ...I‘.‘ and assessing strategic growth opportunities, his strong suit a must entail working closely with senior management in the 0” if!” , I’ " setting of real estate goals and implementation of projects. 2’04. 0 . 0 Appropriate education and proven record of accomplishment ; $1230, a in large scale property management required. Attractive {:0 Loéfio’og a, central Florida location. Reply in complete confidence, giving ’o/;°I,”6 * l” " lo a I I . r 0 details of salary history to: " ”2:4?!” " ‘ / ’e or 0 0 ’c g ‘ 7, r (.61).. 6,10426/2'; 02 4:. / O I. . ' Box (20456, The Wall gm ournal a. . , 0,4,,» Jug/m. a, I 7 ’~' ' l '7 O A a l ' ’0 00/...0/0’0 ’I,’ 000,.094‘9'3‘0 9Q ‘11,, I O - lo ’9 0 o J‘ o o “ . o e I .0 a , of’0’” e,” ”I ”'1 0000904,”:qu .09"! 9 ’6,<-,. 9r. 0. ’o/(Po ”fife, 7.. '0 0 'e I o - I, e ” g'VX’Zfiflfl’t 0”- o”’;°;l°e" n V.P. Engineering V.P. Marketin h. ’b ’c' f”: ”x '0 ”o 4' a. "e . . . .. o 9 O O I“ f ‘P/ s ’I (..urrcnt expansion program creates an unusual opportunity for the qualified .97, 0" 5° $03.10”! ”9090.3092’; applicants to join. our diversified. listed company in an exciting commercial/ 4,. 000% :0 00.3%., ' o”e,,’~ industrial module program. 'Qh '0 04,66," [“01 ’32 ‘ . . . . . . . 0° b’lo ,0 47‘ o The men we are seeking wall he responsible for the designing and engineering 00 9’; Qp’ku '6,9 ’97 of marketing our modular building products. . 4:" I 04.00602, /. . . . O / Please provnde a complete resume so that we may arrange for an early mtervuew y’ '9 9 / #41 , Box ($0.521, The Wall Street Journal 3’41, / 216 --w 0' _u .A " Mg”; Constructianlillnagoment APPENDIX IV continued 00100!!! Available 'vwm APARTMENT DEVELOPMENT ' Opportunity , WSI EXECUTIVE illl'll . ‘ llll lillly 'xpalllliul: real estate lir- llapidly expanding national retail chain is seeking manager ,...l'.,,,.,,,.,,'. m... ,,,,,,.,m,,,.l.i..,, In...“ ,h. - Nit-Icing~ an apartment l vinnll ox- Jo supervise building prolects in the Midwest. Candidate. Am“... Appliirant; moor I... lelryrl- ' ~ - 'ncml III :II lllitSC' 0 apartment should haveacollege degree, demonstrated abillty to super- Inwhmmam a‘m, pgmm n “mm: vise construction activities, analyze building costs, negotiate construction contracts, and establish programs on cost con- trol and standardization of maintenance and construction procedures. ‘~ ' Position requires traveling in, the Midwest. Excellent fringe A business background. Knowledge of all government housing programs helpful. Arc-«ts of involvement will Include planning. design, construc- tion and liianngemout for large multi-family housing projects. The person we are seeking is llnrlnllht- odiy employer], but seeking greater opportunity and compensation. Re- ply ill detail to Personnel Manager. . Emhee Development Corporation. benefits and opportunity for advancement. 3'63.” aux 1530. Del Mains-ll, own I a. a Please submit complete resume and salary requirements to: lot: 0428, The Wall Street Journal V‘l‘ll ”MANAGERS roll—“mm lllllllllllo sulllllllllll llElL EsTlTE DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS MANAGER “’4‘ are a major Chicago resilien- lizll ltllllthT—tlt‘\'(‘l(|p('l‘ \\‘llll nll immmlinto novel for a top ('illlllt‘l' ('ullll‘zlvts Nlllllitn‘t‘l‘. Rental Manager , . . , . I ‘ hilcvessl‘lll applll-mlt \Vllll I‘.\|li‘l'l- AP“""“"" "REIT! flfld TCI'IC ' '0” euro will have llliilliy in «lira-rt :l a 3 man department ill estimating, 1 MalnTenanc. Mon illllllllllr. negotiating: and wrilllll: suit-contracts for mum-million ' flfld NUlPlI‘ICM dollar/year construction of silllrlu amt multl-t‘amily units. its will CODTI'OIIOI' possess a thorough knowledge of light construction and laml dc- Full range of oontrollership duties Please send resume or letter and state salary requlrements. lax case, The Wall Street Journal 3".110 :- Velopmout techniques. and will be motivated to avllleve lnaxl- mum cost reduction. We are offering tnp salary. un— llmitml advancement potential. prnt’lt sharing. pills gelir't'ull:; frilltzo pal-lump. Scull resume in confidence to: ”our Cit-Slit THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ._ -.— l’m" nDlREC'l‘OR 0F "El; PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Fast-growing general contractor, Pittsburgh, seeks professional to supervise staff of 12 in expanding easing program for low and moderate income fami- lies. Currently involved with 1200 inner city privately constructed units, rehabilitated and new. Must be ex- parienced in: progressive management techniques: total operating of property management system; rental collections and application processing procedures; complete programs of property maintenance and social semces. Minimum six years experience in managing large numbers of housing units. Business Administra- tion degree. Starting salary 815,000—817,000. Benefits. Send resume: Milton Washington, Executive Vice ? {resident Allegheny Housing Rehabilitation C LAND ACQUISITION AND DEVELOPMENT EXECUTIVE Major mum-market housing company listed on New York Stock Exchange seeks aggressive, dynamic attorney to take charge of land programs for Michigan Dlvislon. Will be responsible for coordinating public and municipal gov- ernment relations and legal aspects of land development. Must be skillful negotiator with exposure to assembling and zoning land for residential developments and demon- strated business judgment. He will participate in a fast. moving, profit-oriented management team and report to a young Division President! We are able to promote rapidly from within because curl average growth rate during the past: ten years has exceeded 35% annually. It you believe you are the unusual executive we are seeking, send resume and salary history to: llox cross, The Wall Street Journal \4 oh“ 'f/b/i/ ion, 625 Stanwix. Pittsburgh, Pa. 15222 ~ (A: Equal Opportunity orporl- ram-n / rural... in.» ' rorlliou Available M . APPENDIX IV ‘05 I 5/ 36/ ”w ANTED 217 [a continued . NOMEBUILOINC SUPER-STAN .We’re big but still lean. We’re the ooly nationwide single and multifamily ’ Wofoursiso'thatissfillitsown m. .We need a big, lean, unspoiled, self-sufficient division Presidllt. highly experienced in residential building. l We offer assistance from our national organisation, but the main thrust must come from you. Therewardsareoutetanding. If you arethe man', submit resume to: AMERICAN HOUSING oulLo National Office 2210 Fourth Avenue San Diego, California 92101 i 0Nattoa’s largest privately held builder of shale-family housing PROPERTY MANAGEMENT We are looking for an Assistant. to the President of one of the top 100 Development Organisations in the United States, located in and around the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota area. ~ The man selected will head up our newly formed Property Man- ement Division, and assume full responsibility in the o oration a over 1,000 apartment units. He will also be expected to urchaae and Sell Land Inventory; Manage, Rent and Control a number of smaller Commercial Enterprises; Arrange Joint Ventures, Limited Partnerships and Related ransactlons. This man must have a com lete college background and experience in the field of Property anagement. He can expect to receive a liberal commission and an exceptional salary. Our firm will be highly' selective in choosing the right man for this ‘position. If you feel you have the experience and initiative to hen e these responsibilitus contact: . Bax (IR-052, The Wall Street Journal ' PliET Calleislli flatn- housing and building products manufacturer listed on NYSE ; see a a vergspecial TOP EXECUTIVE to take the helm of new mum-plant tchen cabinet subsidiary. A ‘ Drallias, Texas area will be Home Office and first plant site for the u ‘ ‘0 8011011” who'll get top salary plus liberal bonus arrangement. Apply SLY grepeat only) f you're . o capable 0 assuming full profit and loss responsibility for multl-plant operation, 0 experienced in wood kitchen cabinets with a successful company, 0 capable of establishin Southeast and Southwest distributors. and 2 0 knowled cable of mo ern production techniques, equipment. and product esign. Send resume tot CHARLES AQUAVELLA BEDMAN INDUSTRIES 7000 Carpenter Freeway. Dallas, Texas 75847 All replies confidential. An equal opportunity employer. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT MANAGER; l I i I i Nation's largest publicly-held hous'mg company listed on NYSE has a rare l opportunity for someone with a. requisite thin. to act as tam. with local government officials. receive his. award and write contracts. co-ordinate archi- i tects and engineers on a l5 million dollar project that is destined to become i Chicago's most haurious apartment complex. Top salary with excellent compen- sation program including health and life insurance. profit sharing. plus unique potential for advancement in a company with annual average growth rate in ' excess of 30%. Send resume and earn'mgs history to Ir. William Koaaicett, i Kaufman I Bread Homes, Inc., 2 Salt Crook Lalo, H'msdde, Illinois 0052]. \lo phone caIs, please. . f An tarsal 099011118in Employer . oooo ........ ...mr-w-u-mrm'amata" : WISTBUGTIOI AGGOIIITAIT Large well-establidsed low-rise and high-rise apartment developer- contractor seeks individual with accounting and financial control experience. W S T 14.1’1' Initially otoeatabllshandtm entaeoonn rocedureeanda - are... "fr-ram... at. | -g.—‘ at otonegoitete-sb-eonsraeto temotomatn suppliers obreporteoeteendeonbactperlormanoeonregularhaeie totbepreeidensandflseobieiotooutructlon otofiithepreatdenttnvertedprojectplannlngasslgn- m otopertormalltbeaotnncflonealone ' Eventually oioeutpandandoveueetotalaeoonnflngtuncflm otoaaeumereeponsibllltynorflmnchlplanningandconh'ol otobeFlnanclaJVlce Preoldent Degree required. MBA desired. Five years of above experi- ence in construction Many in minimum. You will be a member otemauteam.Oompanyeommlttedtoonormwsgrowth.Great lakeelocatlon. Write in confidence. State background and compensation requirements. BOX com. um WALL emu JOURNAL Land Acquisition and Development Executive ”afar mum-market housing company listed on New York Stock Exchange seeks aggressive, dynamic attorney to take charge of land program for Michigan Division. Will be responsible for coordinating public and municipal govern- ment relations and legal aspects of land development. Must be skillful ne otiator with exposure to assembling and zoning Mama?“ developments and demonstrated business He will participate in a fast moving, profit-oriented man- agement team and report to a young Division President. We are able to promote rapidly from within because our average growth rate during the past ten years has exceeded ,A ,: 85% mutually. I] you believe you are the unusual executive - )5 we are seeking, send resume and salary history to: loss Chi-733, The Wall Street Journal «\(ll l..---------.-. a- - ~_ o:nov.“yooreoooosoooooooooooooooowr‘oroo “E1WE:‘iTIV‘WmtEiliiif l‘l‘) we APPENDIiX IV VICE. -c ontinued PRESIDENT REAL ESTATE Major management opportunity with lnorioa‘s leading builder. Levitt and Sons is seeking a creative management execu- tive with strong leadership qualities to head up and develop the vital real estate arm of our Company. To qualify. you must be thoroughly experienced in .all types of real estate including shopping centers. office buildings. industrial parlts and various residential uses such as multi—family housing, mobile homes. recreational land. etc. ' You must be able to evaluate the most profitable use of land we currently own as well as new sites for development. We are seeking an innovative manager able to deveIOp and utilize imaginative financial methods such as REIT and joint venture syndication. The responsibilities of the . position are of major import- ance to the growth of our Company. The salary is com- mensurate. Send resume to: Robert Ross, SVP-Operatlons . Levitt and Sons. Inc. Lake Success. N. Y. I l040 rectum sites transits Housmo Must have proven erporience and background In VA/FtiA, single lamiiy and townhouse subdivisions. Capable oi supervising and administering solos tome .on multl-prolect basis. _Provan odmtmstrator. strong on detail with knowledge o! sales, sales promotion, advertising and public relations ro- laited to boast» _ Industry. Excellent sale and ban its available to an lndiv ual capable of providing re- sults. Motor N.Y.S.l. developer. III“ “MD! autumn. IDIfllJIITlB GROUP III-201$”. _n-_——-_—_..e-. EXEBIIlWE Will or Tilt to liltll lEVEl MANAGER ixrwtin Director, listiooal Capital Housing lutltaity LOCATION: Washington. D. C. CLOSING DATE: January 31, I," ' A "'REAL "ESTATE """” mAmw‘mges Jargocrodusdin derolo‘p'mflts with sovoral thmtl'td M A N AG E R Housing programs :3: high lnov'ol.od‘mlnis|lrativo"ox;::i.om“ m 'c . Submit applications to: ' Mr. James 6. banks ' Assistant to the Mayor tor Housing Programs W1 more "Mt-t“- Washington, o. aboo's "1 bl“ l‘“ General Manager of land Development Co. .. desnoosiroted'record ofsuecess at. this an... as National publicly owned corporation needs General Manager for a ”9 “Nb" °l ‘fl’mm" "‘l _°‘ "u °‘ W° its newly established wholly owned subsidiary in land develop- R”' W M00090! “ll 5,0 moon-Obie for seelnag and meat. Must have minimum of 10 years experience in either resi- faring ml “M. 00d We- investments and for dential or industrial land development, Real Estate Broker's allow-potash investments. - License and preferably M-A-I. orlorminq this fraction. the m...- will ho utilizing 0 located in desirable metropolitan area ”70“"“flfill-dmlord contacts. in Southwestern U. S. . Mom benefits mm growth potential. o Salary commensurate with experience. a." “mm“ .5... o Excellent “Ital”. PPENDIX IV 219 Wooroa leading. W financial institution hood- ertero'd in Baltimore and are expanding or portfolio Wit-idles to include real estate investments. As ssh we have on immediate opening for a Real Estate roger. The candidate we seahwill have a eolleqe degoe o mbrimum of S-yeors orperieqoe in real canto and tgoge invading. in addition. the iucoesslul candidate will Interested applicants are invited to ‘lubmlt confidential a to: _ ”jg! Sweep. k can- with references to: . . w . Be 911.0! The w ll Street is I ‘Vlw “'J‘N-Coor-r x , . it onto - .1233 Regal Row, Dallas. Texas 75247 "ngggfiljggg. GOMPAIY ' - _ ‘ WWII-l GOISTBIIGTIOI DIVISIOI . . . mun ‘er- - - passing-_sevslesnsnt sellout will Marriott is «first low York state ls esotlsgr : EXECUHVE WC! MSW < — Construction - ' i 7'7""tnrlousl. orvstornrur Flltil (APARTIIENTS Alli) HOUSING) needs Land man for acquisition of *- sso,ooo Range + not sharing +‘ m shelter. Responsible for total management of the construction division, building multi-location turn-key projects. Re- quires an individual with “demonstrated construction management ability; one who is thoroughly familiar, with all phases of construction. Prater engineering degree. Must be an outstanding planner. organizer and _- leador. . GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT - («institution — $18,000 to $20,000 range + profit sharing. ‘ ‘ Responsible for full supervision of multi-locatlon proj-i: act superintendents; and for supervision o! vuloua’: conetruntipn projects to assure optinmm construction: activity and progress. Requires aaiindividual with: demonstrated ability to direct and control supervision- oi multi-site construction projects. Must be thoroughly: familiar with all details of construction work. Prefer; experience with wall-boaringmasonrytypoconstruction. 3;; U Ouelifled candidates are invited se seed serum in lull: m. including salary um, to Ian on»: mug; Mo'reaa equal opportunity employer.) 'Vl'l v7, .: ...- old line, quality oriented, growth company w our field. Due to the promotion of our pre man Ohio plant is in need of a resul oriented on we seek should have had P respons million sales. . ales, purchas- industrial relations. 1: corporation ern facilities. end brief letter or resume stating prior experience quirements to: nox 00-558, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL sites for development in Eastern and Southern portion at the U.S. Qualification Site Analysis Market Analysis Feasibility Studies Home Office—Midwest Compensation-Commensurate wi ' Qiniilicationa. Reply to: Box Cit-340. Wall ire-t Jo ' ‘ ,)\\:€: ‘(g ' 2' . .' 313.3?! ifl-fg‘oq' ‘ PLAITT MXNAGER Shelter Industry operation of at least e are a multi-pl V _ -- 220 la: ttAlIMIIAitEIl DIRECTOR 0| usrrrs & urinf MARKETING-"OMEBIIILDIIIG I " DEVELOPMENTAPPENDIX IV . . . . c ant n Major NYSE residential builder seeks two top marketing 1 ued . . . . . . Are you the man to head into!- managers with recent experience 1n California or Chicago national company, Chicagoland homebuilding operations. Top salary and bonus plan. homebuilding and planned devel- Qandldates should possess a minimum of 5 years quali- Opulent arm? fled expenence in the followina area- which he will be mile?“&°'iiii °£‘&°Jl§r'li§3. iii; asked to supervise. "t aratti‘on, congratuciion. srrliar- .—Market Research and Analysis \ Ll: "x'l‘gi'It-ttirlezlffgoagtar? Svsith Egg-ii “_PrOdm Pla'mung taitll‘h'gpchirr‘r‘ibgr's :fn hggzgtsnecog: "sat” 2i£“°$id5.3l°2°§.33313 $53,}. 1‘3“" —Market Planning ' - i .. lures-v.wns‘tn Jsael —Ade¢:t:1M and Pulzihctty h ' sees w. ern sr.. L; . Tan?“ 11 resume an salary 'story to: 7 m , Box 649-S, The Wall Street Journal _,_ ._ 2999 W. 6th St., los Angeles, Calif. 90005 an 'rssnrr'r usurious! T” We are an equal opportunity emDiO'UOt' “If ‘3 gupmnwgou NT + Life insurance company managing —~~ — -— ~— 3V:A_~v— *r real estate investment trusts seeks an experienced regional apartment supervisor. Must travel, have man- , agement and construction experi- ence. Send resume and salary his- tory to: Investment Division LI! 0 O O llnvsrs'roua msunancm 00* Assumes. 875 Collins none Due to our rapid expansion, we are in need of a profit-oriented l ‘- ' '0 5 individual with exceptional drive and intelligence who wants to be given the opportunity to become general manager 0! a con- struction company within one year. We are a large home building company with construction divi- sions in Chicago, Atlanta, Louisville, Indianapolis, Dallas, Collins- bus, and Dayton. ' d ,, A arilio.l= Send resume and salary history in confidence to: l 312;.3173133'333 grit-T3456. m I E BOX OBI-461, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL .. 0“ An laud! Opportunity Impiover ' _ '24 \ ll‘l‘i ‘fiflfl “"" “$77757 HOME BUILDING .. Hater homehutlder saelss personnel for suburban Chicago operationa ' . Production Hunger—Minimum s years experience directing S or ' more Supts. in site preparation, estimating, purchasing. construe- . ' tion, ate. at 100 plus unit R-l projects. Last. to Production venues—Requires knowledge of civil engineer- ing or house construction, plus strong affinity for numbers and management information systems. lead salary requirement and resume to: .0! art-s. Till WALL s-rnuu-r JOURNAL sees W. It!“ Street. Los Angelou. California eoeee nan—u- -- MI 4 l l l PIEISDENT for co. expanding from - l to modular. Sophistication; l 2:22:101'3'. Moirilelmodular‘ housing . expertise. StO-BOk area.‘ Executive! I’eruounel iv.. Vance Employment“. . .NEW JERSEY LICENSED ONLY 331mm ES SHELTER DEVELOPMENT SPEGIALISTS , . large N.Y.$.E. listed corporation in the building and develop- ;t‘ A. . mummy o, the “in", in“, corporal”! ha... ment business has need for outstanding personnel in chal- United States. we're continually growing, investing. and IOI‘Igll'tg and k0)! pOSIlIODS. w developing the booming real estate industry. . g e . " ' At present. we have tremendous Opportunities for soc-PROJECT FEASAIILITY SPECIALIST: Mortgage banking, M.A.l. "1 cos-ful. licensed ml "we "Mm" ‘0 “'m‘“ their-of F.H.A. experience various types of housing developments. " earnings even further as members of our d namic sales ’ mm “e"ms W "W Wm Cw“ “0"“ Wm h:CI-IIEF LAND PLANNER: landscape Architect and or urban and Top Commission rates. And you’ll have‘as . | . . . . best product, the finest company image,- furnished kudoJOOIONOI P anmng "'0'"an! H-U'D' Program ‘xpfl'mncel ‘c... and the highest earning potential. heavy experience in selling zoning and making presentations. n“ STANDS 10 REASliN THE Briers; HAS THE '-*- 'mud‘" magma" ”r c": N SYSTEMS or C P M SPECIALIST Create and control s n . . . . ystems ”.‘2 - ’ifinmgjfi'viofi for building, development operations, Government experi- « ence helpful. - Z : Development Corporation ' . W5 I MW ‘1 I . 3240 tterttr v“. M” l Please send complete Resume to. . I IJ P.O. Box 27”., Columbus, Ohio 43227 M..— ' Inglewood. New Jersey 0163i JOIN THE. AUERBACH SOCIAL IN URBANOLOGY 1 l ' AUERE. .e. . corporation isra' leader in the field .oi llllOfmdllon sciences and computer consulting;- Our'figcfi-Econdmic’ Division is actively engaged .in a variety of community development programs, including weltare "X i" " Urban . . - - prograrg eyalu "on; job matching systems, , , . anners legal gen/ices ogranis, law enforcement I . it ‘ J and public! systems deS'Igngs. A ~ .You will be conducting studies, iield eval- uations and/or analyses concerned with OPERATIONS RESEARCH ‘ ’ a . .. p , _ \ . , _ ing to assume responsibility at the . r . . ’- gathenng,‘ processing, communicating, Inter- 2e lg! or an ’astablisélad rinortgage . '. . - - - an ng us ness. x or once n l i ‘ ' Pret'ngr evaluatIng and d'SPIGYms 5°C”! creatin commercial an residential " loans. ealing with institutional in- M th ' t' ' data designed ,to imErove the ggalilty or ” urban life. You wr e wo Ing WIt an a ema ICIaHS’ wt in suc federal departments as DOT, ' ‘ DOL, HUD, HEW d various 521 I -‘ . ' an saeggencresi. _ . “Clo ogls S Analytical accuracy and creativity are the ' ' ’ Ireys to this dynamic technology. Supplemen- Economists tary experience in either data processing, statistics or operations research methodolo- gies is most desirable. Masters degree or eq'uivalent expertise, with two toe-tive years of experience is. required. . These are challenging,.rewardin3 and vital services..Tl'I¢' environment at AUERBACH is both free and stimulating. it you are in- terested in. these important. positions, send your resume, with salary require- ments, to Mr. M. J. Semrau, AUER- BACH Associates Inc., l2l N- Broad Street. Philadelphia, Pa. I9I07. We are, an edual opportunity employer. ~ AUERBACH .-: , PHILADELPHIA/WASHINGTONINEV/ YORK/aosrowssn FRANCISCO/LONDON \ “ maria éboIIIIIIImII _ l Modular Housing Excellent opportunity for the right man to join an e erienced, old line, strong over-the-counter company. We are an O a, multi- . plant corporation with modern facilities, recognized for our quality products. If you have a college degree, experience in the con- struction industry and a working knowledge of accounting, design and project development, respond to this advertisement. This is a high level, management position with our company. Sand brie! letter or resume stating salary requirements to: BOX 00-506, m WALL STREET JOURNAL 31,9,” w-- . in sales :————-- I..-‘ M l APPENDIX IV continued --~ Positions Available REAL ESTATE MAN AGE]! Complete charge of 400 townhome cooperative. Send full details, sal- ary requirements, in first letter. Secretary. Colonial Square Cooper- ative, 3012 Williamsburg, Ann Ar- bor, Michigan 48104. . - AAA-AAA MORTGAGE OFFICER ‘ We seek aggressive individual will— vestors. and mortgage servicing a must. Compensation commensurate with eXperience and ability. Lo- cated in Chlcagoland area. Box (JP-413. The Wall ...fo1 ...... ’ HEARING EXAMINER est ZONING {bl-II Prince George's County, Md. 821.!)75 to 829.449. Entrance above minimum ossibie for persons with super or qualifications. Re- quirements: Be an attorney ad- mitted to practice before the highest court of a state or of the District of Columbia. possess {udiclai temperament, have at east five years experience in administrative litigation. and demonstrate a knowled e of ad- ministrative‘ and son as law. .mgn- \ + I ’ ' l I I . promotion-minded. General knowledge of residential construction and depecihm. Ex ant I t. i . ll org old, 11221537 productive hrm. Will involve extensive it“s e1. h' it corn , " vidl'ial viiiqth g "understanding at current market conditions. Send resume clearly stating edua; practice. and procedure by writ- ten examination (at locations convenient throughout country). Apply by letter or hone by clos (1’57i’ufmu' (4:30 .M.) May , o: Pereolsnel Office. Court [I’m Marlboro. M Must have solid varied background ' an sales training—very in home sales ' experience 6 future with 45 nation and benefits {or riot: indi- tion and family situation. dated work history. SEEKING Plilil-‘ESSIOIIIII. MllllAGEIi FOB IIIIJoII RESIDENTIAL GOMPLEX One of the finest, largest mulii-building apartment develop- I ments in America; located in Chicago. Need professionally competent, personable property management executive ex- perienced in maior residential developments. To head up over-all administration and direction. Generous salary and ben its for the man with the qualifications and enthusiasm. compensation Rapidly "pending Prefect Engineers. Will prepare feasibility studies. preliminary-final construction plans. estimates. ele.. developments. P.U.D.'s. commercial. etc. All levels of espe- rienoedeeired. Heavy bootleg. Firm paid benefits. Bonus program. Equal opportunity empleyer. Some day veepense. .. ...,. “similarity: in requirements. 2 7530 TIMES. ENGINEER Site PlannIng consultant has annual growth openings-lor- ier single and multi-lemily 85 Metre Perk Rochester. New York I462) e. \“ . lb! 1’ Box (.10-205, The Wall Street Journal \ Kaufman and Broad l'IOlllO Stale-Is; lee. Offers a rare opportunity to ioin one of the no- tion’s fastest growing mobile home manufac- .turars at the perfect time . . . We have iust completed the first phase (increas- ing from two to seven manufacturing facilities) of a planned expansion program . . . Qualified candidates for sales, purchasing, inan- ufacturing, and general management—by acting now—will have many outstanding opportunities for rapid promotion. Your ioining a winner on the way up, when you are accepted . . . Write us today enclosing a confidential resume. _KasiIIIaII & Broad lloIIIe Syrians, IIIe. ' 10801 National Boulevard los Angeles, California APPENDIX IV continued -..AAAAAA-A -A‘ -‘A-AAA " vvvvvvvvvvvv‘vvv‘vvvv‘vvvv‘v‘ .A‘AA-AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-AAA A—AA- FIIIAIIGE MANAGER Leading community developer and homebullder seeks young. ambitious and creative manager for Mortgage Finance Depart- ment. ReSponsibilities: To se- cure, process and expedite mort- gage financing for FHA, VA and Conventional Housing Pro- grams. Degree in Law, Accounting, or .M.B.A. preferred. Excellent sai. ary and other benefits, plus tre- mendous opportunity for chal- lenging work and rapid man- agement advancement. 0 u r employees know of thi d. ’ Box cross. Wall Etna; M ‘m'siiiriiiisim Land Development ll *1 siti'siisn W T° FWWM "500" Company offers Executive engineer to head Engineering Department in rapidly €§.'§:;f,l“g,g:,‘;;°:glhg tggrfuglts; in expanding Detroit area. Assignment: to coordinate and direct “12-190911“? “a, 3;,ng ¥ArigXG£¥i activities of all civil engineering in order to meet land improve- uIIII madman “ MANAGER Our land developmmt ubsidlary requlree'experlenced individual to manage land development activities in various locations. Re- sponsible for acquisition. zoning work, religiosity studies, cost . M, hid lotions, and supervision of contracts. Should have degree ,equivalant ph- at lesst 2 years related experience. Will , I" 4’“ W in Lafayette, Indiana. Reply to n. w. Moberg. NATIONAL HOMES GORP. \ll r.o. sex 080, WHERE. IND. «90! An taunt Opportunity Employer 1’ rements, engineering designs and Construction sched- duties will include establishing cost estimates for etermlnlng feasibility costs for proposed projects, overnmental approvals of plans, directing develop- glneering sched as to assure accurate and complete of maps, plans for single and mum-family housing t contacts with consultants and governmental reg- s. Engineering degree with at least ten years ex- areas such as contract negotiations, cost estimating, w and zoning. t starting salary, fringe benefits and growth potential ptionel man who has the necessary statistics and it complete resume in writing only including earn- to: lEVlTl‘ AND SONS, iNCOliPORA‘I’ED 28815 Northwestern Highway sane-nerd, Michigan ms 01‘) r 1 An Equal Opportunity Employer _‘n- Positions Available AAAAA A‘ A-AAAAAAAAAAAA_AA-AAAAAAAA AAA- v v'v ' v v'vvvvvv'vv v'vvv 'v'vv r-w— 223 REM. ESTATE SALES! The BRANIGAR ORGANIZATION Positions Available APPENDIX IV continued : cousrnuenou 3mm: MANAGER ionaJ manufacturer of Building Systems is seeking a man oughly familiar with building construction, including :tlon of light structural steels. ReSponsibilities will in- e erection subcontracts, identifying and settling field ilems with dealers and erectors. Minimum 5 years pre- s experience required. a Illinois’ outstanding land develOpment company for over 50 'actlve starting salary and extensive employee benefits. years is expanding operations at APPLE Gllllllll LAKE near Ialana, Illinois This is a big 3,000 acre development consisting of 2600 HOMESITES surrounding a 500 acre Lake. We need bitious salesmen capable of earning 518,000-540,000 YEARLY Vacant property sellingvexpcflmhut‘ not neces- . and has exte sary. Top commissions, and good chance for advancement. This is an outstanding career opportunity to join a growing, company with a 50 year history of success. Please call Mr. Simmer for full details. :1 resume in confidence to: ox C0648, The Wall Street Journal An Equal Opportunity Employer 7’ z: PRESIDENT mama: sumo rum ago area company is seeking a presidentfor its mort- t banking subsidiary. The person we are Iooikng for is sntly in the mortgage banking field, at an executive ive background in FHA mortgage fi- :ing. The compensation is comp etely negotia e on w: mnificant capital gains potential. Box CP-337, The Wall Street J‘u‘l'kl“ am- Thomrgmrfiimon, Inc. Irving Park and Mean-ah lids. Modlnnla, lllinois soisr‘ 025-8200 894-1400 ”h“ ““iioii‘ Estate Production Manager Purchasing Agent To grow with one oi America's fastest-growing real estate developers This young. aggressive community developer is growing hyleapsandbounds. Weneod twoiopmanagementreal estate pros who can keep up with our pace. and quicken oiugrothBothwillworkonlarge.excitingaparunont and single dwelling projects in New York area. We need a take-charge Production "anger with a proven track record. An individual who knows construction likethepahnoihishand. Whocanmanageatnulti-mlllion dollar fact from concept to fulfillment. We need a cracker- lack I I”!!! with a heavy construction background and solid experience dealing with contractors. handling cost esdmadng. budgets. etc. ”VIN Please send resume with salary requirements to: X 774! TM" An Equal Opportunity Zuployer national. lllliEliTOliS nousme DEVELOPMENT 8.] firm with program to build over 100,000 units of housing / and moderate income families seeks individuals with five e estate develo ment experience and substan- I122$;l’ieesl'ircse(:frilthalr‘HidL multi-farl'lily programs to direct region- >perations. d resumes and salary requirements to: Herbert Mouser NATIONAL “(RISING PARTNERSHIP i133 Fifteenth St.. N.W. “‘1' ’l'ph'Washington, D. C. 20005 yvva 'vv' VV AAAAAA. EX GUT VE a ma or re i ing in the St. Louis area and a dential c e are , iced top 8 young, dlnamic company rations; a man rtruction linen : xpuuflif oceans-y "Hug: a): art-site , n , direct manage and integrate man differe angfcem g: welcomflrfat‘lve :mdjv ti négfii?;£ , a ve antes the maul-2:3: to the individual to use all his available in. Roomepiymto: open and dependent Upon ap licant nox 09-313, THE WALL swam JOURNAL? 417! .fl runo- anneal" U4? *' mp“... infill“-.. " A ‘i~~ ‘ 22h I ’L Mobil ome" FINANCING SPECIALIST Ford Mater Credit Company, a wholly owned sub- sidiary of Ford Motor Co., has an immediate opening at corporate staff for an individual with seasoned experience in planning, developing, and servicing mo- bile home financing business. ‘ I The successful candidate must have alternative saloo- financing experience including an excellent wcrflng knowledge of W Mg arrange- ments. IModeratetl'avellsrogulredintninlnghl'nchlnd' dealerperoonnel. I A college degree is desirable. but not mandatory. I'lhispooitIOn offers an exceptional opportunity for personalchaliengeandresponsibilityinagrowlngos- ganisation. Our cotnpesmoidon and benefit programs aremexcelledlnfhesales-financebuslness. For immediate can consideration, please send ro- l . mm . APPENDIX IV continued CONSTRUCTION. EXECUTIVE 9 Expanding international motel organisation is seeking a dy- ic results-oriented well nded executive for the De- ment Division. Candidate have 10 years of experi- commercial or light in- J HOSAJm a-w , 4A DENVER, COLORADO ' * - APARTMENT MANAGER Position ’ Available for top «nun: ' manager {gas development of over coo to. for husband [wife hutg‘r'ltll consi 1y “a Wfiflfln - UH.- _IJ sumo detailing worms educational and salary requdromente to: ’ J wg individual. Parsonsollocra'diogsdeIaco-oot 7'“ EH18. l nan-rum ‘ m m Cl’Odl‘l COmpll'ly 2 Life insura.noe comp. ‘ managing" . Th . ‘ Truaegate lozegtgie‘nglruot‘onoeek: ' ‘13,, " n . On 0 on .u . q 0 American Bead, Bourbon. men. 0111 7.“ H T “pom“, anilfioé’tx‘uh‘g" 3.3. , .a. e on s c n on - AfiMW‘W ”MW" It]! " I I. egos. Send resume and gates? pfris- . - l tory to: Investment Division In!!! . - , INVESTO” ENDURANCE CO 0" mamas. ass Oolllu land i; IL. Cedar Rapids. Iowa sues. ._o REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST COHSTWC’l'lon l-Odll Officer CONSTRUCTION cosr CONTROL MANAGER Leading national mum-family de- veloper has an opportunity for man with construction experience to assume responsibilities involving Dynamic, los Angeles based I.E.l.‘l. with an unprecedented growth record seeks an aggressive and intelligent loan officer with some ex- perience in real estate financing of large commercial or residential protects. Selected candidate will become a regional vice president responsible for morheting and loan placement in a males geographic area. looking or mortgage company experience highly desirable, 'but will consider those with experience selling a financial service. Position offers on outstanding, diversified amponsoflon package and unlimited growth opportunities. Seed resume and earnings history to. Dex sre-v, ‘I'ho Well street Journal W” 1] MW. “flopluwlflomoMS 'Sr "l'l’b/ 1! Columbus, Ohio sans cost and budgeting for our many apartment develOpments, and for our new housing for sale program. Position will otter the right man tremendous challenge and good salary. Send resume to: Mr. John Cavendish THE KLINGBEIL 00. 42 E. Gay 8t. 225 APPENDIX V. LISTING OF POTENTIAL EMPLOYERS OF HOUSING PROFESSIONALS (a) (b) (c) (d) (0) AND SKILLS Home planning, furnishing and decorating, advisory or consulting services which are a part or commercial operations or independent consultants Financial institutions and larger insurance companies with interests in residential investments Large insurance brokers Investment trusts with residential investments Housing and planning (city, community, urban, rural), consulting firms, incl. architectural, engineering and design firms (f) Co-op organizations (a) Media of all types (11) Voluntary trade and professional associations and (i) (k) organizations Information centers New Town development, examples: Jonathan, Minnesota Park Forest South, Illinois St. Charles Communities, Maryland Flower Mound New Town, Texas Hamille, Arkansas New Century Town, Illinois Columbia, Maryland Reston, Virginia Clear Lake City. Texas Irvine, California Sun Cities, Florida, Arizona, California Lake Havasu City, Arizona Sylvander, New York Also 'New Town in Town' developments 226 APPENDIX.V. continued (1) Government, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Health, Education and'Welfare Agriculture, incl. Farm Credit Administration Commerce Interior Defense TVA and Regional Commissions National Science Foundation Economic Opportunity Science and Technology Environmental Protection Congressional Offices Home Loan Bank Board National Capital Housing Authority Washington Mayor's Office FNMA and GNMA Rural Electric Cooperatives (m) Government, State Governors' Offices Housing Commissions and Authorities Planning and Development Urban.Renewal Environmental Protection Codes Social Work Agencies (n) Government, Local Mayors' Offices Housing Commissions and Authorities Planning Commissions Urban Renewal Codes and Regulations, incl. Enforcement and Environmental Protection (0) Education on all levels incl. Extension and Continuing Education (p) Corporate enterprise with interests in.housing Albee Hemes Aluminum.Company of America Aluminum Company of Canada Ltd. American Acronomics Corporation American.Building Maintenance Industries .49.; 227 APPENDIX V. continued American.Continental Homes, Inc. American Cyanamid Corporation American Electric Power Company American Standard, Inc. AMFAC, Inc. Amrep Corporation Anaconda Corporation Arlen Properties, Inc. Armstrong Cork Company Arvida Corporation AVCO Corporation Baird & warner, Inc. Ball Bros. Research Corporation Behring Corporation Big Sky of Montana, Inc. Bloomfield Building Industries, Inc. Boeing Company Boise-Cascade Corporation Bramalea Consolidated Developments Ltd. 3 H Building Corporation Canaveral International Corporation Capital Divers (Canadian) Celanese Corporation Contex.Construction Corporation Champion Home Builders Company Christiana Oil Corporation Chrysler Realty Corporation Citizens Financial Corporation City Investing Company CNA Financial Corporation Commercial Credit Company The Commodore Corporation Community Dimensions, Inc. Conchemco, Inc. Conner Homes Corporation Consolidated Building Company Continental Homes, Inc. Cousins Properties, Inc. Crawford Corporation Dart Industries, Inc. Development Corporation of America (DOA) Deltona Corporation De Rose Industries, Inc. Eaton‘Yale & Towne Corporation Edwards Industries Engelhard Minerals & Chemical Corporation Federal Housing Systems Corporation First Hartford Realty Corporation 228 APPENDIX V . continued First National Realty & Construction Corporation Fleetwood Enterprises. Inc. Florida Gas Company Ford Motor Company Forest City Enterprises Frouge Company Fuqua Homes, Inc. General Builders Corporation General Electric Company General Financial Systems, Inc. Great Southwest Company Gulf Oil Company Grumman Corporation Hallmark Cards, Inc. Hallcraft Homes, Inc. Hercules, Inc. Hodgson Houses, Inc. Hunt Building Marts Inland Steel Corporation Instrument Systems Corporation International Paper Company International Telephone 8: Telegraph Company Investment Corporation of Florida Investors Funding Company Irvine Company J ohns-Manv i lle C orp oration Kaiser Aluminum a Chemical Corporation Kaiser Hawaii Kai Development Company Kaiser Industries Corporation Kaufman 8c Broad, Inc. Kenilworth Associates Key Company Kit Manufacturing Company Knutson Companies, Inc. Leroy Corporation Leisure Technology Corporation Liberty Homes, Inc. Life Realty 8: Apartment leasing Corporation Marcor, Inc. Mariette Homes, Inc. Maryland Community Development, Inc. Mastercraft Homes, Inc. McCulloch Oil Corporation McGrath Corporation Michigan Consolidated Gas Company Midwestern Finance Company H. Miller 8: Sons Mobile Homes Industries Mobil Oil Corporation 229 APPENDIX‘V. continued Modular Housing Systems Monarch.Industr1es National Environmental Corporation National Gypsum.Company' National Homes Corporation Nationwide Homes Corporation Newhall Land & Farming Company Niagara & Mohawk Power Company Olin Corporation Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation Parkwood Homes, Inc. Pease Company Potlatch Forests, Inc. Presidential Realty Corporation Presley Development Company Pulte Homes Realty Income Trust Reasor Corporation Redman Industries, Inc. Republic Development Corporation Revenue Properties, Ltd. Reynolds Metals Corporation Rex-Noreco Richardson Homes Corporation Robino-Ladd Rohr Corporation House Company Ryan Homes, Inc. Scholz Homes, Inc. Schult Mobile Home Corporation Sear-Brown Sears, Roebuck & Company Shappel Industries Shell Oil Company Shelter Resources Singer Company Skyline Corporation Southwest Forest Industries Southwest Land.Corporation C. D. Spanger Construction Company Standard Pacific Corporation The Stanley'Wonks Stirling Homes: Corporation Sunset Occidental Petroleum Corporation SVP-Operations Swift Industries Tenneco, Inc. Thiokol Corporation .23 0 APPENDIX V . continued Tishman Realty Corporation Town & Country Mobile Homes Transamerica Corporation Transamerico. Development Corporation TRW, Inc. UGI Corporation J. W. Underwood Company Urban Investment a Development Corporation U.S. Financial Corporation U.S. Gypsum Corporation U.S. Home Development Corporation U.S. Industries, Inc. United States Steel Company Vindale Corporation Jim Walter Corporation Del E. Webb Corporation Washington Homes Wasserman Development Corporation Western Orbis Westinghouse Electric Corporation Weyerhaeuser Company Wick Building Systems, Inc. Wickes Corporation Zimmer Homes Corporation (q) Research where applicable to any of the above.