The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR JA M ES J. D AV IS, Secretary CHILDREN’S BUREAU G R A C E A B B O T T . Chief ' CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AN INTERPRETATION OF DATA CONCERNING DEPENDENT CHILDREN UNDER THE CARE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGENCIES BY EMMA O. LUNDBERG and MARY E. MILBURN Bureau Publication No. 140 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1924 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis SINGLE COPIES OE THIS PUBLICATION MAT BE OBTAINED FR EE UPON APPLICATION TO THE c h i l d r e n ’ s b u r e a u , a d d it io n a l c o p ie s m a y BE PROCURED FROM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 20 C E N T S P E R COPY https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 3 U.«o^€- $ >4° CONTENTS. Page. Letter of transmittal_________________________ J_____ Vn What child dependency means in the District and how it can be prevented1 The dependency problem______________ L(_3___ 1 The ratio'of dependency.._____ ____________ _____________ i Factors in child dependency___________ ________'1_ ____ 3 The prevention of child dependency_________________ _____ ___ _ 6 Adequate social investigation_____ _____________ __________ 7 Child-study clinic___________________________________ f_____ 8 Public aid to children in their own homes______ /__!___ 8 Rehabilitation of families_________________ 1___ ___________ 10 The relation between public and private agencies___ __________ t_ 11 Concerted action in the revision of child-welfare laws_____________ 13 Standards of care for dependent children__ ___________ ____ _____ 15 The Children’s Bureau study of child dependency in the District of Colum bia_________________ ______ __•___ ,____ __________________ P___ _ 17 The purpose of the study and its definition___ _______ L 17 Children’s agencies and institutions studied_________________ 19 The Juvenile Court_________________ 19 The Board of Children’s Guardians_____________________________ 20 '* Institutions under private auspices_______________________ __ 21 Statistical interpretation of the dependency problem__________ I 22 22 Children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians_______ _ Basis of the study. ______________________________. . . . __ __ 22 Wards of the board________________________ ___ 22 Minority and temporary commitments____________________ 22 Reasons for commitment_______________ ,____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 4 Age at commitment, sex, and race__ _____________________ __ 26 Localities from which the children came_____ ___ . . . _______ 27 Parental status____________________ 28 Custodians at time of commitment___________________ _____ 31 33 Records of families and children_______ _________________ _ Contributions of parents to the support of the children ________ 36 Comparison of the use of various types of placements_____ __ _ 37 Physical and mental condition of the children_________ _____43 Conduct of children while under care of the board_____ ______ 46 48 Wards discharged during one year________ _________________ Children under care of private institutions__________________ < 51 Institution population____________________________________ ' 52 Age when received, sex, and race___________________ _ _______ 53 Custodians of children before their entrance to institutions___ _ _ j 53 Parental status_____________________________ 54 Contributions of parents to the support of the children_______ 55 Children discharged from care during one year._____ ...______ 55 Methods of the Board of Children’s Guardians__ _______________ ____ 57 Departments of work______________________________ 57 Investigation of dependency and neglect cases_____________ i ....__ 57 The policy of the board in regard to placement._______ _______59 Placements of wards on June 30, 1923_________ ^__ ________ 60 Similarity with methods of leading States__ ,__ 60 Present policy compared with that of previous years ^_______ 62 Family-home placements______________________________________ 62 Method of selecting homes___ __________ __________________ 62 Geographical distribution of homes____________ 63 The use of boarding and free homes____________ ____________ 64 Indenture discontinued_______ 67 Policy regarding adoptions________ 67 Homes for handicapped children________ __________________ 67 Placement with own family____________________ In'________ 68 Self-supporting wards____ ______ 68 hi https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis IV CON TENTS. Methods of the Board of Children’s Guardians—Continued. PageInstitutional care____________- — . __— ---------- ------------------------69 Number of children in institutions--------------------------------------69 Institutions under District control----------•---------------------------70 Private institutions used by the board — -----------------------------72 Institutional care of handicapped children--------------------------74 Hospital care and special treatment--------------------------------------75 The question of an institutional adjunct to the board----------76 81 Private institutions engaged in child-caring work----------__---------- — Institutions for dependent children----------- — _-------------- — ;- - 81 Agencies concerned with dependent families and children. __ — -------83 Other agencies engaged in child-caring work____ — _— -----83 The development of a Catholic child-caring agency._— — __ 84 Protective work_________ :_ ------------------------------------------ - - - — 85 Stories illustrating the problems dealt with by the Board of Children’s Guardians____________________________________ _________ _____86 Aid to dependent children in their own hom es.,---------------------------------96 • The extent of the need in the District of Columbia.-------- ____'------96 Estimate of appropriation needed for the District of Columbia-------100 Essentials of a “ mothers’ pension” law-----------------------— -------101 Persons to whom aid may be given--------------- ---------------- -----102 Terms and amount of allowance-----------------------------------------105 Administration and procedure . . . — , . ----------- ---------------------107 109 Staff for administration of mothers’ pensions---------------- ------------. . . Bills introduced in Congress providing for aid to dependent children in their own homes------------ ---------__------------- -------------- - - - - — 109 Text of pending “ mothers’ pension” bill----------------— _— ---------110 The development of child-caring work in the District of Columbia--------142 The development of private child-caring work----- ------- ---------------112 The development of public child-caring work___ - - - - - — ------- .--116 The beginning of public supervision of charities--------------.------117 The origin of the Board of Children’s Guardians__________— 118 The first years of public child-caring work---------. . . --------------122 The problem of adequate support------------------------- -_•— __— 124 127 Increase in the work____________________ _________ -___.------Congressional inquiries concerning the care of dependent children---129 131 Joint Congressional Committee of 1896________ _______--------Report to Congress by the District commissioners in 1904-------135 The “ White House Conference,” 1909__ _______________ _— 138 Appendix A.—General tables----------- -------------------------- ...----------------143 Table 1.— Number and per cent distribution in various types of place ment at end of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians under minority commitment.___ 143 Table 2.—Number and per cent distribution in various types of place' ment at end of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of 144 Children’s Guardians under temporary commitment----Table 3.—Color and sex of dependent and delinquent children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, by type of commitment--------------144 Table 4.—Institutions caring for wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians on June 30 of each year ________--------------145 Table 5.—Age at time of commitment of children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, by type of commitment_______— ------------------148 Table 6.—Age when received, type of commitipent, color, and sex; children received by the Board of Children’s Guardians during the year May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921----- ______ 149 Table 7.—Type of placement, by color and sex and by age, of chil dren under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 15, 1921_________________________—4 150 Table 8.—Length of time under care of children who were wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians at some time during the year May 1 6 ,1920-May 15,1921, by age at discharge or at the end of the year______ _______'J - — .-_------ — 151 Appendix B.—Laws relating to the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia________ _ — _____ — :------ -,--152 Appendix C.—List of references to material on the public and private child-caring work in the District__________:_______----157 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CO NTENTS. V CH ARTS. P age. Dependent children in the District of Columbia: Proportions cared for by public agency and by private institutions_______________________ Proportions of white and colored children under care of the public agency and private institutions and in the total population of the District of Columbia____________ ___________________ ._______ ____________ Parental status of children under care of the public agency and private institutions in the District of Columbia___________________________ Custodians from whom children were removed by the juvenile court and committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians___________________ Placement at end of year of children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians_______________________________________________ Board of Children’s Guardians, District of Columbia: Number of times wards were placed_________________________ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 18 25 30 32 38 42 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. U. S. D epartm ent Ch of *La b o r , B urea i l d r e n ’s u , Washington, February 5, 1924. S i r : There is transmitted herewith a report on Child Dependency in the District of Columbia, by Emma O. Lundberg and Mary E. Milburn of the social-service division of the Children’s Bureau. Elva Dunkle, also of the social-service division, was of special assistance in the preparation of material which has been incorporated in the report. This study was undertaken at the request of the Board of Chil dren’s Guardians of the District of Columbia and also of the Wash ington Council of Social Agencies. Respectfully submitted. G r a c e A b b o t t , Chief. Hon. J a m e s J . D a v i s , Secretary of Labor. VII https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. WHAT CHILD DEPENDENCY MEANS IN THE DISTRICT AND HOW IT CAN BE PREVENTED. From dependency statistics a picture may be constructed of one important phase of community life. Through them the types of treatment used may be ascertained, and they furnish an indication of the social intelligence and the skill of the persons charged with the management of institutions and agencies. The material presented in this report not only is of importance as portraying the child-dependency problem that is dealt with at the resent time by the child-caring agencies of the District of Columbia ut should be'of some value as a basis for the determination of future policy. In interpreting this material the emphasis should be placed not on possibilities of reducing the financial burden borne by the public treasury and by private institutions and agencies but rather on what dependency means to each one of almost 4,000 chil dren who during each year, under present conditions in the District, must be provided for by public or private agencies or institutions because they have no homes or their own homes have proved in adequate. E THE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. THE RATIO OF DEPENDENCY. The District of Columbia is almost entirely urban, with unusual industrial conditions because of its position as the National Capital and with a population that is very mobile. The racial composition of the population is an important factor in the child-dependency problem of the District.1 This factor gives rise to special problems in connection with hous ing, living standards, sanitation, health, and the care and protection that can be afforded children under certain living conditions. While it is generally conceded that the negro population of the District^— which comprises 25 per cent of the total—is on a higher economic level, on the *whole, than that of many cities or States where the race represents a large proportion of the population, it is undoubtedly true that the negro population of the District is economically a dis advantaged group in comparison with the white population. On the basis of figures reported by the Board of Children’s Guardians and the private institutions caring for dependent chil dren, compared with the census data for the population of the Dis1 The total population of th e District of Columbia under 21 years of age in 1920 was as follows:White, 95,680; negro, 36,518. (Fourteenth Census of the United States, Vol. I l l , Population, pp. 178, 180. U. S. Bureau of the Census, Washington, 1922.) https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA . trict under 21 years of age, the interesting ratios shown in the fol lowing table are obtained for the years 1904, 1910, and 1922.2 Number of dependent children per 1,000 of the population under 21 years of age in the District of Columbia. Dependent children per 1,000 population u nder 21 year of age. Year. Under care of Board of In private Children’s institutions. Guardians. Total. 10 10 7 12 15 15 22 25 22 A number of District of Columbia children are placed in Maryland institutions, but most of these are delinquent children; the number of dependent children placed in institutions outside the District is practically offset, so far as could be ascertained, by temporary place ment in District institutions of children who belopg in adjoinmg States. . , ,. Thus it is seen that there have been m the District of Columbia during this period from 22 to 25 dependent children per 1,000 of the general population under 21 years of age. The ratio in 1922 was lower than in 1910 and the same as in 1904. Increase in the popula tion of Washington and postwar conditions have not caused the increase that might have been expected in the child-dependency problem. , . . The dependency ratios are especially interesting in the case of colored children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians and the private institutions, as shown in the following table: Comparative ratios for dependent children per 1,000 of the white and colored population under 21 years of age. Dependent children per 1,000 population under 21 years of age. Year. White. 1904 _ __________________ 1922 .............- ____ _____ ____ --- Under care of Board of Children’s Guardians. Total. 19 21 15 Colored. 25 34 34 White. 7 8 8 Colored. 2^* 34 33 In private insti tutions. White. 12 13 ,7 Colored. 3 1 The table also shows that the greater part of the negro dependency problem is handled by the public agency. s The census figures used for population are for 1900, 1910, and 1920. D ata for the Board of Children s Guardians and th e private institutions are from the census volumes on benevolent institutions for 1904 and 1910. and from figures for 1922 obtained b y the Children’s Bureau from the agency and institutions. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OF O H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y . 3 I t is obvious that any attempt to compare the dependency prob lem in the District of Columbia with that in any of the States or in any of the large cities of the States must take into account especially the existence in the District of the large colored popula tion that is disadvantaged economically as compared with the white inhabitants. In the absence of census figures on children under care of agencies and institutions for a date later than 1910 it is not profitable to attempt comparison of the dependency ratios in the District of Columbia and the ratios for other cities. Many of the conditions peculiar to the Nation’s Capital would point toward a higher de pendency rate than would be found in many other cities; and it would be obviously unfair to compare the dependency rate in the District of Columbia—with a population resident in the one large city—and rates for States. FACTORS IN CHILD DEPENDENCY. The following brief summary of the nature of the child-depend ency problem in the District of Columbia is based on data analyzed in later sections of this report, concerning dependent children under public and private care during one year—2,444 children under care of the District Board of Children’s Guardians and 1,174 children in private institutions from which information was secured. Both, parents dead.—An. outstanding fact concerning the children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians and in the institu tions for dependent children during the year is the small propor tion who had lost both parents by death. Only 5 per cent of all children under the care of the public agency and 12 per cent of those in private institutions were orphans, i. e., children who had lost both parents. I t happens that the percentage is exactly the same for the group of children committed to the Board of Chil dren’s Guardians by the juvenile court as dependent and for those brought before the court because of delinquency. There is a con siderable difference between the percentages of orphans among the white and the colored children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians—3 per cent for the former and 6 per cent for the latter. One parent dead.—Almost one-third of all the children were half orphans. The proportion was twice as high for the children in pri vate institutions as for those under the care of the public agency—54 per cent of the former and 25 per cent of the wards of the board. At the time of commitment to the board more than four-fifths of the children whose fathers were dead were living with their mothers. Of those whose mothers were dead two-fifths were received from the custody of the fathers. I t was found that 61 per cent of all the half orphans were with the surviving parent at the time when they were received by the Board of Children’s Guardians. Home unsuitable, though both parents present..-*- Aimost one-sixth of all the children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guard ians during one year had been removed by the court from homes in which both father and mother were living. An additional 6 per cent came from homes in which there were a father and a stepmother or a mother and a stepfather. Thus 21 per cent of the children under https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OE C O L U M B IA . the care of the board were removed from the custody of both parents or of a parent and a step-parent. For the private institutions in adequate information was secured as to the presence of both parents in the home; but less than 4 per cent were reported as having both parents living. This is doubtless attributable to the fact that chil dren removed by the court from the custody of both parents because of neglect or bad home conditions were committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians. The proportion of children removed from the custody of both parents was greater for delinquent children than for children who were brought before the court because of dependency—35 per cent for the former and 15 per cent for the latter—the percentage of children removed from step-parental homes being more than twice as large among the delinquent as among those committed because of depend ency. The proportion of cases in which the child was removed from the custody of both parents was greater for the white children than for the colored—26 per cent as compared with 18 per cent. Thirtythree per cent of the children committed temporarily and 18 per cent of those committed until they should become 21 years of age were removed from homes in which both parents were living. Abandonment and desertion.—Next to the death of one or both parents, the abandonment of children by both parents or desertion of the family by the father or the mother was the most frequent cause of dependency. Of all the wards of the board 16 per cent were in this class, including those received as foundlings or abandoned, others concerning whose parentage nothing was known at the time of com mitment, and children whose fathers or mothers had deserted their families. Of the children in institutions for whom information was secured, 8 per cent were reported as foundlings or abandoned, or as deserted by one parent. The larger part of the problem of children made dependent by abandonment and desertion is dealt with by the public agency, perhaps because these are usually court- commit ments. Divorce and separation.—Information obtained concerning divorce and separation of parents of children included in the study can not be considered very accurate. I t is probable, also, that many cases reported as desertion should be added to the number of cases of ‘jrmrents not living together”—which is apparently as definite a term as the information justifies for divorce and separation as here reported. Under this general heading are included 10 per cent of all the children cared for by the public agency and 14 per cent of those reported by private institutions. Parent in an institution.—The dependency of the child was related to institutional commitment of one or both parents in 11 per cent of the cases under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians. In a number of cases one parent was in an institution and the other was dead, so that the children were entirely dependent. Of the children in this group both parents of almost one-tenth, the mothers of over one-half, and the fathers of almost two-fifths were in hospitals, insane asylums, prisons, or jails. Unmarried mothers.—-Of the children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians for whom information on this point was obtained, 25 per cent were reported as of illegitimate birth. Only https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OP O H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y . 5 8 per cent of the children under the care of private institutions were reported as born out of wedlock. It is interesting to note that the percentage of children of illegiti mate birth among children under the care of the public agency com pares very closely with that among dependent children under the care of the division of the government of Massachusetts, which deals largely with the same types of problems as the District of Columbia Board of Children’s Guardians. In a study of the children under the care of the division of minor wards, Massachusetts State Board of Charity (now division of child guardianship, Massachusetts De partment of Public Welfare), it was found that 23 per cent of the more than 7,000 children under care during one year were bom out of wedlock.3 Further analysis of the data concerning the children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District shows that 83 per cent of the children of illegitimate birth who were committed to the board were colored. This is in contrast to the proportion of all wards who were colored (62 per cent). Only 11 per cent of the white wards, as against 33 per cent of the colored wards, were known to be illegitimate. These percentages would undoubtedly have been considerably increased if the facts as to the foundlings and all the abandoned and homeless children had been known; doubtless a considerable proportion of these were born out of wedlock. In 56 per cent of the cases in which the child was known to be of illegitimate birth the mother had had the custody of the child im mediately prior to his becoming a ward of the board. Mental defect.—The lack of provision for the care of the feeble minded in the District has seriously handicapped the work of both the public and the private agencies.4 Institutional care has been available for a few feeble-minded white children who were placed at District expense in institutions in near-by States. For feeble-minded colored children no institutional provision has been made, and the Board of Children’s Guardians has dealt with the problem through boarding these feeble-minded children in family homes which it be lieved were especially equipped to care for them. A considerable burden of expense and work: will be lifted from the child-caring agencies and institutions when the institution for the feeble-minded for which an appropriation was made at the fourth session of the Sixty-seventh Congress becomes available. The lack of proper train ing and care for such children, and the danger that feeble-minded ^children who lack proper home conditions constitute to the com munity, have been reiterated many times in the course of the discus sion oi the need for this new institution. I t has been urged especially by those concerned with the public care of dependent children in the District. Inadequate care for colored children.—The disproportionate number of dependent colored children as compared with the colored popula tion 5 indicates an especially serious social and economic problem, which is further aggravated by the lack of proper facilities for the 8 Illegitimacy as a Child-Welfare Problem, P art 2, p. 37. U. S. Children's Bureau Publication No. 75. Washington, 1921. : r : 4 M ental Defectives in the District of Columbia. U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 13. Wash ington, 1915. 6 Of th e children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians on M ay 15,1921,38 per cent were white and 62 per cent colored. Of the total population under 21 years of age in the District, according to the U. S. Census of 1920,72 per cent were white and 28 per cent colored. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6 CHILI} DE&ENDSNCY IN THE DISTRICT ÒF OÒLtTMBIÀ. care and supervision of colored wards of the District. Provision for the care of colored children in institutions under sectarian or private auspices is very meager as compared with such provisions for white children. For delinquent colored girls and for colored feeble-minded wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians no institutional care whatever is available. THE PREVENTION OF CHILD DEPENDENCY. In any community the test of the adequacy of agencies for social action does not lie in the numbers or the physical equipment of these agencies but in their results as they affect the individual lives of the persons who come to them for help. If 100 per cent attention is not paid to thè prevention of dependency and delinquency, the resources of a community are inadequate for child protection, no matter how well its agencies may be equipped to deal with children after they have been received as wards of public or private organizations. Not until it can be said truthfully that the children who are deprived of their own homes and come under the care of institutions or agencies include only those whose dependency could not have been prevented through measures of social justice, through economic assistance, or through the removal of deteriorating forces that destroy physical and moral health can it be claimed that a community or an agency is doing everything that it is obligated to do for the protection of its children. A child may have to be removed from his own family because of conditions that are destructive to his moral growth; many of the commitments included in this study represent a decision on the part of the court, which no one would question, that it was in the interest of the child that he be placed in other surroundings. But a con siderable part of the child-dependency problem is apparently due to poverty, even though this may be an indirect cause of commitment. All the children old enough to be aware of conditions about them have suffered mental stress from the situations which occasioned their dependency—a stress more permanent in its effects, perhaps, than the bodily deprivation and moral contamination that many of them have experienced. A family does not have the characteristic found in some forms of vegetable life which enables the broken segments of a plant to take root immediately in new soil. A child is not transplanted from one mode of life to another without suffering keenly in the process of adapting himself to the new environment, enduring fears and uncer-' tainties and questionings that are unanswered. He may accept the separation from his own family and companions placidly, and it may be essential for his own development that he should be removed into other surroundings. But in general the permanent- or long-time separation of a child from his own kindred is likely to affect seriously the child’s mental and emotional life. The conclusions of the “ White House Conference on the Care of Dependent Children” include an excellent definition of preventive work:6 The most important and valuable philanthropic work is not the curative, but the preventive; to check dependency by a thorough study of its causes and by 6 Proceedings of the Conference on the Care of Dependent Children, held a t Washington, D. C., Jan. 25-26, 1909. Sixtieth Congress, Second Session, Senate Document No. 721. Washington, 1909. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OF C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y ; 7 effectively remedying or eradicating them should be the constant aim of society. Along these lines we urge upon all friends of children, the promotion of effective measures, including _legislation, to prevent blindness; to check tuberculosis and other diseases in dwellings and work places, and injuries in hazardous occupations; to secure compensation or insurance so as to provide a family income in case of sickness, accident, death, or invalidism of the breadwinner; to promote child-labor reforms, and, generally, to improve the conditions sur rounding child life. To secure these ends we urge efficient eoooeration with all other agencies for social betterment. ADEQUATE SOCIAL INVESTIGATION. This study suggests the possibilities in work for the prevention of child dependency. One of the avenues to prevention is adequate social investigation of the needs in each case coming to the attention of public and private agencies or institutions and the inauguration of more adequate means for preventing the breaking up of families. An example of coordinated activity among agencies engaged in child-caring work is found in the Children’s Bureau of Cleveland, organized in 1921 by sectarian and other private agencies and insti tutions for the purpose of securing adequate social investigations of all applications for the care of dependent children.7 The second annual report of the bureau contains the following statement of the work :8 The Children’s Survey of 1920 recommended that the bureau be organized to perform certain fundamental functions: Iv To investigate all new admissions to the various dependent children’s institutions in Cleveland, making trained service for investigation available to even the smallest institution. II. After placement of a child in the institution to follow up his progress and that of the family from which he came in order that thorough plans for the future might be developed. III. To arrange for thorough medical and corrective work on children being admitted to institutions. IV. To develop facilities for the mental diagnosis of difficult, problem’ and subnormal children. An interesting illustration of the possible advantage of thorough study of the need for admission of children for whom application is made is afforded by one institution in the District which on Decem ber 30, 1910, according to the 1910 census of benevolent institutions, was caring for 140 children. Because of deterioration of the plant and equipment and delay in proposed building the population has been so reduced that in the fall of 1923 it reached the low level of 35. Much of this reduction has been effected by closing certain depart ments and sending the children back to their homes. Although em barked on a building program, the board had apparently taken no steps to learn whether the children who were thus returned to their homes when the need arose could have been kept in their homes from the beginning if certain types of assistance had been given their families. Almost all the children cared for were half orphans. Together with provision for social investigation, there should be means for giving constructive help to families in which children have been reported as dependent or neglected but in which con ditions do not seem to warrant immediate commitment. Responsi bility for this type of service belongs either with the juvenile court 7 In the District of Columbia somewhat similar work has been in the process of development during the last two years by the Catholic Charities of Washington. This agency investigates the intake of some of the Catholic child-caring institutions. 8 Second Annual Report of the Children’s Bureau of Cleveland, M ay, 1923 (multigraphed). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA . or with the Board of Children’s Guardians. Neither of these agencies is now in a position to do preventive work of this nature. CHILD-STUDY CLINIC. Much attention has been given in recent years to the development of clinical facilities for thorough scientific study of children coming to the attention of juvenile courts or agencies in order to determine their physical and niental condition and help in making a normal adjustment. The study of the child’s physique, personality, and mental habits must be linked up with social investigation into his background and environment. Only with the knowledge so gained can treatment be adapted to the real needs of the child. With such a basis for action each individual child can be given the type of care th a t is required in order to build up a healthy body and mind and avoid the difficulties that jeopardize his development. The director of the Commonwealth Fund, Barry C. Smith, under whose auspices demonstration clinics have been undertaken in a number of large cities to show the methods by which scientific study of children may be made of service to a community, has made the following statement regarding the meaning of such study:9 Only very recently has there come to be some conception that early study of the individual who is out of adjustment, scientific diagnosis of his so.cial difficulty, may make possible a considerable degree of prevention; that carefully differentiated treatment—physical, mental, and social—based on such a diagnosis, may produce results quite as salutary as may be found in the physician’s practice, may even direct many a young offender on the pathway toward good citizen ship instead of toward the life of the “ repeater.” * * * For the child who is tending toward delinquency, who fails to “ get along” in his school, home, or neighborhood environment, who is troublesome or “ different” or “ maladjusted,” who comes for the first time before the juvenile court—for him the greatest single need is that he be accurately and adequately understood; that his problems, difficulties, and motives be appreciated—in short, that the decision as to what is the best thing to do for him be based on a thoroughgoing knowledge. For a period of about 18 months the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia had the services of a clinic conducted by the United States Public Health Service, which gave mental and physical ex aminations* to children who were below normal physically or men tally or who gave special difficulty. This clinic had to be discon tinued nearly three years ago. The Board of Children’s Guardians has had the services of several of the psychiatrists in the city and of the mental clinic in connection with a hospital. But both the board and the court, as well as other social agencies in the District, have repeatedly urged the establishment of a fully equipped clinic for the thorough, scientific study of problem children. Many dependent and neglected children, because of unfavorable home and environmental conditions, are as much in need of such study as are delinquent children. Concerted action is needed in order that clinical facilities may be provided in the District of Columbia. PUBLIC AID TO CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOM ES.1« In the District of Columbia there is no provision whereby a mother who needs financial assistance to maintain her children in her own 9 Anderson, V. V., M . D .: The Psychiatric Clinic in the Treatm ent of Conduct Disorders of Children and th e Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency, p. 11. The National Committee for Mental Hygiene, New York 1923. 10 See pp. 96-111. See also A Tabular Summary of State Laws Relating to Public Aid to Children in Their Own Homes in Effect June 1,1924, and the texts of the laws of certain States (U. S. Children’s Bureau Chart No. 3, revised edition; in press). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OF C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y . 9 home may be aided from public funds, although board may be paid for the children in foster homes. A dependent child can not be given public assistance (for a period of more than a week) except through commitment by the juvenile court to the Board of Children’s Guardi ans. There is little question as to the need in the District for some means by which when the home is deprived of its breadwinner pub lic funds may be used to aid the children, thus preventing the break ing up of families and making unnecessary the assumption by the ublic of the entire burden of the children’s care and support in oarding homes or institutions. The question of assisting mothers to care for their children in their own homes has been discussed with much interest in the District for several years. Only six States are now without some public pro vision for aid of the kind popularly known as “ mothers’ pensions.” Several bills providing for such aid in the District of Columbia to children in their own homes were introduced in the Sixty-seventh and preceding Congresses. The fact that none of these measures has been brought to vote in either house of Congress may be due in large measure to lack of agreement among the various agencies and groups urging such legislation. The discussion of proposed bills has re vealed dissension and differences of opinion, especially in regard to the agency with which administration should be lodged. I t has been shown in the foregoing discussion that 35 per cent of the children who became wards of the Board of Children’s Guar dians in a given year were living with their mothers immediately prior to commitment. The proportion is even larger (56 per cent) for the children received in the same year by institutions for depend ent children reporting on this item. The mothers of these children were widowed, deserted, divorced, or living apart from their hus bands ; or the fathers were in hospitals, asylums, or prisons. Un doubtedly many of the children received from other custodians had mothers who with financial assistance might have cared for them. I t must be remembered that a considerable number of the children committed to the public board had been removed from their homes because conditions there were detrimental to them. The greatest value of such aid as “ mothers’ pensions” is found in giving the as sistance before the home has broken down and thus keeping the chil dren with their mothers. I t can not restore to a mother who has been worn out in the struggle to maintain her home the children whose delinquency is due to her enforced neglect. Perhaps comparatively few of the families represented by wards of child-caring organiza tions of the District of Columbia—especially those of children com mitted by the court to the public agency—could be rehabilitated by financial aid after they have once been scattered. A certain propor tion of the children were made wards of the public agency because of demoralizing influences in their homes; in these cases financial assistance would obviously not be the remedy. But failures could be prevented for many other mothers, to the great gain of their children and of the community. I t is manifestly impossible to determine just how much of the child dependency with which the public and private agencies of the Dis- E 88962°—24f— - 2 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 10 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA . trict are now dealing might have been prevented had there been public provision for aid to children in their own homes. In order to do so, it would be necessary to go back in the family histories to the origin of the difficulties that led to the children’s removal from their homes because of destitution or neglect, or to the underlying causes of the delinquent acts that made it desirable to place them in other homes or in institutions because their own homes lacked the restrain ing influence needed. Although it is impossible to present statistical data on such questions as these, the information secured in this study regarding the children who were removed from the custody of their mothers gives weight to the arguments in favor of economic aid in th preservation of homes where children can be benefited thereby. When the District, by act of Congress, is permitted to join the ranks of the 42 States that have enacted so-called mothers’ pension laws providing for aid to children in their own homes, it will no longer be necessary for the public child-caring agency to remove a child from a mother who is able to care for him in every way except financially and place him with strangers in order to provide for his maintenance. Perhaps not a very large proportion of the homes that have already been Broken up through poverty or the condi tions that result irom deprivation could be restored to the children. But the experience in the District would undoubtedly be found to be very similar to that in localities where such public aid has been provided—in respect to both the value of this aid in preventing the removal of cnildren from their own homes and their acceptance as wards of public or private charities, and the real benefit of such aid to the individual children.11 REHABILITATION OF FAMILIES. Next to the task of preventing the break-up of families, whenever that is possible through constructive work and assistance in indi vidual cases, the most compelling need is to prevent the continued dependency of children received as wards, if it is possible to rehabili tate the family and make it reasonably safe for the child to be in the custody of his own parents. Some work of this kind is now being done by the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia in its robation service and its supervisory control over adults who have een brought to court for nonsupport of minor children or for con tributing to delinquency. The attitude of the Board of Children’s Guardians on this very important question is shown by the number of children whom it has placed with their own parents, under super vision of the board, when conditions in the home have made it pos sible to take such action, even in the case of children committed for minority. Until empowered to do so by a provision contained in an appropri ation act of Congress in 1921,12 the Board of Children’s Guardians could not restore children to the legal control of their own families; but before that time the board frequently placed children back with their parents, retaining supervision over them. The court has long been urging the need for a larger probation staff and for legal E 11 See Standards of Public Aid to Children in Their Own Homes, by Florence N esbitt (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 118, Washington, 1923). “ é l Stat. 1137 (Act of Feb. 22, 1921). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis m e a n in g and p r e v e n t io n op c h il d dependency . 11 authority to deal with dependency cases not requiring commitment. The Board of Children’s Guardians has never had a staff large enough to provide for supervision of its wards in accordance with the best child-caring standards. The annual reports of the board have repeatedly called attention to this fact. Both these agencies could increase the effectiveness of their preventive and reconstructive work and thus reduce still further the number of public wards, if they were granted an adequate staff of workers equipped to deal with each case in all its aspects and to enlist the cooperation of the other social agencies in the District. THE RELATION BETWEEN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AGENCIES. During the development of public child-caring work there has been a steady growth also in privately, financed activity for child care and protection. The public work has frequently had its incep tion in the pressing need for a greater amount of provision for the protection of children than it was possible to secure from private sources. In general the public agency has assumed the care of chil dren removed from the legal custody of their parents or requiring care for a long period, and private agencies and institutions have relieved temporary distress or have demonstrated methods of care or reconstructive work. The field of the public agency is usually, but not necessarily, delimited by the requirement that children be received by it only on court commitment. The private agency fre quently devotes itself to giving assistance in temporary need through informal arrangements with parents or guardians or to providing temporary care for wards of courts or other public authorities. In the most successful working out of a state-wide child-caring program the activities of a State agency have usually been sup plemented by special types of care provided by private organiza tions, the State and private forces working together toward the highest aim of child-caring work—the gradual elimination of the causes of child dependency. The public agency especially has been awake to the relation between its present task of caring for de pendent children and the promotion of constructive activities, under whatever auspices they may be. The policy which should govern such harmonious development of public agencies in relation to private agencies, whereby they may together provide for present needs and work toward the prevention of child dependency and neglect, was described in the Minimum Standards for Child Welfare as being f‘ conceived and exercised in harmony with democratic ideals which invite and encourage the service of efficient, altruistic forces of society in the common welfare.” 13 I t has come to be a well-established policy that the State is the “ overguardian” of all its children. As such it has toward the de pendent children a peculiar obligation for protection. Public super vision of the work of private agencies and institutions is a neces sary feature of the guardianship needed for the disadvantaged children who have been deprived of care in their own homes. The District of Columbia lags far behind the progressive States in pro» M inimum Standards for Child Welfare Adopted by the Washington and Regional Conferences on Child Welfare, 1919, p. 12. U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 62. Washington, 1920. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 12 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA . viding this protection for its children.14 Public supervision, prop erly exercised, is restrictive only in so far as it controls the estab lishment or limits the activities of organizations that are proved to be detrimental to the public interest or to the welfare of individual wards. An equally important feature of State supervision and one that receives continually increasing emphasis in many States may be defined as educative rather than supervisory. This implies the fostering and encouragement of desirable methods of care and the promotion of cooperation among agencies and institutions in meas ures pertaining to the welfare of their wards and in the broader program of prevention and reconstruction. I t is the general experi ence that the exercise by the State of its protective duties toward dependent children is welcomed by the private agencies and insti tutions that really have at heart the welfare of their individual wards and are seeking to lessen the burden of dependency. I t has been shown that in the District, in spite of the absence of such supervisory authority and the lack of proper investigations to limit ¿he intake of institutions through discovering the real need and dealing with it constructively, the dependency problem has decreased since 1910 in comparison with the population. What may not be the result in another 10 years if the preventive measures whose prin ciples are now accepted are put into operation through the coopera tion of all the public and private organizations concerned with the care of dependent children? An understanding of the work of other agencies gained through open-minded contacts between the public and the private organiza tions must be the basis of cooperation in raising the level of child caring work in the District. The organization of the public chari ties, as well as their functions in relation to private agencies and institutions, is of importance in this connection. From time to time there has been discussion of the question of unifying certain of the public boards concerned with charitable and correctional work in the District, especially the Board of Charities and the Board of Children's Guardians. In a small administrative unit such as the District there would appear to be definite advantages in centralized responsibility. Addecf prestige and greater confidence on the part of the public might be expected to result—an especially important consideration at this time in connection with chud-caring work in the District. The experience in many States would seem to indicate that better coordination of child-caring and protective work could be attained and the public service placed on a higher level if the District had one central child-welfare department—presumably with greater au14 In October, 1923, the grand jury made the following recommendation to the Commissioners of the District: “ To the honorable the Commissioners of the District of Columbia: “This grand jury had before it a case for consideration involving the food, clothing, and health conditions of a children’s boarding school and nursery, in which the testimony disclosed the fact that there was no provision in the law whereby the health or police departments might make examinations of such places until some specific case of a law infraction had been brought to light. “ For the general welfare of our city’s children, we, the grand jury for the October term, 1923, recommend: “ First. T hat such law or regulation be enacted which will allowthe health department and th e proper branch of the police departm ent to have access to allinstitutions, schools, homes, or any other places where children under the age ofsixteen (16) areboarded or housed, whether i t be by the day, week, month, or year. “ Second. T h at all places operated to care for children under the age of sixteen (16) m ust register w ith the proper authorities so th at proper regulations m ay be drawn and periodical examinations of conditions existing therein m ay be made. “ Respectfully submitted by— “ F o r e m a n a n d M e m b e k s o f G r a n d J u r y .” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N O F C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y . 13 thority than the existing boards in respect to protection of children in line with progressive methods—and as a branch of that depart ment a bureau or division providing care for dependent children who are made wards of the department by the juvenile court.15 The problem of child protection in the -District of Columbia is peculiar as compared with that of a State. The unit of government is small, comparable to a county in which a large city covers most of the area. But the District must have the functions of a State with respect to the necessary regulation of private agencies and institu tions and must, as well, fulfill the duty of providing care for public wards through a child-caring agency with some authority over other local institutions under public control. The powers and duties of State hoards of charities, boards of control, or (as they are coming to be called more frequently) departments of public welfare and the way in which these boards or departments are organized in such States as Minnesota, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania can be profitably studied in connection with the District situation. But it is equally important that the Dis trict of Columbia, where, because of its size, the complex organiza tion of boards developed in the large States is not needed—though complete legal authority for supervisory and executive work is essen tial—should profit also by the experience of county boards of public welfare.16 Some of these are doing outstanding work in child care and protection, especially in the promotion of cooperative effort for the prevention of child dependency and delinquency and a better general understanding of constructive social-welfare work. CONCERTED ACTION IN THE REVISION OF CHILD-WELFARE LAWS. Beginuing with the appointment in 1911 of “ the Commission to Codify and Revise the Laws of Ohio Relating to Children/’ the development of child-welfare commissions or children’s code com missions has steadily progressed until, by the end of 1923, 29 States had had such official commissions.17 The “ minimum standards of child welfare” adopted by the conference on child welfare held under the auspices of the United States Children’s Bureau in 191818 included the following definition of the purpose and method of the work of such commissions : The child-welfare legislation of every State requires careful reconsideration as a whole at reasonable intervals in order that necessary revision and coordi nation may be made and that new provisions may be incorporated in harmony with the best experience of the day. In States where children’s laws have not had careful revision as a whole within recent years a child-welfare committee or commission should be created for this purpose, Laws enacted by the several States should be in line with national ideals and uniform so far as desirable in view of diverse conditions in the several States. Child-welfare legislation should be framed by those who are thoroughly familiar with the conditions and needs of children and with administrative i®For illustrations of well-organized child-welfare bureaus or divisions within central departments of public welfare (or boards of charities or boards of control), see Statelaw s and the reports of boards in M in nesota, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Ohio, Indiana, and Pennsylvania. For references to avail able compilations oflaws of these States, see State Commissions for the Study and Revision of Child-Wel fare Laws, p. 121 (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 131, Washington, 1924). 16 For descriptions of some types of such work see County Organization for Child Care and Protection (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 107, Washington, 1922). 17 See State Commissions for the Study and Revision of Child-Welfare Laws, pp. 1-2 (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 131, Washington, 1924). 18 Minimum Standards for Child Welfare Adopted by the Washington and Regional Conferences on Child Welfare, 1919. TJ. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 62, Washington, 1920. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 14 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA . difficulties. It should be drafted by a competent lawyer in such form as to accomplish the end desired by child-welfare experts and at the same time be consistent with existing laws. The Attorney General of the United States on March 6,#1914, appointed a committee, of five to study the laws pertaining to children in the District of Columbia. The letter addressed to the members states the proposed scope of work of this committee: Intending soon to take under consideration the question of the amendment, revision, and codification of the laws in force in the District of Columbia per taining to children and to the jurisdiction, practice, and procedure of the juvenile court of the District, I have the honor to request you to serve on a committee * * * to study the present laws and the needs of the District in this parti cular and to advise me in the premises, accompanying your report, if you will, with a draft of such a code as the committee believes would give the District satisfactory laws upon these subjects. The committee in its report, dated January 15, 1915, described the work it had undertaken as follows: In pursuance of the work thus put before it the committee made a compilation of all the existing laws relating to children in the District, so that it might be informed as to the development and operation of these laws and as to how far any revision was needed. It also secured a list of all children’s institutions .or agencies in the District and, by means of a brief but comprehensive questionnaire^ calling for annual reports and for the facts as to the organization and connection, if any, of each of these with the Government, collected the data needed for taking a compre hensive view of the whole field and of the relations of each of these institutions and agencies to the others and to the Government. While this survey revealed certain obvious problems and needs, as, for example, that the District had no provision for feeble-minded and epileptic persons and that institutional care for delinquent white girls and for the slighter offenses of delinquent boys was lacking, the most apparent and urgent need was a revision of the present juvenilecourt law, to which reference had been specially made in the letter of appointment. The reasons for this will appear in the discussion of this particular subject later. I t soon became apparent that a plan for providing adequately for all cases of neglected and defective children in the District would require careful study not only of the local situation but also of the latest and best methods in use in other communities. In the mean time the juvenile court was handling cases of neglected and defective children and, owing to the defects in the law, was working injustice upon them. The committee, therefore, felt it a duty to submit a report on this phase of the problem in order to avoid the delay which further study of the whole question would necessitate. I t regarded a prompt revision of the juvenile-court law as imperative. Accompanying this report, and part thereof, were the drafts of two bills: (a) A bill amending the present juvenile-court law and in fact creating a new juvenile court; (Jb) a bill intended to remove certain disabilities affecting children by reason of judgments of conviction of crime of record against them in the juvenile court of the District. The committee presented these measures in the hope that they would be introduced in the Congress and passed as drawn. A discussion of their merits involved primarily a consideration of the existing law and the results obtained under it. The proposed bills were not passed by Congress. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis M E A N IN G A N D P R E V E N T IO N OE -C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y . 15 The District of Columbia Children’s Code Commission of five members was appointed by the Commissioners of the District in September, 1920. No appropriation was available for salaries or expenses. In May, 1921, the Commissioners of the District increased the scope of the work of the commission, and its name was changed to “ Public-Welfare Code Commission of the District of Columbia.” The duties of the new commission were defined as follows: To codify the laws of the District of Columbia relating to matters of public welfare concerning the care, confinement, and treatment of the insane and mental defectives; children, their care, custody, education, <labor, and correction; employment of minors; the juvenile court; aid or support of parents; aid to mothers with.dependent children; charities and corrections and charitable and correctional institutions and all kindred or related subjects; and to recommend to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia what amendments and new legislation are, in their judgment, necessary to improving the law. Seven members were named by the commissioners to serve without compensation. Additional members have been appointed and in December, 1923, the total membership was 16. A letter from the secretary of the commission states that during the year 1922 the commission had considered proposed amendments to an act relating to lunacy proceedings and to an act to amend the juvenile-court act of the District of Columbia, and also had discussed other changes in laws of the District. In November, 1923, active work was planned in cooperation with the division of child-welfare legislation of the Russell Sage Foundation. STANDARDS OF CARE FOR DEPENDENT CHILDREN. The outstanding needs in care of dependent children—and in work for the prevention of child dependency—in the District of Columbia are summarized in the “ minimum standards for child welfare ” framed by the Washington and Regional Conferences on Child Welfare in 1919. The following sections are especially pertinent to the facts brought out in this study.19 Assistance to mothers.—The policy of assistance to mothers who are com petent to care for their own children is now well established. It is generally recognized that the amount provided should be sufficient to enable the mother to maintain her children suitably in her own home, without resorting to such outside employment as will necessitate leaving her children without proper care and oversight; but in many States the allowances are still entirely inade quate to secure this result under present living costs. The amount required can be determined only by careful and competent case study, which must be renewed from time to time to meet changing conditions. Removal of children from their homes.-—Unless unusual conditions exist, the child’s welfare is best promoted by keeping him in his own home. _No child should be permanently removed from his home unless it i s ‘impossible so to reconstruct f a m i l y conditions or build and supplement family resources as to make the home safe for the child or so to supervise the child as to make his continuance in the home safe for the community. In case of removal, separation should not continue beyond the period of reconstruction. Home care.—The aim of all provision for children who must be removed from their own homes should be to secure for each child home life as nearly normal as possible, to safeguard his health, and to insure for him the fundamental rights of childhood. To a much larger degree than at present, family homes may be used to advantage in the care of such children. Children in institutions.—The stay of children in institutions for dependents should be as brief as possible. The condition of all children in such institutions is Minimum Standards for Child Welfare, sections 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8. IT. S. Children’s Bureau Publica tion No. 62. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 16 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OP C O L U M B IA . should be carefully studied at frequent intervals, in order to determine whether they should be restored to their own homes, placed in foster homes,_or transferred to institutions better suited to their needs. While they do remain in institutions, their condition should approximate as nearly as possible that of normal family life as to health, recreation, schooling, and spiritual, aesthetic, civic, and voca tional training. State supervision.—A State board of charities or a similar supervisory body should be responsible for the regular inspection and licensing of every institution, agencv, or association, incorporated or otherwise, which receives or cares for mothers with children or children who suffer from physical or mental handicaps, or who are delinquent, dependent, or without suitable parental care, and should have authority to revoke such licenses for cause and to prescribe forms of regis tration and report. This State agency should maintain such supervision and visitation of children in institutions and children placed in family homes as will insure their proper care, training, and protection. The incorporation of private organizations caring for children should be required and should be subject to the approval of the State board of charities or similar body. State supervision should be conceived and exercised in harmony with democratic ideals, which invite and encourage the service of efficient, altruistic forces of society in the common welfare. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE CHILDREN’S BUREAU STUDY OF CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY AND ITS DEFINITION. At the formal request of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia the Children’s Bureau undertook a study of record data concerning the children who had been wards of the board during one year. Material secured from records was supplemented by a study of the problems dealt with and the methods used, as shown in the annual reports of the board and by visits to a number of homes and institutions caring for its wards.1 The juvenile court of the District is the agency through which children are committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians and is therefore of almost equal importance with the board in a considera tion of the dependency problem in the District. A study of the juvenile court had already been made by the Children’s Bureau as one section of a comparative study of courts in a number of cities.2 Because of a recent study by the child-helping department of the Russell Sage Foundation of child-caring institutions in the District of Columbia,2a this inquiry by the Children’s Bureau was limited origi nally to an analysis of the child-caring problems of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Toward the close of this study, however, the bureau was requested by the Washington Council of Social Agencies to secure data in regard to the number and distribution of dependent children cared for in the District under private auspices in order that a basis might be provided for comparison of the extent and nature of the problems dealt with by the public agency and by the private institutions. A somewhat general census of these insti tutions was therefore undertaken and was carried out largely through the cooperation of those most closely concerned with institutional work in the District. No study was made of the equipment or the work of the private institutions. The term “ dependency” as used in this study has a broad inclusion, comprehending all the children who were wards of the District of Columbia Board of Children’s Guardians and those in private insti tutions for dependent children. Concerning the latter the question may arise as to the propriety of calling those children dependent whose parents pay part of their expenses in the institutions. But it is generally conceded that even when the maximum amount of board charged by such, institutions is paid by the parents the amount does not usually cover the overhead cost but includes only the child’s actual maintenance. In 60 per cent of the cases reported by institu tions some payment was received from the parents, only 40 per cent of the children being totally dependent on the institutions for their 1 The period selected for the analysis of record data was M ay 16, 1920-May 15,1921; other data were - secured through th e fiscal year 1922-23. WK. ; 2 Juvenile Courts a t W ork: A study of the organization and methods of ten courts, by Katharine F. Lenroot and Emm a O.Lundberg. U. S. Children’s Bureau. (In press.) . . . 2a H art, Hastings H .: Child Welfare in th e District of Columbia; a study of agencies and institutions for the care of dependent and delinquent children. Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1924. 17 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 18 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OF C O L U M B IA . maintenance. However, a somewhat similar situation exists in the case of children under care of the public board; for here, too, it is probable—perhaps more so than in the case of the private agencies— that the whole cost of care and supervision is never met. The defini tion of dependency, therefore, turns on the removal of the children from their own homes and the assumption of their care by the public agency or the private institutions. All the children committed by the juvenile court to the Board of Children’s Guardians are classed as dependent in this study without distinction as to the immediate reason for their coming to the atten tion of the court. The juvenile court law of the District of Columbia D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E D IS T R IC T OP COLUM BIA—PRO PO R TIO N S CARED PO R BY PU BLIC AGENCY AND BY PRIV A TE IN STITU T IO N S. Based on 2,800 children under care on a specified date. directs the court to commit to the Board of Children’s Guardians those children who must be removed from their own homes and who are not proper subjects for the national training schools for delinquent children.3 In providing care for the children received from the court the Board of Children’s Guardians does not make any distinction based on the reason for commitment; its policy is to place each child, so far as possible, in a home or institution that is equipped to meet his indi vidual needs. I t may fairly be assumed that the juvenile court does not commit delinquent children to the board, except perhaps for a short period as a disciplinary measure, unless the fundamental diffi culty is in the home conditions, lack of parental control, or bad environment from whidh the child must be removed. The definition of delinquent children in the juvenile court law of the District is somewhat peculiar, providing that “ the term 1delin* 34 Stat. 73-78 (Act of Mar. 19,1906). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis T H E C H IL D R E N S B U R E A U S T U D Y . 19 ^uent’ child or children as used in this act shall be held to mean and include any child who has been convicted more than once of violating any law of the United States, or any laws, ordinances, or regulations in force in the District of Columbia.” 4 A dependent or neglected child is defined as “ any child who is destitute or homeless or abandoned or dependent upon the public for support, or who has not the proper parental care or guardianship, or who habitually begs or receives alms, or whose home, by reason of neglect or cruelty or depravity of the parents, is an unfit place for such a child, or any child under 8 years of age found peddling on the streets.” 4 CHILDREN’S AGENCIES AND INSTITUTIONS STUDIED. THE JUVENILE COURT. Children become public wards of the District only through com mitment by the juvenile court. The court is therefore the agency of primary importance in the prevention of dependency and in the whole problem of intake as related to the public child-caring agency. The Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia is a court of limited criminal jurisdiction in delinquency cases; in dependency cases and in cases of incorrigible children it follows the principles of chancery or equity procedure. The court is operating under the provisions of a law passed in 1906. Many efforts have been made to secure the passage of a new law more in accord with juvenile-court standards in other parts of the country—notably by the committee appointed by the Attorney General of the United States in 1914,5 which submitted to Congress in 1915 a draft of law that would have given the court chancery jurisdiction and would thus have enabled it to establish a procedure better suited to the protection of children. The administration of the court has been directed toward the devel opment of procedure as free from formality as the law will permit, and the court has endeavored to conduct its investigations and the supervision of the children in accordance with the principles of social case work, so far as its somewhat limited staff made this possible. The jurisdiction of the court in delinquency cases includes crimes and offenses of persons under 17 years of age committed against the United States or the District of Columbia, not capital nor otherwise infamous, and not including libel, conspiracy, and violations of the post-office and pension laws of the United States. Incorrigible children under the age of 16 years, truants between the aged of 8 and 14 years, and destitute and neglected children under the age of 16 come vdthin the jurisdiction of the court. In addition, the court has jurisdiction over children applying for waivers of school certifi cates required under the child labor law, under the poverty-exemption clause which still obtains in the District for children from 12 to 14 years of age. The adult jurisdiction of the court includes persons contributing to the delinquency of children, determination of paternity and enforcement of support of children born out of wedlock, jm d violations of the child labor law. Prior to a decision of the United * Idem. * Supplement to Annual Report of the Attorney General of the U nited States for the year 1914, embody ing first report of the committee appointed by the Attorney General to study the heed for legislation affect ing children in the District of Columbia, including drafts of new juvenile-court laws. Washington, 1915. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OP C O L U M B IA . States Supreme Court in 1922 6 the juvenile court exercised jurisdic tion oyer cases of nonsupport of wife or of children in destitute or necessitous circumstances. It is desirable that this jurisdiction be restored to the juvenile court through amendment of the present law. Commitments of delinquent children must be either to the Board of Children’s Guardians or to the National Training School for Boys or the National Training School for Girls.7 In dependency cases commitments may be made only to the Board of Children’s Guard ians. No provision exists for. dependent children who have reached their sixteenth birthday, except that such children who are under 17 years of age may be committed to one of the national training schools for delmquents. Comprehensive social investigations are made by the court staff in delinquency cases,9 but in dependency cases the responsibility for preparing cases for hearing rests with the Board of Children’s Guar dians, which in such cases petitions the court to commit the children to it. Following a meeting of the board in December, 1923, it was recommended to the commissioners of the District that the board be relieved of “ any responsibility or connection with the committing of children to its care and for making investigations preliminary to commitment and that it be made a child-caring agency only.” 10 If the court does not consider that the circumstances justify commit ment, no machinery for supervision of the child in his own family exists in either the court or the board. The court has tried, without success, to obtain from Congress sufficient appropriations to permit the assumption of this responsibility. • THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. The Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia was created in 1892 as a public agency for the care of dependent children.11 The act creating the Board of Children’s Guardians 12 provides that the board shall have the care and supervision of a ll. children who have been ill-treated, willfully abused, or neglected (including children under 16 years of age who have been found in houses of ill fame), all children who are destitute of suitable homes and adequate means of earning an honest living, all children aban doned by their parents or guardians, all children of habitually drunken or vicious parents, all children habitually begging in the streets or from door to door, all children kept in vicious or immoral associations, and all children known by their language or life to be vicious or incorrigible, whenever such children may be committed to the care of the board by the police court or the criminal c o u rt13 of the Dis trict. I t authorizes the commitment to the board of children of these classes who are not over 16 years of age. 8 See I The Moreland Case” in The Legal Aspect of the Juvenile Court, p. 29 (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 99, Washington, 1922). In November, 1923, the law relating to determination of paternity of children born out of wedlock was attacked in the court of appeals on grounds similar to those on which the juvenile court was deprived of nOnsupport jurisdiction. 7 See text of law in Appendix, pp. 156-166. • Under an act of Congress approved Mar. 3, 1901, the agent of the Board of Children’s Guardians was designated to act as probation officer. He continued to act in this capacity until Feb. 18,1902, when a probation officer was appointed. This arrangement continued until the juvenile court began its w ork"' in 1906. 10 The Post, Washington, D. C., Dee. 20, 1923. 17 For description of the functions and organization of the board see pp. 57-59. \ 18 See text of law in Appendix, pp. 152-153. \ 13 Since 1906 the juvenile court h as had exclusive jurisdiction in such cases. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis T H E C H IL D R E N S B U R E A U S T U D Y . 21 The board receives children from the court both on temporary and on permanent, or minority, commitments and is the legal guardian of such children during the term of their commitment. In addition to dependent and delinquent children the board pro vides for feeble-minded children. This group includes children received on petition of parents or guardians who are unable finan cially or otherwise to make proper provision for them in institutions, as well as those committed because of dependency or delinquency and later found to be feeble-minded. Children who are received from parents without court commitment are not considered wards of the board and must be released upon the request of their parents, although they may remain under the board’s care indefinitely. On June 30, 1923, the Board of Children’s Guardians had under its care 1,561 children. During the preceding year it had given care to 2,036 children,14 utilizing family homes (boarding, free, and wage) ; two institutions under the control of the District (one for white boys and girls and one for colored boys) ; one institution under private auspices but maintained only for the care of wards of the board; and, to some extent, private institutions in which it boarded its wards. INSTITUTIONS UNDER PRIVATE AUSPICES. The Board of Children’s Guardians, as has been noted, receives children on commitment. The private institutions for dependent children, on the the other hand, receive children only on voluntary placement by relatives or other individuals or by agencies; the legal guardians of these children may remove them, or the institution may return the children to their guardians, at any time. Eighteen private institutions15—17 of which receive white children only—care for dependent children within the District. The ma jority of them are under the auspices of religious organizations. They are all supported mainly from private funds, either voluntary contributions collected from time to time or endowment funds. There is no public supervision of private agencies, institutions, maternity homes, or boarding homes in the District of Columbia, except that the Board of Charities has authority in regard to insti tutions receiving subsidies from the Government.16 The Board of Children’s • Guardians places some dependent children in private institutions for which payment is made from public funds.17 On the basis of the information obtained directly from private institutions and from reports of the Board of Charities and other sources it is estimated that at the beginning of 1923 approximately 900 children were being cared for in the District in private institu tions for dependent children. I t is estimated that about 600 addi tional children had been cared for in the institutions during the preceding year. This group of about 1,500 children who were under the care of private institutions at some time during the year and the 2,400 wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians make a total of almost 4,000 children under the care and supervision of an institution or -agency at some time during the year 1922. 14 This number does not include the feeble-minded children received from the parents without court com mitment, for whom data were not secured in this study. 15 For names of these institutions and facts concerning them, see pp. 81-82. i* See pç. 117-118. if For discussion of Government subsidies to private institutions, see pp. 72-73; 112-116; 120-122 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF THE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. BASIS OF THE STUDY. The records of all children who were under the supervision of the Board of Children’s Guardians at any time during the 12-month period ended May 15, 1921, were chosen as the basis for analysis. Two types of commitments to the Board of Children’s Guardians were used by the juvenile court: The permanent, or minority, com mitment, which placed the child under the guardianship of the board until he should ieach the age of 21, and the temporary commitment, which extended from a few days to several years according to the reason for commitment. During this year the board was responsible for a total of 2,444 children—1,924 under care at the beginning of the year and 520 received during the year. Of these children 503 were discharged during the year. More than two-thirds (1,686) of the children included in the study were committed to the board because they were found by the court to be destitute of suitable homes or of proper parental control, and the remaining 758 had come before the court because of delinquency. Of the entire group 1,698 (69 per cent) were under minority commit ment, and 614 (or 25 per cent) were under temporary care during the year of the study. One hundred and thirty-two children (5 per cent) were being cared for as feeble-minded; all but 12 of these had been committed as permanent wards of the board. WARDS OF THE BOARD. At the end of the period selected for the study (on May 15, 1921) 1,941 children were under the jurisdiction of the board. The dis tribution of these children as to race, sex, and age gives a cross section of the problem handled by the board. The white children constituted 38 per cent of the whole number and the negro children, 62 per cent. Thirty-seven per cent were girls and 63 per cent were boys. The age distribution was as follows: Age. Number. Per cent distribution. Total under care May 15, 1921____ _____ 1,941 100 Less than 1 y e a r . . . ___ •;_______________ . . 1-3 y e a r s . . __ i -------- __ ______________ _______ 4-6 years ----- ------_ ________ ____ 7-9 years. _ ________ ________ -------10-13 y e a r s __ . . . __ __ _____ _______ ____ 14-15 years_________ _______ _________ _____ 16-17 years. __ __ _ _________ ____ _____ 18 years and o v e r ______ ________ . . . _ _____ 12 77 127 175 470 366 336 378 1 4 7 9 24 19 17 19 MINORITY AND TEMPORARY COMMITMENTS. The court frequently committed a child to the board temporarily either because its information regarding the child’s own family was 22 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis S T A T IST IC A L IN T E R P R E T A T IO N OP D E P E N D E N C Y P R O B L E M . 23 insufficient or because the indications were that it would be expedient to return the child to his parents within a comparatively short period. Abandoned or deserted children, or children whose parents were failing to make proper provision for them because of physical or mental inability or moral unfitness, were often placed with the board on temporary commitments, in order to provide opportunity to the officers of the board for the location of responsible relatives who were willing to assume the care of the child or for some readjustment in the home. Delinquent children were sometimes committed temporarily in order that the underlying cause of trouble might be discovered through mental and physical examination. In other cases, when the officers of the board or of the court had advised some change in the family's living conditions—such as more room, a better neighborhood or a competent caretaker while the mother was at work—a temporary commitment pending such rearrangement was recommended. Of the 2,444 children under care during the year covered in the study of records 1,698 were under minority commitments. Of these, 632 were originally committed as temporary wards. In addition, 120 had been on minority commitments and had been transferred to the feeble-minded roll. The total number of children who had been committed during the year as temporary wards was 1,304, of whom 614 were still on tem porary commitment at the end of the year or at the time when they were discharged from care,- 678 were later committed for minority and 12 were transferred to the feeble-minded roll. Thus 53 per cent of all the children under care during the year had been placed under temporary supervision, but more than half of these were later committed for minority. Children who became wards of the board because of dependency or neglect were much more frequently committed until majority than were those placed under supervision because of delinquency. Of the 1,686 children under the care of the board during the year of the study who had been found to be destitute of suitable homes, 1,406 (more than four-fifths) were on minority commitments during the year, whereas only 424 (not much more than half) of the 758 com mitted because of delinquency were wards for minority, and many of these had originally been received on temporary commitments. Of the children who were on minority commitments at the time of the study nearly four-fifths had been committed because they were found to be destitute of suitable homes and only one-fifth because of delinquency. Mapy children were committed temporarily pending some readjust ment in the home or a decision from the officers of the court as to the advisability of returning them to their parents or relatives; other children were committed temporarily until mental and physical examinations could be given them. These examinations frequently reveal very serious defects, both physical and mental, which influence the decision of the judge as to the most desirable type of commitment. At the end of the first temporary commitment the child might be discharged, committed for another temporary period, or committed hntil he should reach his majority. I t was the duty of the investigat ing department of the Board of Children's Guardians, at the expira tion of the temporary commitment, to report to the juvenile court concerning the child as well as the conditions existing in his parental https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 24 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y I N T H E D IST R IC T OR C O L U M B IA . • home; the decision as to recommitment rested with the court. Although the original commitment might be for only a short period, varying from a week to several months, through a series of temporary commitments children frequently continued under care for a year and sometimes longer. Some of the children received under tem porary care were discharged when home conditions had improved sufficiently to make this advisable. Others were kept under tem porary care until it became evident that no adjustment could be made; they were then committed to the board until they reached their majority or until they were discharged for other reasons. REASONS FOR COMMITMENT. At the time of the study children became wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians only through commitment by the juvenile court. Occasionally children were taken under care without any court action because of immediate need*, but these children returned to relatives within a few days when further provision was found unneces sary; three such children were included in the study. The board was not allowed to hold any child for more than one week without an order of the court. Of the older wards under care 45 had been committed to the board by the police court prior to the establish ment of the juvenile court m 1906. Of the 2,399 children committed to the board for whom the source of action leading to commitment was reported, 1,300 (54 ner cent) were committed on the petition of the Board of Children’s Guardians after an investigation of the home conditions; all these children except 2 were classed as dependent. Until about 10 years prior to the study the board had occasionally petitioned the court to commit a delinquent child. In the cases of 1,099 children (46 per cent of those included in the study) the action leading to commitment ori ginated in the juvenile court or the police court; and of this number 353 were dependent children. In 42 cases it was not reported whether the action originated in the court or in the Board of Children’s Guardians, and in 3 cases the children were under care for less than a week and were not committed. Dependency. • The 1,686 children committed because they were found by the court to be destitute of suitable homes included (1) children one or both of whose parents were dead or were temporarily absent from the home because of commitment to a hospital or a correctional institution, as well as foundlings and other homeless children whose parents were failing to provide for them; (2) children whose parents were unable to provide for them for other reasons; and (3) children whose parents had failed to give them the proper supervision in the home or had willfully neglected them or exposed them to improper surroundings and associates. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis UNDER CARE OF THE PUBLIC AGENCY AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS. IN THE TOTAL POPULATION UNDER 21 YEARS OF AGE IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 1920 . STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 88962 PROPORTIONS OF W H ITE AND COLORED C H IL D R E N U N D E R CARE OF T H E PU BLIC AGENCY AND PRIVATE IN STITU TIO N S AND IN T H E TOTAL POPULA TION OF T H E D IS T R IC T OF COLUMBIA. 25 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis WÈÈ 26 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. Delinquency. As has already been stated, 758 (nearly one-third) of the children under care during the year were committed on charges of delin quency. The following list shows the charges upon which the 758 delinquent children were committed: Charges. Number. Total delinquent children________________ Per cent distribution. 758 Incorrigibility- :._____________________ 326 Taking property of another_____________________ 164 Petty larceny.------------------------------------------------j 108 Truancy----___________ _____________ iA A ____ 66 Disorderly conduct_______________________ 22 12 Destroying private property.____ _________ Vagrancy. _______________________ . . . _____ 7 Violating police regulations: Playing in the streets______________________ 7 Running automobile without license_________ 3 Throwing missiles_____________________________ 5 Carrying concealed weapons______________ 4 Sex charges______ ___________________ ____________ 3 Discharging explosives______ __________________ 2 Other--------------------------------------------19 More than one charge_______________ 10 100 43 22 14 9 3 2 1 1 ... 1 1 __ 3 1 A G E A T C O M M IT M E N T , S E X , A N D R A C E . The following list shows the age at commitment of the 2,444 children included in the study, according to whether they were dependent or delinquent: Dependent. D elin quent. Total children. 1, 686 758 Age at commitment. Under 6 m onths. __ 6 months, under 1 year__ 1 year___ 2 years__ 3 years___ 4 years. 5 years 6 years _ . ■ --- 128 69 100 105 109 95 119 113 n __ __ ' __ ' _^_ __ __ Dependent. D elinquent. 7 years _ _ ___ __ ___ 127 8 years. . ___ 134 9 years ___ 102 10 years. ___ 113 11 years.. _ . ___ 98 12 years__ ___ 77 13 years. ____ __ ___ 75 14 years__ _______ ___ 71 15 years. _ __ ___ 49 16 years___ _ ____ 2 2 18 51 96 101 131 139 125 74 21 Age at commitment. Eight 1 ier cent of the entire group included in this studv were received 1iy the board before they were 1 year of age; 34 per cent were received before they were 7 years of age; 52 per cent were received between the ages of 7 and. 13, inclusive; and 14 per cent were received when 14 years of age or over. Of the 1,686 children committed because of dependency, at the time of commitment, 50 per cent were under 7 years; 43 per cent were from 7 to 13 years, inclusive; and 7 per cent were 14 years or over. Of the 758 children committed because of delinquency 71 per cent were from 7 to 13 years of age and 29 per cent were 14 years or over. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 27 The children included in the study were distributed, according to cause of commitment, color, and sex, as follows: Boys. Total children_____________ .__________ 1, 558 White_____________ Negro___________________________ Dependent_________ White_________________________________ Negro___________________________ ______ Delinquent. White___ ____________________171 Negro__________________ Ü______________ Girls. 886 567 991 349 537 945 741 396 549 310 431 613 145 442 39 106 Of the children under supervision during the year 916 (37 per cent) were white and 1,528 (63 per cent) were negro. In 1920, according to the census, the negro children between the ages of 7 and 20 years inclusive, comprised 28 per cent1 of all children be tween these ages in the District of Columbia. In order to compare the proportions of white and negro children committed on charges of delinquency and committed because of dependency or neglect, only those dependent children who were 7 years of age or over at the time of commitment are included, as no child under that age was committed by the court on a charge of delinquency. The percentages of children 7 years of age and over were practically the same for white and negro children as for the entire group included in the study. Of the white children aged from 7 to 20 years, inclusive, 64 per cent were committed because of dependency and 36 per cent had been brought before the court because of delinquency; of the negro chil dren of the same age group the corresponding percentages were 46 and 54. Boys predominated in both the white and the negro group, the proportion being about the same—62 per cent of the white and 65 per cent of the negro. More than half of the 1,686 dependent children and four-fifths of the 758 committed because of delinquency were boys. L O C A L IT IE S F R O M W H IC H T H E C H IL D R E N C A M E . As it was impossible in most of the cases to obtain information in regard to the birthplace of the children’s parents and the length of time they had resided in the District, the only tabulation that could be made in this connection was of the birthplaces of the children themselves. Information was secured as to the birthplaces of 2,178 (89 per cent) of the 2,444 children. Ot the white children whose birthplaces were known, 75 per cent were bom in the District of Columbia as compared with 85 per cent of the negro children; 25 per cent of the white and 15 per cent of the negro children were bom outside the city. The following fist gives i Computed from Fourteenth Census of the U nited States, Vol. I l l , Population, p. 178 (U . 8. Bureau of the Census, Washington, 1922). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 28 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. the birthplaces of the 814 white children and the 1,364 negro children whose birthplaces were reported: W hite children. Birthplace. Native born________ _______________ Negro children. 787 1, 364 District of Columbia_____________________ 607 Maryland__ _______ 42 New York________________________ 12 North Carolina__________________________ 3 29 Pennsylvania_______________________ ,____ South Carolina___________________________ _____ Virginia-----------------------------------59 Other___________________________________ 35 1, 166 57 7 Foreign born____ _ _________________ 27 Canada________________________ _________ England____________________ _______ „___ Italy------------ __------------------- ------- ---------Russia___ _______________________________ Other________ __________ ;_____ __________ 3 2 8 6 8 8 9 16 87 14 P A R E N T A L S T A T U S. The status of the child’s own parents 2 at the time of his com mitment to the board is shown in the following statement for the children who were under care at some time during the year: Parental status. Number. Per cent. 2, 444 100 Both parents in the home___ aj___________ r;i Mother head of family____________________ 370 665 15 27 Father dead____ _________ Father deserted_____ _ ______ '_________ Parents divorced______________________ Father in. hospital___________________ Father in hospital for insane____________ Father in correctional institution_______ Father working away from home_______ Father not living with family or where abouts not known__________________ 238 162 14 5 8 43 6 ______ ______ ______ 189 ______ Mother unmarried_________________________ Father head of fam ily________________ 295 234 12 10 Mother dead________________________ Mother deserted._________ ___________ Parents divorced___________ - _________ Mother in hospital___________________ Mother in hospital for insane__________ Mother in correctional institution______ Mother not living with family or where abouts not known__________________ 123 18 3 30 19 8 Total children__________ __________ _____ __ ;__ ___ 33 Step-parents________\__________________ _ 152 Mother and stepfather-____.___________ Father and stepmother_______________ Stepfather only______________________ Stepmother only_ i ___________________ 99 50 2 1 6 2 It was not always clear from the entries in the records for the older cases whether the agency did not know the whereabouts of the parent or parents at the tim e of the child’s commitment or whether the absence of information was due merely to failure to record it. In the case of the 466 children included under “ no parental hom e” the whereabouts of one or both of whose parents was not known, the fact as to the nonex istence of parental homes was definite. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. Parental status. Number. No parental home________________________ 728 Both parents dead___________________ Whereabouts of both parents not known. Both parents in institution____________ One parent dead, whereabouts of one not known_________________ _____— One parent dead, one in institution_____ One parent in institution, whereabouts of one not known___________ One parent in institution, one without home_________ - ___________________ One parent dead, one without home___ Whereabouts of one parent not known, one without home__________________ 116 215 25 29 P ercent. 30 163 57 58 23 41 30 The following table shows for dependent and delinquent and for white and negro children the percentages who had no parental homes or who had one or both parents or a step-parent in the home at the time they became wards of the board: Parental status of dependent and delinquent and of white and colored wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Per cent distribution. Parental status. Depend ent. Delin quent . Total____________________________________________ 100 100 100 100 Both parents in the home__________________ _____ _______ One parent and one step-parent in the home..................... .......... Mother only in the home_____________________ ___________ Father only in the home_________________________________ No parental home----------------------- -------------------------------- 10 4 40 11 35 26 10 38 7 19 22 5 36 13 24 11 7 42 7 33 • White. Colored. Children rem oved from parental h o m e s.3 Only 370 (15 per cent) of the 2,444 children had both parents living in the home. The total is 519 (21 per cent of the entire group studied) if homes in which there were step-parents are included (50 children had a father and a stepmother and 99 had a mother and a stepfather). Twenty-seven per cent of the white children as com pared with 18 per cent of the negro children had both parents or a parent and a step-parent in the home. The homes of 960 children (two-fifths of all) were maintained by the mothers. The percentage of cases in which the mother was maintaining the home was somewhat smaller for the white than for the negro children—35 as compared with 41. These 960 children who had neither fathers nor stepfathers in the homes included 295 children whose mothers were unmarried. Three-fourths of these children were being cared for by their mothers at the time of their commitment to the board. Five per cent of the white and 16 per cent of the negro were children of unmarried mothers. 3 The number of children who were received from their fathers and mothers was not the same as the number who were reported as being w ith their parents in their own homes at the tim e of commitment. Some children had no homes because, though they remained in the custody of their parents up to the tim e they were received as wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, the parents were at the same time sent to correctional institutions. A somewhat similar situation sometimes occurred in regard to children who had one parent in the home and those who had a parent and a step-parent. These included children who were received as wards of the board at the time of the parents’ death or their commitment to a correc tional institution or to a hospital. On the other hand, there were some children who were not living in their own homes a t the tim e of commitment although one or both parents were maintaining a home. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ûo O PA R E N TA L STATUS OF C H IL D R E N U N D E R CARE OF T H E PUBLIC AGENCY AND PRIV A TE IN STITU T IO N S IN T H E D IS T R IC T OF COLUM BIA. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILDREN IN PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS. CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 31 The homes of 234 children (about one-tenth of the whole number) were maintained by the fathers alone. The mothers of 123 of these children were dead, the mothers of 18 had deserted, the parents of 3 were divorced, and the parents of 90 were separated. This number included 30 whose mothers were in hospitals, 19 others whose mothers were in hospitals for the insane, and 8 whose mothers were in correc tional institutions. Two children had stepfathers and one had a stepmother but no parent in the home. Children having no parental home at commitment. Three-tenths of the entire number (728) were children who had no parental homes at the time of their commitment to the board. This group included 116 orphans (5 per cent of all wards) and 261 half orphans (11 per cent). In the case of 57 of the half orphans the surviving parent was in an institution, 8 mothers and 10 fathers being in correctional institutions, 9 mothers and 1 father in hospitals for the insane, and 19 mothers and 10 fathers in other hospitals. In 81 cases one of the parents was in an institution and the other was failing to provide a home. An analysis of this group shows that 19 mothers and 23 fathers were in correctional institutions, 5 mothers and 1 father in hospitals for the insane, and 27 mothers and 6 fathers in other hospitals. In 25 cases both parents were in institutions. In 11 both parents were in correctional institutions, in 6 both parents were in hospitals, in 3 the mothers were in correctional institutions and the fathers were in hospitals (1 father was in a hospital for the insane), and in 5 the fathers were in correctional institutions and the mothers were in hospitals. C U S T O D IA N S A T T IM E O F C O M M IT M E N T . Sixteen per cent of the children were living in their own homes with their fathers and mothers at the time they became wards of the board. An additional 6 per cent of the children had a parent and a step-parent in the home. Twenty-two per cent of the white children were with both parents and 4 per cent with a parent and step-parent, as compared with 12 and 6 per cent, respectively, of the negro children. Of the dependent children 11 per cent were from homes in which both parents were present and 4 per cent from step-parental homes; the corresponding percentages for delinquent children were 25 and 9. About two-fifths of all the children were removed from the mothers. Thirty-eight per cent of the white children and 39 per cent of the negro children were removed from the custody o f their mothers when committed to the board. Forty-one per cent of the dependent and 34 per cent of the delinquent children were being cared for by the mother immediately prior to their commitment. In one-tenth of the cases the father was the custodian at the time when the child was committed. The percentage of children who were in the custody of the fathers at the time of commitment was twice as large among the white as among the negro—14 per cent as compared with 7 per cent. Eleven per cent of the dependent child ren and 7 per cent of those committed because of delinquency were being cared for by their fathers when committed. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis > 05 to CUSTODIANS FRO M WHOM C H IL D R E N W ERE REM OV ED BY T H E JU V EN ILE COURT AND C O M M IT TE D TO T H E BOARD OF C H IL D R E N ’S GUARDIANS. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis - DELINQUENT CHILDREN. CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. DEPENDENT CHILDREN. STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 33 Relatives other than the parents had the custody of 13 per cent of the children at the time of commitment to the board. Only two or three children received by the board were in the custody of child caring institutions when committed. Eight per cent of the children were living temporarily with neighbors or friends following the death or commitment to institutions of one parent or both. Seventy-three children were received from foster homes. This number constituted 3 per cent of all the children; the percentages were 2 and 3, respectively, for the white and negro groups, and 3 and 4 per cent for the dependent and delinquent children. The custodian of the child prior to the commitment to the Board of Children’s Guardians is shown in the following table, according to race and according to whether the child was brought before the juvenile court because of dependency or delinquency: Custodians at time of commitment of white and colored and dependent and delinquent wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Children committed to Board of Chil dren’s Guardians. Custodian a t time of commitment. Depend ent. Delin quent. White. Colored. Total children.............. ........ ................................................. 1,686 758 916 1,528 Father and mother........................................................................... 188 184 690 23 42 189 44 168 151 7 191 53 261 24 48 117 29 26 5 4 202 124 351 20 20 64 22 60 51 2 177 113 600 27 70 242 51 134 105 9 Father and stepmother.................................................................... Mother and stepfather_______ ___________________________ Other relatives_________ ______________ ________________ Adoptive or foster parents........ .......................... ........................... O th er..______ ___ _____________ . . _________________ No custodian (foundling or abandoned child). . ........................ Custodian not reported------------------- ------ -------------------------- R E C O R D S O F F A M IL IE S A N D C H IL D R E N . N um ber o f children com m itted from each fam ily. The 2,444 wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians included in the study came from 1,764 family groups—many of which, how ever, did not have the custody of the child at the time of his commit ment to the board. The “ own families” of the 2,444 children had had the following numbers of children at some time under the care of the public agency: Number of children under care at some time. Number of families. Total families included in the study________________ 1, 764 One child___ ______________i ______ __________________ 1, 383 Two children______ |____ ____.____ ____________________ 216 Three children___ __________ _________________ __,_____ 90 Four children________ __ _________________ , *1__ t i _— 36 Five children_______ ____________ - f t _________________ 29 Six children.--__ ___i____________ _________Ln----------- 8 Seven children_______ ___________________--------------------1 Eight children____ .*-------------------- ------------------------------1 Nine children___ ________— ................... ..........- .................... 1 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 34 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The following table shows the correlation between the total number of children in each family and the number of children the family had had under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians: Number of children in fam ily and total number at some time under care of the Board of Children's Guardians. All the children of 555 (one-third) of the families had at some time been wards of the board. Of these families 313 had had under care only one child; 110, two children; 50, three; 41, four; 29, five; 8, six; 2, seven; and 2, nine. Families of which all the children had been under the care of the board at the same time numbered 424. Exclud ing the families, and the wards from the families for whom it was not reported how many children there were per family, it is seen that 36 per cent of all the children in 1,530 families were wards of the board. Dependency or delinquency records of the families. In 520 (30 per cent) of the 1,764 families represented by the 2,444 children under care during the year of the study one or both parents had previously been before the juvenile court or the family had been aided by a family-relief society or some other social agency. Eightyeight families had records with more than one agency. In 72 families the fathers, in 20 the mothers, and in 3 families both'parents had been before the juvenile court on charges of non support or desertion. Nineteen of the fathers and 6 of the mothers had been sentenced to correctional institutions by the juvenile court. In addition to these, 51 fathers, 67 mothers, and in 10 families both the father and the mother had been inmates of cor rectional institutions through other court commitment. Eighteen of the mothers of wards of the board had themselves been previously or were during the year of study wards of the Board of Childrens Guardians. One of these mothers had three children under super vision during the year of the study, one had four, and each of the other 16 had one. Both parents of one child were in a hospital for the insane and in 43 families one parent had been in such an insti tution—in 31 families the mothers and in 12 the fathers. A total of 77 children from these 44 families were included in the study and 14 other children in these families had been under supervision at some previous time. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 35 Eleven of the motners and two of the fathers had been inmates of institutions for dependents. The Associated Charities or other family-relief agencies had aided 235 of the 527 families that had been known to agencies. A total of 27 families had been provided with institutional care through the District of Columbia Board of Charities, of which 4 had been helped by both the Board of Charities and a family-relief agency. Forty-eight families in all were aided in some way by other agencies of various types, including the Juve nile Protective Association, the Washington Humane Society, the Instructive Visiting Nurses’ Association, and the Salvation Army. Children’s previous agency records. Eight hundred and seventy-one (more than one-third) of the 2,444 children had been under the care or supervision of an agency or institution for the care of children previous to the commitment to the board effective at the time of the study. Children committed because of dependency.—Of the 1,686 children who were committed because of dependency 324 had been known to some agency previously. The agencies are shown in the following list: Agency. Number. Total children_______________________ ___________* 324 Board of Children’s Guardians__________________________ Institution for dependent children_____ :_________________ Juvenile court_________________________________ Child-caring agency___________________________________ Juvenile court and Board of Children’s Guardians_________ Board of Children’s Guardians and institution for dependent children____________________________________________ Correctional institution____________________ _______ _ Institution for dependent children andchild-caring agency.. _ Board of Children’s Guardians, juvenile court, and correc tional institution__ _________________________________ Juvenile court and institution for dependentchildren_______ Institution for dependent children and institution for feeble minded________________________________________ 131 83 52 22 15 6 6 4 2 2 1 One hundred and fifty-four, or nearly half this group, had been wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians previously; this figure includes 17 who had also been before the juvenile court for delin quency, 2 of whom had also been in institutions for delinquent children. A total of 71 had been before the juvenile court on charges of delinquency, 96 had been in institutions for dependent children, 8 had been in institutions for delinquent children, 26 had been under the supervision of a child-caring agency, and 1 had been in,an institu tion for the feeble-minded. Children committed because of delinquency.—Of the 758 children who had been committed to the board because of delinquency 547 4 The entries for the juvenile court relate to appearance before the court for an offense other than that which was immediately responsible for the commitment to the board which is dealt w ith in this study. The entries for the Board of Children’s Guardians include only children who had been wards of the board on temporary commitment and had been released prior to M ay 16,1920 (the beginning of the year covered by this study). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 36 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. had had a previous agency record. The agencies to which these children were known are given in the following list: Agency. . Number. Total children____ ______!---------------------- - ----------- 4 547 Juvenile court____ — ------------KU---------- ----------!J- - ------- 404 Juvenile court and Board of Children’s Guardians-------------92 -------19 Board of Children’s Guardians--------------------- — Juvenile court and institution for dependent children---------8 Board of Children’s Guardians, juvenile court, and correc 7 tional institution. _i-------------------- ------------------- -------- Correctional institution-------------------------- r - —- - ------- r _ 6 Institution for dependent children— !---------------------- ■- -----5 Board of Children’s Guardians and institution for dependent children--------__------------- :ih-------------------------------------2 Other___________ _____ , -------------------------------------- - - - - 4 A total of 511 (93 per cent) of this group had been before the juvenile court on charges of delinquency prior to that which occa sioned the commitment to the board in effect at the time of the study. This number included 92 who had been wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians previously, 8 who had also been in institu tions for dependent children, and 7 who had been wards of the board and in institutions for delinquent children. A total of 120 children—22 per cent of the 547 who had previous agency records— had been wards of the board previously; 15 had been in homes for dependent children and 13 in institutions for delinquent children. C O N T R IB U T IO N S O P P A R E N T S T O T H E S U P P O R T O F T H E C H IL D R E N . In addition to having jurisdiction over dependent and delinquent children, the juvenile court assumed jurisdiction over nonsupport cases, until in April, 1922, the United States Supreme Court decided that it had no jurisdiction over such cases.5 The fathers of 143 children included in this study and the mothers of 22 had been before the juvenile court because of failure to support their children. The court ordered the parents of children committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians to make such payments toward the children’s support as appeared feasible in consideration of the eco nomic condition of the parents. In a large proportion of the cases in which the father or the mother agreed voluntarily, or was ordered by the court, to contribute toward the support of a child or children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, the sum was only $1.50 to $2 a week per child, and sometimes this small amount was paid for the care of several children committed to the board at the same time. Occasionally when both parents were working a regular weekly payment was ordered from each of them. The records failed to show how regularly these sums were paid or over how long a period payments extended; but it was evident from the informa tion available that the parents frequently failed to carry out the court orders in this regard. In cases in which the parent made a voluntary payment the sum was usually larger and was paid with more regularity than when payment was ordered by the court. * The entries for the juvenile court relate to appearance before the court for an offense other than that which was immediately responsible for the commitment to the board which is dealt with in this study. The entries for the Board of Children’s Guardians include only children who had been wards of the board on temporary commitment and had been released prior to M ay 16, 1920 (the beginning of the year cov ered by this s*udy). 1 , , _ /_ . 6 See “ The Moreland Case,” in The Legal Aspect of the Juvenile Court, by Bernard Flexner and Reuben Oppenheimer, p. 29 (U. S. Children’s Bureau Publication No. 99, Washington, 1922). https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 37 Larger amounts were paid by parents for feeble-minded children who were not wards of the board but who were under supervision at the parents’ request; in some instances the amounts paid by the parents for the support of such children approximated the amount the board was required to pay for their care in institutions. In these cases, since the arrangements were purely voluntary, the board was privileged to return the children to the parents whenever the parents failed to make the payments promised. During the fiscal year July 1, 1920, to June 30, 1921, the board received $7,930.33 from relatives for the support of children, including $1,053 which was paid for the care of feeble*minded children under the supervision of the board. The Board of Children’s Guardians does not have authority to assist parents to find boarding homes for children or make arrange ments for the care of children, other than the feeble-minded, who have not been legally declared its wards. C O M P A R IS O N O F T H E U S E O F V A R IO U S T Y P E S O F P L A C E M E N T . First placement. Analysis of first placements made by the board shows that during the year of the study institutions had been used extensively as ^‘re ceiving homes” pending placement in family homes, or for children who were committed to the board for short periods. In order to dis cover whether the proportion of children placed in institutions and in family homes had changed during the two years ended May 15, 1921, from what it had been during preceding years, comparison was made of the first placement of all children under care during the year of the study—children who had been committed over a period almost 21 years in duration—and of the children under care during the year of the study who had been received by the board during the two-year period. The proportions of first placements in institutions were practically the same (47 and 49 per cent) and those for children placed m boarding homes were identical (46 per cent). The figures follow: Per cent c istribution. Children under care during year ended May 15, 1921.“ Type of first placement. Total___________________ _________________________ ____ In stitution................... ............................................................................ .................... Boarding home_____ ____ ________________________ ________________ .. Free home__________________________________ ___________________ Parental h o m e.._____ ___________ _______ _____________________ . . . Prospective adoptive home_________ ______________:J,____________ Trial indenture___ ________________________________________ ___ . House of detention______________________________________________ « Committed at any time during preceding 21 years. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . Children committed during 2year period ended M ay 15,1921. 100 100 47 46 2 1 49 46 i (b) ( 6) jB 2 b Less than 1 per cent. 3 (») CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. 38 The first placements by the board of the 2,435 children for whom information was obtained are shown in the following list, according to whether the child was committed because of dependency or delin quency: Type of first placement. Dependent. Delinquent. Total children__ ____ _________________ 1,677 758 606 941 54 31 551 184 36 2 12 Institution----------------------------------------------Boarding home_____________________________ Free home__________________________________ Parental home___________________________ '__ Prospective adoptive home___________________ Trial indenture______________________________ Hospital____ _______________________________ House of detention________________________ 3 4 6 5 PLA C EM EN TS AT E N D OF YEAR OF C H IL D R E N U N D E R CARE OF T H E BOARD OF C H IL D R E N ’S GUARDIANS. Boarding homes. 27* Institutions. Free homes * Parents’ homes. Wage homes. Trial adoptive homes _ Other **. Hospitals. Based on 1,939 children under care on M ay 15,1921, for whom information was obtained. * “ Free homes” includes homes in which self-supporting children were paying their own board. ** “ Other” includes 16 in indenture or trial indenture homes, 2 in apprentice homes, 8 in house of deten tion, and 29 in the Army, Navy, or Marine Corps. The board had placed in institutions 36 per cent of the children committed because of dependency as compared with 73 per cent of those committed because of delmquency. Of the dependent chil dren 56 per cent as compared with 24 per cent of the delinquent were first placed in boarding homes. Fifty-four children committed https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 39 because of dependency and 6 committed because of delinquency were placed in free homes when received by the board, and 31 dependent children and 5 who were delinquent were returned to their parents under supervision. Thirty-six dependent children and 12 delmquent children were found to be in need of special treatment and placed in hospitals until they could be placed in private homes or in institu tions. A total of 237 children of the 441 who were committed to the board during the calendar year 1920 were placed in institutions as soon as they were received. On May 15, 1921, over one-fourth of these 237 children were still in institutions, many of them having been trans ferred from those in which they were first placed. Over one-third had been transferred to boarding homes, free homes, or the homes of relatives. • Dependent. Delinquent. Total children________________________ 98 139 16 Remaining in first institution_____________ 1___ Transferred to: Other institution.________________ ________ 10 46 Boarding home_________________________ Parental home_________________ . . . . _____ 6 Free home______________________________ 7 Wage home_____________________ _____________ 1 Hospital_____________ Discharged from first placement_______________ 6 12 Whereabouts unknown_______________________ ______ 25 18 14 5 5 2 __ 7 64 6 The use of institutions and family homes. The following list shows the number and percentage of children who were placed in institutions or in family homes oi the different types at any time while they were wards of the board : Number of children. Per cent. Free homes________________________ 971 Boarding homes--------------- ------------------------------ 1,794 Wage homes_____________ 304 516 Parents’ homes under supervision_________ Institutions___________________________ ______1, 751 40 73 12 21 72 Three hundred and eight children (13 per cent of all) had been cared for in boarding homes from the time of their commitment to the board, and practically the same number (306) had always been in institutions. I t is seen that while nearly three-fourths of the children had been in boarding homes and the same proportion in institutions at some time, one-fourth were being cared for in boarding homes and less than one-fourth in institutions a t the end of the year of the study or when released from care. Two-fifths of the children had been in free homes a t some time; less than one-fourth, however, were being cared for in this way at the end of the year or a t the time they were released. One-fifth had been tried in the homes of their own parents while under the board’s jurisdiction, although only one-seventh of all were in their homes until the end of the year or until their discharge from jurisdiction. One-eighth of the children had been in wage homes at some time, but less man 5 per cent were living in such homes at the 6 Temporary wards whose terms of commitment had expired. 7 Sixty were temporary wards whose terms of commitment had expired, 3 were permanent wards who were committed to the national training school, and 1 married, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 40 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA. time of discharge or at the end of the year. Probably much of this difference is accounted for by the fact that the older children had shifted from this arrangement to boarding in family homes and working elsewhere. The wards of the board were as a rule required to go to work as soon as they reached the age of 16 years, and the placing officers frequently advised with them and helped them to find work. Certain occupa tions were not favored, ana every possible effort was made to secure for the children profitable, safe, and congenial work. Colored girls were frequently placed at domestic service in private families when they left school, and some of the boys were placed with private fami lies on farms where they worked either indoors or outside. Work ing children received their own wages and were responsible for their own personal expenses. An officer of the board visited these children at intervals, advised with their employers, and in case the arrange ment proved unsatisfactory arranged for the child’s placement in another wage home, or in a boarding home until other plans could be made. On the recommendation of the physician or of one of the nurses employed by the board, a child in need of hospital treatment was given care in one of several hospitals in the city—through a special appropriation made for this purpose. The Washington Asylum Hospital also received patients of all classes for observation and treat ment, and this institution was frequently used for children suffering from venereal disease or children in need of special prolonged treat ment or of observation for mental condition. Number of placements of each child. A consideration of the number of placements of each child brings out the fact that many of these children were tried in a number of homes or institutions before a satisfactory arrangement could be reached. Sometimes the caretaker became ill or for some other reason was unable to keep the child; but more frequently the change was attributed to some fault or lack of adaptation on the part of the child. Occasionally the board moved a child in order to place him farther away from his family or old associates, or to have him nearer school or near a hospital if he was in need of frequent examination or treatment, or to place him with his brothers or sisters. Transfer from a family home to an institution and from an institu tion to a family home, as well as from one institution to another, de pended very largely upon the child’s conduct. In a few instances, however, it was necessary to place a child in an institution temporarily because no family home was available or to provide for him in a family home temporarily until arrangements could be made for his care in a suitable mstitution. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 41 The following list shows the number of placements of the 625 chil dren under temporary commitment and of the 1,809 under minority commitment for whom the number of placements was reported: Number of placements.8 Total children One________ ____ Two__ ____ _____ Three___________ Four__ _________ Five__;---------------Six_______ ______ Seven_____.______ Eight____ _______ Nine____________ Ten_____________ Eleven__________ Twelve__ | --------Thirteen_________ Fourteen________ Fifteen to nineteen Twenty and over__ Temporary wards. M inority wards. __ 625 1, 809 237 141 74 64 35 32 25 160 280 248 227 198 146 6 3 2 2 1 1 2 120 99 79 74 42 36 19 23 52 6 Data that could be fairly compared with the foregoing are not available for other cities, and it is impossible to say whether a similar situation prevails in other places. The number of changes indicated in the above figures points to a very serious situation that can not help being detrimental to the children. One reason for the large number of placements is to be found in the temporary commitments. Children committed temporarily are very frequently recommitted one or more times. This often neces sitates shifting of location because of the difficulty in securing suit able homes which will receive these children and the uncertainty con cerning the length of time they will have to be provided for. The duration of temporary commitments varied from one week to over five years, in the majority of cases being about two years. In the light of this fact and of those shown above in regard to thé number of placements, the seriousness of the situation is evident. The number of placements of children under minority commit ment is also to be explained to some extent on the above basis; many of these children had been committed as temporary wards— some of them several times—before they became wards for minority, and the board was in a position to provide more permanent homes for them. A particularly unfortunate situation in relation to the shifting of the children from one location to another is due to the in elasticity of the appropriation made to the board. It frequently happens that before the expiration of the fiscal year the amount appropriated for the maintenance of wards has been so nearly ex hausted that the last few weeks find the board in a dilemma, having to provide for the care of some of its wards who are in boarding homes without having the money necessary to continue paying board for them. Other arrangements are necessary for the short period until the next appropriation is available. 8 “ Placements” include placements in both family homes and institutions but not in the house of deten tion or a hospital. 9These figures exclude two children committed to the board but never placed by it—a boy who ran away from the juvenile court immediately following his commitment and has never been located, and an abandoned in fant who was committed b u t whose relatives were located the same day and agreed to provide for him. 88962°—24f----- 4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis to BOARD OP C H IL D R E N ’S GUARDIANS, D IST R IC T OF COLUMBIA—N U M B E R OF TIM ES WARDS W ERE PLA C ED . 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Based on 2,434 children for whom number of placements was reported. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1» 13 14 15 or more CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 1 STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OP DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 43 Although information in regard to the number of placements brings out the fact that in many cases children had to be moved frequently, and new plans for their care were necessary from time to time, the special significance of these changes in correlation with the length of time the child had been a ward of the board is shown by the figures given in the following table: Length of time under care, by number of 'placements; children under care of Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921. Number of children under care for specified length of time. Number of placements. Total One____________ Two______ _•____ Three___________ Four.................. Five____________ Six_____________ Seven___________ E ight...................... Nine___________ Ten_____________ Eleven__________ Twelve__________ Thirteen.............. . Fourteen....... ......... Fifteen to nineteen. Twenty and o v er.. Not reported.____ 3-4 years. 5-9 years. 10-14 years. 15 years and over. Not reported. 3 dren. 1 year. 1-2 years. 12,442 554 501 323 707 234 120 397 421 322 291 233 178 145 105 82 76 44 37 20 25 52 6 8 283 157 55 36 11 7 2 3 75 133 107 85 40 23 19 10 4 2 1 2 17 39 49 53 45 38 32 17 12 9 6 3 1 1 1 14 68 79 87 98 77 57 52 40 36 25 22 14 11 25 2 5 20 24 22 26 22 21 17 18 17 7 6 4 7 13 2 3 3 3 8 7 13 10 14 6 g 12 5 4 1 6 13 2 5 1 1 1 1 Excluding 2 children who were never placed. I t is seen that of the children under care for less than a year more than one-tenth had had from 4 to 8 placements in this short period of time. Of those under care 1 or 2 years more than one-third had been shifted from 4 to 12 times. Two-thirds of those under care 3 or 4 years had been in 4 to 15 locations. Over three-fourths of the children under care from 5 to 9 years had been placed 4 times or more; almost one-fifth of the whole number in this group had been placed from 10 to 20 or more times. Almost four-fifths of the chil dren under care from 10 to 14 years and almost nine-tenths of those under care 15 years and over had been placed 4 times or more. Of the children in these two groups together, three-tenths had had from 10 to 20 or more placements. P H Y S IC A L A N D M E N T A L C O N D IT IO N O F T H E C H IL D R E N . Physical condition. * Children examined when received.—Since the board has had a physician in its employ the plan has been to give a physical examina tion to each child when he becomes a ward of the board. Of the 686 children for whom it was possible to secure information as to physical condition at the time they became wards of the board only 170 (25 per cent) were found to be in satisfactory condition. Three hundred and ninety-eight (58 per cent) were in unsatisfactory condition; that is, they were below normal in certain respects or were suffering from defects which with proper care and treatment could be remedied and would not cause any serious handicap. One hundred and eighteen https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 44 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. (17 per cent) of the children who had an examination were found to have physical disabilities which constituted serious handicaps; although some of these children could not be completely cured, the condition of the majority of them could be greatly improved by proper treatment. The following list shows the number of children reported as having some physical defect which was considered a serious handicap: Physical defect. Total children with serious physical defects. Syphilis or gonorrhea_____ Active tuberculosis_______ Deformity of limb or spine Sight defect_____________ Speech" or hearing defect. _ Heart defect_____________ Epilepsy _________________ Other___________________ Number. . 118 32 24 24 10 10 7 4 7 The group of children classified as unsatisfactory in physical con dition at the time of reception included those who were in need of treatment or special care temporarily but whose defects were not of such nature as to interfere with their progress in school. They were children who were underdeveloped, who had diseased tonsils, slight speech or hearing defects, or intestinal or other organic disturbances, or who were suspected to have tuberculosis or venereal disease. The proportion in each of the three groups—satisfactory, unsatisfactory, or seriously handicapped condition—does not differ to any extent for the white and the negro children. An analysis of the findings for children committed as dependent shows that only 22 per cent were in good physical condition, 59 per cent were in unsatisfactory condition, and 19 per cent were seriously handicapped. Of the delinquent, 29 per cent were in good condi tion, 57 per cent were in unsatisfactory condition, and 15 per cent were seriously handicapped. Children examined 'prior to release from care.—Of the children included in the study 929 (nearly two-fifths) had had a physical examination within six months prior to their release from supervision or the end of the year of the study. Of this group 511 (55 per cent) were found to be in good condition; 294 (32 per cent) were in un satisfactory condition; and 124 (13 per cent) were suffering with some serious handicap. The following list gives the number of children examined within 6 months of release or the end of the year who were in satisfactory condition, in unsatisfactory condition, and seriously handicapped: Physical condition. Number. * Total children__________ ___________ j ___________ ___929 Satisfactory;___________ .__ ___ ^ __ j__ ___________ 511 Unsatisfactory._________________________ 294 Seriously handicapped________________ i$___________ ____124 Syphilis or gonorrhea. ______________________________ 35 Active tuberculosis________ \________________________ 35 Deformity of limb or spine_____ ____________________ 19 Sight defect_____ ________ 7 Speech or hearing defect_____________ ._____________ 10 Heart defect__ _______ ______________ __ :____ ______ 3 Epilepsy _____________ +__ ,------------------- ---------9 Other_____________________ 6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 45 Of the 124 children in a serious physical condition at the end of the year or at the time of discharge, 35 had active tuberculosis; 12 of these children were white, and 23 were negro. Thirty-two of the 35 children with venereal disease were negro; 23 of them were girls. Of the 19 deformed children 9 were white and 10 were negro; 11 were boys and 8 girls. Policy regarding mental exam inations. The board has the services of several of the psychiatrists in the city as well as of the mental clinic in connection with one of the hospitals. Mental examinations were given to four classes of wards of the board: (1) Children who were apparently feeble-minded or deficient, (2) children presenting special behavior problems, (3) children whose histories were inadequate for placement for adoption or in free homes, and (4) children selected for study because of some special opportunity offered to a child who was able to profit by it. Frequently, careful study of a child’s needs was made over an extended period in order to ascertain the best plan to follow in caring for the child. Of the 2,176 children who were 7 years of age and over when they were committed to the board 529 were given mental examinations immediately prior to their reception or at some time after they became wards; one-fourth of those examined were found to be sufficiently subnormal to be classed as feeble-minded. During the greater part of the year covered by this study of record data the juvenile court had the services of a clinic conducted by the United States Public Health Service,10 which gave mental and physical examinations to all children found by the probation officers especially difficult to manage, as well as to all children apparently below normal either physically or mentally. A copy of the clinic’s report was forwarded to the board at the time of the child’s commitment and was frequently of material assistance in making proper provision for the child. F eeble-m inded wards. One hundred and thirty-two children were committed to the board by the court as either temporary or permanent wards and later transferred to the rolls of the feeble-minded, because upon examina tion they were found to be in need of institutional or other special care. Fifty-eight of these feeble-minded children were first committed as temporary wards (46 of these were later made permanent wards), and 74 were originally committed as permanent wards. In addition to these children received from the court, 62 feeble-minded children who had never been formally committed to the board were being cared for at the request of parents. Two institutions which care for feeble minded children granted special rates for children placed by the Board of Children’s Guardians, and when necessary the board supple mented the amount the parent was able to pay. Only 28 of the 117 feeble-minded wards and 50 of the 62 feeble minded children under supervision who were not wards of the board were in institutions for the feeble-minded at the end of the year. Board was being paid for them at the rate of $25 to $40 a month. Feeble-minded children are released from supervision when they become 21 (or when the term of their commitment expires) unless their parents request the board to continue to provide for them. i° This assistance has not been available since April, 1921. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 46 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The ages of the 117 feeble-minded children who were wards of the board on May 15, 1921, are shown in the following list: Age. Number. Total feeble-minded wards__ 117 10 years____________________ 11 years_______________ 12 years_______________ 13 years__ _____________________ 14 years_______________________ 5 1 5 6 8 Age. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Number. years___________________ years_______________________ years_______________________ years___ _______________ years______________ years_______________________ years or over________________ 17 16 19 13 15 7 5 At the end of the year of the study 28 of these children were in institutions for the feeble-minded, and 36 were in institutions of other types. At that time 12 were being cared for bv their own parents, 12 were in boarding homes, 12 were in homes of relatives or friends to whom no board was being paid, 6 were working in private homes and receiving wages, and one boy was in the United States Army. The remaining 10 children were classed as “absconders.’’ CONDUCT OF CHILDREN WHILE UNDER CARE OF THE BOARD. The difficulty of the task confronting the Board of Children’s Guardians is indicated by the data secured concerning the conduct of the children while under its care. I t must be remembered that a considerable proportion of the wards had been committed because of delinquency. Although a number of the younger children were hard to control and exhibited traits which caused the caretakers considerable trouble, the 268 children under 7 years of age at discharge or at the end of the year are not included in the tabulation showing the child’s conduct while under care. Information was obtained as to the conduct of 1,726 of the 2,176 children 7 years of age and over who were under the care of the board during one year. The conduct of 501 of these was reported as good; the 450 for whom there was no report may be assumed to have given no special difficulty. The other 1,225 were reported as disobedient, runaways, truants, sexually immoral, or guilty of fighting, stealing, lying, or some less serious offense; for many of them more than one type of misconduct was reported. A total of 952 of the 1,225 children whose conduct was reported as poor were runaways, and 68 were habitual truants. Three hundred and fifteen of the children stole, 217 were disobedient, 108 were habitually untruthful, and 108 were sexually immoral. Fifty-six children were reported as being guilty of delinquencies other than those detailed above; the offenses of this group included vagrancy, housebreaking, assault, street begging, destroying property, carry ing concealed weapons, forgery, and disorderly conduct. The conduct of 34 children who did not seriously misbehave was considered poor; these children used bad language, had violent tempers, or were impudent, obstinate, quarrelsome, destructive, or generally hard to manage. W ards brought before th e ju ven ile court. Forty-seven per cent (758) of the 1,606 children 7 years of age and over when received by the board had been brought into court because of some delinquency. Twelve per cent (197) came before the juvenile court or the police court on charges of delinquency while wards of the board. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 47 Of the permanent wards 7 years of age and over who were com mitted to the board because of dependency or neglect 6 per cent were brought into court on charges of delinquency while wards of the board. Of the corresponding group of children who were committed as delinquents 19 per cent were brought before the court on charges of delinquency while wards of the board. The investigating department of the Board of Children’s Guardians reported that during the year ended June 30, 1923, 48 wards of the board were brought before the juvenile court for minor offenses; 13 of them were sent to one of the national training schools. Thirteen wards were brought before the juvenile court on the charge of incorrigibility; of this number 10 were committed to one of the national training schools. Four colored boys who were beyond the age of juvenile-court jurisdiction were brought before other courts. “ A bsconding” children. The 275 wards classed as “ absconders”—children whose where abouts was not known at the end of the year or at the termination of the periods for which they had been placed under supervision 11—were for the most part older wards of the board who were able to care for themselves independently or who were being cared for by relatives and had left their foster homes without notifying the board. This number represents the net accumulation of many years, as runaway wards are carried on the rolls of the board until they reach majority or are discharged for other reasons. In some cases a parent or other relative had removed the child from the home or institution in which he had been placed and had failed to notify the board, either through carelessness or intentionally because the board as legal guardian of the child objected to his return to relatives; the latter explanation applied with especial frequency in the cases of the younger children included in the group o f absconders. Some of the older boys and girls who had become self-supporting did not report to the board when they changed their addresses merely because they did not realize that they were under obligation to do so. If it had been possible to ascertain the reason for the child’s disap pearance in every case it is probable that the number of absconders would have been somewhat reduced. The largest number (101, or 37 per cent) of those whose whereabouts was not known at the end of the year or at the time of discharge from supervision Were in institu tions immediately prior to their being lost sight of by the board. Fifteen (5 per cent) of the children had been placed as apprentices or on indenture, 32 (12 per cent) were in wage homes, 30 (11 per cent) were in the homes of their own parents, 52 (19 per cent) were in free homes, and 43 (16 per cent) were in boarding homes. For 2 the whereabouts prior to disappearance was not reported. Fifty-eight (one-fifth) of the absconders were under 14 years of age; of this number 9 were less than 10 years old, 4 were 10, 6 were 11, 10 were 12, and 29 were 13 years old. Eighty-six were 14 or 15 years of age, and 131 were 16 or over. The following table shows the ages Children who had run away and had been located during the year were classified as “ runaways” and not as “ absconders.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 48 CHI l T) B e PENDENCY IN THE BISTNICT OP COLUMBIA. of the absconding children and the length of time their whereabouts had been unknown: Age at absconding and length of time whereabouts was unknown; wards who ran away while under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians.1 Length of time whereabouts was unknown. Age at absconding. Total Less 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, abscond than 6 less than less than less than less than 4 years and over. ers. months. 1 year. 2. 3. 4. Total absconders_______ 275 63 Under 10 years______________ 10 years____________________ 11 years.____________ _______ 12 years_____________ ____ 13 years________ __________ 14 years____________________ 15 years____________________ 16 years_______________ ____ 17 years____________________ 18 years________________ ____ 19 years__________________ _ 20 years___ ________________ 9 4 1 1 1 10 9 15 8 5 3 6 4 10 29 32 54 03 29 20 19 10 34 1 4 3 7 7 3 3 6 60 1 4 9 10 10 7 12 36 35 47 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 5 10 8 6 2 4 2 10 4 9 10 4 1 8 8 6 7 1 1 Whose whereabouts was unknown when they were discharged from care or on M ay 15,1921. Seventeen per cent of the absconders had been gone for 4 years or more; 13 per cent for 3 years; 35 per cent for 1 or 2 years; 12 per cent for 6 months to 1 year; and 23 per cent for less than 6 months. WARDS DISCHARGED DURING ONE YEAR. Age at discharge. The ages of the 503 wards of all classes and groups who were discharged from the care of the board during the year covered by this study (including those who died) are shown in the following list: Age a t discharge. Number. Total wards discharged dur ing year_________ __ __ 503 Under 6 months __ __ ___ __Ji J _ 7 6-11 m o n th s..__ ______ _._______ 7 1 y e a r .._______ _______________ ■ 7 2 years______ .______ __________ 5 3 years_____ . _________________ 13 4 years__ ______________ 6 5 years ___ ____-tUu______ 4 6 years. __________ _ _____,___1__ 7 years___________ 8 years___________ 3 9 10 Age at discharge. Number. 9 years__ ____-._______ 12 10 years.__ _______ __________ ! 15 11 years_________ 21 12 y e a r s . ^ ___________L____ 34 13 years________ ___________ 37 14 years__________________ 64 15 years____________ 59 16 years______________ 35 17 years__ ____ 12 18 years______________________ 12 19 years____ ____________ 4 20 years_______________ 2 21 years______________ 1_______125 Of the 503 wards discharged from supervision 62 per cent were 14 years of age or over. Twenty-five per cent had reached the age of 21 years; these were the children who had been committed until they should reach the age of 21. Thirteen per cent were from 16 to 20 years of age, inclusive, and 24 per cent were 14 or 15 years of age. Most of the 190 children who were less than 14 years of age when they were discharged had been committed as temporary wards. One hundred and seven children (21 per cent) of all dis charged during the year were from 10 to 13 years of age; 38 (8 per cent) were from 5 to 9 years; and, 45 (9 per cent) were under 5 years. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 49 Reasons for discharge. The reasons for discharge from supervision are given in the fol lowing list for the 503 wards (191 on minority commitments and 312 temporary wards) who were discharged during the year of the study: Reasons for discharge. Number. Total wards discharged from supervision_____________ 503 Terms expired____________________________ _______ i____ 293 Attained majority_________________________ 131 Committed to national training schools. _________ _________ 37 Married_________ 14 Died_______________________________________.__________ • 14 Adopted____________________.- _ -------------------------------8 Dropped—no commitment___________________ 3 Transferred to Blue Plains Home for Aged and Infirm 12_____ 2 Transferred to Government Hospital for the Insane________ 1 Reference has been made to the fact that until 1922 the board had no authority to release from guardianship a child under minority commitment before he had reached his majority, except in the case of girls who married, wards who were adopted, or wards committed to one of the national training schools. Temporary wards could not be released from supervision except upon the expiration of their terms of commitment. Attainment of majority and the expiration of temporary commitments were responsible for the discharge of 84 per cent of those released from supervision during the year. Seven per cent were committed to one of the national training schools, 3 per cent died, 3 per cent married, and 3 per cent were discharged for other reasons. Length o f tim e under care. Wards on minority commitment.—The following list shows the length of time the wards under minority commitment who were discharged during the year had been under supervision : Length of time under care. Number. Total minority wards discharged during year_________ 191 Less than 6 months------------------------------------------------------ — 6-11 months_____________________ _______ ________ ________ 1-4 years__________________ _____________ -------------- 1 ------5-9 years__________ ----------------------------------------------------- ; .. 10-14 years___________________________________ __________ 15 years and over------------------------------------------------------------ 8 5 22 80 37 39 Forty per cent of these 191 children had been under supervision for at least 10 years; 42 per cent, from 5 to 9 years; 12 per cent, from 1 to 4 years; and 7 per cent, for less than 1 year. All the permanent wards who had been under supervision for less than 5 years had been released because they married or had to be committed to the national training school. All but one of the 13 who were under the supervision of the board for less than a year were discharged when they were 14, 15, or 16 years of age. Two of these 13 were girls who were released because they married, and 11 were committed to the training school (one a boy of 9 years). Until 1915 it was the policy of the court to commit girls until they were 18 years of age, when they were considered to have reached 13 Feeble-minded wards, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 50 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. their majority; but since that time both boys and girls who were committed for minority have remained under supervision until they were 21. During the year of the study 131 wards of the board were discharged because they had reached their majority; 9 of these were girls who had been wards for at least 10 years and were released when they became 18 years of age. Almost naif these children had been wards of the board for 10 years or more. ' Of the eight children adopted during the year one had been under care for 2 years, 2 for 3 years, 1 for 5 years, 1 for 6 years, 2 for 7 years, and .1 for 8 years. All these were colored children who had been committed to the board because they were destitute of suitable homes. Three children who were never formally com mitted to the board but were under care for a few days during the year were returned to their parents. Six of the 14 children who died during the year had been under supervision of the board for less than 1 year, 1 for 1 year, 2 for 2 years, 2 for five years, 1 for 6 years, and 2 for more than 10 years. I t was the policy of the board to discharge girls who married adults, if after investigation conditions were found to be satisfactory. Two of the 14 girls who were released during the year because they married had been under supervision for less than 1 year, 3 for 1 year, 1 for 2 years, 1 for 3 years, 1 for 5 years, 2 for 6 years, and 4 for 10 years or longer. When a ward of the Board of Children’s Guardians under 17 years of age is brought into court on a delinquency charge the case is heard in the juvenile court, and if the judge does not return him to the board he is committed to one of the national training schools and discharged from the supervision of the board. The cases of all minors 17 years of age and over who are brought into court on de linquency charges are heard in the police court. When a ward of the board is committed to a national training school by the police court, the board retains supervision until he reaches majority.^ Of the 37 wards of the board who were committed to national training schools by the juvenile court 17, all of whom had been committed to the board on delinquency charges, had been wards for less than 1 year; 15 had been under care for 1 to 3 years; 3, for 4 to 7 years, and 2, for 10 years or more (both of these were committed to the board on the charge of dependency). Two of the older feeble-minded wards who had been under super vision for 15 years or more were transferred to the Home for the Aged and Infirm at Blue Plains, and one who had been under care for 10 years was transferred to the Government Hospital for the Insane. The board had no definite policy in regard to retaining supervision over wards placed in the latter institution, and at the time of the study 6 inmates of this institution (5 who were feeble minded and 1 who was insane) were still wards of the board. Temporary wards.—The board was required to investigate the home conditions of every child placed under temporary care and to return the child to the juvenile court at the end of his term of commit-* ment. Although there was no limit to the length of time a child might continue as a temporary ward of the board, in the majority of cases the first temporary commitment was for a short period, usually from 1 week to 3 months. Occasionally, however, a child was committed as a temporary ward for an indefinite period “ pending https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 51 final judgment.” Some children were discharged at the end of the first commitment; others were continued under temporary care through a series of commitments. Temporary wards were fre quently recommitted either temporarily or under minority commit ments. The following list shows the length of time under care for temporary wards discharged during the year of the study: Length of tim e under care. Num ber. Total temporary wards discharged during year___ _________ _____________ _____312 Less than 1 month 1-2 months______ 3-5 months______ 6-11 months_____ 1 year__________ : 2 years___ ______ 3 years_________ 4 years__________ 5 years__ ___t __ Per cent distribution. 100 65 45 28 33 401 65 21 20 45 14 > 14 9 11 2. Feeble-minded wards.1*—All children are committed to the board because of dependency or delinquency and as temporary or per manent wards. For this reason the 132 wards of the board who had been found to be feeble-minded have been included in one or the other of the preceding lists. Unless the parents of feeble-minded children request the board to continue to provide for them after their term of commitment expires or after they reach majority, they are released from care under the same conditions as other children. Fifteen feeble-minded wards were discharged from care during the year of the study; all of them had been under care for at least 2 years, and 6 had been under care for 10 years or more. The following list gives the length of time the 15 feeble-minded wards discharged during the year had been under the care of the board : Length of time under care. Number. Length of time under care. Total wards discharged dur ing year_________ 15 2 years, less than 3 _____________ 3 years, less than 4_________ 5 years, less than 6_____________ Number. 7 years, less than 8_ _,__________ 9 years, less than 10 _ __________ 10 years, less than 11_____________ 4 15 years, less than 16___________ 1 20 years and over-..,____________ 1 2 1 3 1 2 One of the two who had been wards of the board for 20 years or more was 22 years of age, and the other was 31 years of age. The former had been under supervision for 22 years and the latter for 26 years. Both of these were committed to the Blue Plains Home for the Aged and Infirm during the year covered by the study. Of the other 13 who were released from supervision during the year, the term of commitment (as dependent or delinquent children) of 8 had expired, 3 of the girls married, 1 was committed to the Govern ment Hospital for the Insane, and 1 died. CHILDREN UNDER CARE OF PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS. Of the 18 private institutions in the city which provide for depend ent children, 14 supplied data in regard to the 700 children cared for 13 The 62 feeble-minded children who were under the care of the board through voluntary placement by parents, b u t who were never committed as wards of the board by the juvenile courts, are not included in this analysis. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 52 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. by them in 1922,14 and 13 gave some information concerning the 474 children who had been under their care during the previous year but had been returned to relatives, had been placed in foster homes, or had been provided for in other ways. Information was obtained from the institutions on special forms filled out by them for the individual children under care or from unpublished institution reports which were placed at the disposal of the bureau. In some instances the record system was so primitive that little reliance could be placed on information concerning wards, even when an attempt was made to furnish it. INSTITUTION POPULATION. The early history of the private institutions in the District of Columbia is described in the section on the development of private child-caring work.15 The total number of children under the care of private institutions in the District at the time of the study was approximately 900. The population of each institution varied from 25 to 130. Several of these institutions were caring for children who were wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians; these children have been excluded from the group considered in this section of the report, as they were included in the discussion of the wards of the board. Of the total number under care more or less complete information was received from the institutions for 700 children. Nine of the 18 institutions are sectarian. Although these had been established primarily for the children of certain denominations other children in need of care are received by nearly all of them. Of the children who were under the care of private institutions 304 were boys and 396 were girls. All but 18 were white children, 15 were negroes, and 3 Chinese. The following list gives the ages 16of 700 children in the institutions on a specified date: Age. Number. Total children under care __ 700 Under 1 year______________ 63 1-3 years_____________ J_______ 45 4^8 years_____________________ 196 9-11 years______ _*____________ 155 Age. Number. 12-13 years___________________ 80 14^15 years___________________ 49 16-17 years__ _________________ 26 20 18 years and over___ __________ Not reported.._______________ _ 1766 The majority of the infants were being cared for by their mothers in two maternity homes and an infant asylum and maternity home which received both mothers and babies. Because of limited ac commodations and the difficulties of discipline several institutions caring for both boys and girls refused to keep boys over 12 years of age, returning boys above this age to relatives or making provision for them in other institutions. Girls were more frequently provided for until they were 16 or 18, and a proportionately larger number of girls was found in the higher age groups. Nineteen girls 18 years of age or over were in a denominational institution maintained for the care and training of older girls. An 18-year-old negro boy, who u One institution furnished information only as to the number and sex of the children. « See pp. 112-116. 16 This age grouping is used because it is the one given in the reports of several of the larger institutions. 17The age limitations of institutions caring for 60 of these children were from 6 to 16 years, and the other 6 children were in an institution which cared only for children under 4 or 5 years of age. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OE DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 53 was feeble-minded, had been in the institution in which he was living for 13 years. No board was being paid for him, as he was able to help considerably about the house and the matron considered that he more than earned his board. AGE W HEN RECEIVED, SEX, AND RACE. The children’s ages when received were not reported by four of the larger institutions which furnished other data m regard to the 371 children under their care. I t is known, however, that the 95 children in one of these institutions were all under 9 years of age, the 212 children in two others were from 5 to 15 years of age, and the 64 children in another institution were from 12 to 20 years. Only four institutions in the District reported receiving children under 2 years of age. These institutions received only white children and were not equipped to care for children over 5 or 6 years of age. Only 3 of the 14 institutions received children after they had rêached the age of 14 years. Two sectarian institutions received only girls, and one other supported by the same denomination received onlv boys. All the 39 children received by private institutions before they were 6 months of age were of illegitimate birth. Only 5 other children were under 2 years of age; the mothers of 2 of these had deserted their families, and the fathers of 3 had* died. The children received when they were between the ages of 2 and 5 years, inclusive, numbered 93, or 57 per cent of those whose ages were reported and who came to the institutions before they were 6 years of age. Twenty-six per cent were from 6 to 8 years of age, inclusive, and 17 per cent were 9 years of age or older when received. The following list gives the ages of the 240 children whose ages at the time they were received by the institutions were reported: Age when received. Number. Total children___________ 240 Born in the institution_________ Under 6 months_________ ____ ^ 6-11 months_________________ _ 1 year________________________ 2 years.______________________ 3 years__ _____________________ 4 years_______________________ 5 years____________ _____„____ 33 6 2 3 12 18 27 36 Age when received. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Number. years. _ _ __ _________ ___ __ _________ years _ years__ ______ _________ ______ ____ ______ iöj years years __ _________ y e a r s __ _______ . _________ years _______ _ years _ _ _ _ _ ______ years. __________ _________ 22 20 21 18 6 10 3 2 1 CUSTODIANS OF CHILDREN BEFORE THEIR ENTRANCE TO INSTITUTIONS. All children who were in private institutions for dependent children at the end of the year had been received from parents, other relatives, u friends,” or other institutions or agencies. They were all consid ered to be under care temporarily, as the person or the agency which placed them could remove them at any time and the institution could request their removal in case the relatives failed to comply with its regulations. The matron of one institution, with the consent of the father, had been appointed the legal guardian of two children under her care; these were the only children known to be permanent wards of any of the institutions. 1 :: : https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 54 CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Information was obtained as to the source from which 536 of the 700 children in institutions were received: Number. Custodian from whom received. . Total children__ Mother_______________________ Father________________ — ;------Parents, other relatives, or friends Institutions or agencies-------------Born in the institution--------------Not reported (foundlings)----------- 536 107 72 is 272 8 74 3 PARENTAL STATUS. The following list gives the parental status of 612 children when received by the institutions (excluding 88 for whom parental status was not reported) : Parental status. Total children Both parents living in the home-------------------------Both parents dead---------- --------------------------------One parent dead---------------------------------------------Mother unmarried------------------------ ---------------Parents separated or divorced, or a parent deserted One parent in hospital for insane-_---------------------One parent in correctional institution------------------Mother dead, father deserting---------------------------Not reported (foundlings or abandoned)-------------- Number. 612 22 72 326 51 116 7 3 2 13 I t was reported that 12 per cent of the children received by the institutions were orphans. Even this low percentage is considerably higher than that reported for the wards of the public child-caring agency (5 per cent). But this may readily be accounted for by the fact that a considerable proportion of the wards of the board were removed from their homes because of parental neglect or home com ditions that were detrimental to them, whereas the private institu tions received no children by court commitment. As would also be expected, the reverse of the situation found in the public agency was true in regard to the proportion of children both of whose parents were living in the home. These constituted only 4 per cent of the children in institutions, as compared with 15 per cent of those under the care of the public agency. Half orphans, on the other hand, comprised 53 per cent of all the institution children but only 25 per cent of those under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Unfortunately information obtained from the institutions on this point was too incomplete to permit a comparison of the number of children whose fathers had died with the number whose mothers had died. 1’ ' ' *'*' . Only 8 per cent were reported as being the children oi unmarried mothers, as compared with 12 per cent of those under the supervision of the public agency. A very considerable percentage of the children were reported as having parents who had separated or one of whom had deserted the family. This group represented 19 per cent of the total. The fathers of four children and the mothers of three were in. a hospital for the insane, and the fathers of three were in correc tional institutions. ____ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STATISTICAL INTERPRETATION OF DEPENDENCY PROBLEM. 55 CONTRIBUTIONS OF PARENTS TO THE SUPPORT OF THE CHILDREN. Practically all the private institutions are maintained in part from payments made by relatives for the care of children. The amounts varied according to the financial circumstances of those responsible for the child. Information was obtained on this point regarding only 35 per cent of the 700 children included in this study. Relatives were paying the full amounts required by the institutions for the care of 80 children, and in 68 cases only part of the amount asked for the support of a child was being paid. Thus in the case of 148, or 60 per cent of the 248 children for whom information was obtained, relatives were paying something toward their support. I t was reported that the institutions were receiving no payment for the other 100 children. The following gives the parenta. status of the 248 children for whom information was obtained, separately for those for whose support some payment was being made by relatives and those who were being cared for entirely at the expense of the institutions: Full or partial payment. Parental status. Total children. Both parents living in the home. One parent dead__ Both parents dead. . Mother unmarried. Parents separated or serted. One parent in hospital: One parent in correctional institution. Mother dead, father deserting. Child abandoned___________ Not reported_______________ P r-T LM __ No payment. 148 100 2 88 4 _____ 30 7 40 29 * « d 0 S}6rr Si ^ 3 -1 ^ d ä £ S £ 2 3 1 6 In 85 per cent of the cases included in this group of 248 in which the mother was dead the father was contributing toward the child’s support, and in 63 per cent of the cases in which the father was dead the mother was paying. Either full or partial payment was being made for 66 per cent of the children whose parents were separated or divorced or one of whose parents had deserted. About one-fifth of the unmarried mothers were paying something toward the child’s support. CHILDREN DISCHARGED FROM CARE DURING ONE YEAR. Information regarding children discharged from care during one year was secured from 13 institutions, all of which furnished data rethe persons to whom children were released. Four of these, Êarding owever, failed to report the ages of the children at discharge or the length of time during which they had been under care. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 56 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Age at discharge. # The age at discharge was reported for only 136 of the 474 children who had been discharged from care during the year. The ages of these children are shown in the following list: Age at discharge. Number. Total children___________ 136 Under 6 months. __------------------- 15 6-11 months_______________ .... 12 1 year____ ____________________ 7 2 years_________ s--------------------5 3 3 years________ 4*years_____________ d------------8 6 5 years-------- -----------6 years----- ----------9 _____________ ____-2 7 years. Length of time under care. Age a t discharge. Number. 8 years___________ 9 years_____ _______if.________ 10 years________________________ 11 years______________________ 12 years_____________________ _ 13 years___________ 14 years._____________ 15 years____ u'.J______ X --------16 years___ ___________________ 18 years___________________ - . . 19 years. ___ _ __ r______ ___ 14 8 15 7 10 4 4 1 2 3 1 Two-thirds of the 133 children discharged during the year for whom information as to length of time under care was obtained had been given care for less than 2 years, one-fourth for 2 to 4 years, and only 10 for 5 years or more. All but 2 of the 10 children cared for 5 years or more were placed with their own parents or other relatives when dis charged. Eight of these 10 children were 12 years of age or over at the time they were discharged. A large proportion of those who had been under care for the shorter periods of time were returned to parents—7 of the 8 who had been in institutions for three years, 16 of the 19 under care for two years, 22 of the 23 under care for one year, and 58 of the 67 under care for less than one year. The following list shows the length of time under care for the 133 children discharged during the year of the study for whom this infor mation was obtained : Length of time under care. Number. Total children___________ 133 Less than 6 months____________ 6 months, less than 1 year______ 1 year, less than 2 -------------------2 years, less than 3____________ 42 25 23 19 Length of tim e under care. 3 years, less 4 years, less 5 years, less 6 years, less 8 years, less 9 years, less than than than than than than Number. 4____________ 5____________ 6 -----------------7----9 ____________ 10 __________ 8 6 2 3 2 3 Forty per cent of the children remaining in institutions had been cared for less than one year, .25 per cent for one or two years, 19 per cent for three or four years, 6 per cent for five years, and 10 per cent for six years or more. Custodians of children upon discharge. Information concerning the custodians of the children upon dis charge was given for all but 2 of the 474 children reported by 13 insti tutions. Three hundred and ninety-nine children were reported re turned to their parents or guardians. A change in the situation in the home through the return of a parent or the remarriage of the mother or of the father, or the reestablishment of a home through the assistance of some relative was responsible for the return of most of these children. Only 26 children were placed in adoptive homes. Eleven were placed in family homes—10 being cared for free and 1 boarded. Ten children were placed with relatives or friends. Twenty-two children were transferred to another institution; 1 girl was discharged because she married; and 3 children died. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. DEPARTMENTS OF WORK. • In June, 1923, the organization of the board under the direct supervision of an executive officer called “ agent” was as follows: Investigating department, foster-homes department, placing-out de partment, medical department, and clerical service. The work of the placing-out department was being carried on by. 10 placing officers. This branch of the board’s work was seriously handicapped because, owing to the small number of workers per mitted by the limited salary appropriation, each officer had under her supervision from 200 to 350 children. The foster-homes depart ment consisted of two workers who gave all their time to locating and inspecting family homes in which wards of the board might be placed. The force of the investigating department consisted of a supervisor and 3 investigators. In addition to the workers in these departments the board had a physician on part time, 1 nurse, and a clerical staff of 7 persons. INVESTIGATION OF DEPENDENCY AND NEGLECT CASES. The investigating department, in addition to investigating all complaints made to the board of children who were neglected, cruelly treated, or living in immoral surroundings, at the expiration of temporary commitments reinvestigated conditions in the families from which the children were removed and had charge of cases in volving incorrigibility and court hearings of wards of the board. On June 30, 1923, there were 1,561 children under the supervision of the board. A much smaller number of children were committed to the board by the juvenile court during the fiscal year ended on that date than in preceding years—a total of 222 children, 27 on minority commitments and 195 for temporary care. Of these 222 children 67 were committed on petition of the Board of Children’s Guardians, which had made investigations of complaints. The other 155 were committed by the juvenile court mainly because of delin quency, investigation having been made by the staff of the court. Action for commitment because of dependency or neglect usually originates with the board. Cases are reported to the board by indi viduals, by social agencies, or by the juvenile court, and a thorough investigation is made of the home and the family in all cases in which a child is reported as being neglected or cruelly treated or as living in immoral or unfit surroundings. If on investigation the child is found to be ‘ ‘destitute of a suitable home, ” the board petitions the court to commit him to its care. Occasionally children who have run away from home and are loitering or aimlessly wandering about the streets, or children who have been abandoned by their parents, are taken under care by the board until they can be returnee! to relatives or until action can be taken by the court. The act creating the Board of Children’s Guardians states that such children may not be kept longer than one week except by an order of the court. 88962°—241 -— 5 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 57 Crc 00 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. Supervisor. 3 investigators. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis FOSTER-HOM ES DEPA RTM EN T. 2 agents. PLACING-OUT D E PA R T M E N T . 10 placing Officers. M ED ICA L D E PA R T M E N T . 1 doctor (part tim e). 1 nurse. \ CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. IN V ESTIG A TIN G DEPA RTM EN T. i CLER IC A L STAFF. 7 workers. I METHODS OF THE BOAED OF CHILDREN’s GUARDIANS. 59 During the fiscal year ended June 30, 1923, the investigating department received a total of 644 applications and complaints, involving 1,302 children.1 Applications from parents anch relatives for the board to care for children numbered 342, involving 585 children. Complaints of unfit surroundings and neglect of children received from the police department, the public schools, various organizations, and private individuals, numbered 302, involving 717 children. Of the total of 1,302 children 614 were white and 698 were colored, and 1,021 were of legitimate and 281 of illegitimate birth. Investigations were made in all cases, with the result that 440 cases, involving 854 children, were adjusted by the Board of Children’s Guardians, and the remainder were referred to other agencies. Most of the latter were referred to the Associated Charities and the Catho lic Charities of Washington; in many of them the families were found to be in need of financial assistance, and some of them were already active cases in these organizations. In only 50 cases, involving 67 children, were petitions filed by the board in the juvenile court on the ground “ destitute of a suitable home.” Sixty applications or complaints, involving 157 children, were referred to the Associated Charities; 56 cases, involving 139 children, to the Catholic Charities; 3 cases, involving 8 children, to the Juvenile Protective Association; 2 cases, involving 2 children, to the probation office of the juvenile court; 1 case, involving 1 child, to the Board of Charities; 2 cases, involving 4 children, to the Red Cross. At the close of the year 30 cases, involving 70 children, were under investigation. Of the 67 children for whom petitions for commitment were filed in the juvenile court by investigators of the Board of Children’s Guardians, 7 were committed until they should reach majority (the age of 21 years), 3 were committed until they should become 18 years of age, and 52 were committed temporarily. Two cases, in volving 5 children, were continued,1‘subject to call. ” (In both these cases it was reported that the families had left the District before the summonses were served and had not been located.) In addition to the investigation of new cases, 270 cases, involving 366 children, were reinvestigated at the end of temporary com mitments to determine whether conditions were such that these children should be returned to their parents or relatives. Thirtysix cases, involving 65 wards committed during minority, were re investigated with a view to returning the children to parents or rela tives, if conditions were favorable. Of these children, 4 were returned to their homes. The cases of 37 feeble-minded wards in institutions Were taken up for further investigation. Twelve cases, involving 22 wards, were reinvestigated to find out whether the parents could con tribute toward the children’s support. THE POLICY OP THE BOARD IN REGARD TO PLACEMENT. An early report of'the board contains the statement: “ The policy of the board has been to find free homes for its Wards as soon as they are fitted to go into such homes. Until that time they are kept in i D ata from manuscript report of the investigating department of the Board of Children’s Guardians for the year ended June 30, 1923. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 60 suitable boarding homes or institutions.” 3 This has continued to be the policy of the board, especially in providing for children committed because of dependency. _ _ Wards of the board are placed in family homes rather than m institutions when such arrangement can be made. Children who re quire institutional care because of their mental condition, or because their conduct or physical condition is such that they can not be satisfactorily placed in a family home, constitute^ a very large pro portion of those who are provided for in institutions. Analysis of the statistics relating to the placement of wards of the board shows that at the end of each year approximately three-fourths of the children were in family homes. Within the year preceding this study special emphasis had been put on the advantages of family homes for the care of children, and an effort was being made by the executive of the board to secure more homes of the better class m which children could be placed either free or at board. P L A C E M E N T S O F W A R D S O N J U N E 30, 1923. Of the 1,561 children under care of the board at the end of the fis cal year 1923, almost three-fifths were in free homes or were living in homes on trial for adoption, were with relatives (including their own parents) and other persons to whom no board was being paid, or were supporting themselves and either living in their places of employment or paying their own board in private families; only onethird were being cared for at public expense in boarding homes and institutions. _ - ±„ «, The distribution of wards under care of the Board oi Childrens Guardians on June 30, 1923, was as follows:3 Per cent disNumber. Total wards__ — --------------- .Jl__---------- 1,561 In free homes 4: -----.— ?------------- --------- - - - - - - ^46 tribution.. 100 55 In boarding homes------------------------ '- - - -----------In wage homes 5 ------------ - ------------ - ----------------- 6 J" * Inhospitals----------------- --— - - — - - ----- ---------Whereabouts unknown----------------- ------ ------------ »4 o 21 SIMILARITY WITH M ETHODS OF LEADING STATES. The following data will be of interest as giving a comparison of the types of placement used by certain States engaged in public childcaring work somewhat similar to that in the District of Columbia. For the children under the care of the division of child guardianship of the Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare the distribution on November 30, 1922,7was as follows: 2 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia for the Fiscal Year Ended ^ R e p o r t o f the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1923, p. 108. : ,., 4 Including parental homes of children under supervision of the board and homes m which working chil dren were paving their own board, as well as the type of family homes usually classed as free. 6 Including family homes in which older children were living and receiving wages m return for full-time n l S g 90 in the Industrial Home School for Colored Children who were being cared for at public exnense b u t for whom the board did not pay from its appropriation. iJiv . . . , t> ^ 7 Report of division of child guardianship for the year ended November 30, 1922, m Annual Report of Departpaent of Public Welfare, Massachusetts. Boston. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OE THE BOARD ÔE CHILDREN *S GUARDIANS. Per cent distribution. Number. Total wards 6, 127 In free homes_________,________ . ____ ____ 100 ygg In boarding homes_____________ ______ 3 759 In wage homes . . A . . _____ ____ * ~” I Other places____ ______ ___________ I ____”_____ ’ 692 In institutions.________ ,_±__ ____ ___ Whereabouts unknown ______________________ 711 108 61 12 61 11 99 2 12 2 The New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians reports the distribution of its wards on June 30, 1922, as follows: 8 Total wards.____ ____ ________________ Per cent distribution. Number. 2,973 100 In free homes__________ •___ _________________i 067 In boarding homes__________ ___^ __ ________ 1, 906 36 64 The Ohio Department of Public Welfare in its reportfor theyear ended June 30, 1922,9 gives the following statistics for the wards of its child-care division for the fiscal year: Number. Per cent distribution. Total wards-------- _-------------------_______ 1, 990 100 In free foster homes, under supervision of chil dren’s bureau.._____ *;!__ _ _ _ _____ ____________________l 415 At board in private families__________________ ’ 575 7i 29 l j . Of the children under the jurisdiction of the West Virginia State Board of Children’s Guardians on August 1, 1923, 839 were in free family homes and 5 were temporarily in boarding homes; only 14 were in an institution.10 The Minnesota State Public School represents a type of provision for dependent children that is paralleled in a number of States, among them Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Rhode Island, Nebraska, Kansas, and Missouri. The institution or “ school” is used as a temporary home for children until they can be placed out in family homes. This system was originated in Michigan in 1874, with the intention of promoting family-home care for dependent children and avoiding the experience of some of the older States in which insti tutions had been fostered through the State subsidy system. The ^ ^ or many of these “ schools ’ or “ homes,” which are in reality child-placing agencies with an institutional adjunct for temporary care, will be found to be similar to the following in regard to the status^ of wards of the Minnesota State Public School on June 30, 1922 : , Number. Per cent dis- tribution. Total wards----------------------- ---------------- 1,489 100 Placed out in family homes.___ _____...________1 177 In the institution temporarily. _____ ____ ______ ’ 312 79 21 Of the wards of the public agency of the District 79 per cent were in family homes under supervision of the board. In Massachusetts the proportion in family homes was larger (84 per cent); and in New ®Report of New Jersey State Board of Children’s Guardians for the Year 1922, p. 16. ,nTr -Report of the Ohio Department of Public Welfare, for the year ended June 30.1922. p. 48. 10Unpublished data received from the board. 11 Biennial Report, State Public School, Minnesota, Period Ended June 30, 1922, p. 4 . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 62 Jersey and Ohio all dependent State wards were so provided for, as were also the majority of the wards of the West Virginia board. Of the children under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota State agency 79 per cent were in family homes and 21 per cent were temporarily in the institution conducted by the State for its dependent wards. From the foregoing data it is seen that in respect to the proportion of its wards placed in family homes the work of the Board of Children s Guardians of the District of Columbia closely parallels that of certain States which lead in provision for the care and protection of dependent children. PRESENT POLICY COMPARED WITH THAT OF PREVIOUS YEARS. On June 30, 1923, 82 per cent of the children who had been made wards of the board for minority were in family homes, and 10 per cent were in institutions. The remaining 8 per cent comprised runaway children and children receiving hospital care. During the preceding 28 years of the board’s activity the percentages of wards m family homes on the last day of each fiscal year ranged from 60 to 84. The lowest percentages were found in the-10 years preceding 1923. In the following tabular statement the percentages of wards during minority who were in family homes on June 30 of each year are shown in comparison with .the corresponding percentages in institutions. The latter ranged from 27 per cent (in 1915) to 10 per cent (in 1910 and 1923). Year. 1895_______ 1896 _____ _____ _______ 18971898____ ________ 1899_______ _______ 1900_______ _______ _______ 1901- _ 1902 _ . _ ________ 1903_______ _______ 1904-________ 1905- -_ -_ _____ _____ 1906 ___ __ 1907_______ _______ _____ 1908_______ 1909_______ _______ of wards in family homes.1* 79 81 81 78 76 77 74 78 79 74 81 83 84 83 80 Per cent of wards in institutions. Year. Per cent of wards in family homes.11 1910_,___ - ______ 1911________ ______ 1912 _ •_____ _____ _ 1913________ 1914________ ______ 1915________ _ _ 1916________ ______ 1917________ ______ 1918________ ______ 21 1919________ _____ 15 1920________ ______ 12 1921________ 10 1922________ ______ 11 1923________ ______ 18 15 15 16 19 17 19 16 16 81 77 73 72 66 63 60 62 67 68 68 71 74 82 Per cent of wards in insti-' tutions. 12 14 18 19 24 27 25 20 16 12 15 15 14 10 12 FAMILY-HOME PLACEMENTS. M ETHOD OF SELECTING HOM ES. The board’s procedure in selecting homes for wards is as follows: Persons who desire to take children into their homes are required to furnish three references in addition to the minister of the church which they attend and the family physician and to satisfy the board that the children will be well cared for both physically and morally. The references are interviewed and some independent references are also seen. Accessibility to church and school and facilities for play under safe conditions as well as the character and economic condition of the members of the family are carefully considered. 18 Including those placed with parents and in wage homes. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’s GUARDIANS. 63 Every applicant for a child to be taken for possible adoption, for wages, or on free arrangement is required to state the object in taking a child, the kind and amount of work required, if any, and previous experience with children. Special inquiry is made as to whether the family has ever had children from other agencies. The persons named as references are questioned as to their relationship to the family, the length of their acquaintance, and the disposition, habits, church attendance, and financial condition of the person who has aDplied for the child. If the information obtained appears to be satisfactory, an agent of the board visits the home and talks with the woman who would have charge of the child and with as many other members of the family as possible and inspects the home with reference to sleeping quarters, facilities for play, and other conditions. The act of Congress making appropriations for the fiscal year 1902 required that children should, when practicable, be placed in homes where they would be brought up in the religious faith of their parents; and the board adopted a rule to the same effect soon after its organ ization.13 White children are always placed with white women and negro children with negro women, except that if a very young white child is sick or in need of special care and no other suitable home is available at the time, he may be placed, very temporarily, in the home of a competent negro woman. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION OF HOM ES. Since the establishment of the Board of Children’s Guardians its wards have been placed in 30 different States. The largest number of States in which the board had wards in a single year was 20. In 1897, the first year for which figures as to the geographical distribution of the wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians are available, the board was caring for 145 children in the District of Columbia, 78 in Virginia, 52 in Maryland, and 22 in 5 other States (Alabama, Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania). Less than half the wards of the board were being provided for in the District. On May 15, 1921, 360 (about one-fifth) of the wards of the board under minority commitment were living outside the District. The largest number (195) were in Virginia, 114 were in Maryland, 14 in Pennsylvania, 7 in West Virginia, 6 in New York, 6 in Illinois, 4 in New Jersey, 3 in California, 3 in Georgia, 2 in North Dakota, and 1 in each of the following: Florida, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, and Canada. Nine of those in Virginia were in institutions to which they had been committed by the court; 26 of those in Maryland were in institutions for delinquents in which they had been placed by the board. Nine others were in institutions outside the District. Fortyone were in boarding homes in Maryland, and 36 were in boarding homes in Virginia. A very large proportion of those in family homes other than boarding homes were with relatives, although 4 were in wage homes and 28 in prospective adoptive homes. The wards of the board in distant States had usually gone away with relatives or had gone to take positions. Many of them were nearly 21 years of age. 13 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1901, p. 10. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 64 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA. Practically all the children who had been placed in family homes outside the District were “ on trial with relatives or friends/ on trial for adoption, or apprenticed or indentured. Up to 1915 (the latest year for which information was available from printed reports), the board had placed very few children in hoarding homes outside the District of Columbia; 11 is the largest number reported in any one year, and for several years there was only 1. ' _• The number of wards of the board in institutions outside the District of Columbia has varied from 15 to 90—the largest proportion in any year being approximately one-fifth, of the entire number of wards who were m institutions. The fact that there were no local institutions for certain types of cases has always made it necessary for the board to place a certain number of children in institutions m neighboring States.14 4 , In each year for which information was obtained a larger number ot children have been provided for in private homes in Virginia than in any other State, the number ranging from 78 in 1897 to 355 in 1910. In some years as many as one-fourth of the entire number under care, and never less than one-tenth of the wards, were in homes in Virginia. A much smaller number of wards have been provided for in homes in Maryland, the largest number in any year being 104. The percentage of the entire number under ,care who were provided for in Maryland homes decreased from 18 per cent in the earlier years to 3 per cent in 1915. THE USE OF BOARDING AND FREE HOM ES. The figures previously cited show that on June 30, 1923, 320 (21 per cent) of the 1,561 children under care of the board were in board ing homes and 846 (55 per cent) in free homes. In comparing the figure for free homes with data from other child-caring agencies it must be kept in mind that the board uses the term free home as covering not only the family homes usually classified as free homes but also homes in which working children are paying their own board and homes of parents or other relatives in which wards are under supervision of the board. Comparison of the use made of boarding homes and ot tree homes shows that the proportion of permanent wards being cared for in boarding homes on June 30, 1923 (18 per cent), was lower than the proportions for the preceding six years and that a larger proportion of wards were in free homes at the end of the last fiscal year then ever before. The percentages of children in boarding homes ranged from 7 to 29 in the 29 years. There is a curious similarity between the figures for the first five years of the board’s activity and those for the last seven years, the years between showing a gradual decline with low figures for 10 years, followed by an increase. The data concerning the use of free homes, on the other hand, show a fairly regular increase for the first 15 years, followed by a decline for 11 years and again by an upward trend. In 1923, 59 per cent of the permanent wards of the board were in free homes—a figure considerably higher than for any of the preceding years. For 9 years of the 29, two-fifths or more of the children under minor ity commitment were cared for in free family homes. The following figures show what proportions of the wards of the Board of Chil« See Table 4 in appendix, pp. 146-147, for data regarding institutions used by the board. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN V GT7ARDIANS. 65 dren’s Guardians under minority commitment were in free and in boarding homes at the end of each fiscal year since the board was established; Year. Per cent Per cent of minority of minorwards in ity wards boarding in free homes. homes. 18 23 1895 ____ ______ 12 21 1896_______ ______ 16 23 1897_______ ______ 16 29 1898_______ 20 20 1899_______ ______ 24 17 1900_______ ______ 24 16 1901_______ ______ 22 16 1902_______ ______ 28 13 1903_______ ______ 25 13 1904_______ ______ 34 12 1905_______ ______ 40 9 1906_______ ______ 42 8 1907_______ ______ 42 9 1908_______ ______ 44 7 1909_______ ______ Minority and temporary commitments. Per cent Per cent of m inority of minorwards in ity wards boarding in free homes. homes. Year. 1 9 1 0 ____ 1911_____ 1912. _ 1913_____ 1914____ 1915____ 1916_ ___ 1917____ 1918____ 1919_____ 1920 ___ 1921_____ 1922____ 1923____ 9 9 11 16 17 15 17 22 20 25 28 20 25 18 42 40 36 33 31 31 29 29 36 36 33 43 44 59 The preceding figures relating to children committed to the board during minority show an interesting contrast with the percentages of children temporarily committed who were in the various types of placement at the end of each fiscal year. As would be expected, the percentages in institutions were about twice as high for the children under temporary care as for those committed during minority.15 Similarly the figures for children placed in boarding homes ranged from 15 to 28 per cent for the children under minority commitment but from 35 to 48 per cent for the temporary wards. Free homes, on the contrary, were used for 29 to 59 per cent of the children under long-time care, as compared with 3 to 25 per cent of the temporary wards. Placements of white and negro children. For the 18 years preceding 1922 for which figures on the basis of race are available the proportion of negro minority wards placed in all types of family homes averaged over 7 per cent more than the corresponding proportion of white children—75 as compared with 68 per cent; and the proportion of negro children in institutions aver aged 11 per cent less than that of white children—A3 as compared with 24 per cent. The proportion of placements in family homes has markedly increased in the last 2 years for white children and in the last year for negro children, the percentages being as follows: 1922, 82 for white and 69 for negro; 1923, 86 for white and 79 for negro.16 The percentages of the children of the two races placed in free homes are very much alike, ranging from 27 to 61 per cent for the white and from 25 to 58 per cent for the negro children. For wards in boarding homes, on the other hand, the percentages were considerably lower for the white than for the negro children, except in the last lour years, when they were similar for the two races. Number of children in a home. It was the policy of the board to place as few children as possible in each home, but the number varied considerably according to conn See Table 2 in appendix, p. 144. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 16 See Table 1 in appendix, p. 143. 66 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. ditions. I t was sometimes found advisable to place several children with a caretaker who was considered by the board to be well adapted to work of this kind and who was wiling to give all her time to the care of children of special ages and types. A few homes cared for only tuberculous children or feeble-minded children, and others re ceived only children under 3 years of age. On May 15, 1921, the end of the year covered by the analysis of record data, 465 wards of the board were being boarded in 190 private homes. I t was the board’s policy to keep brothers and sisters together in the same family home wherever possible, and a number of the homes which were boarding more than one child were caring for two or more members of a family. The following list shows the distribution of the children boarded in the 190 homes, by number of children per home: Number of children per home. Total__ __ Number of homes. 190 — 1______________ 2 ___ 3 ______________ 4 _ ________ 68 50 34 18 Number of children per home. Number of children. 465 '---68 5______________ 6 8 __________________ __________________ 100 9 ______________ 102 10 _________________ Number of homes. 9 7 1 2 1 Number of children. 45 42 8 18 10 72 Amount of board paid. At the time of the study the amount of board paid for a child was $20 a month, except for infants and for older children in need of special food or extra care. From $25 to $37.50 a month has been paid for children suffering from tuberculosis and others who required special care. For feeble-minded children $25 a month was paid in family homes, and for children who presented behavior problems as much as $37.50 a month has been paid. From the amount received the caretaker was required to replace the child’s clothing when necessary. The Board of Children’s Guardians provided necessary medical and dental treatment. In this connection it is interesting to note that in 1917 a special committee appointed by the board made a study of the amounts paid in other localities for the board of children in private homes and recommended that the rate be increased from $10 to $12 a month for children over 3 years of age, from $11 to $13 for children under 3 years of age, from $12 to $14 for chronically sick children, and from $13 to $15 for feeble-minded children. A few months later the board decided to increase the rates by adding $3 a month in each case. In the following year it was found necessary to increase the rate of board to $20 a month for children over 3 years of age, $21 for children under 3 years of age, and $22 for chronically sick and for feeble-minded children. Data obtained by the Children’s Bureau in a recent study of child caring agencies which board children in family homes indicate that the amount of board usually paid by the Board of Children’s Guard ians—$20 to $22 a month, or $4.50 to $5 a week—is approximately the same as that paid by agencies in other cities. The amounts paid by the societies studied are as follows: One agency in Philadelphia: Regular rates, $3.50 a week; for babies, $4; maximum rate, $5. In temporary homes—regular rate, for children over 2 years of age, $5; for children under 2, $7; maximum rate, $9. A second agency in Philadelphia: Regular rate, $6 a week; for babies, usually $ 10; maximum rate, $ 12. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN » GUARDIANS. 67 An agency in Detroit: Average rate, $4.50 a week; for babies, $5; maximum rate, $7 to $10 (seldom paid). A second agency in Detroit: Regular rate, for children over 2, $4.50 a week; for babies, $5; in special cases, $6 or $8. An agency in Chicago: Regular rate, for children over 2, $4.50 a week; for children under 2, $5; maximum rate, $ 10. An agency in St. Louis: Regular rate, for children over 2, $3.50 a week; for children under 2, $3.75; maximum rate, $6.25. INDENTURE DISCONTINUED. The policy of placing children in homes on indenture or as ap prentices was discontinued by the Board of Children’s Guardians in 1914.17 However, two of the older children under the hoard’s care were still apprentices, and 16 were on indenture at the end of the year of the record study. Although the terms of the indenture dif fered somewhat from time to time, the usual contract was for a total of $50 to be paid to the board for the benefit of the child in annual installments until he became 18 years of age. The money was placed at interest by the board and paid to the child when he became 21 years of age. The person who received a child on indenture agreed ■?to treat said child properly and kindly at all times as a member of his family.” Other provisions of the contract were in part as follows: That he will provide the child suitable and sufficient clothing for all seasons of the year, for week days, and for attending public religious worship, and with suitable food and other necessaries, including medical attendance in health and sickness, and a decent burial in case of the death of sa id ---------after having lived two years continuously in the family. * * * That he will have it taught some useful occupation and the branches usually taught in the common schools, causing it to attend the public schools. * * * It was the policy of the board to require a period of trial indenture, varying in length, before the final contract was made. POLICY REGARDING ADOPTIONS. Only in exceptional cases was a child placed in a home on trial for adoption before he had been a ward ot the board for at least one year. This policy was followed to give opportunity for the loca tion of some relative who would be able to provide for the child permanently and also to make sure of the character of the foster home and the adaptability of the child to it. In arranging for the legal adoption of a child under minority commitment it was the policy of the board to obtain the written consent of the parents be fore a witness, or, if neither parent was living, the consent of the nearest relative. A large number of children were kept year after year in boarding homes with the expectation that eventually they could be returned to their own parents or because of the unwilling ness of the parents to relinquish claim to them. The board had a number of very desirable homes in which children could be placed for adoption, but the number of children available for such place ments was small. Adoption homes could be found readily for chil dren (especially foundlings) under 6 years of age who were normal mentally and without family ties. HOM ES FOR HANDICAPPED CHILDREN. Special care was taken in placing children suffering from tuber culosis and venereal disease, Doth for their own sake and for the •17 N o wards of the board remained in apprenticeship or on indenture after December, 1922. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 68 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. purpose of protecting other children from infection. Tuberculous children were so placed that they could attend an outdoor school. Several boarding homes were reserved for these children, and special emphasis was placed on diet and general living conditions, as well as on regular attendance at a clinic for treatment. Active cases of tuberculosis were treated in the tuberculosis hospital and in the children’s hospital (children under 12 years), and no child was considered cured and eligible to be placed in a home with nontuberculous children until a “ recovery card” had been granted by the attending physician. Country homes in Maryland and Virginia were used for the care of many oi the children and were considered especially desirable for children with any tendency toward tuber culosis. PLACEMENT W ITH OW N FAMILY. As the majority of the children became wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians because of unsatisfactory conditions in the home, only in exceptional cases was it deemed advisable to place them with their own parents, under supervision, as soon as they were received by the board. Thirty-six children were so placed on trial as soon as they were committed to the board. These included children who had run away from home and were returned, children who were removed from relatives other than their own parents, and children whose parents had separated and who after being removed from one parent were placed with the other. Whenever home conditions had sufficiently improved or the child’s conduct was such as to warrant his return to his parents, he was placed on trial in his own home, and if the arrangement was satisfactory he was allowed to remain; but he continued to be under the supervision of the board and was visited by a placing officer at regular intervals. This method had been followed ever since the board was established. At first such children were said to be “ placed on probation to their parents” ; later the term was changed to “ placed on trial with their parents.” Of the entire group of children included in this study of record data one-fifth (516) Were placed in the homes of their parents a t some time while under the care of the board, remaining under supervision. I t would appear that in at least one-third of these cases the arrangement was not regarded as satisfactory, as only 346 children were living in their parental homes at the time of discharge or at the end of the year. SELF-SUPPORTING WARDS. I t was the general policy of the board to keep the children in school until they became 16 years of age. Children who Were habitual truants or difficult cases in school, or who were unable to make the usual progress, were allowed to go to work when 14 or 15. Of the children under care of the board on May 15,1921,194 were working, and the occupations of 157 were reported. The largest number in any occupational group (with the exception of the 39 enlisted in the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps) were the 38 employed in domestic service. Twenty-four were working on farms; 12 were in the Govern ment service (10 as clerks or stenographers and 2 as messengers); 8 were employed in stores (2 as clerks and 6 as bundle wrappers or messengers); 4 were clerks in private offices; 3 were working as apprentices in skilled trades; 5 were factory or laundry operatives; https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OE THE BOARD OE CHILDREN S GUARDIANS. 69 and 24 were engaged in other occupations (including drivers of delivery wagons, elevator boys, “ helpers” for carpenters, electricians, hucksters, and a lamplighter, a bootblack, a waitress, a teacher, and a nurse in training). In addition, there was a large group of children 16 years of age and over who were working and paying their own board in family homes. I t was impossible to ascertain the exact number of such children, as all children for whom the board was not paying were considered as being in free homes. INSTITUTIONAL CARE. In the 29 years of the Work of the Board of Children’s Guardians more than 40 institutions under private control and 3 under the management of the public authorities have been used by the board for the care of children who were its wards. A table giving the names of these institutions and the number of children under care in each institution at the end of each fiscal year from 1895 to 1923 is given in the appendix, pages 145-147. N U M B E R O F C H IL D R E N IN IN S T IT U T IO N S . A preceding section discussed the percentages of placements in institutions as compared with the percentages of family-home place ments over a period of years.18 I t was shown that on June 30, 1923, 82 per cent of the minority wards of the boards were in f amily homes and 10 per cent in institutions. For all wards (including those on temporary commitment) these percentages were 79 and 13,. respec tively. The following list shows the number of wards of the board (tem porary and permanent) who were being cared for in institutions of different types on June 30, 1923: Institutions. Number. Total wards in institutions __ ____________ ___ 202 Industrial Home School for Colored Children_____________ 19 90 Temporary home for negro children____ ________________ 55 8 Institutions for dependent children__ ____ _______________ Institutions for delinquent children______________________ 22 Institutions for feeble-minded children___________________ 27 The situation represented in the above figures is not entirely comparable with the conditions found in preceding years, because of the change in the board’s policy concerning the use of the Indus trial Home School (for white children). Therefore data pertaining to children in institutions on May 15, 1921—the end of the year of the special record study—are here given : Institutions. / Number. Total wards in institutions_______________________ 20393 Industrial Home School (for white children)____ _ 90 Industrial Home School for Colored Children_________ ___ 19 84 Temporary home for negro children_____________ ________ 79 Institutions for dependent children____________________ _ 15 Institutions for delinquent children_____ _________________ 86 Institutions for feeble-minded children-____i_____________ 28 Hospital for the insane_________i _■iLvj',______ ^__________ 7 School for the blind________ __________________________ 3 School for the crippled_________________________________ 1 is See p. 62. 19 Boys only. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20 Excluding 57 children who “ absconded” from institutions. VO CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA. Two of these institutions, the industrial home schools, were under the direct control of the District of Columbia. One institution under private auspices^ tlie temporary ^liome for colored cnildrent cared only for wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Reference has already been made to the fact that although 1,751 children, or nearly three-fourths of those included in the record study, had been in institutions at some time while they were wards of the board, only 393, or about one-fourth, were in institutions at the end of the year or at the time when they were released from care. In addition to the 393 children who were in institutions under the supervision of the board at the end of the year of the record study and 135 children who had been released from supervision while in institutions, there were 76 who had been in institutions but had run away while wards of the board. INSTITUTIONS UNDER DISTRICT CONTROL. The Industrial Home School, which provided for white boys and girls between the ages of 6 and 14 years, and the Industrial Home School for Colored Children, which received only negro boys between the ages of 10 and 19 years, were maintained for the care of wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Admission to these institutions was through the Board of Children’s Guardians. Until 1923, when the Industrial Home School was placed under the Board of Children’s Guardians, the school had a separate board. The Industrial Home School for Colored Children is under the direct con trol of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia. Prior to 1910 the Board of Children’s Guardians paid out of its own funds the maintenance of its wards who were being cared for in insti tutions in the city, including the industrial home schools. In 1910 the appropriations to these schools Avere increased so that wards of the board might be provided for without any payment by the board. The Industrial Home School. The early history of the Industrial Home School and its transition into a public institution are described in another section of this report.22 For several years the Industrial Home School was considered a permanent home for dependent children, and it was unusual for the board to remove a child once committed to the home to place him in a private home. At the time of the study, however, it was the policy of the Board of Children’s Guardians to use the school as a home for children who for some reason could not be placed in private homes or as a temporary home for children who would be cared for otherwise as soon as suitable homes were available. The children in the institution had their own school on the grounds, the classes being conducted by teachers assigned by the District school department. The boys worked on the farm and in the green houses under the supervision of the persons in charge, and the girls were taught to sew; there was no other instruction outside the schoolroom. Material and tools were on hand for manual training, but at the time of the study no teacher was provided for such work. A young man who had formerly been in the school voluntarily acted https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. 71 as athletic director for the boys, giving his services for two hours every afternoon. . On May 15, 1921, 90 children were being cared for in the institu tion. In the summer of 1921 one of the workers of the board under took to supervise all wards of the board in the Industrial Home School and made particular efforts to learn their individual needs, with the idea of placing them in private homes as soon as possible. During the following year the population of the institution was entirely depleted, and for some months no children were placed in the school. This situation was brought about mainly because of diver gent opinions held by the managing boards of the Board of Children’s Guardians and the Industrial Home School. A solution was appar ently arrived at when Congress abolished the separate board of trustees of the Industrial Home School and placed the agency and the institution under the management of one board.23 The Industrial Home School for Colored Children. For many years the board lacked necessary provision for the care of negro wards.24 The report of the Board of Children’s Guardians for the year ended June 30, 1901, made the following statement in regard to the need for an industrial home for negro children: Since the benefits of the present Industrial Home School of the District are "confined to white children, there is need of a similar institution for colored children. A committee of this board was appointed April 13, 1901, to confer with a com mittee of the Board of Charities upon this subject and reported that the latter committee had intimated its purpose to recommend the establishment of such a school.25 The Industrial Home School for Colored Children of the District of Columbia was created by an act of Congress and came into existence July 1, 1907. The institution has approximately 120 acres of land, four modern cottages, an administration building, and a school building. The school is operated on the cottage plan. The popu lation of about 90 boys is distributed among four cottages. Each cottage family is governed by a housemother or caretaker, who prepares the boys’ meals, mends their clothing, and directs them in household duties assigned to them. The report of the Board of Charities for 1922 recommended that an additional appropriation be made for the Industrial Home School for Colored Children. This school, which can accommodate only 90 boys, is filled at all times with colored boys in need of special training. The school is admirably conducted and renders the most satisfactory service. It is for colored boys only and is adminis tered by a staff of colored people, including a colored superintendent in charge. We earnestly recommend appropriations to build additional cottages at this institution. There are now kept in private institutions at public expense a sufficient number of colored boys to fill three additional cottages. We recom mend also that a small cottage be built as a home for the superintendent and his family. Conditions in this respect are most unfortunate. The superintendent 2» In December, 1923, the board asked the Commissioners of the District for authority to accept a farm near Annapolis Junction, M d., on which to establish an institution for care of wards, to be used for children for whom institutional care is indispensable. A t the same tim e it was suggested th a t the Industrial Home School property be sold and th at a conveniently located ‘‘temporary ’’receiving home be provided. 24 On November 10,1897, the board entered into a contract w ith Prof. William H . H . H art for the care, maintenance, and training of male negro wards between the ages of 8 and 18 years at his farm, which was situated in M aryland a short distance outside the District. This arrangement contmued until June 30, 1906. Twenty-one boys were cared for a t the H art Farm School during the fiscal year ended June 30,1899, and a larger number during each of the following years. Sixty boys were provided for in this institution during each of the last four years of its existence. „ . ,_ 28 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1901, p. 13. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 72 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. has not been able to find room enough in any building to shelter his family, which consists of himself, wife, and four children. Part of his family must now live away from the institution. Such conditions are likely to result in our losing a most valuable man at any time and then render it almost impossible to secure a proper man in case of a vacancy.26 Teachers from the District school department were assigned to this school, and a special teacher was provided for mentally defective boys. All boys were required to attend school half the day and work in the shop or on the farm the other half of the day. The boys did practically all the necessary work about the place, and an attempt was made to teach each one every part of the work so that his train ing might be of value to him when he left the institution. There were 84 boys in this institution at the end of the year of the study. There is no similar provision for negro girls. The following statement on the need of such provision is made by the Board of Children’s Guardians in its annual report for 1920: An industrial home school for colored girls is greatly needed here. Many of the older colored girls committed to us would go to the National Training School if there was room there for them, and others of the less incorrigible type need the discipline of an institution and should be in an industrial school where they ean be properly trained for usefulness.27 In discussing the facilities available for the care of its wards, the Board of Children’s Guardians in November, 1923, again emphasized the need for additional cottages at the Industrial Home School at Blue Plains for the care of delinquent negro girls., PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS USED BY THE BOARD. Institutions for dependent children. On June 30, 1923, 59 wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians were being cared for in private institutions for dependent children. A privately conducted institution known as the Children’s Tem porary Home, which received only negro boys 7 years of age and over who were wards of the board, was caring for 55 of the 59. Board was paid for these children by the board at the rate of $25 a month. A public school with two teachers in charge had recently been opened on the grounds, and plans were being’made to start a class in manual training. Several acres of ground allowed sufficient space for out door work and recreation. Since 1905 the board has provided for the care of its wards in private institutions for dependent children in one of two ways—by making private arrangements and paying board for them out of the appropriation for the maintenance of wards or through the use of the funds made available for special contracts. Under the latter arrangement the institutions are paid out of the appropriations set aside for this purpose only such amounts as have been earned by them through providing care for children received from the board. One of the reasons which led to the creation of the Board of Children’s Guardians and one of the main arguments for the estab lishment of the District Board of Charities was the extensive system of congressional appropriations for the support of private institu tions. The section of this report dealing with the history of private institutions contains interesting items concerning congressional appro26 Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1922, P-9. . ^ 27 Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the Board, of Children’s Guardians of the District of Colunihia., for the fiscal year ended June 30,1920, p. 6.. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOAED OF CHILDEEN ’s GUAKDIANS. 73 priations to aid in the establishment of these institutions and the beginning of the subsidy system.28 The report of the Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institu tions in the District of Columbia includes a statement, submitted to Congress, of the public appropriations for the maintenance of private institutions for children from 1883 through 1897.29 Figures were not available for the years prior to 1883. Figures for subsequent years have been secured from appropriation acts. From 1883 through the fiscal year ended June 30, 1893, the sub sidies to private institutions, 3 to 12 in number, totaled from $16,500 to $54,750. The activities of the Board of Children’s Guardians began in July, 1893. For the year ended June 30, 1894, the total appropriations were reduced from $54,750 to $34,800, and during the following four years the total grants ran from $36,700 to $45,600, received by 10 or 11 institutions. For the fiscal year 1899-1900 and continuing through the year 1906-7 the number of institutions receiving subsidies and the amounts were greatly reduced. During these eight years five or six institutions received grants totaling from $22,400 to $36,100. By an act of Congress of March 3, 1905 (33 Stat. 908) the contract system was put into effect in place of the system of lump-sum appro priations. Under this system certain specified institutions were to care for children under contracts entered into .by the District of Columbia Board of Charities. Congress appropriated amounts desig nated as the maximum that could be used to pay for the care of wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. For the year ended June 30, 1906, such contracts were made with six institutions. In the following year the number was reduced to five, and beginning with July 1, 1907, contracts were made with four institutions—the Washington Home for Foundlings, the National Colored Home, St. Ann’s Infant Asylum, and the German Orphan Asylum. In 1910 the German Orphan Asylum was dropped from the list of institutions with which contracts might be made. By an act of Congress of March 3, 1917 (39 Stat. 1037) the contract arrangements were placed with the Board of Children’s Guardians instead of the Board of Charities. The amounts made available for the contracts ran from $21,000 to $23,300; information was not available until 1917-18 as to the amounts actually expended. For 1910-11 the annual appropriation made available for such contracts with the three institutions—the Washington Home for Foundlings, the National Colored Home, and St. Ann’s Infant Asylum—was $20,700; for the years from 1911-12 through 1919—20 the amount was $21,900—$9,900 for the care of wards in the National Colored Home and $6,000 for wards in each of the other two. During 1917-18 and 1918-19 practically all the money available was used by the board; during 1919-20 none of the $9,900 was used for children in the National Colored Home, and only $8,565 of the remaining $12,000 was used for the care of chil dren in the other two institutions. For 1920-21, $5,000 was set aside for use in each of these three institutions; only $4,547 of the total $15,000 was used. For 1921-22 and 1922-23 the amounts were 29 P art I.—Hearings; Statements; Reports from Cities; Suggestions for a Board of Charities, p. 91. 88962°—24t------6 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 74 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. reduced so that only $2,500 could be used in the National Colored Home, $1,500 in the Washington Home for Foundlings, and $1,000 in St. Ann’s Infant Asylum, the total available being $5,000. Almost the whole amount available in 1921-22 for children in the National Colored Home was expended, but of the other $2,500 only $1,237 was used. No information was obtained as to the amount spent in this way during 1922-23. In the appropriation act for the fiscal year 1923-24 (42 Stat. 1360-1361) Congress eliminated all reference to contracts with private institutions and made no direct appropria tions to institutions. The Board of Children’s Guardians, though not granted any special sum to board children in private institutions, can, of course, compensate institutions for the care of wards from its regular appropriation. Provision for delinquent boys and girls. Delinquent white boys in need of closer supervision or stricter discipline than was consistent with the management of the industrial home schools have usually been placed by the board in an institu tion in Baltimore—St. Mary’s Industrial School, a Catholic institu tion for boys. Nine of its wards were in this institution on June 30, 1923. There was no institution in the District of 'Columbia in which delinquent white or negro boys or delinquent negro girls could be placed by the hoard. Delinquent negro girls were occasionally placed in institutions outside the District; the Industrial Home for Colored Girls (for Protestant girls), located just outside Baltimore, and the House of the Good Shepherd (for Catholic girls) in Balti more care for most of the negro girls whom the board finds it neces sary to place in institutions. On June 30, 1923, the hoard had 8 wards in the former institution ; in addition it had 5 delinquent girls in institutions in Virginia. Delinquent white girls are placed in the House of the Good Shep herd in Washington, and girls who have to be provided with maternity care are placed in the House of Mercy. At the end of the fiscal year 1923 two white wards of the board were in the House of the Good Shepherd, and two were in the House of Mercy. INSTITUTIONAL CARE OF HANDICAPPED CHILDREN. Institutions for the care of feeble-minded children. Reference has been made to the fact that there is no local institu tion for feeble-minded children and no available institution for the care of feeble-minded negro children.30 The Training School a t Vineland, N. J., the Pennsylvania Training School for Feeble-Minded Children at Elwyn, Pa., and the Gundry School at Falls Church, Va., have received a limited number of the feeble-minded children who were under the supervision of the board. On May 15, 1921, there were 90 children in these institutions who had been placed there by the Board of Children’s Guardians. Of these children 28 were wards of the board and 62 had been received under care by the board, without commitment, from parents or guardians, who were paying a part or all of the cost of maintenance m the institutions. In addition, 7 wards of the board who had been committed to the Government Hospital for the Insane were 30 i n June, 1922, Congress made an appropriation for an institution for the feeble-minded. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OP THE BOARD OE CHILDREN’s GUARDIANS. 75 still under "supervision. Six of these were feeble-minded and one was insane. On June 29, 1922, $250,000 was appropriated by Congress for an institution for the feeble-minded in the District of Columbia.31 Of this amount $100,000 was to be immediately available, with the provision that the institution be located at Blue Plains on the land adjoining the Home for the Aged and Infirm. This location was considered by the Board of Charities and others interested to be entirely unsuited for the purpose, and no steps were taken toward beginning the construction of the institution. On February 28, 1923, the provisions of the original bill were set aside by the passage of another bill appropriating $300,000. Of this amount $100,000 was to be immediately available—$38,000 for the purchase of a site in Maryland, Virginia, or the District of Columbia, and the remaining $62,000 for the erection of buildings. The site has been purchased in Anne Arundel County, Md., about 20 miles from Washington, and in August, 1923, plans were being made for the construction of buildings. Schools for the physically handicapped. An annual appropriation is made by Congress for the care of blind children in suitable institutions in Maryland or other States,32 and four such children were being cared for in the Maryland School for the Blind during the school year 1920-21. An 11 year-old white girl who was permanently crippled as a result of infantile paralysis was in the Widener Memorial Industrial Training School for Crippled Children in Philadelphia at the end of the year of the study. HOSPITAL CARE AND SPECIAL TREATMENT. Reference has already been made to the fact that a special appronation was made for the care of wards of the board in several of the ospitals of the District. These included the Children’s Hospital, receiving children under 12 years of age; Garfield Hospital and Columbia Hospital, receiving patients 12 years of age and over; and the Washington Asylum Hospital and Freedmen’s Hospital, receiving patients of all ages. Although not especially equippedfor the care of children, the Tuberculosis Hospital received wards of the board for treatment. The Episcopal Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital received children in need of operation or special treatment. The clinics in connection with the Episcopal Eye, Ear, and Throat Hospital and the Freedmen’s Hospital were frequently used for wards of the board, as was also the tuberculosis clinic conducted by the District of Columbia Health Department. Wards of the board who had a venereal disease were required to attend the clinic con ducted by the District of Columbia Health Department until they were discharged. No ward suffering from venereal disease was placed outside the city. In addition to these clinics, the infantwelfare centers maintained by the Child-Welfare Association and the Instructive Visiting Nurses Association aided in caring for a number of the younger children under care. Several surgeons and other specialists in the city rendered valuable assistance in cases needing special care. E 3142 Stat. 702 (Act of June 29, 1922), as affected by 42 Stat. 1360 (Act of Feb. 23, 1923). 33 Rev. Stat. 1873-74, secs. 3689 and 4869; 30 Stat. 1101; 35 Stat. 295. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 76 " CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA. Special effort was made to provide properly for tuberculous chil dren in homes where they would receive proper care and would not be a source of infection tp other children. During the year of the study 44 active cases of tuberculosis were reported, and 10 suspected cases; 14 children who had had tuberculosis were given recovery cards. A sanatorium for the care of tuberculous children would be a great benefit to the District and would lighten the duties of the placing officers in arranging for the care of this class of children. The executive officer of the board in the annual report for the year ended June 30, 1920, made the following statement in regard to one of the urgent needs in connection with the work of the board : A sanatorium for tuberculous children could be used to great advantage and should be established at once, if only in a modest way. After careful examina tion as many as 50 tuberculous children have been found among the wards of the board this year, for whom it has been very difficult to provide.. Some of the younger ones have remained 'for a number of months at Children’s Hospital and have later been placed in private homes where there were no other children. Others have been in private homes only and have gone to the tuberculosis school, and still others have been placed in the tuberculosis hospital. The reason for the difficulty in finding suitable homes must appear evident. Many adults are afraid to board children suffering from this disease, in even the incipient stage, and others are not willing to take the responsibility and give the necessary care. It necessitates on our part placing them in homes where there are no other children, and if they are of school age, near the tuberculosis school. It also means a careful watch to see that instructions are carried out regarding fresh air, rest, and diet. The hospitals can not offer ideal conditions for incipient cases, for the reason that although general care and feeding may be good, the children miss their school and such recreation as they should have to keep them in a happy frame of mind.33 THE QUESTION OF AN INSTITUTIONAL ADJUNCT TO THE BOARD. Since the early years of public child-caring work in the District there has been discussion of the need for some form of public insti tution closely related to the child-caring agency. I t is shown in other sections of this report34that the Industrial Home School, begin ning as a private enterprise, was assumed as a public institution in 1896. After many years of urging of the need for a public institu tion for negro children—for whom there was practically no provision in private institutions—the Industrial Home School for Colored Children was established in 1907. This school was located in the country on a tract of 100 acres and was built on the cottage plan. I t has since been supplemented by an institution for negro boys, operated under private auspices but caring only for wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Aside from the lack of institutional provision for negro girls who can not be cared for in family homes, there seems to have been little recent difficulty in regard to the question as it relates to negro children. The problem of the type of institutional care needed for white wards of the board, however, has been a matter of much discussion. In 1897, almost immediately after the Industrial Home School was transferred to the control of the District of Columbia, the president of the Board of Children’s Guardians, in his statement before the Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reforma tory Institutions in the District of Columbia, reported for the board 33 Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30,1920, p. 7. 34 See pp. 114-115. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN*S GUARDIANS. 77 on the “ essential features of an ideal system,” including the follow ing propositions: A receiving station conveniently located in the city of Washington, where would be established the executive offices of the child-caring commission, which would also provide accommodations for not to exceed 20 children, to which the police could send any child found homeless about the street, night or day, and at which would be kept children held under temporary care, pending investiga tion of their necessities. A thoroughly modern child-caring institution, located near some wholesome country town within 50 miles of Washington and easy of access. This should consist of one central building for general purposes and grouped about it such a number of cottages for children and other buildings for special purposes as might be required. It should occupy a tract of land of such dimensions as would furnish facilities for the production of the fruit, vegetables, milk, and meat required for its own use, and for the training of boys in agricultural pur suits.35 Until recent years there was considerable difficulty because chil dren were received into the Industrial Home School independently of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The report of the commis sioners to Congress in 1904 on the care of delinquent and dependent children pointed out that— The Industrial Home School, now a public institution, under the control of the commissioners and supported entirely by public funds, should be the prin cipal receiving and training home for white wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, who should be placed there by the authority of the Board of Chil dren’s Guardians. No other children should be placed in that institution. 38 The same report pointed out the difficulties existing at that time in connection with the management of this institution. At that time, although the school was a public institution, it received wards on the action of a committee of its own board. I t continued to do so until 1913, since which time no children have been received directly by the industrial schools but all have been placed there by the Board of Children’s Guardians. In this report the commissioners also recommended that the insti tution be removed to larger grounds in the country. The Board of Childrens Guardians has frequently called attention, also, to the need for a temporary receiving home especially equipped for the study of the mental and physical condition of children and for emergency care.37 The following is quoted from the report of the board for 1918: We repeat that one of the greatest needs of the board is a temporary home for the children where they may be received immediately after commitment and kept under observation for a short time before being placed. An intelligent matron would give them kindly care and treatment, free them from communica ble skin and scalp diseases, and fumigate their clothing. She would see that the most important part of the recommended medical work be attended to, and clean, healthy, and desirable children could be placed in good homes after this period of observation, in place of the undesirable, dirty, sickly ones which the present arrangements force us to place in the homes that will receive them. This will insure the best type of private boarding homes taking more children. 36 P art I.—Hearings; Statements; Reports from Cities; Suggestions for a Board of Charities, p. 456. 36 Care of Delinquent and Dependent Children in the District of, Columbia; letter from the Commis sioners of the District of Columbia submitting a plan for the future care of delinquent and dependent children in the District of Columbia, p. 2. Fifty-eighth Congress, second session, Senate Document No. 85, January 6,1904. i ., 37 i n December, 1923, the board recommended to the Commissioners of the District th at a “ tem porary” receiving home be made available for the use of the board to be “ less extensive and more conveniently located than th e Industrial Home School,” which it is proposed to sell because it is “ not adapted for use as a temporary receiving home.” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 78 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. A receiving home would be a source of great assistance in caring for all emer gency cases, which are so perplexing. It would divert from the District building a continual traffic which is objectionable and would give the office more working space, as it is exceedingly difficult, though interesting, to work in an office over flowing with children at all hours of the day . The supply of clothing would be kept there and given out to the children far more satisfactorily than under the present crowded conditions at the office. If deemed advisable the doctor would have his semiweekly office hours here, and later the board hopes to have a well-equipped dental office in such quarters in order to combine, under the supervision of the doctor and the office, all of the dentistry which is now being done by five dentists at their private offices.88 TJnder the section of the annual report for the year ended June 30, 1920, dealing with “ some well-known needs” the executive of the board made a recommendation for the establishment of ‘‘a new in dustrial home school for white children on the cottage plan, situated outside of the city and equipped to give proper vocational instruc tion.” 89 The report of tne board of trustees of the Industrial Home School for 1921 contains the following in regard to the institution and its needs: Only children between the ages of 6 and 14 who are mentally normal are de sired. * * * For many years this institution was conducted as semiperma nent for dependent children, many of them remaining here from the age of 6 years until they had finished high school; and while some were placed outside in private homes such placement was only made when it was felt to be peculiarly advantageous to the child. Consequently the turnover in the student body was comparatively small. For such a home the trustees felt that the institution should be moved to a small farm and new buildings erected on the cottage system. The present main building is the old Georgetown almshouse of nearly a hundred years ago, with additions and improvements, and is felt to be wholly unsuit able. * * * In recent years the Board of Children’s Guardians have adopted a change of policy in regard to the children committed to our charge; these children are now only sent to the home until suitable private homes or boarding homes can be found for them. The institution is also used as a place of temporary commitment for children until a more permanent disposition can be arranged for. Under these circumstances it is absolutely necessary that the home should be in the city, and a great deal of land is not required. The present board of trustees believe, therefore, that as the present location is high and healthy and contains land enough for garden and greenhouses it is entirely satisfactory. It is believed, however, that certain improvements are imperatively demanded. These include electricity in the place of gas, for lighting purposes; new plumbing; new heating pipes between the boiler room and the greenhouses; and the tearing down of the oldest portion of the main building, which has depreciated to such a great extent as to render it impossible of being repaired for use. As soon as financial condi tions permit the board will urge the desirability of tearing down the older buildings on the grounds and the replacing thereof with other buildings on the cottage system in order that modern methods of handling children may be more satis factorily applied.40 The report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia for 1922 discussed the difficulty then existing between the Board of Children’s Guardians and the Industrial Home School in the following paragraphs: During the year (1921-22) there developed a difference of opinion between the Board of Children’s Guardians and the Industrial Home School which finally resulted in the closing of that school for the time being. The Board of Charities made a careful examination of the matters in dispute and on June 22, 1922, 38 Twenty-fifth Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1918, p. 8. 39 Twenty-seventh Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia, for the fiscal year ended June 30,1920, p. 6. 40 Report of the Board of Trustees of the Industrial Home School of the District of Columbia, in Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1921, pp. 101,100. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis METHODS OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. 79 submitted to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia a report thereon. Briefly, the point in contention is as follows: The Board of Children’s Guardians takes the position that it can find suitable family homes for all normal white children and that an institution is necessary only for the care of abnormal children, or for the temporary care of children when received, for such period as may be necessary to afford opportunity for study of mental, moral, and physical character istics of the child and for the application of such treatment as may be indicated. The trustees of the Industrial Home School, on the other hand, maintain that the institution is the best training for a certain number of dependent children, some of whom should be allowed to remain in the school for a considerable period of time. The result of these different views on the part of the two agencies con cerned was the closing of the school by virtue of the fact that the Board of Children’s Guardians, which has legal custody of all dependents, withdrew the children from the school, and the school has been without children now for several months. The property is being cared for by two or three employees who have been retained for the purpose of harvesting the crops and marketing the flowers from the greenhouses. The Board of Charities in its report to the commissioners recommended “ that the Industrial Home School be used for the purpose of such a receiving home and for the care of such children as can not be provided for elsewhere.” Unfor tunately, because of a lack of unified control, this recommendation has not been carried out. The members of the Board of Children’s Guardians are appointed by the judges of the police court and a judge of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia. The members of the board of trustees of the Industrial Home .School are appointed by the commissioners, and there is no authority vested in anyone that can reconcile the differences that may arise between these agencies. The Board of Charities has frequently in its annual and in special reports called attention to the lack of coordination in the control of the charitable and correctional institutions of the District of Columbia. This controversy over the Industrial Home School acutely illustrates this lack of coordination. We have frequently expressed the conviction, which we now reiterate, that all publicwelfare agencies should be under the direction of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia. All the experience of the added years emphasizes the wisdom of this recommendation. If authority were thus centralized, it would be possible when controversies arise, as controversies inevitably will, for the com missioners to insure cooperative action. Several attempts have been made to secure legislation with a view of effecting a more harmonious organization of public-welfare agencies, but unfortunately such efforts have not yet resulted in legislative action. There is at present a code commission appointed by the commissioners, with Mr. Justice Siddons as its chairman, studying the question with a view of making a report with recom mendations for the necessary legislation. Pending a more comprehensive plan, it would relieve the present situation in relation to the Industrial Home School if a clause were enacted providing that the members of the Board of Children’s Guardians should be appointed by the commissioners and that the control of the Industrial Home School should be in that board, acting with the approval of the commissioners.41 On February 28, 1923, the following law was passed by Congress abolishing the board of trustees of the Industrial Home School, placing the institution under the Board of Children’s Guardians, and providing that the members of this board be appointed by the Commissioners of the District of Columbia: Board of Children's Guardians appointed by commissioners; powers of trustees of Industrial Home School transferred to board.— * * * Provided, That the board of trustees of the Industrial Home School of the District of Columbia is abolished on and after the date of the approval of this act, and thereafter the powers and duties of such board as specified and restricted by law shall be transferred to and vested in the Board of Children’s Guardians: Provided further, That on and after the date of the approval of this act the authority to appoint and remove members of the Board of Children’s Guardians is transferred from the judges of the police court and the judge holding the criminal court of the District of Columbia to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, and shall be exercised by them in accordance with section 2 of the act of July 26, 1892 (Twenty-seventh Statutes, 41 Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1922, p. 8. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 80 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. page 268), and the powers and duties of the Board of Children’s Guardians as prescribed by or pursuant to law shall thereafter be performed under such regula tions as may be made by said board and approved by the commissioners.42 The foregoing provision for the appointment of the members of the Board of Children’s Guardians by the Commissioners of the District put into practice a plan that had been urged at intervals for many years. The arrangement for a single board charged with the management of the child-caring work of the Board of Children’s Guardians and the Industrial Home School is similar to that in force in St. Louis, where a single board is at the head of the child-caring agency and the city institution for boys.43 I t is a curious feature of the present situation in- the District that the Industrial Home School for Colored Children (receiving only boys) is not under the Board of Children’s Guardians, although its relation to the board would logically be similar to that of the industrial school for white boys and girls. I t has been pointed out that there is no public institutional provision for negro girls. In practice the institution for negro boys appears to have been used by the board more especially for the semidelinquent, whereas the industrial school for white children has been used also for dependent or neglected children who for some reason could not be placed in family homes or who are awaiting such placement. «42 Stat. 1360-1361 (Act of Feb. 28, 1923). 5 | . .t « The St Louis Board of Children’s Guardians provides family homes for dependent and neglected children, gives aid to children in their own homes, and directs the Bellefontaine Farms, an intermediate institute for the training of delinquent boys. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK. INSTITUTIONS FOR DEPENDENT CHILDREN. The following summaries in regard to the 18 private institutions for dependent children in the District have been abstracted from the Directory of Social Agencies of Washington, D. C., published by the Washington Council of Social Agencies in.1922. The figures for the number of children under care were obtained either directly from the institutions or from annual reports made by them. A few of the wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians were being boarded in some of the private institutions. These children are included in the total number of children under care of the institutions. Baptist Home for Children.—A charitable institution for the maintenance and education of dependent white boys and girls between the ages of 3 and 10 at admission. It is under the general supervision of the executive board of the Columbian Association of Baptist Churches. Baptist children are given preference. Supported by voluntary offerings from the white Baptist churches of the District of Columbia. Children under care: 27. Bruen Home for Children.—A nonsectarian home for children over 2 years of age who have no other home. Supported partly through small sums paid for board and partly by contributions from churches and individuals. Children under care: 63. Central Union Mission.—Children’s Emergency Home for Destitute Mothers and Children. Children under care: 27. Episcopal Home for Children.—A home for white children of all denominations between the ages of 6 and 16. Admission is by application. Children attend the public schools of the District of Columbia. Supported by Episcopal Church and voluntary contributions. Children under care: 51. Florence Crittenton Home.— A nonsectarian home for white women and girls who are unfortunate and need help, A small fee is asked from those able to pay or from the Board of Charities when it sends cases to the home. Its purpose is to bring such women and girls under religious and benevolent influence and to assist young mothers in preparing themselves to care for their chil dren. Supported by voluntary contributions. Children under care: 24 (includes only the babies). German Orphan Asylum.—A nonsectarian home for white children of all nation alities. Supported by voluntary contributions. Children under care: 33. Gospel Mission.— Maintains emergency children’s home. Day nursery for white children from 2 to 8 years of age. Children under care: 11. House of Mercy.—A rescue home for young white girls and their babies, not limited to residents of the District. Under the direction of the Bishop of Washington. First cases only. No diseased nor feeble-minded admitted. Must remain one year at least, generally two years. Industrial and domestic training. Supported by endowment and voluntary contribution. Chil dren under care: 21 (includes only the babies). Jewish Foster Home.—A home for temporary care of dependent Hebrew chil dren between the ages of 4 and 14. Must be residents of the District, except in a few emergency cases. Children under care: 19. National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women and Children.— An association for the care of destitute negro women and children. Boys and girls, wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, taken to board. The home also maintains wards of its own, as it did before the Board, of Children’s Guardians was created. It also receives children whom death has deprived of father or mother, in cases in which the surviving parent is obliged to work away from home. Supported partly by appropriation from Congress, disbursed by Board of Children’s Guardians. Children under care: 27 81 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 82 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. St. A nn’s Infant Asylum and Maternity Hospital.—An institution for the care of white mothers and infants. Supported by patients’ fees and voluntary contributions. In charge of Sisters of Charity. Children under care: 95. St. John’s Orphanage.—An institution for white boys and girls between the ages of 5 and 9 years at admission who through the death, desertion, or in capacity of one or both parents are in need of a home. Supported by St. John’s Church (Episcopal). Summer home at Arlington, Va. Governed by a board of trustees and by the ladies’ aid. Children under care: 74. St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum.—A home for dependent and orphaned white boys between the ages of 6 and 14 years. Supported by endowment fund, annual benefits, and fees for board. In charge of Sisters of the Holy Cross. Children under care: 82. St. Rose’s Technical School.—An institution for the care and training of depen dent white girls between 14 and 16 years of age. Supported by products of sewing rooms and entertainments. In charge of the Sisters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul. Children under care: 54. St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum.— A. home for dependent white girls between 5 and 14 years of age who are without one of both parents. Supported by fees, voluntary contributions, legacies, etc. In charge of Sisters of Charity of Emmitsburg, Md. Children under care: 130. Swartzell Methodist Home for Children.—A home for white boys and girls from. 3 to 14 years of age, preferably Protestants, who are without proper homes. Supported by Methodist churches of the District. Children under care: 24. Washington City Orphan Asylum.—An institution for the care of orphans and destitute white Protestant children. Children under care: (approximately) 85. Washington Home for ChildrenJ— An institution for the care of homeless white children under 6 years of age. Board $30 a month, or less if circum stances necessitate. Supported by voluntary contributions. Children under care: 48. The Children’s Temporary Home, which receives only negro wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians, has not been mchided in this section of the discussion. For several years prior to the study special congressional ap propriations were made for the care of wards of the Board of Chil dren’s Guardians in St. Ann’s Infant Asylum and the Washington Home for Foundlings, and by the National Association for the Care of Destitute Colored Women and Children (which maintains the National Colored Home). During the fiscal year 1920-21 only a small part of the appropriation for St. Ann’s Infant Asylum and the Washington Home for Foundlings was used, and in 1921-22 the amount of the appropriation was considerably reduced. These two institutions are the only ones in the city which receive children under 2 years of age without their mothers; the former is a sectarian institution, and the latter gives hospital care to infants—both foundlings and other children in need of special care. The National Colored Home is the only institution in the city which cares for negro children other than wards of the Board of Children’s Guard ians. This institution receives wards of the board as well as other children on free and boarding arrangement but can care for only a limited number of children. In the majority of the cases in which it is necessary to provide for infants or negro children outside their own homes, either because of the death of one parent or because the mother has to go to work and can not keep the child with her, it is necessary for the guardian to find a boarding home without assist ance from any agency. 1 Formerly Washington Home for Foundlings. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK. 83 AGENCIES CONCERNED WITH DEPENDENT FAMILIES AND CHILDREN. The Directory of Social Agencies of Washington, D. C., published in 1922 by the Washington Council of Social Agencies, lists a number of organizations that do relief work with families. Although only one of these (the Catholic Charities of Washington, described later) has developed distinctive child-caring work, the work of all familywelfare societies fundamentally includes the prevention of child dependency and is closely related to the work of child-caring agencies and institutions. In order to present authoritatively and in brief form the main facts concerning the family-relief agencies, the follow ing summaries, representing reports by the agencies themselves, have been abstracted from the directory of social agencies: Associated Charities of the District of Columbia.—A family-welfare agency ministering to the poor and distressed without respect to race or creed, furnishing relief where and when necessary but striving to restore the family to self-maintenance at the earliest possible moment. Provident Savings Fund, operated by the Associated Charities for the encouragement and teaching of thrift. Deposits last year were $19,910.30. Camp Good Will, and Camp Pleasant (for negroes), conducted by summer outing committee for eight weeks in the summer for families of jnothers and children unable to provide their own vacation. Social-Service Exchange conducted for the confidential use and benefit of social-service agencies, churches, and benev olent individuals of. the District of Columbia. A directory of 85,000 names of clients or registering social agencies. The Associated Charities is supported by voluntary contributions. Catholic Charities of Washington,—The Catholic Charities provides a clearing house and coordinates the work of the parish conferences of the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and other organizations and institutions engaged in social and relief work in the District of Columbia. It cares for city-wide problems, develops new activities, and assists parish conferences with their cases. (For further discussion of the work of this society see pp. 84-85.) Society of St. Vincent de Paul, Particular Council.—The central office is a clearing house for the different parish conferences of the society and also between the society and other organizations. The particular council has a special works committee which cares for the spiritual needs of Catholic inmates in various institutions. Central Union Mission.—A nonsectarian religious and relief-giving organiza tion for white men, women, and children. Free employment bureau. Summer outings for mothers and children. (Children’s Emergency Home has been described under institutions.) The Salvation Army.—A nonsectarian religious and relief-giving organization for men, women, and children. It operates through a main office, a socialservice department, and three corps headquarters. Fresh Air Camp at Patuxent, Md., is maintained during the summer months, where mothers and children are given vacations of 10 days to 2 weeks. Supported by voluntary contributions. United Hebrew Relief Society.—An organization to provide financial assistance to Jewish widows and orphans, to help Jewish families in sickness or distress, and to provide food and shelter for Jewish transients. Supported by voluntary contributions. Volunteers of America.—A religious organization; seeks to relieve human needs in a practical way regardless of creed, color, or nationality. Maintains a mission hall and relief station. OTHER AGENCIES ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK. I t is difficult to compile an adequate list of agencies concerned with the care of dependent children or the prevention of dependency. Churches, settlements, all social agencies, and other groups interested in promoting the welfare of the community contribute materially and spiritually to the prevention of child dependency through the main tenance of homes. Among the organizations in the District, other https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 84 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. than those listed, which devote themselves more specifically to some form of children’s aid, may be mentioned the following:2 Christ Child Society.—An organization for the relief and care of children. Aid given to crippled children in the form of appliances and home instruction if needed. Volunteers visit in homes, extend relief, and make and distribute garments—especially layettes for infants of poor mothers. Conducts dental clinics, attends to the health needs of the children, and operates its own farm, where children are sent during the summer. Supported by contri butions from members and an annual tag day. ; Congress of Mothers and Parent-Teacher Associations of the District of Columbia.— The health committee is serving school lunches of milk and graham crackers. A committee will furnish shoes, rubbers, and clothing to children who are out of school because of this need. Supported by dues and voluntary contributions. Ladies of Charity— Supply clothing and look after women and children, materially and spiritually. Four parish units. Supported by dues, and by contributions from the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. Prudence Crandall Association.—An organization to furnish shoes to needy negro school children upon recommendation of the teachers. Supported bv voluntary contributions. Sterling Relief Association.—Clothes and shoes given to negro school children upon recommendation of the teachers. Hot lunches also served at certain schools. Supported by voluntary contributions. Washington Humane Society.—A society to protect children and animals from cruelty and abuse. T H E D EV ELO PM EN T O F A CATHOLIC CHILD -CARIN G AGENCY. Until the child-caring work for Catholic children was organized in 1922, there was in the District no private agency especially con cerned with the problems of providing boarding-home and free-home care for dependent children and children needing such care during family emergencies. The Catholic Charities of Washington in May, 1922, organized a children’s division as one of its four branches. The other closely related divisions are: The division of family case work, the division of protective care, and the division of recreational work. Other agencies handling the general problem of family aid in the District cooperate with the Catholic agency, referring to it all new cases of Catholic children and old ones involving religious problems. An outstanding feature of the work of the Catholic Charities in Wash ington—as of similar work developed in other cities by religious groups, especially the Jewish and the Roman Catholic—is the close interrelationship between the work with families, the work toward the prevention of dependency and delinquency, and the child-caring work of the agency and of institutions with which it is cooperating. The work of the children’s division of the Catholic Charities of Washington is important in its relation to the future work of Catholic institutions in the District. The children’s division investigates the intake of certain institutions and places out or supervises children who are discharged from care. Its activities are defined by the director as follows : The children’s division (a) cooperates with St. Ann’s Infant Asylum and Maternity Hospital, investigating and planning for mothers and children under their care; (6) places out children from the various Catholic institutions; (c) finds boarding and free homes for children; (d) cooperates with the Board of Children’s Guardians in the care and supervision of Catholic children; (e) concerns itself with improving the standards and policies of Catholic child-caring homes and exercises general supervision over their work. 2 The descriptions of activities here given include only those related to special assistance https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS ENGAGED IN CHILD-CARING WORK. 85 In its first annual report3 the agency states that during the first eight months of the existence of the children’s division, 92 children were directly under its care. PROTECTIVE WORK. The Juvenile Protective Association of the District of Columbia was organized in 1914 and represents the first work of this kind in the District on a comprehensive scale. This agency deals primarily with delinquency problems, but its work is, of course, closely related to the prevention of dependency. The work is described in the directory of social agencies as follows: A city-wide nonsectarian organization whose sole object is to protect children and prevent delinquency. It is supported entirely by voluntary contributions. Cases are received from the juvenile court, all social working agencies, schools, churches, business firms, private individuals, and parents. First visits are made by a trained social worker, the follow-up work being done by this worker assisted by as large a number of volunteers as can be secured and properly supervised. Having made the approach to the family through the delinquency of one of its child members, all efforts are directed toward the adjustment of any condition which tends to promote delinquency on the part of any child in the family. All community resource are called upon, special effort being made to insure the health of the children and to connect them up with school and church and proper recreational activities. * * * One important part of its work is. supplying Big Brothers and Big Sisters for children who need them. An equally important feature of the work is correcting neighborhood conditions which contribute to the delinquency of children. As was mentioned in the preceding section, the Catholic Charities of Washington has a division of protective care. This is describtkl by the director of the organization as follows: The division of protective care cooperates with the juvenile court and other agencies of the community in dealing with delinquent Catholic children. The juvenile court refers the following types of cases to the division: (a) All cases of Catholic children disposed of unofficially by the chief probation officer; (6) cases in which sentence has been suspended; (c) cases discharged from probation; (d) the court frequently asks the aid of the division for specific types of service in cases on active probation. The division of protective care has developed an organization of Big Brothers and Big Sisters to assist in caring for delinquent and semidelinquent children. Some of the parochial schools of the District are referring their problem children to the division. 3 The Charity of a Year—First Annual Report (January to December 31, 1922) of the Director of Catholic Charities, Washington, D. C., p. 8. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The records of individual children tell the story of the complica tions of poverty, immorality, and other delinquencies, disease, and mental defect. They show the lack of resources to deal with these conditions early enough in an effective way. In consequence, par ents and children are separated unnecessarily, children become de linquent because of improper home conditions, education is neglected, and the child is handicapped for his whole life. No care that an agency can provide for a child can compensate for the experiences that have left an ineradicable impression on his mind or for the deprivation of those things that go to make up a normal, healthy childhood. Mrs. F, a widow, has three girls and two boys under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians. She earns her living by going out to work by the day. More than four years ago her oldest boy, then 11 years of age, was brought before the juvenile court because of persistent truancy and was committed to the guardianship of the board. He has spent most of the time since his commit ment in a private industrial school in Maryland but has been for short periods in the Industrial Home School, the Working Boys’ Home, a boarding home, and his mother’s home. He ran away three times from the Industrial Home School, twice from the Working Boys’ Home, and four times from the school in Mary land. After he had been in the boarding home only two weeks the foster mother requested that he be removed. The three periods he spent with his mother were each very short, the last and longest being of three months’ duration. Since the home conditions were then not favorable the mother asked to have h i m sent back to the Maryland school, and he is still there. About a year ago the four younger children were committed to the board for minority. A month earlier the mother had given birth to a child out of wed lock, and a social settlement had reported the family to be in need of assistance. At the time of the commitment the Associated Charities stated that the family had been helped by no less than seven organizations, and the day nursery to which the children were being sent had refused to continue to care for them because of their uncleanly condition and bad habits. The baby was first placed in a children’s hospital and after six weeks there was placed in a boarding home. The other children (aged 3, 6, and 10 years) were placed in boarding homes. All four children are now under one foster mother’s care. The 0 ’s_ have a family of 10 children, 5 boys and 5 girls. The father has a record of intemperance, and though he is working and a number of the older children are of working age, the family does not seem to be able to get along on its income. Its ^members also have a reputation for quarrelsomeness. The Associated Charities, the District Board of Charities, and the Christ Child Society have at different times given the family assistance, and one of the chil dren was for a time in an institution for dependent children. A few months ago five of the children, ranging in age from 4 to 12 years, were committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians for minority. One boy and two girls were sent to an institution; the two younger boys were placed in a boarding home. Some years previously all these children except the youngest had been under the guardianship of the board for a week. Of the other five children four are older than those committed, being 15 to 22 years of age. They have all at various times been temporarily under the care of the board, some of them for several periods. One of the girls spent a year in 1 Each of the stories in this section is written as of the date when the material was secured in the course of the Children’s Bureau study. The conditions described in the present tense are, therefore, those which obtained while the investigation was proceeding, b u t they m ay not be those existing a t the tim e of the publication of this report. The identity of the families and children is, of course, disguised; where, for convenience, letters or names are used they are not actually those of the persons under discussion. 86 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS. 87 the National Training School for Girls, having been committed to it when she was 15 years of age. The only child in the family who has not been under the guardianship of the board is the year-old baby. ^ Alfred’s mother was a frail woman, but she strove early and late to care for her children and give them an education. The father was immoral and a heavy drinker and refused to support his children. While he was serving a five-year sentence for violation of the Mann Act the mother divorced him. She had to work away from home all day. Alfred and his sister became incorrigible, and Alfred was brought before the juvenile court a number of times. Then the mother died, and Alfred went to live with a blind old grandmother who had no control over him. She had long been given aid by the Associated Charities. Within a year, when he was 14 years of age, it was necessary to commit him to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians. Alfred is now, a year later, in the home of a maternal aunt, where there are two children younger than himself. The board of guardians pays $20 a month for his care. The aunt’s husband shows much interest in the welfare of. the boy, who though he has had to have a great deal of hospital treatment since his commitment is steadily improving in health. Alfred repeated grade 6A three times but is considered normal mentally. His retardation in school was prob ably caused by his physical condition. At any rate by voluntary attendance at summer school he won his certificate for grade 7A. He now shows much selfrespect, is eager to do the right thing, and wants to go to work and learn a trade if possible. An effort will be made to induce the father, who is working in a southern State, to help give the boy some trade education. The father is paying $25 a month for the care of Alfred’s younger sister, now an attractive child of 13 or 14, who is living with the grandmother mentioned, under the supervision of the board of guardians. The father wants Alfred, but though he is said to have recently married a good woman, his past reputation makes it seem unwise to send the boy to him, away from an environment which is fostering his happiness and good character. The alcoholism and insanity of the father and the mental subnormality of the mother have caused the B’s to be a continual burden on their relatives and on the communities in which they have lived. The three little daughters— Minnie, Irene, and Betty-—were committed four years ago to the Board of Children’s Guardians because the father was not supporting the family and the mother had degenerated almost into a beggar. At that time Minnie was only 1J years of age, and the other girls were 5 and 7 years old. The oldest child, John, now 13, has lived with his maternal grandmother almost since birth, but she can give no aid to the other children. Soon after the commitment of the children the father was placed in the Govern ment Hospital for the Insane. The next year he was discharged, and Betty, then 8 years of age, was placed under the care of the woman ^ith whom he boarded. When the board’s workers found that he was constantly intoxicated they removed the child. He is reported to be again in the asylum. Nothing is known of his relatives except his mother, who is said to have been an habitual drunkard. Mary will soon reach her majority and be discharged from the guardianship of the board. She has been holding the same clerical position for three years and is now earning $20 a week. She was committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians when she was 12 years of age, together with two brothers, one older and one younger than herself. Though the family had been helped by the Associated Charities and by their church and it is reported that some of the children had been in an orphan asylum in Germany, destitution formed the least part of the reason for their removal from the father’s home. The father eould earn $20 to $25 a week at his trade, and the three older daughters were earning fair wages according to the standards of the time, so that the family should have been in good circumstances. But the mother had died, the father drank heavily, and the older daughters had been compelled to leave home because the father brought undesirable men into the house. The oldest girl lived where she worked, one boarded, and one lived with a friend. It was Mary’s oldest sister who appealed to the board for the protection of the younger children. The older brother, who reached his majority two years ago, has a good position and is studying for a profession. The younger, though he is still under the supervision of the board, is making a good salary as a bookkeeper, having graduated from a commercial school. The two boys and Mary are now living with their oldest sister, who is married. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 88 CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. The way in which a family may be scattered after the mother’s death is Illustrated in the history of a group of negro children. The mother died after giving birth to twins, leaving seven children to the care of an alcoholic father who had never properly supported the family. The oldest child was 10 years of age when the mother died. Four children were taken to the home of the maternalgrandmother, who was living in a small town of a neighboring State. She has since died, and there is no report of the present whereabouts of these children. The twins were committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians when 6 months of age. They were placed at board in a private home and when 2 years of age were legally adopted. The remaining child, a boy 6 years old when his mother died, was cared for by a friend for nearly three years and was then committed to the board because the father failed to pay board for him. He is now 12 years of age, in fair physical condition though considerably underweight, and is doing well in school. He has been broken of the habit of taking small sums of money, but he is easily influenced and has run away frequently from the homes in which he has been placed, so that it has been found necessary to keep him in the In dustrial Home School. A maternal uncle, who is reported to have a good home, now says that he would be glad to take charge of this boy. In 1917 six children—three boys and three girls, ranging in age from 1 to 11 years—were temporarily committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians because of destitution. A few months later, with the help of various agencies, the family was reestablished, and all the children except the oldest boy, who was crippled, were returned to the parents. In the summer of 1919 the mother brought a suit for divorce because the father had beaten her, his excuse being that he “ found her drunk and the baby’s head in the drain.” The suit was dismissed, for though the couple had lived together for over 15 years they had not been legally married. In fact, the father had never been divorced from his legal wife, who was still living in the West. At this time the children were again temporarily committed to the board, the group now including two children born since the former commitment. A ninth child was born early in 1920 and was committed permanently when he was only 4 months old. At the same time all the other children were made wards for minority. Meanwhile the mother had married another man—whom she has since deserted, taking all his savings with her. About a year and a half ago a boy of 15 years was committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians for minority. He had been charged by the uncle with whom he was living with taking a small sum of money. This boy and his sister (who is now 12 years of age) are the children of a negro father and an Italian or Greek mother. The father is reported to have earned a good living, but he led an immoral life, neglected the mother, and showed no interest in his children. In 1910 the dis couraged mother followed the father’s example and deserted the family. There has been no news of her since, and nothing is known of her relatives. Such is the story as related by the paternal aunt of the children. The case first came to the notice of the Board of Children’s Guardians in 1913, when the aunt reported that the deserted children had been with their grand mother for over three years. The father was told by the board to make provision for them but did nothing until about three years ago, when he placed the little girl in a private institution in Baltimore. She is still there, supposedly being supported by him. Two years ago the uncle with whom the boy was then living sent him to Philadelphia to his father, who placed him in school. There the boy was very unhappy, and he soon ran away and came back to Washington. He went to live with another uncle, but the father refused to help in his support, and it was soon after this that the child was committed to the custody of the board. About two years ago a widow, who was working as maid in a hotel, applied to the Board of Children’s Guardians for aid for her three children, then 8, 10, and 12 years of age. Her case was referred to the Associated Charities, and the two younger children—both of them boys—were placed in a boarding home in the country. Some time later they were returned to the mother, but early in the present year she again applied to the board and was again referred to the Asso ciated Charities. Since she refused to cooperate with the association in any pla: for the children’s welfare, it had the two boys placed in a boys’ home. Almost immediately the superintendent of the home refused to keep them because they had been detected in stealing. The juvenile court then committed the boys temporarily to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians; within a short time the commitment was made permanent. The board placed them in the Industrial Home School, where they still are. The sister has never been com https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS. 89 mitted to the care of the board. The mother is known to have lived in homes conducted by two district social agencies. The mother of the H family was arrested and charged with vagrancy. Her two men companions and three of her children—girls of 1, 7, and 16 years-—were taken into custody at the same time. The father had deserted the family. The day after the arrest of the mother the two younger girls were committed tem porarily to the guardianship of the board. They were both placed in an institu tion for a short period and were then removed to a boarding home. Within 10 months their 11-year-old sister also was received under temporary commitment, after the women’s bureau of the police department reported the mother’s failure to observe the terms of her parole. A short time later the commitments of all three children were made permanent. Two are now in boarding homes. The eldest of the three (now 12 years of age) and her 17-year-old sister are living with their grandmother, the former being still under the supervision of the board. The difficulty which a father often has in keeping a family of small children together after the mother has died was exemplified in the case of an Italian shoe repairer. He has a dull mind and little command of English, and owing to gen eral inefficiency his earning capacity is low. For a time he struggled to keep his three children with him, but since he could not afford to hire a housekeeper he became discouraged and lost interest, and some months after the mother’s death the two younger children were committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians. Three years later the oldest child, then a boy of 11 years, was removed by the board, at a time when the father had in the home a woman who neglected the house and caused the father to be indifferent about his children. ' The father appears to be subnormal mentally, and not one of the children measures up to normal intelligence. Three of a family of four negro children were committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians on the same day in 1917. The father, a school janitor, who is reported to have been “ a good industrious man,” had died of pneumonia about a year and a half before. The mother was granted a so-called “pension” by the Associated Charities, and the workers tried to aid her with advice and encouragement; but she steadily deteriorated in her care of the children and in character—although her two younger sisters, who say she was “ almost a mother” to them when they were orphaned, declare that during the husband’s life she was a good woman and gave her children “ the best care she knew how to give.” About two weeks before the children were removed from her she had given birth to a baby girl, whose father she hardly knew. A year later she was stabbed by another man with whom she had been living from time to time. Her young est child was then removed from her and placed at board, the charge being “ lack of physical care.” Since then she seems to have had no regular work and to have made no effort at improvement. The family life of the D ’s was broken up by the alcoholism and immorality of the father. He had never properly supported the children, and he was finally sent to prison for five years for criminal assault. These facts, however, did not prevent him from obtaining in 1915, in another city, a decree of divorce with the custody of his children, although nothing was ever proved against the char acter of the mother. Fortunately his lawyer did not press his claim to the custody of the children, because of his evident unfitness. He is now married again and has two children by his second wife. The mother is ignorant, speaks very little English, and is incapable by herself of making a home for her three children. kEarly in 1919, on the petition of the maternal grandfather, the 13-year-old girl was committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians. Four months later the 12-year-old boy was committed, because of his incorrigibility and the inabil ity of the mother to control him. Both children were placed in an institution. At the age of 16 years the girl has a mental age of 10 years. She is still in the fourth grade and has apparently reached her intellectual limit. The boy, now 15 years old, is diagnosed as 11 years of age mentally. He is said to enjoy school, but he passed into the fifth grade only this spring. Both children are in good physical condition, and they are well liked. The girl is good-natured and enjoys housework. The mother is anxious to reestablish the home. She is earning her living, working by the day. She expects to marry a railroad employee when he returns 88962°—24t----- 7 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 90 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. from Italy, where he has gone to get his 14-year-old son. He is said by his foreman to be an intelligent and trustworthy man. In the spring of 1920 two children of a foreign-born father and a native mother were taken from their home by the juvenile court and committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians. They were boys 6 and 10 yearsof age. The father was working away from home. The mother was living with a negro and was pregnant. Between the years 1908 and 1919 she had been before the police court a number of times. The two older children in the family were not living at home at the time of the commitment—a boy of 18 was in the Navy, and a girl of 16 was working and maintaining herself. The younger children are now in a boarding home in the country, and the father has been ordered by the court to pay $25 a month to the board toward their support. Two little negro children, 1 and 7 years of age, a boy and his half sister, were removed in 1904 from the custody of their mother. She had been going out to work at 6 o’clock in the morning, leaving the children in the care of the father of the boy, an old man who drank hard and abused the children and who later served a jail sentence for larceny. The girl died in 1906. The boy spent all but 10 days of the first six years of his commitment in two boarding homes. He was then placed on trial for adoption; but two years later, when he was 9 years of age, the plan was changed and he was placed in the same home on trial for indenture. He is now 18 years old and is being trained as a blacksmith. The misfortune of being illegitimately born is keeping George from enjoying a comfortable home with his half brothers and sisters. When he was 5 years of age the Board of Children’s Guardians found that he had been living since babyhood with a family known to be alcoholic and immoral and that they were giving him very poor care. His stepfather has always refused to have anything to do with the child. As an added excuse for keeping him out of the home, the mother says that her younger children know nothing of his existence.^ Now, at nearly 10 years of age and after placement in a number of homes, he is living in a free home with a woman and her daughter, people of excellent reputation, who may in time adopt him. William’s mother, his five brothers, and two sisters lived in a near-by State, while the father worked in Washington and kept William with him in the expec tation of teaching him his own trade. The father went home only occasionally. Being away from his mother’s influence and supervision, William became incor rigible, and early in 1913 he was brought before the juvenile court. He was re turned to his father on condition that he be sent home to his mother. However, he remained in the city with an aunt, who at the end of a year charged him with taking money from a registered letter and with stealing other things. He was then, at 14 years of age, committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guard ians for minority. He absconded three times from the institution in which he was placed; in fact, he spent there only five and one-half months of the nearly six and one-half years between his commitment and his coming of age. A boy who seems to have overcome a “ wanderlust” is the youngest of three negro children who 18 years’ago were found living with their parents in one very unclean room. They were committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians for minority, their parents being sentenced on a statutory charge to six months’ imprisonment in the District jail. The two little girls were 2 and 5 years of age when received by the board. The older was discharged from care on becoming of age-; the younger is now in a correctional institution, committed for minority. Their brother, who was 1 year old when he was removed from the home, is still under the guardianship of the board, though he has lived in the home of his parents for a total of over 15 years since he was committed. When not quite 15 years of age and while living with his parents, he ran away and was gone for nearly a week. He was then placed in a free home; after living in it seven months he again ran away, this time being absent five months. When he returned he was placed with his parents, under the board’s supervision. Robert is a negro boy who has been under the guardianship of the board for six years. His parents had been dead four or five years when, in 1914, he was charged before the juvenile court with stealing a child’s express wagon from the shed of the home where his grandmother was employed. He was then 8 years of age, and he and his twin sister were living with the paternal grandmother. The court committed him to the Board of Children’s Guardians, who placed him https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILL-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS. 91 in a children s institution. Here he remained for a year and nine months He was then placed in a free home in the country. After one and one-half years the foster mother complained that he was dishonest, and he was placed in an institutional home for colored children. His stay in this institution lasted 10 months, at the end of which period he was again placed in a free home in the country. From this place he ran away after he had lived in it a year and four months. Four days later he was arrested, charged with stealing newspapers. His own story is that a boy had given him the papers to sell, and he did not know they had been stolen. This time he was placed in a boarding home. When Robert was 14 years of age and had passed the fifth grade he secured a place as waiter in a hotel, receiving very good wages and his meals. He con tinued to live in the boarding home, paying his own room rent, for a little over two months, when he ran away leaving a debt of $12 for rent. He was found four days later and placed in another home under the same conditions as in the last until he lost his job, when the Board of Children’s Guardians resumed paying his expenses. Soon after he had again secured work he became ill with pneu monia and was sent to a hospital. Leaving the hospital, he was placed in a home where the board paid his expenses until he had recuperated. Then he again got work and was expected to become self-supporting. He again ran away, was apprehended after being at large four weeks, was placed in another home, and_ ran away again three months later—just a few days before his case was studied by the agent. A negro boy was only 11 years of age when he was turned out into the street by the woman who had cared for him after his mother’s death, because his father was $25 in arrears in the payments which he had promised to make. The boy’s parents had not been married, but the father Lad contributed to the child’s sup port- The homeless boy applied at the police station for protection and was taken under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians. His married half sister felt that she could not be responsible for his support as well as that of the brother who was already living with her, because her husband was out of work. The child was therefore placed in a children’s institutional home, where he re mained for nearly three years. When he was 14 years of age his half sister offered him a home. He continued to go to school until he was 15, when he secured work as an assistant janitor. A girl of 16 who was committed to the guardianship of the board had. been brought before the juvenile court charged with immorality. Her father was at the time in a hospital for the insane in a near-by State, and it was stated that her mother had been for a year in a similar institution in the District. The girl was diagnosed as a constitutional psychopathic inferior. The Board of Children’s Guardians placed her in a private institution for delinquent girls, but after three months her removal was requested because she had a disturbing influ ence over the other inmates. She was then placed successively in three board ing homes. The period which she spent in these homes covered in all only five and one-half months. The last placement proving as unsuccessful as the others, she was sent to the Industrial Home School. After a month there she was placed in another institution for delinquent girls, where she is still living. The mother is now reported to be in a hospital for the insane. A negro baby boy only a few weeks old was placed by his mother in a home of a woman whom she had promised to pay for his care. No payment was made, but the mother after a while asked the caretaker to place the child in a home. He was a little over 3 months of age when the Board of Children’s Guardians re ceived him for care. Upon communicating with the mother it was found that she had an older child, who was living with a maternal aunt. The father of the baby, to whom she had not been married, was dead, and she was a cripple and unable to support the child. After two months in boarding homes the child was placed on trial for adoption with a family living in a near-by State. A year later these people returned him to the board, and for nearly a year and a half he was again in a boarding home. At the age of 3 years he was placed on trial for adoption for the second time. This status continued for nine years, when At was changed to free placement with the same family. The boy is now 17 years of age and is still living in this home. The story of Ralph shows how easy it is under some circumstances to lose track of relatives. This negro boy was committed to the care of the Board of Childrens Guardians in 1919, when he was 11 years of age. His mother had died six years earlier. The father had attempted to kill his second wife. He https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 92 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. forfeited his bond and has never since been found. The stepmother was taken to a hospital, and her grandmother, with whom the family had been living, refused to keep the boy. She also declared that she could not control him, but he has done well in the family where he was placed at board and later given a free home. His foster mother and father seem to be patient with his general slowness, firm in holding him to his tasks at home and at school, and able to command his respect and affection. Though the boy is known to have at least seven near relatives besides his father, it has been impossible to ascertain the whereabouts of any of them. The feeble-mindedness of the mother plays an important r61e in the history of four negro children who were 2, 4, 8 , and 11 years of age when they were removed in 1917 from an unclean and disordered home. They had constantly been left alone while the mother went out to work and were found in a dirty and neglected condition. Their paternity is very much in question, since the woman has claimed several men in turn as the father. A year after commitment to the board of guardians the 12-year-old boy stole a horse and wagon and was sent to a correctional institution. The other children under care are all tuberculous, no doubt as a result of poor diet and insanitary living conditions. Two of them have responded to treatment and are going to school. They are much retarded in grade, perhaps owing to their physical condition. The youngest—now a boy of 5 years—will probably have to remain in the hospital for an indefinite period. The decided subnormality of the mother and the histories of the oldest brother and of two older half brothers and a half sister are not hopeful indications for the possible development of these children. Both half brothers have been in correctional institutions, and the half sister has borne a child out of wedlock. The mother has recently married a laborer who is making good wages, and she herself is earning good wages as a cook. A daughter 2 years of age is living with her, and she is anxious to have her other children with her. Though the people for whom she works consider her industrious and trustworthy, her history and her subnormality make it seem unwise to return them to her. When Henry was 11 years old his mother deserted the family, leaving the boy and his 9-year-old brother to the care of the father. At some time within the next three years the younger brother was sent to an aunt in a distant State. Henry and the father lived in a single room behind the shop in which the father carried on a small business of his own. The father was a well-meaning man but apparently unable to control his son. The sketchiness and insufficiency of their meals may easily be imagined. When the boy was 14 years of age he was brought before the juvenile court charged with stealing bread and milk. He soon violated his probation and was then committed for minority to the Board of Children’s Guardians. When he was nearly 17 years of age it was discovered that the father had a cousin in the District, a fine, intelligent woman, who for nearly a year did a great deal to help the boy. Toward the end of 1920 the aunt who had the brother sent for Henry. He is now reported to be in good physical condition, doing fine work in school, and eager to complete the education which his aunt can well afford to give him. Marian came under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians when she was 10 years of age, having been committed on petition of the superintendent of a children’s home because she was difficult to manage. She was born in a southern State to a mother who had been deserted by the father. The mother came to Washington and for a while paid board for the child in the children’s home referred to. She soon left the city, and nothing has since been heard from her. The institution placed Marian in the home of a childless couple living in a near-by State. There she remained until the fall of 1919, when the foster mother returned her to the institution because she herself was going West with the intention of securing a divorce from her husband. This husband had been "queer and erratic” for years, and there is good evidence that he was unbalanced at the time the child was placed with the family. The wife, too, seems to have become erratic. Brought up in an exciting and_ unwholesome atmosphere, Marian has de veloped into an egotistic and undisciplined child, and it has been found impossible ^ to place her satisfactorily, though the board has made every effort to give her an environment stimulating to her undoubted mental abilities. She is now an ambitious, good-looking, well-grown, athletic girl, not yet 13 years of age, but rather advanced in general mental development. At the present time she is in https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis STORIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS. 93 the Industrial Home School, and unless she can be induced to change her attitude, no doubt it will be difficult to provide for her in a family home. It was not easy to understand why Tom, who had a clean and comfortable home in a fairly good neighborhood, should have been so incorrigible that he had to be brought before the juvenile court several times. His mother, who was visited recently, is a woman of good appearance and apparently manages her house well. Two older brothers in the home are employed and contribute to its expenses. It is said that when the father was in the home he gave all Ms earnings to its maintenance, but he seems to have been in the habit of deserting the family. He disappeared for the last time over two years ago. Shortly after this, Tom, then 14 years of age, violated the terms of his probation and was committed for minority to the Board of Children’s Guardians. While living in the institution in which the board placed him he made a good record, was well behaved, and became especially interested in greenhouse work. He is now 16 years of age. He has recently been returned to his mother and is said to be very unhappy about it. The mother’s relatives now state that she has been leading an immoral life, and it seems not improbable that this fact was at the root of the boy’s trouble. _ A number of maternal relatives live in the city or in a near-by State, but since it seems necessary for the boy’s happiness and well being to remove him from all association with his mother, possibly his best chance will be with an uncle in the West. The Board of Children’s Guardians has had under its care since early in 1912 three of the children of the M family. At the time of their commitment the mother— a negro woman—had been living in a house of prostitution for a week, leaving the children in a most destitute condition. She was sent to a correctional institution to work out a fine of $100. She has never been married to the father, but it is reported that they have had 20 children, half of whom are living. The 70-yearold negro father spends his time partly with his Washington family and partly with his family in Baltimore, where he has a legal wife who also has borne him many children. Two other children were committed at the same time as the three mentioned above, but they passed from under the guardianship of the board when they reached their majority. The younger children (now 12 and 14 years of age) are living in boarding homes, and the oldest (a girl of 16) is at domestic service in a wage home. . In 1912 a boy of 3 years was found living with his mother and grandmother in a single unclean room. The mother was feeble-minded, the grandmother was known to be a habitual beggar, and the father had disappeared. Every one of the adults had police records. Aid had been given the family by a church, the Associated Charities, and the Salvation Army. The child was committed to the guardianship of the board, which placed him in a boarding home. He is now, at the age of 12, in a prospective adoptive home. He has a record of being untruthful and has run away twice in the nine years since his commitment. The mother of four children was working as a servant and living in the home of her employers, while the children were in the home maintained by the father, who also was working. The youngest of these children was 3 years of age, and the oldest was only 9. The conditions in the family were reported by the Associ ated Charities, and the children were committed by the court to the Board of Children’s Guardians for temporary care. Two boys and a girl were placed in boarding homes and the youngest boy was placed in a hospital, from which the mother removed him without the knowledge of the board. After remaining with her two weeks, he was placed by the board in a private institution for children. A little more than a month after their temporary commitment all four children were committed to the board during their.minority. They are now in boarding homes, two of them living in the country, and the parents are contrib uting to their support. The father, who earns from $25 to $30 a week, is paying $15 a week for their care; the mother, whose money wages are $6 a week, is contributing $10 a month. Eight years ago a family consisting of parents and six sons were evicted from their home. The intemperance of the father had prevented him from ever giving his family decent support. The Associated Charities placed 14-year-old Tom and 10-year-old Martin in a private institution for dependent children and made temporary provision for the mother and the three younger children (Fran cis, aged 7; Robert, aged 5; and Michael, a baby in arms) in a maternity home. The oldest boy, Joseph, was working; he got a place to board and became an https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 94 CHILD1 DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT ÖE. COLUMBIA. independent member of the community. Since there seemed to be no possibility of reestablishing the family in an independent position the five younger children were committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians during minority. After a few months the mother left the maternity home and was allowed to take the baby with her. At about the same time Francis and Robert were placed in a boarding home. Ten months from the time of commitment all the children were reestablished with their parents, the Board of Children’s Guardians con tinuing supervision over them. At the end of three years, during which time a sister was born and the father deserted, arrangements again had to be made for the maintenance of the mother and her children. The mother, Michael, and the new baby were sheltered in the maternity home; Francis, Robert, and Martin were sent to the Industrial Home School; and arrangements were made for Tom (then 17 years old) to work and pay his own board in a boys’ home. The mother and the two children remained in the maternity home for six months. Then she left and took with her the baby, who has never been under the legal guardianship of the board. Michael was placed in a boarding home, and he lived in such homes until he was returned to his mother, some three years later, together with Francis and Robert. These two boys had remained continuously in the institution in which they had been placed, except for volun tary absences—Francis had run away once and Robert nine times during the three-year period. Fourteen-year-old Martin, after nine months at the Industrial Home School, was placed in a boys’ home. Here he w$s expected to go out to work and pay his own board, except for a brief time during which he was given the chance to go to a commercial school. Since he showed himself indifferent to this oppor tunity, he was soon returned to a working basis. When he was 16 years of age he ran away and was at large for six weeks. Five months after he was found he was returned to his mother. This was eight months before his younger brothers were sent home and only a few days after his older brother, Tom, had run away from the boarding home in which he had been living and paying his own expenses. ^Tom had not been found at the date of his majority, when he passed automatically from under the guardianship of the board. The mother has been employed in a Government office for three years, and for a time before the children were returned to her she paid, by order of the court, $12.50 a week for their care. The youngest of the four younger boys who are now with her is nearly 9 years of age, and the oldest is 18; the little girl is about 6 years old. The oldest boy and the father seem to maintain no connection with the family, though the father is reported to be still living in Washington. The father of one little boy promised to marry the mother after she had brought charges against him but instead married another woman. The mother is frail physically and subnormal mentally. She has another son who is eight years older than this child and is the child of a different father—to whom, also, she was not married. This older child she has always supported. She felt, however that she could not care for the baby, too, and so consented that he should live with the father and his wife, who wished to have him. Later the father was. sentenced to a five-year term in the penitentiary for robbery, and since neither of the women could support the child, he was committed to the Board of Chil dren’s Guardians soon after he completed his first year. He is now a sturdy little boy of 2 years, on free placement in the home where he was boarded for a year. Not quite a year ago three children of 8 , 5, and 3 years, the oldest a girl and the others boys, were committed for a year to the care of the board, the mother being sent at the same time to a maternity home to regain her health. The mother s childhood and youth had not been happy; she had never known her father, and her mother had practically deserted her. Until she was 12 years of age she was cared for by a great-aunt. She was then placed in an institution because the great-aunt had to be sent to the home for incurables. The girl remained in this institution until she was nearly 20, at which time she left it in the company of a man who was working on the building and who promised to marry her. He told her that he was divorced from his wife and had a good home for her. It is not yet known whether he had ever obtained a divorce; at any rate, he never married the girl. When the children were committed the family were living in an unfinished house in the suburbs, and the mother was worn out by the father’s erratic and cruel treatment of herself and the children. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ST'OKIES ILLUSTRATING CHILD-DEPENDENCY PROBLEMS. 95 Hannah was orphaned at the age of 2 years by the deaths of father and mother two months apart. The father, said to have been a strong, healthy, industrious man, died as the result of an accident. The immediate cause of the mother’s death was pneumonia following influenza, though she had for some time been under treatment for tuberculosis of the bones. For nearly a year after the mother’s death Hannah was kept by different rela tives. When she was about 3 years of age, since she could not walk nor use her hands and could talk very little, the relatives had her committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians. The paternal grandfather paid $10 a month for her care. He soon died, however, and the board assumed the entire charges for her main tenance. She is now 5 years of age; and after two years of treatment under the care of the board, she can run about and play, use her hands, and talk freely, is immensely improved in disposition (being now a happy child), and is probably almost normal in mental development. Three children in this family were not committed to the board. Twelveyear-old Jennie is in an orphan asylum, where her board is being paid by relatives. Margaret, 9 years of age, is being cared for by a woman who is much interested in her and plans to keep her permanently. The youngest child, a boy 3 years old, was taken when only 2 weeks of age by a friend of the mother. The friend died early this year, but her two young daughters are caring for the boy. It was brought out in the study that the father had left property from which was realized $5,000 in cash. This was placed in a bank for the benefit of the four children. It became available for use in May, 1920, since which time $40 a month has been distributed by an aunt" for the care of three children not com mitted to the board and $10 a month has been deposited to the credit of little Hannah, the child for whom the board is caring. The grandfather also left a sum of money to the aunt who was acting as guardian, with the understanding that she would help to provide for the children after their own estate was ex hausted. ■> '-r> And so these children of fine and thrifty parents are growing up separated from one another. Not one is now living with relatives. Hannah was cared for by relatives for a time. A great-aunt had Jennie for a while until her own children compelled her to give up the little girl, fearing that the child would get some of their mother’s money. The aunt who is acting as guardian and who has six children of her own, ranging in age from 1 to 9 years, says that in another year she expects to take Jennie into her home and that more money will then be available for Hannah’s care. It is thought possible that the aunt who did most for Hannah may consider taking Frank, who is now a fine little fellow, sturdy and attractive. But neither aunt is willing to assume the care of Hannah. The three uncles have never contributed in any way to the maintenance of the children nor shown the least interest in them. All the relatives are in good circumstances and, except one uncle, are living in Washington. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES. THE EXTENT OF THE NEED IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. At the request of a mothers’ pension committee appointed by the Twentieth Century Club of Washington, the Children’s Bureau attempted to secure some information in regard to families that might be eligible for aid if a law providing for public aid to children in their own homes were passed in the District of Columbia. Ac cordingly, all the public and private child-caring agencies and insti tutions in the District were requested to furnish certain information in regard to families known to them who in their estimation should be given public aid of this kind. The following agencies cooperated in this survey: Juvenile court, Associated Charities, Bureau of Catho lic Charities, United Hebrew Association, Visiting Nurses Association, Juvenile Protective Association, Neighborhood House, Washington City Orphan Asylum, Jewish Foster Home, and Salvation Army-. I t will he noted that very little information was received from children’s institutions and none from the large public child-caring agency. I t is, therefore, evident that the resulting information represents a very incomplete list of the families who might be eligible for this form of assistance. Moreover, it has been the experience of agencies administering such aid that a considerable proportion of the f amibes on their lists were not previously known to relief agencies, courts, and other organizations. The purpose of aid to dependent children in their own homes is to prevent the breaking up of families and to save the children from injurious deprivation. The adminis tration of the aid is therefore largely preventive, dealing with what is sometimes referred to as u a new class of dependents.” The result must be to reduce the dependency problem that would otherwise have to be dealt with by agencies and institutions. The lists of families secured from the agencies included a con siderable number that with the somewhat meager evidence sub mitted did not appear to come within the definition of probable eligibility and others in which the information was too slight to be of service. A total of 129 families was selected as illustrating the need for aid to dependent children in their own homes. In these families there was a total of 425 children, under 16 years of age, as follows : Age. Number. Total children____— ------ 425 Under 1 year--------------------- — 1 year___________ - - - _________ 2 years___________________ ----3 years_______________________ 4 years---------------5 years--------------6 years_______________________ 7 years_______________________ 96 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 9 13 20 26 22 24 21 28 Age. 8 years_______ - — Number. --------------- 35 9 years______________________ 24 10 years___________ M-------------- 39 11 years________________ 36 12 years----- --------35 13 years______________________ 32 14 years__________ _______— 29 15 years______________ 25 Ages not reported, but under 16__ 7 AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES. 9.7 More than one-third of the families had four or more children under 16 7ea1rs of aSe* 0nly « 8 ^ of the families included had one child' 35 had two children, 38 had three children, 24 had four children 12 had five children, 8 had six children, 3 had seven children, and 1 family had eight children. Less than two-thirds of the families were reported as being in need because of the death of the father. Desertion by the father was given as the reason in almost one-fourth of the cases. This would seem to point toward the need of better provision than now exists for enforcing the father’s responsibility to support the family. I t would not be contemplated that public aid to those children should be granted unless everything possible had been done by legal and other measures to enforce this obligation of the father. This group of chil dren should not be permitted to suffer because of the lack of aid, but er safeguards should be applied for the protection of the public s' ^^e same is true in regard to cases of divorce and separation. The following are the causes of dependency as reported for the 129 families: a Causes of dependency. Total families. Number. ___ 129 Death of father__________________ _____ ______ __ _ g2 Desertion of father_____________ L _ _ L ^ 4II j I l_3___~ ~~~ 29 Father physically or mentally incapacitated __________ _ 8 Parents separated_______________ _________________ 5 Parents divorced_________ _____ ______________ _ __ ~~ . 2 Father in hospital for insane__________________~~~ ~ 2 Father in prison.Li____________________ In a considerable number of the families reported children had been getting into difficulty because of the absence from home of mothers who were working and who had to leave the children to their own re sources during the day or in the evening. In the 129 families 89 mothers were reported as having some earnings. Most of these mothers were employed at domestic service, general housework, or day’s work; a few were doing laundry work at home. There were eliminated from the list of families reported by the agencies those in which the mother was employed in Government offices or at other work paying similarly high wages, since it would be assumed that the amount of aid granted would not be sufficient to make it desirable for these women to give up their employment to stay at home and take care of their children. Children from most of these families had been placed by the mothers in institutions. In the families that were included the mothers were not able to earn enough to support the c^ dreib and in many cases it seemed very desirable that the mother should not be away from home as much as it was necessary for her to be m order to earn this partial support for the family. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILD DEPENDENCY &8 in THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA, The sources of income were reported as follows:, Sources of income N um ber. Total families____________________________________129 Earnings of mother--------- ----------------------- ---------------------- 45 Earnings of mother and children-------------------------------------- 14 Relief agencies----------------------------- --------------------------------- 14 7 Earnings of mother and rental of rooms----------------------------7 Earnings of mother and aid from relatives -------------------------8 Earnings of mother and aid from relief agencies--------------------3 Earnings of children---------------------------------------------------- 3 Aid from relatives and relief agencies-------------------------------Earnings of mother, aid from relief agencies, and rental of 2 rooms---------------------------------------- -----------------------------2 Aid from relatives------- \--------------------------- ------------------ Earnings of mother and children, aid from relief agencies, and 2 rental of rooms______ ----------- ------------ -------- -------------2 Earnings of children and aid from relief agencies------------------2 Aid from relatives and rental of rooms-------------------- ---------1 Rental of rooms---------------- --------------------------------------- ---1 Father’s life insurance. _ ----------------------------------------------1 Earnings of mother and children and rental of rooms-------------1 Earnings of mother and children and aid from relief agency----1 Earnings of mother and children and aid from relatives----------1 Earnings of mother, rental of rooms, and father’s life insurance 1 Earnings of children and aid from relatives------------------------1 Aid from relief agency and rental of_ rooms----------------------- Earnings of children, aid from relief agency, and rental of 1 rooms__________________________________ ____________ 9 Not reported__________________________________________ The causes of dependency, the ages of the children, and the sources of income for each family are shown in the following detailed table: Causes of dependency, ages of children, and sources of present income. Sched Ages of children under Cause of dependency. ule 16. No. Divorce of parents___ Desertion of father__ Divorce of parents---9 Desertion of father__ 10 11 12 ........do.......................... 13 6 months, 2,4,7,10,11, 13. 5 children between 2 and 8. 1,3,8,11....................... 4, 7, 9'._____ _______ 3, s'<.............................. 10,11____ ________ _ 11, 1 3 ______________ 7, 9,11 _________ 5, 6 ,8,10 _______ 3, 7,9,12................... Z, 9| 10,12__________ 12,15 _______ ____— 13.................................. 14 13___ _____________ 15 11,12............................. 16 5 ,1 3 .--........... ............ 17 11,15_____ _________ 1 2 Father physically incapacitated. 3 Desertion of father__ 18 13,15............................. 19 11, 15............ - ............... 20 10, 12, 15......... -............ 21 5, 12_______________ https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Sources of present income. Aid from relief agency. Mother’s income from store; aid from relief agency. Aid from relief agency. Do. M other’s earnings, domestic service. M other’s earnings, clerk, $15 a week. M other’s earnings, domestic service. M other’s earnings, clerk. M other’s earnings, waitress, $12 a week. M other’s earnings, attendant. M other’s earnings, clerk, $15 a week. Not reported, mother unable to work. Mother’s earnings, laundry work at home, $8-$10 a week. M other unable to work full time. Aid from relatives. M other’s earnings, day’s work (3 days a week); aid from relatives. Mother’s earnings, selling fruit on street; earnings of 17-year-old boy. M other’s earnings, housework and day’s work; earnings of 16 and 18 year old boys. M other’s earnings, matron at theater, $12 a week; rental of rooms. Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $10 a week; earnings of 17-year-old boy. M other’i earnings, day’s work; earnings of 16year-old boy. Mother’s earnings, maid, $10 a week; earnings of 20-year-old boy. Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $10 a week; earnings of 18-year-old boy. AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S . 99 Causes of dependency, ages of children, and sources of present income—Continued. Sched ule Cause of dependency. Ages of children under 16. No. Sources of present income. 22 Parents separated___ 12,14........................... . Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $4 a week; 23 Death of father_____ 24 Desertion of father__ 10,12,14.................. - Father physically in capacitated. 26 Desertion of father__ 27 ....... do........................... 28 ........do........... .............. 3,9,13..................... . 25 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 2,10,12............... 12,14,15....................... Mother’s earnings, cook in lunch room, $13 a week. 10,12,15 . Mother’s earnings; earnings of boy over 16. 10,13| 15 Mother’s earnings, day’s work, $9.50 a week; aid from relatives. Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $10 a week; rental of rooms. ___ do........... ' •............. 10,11,12 Mother’s earnings, cleaning; rental of rooms. ....... do................ .......... 6, 9,11,15... Mother’s earnings, laundry work (irregular) rental of rooms; father’s life insurance. ___ do......................... . 6, 7,12,14 Mother’s earnings, sewing; rental of rooms. ....... do........................... 8, 9,11,13,15. Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $6 a week; earnings of 18-year-old boy. Desertion of father__ 1, 2, 4, 8, JO, 12______ Mother’s earnings, day’s work. Death of father......... . 3, 8,10,11,13,15. Mother’s earnings, domestic service; rental of rooms. Desertion of father__ 12............................... Mother’s earnings, book bindery, $18 a week. Death of father_____ 12,14............ Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $45 a month. ___ do.................. ........ io;i2........... ............ . Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $9 a week. ___ do........................... 9,14............. Mother’s earnings, laundry work at home, $8 a week. Desertion of father__ 6,13,13................... . Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $10 a week. Father mentally in 7 ,8 ,1 2 ,1 4 ................. . Mother’s earnings. Death of father......... _ 5,11,12............... capacitated. Separation of parents. 11,12,15...................... Death of father____ 3,8,10,13,14 ___do........................... 10, 11, 15 (one child, age not reported). Desertion of father__ 1 month, 2,9________ Death of fa th e r......... 8,10,14___ ___ do.................. ........ 1,4, 5, 7,8r 9,11,13 ___do.......................... 4, 7,9,10,14 Father physically in 6 months, 2,3,9_____ capacitated. Death of father_____ 3,13,14........ ____do.... .................. . 10,13. ....... do........... .............. 2,4....... 53 ........do..................... . 8,11....... 54 ........do....................... . 12,14,14. 55 Desertion of father__ 8,10,13................... . 56 ........do........... .......... 57 Death of father.____ 58 •___do.......................... 2,5,7 10,11,12.. 11,12,14 59 Desertion of father__ 8,10,15....................... . 60 Death of father........... 8,11,14_____ 61 Father mentally in capacitated. Death of father_____ 62 2 ,3 ,4 ........................... 5,8,9,11,14... 63 ........do_____________ 7,9,11,13,15 64 ........do.............1........... 3,3,6,13 65 ........do........................... 5,7 (one child, age not reported). 66 Father physically in 2,4,6,8,12,14________ capacitated. 67 68 69 70 71 earnings of 17-year-old girl. * Mother’s earnings, laundry work and cleaning, $12 a week. Moltier’s earnings, maid, $35 a month; rental of rooms. Mother’s earnings, cook, $30 a month. Death of father........... 4,6,8,10,11,12... ........do...... ................... ____do........... .............. ....... do........................... ........dO-_.______ ____ 3,5.................. 13,15.............................. 5,6................................. 11,12,15. 72 ........do........................... 5,7,11,14 . 73 6,7,9,14.............. . . . . . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Mother’s earnings, maid, $7 a week. Mother’s earnings, domestic service. Mother’s earnings, dishwasher, $12 a week. Earnings of 18-year-old boy. Rental of rooms; aid from relatives Not reported. Do. Do. Aid from relief agency. Earnings of 17-year-old girl; aid fromrelief agency. Mother’s earnings, waitress, $45 a month; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings, laundry work at home; earn ings of 19-year-old boy; rental of rooms. Aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings; earnings of .16-year-old boy; aid from relief agency; rental of ro o m s Mother’s earnings, laundry work; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings, book bindery, $15 a week; aid from relief agency; rental of rooms. Mother’s earnings, caretaker at school, $62 a month; earnings of boys, selling papers. Mother’s earnings, laundry; earnings of 17year-old boy. Mother’s earnings, laundry; earnings of 17year-old boy; aid from relatives. Mother’s earnings, maid, $11 a week; rental of rooms; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings, laundry work; earnings of 18-year-old boy; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings, charwoman; aid from rela tives. Mother’s earnings; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings, laundry work; aid from rela tives. Mother’s earnings, cleaning; earnings of 16year-old boy; rental of rooms; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings, day’s work, $20 a month; earnings of 20-year-old boy. Mother’s earnings, checker at hotel, $15 a week. Mother’s earnings, laundry work. Mother’s earnings, laundry work, $15 a week. Mother’s earnings, day’s work; aid from relief agency. . Do. * Mother’s earnings, day’s work and laundry work. 100 c h il d d epen d en cy in T H E D IS T R IC T O P C O L U M B IA . @mm of d&pehd'ehcjj, ages of children, and source$ of pment iMome~-&m%iftm&, Sched ule No. Cause of dependency. 74 D eath of fa t h e r ....... Diiseftibh 61fatliSf—.. jbf fathfei fz.zzt; D&sbrtioh bf father-.-. Death bffather.—---. .——d b . . ......... Father id hospital for insane; Ages of children under 16. Sources of present income. earnings, laundry work and cleaning, llia^ eek . . M8ffieF§eaffiifig§; )0., 7, let’s 8, M m I — ___ i V l U L lie jr ’S tJWI UAAlgO, . « v m o o o w w » ■ 2 g ft, f. 9 4 m o n th s ; 2Z 4~,6( 8* 1 3 . Rental ®f focpSj hid froifi rel&tiV'feS; Rarhings I, 4,8, ii} 13) 15— ——— bfolder hoy, paper roiite; ftid from relief M other’s ......... 10, 1% 1 4 ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; 4 , 8 , 9 r. - ^ - - - = ^ - = - ^ - ; Earnings of 17-year-oid boy; rehtal of foOihS; aid from relief agency. AidIpsa reM&paey- . „ Aid frOSrelatives jaid freta relief agency. Aidfrofii reliefagencyjrental of rooms. Aid froin reliefageney; , Eafflirip 6f,eld» daiightefj Aid from relief apney.- ....d b ..- .....- - ..---- lb.ZZIIIIIIZIIIZIZ.ZI; Aid frain relief ageneiesj aid frem fdatiyea. Death of father....... 8.9.11.13 .... Rental ofroom. II, Mother’s earnings, maid; earnings of 17-year-oid 14.................................... .................... D eath of fa th er.-.__ 5 ,7 ,1 0 ,l3 ,U - - - - - 5t & — li 10,13) 15— — - - 7,10(l | ; - - - - - - rZ iZ a b Z rrim iiiiiiiii 88 ——d b . --------- Desertibfl bffather— ..d o .. . . . . . . . . . . . . — Earnings of i 7-year-old girl; aid from relatives. D eath o ffa th e r ..* -..- I I , 1 3 - . . . . 3 - . . . . . . . . . . .Father’s . . . . . . . life-instiraiice money. . . „ -d O .... . . . . . . . — — I , Aid from relief agency. Desertion of father— 13,15.-...-...... . .. .. . Desertion of father— D eath of fa th er... . . . . 8.......................... 97 ___ do............ ............... 1 0 ,1 2 .................................. . 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 Desertion of father— 10.11.13 .................. ___ d o .......... ...........— 1 — .............. — _______ . ............ Separation of parents. 6.7.. ___ do . . . . ........ ......... 8months, 2_______ Desertion of father— 1,1,3,6,8,10........ — Father in hospital for 1 ,2 ,6 ............ — ............... insane. Death of father___... 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 .................................. , Mother’s earnings, selling lemons on street. Mather's earnings, laundry work at home. Not reported. Do. Do. Do. Aid from relatives. Mother’s earnings, domestic servant, rental of rooms. ; earnings, chambermaid. Separation of parents. 10months, 2............... Mother’s Mother’s earnings, cleaning cars. Death of father_____ 2 5 9 14___________ Mother’s earnings, paper factory. ........do........................... . 10months, 3, 5, 6, 8... laundry work. 6months, 2,4,7,8,12,14 Mother’s earnings, earnings, office work, $16.50 a week. 6,8—.................. - Mother’s Earnings of 19-year-old girl. 3.6.12.14.. . — d o ....................... ! Mother’s earnings, waitress, $40 a month. _________ _________ _________ ___do.......................... 2.4 Notreported. „ 5,8________ _____ ___do.......................... Aidfrom relatives; aid from relief agency. ___do.......................... 1, 3, 3, 4, 7, 7,10____ Aid from relatives. 3, 5, 6 , 8 , 10________ ___do.................... Desertion of father__ 10, 12,15.................... Mother’s earnings, day’s work; aid from relief agency. from relief agency. ■ .. Death of father.......... 4, 7, 9,10,14............. . Aid Mother’s earnings, chambermaid, $50 a montn. 5.8.10.11.. — Desertion of father__ Mother’s earnings, clerk in store. ..— ........ Father physically in 1.3.4 capacitated. earnings, charwoman, $16 a week. Death of father_____ 3, 7,10,12.................. Mother’s Mother’s earnings, domestic service, $8 a week. ___ do______ . . . ----- 1„ .............................. Aid from relief agency. Father mentally inca 7 ,9 ,1 1 -— .- — . . . 105 106 107 Mother’s earnings. 119 120 121 122 pacitated. Death offather......... 126 127 128 129 .......d o ................... — 9 months, 3............... .......d o .............. ........ 2 ,4 ,5 ............. ___ do____________ 13,15.......................... Father in prison____ 7,10,12.— ............. 1, 3, 8 , 10,12,15......... 123 Desertion of father... 4, 5........ .................... 124 ___ d o ........ .............. 7 7 8 r i 3 - z : z : : : : : z : : : z 125 Death of father____ Do. Mother’s earnings; aid from relief agency. Mother’s earnings; aid from relatives. Mother’s earnings, clerk in store; earnings of 17year-old girl. Mother’s earnings. Mother’s earnings, clerk, $20 a week. M other’s earnings, m aid, $45 a month. Mother’s earnings, domestic service; aid from relatives. ESTIMATE OF APPROPRIATION NEEDED FOR THE DISTRICT OF * COLUMBIA. The accompanying table shows the total annual appropriations for public aid to dependent children in their own homes in 12 counties m five different States, the number of families and number of children https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S . 101 aided, and the total child populations in each county, according to the last Federal census. On the basis of the data given, comparing the child population under 16 years of age of the District of Columbia with the total for six of the counties listed 1 and assuming the same per centage of dependents, the number of children to receive such aid in a year in the District of Columbia would be about 950. (Separate esti mates based on the figures for each of these six counties would give the following approximate numbers of dependent children in the District of Columbia who would require aid in their homes: 725, 970, 1,080, 880, 1,250, 1,910.) Similarly, on the basis of the aggregate amount expended in the six localities cited, the total appropriation for the District of Columbia would approximate $100,000. (On the basis of the appropriations in each of the six counties, the estimates for the annual expenditures in the District of Columbia would range from $74,000 to $199,000, as follows: $74,000, $78,000, $104,000, $108,000, $139,000, $199,000.) Population, appropriation for public aid to dependent children in their own homes, and number of children and families aided during one year, in each of 12 counties. Number receiving aid during year. Total appro Children priation. Children. Families. under 16 years. Population, 1920. District of Columbia and counties (year specified). Total. D istrict o f Colum bia......... .............................. ............ 487,571 Cuyahoga County, Ohio (Cleveland)—1921....... ...... 943,495 634, 688 Erie County. N . Y . (Buffalo)—1921_______ ______ Milwaukee County, Wis. (Milwaukee)—1921______ 539, 449 Hamilton County, Ohio (Cincinnati)—1919_______ 493, 678 Hennepin County, M inn. (Minneapolis)—1920____ 415,419 Westchester County, N . Y . (W hite Plains)—1920___ 344,436 Monroe County, N . Y . (Rochester)—1921_________ 352, 034 Ramsey County, M inn. (St. Paul)—1920______ :___ 244, 554 Albany County, N . Y. (Albany)—1922___________ 186, 106 Oneida County, N . Y . (Utica)—1921.......................... 182, 833 154, 029 Polk County, Iowa (Des Moines) 1920___________ Rensselaer County, N . Y. (Troy)—1921___________ 113,129 95,506 289,824 $264,166 193,112 210, 655 162, 804 91, 863 124,811 287, 554 110, 270 90, 228 109,146 123,871 84, 755 100,122 66,985 104,373 47,405 53,767 54, 066 78,942 42,462 32,809 27,763 57,875 11, 565 i 1,468 1,129 927 1,116 1,132 732 1,035 536 498 1 554 555 567 432 341 318 317 334 242 342 196 169 188 215 * Number of children not available in report for this year; estimated on the basis of figures reported for previous year. 1 Report states th at owing to inadequate appropriation none of the 232 applicants in 1919 could be granted aid because of waiting list from previous year.. ESSENTIALS OP A MOTHERS’ PENSION LAW. In the consideration of measures for child care and protection in the District of Columbia the provision of mothers’ pensions to prevent the breaking up of homes because of poverty is only one of several important subjects that must be given attention. I t has been pointed out that the juvenile-court law of the District needs amendment to bring it into line with the laws of progressive States. The method of handling nonsupport and desertion cases is of par ticular interest at this time and has an important bearing on the subject of child dependency. Child welfare in the District would be promoted by the provision of a sufficiently large staff for the juvenile court to permit the highest grade of service and of the number of workers needed by the Board of Children’s Guardians in order to iE rie County, N. Y.; Hennepin County, M inn.; Albany County, N . Y.; Oneida County, N. Y.; Polk County, Iowa; Rensselaer County, N. Y. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 102 c h il d d e p e n d e n c y i n t h e d is t r ic t oe coltjMS ia . insure the grade of investigation and supervision essential to the welfare of its wards. Another important need—the coordination of the public charities of the District—is discussed briefly in this report, on pages 12-13. While legislation of this character must be drawn up with due consideration of the conditions existing in each State or otner division of government, and especially with regard to laws on related subjects, there are certain fundamental principles that must be observed if mothers’ pension laws are to be effective child-welfare measures. These may be summarized briefly as follows: 1. Application broad enough to permit aid whenever by such means a suitable home may be maintained. 2. Age limitation to conform with education and child-labor laws. 3. Amount of aid to be based on the needs of each individual family, with due regard to other available resources. 4. Inquiry in each case to determine the home conditions and the assistance needed for proper care of the children. 5. Continued oversight in order that the welfare of the children may be protected and the aid adjusted to meet changing conditions. 6. Provision of safeguards necessary to protect the public treasury against fraudulent or unwarranted claims and against burdens that should be borne by other communities or by individuals legally responsible and able to furnish support. 7. Administration lodged in the public agency best fitted to carry out the provisions of the law as a constructive child-welfare measure. 8. Appropriation adequate to carry out the purpose of the law, with respect both to funds required for aid and to expenses of administration. The following analysis of mothers’ pension laws in the United States covers the legislation enacted prior to 1924 by 42 of the States. PERSONS TO WHOM AID MAY BE GIVEN. The first state-wide law providing for public aid to children in their own homes—passed in Illinois in 1911—was called a “ funds to parents act.” This law was very broad in its inclusion, providing that— If the parent or parents of such dependent or neglected child are poor and unable to properly care for the said child, but are otherwise proper guardians and it is for the welfare of such child to remain at home, the court may enter an order finding such facts and fixing the amount of money necessary to enable the parent or parents to properly care for such child * * *. The Colorado law, passed by popular vote in 1912, and still in effect, incorporated this same provision. (The Illinois law has since been changed.) The trend of this legislation in the various States has been toward widening the application of the law and giving the benefit of the aid to dependent children wherever the circumstances are such that the home should be maintained. While a few States still limit the aid to children of widows, the prevailing method is either to permit aid to be granted to any mother with dependent children or to define certain types of cases, including: Mother widowed, deserted, or divorced; father physically or mentally incapacitated, or imprisoned. Such restrictions as are considered necessary are made in cases of desertion and divorce. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S . 103 The following provisions are examples of the broad application of these laws in seven-eighths of the States: Delaware.—Any widowed or abandoned mother of a child or children under * * * years of age who is unable, without aid, to support, maintain and educate such child or children, or any mother of such child or children whose husband is permanently, either physically or mentally, unable, without aid, to support, maintain, and educate such child or children, or any mother of such child or children whose husband has been sentenced to a term in prison of not less than six months, and who is unable, without aid, to support, maintain, and educate such child or children, shall be deemed to be within the class described by this section. The term “ mother” as used in this section shall include any woman standing in loco parentis to any child or children under 14 years of age. [Laws of 1921, ch. 183.] Maine.—Every city and town shall, subject to the provisions hereinafter contained, render suitable and needful aid to any mother residing therein, with a dependent child or children under the age of 16 years, who needs and desires such aid to enable her to maintain herself and children in her home and who is fit and capable, mentally, morally, and physically to bring up her children. [Laws of 1917, ch. 222, sec. 1, as amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 17, sec. 1.] Minnesota.—Whenever any child under the age of 16 years who is not law fully entitled to apply for and receive an employment certificate is found by juvenile court to be dependent the court shall, when requested so to do, and in the same proceeding, make its findings upon the following points: (a) Whether the mother of the child is a widow; (b) If her husband is living, whether he is an inmate of a penal institution under a sentence which will not terminate within three months after the date of such finding; or is an inmate of a State insane asylum or hospital, or of a State hospital for inebriates; or is unable to labor for the support of his family by reason of physical disabilities; or is and for one year has been under indictment for the crime of abandon ing such child; (c) Whether the dependency of the child is due to the poverty of the mother without neglect, improvidence, or other fault on her part; (d) Whether the mother is otherwise a proper person to have the custody of the child; (e) Whether the welfare of the child will be subserved by permitting him to remain in the custody of the mother, if adequate means of support shall be provided. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 1, as amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 328, and by Laws of 1921, ch. 435.] Whenever the court shall be of the opinion that the welfare of a dependent child will be best served by permitting him to live in the family of his grand mother, all the provisions of this act shall be so construed as to apply to such grandmother and her husband in like manner as to the mother and her hus band. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 10.] * * * Provided, however, That no allowance shall be made when the hus band is under indictment for abandonment unless the court is satisfied that he is a fugitive from justice and that the mother has in good faith assisted and will continue to assist in all reasonable efforts to apprehend him. [Laws of 1921, ch. 435, sec. 1 f,J* Washington.—In every county it shall be the duty of the county commission ers to provide out of the moneys of the county treasury an amount sufficient to meet the purposes of this law for the support of mothers who by reason of desti tution, insufficient property or income, or lack of earning capacity, are unable to support their children under the age of * * *. [Laws of 1915, ch. 135, sec. 1, as amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 103.] R esidence and citizenship. The eligibility requirements as to residence and citizenship vary in the different States from a minimum of one year in the county to citizenship in the United States with five years’ residence in the State ana three years in the county. Most States do not require citizenship or declaration of intention to become a citizen of the United States, the laws of only 10 containing such a provision. Twenty-six of the 42 States having mothers’ pension laws specify https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 104 C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y I N T H E D IS T R IC T OF COLU M BIA . residence in the State. This requirement is satisfied by a residence of one or two years in 13 States, three years in 5 States, and four or five years in 4 States. Four States require that the father must have been a resident of the State at the time of his death or when he became incapacitated. Thirty-one States require residence in the local political unit, as follows: 6 months____________ 1 year 2 years. ____________ ____ 3 years_____________ 5 years_____________ South Dakota, Idaho. ., T T, T ». Arkansas, Colorado,Florida, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri (except Jackson County and St. Louis), North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming. Nebraska, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Jackson County and St. Louis, Missouri. Illinois, Maryland. New Jersey. The following illustrate residence requirements of different types: New Hampshire.—No aid shall be given to a mother unless [she] * * * *has been a resident of this State for at least two years before she apphes for aid. [Laws of 1921, ch. 85, sec. 40.] Pennsylvania.—In order to prevent the alienation of the citizenship of those who may receive the benefits of this act, no family shall be a beneficiary there under unless the mother has been a resident continuously of the Statfe for a period of two years and of the county in which she applied for assistance for a period of one year. No family entitled to receive the benefits of this act m any county shall be deemed to have lost its residence in such county within one year after removal therefrom, but any such family shall, if it returns to the county in which it was entitled to receive assistance within said year, be immediately entitled to assistance in such county. [Laws of 1919, No. 354, sec. 7.] Wisconsin.—* * * ; the mother or grandparent or such other person must have resided in the county in which application is made for aid for at least one year prior to the date of such application. [Stat. sec. 573 (b), pp. 4ol—2, as amended by Laws of 1919, ch. 308, sec. 1.] Ownership of property. In the majority of the States ownership of real esate and other property is not specifically made a disqualification. Provisions on this point are illustrated by the following: Louisiana.—The mother shall not receive such relief who is the owner of real property or personal property (other than household goods) exceeding one thousand ($ 1,000) dollars in value; or when the child or children have relatives of sufficient ability and means to support them. [Laws of 1920, Act No. 209, sec. o.J Minnesota.—The ownership by a mother of personal property of the value of one hundred dollars, exclusive of appropriate clothing and household furniture and of such tools, implements, and domestic animals as in the opinion of the court it is expedient to retain for the purpose of reducing the expense or increasing the income of the family or of real estate not used as a home; or of real estate, when used, as a home, of a value disproportionate to the actual needs of the family, shall be a bar to any allowance under this act. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 8.J Nebraska.—A mother shall not receive such relief who is the owner of real property or personal property other than the household goods of more than two thousand dollars in value. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 7.] Wisconsin.—The ownership by a mother of a homestead shall not prevent the granting of aid under the provisions of this section if the rental thereof would not exceed the rental which a family of the same size as the family of such parent, receiving aid, would be ôbliged to pay for livmg quarters. [Stat. 1919, ch. 48, sec. 48.33 (5).] https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis ATT) TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N IN T H E IR O W N H O M E S . 105 TERMS AND AMOUNT OF ALLOWANCE. Conditions of allowance. Conditions determining the granting of aid refer mainly to economic need and the mother’s ability to give the children proper care. Examples of good provisions are found among the requirements in the laws of a number of States (Arkansas, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, North Dakota, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, and West Virginia). They include the following: Such allowance shall be made * * * only upon the following conditions: (D The child or children, for whose benefit the allowance is made, must be living with the mother of such child or children; (2) * * * and when by means of such allowance, she will be able to remain at home with her children; (3) the mother must, in the judgment of the probate court, be a proper person, physically and mentally, for the bringing up of her children; (4) such allowance shall, in the judgment of the court, be necessary to save the child or children from neglect. Sections regarding assistance by relatives are included in the Illinois and Nebraska laws: Illinois.—A mother shall not receive such relief if her child or children has or have relatives of sufficient ability, and who shall be obligated by the finding and judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction to support them. [Laws of 1913, sec. 11, p. 137, as amended by Laws of 1921, p. 162.] Nebraska.—A mother shall not receive such relief if her child or children have relatives within the second degree of sufficient abilities to support them, said relationship to be computed according to the method of determining intestate succession to property in Nebraska. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 7.] An important item is included in the laws of Delaware and Ne braska in regard to safeguarding the education of the children re ceiving this form of public aid: Delaware.—That the child, or children, if physically and mentally able, attend school and have a satisfactory record from the teacher. [Laws of 1917, ch. 227, as amended by Laws of 1921, ch. 183.] Nebraska.—The relief granted shall, in the judgment of the court, be neces sary to save the child or children from neglect and to furnish such child with suitable education. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 7.] Ages of children. The most important consideration in regard to the age to which a child may be granted aid is that it shall be in conformity with com pulsory school attendance and child labor laws. Michigan and Tennessee have placed the age limitation at 17 years. In 26 States children may be granted aid until they are 16 years of age, some times with the proviso that aid shall cease when the child is eligible for an employment certificate, unless it appears to be desirable to permit him to continue his education. Provision is also made in a number of States for continuance of aid when a child over the age limitation is incapacitated. The following States permit assistance until the child is 16 years old: Iowa. Arizona. Louisiana. California. Maine. Colorado. Connecticut. Minnesota. Missouri. Florida. Montana. Illinois. New Hampshire. Indiana. 88962°—24f----- 8 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Nevada. New Jersey. New York. North Dakota. Ohio. Oregon. Pennsylvania. South Dakota. Texas. Utah. Vermont. Virginia. 106 C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF C O LU M BIA . Three types of provisions follow: Louisiana.—That whenever any child shall arrive at the age of sixteen (16) years any relief granted to the mother for such child shall cease; Provided, how ever, That where a child of sixteen (16) years or over may be ill or incapacitated for work, the mother shall receive funds for his or her care during such illness or incapacity, which shall cease on his or her arriving at the age of eighteen (18), provided that the court may, in its discretion, at any time before such child reaches the age of eighteen (18) modify or vacate the order granting such relief to any mother or child. [Laws of 1920, Act No. 209, sec. 7.] Nevada.—Whenever any child shall reach the age of 16 years, any allowance made to the mother for the benefit of such child shall cease, but when any child on reaching the age of 16 years shall be incapable of self-support on account of physical disability, the pension for the benefit of such child may be continued for such time as may be fixed by majoritv vote of the board of county com missioners. [Laws of 1921, ch. 107, sec. 4 .] Pennsylvania. It shall be the duty of the board of trustees to provide, from the_ funds made available under the provisions of this act, as aid in supporting their children in their own homes, assistance to poor and dependent mothers of proved character and ability, who have children under the age of 16 years * * *. All payments made under the provisions of this act shall continue at the wili of the trustees but not beyond the time when any child under the provisions of the law may secure employment, excepting where the child is physically unable to earn wages or is at school with a satisfactory record of attendance and scholar ship, in which case such payment shall continue until such child has reached the age of 16 years. [Laws of 1919, No. 354, secs. 6 and 11.] Amount of allowance. Experience in the administration of mothers’ pension laws has shown that it is desirable to avoid strict limitation of allowance and instead to permit assistance to be based upon the needs of each family. In determining the amount of the grant required due con sideration should be given to the needs of the family as determined by its composition, as well as to available resources of earnings and aid from relatives. The laws of Colorado, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island permit adjustment of the grants to the needs of each family, specifying merely that the aid must be sufficient to care properly for the child at home; in Arizona the amount of the aid is fixed by the child-welfare board, and Maine leaves the amount to be determined by the State and county boards. The Ohio law (providing a maximum of $35 a month for the first child and $10 a month for other children) and the Minnesota law (with a maximum of $20 a month for the first child and $15 for each additional child) are examples of the most adequate grants allowed when the maximum aid is fixed by statute. In practice, in these and other States, aid is granted to each family in accordance with individual needs and resources, so far as the limitations of the law permit. Colorado.—If the parent or parents of such dependent or neglected child are poor and unable to properly care for such child, but otherwise are proper guard ians, and it is for the welfare of such child to remain at home, the court may enter an order finding such facts and fixing the amount of money necessary to enable the parent or parents to properly care for such child, * * *. [Laws of 1913, sec. 7, pp. 694-696.] 1 Massachusetts.—The aid furnished shall be sufficient to enable the mothers to bring up their children properly in their own homes; and such mothers and their children shall not be deemed to be paupers by reason of receiving aid as aforesaid. [Laws of 1913, ch. 763.] Minnesota.—The court shall further find, and order the payment of the sum of money which it deems necessary for the county to allow the mother in order to enable her to bring up the child properly in her own home, not exceeding https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES. 107 twenty dollars per month for one child and not exceeding fifteen dollars per month for each additional child; * * *. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 1. as amended by Laws of 1921, ch. 435.] Ohio.—The juvenile court may make an allowance to each of such women as follows; Not to exceed thirty-five dollars a month when she has but one child not entitled to an age and schooling certificate, and if she has more than one child not entitled to an age and schooling certificate, it shall not exceed thirty-five dollars a month for the first child and ten dollars a month for each of the other children not entitled to an age and schooling certificate. [General Code 1910, sec. 1683-2, as amended by Laws of 1921, sec. 1, p. 70.] ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE. Administrative ageneies. Differences in the types of administrative agencies are traceable largely to fundamental differences in State and local conditions in the various sections of the country. In the Middle West, where mothers’ pensions had their origin, the administration was placed in the juvenile court—the public agency that appeared to be best equipped to handle the work through its staff experienced in social investiga tion and supervision. In other States the county, town, or municipal board giving poor relief has been made the administrative agency in granting aid to mothers of dependent children. County boards created for the sole purpose of mothers’ aid administration are found in New York and Pennsylvania; town or city boards or directors of mothers’ aid may be appointed in Rhode Island; in Indiana aid may be granted to dependent children in their own homes by the county boards of children’s guardians. Administration is by a State board in Arizona, California, Delaware, New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Vermont. The Delaware Mothers’ Pension Commission was spe cially created. The Arizona State Board of Child Welfare and the New Jersey Board of Children’s Guardians, agencies caring for all dependent children who become wards of the State, also have the administration of aid to dependent children in their own homes. A law passed by New York in 1922 authorizes the establishment of county boards of child welfare, responsible for the relief and care of dependent children committed to them by the, courts and for the granting of mothers’ allowances. * * * A [county] board of child welfare when so established shall be respon sible for the relief and care of dependent children received by it as public charges and of such children as may be committed to it by the courts, and it shall adminis ter public aid for dependent children generally. * * * The board may grant an allowance to any dependent widow, or to any mother whose husband is an inmate of a State institution for the insane, or confined under sentence of two years or more actual confinement in the State prison, or to any mother whose husband is totally incapacitated by physical disability or ailment. No such allowance shall be made to any person unless the board of child welfare deems such person to be a proper person mentally and morally and physically to care for and bring up the child or children for whose benefit such allowance is made. * * * [New York, Laws of 1922, ch. 546.] Methods of making application for aid. The following sections define methods by which application may be made to boards having the administration of mothers’ aid laws. When a court is the administrative agency the procedure in granting aid is necessarily more formal and detailed: Hawaii.—Applications for allowances under the provisions hereof may be made directly to the local board of child welfare by the mother applying for such allowance or by some suitable person acting on her behalf. [Laws of 1919, Act 129, sec. 7.] https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 108 CH ILD ' D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF CO LUM BIA. New Hampshire.—An applicant for aid shall file a petition under oath with the * * * asking for an allowance and setting forth in detail the^ facts on which she relies and it shall be the duty of the * * * to investigate the case. * * * [Laws of 1921, ch. 85, Part I, sec. 38.] New York.—An application for allowance may be made directly to the local board of child welfare or to any member of the board. [Laws of 1915, ch. 228, sec. 153.] Investigation of application. The laws of the several States include a statement relating to investigation of each application in order to determine eligibility under the law, the character of the home, and the amount of aid required. Maine.—When such application has been made to the municipal board, it shall forthwith make careful investigation by personally interviewing the mother in her home, looking up her references, and pursuing such other sources of infor mation as are available, for the purpose of determining, first, the truth of the statements contained in her application; second, whether she is a fit and capable person to bring up her children, and whether the inmates and surroundings of her household are such as to render it suitable for her children to reside at home; third, whether the child or children of the applicant are attending school, and if not, why; fourth, whether, under all the circumstances, considering her own resources and the ability of any member of her family to contribute to her sup port, the possibility of receiving aid from other relatives, individuals, agencies, or child-welfare organizations, and the possibility of compelling contributions by any person under legal obligation so to do, such mother is in need of aid under the provisions of this act, and if so, in what amount. [Laws of 1917, ch. 222.] Massachusetts.—Before aiding any mother under the foregoing section, except as hereinafter provided, the * * * shall determine that the mother is fit to bring up her children and that the other members of the household and the surroundings of the home are such as to make for good character, and that aid from the * * * is necessary to enable her to bring up her children properly, by making an immediate and careful inquiry including the resources of the family and the ability of its other members, if any, to work or otherwise contribute to its support, the existence of relatives able to assist the family, and of individuals, societies, or agencies who may be interested therein; shall take all lawful means to compel all persons bound to support the mother and children to support them, and to enforce any other legal rights for their benefit; shall press all members of the family who are able to work, other than the mother and her dependent children, to secure work; shall try to secure work for them; and shall secure all necessary aid for the'mother and children which can be secured from relatives, organizations, or individuals. [Laws of 1913, ch. 763, sec. 2.] Pennsylvania.—The trustees of the various counties shall in no case recommend payment to any mother until they are satisfied that she is of proper char acter and ability and that for the proper maintenance of her children in her own home monthly payments are necessary. For such purpose the board of trustees shall cause to be made proper investigations. Nonpayment shall be made on account of anv child of proper age and physical ability unless satisfactory report has been made by the teacher of the school in which such pupil is enrolled stating that such child-is attending school. [Laws of 1919, No. 354, sec. 8 .] Supervision. Continued oversight of the families granted aid is provided for in the following sections: Minnesota.—Every familv to which an allowance has been made shall be visited at its home * * “* at least once in three months; and after each visit the person making the same shall make and keep on file as a part of the official record of the case a detailed statement of the condition of the home and family and all other data which may assist in determining the wisdomof the allowance granted and the advisability of its continuance. [Laws of 1917, Ch. 223, sec. 5.j New Jersey.— I t shall be the duty of the State board of children’s guardians to see that any widow committed to its care, pursuant to the provisions of this act, is properly caring for her children, that they are sufficiently clothed and fed, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AID TO D E P E N D E N T C H IL D R E N I N T H E IR O W N H O M E S . 109 that they attend school regnjarly, and receive proper religious instruction; and that said family shall be visited at least six times a year. [Laws of 1913, ch. 281, sec. 6.] Review of allowances. In order to adjust the allowances to changing conditions it has been found desirable to provide for review of the grants at regular inter vals—in most instances, once in six months. Minnesota.—* * * and the court shall at least once in each year reconsider every case in which an allowance has been made and take such action as the facts then existing shall warrant. [Laws of 1917, ch. 223, sec. 5.] Nebraska.—Provided further, No such order shall be effective for more than six months, unless renewed by the court at or after the expiration of that period. [Laws of 1919, ch. 221, sec. 6 .] New York.—An allowance made by the board shall not be for a longer continu ous period than six months without renewal, which allowance may be continued from time to time at same or different amounts, for similar periods or less, either successively or intermittently or may be revoked at the pleasure of the local board of child welfare. [Laws of 1915, ch. 228, sec. 153.] STAFF FOR ADMINISTRATION OF MOTHERS’ PENSIONS. The following table shows the staff administering'mothers’ pensions in several counties in which large cities are located and also in Boston, Mass., together with the population in each administrative unit according to the 1920 census: Administrative unit. Population. Erie County, N. Y------- 634,688 Staff. Principal city. Domestic educator, 3 investigators, 2 stenog raphers, and 1 clerk; salaries, $11,500. Secretary, 2 field workers, and part-time 183,833 clerical assistant; salaries, $4,300. 113,129 T ro y .......... ...... Secretary and investigator; salaries, $3,240. Superintendent and 5 field workers. 943,495 415,419 Minneapolis----- Supervisor (part time) and 4 field workers. Supervisor and 10 investigators. 748,060 Oneida County, N . Y _ ... Rensselaer County, N . Y Cuyahoga County, Ohio. Hennepin County, M inn Boston, Mass------------- - BILLS INTRODUCED IN CONGRESS PROVIDING FOR AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES. Date. Bill. H .R . 11898(Mr. Gorman)_ Jan. 19,1914 Title. To provide a pension for dependent mothers. (This bill would provide aid for all mothers in the United States coming with in its provisions.) H. R . 8348 (Mr. Johnson of Kentucky). Jan. 8,1916 An act to amend an act entitled “ An act to create a juvenile court for the District of Columbia” and for other purposes. (Section 24 of this bill provided for paym ent to the parent or parents of any dependent or neglected child who are poor and unable properly to care for such child.) H. R. 11981 (M r. Tinkham). M ay 8,1918 To provide allowances for mothers w ith children under 16 dependent upon them for support in the District of Columbia. S. 4688 (Mr. Thompson) . . June 10,1918 Same title and text as H . R. 11981. H. R. 13668 (Mr.Rhodes) - Apr. 17,1920 Providing pensions for needy mothers having the custody of dependent children under the age of 16 years. (This bill would, provid© aid for all mothers in the United States coming within its provision.) H. R . 1397® (M r. Tinkhaw). M ay 7,1920 Same title and text as H . R. 11981 and S. 4688. S. 4358 (M r. C u rtis)..—- M ay 10,1920 Same title and text as H . R. 11981, H . R. 13979, and S. 4688. S. 48§3 (Mr, Dillingham) - Jan. 17,1921 To establish the Department of Public Welfare and to deter mine its functions, and fof other purposes. P art V —Aid to Mothers with Dependent Children. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 110 C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D IS T R IC T OF CO LUM BIA. Bills introduced in Congress providing for aid to dependent children in their own homes—Continued. Bill Date Title H. R. 3186 (Mr. Rhodes). Apr. 14,1921 Same title and text as H . R. 13668. H. R. 5029 (Mr. M ason).. Apr. 25,1921 Same title and text as H. R. 11981, H . R. 13979, S. 4688, and S. 4358. H . R. 5358 (Mr. Tinkham). Apr. 27,1921 Same text as H. R. 11981, H . R. 13979, S. 4688, S. 4358, and H. R. 5029. S. 1357 (Mr. Curtis) Apr. 28,1921 Same title and text as S. 4358, H. R. 11981, H . R. 13979, and S. 4688. S. 3847 (Mr. Pom erene)... Apr. 20,1922 To provide for m others’ pensions in the District of Columbia, S. 3898 (Mr. Calder)____ Aug. 3,1922 To provide home care for dependent children. H . R. 12684 (Mr. Focht).. Sept. 16,1922 Same title and text as S. 3898. S. 4196 (Mr. Brookhart).. Dec. 16,1922 Defining the legal status of all children under 18 years of age m the District of Columbia; creating a Parental Court; and providing for a child-relief allowance for the assistance of cer tain mothers. H . R. 13537 (Mr. F re e)... Dec. 21,1922 Same title and text as S. 4196. S. 724 (Mr. Capper) Same title and text as S. 3898, H. R. 12684, and S. 3898. Dec. 10,1923 TEXT OF PENDING “MOTHERS’ PENSION” BILL. Following is the text of a bill to provide home care for dependent children, as introduced in the Senate and the House of Representa tives by Sentor Calder and Representative Focht, in November and December, 1922, and in the Senate by Senator Capper in December, 1923: 9 A bill to provide home care for dependent children. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that when used in this act— The term “ District” means the District of Columbia; The term “ board” means an agency designated or established by the Com missioners of the District to carry out the provisions of this act; The term “ mother” includes any woman, the custodian of a.child dependent upon her for support, who is unable without the aid herein authorized to maintain a suitable home and provide proper care for such child; and The term “ child” means any child under the age of sixteen years in the custody of a mother. S e c . 2 . That the Commissioners of the District are authorized and directed to designate or establish an agency to carry out the provisions of this act and such agency is authorized to make rules and regulations necessary for the proper administration of this act. S e c . 3. That application for the benefits conferred by this act may be made by any mother who has resided in the District for at least one year immediately preceding the time of making such application. Sec. 4. That upon application the board shall make an investigation to de termine (1) whether the mother is a fit person, capable of bringing up such child(2) whether conditions in the home are suitable for the proper upbringing of the child; (3) what resources are available for the maintenance of the family; (4) if the father of such child be living and able to provide support, whether legal steps have been taken to compel the fulfillment of his obligation; and (5) the amount of aid needed. If upon such investigation the board finds that the mother would be able to maintain a home and give proper care to the child if granted aid, and that such aid is necessary to save the child from neglect or from separation from its mother, it is authorized to make a m onthly allowance in an amount deemed necessary. S e c , 5, That the board may award an allowance for a continuous period not to exceed six months, shall review the award prior to the expiration of the period https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN IN THEIR OWN HOMES. Ill for which the allowance is granted, and may renew any allowance for a con tinuous period not to exceed six months at the same, an increased, or a decreased rate, but an allowance shall not be decreased in amount or discontinued unless reasonable notice is given to the mother. If the mother refuses to comply with the rules and regulations made by the board, the allowance may be immediately discontinued. S e c . 6. That payment shall not be continued after a child has reached the age of 16 years, unless the board is satisfied that the mental or physical condition of such child necessitates further aid. S e c . 7. That the board is authorized to make an emergency payment to any mother in an amount not to exceed $50, if such board is satisfied that an emer gency exists. S e c . 8 . That the board shall cause every home for which an allowance is made to be visited by its representative, who shall report upon the conditions of the home. S e c . 9. That any person who attempts to obtain by fraud or who fraudulently obtains any allowance under the provisions of this act, or who receives any allow ance knowing it to have been fraudulently obtained, shall be guilty of a mis demeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine of not more than $100 or imprisoned for not more than three months, or both. S e c . 10. That there is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $ 100,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to be expended by the board designated or established by the Com missioners of the District to carry out the provisions of this act. The board shall have the power to appoint, remove, and fix the compensation of such officers and employees, subject to the civil-service laws, and make such expenditures for printing, telegrams, telephone, law books, books of reference, periodicals, furni ture, stationery, office equipment, travel, and other supplies and expenses as shall be necessary to the administration of this act in the District of Columbia. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis THE DEVELOPMENT *OF CHILD-CARING WORK IN THE D IS TRICT OF COLUMBIA. THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRIVATE CHILD-CARING WORK. The report of the joint committee of the United States Senate and House of Representatives^ appointed in 1896 to investigate the charities and reformatory institutions of the District of Columbia, gives the history of the public and private agencies and institutions existing in the District at that time. Of the 18 private institutions in the District caring for dependent children in 1923 all but 4 were founded more than 25 years ago. The report gives the following in teresting description of the origin of the first institution in the Dis trict for the care of dependent children—the Washington City Orphan Asylum, founded in 1815. The sad results of the War of 1812 were not confined to the destruction of the public buildings but left to the care and sympathy of the citizens a full share of the orphanage resulting largely therefrom. The proclamation of peace sent a thrill of joy through every household and elicited the warmest sympathy for the fatherless children brought to public notice. Mrs. Gen. John P. Van Ness, moved by the frequency of appeals to her charity, consulted 'with Mrs. Rev. Obadiah Brown, of the First Baptist Church, as to the feasibility of effecting an organization by which permanent relief could be assured for the helpless orphans of the city and neighborhood. As a result of this interview a public meeting was called through the press for “ the ladies of Washington and neigh borhood, to be held in the Hall of Representatives, on Tuesday, October 10, 1815, to consider the propriety of instituting an asylum for the relief and main tenance of orphans. ” At the time and place named a number of ladies responded to the call. * * * The institution being duly officered, a small frame house fronting on Tenth Street west, near Pennsylvania Avenue, was rented, and in this unpretentious structure the first organized effort on behalf of destitute orphans, it is believed, was made in the Capital City, under the presidency of Mrs. James Madison and her associates in office. The lady managers were for many years dependent upon voluntary contributions and church collections to meet the expenses of their growing family .2 The next institution founded in the District was the St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum, which was established in 1825 by the Roman Cath olics of .Washington. The report cited states that “ parents, guard ians, or friends of children may place them in the asylum until they reach the age of 21 years, if males, or 18 years, if females; and the asylum may receive children who have neither friend nor protector. The power of binding out children was given, and provision was made for schools. ” 3 The first Federal aid granted to private institutions in the Dis trict was provided for by an act of July 14, 1832, which directed “ the commissioner of public buildings to select and value such of the building lots and parts of lots owned by the United States in the city of Washington as he shall think may be brought to market and sold to the greatest advantage, to the amount of $20,000, which he shall 1 Early data based on report of the Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the D istrict of Columbia: P art III.— Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutionsin the District of Columbia. Edited and compiled b y Charles Moore, clerk of the joint select committee, Fifty-fifth Congress, first session, Senate Document No. 185. Washington, 1898. 2 Ibid., pp. 107, 108. 3Ibid., p. 115 112 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -C A B IN G W O RK . 113 divide and separate into two parcels of $10,000 worth each, one of which, at his election, he shall convey to the Washington City Orphan Asylum and the other to the St. Vincent’s Female Orphan Asylum of Washington, and to the successors of each forever.” These lots were exempted from taxes for five years, unless sooner disposed of, and might be sold or leased, the proceeds of the sale or rents not to be applied to any other objects than the purposes of the institutions named.3 The St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum was opened in 1856. The asylum was established by the united contributions of the different Roman Catholic congregations in Washington and placed under charge of the Sisters of the Holy Cross. “ For 42 years after the incorporation of the asylum the total amount of money received from the Government was about $7,200, and the average number of boys cared for was 127. Orphans come mainly from St. Ann’s Infant Asylum, being turned over to St. Joseph’s at the age of 6 years and retained until they are 14 years of age, when positions are obtained for them if possible. ”4 The St. Ann’s Infant Asylum was started in 1860 by Sister Dyonisia, under the name of the Washington Infant Asylum. I t was “ the first distinctly foundling asylum in Washington.” The report states: The objects of the institution as given in the act are the support and main tenance of foundlings and infant orphan and half-orphan children, and also to provide for deserving indigent and unprotected females during their confinement in childbirth. * * * Children are committed to its charge as fully and com pletely, to all intents and purposes, as if they were regularly indentured and bound apprentices of the institution, until they shall attain the age, if males, of 21 years, and if females, 15 years, or for any shorter period that may be agreed upon; and to the corporation is given the power to bind out children as appren tices, to learn any trade or business, or to learn to be useful in housekeeping. The corporation is not restricted in the exercise o f their powers in binding and placing out in the District of Columbia; and Congress reserved the right to alter, amend, or repeal the act. * * * • In 1877 the institution received its first appropriation from the Government, and from that year to the present time it has been receiving an appropriation from Congress. * * * . In case homes have not been found for children who have arrived at the age of 6 years, they are sent to St. Joseph’s or St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum, where they continue until the age of 15 years. They are then sent to homes in the country, if such homes can be found. If the girls show an aptitude for needle work, they are sent to St. Rose’s Industrial School.5 The National Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Orphans Home was organized in 1866 “ to provide a home and education for orphans and half orphans of soldiers and sailors who have been in the service of the United States.” 6 Boys and girls under 12 years of age were received. The institution was at first entirely dependent for support on vol untary contributions and the proceeds of a large fair field m Washings ton to raise funds for its maintenance. In 1867 Congress made an appropriation for the support of the institution to the amount of $5,000, and the later appropriations amounted to as much as $15,000 a year. In 1882 an act of Congress conveyed the property of the orphans’ home to the Garfield Memorial Hospital. The National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women and Children was incorporated in 1863 for the purpose “ of supporting such aged or indigent and destitute colored women and children as 8 Ibid., p. 115. 4 Ibid ,p. 116. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 Ibid., pp. 102,103 8 Ibid., p. 117. C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF CO LUM BIA. 114 may properly come under tlie charge of such association; to provide them a suitable home, board, clothing, and instruction, and to bring them under Christian influence.” The society was authorized to receive “ any destitute child or children at the request of the parents or guardians, or next friend, or the mother, if the father be dead, or has abandoned his family, or does not provide for their support, or is an habitual drunkard, such parents, guardians, or next friend, or mother making a written surrender of such child or children.” This institution has remained the one institution under private auspices for the care of dependent negro children in the District. The Industrial Home School was organized in 1879 “ by a few benevolent ladies.” The transition of this institution from private to public control is set forth as follows in the report of the congressional committee: During its first years the school occupied rented quarters, but in March, 1875, the Commissioners of the District of Columbia set apart for its use the buildings and grounds of the Georgetown almshouse * * *. The trustees asked the commissioners to recommend to Congress the enact ment of a law, similar to that existing in several States, requiring the District of Columbia to pay to the board of trustees of the school the amount of $2 per week for each inmate of the industrial home. This amount, with some assistance from charitable people, the trustees believed would suffice to carry on the institution successfully, provided the requisite buildings were furnished for mechanical and industrial purposes. v The school already had a steam engine and other machinery, secured by act of Congress in June, 1871; but this machinery was in a rented building more than a mile distant from the then location of the home, necessitating a payment of rent of $250 a year and the loss of much valuable time, without affording the requisite facilities for proper instruction in mechanical and other arts. Therefore an ap propriation of $ 10,000 was asked for the purpose of erecting a suitable building for workshops in conformity with plans submitted. Such an appropriation had passed the House of Representatives during the previous year, but owing to some misunderstanding it failed in the Senate * * *. [In 1878] the buildings occupied as a home were sadly in need of repair. The industrial department was still in a rented building, more than a mile distant from the home, and under the circumstances the trustees renewed their applica tion for $25,000 for the erection of a workshop and effecting the indicated im provements- upon the home, already the property of the Government. The report for the year showed receipts of $7,091.02, of which amount $3,000 was the first installment of an appropriation by Congress. The first report of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, appointed under the act of Congress providing for a permanent form of government for the District, approved June 11, 1878, commended to. the liberality of Congress the Industrial Home School of Georgetown. “ This charity,” they say, “ has been founded and chiefly sustained thus far by private benevolence. By permission the school is occupying the Georgetown almshouse, where a small number of District paupers are provided for by an arrangement between the Commissioner of the Washington Asylum and the managers of the home school. The benevo lent ladies who have charge of this deserving charity have collected within the walls of the dilapidated building about 50 indigent children of both sexes, whom they are educating in various industries and for whom they provide homes as 'soon as they attain sufficient age and qualifications. The workshops connected with the institution contribute largely to its maintenance, and experience thus far has demonstrated the wisdom and beneficence of this plan.” * * * * * * * Although established and thus far chiefly maintained by private benevolence, the school was destined, the commissioners believed, to solve successfully the important problem of industrial education as a factor in our system of public instruction * * *. In the report of the school for 1883 the president and the secretary state that the amount appropriated by Congress, $5,000, for the expenses of the school was entirely inadequate properly to maintain it. Although economy was practiced at every point, the unattractive and poorly adapted building, with the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OP CHILD-CAKING WORK. 115 addition of one cottage, compared very unfavorably with the elegant modern ui dings used by the reform school, “ where it must be a genuine pleasure for those who go there to remain, and a temptation for them to commit offenses in order to gam admission.” in 1896 the school was transferred to the control of the District of Columbia as provided m the District appropriation act of June 11 of that year, and thé name was changed to the District of Columbia Industrial Home School.7 The following history is given of the beginning of St. John’s Orphanage: ^ai? Church Orphanage s parish nad its origin in the work begun on All Saints Day, 1870, by Sister Sarah, who for 11 years continued to provide tor a few destitute orphan children, with such assistance as she could obtain from persons whom she interested in the work. In 1872 the institution had been incorporated under the general incorporation law. In 1881 the Rev Dr Leonard, now bishop of Ohio and then rector of St. John’s Church, undertook the task of placing the orphanage on a firm foundation. An appropriation by Congress of $10,000 was obtained for the purchase of lands and buildings, and a considerable amount was raised from private sources. The president of the orphanage is the bishop of the diocese for the time being and the warden is the rector of St. John’s parish. The institution is managed by a board ad of whom, except the treasurer, must be communi cants of St._John s Church. A ladies’ aid, consisting of 25 ladies of the parish, also assists m the management, and there are two physicians connected with the orphanage. The Washington Hospital for Foundlings was incorporated in 1870. The object, as stated in the incorporating act, was to found in the city of Washington a hospital for the reception and support of destituto and. friendless children. The children receiveu were to be ' wholly under the guardianship, care, and control of the institution to be educated, apprenticed, and otherwise disposed of until they cached the age of 18 years, when the care and control was to cease/’ The hospital was founded to carry into effect the bequest contained in the will of Joshua Peirce, who died in 1869, by which land valued at $95,550 was provided as a site for such an institution. Because ol the difficulty of raising money to erect the necessary building the institution, although chartered in 1870, did not begin operations until 1887. The ^sum ^of $31,500 having been secured, Congress appropriated the $3,500 necessary to complete the budding. § The Government made an annual appropriation for the maintenance of the institution. St. Rose’s Industrial School was organized in 1872. Congress appropriated $20,000 for the buildings, the total value of which was reported as being about $30,000. The school * * * receives orphan girls from St. Vincent’s Orphan Asylum at the age of 14 and keeps them until 21, at which age they are expected to be trained in housekeeping dressmaking, and sewing. After the girls attain the age of 21 employment is found for them in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia or other cities. If they are employed in the District, they are supported for one montn; that is to say, they receive one month’s wages in advance, and if thev time an° ther Clty they are Provided with a sufficient sum to keep them for a Since the school was established in 1872 of Charity, six^ of whom * * * are on as instructors m domestic economy, plain dressmaking m its different branches.. A devoted to study. it has been conducted by the Sisters duty at the industrial school, acting sewing, practical housekeeping, and certain amount of time each day is J In 1879 a German Lutheran Church made an appeal to the German-Amencan citizens of the District for the erection of a German 7 Ibid., pp. 122, 125. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 Ibid., p. 118. Ibid., p. 125. 116 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. orphan asylum that should be nonsectarian in character. The institution was incorporated within a month of the time the appeal was made. The Government appropriated $10,000 for the cost of the site, representing half the total amount paid. The institu tion was conducted partly as a farm, the produce of which supnlied a considerable share of the maintenance. In the next decade only two institutions were started. The Women’s Union Christian Association opened the Home for Friendless Colored Girls (later discontinued) “ in order that such girls, rescued from destitution and vice, from earliest age to their fourteenth year, might be cared for and trained in matters of housekeeping and made self-supporting and self-respecting.” The House of Mercy, organized as the Association for Works of Mercy, was organized in 1884, under the Sisters of the Epiphany of the Protestant Episcopal Church. The Florence Crittenton Hope and Help Mission and the Bruen Home for dependent children were started in 1895 and 1896, respec tively. The Central Union Mission, organized in 1884, early began the care of a few children and a number of years later established the Emergency Home for Children. The first work of which the Epis copal Home for Children is an outgrowth was begun about 1895 and provided summer outings for children. Later a winter home was opened, which was turned over to the diocese of Washington and incorporated under its present name in 1908. The Jewish Foster Home was established in 1911, the Swartzell Memorial Methodist Home for Children in 1912, and the Baptist Home for Children in 1915. THE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC CHILD-CARING WORK. With the development of higher standards of child-caring and protective work the States have increasingly assumed as a public obligation the care and supervision of certam classes of dependent children and have taken their place alongside the steadily growing private organizations providing for those who stand in need of assistance. In 1893 the District of Columbia undertook as a public duty the care of dependent children committed tor its guardianship by court action. The Federal law creating the District of Columbia Board of Children’s Guardians for the care of dependent children followed in its general policy the precedent that had been set by a number of States, including Massachusetts, Nevada, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, and Kansas. So steadily has this activity grown that there are at the present time 27 States, in addition to the District of Columbia, in which a State board or other agency provides direct care for dependent children committed to it by courts or does home-finding work and supervises placed-out children for county authorities. Placement in family homes, either boarding or free, is the predominating method of care. Placement of children in foster homes and supervision of dependent children has been assumed as a public function in Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. In a number of these States https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OE CHILD-CARING WORK. H 7 dependent children are provided for in State schools or homes, usually for short periods, pending placement in family homes; in the others the placement work is done without such intermediate institutional provision. THE BEGINNING OF PUBLIC SUPERVISION OF CHARITIES, The report of the congressional investigation committee, describing the beginning of the work of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, stated that the Commissioners of the District in their re port for the year 1875 called the attention of Congress to the need for the “ reorganization of the public charities of the District, to the end of having them put under the control of a commission, to whom shall be intrusted the disbursement of all moneys, whether appropriatedby Congress or contributed by the District for the support of such charities, and who shall account for the same to the District authori ties, under such regulations as shall be prescribed by law.” 11 I t was pointed out that under the system then existing a few «charitable institutions were maintained by the District of Columbia and a number by the Federal Government, and private institutions of like character were receiving support from both the District and the Federal Government. It was recommended that all public charitable institutions be placed under the control of the District government and managed by a board which should have general charge ; that all appropriations of public funds for charitable purposes should be made in the aggregate and distributed by this board and that it should have the right of inspection of all charities, public and private. Similar recommendations were made in each succeed ing report of the commissioners of the District. In 1883 the sugges tion was made that, until a better system could be devised, the commissioners should be authorized to appoint an inspector of charities who should devote his whole time to the investigation that devolved upon the commissioners by law. In their report of the following year it was stated that the total appropriations for chari table purposes and chargeable to the District expense for the year 1884-85 amounted to $235,212, of which about $114,000 was appro priated for institutions managed by private boards of trustees, 1doubtless upon the theory that public money is only given to supple ment and encourage private donations.” The commissioners held that this might be true in the case of four children’s institutions mentioned but that the reform and industrial schools, one hospital, and one institution for women and children were maintained almost entirely from the public treasury. I t was stated that other institu tions were demanding aid but that the commissioners were not sufficiently informed to judge of their comparative merits or necessi ties. During the year 1883, acting under instructions of the superin tendent of police, the board of police surgeons visited the charitable institutions of the District to ascertain their sanitary conditions. In the following year the board made a reexamination and reported correction of some of the bad conditions that had been discovered. A clause in the District appropriation bill approved in 1884 pro vided that “ the commissioners should thereafter investigate the management of all institutions of charity within the District which » Ibid., p. 177. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 118 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. may be appropriated for out of the District revenues in whole or in art and require an itemized report of receipts and expenditures to e transmitted with the annual report of the commissioners to Con gress, together with such recommendations as they might deem proper concerning the necessity for such institutions, together with a plan for their organization and management and extent of appro priation necessary for their maintenance.” 12 In order to carry out these provisions an agent was detailed by „the commissioners to visit the various institutions. His report concluded with the follow ing recommendation: E I would call the attention of the commissioners to the fact that many of these institutions are duplicating each other’s work and as a necessary consequence are much more expensively managed than they would be if the efforts in favor of the objects were more concentrated. It is my opinion that some plan of general control and unification should be adopted whereby the large amounts appropriated out of the District revenue for these various charities could be more prudently, more economically, and more satisfactorily applied to the objects for which the money was appropriated. Finally, on August 6, 1890, Congress created the office of super intendent of charities, embodying this provision in the appropriation bill for the District. The first superintendent of charities of the District of Columbia was Amos G. Warner, well known as a student of the methods of dealing with dependency problems and later the author of a standard textbook entitled “ American Charities.” 13 Mr. Warner took office April 11, 1891.14 THE ORIGIN OF THE BOARD OF CHILDREN’S GUARDIANS. The Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia was established by act of Congress approved July 26, 1892, and began to receive children under its care July 1, 1893. The act authorized the judicial commitment to the board of all classes of dependent and delinquent children, except those properly belonging in the two “ reform schools” that had been established in the District by the Government. The origin of the Board of Children’s Guardians and the ideas that led to its establishment were described as follows in the report issued by the joint congressional committee: 15 As soon as the first superintendent of charities had become familiar with the methods of admitting children to the several institutions provided for the care and education of destitute and abandoned children in Washington, with the character of the work done with the children in such institutions, had observed the want of authority and continuity in such work, and had witnessed the embarrassment of the courts of the District in attempting to deal justly and humanely with children charged with being vagrants or with petty offenses, he became convinced that another agency was required in order that the reception of children to be supported at public cost should have placed about it certain safeguards; that the child-caring and child-saving work of the District should reach those whose condition furnished the strongest appeal for protection, and that those to be supported at public expense should become public wards, for whom somebody should be responsible continuously during their minority. The superintendent therefore prepared a bill later introduced in the Senate “ to provide for the care of dependent children in the 18 Ibid., p. 182. 13 Warner, Amos G.: American Charities; a study in philanthropy and economics. Thomas Y. Cro well & Co., New York, 1894. 14 The Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, organized July 12, 1900, took the place of the Superintendent of Charities, whose office was abolished June 30, 1900. 13 Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of Columbia: P art III.—Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of Columbia, p. 185. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OE CHILD-CARING WORK. 119 District of Columbia and to create a board of children’s guardians,” transmitting it to the Commissioners of the District on February 9, 1892. Mr. Warner’s letter in explanation of the purposes of the bill includes the following : (1) It is desirable that there should be some more accurate measure of service rendered to the public by the subsidized charitable institutions for children than at present exists and that the amount of public aid should then in each case bear a fixed proportion to the amount of public service so rendered. At present each institution admits such children as its managers or officers think proper to receive. Frequently there is no adequate investigation of the case, but the account given of the child and of its destitution by those who desire its admission is accepted without verification. The institutions then base their claims for public aid in a general way on the number of children cared for. There is, however, no definite proportion established between the amount of aid and the number of inmates; nor, while present diverse and irresponsible methods of admission prevail, does it seem desirable that there should be. In my recommendations of estimates last September I kept as close as possible to the precedents of previous years; not because I considered this condition of things satisfactory but merely to gain time until some proper method of appor tioning public aid in proportion to public service could be found. If the present system were to continue there are other institutions for children receiving noth ing that would be equitably as much entitled to subsidies as those now receiving them. Most of the institutions for children do two classes of work—public work and church and private work. By public work I mean the care of children who are absolutely destitute and properly chargeable to the District, for whom no rela tive, or friend, or church, or private charitable association is willing to provide and for whom the District taxpayers can therefore properly be asked to provide, both as a matter of humanity and as a defense against the propagation of pauper ism. By church or personal work I mean the care of children for the purpose of securing their education in a particular faith or for motives of personal sym pathy. To carry on church or personal work, as such, by means of public money is improper, for it leads to a great increase in the number of dependent children and needlessly burdens the taxpayers. The board of children's guardians provided for by the inclosed bill will be charged with the duty of investigating thoroughly the case of each dependent child. ^If a child is found to be a proper subject for public care it will be placed in an institution or otherwise provided for by the board, and each institution will then be entitled to public money in proportion to the number of such children that it cares for. (2) It is desirable-that careful and thorough experiments should be made in the placing out of children in the community. The subject of placing out was briefly referred to in my annual report. It consists of boarding children in private families instead of placing them in insti tutions, or in finding for the older children homes where their services are an adequate return for their support. It also involves the adopting of children into private families whenever this can be accomplished with safety. The sooner a dependent child can be grafted into a good home the better it is for the children and the community. Many children on becoming dependent can be placed in homes at once and the evils of institution life avoided altogether. This is true of all classes of children from nursing infants up. On leaving the institu tions, also, great care is needed in selecting homes for the children, and syste matic visiting is necessary in order to see that the child is adapted to the home and to make sure that he is not neglected or abused. In Washington this work of placing^ children when they can not be longer kept in the institutions is done by committees and by matrons or other resident officials, chiefly during the summer months. Such persons are hurried with other duties and at the best are not experts in the work of placing out. It thus often happens that the time and money spent in reclaiming a waif are eventually wasted and the future of the child ruined because it is not properly placed and watched over on leaving the institution. To secure good results it needs a specialist in this work who can attend to placing and visiting his wards all the year round. The considerations apply to the placing of children liberated from the reform schools as well as to the dependent children who leave the charitable institutions. The reform school for boys is overcrowded, and it is possible that, through the Board of Children’s Guardians, many now sent to that institution might other https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 120 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. wise be provided for. The recent experience of the Children’s Aid Society of Pennsylvania indicates as much. At any rate the creation of the board, as herein proposed, would give our courts an option in the matter that might be of use should first experiments have satisfactory results. The board of guardians would be an efficient agent for the placing out of chil dren in this community, and this, as indicated, is the second reason for desiring its prompt establishment. Mr. Warner also recommended that there should be provision for a suitable place of detention for juvenile delinquents pending trial or before removal to the reformatory, such as a temporary home under the management of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The proposed bill was passed by Congress, after some amendments had been made—includmg the elimination of the provision for a temporary home—and eceived final approval on July 26, 1892.18 The judges designated as the appointing authority named the nine members of the Board of Children’s Guardians, and the first meeting of the board was held on January 11, 1893. The report previously cited states that the board at its second meeting, m February, 1893, decided to urge the appropriation of $6,000 for administrative expenses. “ Thus early did the board recognize the fact, ever since insisted upon, that its mission was the accomplishment of a large amount of real work which must be done by employees who gave their whole time to it, and who must be persons of such character, judgment, and ability as to make their services of great value, and only to be secured by offering such com pensation as would be offered for like service in any other great business enterprise.” 17 The District appropriation bill passed early in 1893 carried an appropriation of $5,000 for administrative purposes, making it immediately available. The direct appropriations which had been made for child-caring institutions in the preceding year were reduced by 40 per cent, anci the funds so withheld from them were placed at the disposal of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The board engaged as its agent a man experienced in State child-placing work, who undertook his duties* on May 1, 1893. Shortly thereafter a letter was sent by the board to the managing boards of all institutions whose direct appropriations had been reduced, setting forth the policy of the board in regard to the relation between the institutions and the Board of Children’s Guardians.18 The text of the letter follows: W a s h i n g t o n , D. C., May 17, 1893. The act approved March 3, 1893, making appropriations for District of Columbia expenses for the fiscal year to end June 30, 1894, gives your institution somewhat less for maintenance than was given for the current year; and the institution is remitted, with others, to the act of July 26, 1892, (Public No. 156), “ to provide for the care of dependent children in the District of Columbia and to create a board of children’s guardians,” “ for all rights^ and benefits which” it may have under the provisions of the latter act. Such rights and privileges are deemed to be that your institution may enter into a contract with the Board of Children’s Guardians for the care and support of children, the wards of the board, at rates of compensation to be agreed upon. By such means your institution may receive more than the amount by which the direct appropriation has been diminished or it may receive less. The Board of Children’s Guardians has now been organized, has secured an office and appointed an agent, and is ready to consider applications from instituS ir s and M esd am es: 18 For text of the law see Appendix, pp. 152-153. k Joint Select Committee to Investigate th e Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of Columbia: P art III.—Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of Columbia, p. 191. is Ibid., pp. 192-193. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK. y 121 tions with a view to the making of contracts. The board is not charged with any duties or responsibilities in regard to the children now in institutions, these children being already provided for and not having been committed to the board by the methods specified in the act. Should your institution wish to transfer to the board the control and responsibility for the support of any now in your charge, it may apply to the courts to have the board declared the legal guardian of such children. Should this application receive the approval of the court, due proceedings being had, your authority over and responsibility for the children and the authority and responsibility of parents and natural guardians would be terminated. The board would then be in a position to board the children “ in private families, to board them in institutions willing to receive them, to bind them out or apprentice them, or to give them in adoption to foster parents,” or it may leave them where they now are. The board expects to have committed to it many children now in institutions. For these it must provide places in private homes, institutions, or elsewhere. It wishes to be able to so arrange that none of the institutions whose appropriations have been diminished for the coming year may be injured or inconvenienced by the change and to that end solicits the good offices and cooperation of all. It can not undertake any charge for the support of children until July 1, 1893, but wishes meanwhile to make all possible preliminary arrangements. The agent of the board, Mr. Herbert W. Lewis, will call upon you at your institution. We solicit for him a favorable reception, with the view of inception of friendly relations, By order of the board. Very respectfully, B. P ickman M a n n , Secretary, Board of Children's Guardians, District of Columbia. The committee report stated that on July 7, 1893, eight hoys who were inmates of the National Colored Home were committed to the guardianship of the board by the police court and were “ speedily provided with homes in the families of suitable persons willing to receive them.” On July 20 officers of the Industrial Home School resented 10 children for commitment to the guardianship of the oard. A hearing on the question of commitment of children already inmates of institutions resulted in the commitment of the children to the board and their return by the board to the Industrial Home School, the institution being paid for their maintenance from the funds of the Board of Children’s Guardians until homes were provided for them by the agent of the board. The same policy was carried out in a later commitment of children from the National Colored Home. “ Thus the commitment of institution children to the guard ianship of the board was formally approved by the courts authorized to commit, and thus the institutions which were willing to yield to the provisions of the new law suffered but little inconvenience from it, while the children committed received the benefit of the continuous guardianship of the board and the watchful care of its agent after they were placed out.” 19 The report further states: E Other institutions, however, objected that they were unable to receive from the board any considerable part of the amount by which their direct appropria tions had been reduced. Another letter was therefore sent out on September 13, by which it was sought to remove some of the difficulties which had attended the commitment of children at first, and additional opportunities were offered for any institution which was supporting from its reduced income any children for whose support the District of Columbia was properly chargeable to make known how many such children it desired to have transferred to the guardianship -of the board, in order that the board might legally pay the institution for the support of the children until homes for them were secured. To this letter there was no response whatever. » Ibid., p . 194. 88962°—24t----- 9 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 122 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. In its first report to the superintendent of charities, August 22, 1893, the Board of Children’s Guardians pointed out the economy of the new plan and indicated its willingness to undertake the care of all children who could be shown to be necessarily dependent upon the D istrict:20 During the present year a fraction of the sum hitherto usually appropriated to charitable institutions in the District of Columbia has been appropriated to the use of the board, while the remainder has been appropriated to the institu tions as before. There is now no occasion for the courts to send a single child properly chargeable upon the District of Columbia to any private institution for care and support. The Government has established an agency of its own competent to care for every such child, and as a matter of fact, since the courts have had the authority, they have thrown the whole burden of the support of such children upon the board. There is no public reason, therefore, why the Government should subsidize in future any private charitable institution for the care of children in this District. Prior to the creation of the Board of Children’s Guardians there was no arrangement by which the courts of the District could commit children to charitable institutions. The institutions reserved the right to say which and how many children they would receive, the court could not commit without their consent, and no such com mitment had taken place in several years. THE FIRST YEARS OF PUBLIC CHILD-CARING WORK. The congressional-committee report gave the following facts indi cating the character of the investigation and supervisory work done by the board during its first year:20° By the close of its first fiscal year there had been committed to the guardianship of the board 203 children, of whom 90 had been already removed from the depend ent class, having been received as members of their families by persons found upon investigation to be such as could safely be trusted to perform the duties of parents toward the helpless little children placed in their custody. The supervisory work provided for by the statute had been faithfully per formed, and the record being kept regarding each child under guardianship, showed that notable success had been attained in securing permanent settlement of children placed out. The provision of free homes for this large proportion of the children received had resulted in considerable economy of funds appropriated for their support, and the board returned to the Treasury of the United States the sum of $6,054.45 as an unexpended surplus. During this year the agent of the board was called upon to consider applica tions on behalf of 290 children whom it was desired should be taken in charge with the result that 96 of them were presented before the courts of the District for further and more authoritative examination as to their necessities, the remain ing 194 being, in the judgment of the agent, in no such condition as demanded the intervention of public authority for their protection or relief. * * * During this year the board also began the practice of placing all in fants committed to its care in the hands of hired nurses and of providing skillful medical attendance for all such children. At the close of the year the indications were that this experiment would be highly successful. Reports for the following years tell the same story of thorough in vestigation and careful consideration of the propriety of accepting as public wards the children who were reported to the board as in need of such action. During the year ended June 30, 1895, 307 applica tions were received on behalf of children who were said to be in need of provision by the board. For 89 of these the board began proceedings m court, recommending commitment. These recommendations re sulted in the final commitment of 58 and the giving of authority for 30 Ibid., p p . 194-195, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 30a Ibid., p. 195. DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK. 123 the temporary care of 17. In 14 cases the court did not commit the children to the board (these were mainly cases in which it was sought to remove children from parents alleged to be intemperate or other wise unfit). The reasons ior commitment of the 58 children were as follows: Destitute, no suitable home, 47; abandoned by parents, 10; vicious and immoral associations, 1. Of the children found by the agent of the board not to be proper subjects for public care, the greater number were reported as “ not dependent,” a number were found to be nonresidents, and for about one-eighth the report was “ referred to other agencies ” or “ private arrangements made.” The total number of final commitments to the board during the year was 110; about one-half were recommended by the agent of the board, one-fifth by police officers, and the remainder by a number of institutions and agencies.21 The agent of the board pointed out that nearly all the commit ments recommended by the board were for “ simple destitution,” but this was apparently due to the fact that it is easier to prove that a child “ is destitute of suitable home and adequate means of earning an honest living,” than to prove such underlying causes as the “ unfit ness” of his parents or vicious and immoral surroundings. I t was stated that no incorrigible children were presented by the board for commitment during the year, for the reason that “ it has been known throughout the year that the funds at the disposal of the board would not be sufficient to meet the demands upon it, and this class of chil dren are always most expensive and troublesome to deal with. There are several reasons why the board could not give them ternis of insti tution training, and to place them in free private homes without such training would simply be to turn them loose upon unsuspecting per sons entitled to better treatment.” However, 12 children classed as “ vicious or incorrigible ” were committed to the board, and 8 girls were transferred to the board from the reform school. In contrast with the statement regarding the placement of delinquent children, the report relates the difficulties met with because of the limitation of the intake of one institution to children under 10 years of age and the refusal of the Industrial Home School to receive any child who had been guilty of larceny, resulting in the enforced care of such children in boarding homes. “ Whatever may be thought of the classification of human beings in this manner rather than by ascertained character, disposi tion, and capacity, we are not sure, but it will prove in the end to have been a good thing for the board, for it has forced us to find boarding homes for a number of apparently bad boys, in which the results have been most delightful.” This appears to have been the beginning of the later extensive work of the board in placing out children who had come before the courts because of delinquency. The selection of foster homes was also a subject of special concern during the first years. The 1895 report states :22 The persons who seek to secure children are not always the ones best calcu lated to be of service to them. To be restricted in the selection of homes to those voluntarily offered is to fail of the best work. There are multitudes of people whose homes would be thrown open to dependent children and in whose homes such children would receive excellent care and training, if a personal appeal were made to them. * * * A distinct effort should be made in order to extend the work of placing children into such homes. * * * . 21 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30,1895. Washington, 1895. 22Ibid., p. 14. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 124 * * * no carelessness or loose methods have been allowed to affect the investigation of the homes offered. The agent was assisted by members of the board in supervising homes in which children had been placed, but the supervision was ^ necessarily inadequate because of the number of children under care. The agent reported that “ at the close of the fiscal year no ward of the board had resided in any family home for longer than 10 months without having been visited,” most of them having been seen during the last six months of the year. The thoroughness with which the board went into conditions surrounding the children is shown by the data included in the statistical analysis in the annual reports from the very beginning of the work. Special attention was given to the care of infants committed to the board. Practically all wards of the board 2 years old and under were placed in private homes during the first years. Not more than two were placed under the care of any one person. The number of children under temporary care increased rapidly. Under the law creating the Board of Children’s Guardians agents of the board were permitted to take charge of children for not longer than one week, without authority of the court, and the law was construed to imply that children might be given “ temporary care” for any length of time by the authority of the courts. Under the provision of a law passed m 1875 (Forty-fourth Congress) certain feeble-minded children in the District were taken in charge by the Secretary of the Interior and provided for at District expense at the training school at Elwyn, Pa. On March 3, 1893 (Fiftysecond Congress), Congress included in the District appropriation bill a provision transferring to the Board of Children’s Guardians the authority for placing feeble-minded children. The magnitude of the task was early apparent and was summed up by the board in its second report:23 We know of no instance wherein any other body, public or private, has been charged with the variety of duties and responsibilities which has been laid upon this board. The care of infants; the care of dependent and neglected children; a share in the care of wayward and criminal children; the care of feeble-minded persons, who are always children, no matter what their age, and with all these classes the duty of investigation prior to reception, as well as of guardianship during minority, makes up a series of opportunities and responsibilities certainly not equaled in the District of Columbia, and not to our knowledge anywhere. THE PROBLEM OF ADEQUATE SUPPORT. One unvarying note runs through, the successive annual reports of the Board of Children’s Guardians—the urgency of more adequate appropriations for the work delegated to the board. Repeatedly the officers of the board have called attention to the need for funds that would permit the quality of work required for the proper safe guarding of its wards. The annual report issued in 1897 contains the following statement: The imperative need of an appropriation larger than any of those heretofore made for administrative purposes in proven by the statistics and statements rendered in another part of the report. The most urgent needs are those of an increased number of employees and an increased amount available for expenses of placing and visiting children. Aside from all considerations of economy, the welfare of the children demands that it should be practicable to place the children in homes where they may grow up to become adult citizens in the normal way. **Ibid., p . 2L https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OE CHILD-CARING WORK. 125 The consideration of the importance of increased administrative funds from the point of view of economy is most readily to be expressed, as this is susceptible of statistical treatment. The per capita cost of maintenance of children in board ing homes and in institutions was $124.10 in 1894, $118.66 in 1896, $113.15 in 1896, and $120.14 in 1897. Children above the period of infancy, and who have no special needs and receive no special training, may be boarded in institutions for $96 per annum. If it were desirable to place the children in institutions and leave them there unsupervised, the only administrative expense of their care would be that of reception and placement, incurred once and finally; but if they be placed in free homes, under the conditions of family life, and be properly supervised, the cost of such supervision will be the only expense incurred in their behalf. Administrative expenses per capita were $35.68 in 1894, $16.75 in 1895, $13.45 in 1896, and $11.67 in 1897. It appears, therefore, that for every child removed from an institution charging the lowest rate and placed in a free home an annual saving of about $75 may be made. Of the 51 children in institutions where board is paid, some of them of the more expensive class, at the close of the year probably as many as 40 might have been placed out had proper means been at hand, resulting in a reduction of expense at the rate of more than $3,000 annually. * * * The law establishing the board authorizes the employment of two agents, but the appropriation bills have never provided funds sufficient for the employment of more than one competent person to that position.24 The executive of the board further emphasized the lack of adequate supervision of wards because of insufficient funds in the following statement: This is a very unsatisfactory showing in comparison with the records of the three preceding years, when the number of children was not so great and when the work of placing out was permitted a healthy growth in the hope that Con gress would recognize its value, both for the children and the taxpayers, and give the means to foster and extend it. During the first half of the year a consider able number of children were placed in free homes; but when relief for our over burdened administrative fund was not obtained from the general deficiency bill the work of placing out was practically suspended. The act of Congress creating the board requires visitations to be made to placed-out children at least once a year, but we have not been able to obey the mandate. * * * Efforts have been made to offset the lack of personal super vision of the placed-out children by correspondence and by requesting frequent reports from the foster parents. * * * These, however, can not be expected to disclose any faults in the homes themselves or any failures on the part of foster parents to come up to the high standards of care expected by the board, and which can only be secured through careful personal supervision.26 Again in the following year the agent of the board reported that the board had been compelled to leave undone things which ought to have been done because the appropriations for the year were no greater than for the preceding year, whereas the demands were largely in creased. “ Only a few absolutely necessary or especially desirable placements could be made, and a very large number of children pre viously placed out could not be visited.” 26 The 1906 report gives figures on the comparative per capita cost of administration and supervision for a period of years and points out that much of the implied saving actually represented a danger ous lowering of the standards of protection for the wards. An examination of this table shows the progressively diminishing per capita cost of administration and supervision from $58.80 in 1894 to $9.34 in 1906. It is well understood that with a complete plant and a small population the fixed harges assume an excessive proportion, and thus it was that in the first year of the board’s work this per capita cost was $58.80, while in the second year it 24 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the D istrict of Columbia for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1897, p. 5. s Ibid., p. 10. 226 Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1898, p. 14. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 126 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA. was $22.87, and in the third year $16.99. At this time it began to be imprac ticable for the agent and the assistants provided for him to comply with the terms of the law in regard to the visitation of children, and such difficulty has existed ever since, becoming aggravated as time went on. While the number of children placed out in free homes who have not been visited as often as once in a year has not been large, the number of those who have not been visited as often as they should be has increased, and the obvious impracticability of making the number of visits that would have been imperative if more of the children of the character who need the most supervision had been placed out has made it necessary to keep-these children in institutions or at board. This is^poor econ omy, and when the advantages to the children of being removed from institutions to free family homes are considered it is a great injustice. The pressure to care for the children in the best manner has resulted m the diversion of so much of the available resources of the board from the performance of other duties imposed by the law and good practice that the records have fallen far in arrears and it has been impossible to make such investigations to serve as a basis for action and record as should be made.27 The annual reports of 1908 and 1909 reiterate the plea for adequate funds to carry on the work in such a way that the welfare oi the children under guardianship of the board, might be safeguarded, through the provision of a sufficiently large staff of well-qualified and properly compensated workers. The most important part of the work of the board is the placing of its wards in homes and their supervision. This work being once properly accomplished, the wards of the board take their place in the community on a par with normal children and self-supporting citizens. For the accomplishment of this work the board needs not only competent placing officers, but a sufficient number of them, so that none of its wards nor the homes in which they are placed shall be neglected. The rate of payment at present authorized for the salaries of the placing officers is insufficient to compensate properly employees who possess the necessary qualifications, and the number of placing officers whom the board is authorized to employ is insufficient to enable the board to place its wards in homes as rapidly and to keep them there as safely as should be. As has been pointed out several times in the past, the total expenditures of the board might be largely diminished if more could be paid for the administrative force, especially in the employment of additional placing officers. The act establishing the board requires records to be kept, which can not be kept in a proper manner because of the insufficiency of the clerical force in the office. Much work that the board should do can not be done at all.28 The process of selecting homes involves several steps. In the first place, offers of homes or solicitations of children for homes are received, and in the second place, confidential correspondence is conducted with clergymen, business men, local officials, and other persons in regard to the homes. Then the home should be visited personally by the placing officer, at least as soon as the child is placed. But it is evident that this process involves much time and labor. For the mere placement the present office force is inadequate. It is considered by competent authorities that such an organization as this board should have 1 visiting employee for each 100 of its wards placed in private homes. To maintain such an average the board should now have 12 placing officers and visiting inspectors. * * * . . Among the most pressing faults of the present field service of the board is the lack of visitation of placed-out wards. Some of these wards are placed in distant States, such as Maine, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Ohio, Michigan, Colorado, and California. It is evident that if the placing officers of the board must visit these wards even once a year, an inordinate expenditure of time and car fare will be necessitated. All these States, however, have child-caring agencies or philanthropic citizens who may be within easy access of wards of the board and who, if commissioned officially for the purpose, may make visitations to these wards in behalf of the board. The board is forbidden by law to accept voluntary 27 Thirteenth Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30, *^%ifiteenth Annual Report of the Board of Children’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30,1908, p. 6. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis d e v e l o pm e n t oe c h il d - caring w o r k . i 127 services and, if it were permitted to accept such, could not properly expect its aids to defray their own expenses in the- service of the board, nor would it prob ably be authorized to reimburse such expenses to persons not officially connected with it.29 For these reasons a contingent appropriation for personal services is solicited, the amount of such appropriation being tentatively placed at $200. Undoubtedly, if such method of procuring temporary services succeeds, a large increase of effectiveness in visitation of wards may be secured at small cost. The appropriation asked for administrative expenses aside from cost of personal services is the same as heretofore made. The contemplated increase in number of placing officers, if granted, should be followed by an increased amount of travel. Although a considerable balance of the appropriation for these purposes for the present year was returned to the Treasury, the conditions during the year were unusual. A change of agent and of one placing officer and other conditions interfered with the normal execution of the work of placement and visitation. The board has for the coming year one more placing officer than for the past, which should enable a larger amount of travel and visitation to be made. Against the possibility that a balance may result from such an appropriation as may be made is the certainty that if the appropriation were insufficient the work of the board would have to be suspended, for whereas the board is not responsible for such cost as may be imposed upon it by the courts in committing children to its care, and if it were unable to place and visit them in free homes could bring them back to the District and board them out, incurring debt therefor, it has within its control the cost of administration and may be held to account for exceeding the appropriation.30 In the report for 1921 the agent of the board pointed out the economy of making it possible to place children in well-supervised free homes: The additional inspectors and placing officers allowed in the current appropria tion act are enabling the Board of Children’s Guardians to place more children in free homes. It is expected that the report for the current fiscal year will show a reduction in the cost of maintenance for board and care of children. The board of guardians still needs additional investigators and inspectors. We have sub mitted estimates for this purpose and urge their favorable consideration. If the board is supplied with a sufficient force to enable it to place in private family homes all children that are fitted for such homes and also to supervise properly these children when so placed, a very marked saving will be effected in the amount necessary for the board and care of children, who, if not placed in free homes, must be maintained in institutions and boarding homes. It is now generally recognized that the system of placing in family homes, under proper inspection and supervision, is greatly to the benefit of the children, inasmuch as it insures their upbringing under more nearly normal family environment.31 INCREASE IN THE WORK. I t was shown in a preceding section that the ratio of dependent children under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians to the child population of the District was about the same in 1904, 1910, and 1922. The ratio was 15 per 1,000 of the population in the District under 21 years of age in 1910 and also in 1922, the ratio for the year 1904 having been 12 per 1,000. In actual numbers under care, how ever, there has been a very considerable increase since the early years of the board’s work. This is best shown in the following table, which gives for the period from 1894 through 1923 the number of wards received by the Board of Children’s Guardians during each year, the » On M ay 18,1910, a bill was passed which permits the board to accept assistance of voluntary workers. 80 Sixteenth Annual Report of the Board of Cmldren’s Guardians, for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1909, pp. 25-27. 81 Report of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia, 1921, p. 7. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 128 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. number under care at the end of each year, the number cared for each year, and the expenditures for each year: Number of wards received by the Board of Children’s Guardians during each year,s number under care at end of each year, total number under care in each year and total expenditures for each year: 1894 to 1928. Number of wards received. Year ended June 30— Total. 1894___________ ____ ________ 1895___________________ _ 1896__________________________ 1897..___ ________________ 1898....... ..................... .................... 1899_________ _______ ______ 1900_______________ . . . 1901____________________ 1902................................. .......... 1903..____ ____________ 1904_____ _________ 1905_____________________ 1906___________________ 1907_____ __________________ 1908_____________________ 1909_____ __________________ 1910_____________________ 1911_____________________ 1912......... .................................. 1913.......................................... 1914___ ___________________ 1915____ ______________________ 1916_______________________ 1917______ ___ _________________ 1918______ ____ ____________ 1919_____________________ 1920......... .............................. 1921_____ _______________ 1922___ _____________________ 1923___ ____ ___________ . 8 251 8172 8163 143 170 186 214 229 285 380 350 359 309 320 518 468 340 363 453 610 592 595 422 572 1,119 565 645 582 476 222 Perma nent. 8 203 8 110 8 93 ‘ 89 95 135 126 146 227 214 213 250 200 147 254 202 125 119 183 277 426 145 135 145 151 153 223 178 126 27 Tem porary. 8 48 8 62 8 70 54 76 51 88 83 58 166 137 109 109 173 264 266 215 244 270 333 166 450 387 427 968 412 422 404 350 195 Number Number under Expendi under care at for care dur tures end of ing year. year .8 year . 1 198 255 339 422 496 612 688 791 959 1,061 1 ,2 0 0 1,331 1,437 1,536 1,753 1,822 1,712 1,652 1,746 1,803 1,826 1,860 1,928 1,997 2,159 2,026 1,988 1,914 1,809 1,561 8 251 8 370 8 418 482 592 682 826 917 1,076 1,339 1,411 1,559 1,640 1,757 2,054 2,2 2 1 2,162 2,075 2,105 2,356 2,395 2,421 2,282 2,500 3,116 2,724 2,671 2,570 2,390 2,036 $15, 000. 00 21,728. 48 23,801.36 27) 420. 00 3 i 710.15 44; 750. 00 35,540. 76 51,950.00 57,431. 36 56,061.12 67i 447. 54 76,949. 39 74,152. 35 6 i; 854.45 68,109. 98 72,378. 84 64,105.07 6 < 139. 35 76,053. 98 93, 785. 74 100,942. 95 106,554. 70 113,985.44 138,422. 72 173; 798. 02 211,072. 54 213,309.35 248, 750.80 217,607.06 223,906.43 1 Excluding feeble-minded nonwards. 8 The figures here given are based on the number of children under care at the beginning of the year plus the number received during the year (except feeble-minded nonwards). For 1918, 1919, and 1922 the numbers are not the same as those given in the reports of the board. * Some of those received as temporary wards were made permanent later in the year. These are counted among the temporary and among the permanent also, thus causing some duplication in the total. * The small number of permanent commitments in 1916 may due be to a decision of the court of appeals in 1915, th at the juvenile court was without authority to set aside a commitment after the expiration of the term of court m which the commitment was made. The best guide to the amount of work handled by the board is the number of wards cared for during each year. I t will be seen that this number was 2,031 in the year ended June 30, 1923. With 100 as the index number representing wards cared for during the year ended June 30, 1897, the proportionate numbers for wards cared for during each fifth year and during 1923 are as follows: 1897, 100; 1902, 223; 1907, 365; 1912, 437; 1917, 519; 1922, 496; 1923, 421. The funds expended for the administration of the work of the board showed the following ratios, 100 being used as the base for 1897: 1897, 100; 1902, 185; 1907,239; 1912, 323; 1917, 418; 1922, 643; 1923, 825. In contrast with these figures the increases in expendi tures for maintenance of wards are shown by the following index numbers: 1897, 100; 1902, 262; 1907, 252; 1912, 311; 1917, 630; 1922, 1,085; 1923, 1,262. t In considering the expenditures for maintenance of wards in relation to the increase in the number of wards under care it is neces sary to take into account two important facts: First, prior to 1910 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK. 129 the Board of Children’s Guardians paid from its appropriation for the maintenance of wards cared for in both the industrial home schools; after that time the appropriations for the maintenance of the children in these institutions were made direct to the schools. Second, the amounts that had to be paid for the board of children, both in institutions and in family homes, were very appreciably increased in the years during and following the war. The needs of the administrative work are indicated in a com parison of the number of children in family homes under supervision of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Columbia on one date with the number under care of the division of child guardian ship of the Massachusetts Department of Public Welfare.32 On June 30, 1923, the District board had under supervision in family homes 1,233 wards; 10 placing agents were looking after these children. On November 30, 1922, the Massachusetts agency had 5,209 children under care in family homes and 53 agents for the work of super vision. Thus if the District board had the same proportionate number of supervising agents as Massachusetts its staff would include 13 agents instead of 10. The Massachusetts agents supervising children placed in family homes had an average of less than 100 children per agent. The District board had an average of 123 children to each agent. In addition, the placing agents of the Dis trict board are charged with a considerable amount of work in con nection with the children who are temporarily in institutions. I t is generally agreed among child-caring agencies that the number of children in family homes supervised hy one agent should not exceed 50 to 75. The staff of the Board of Children’s Guardians, especially for its home-finding and supervisory work, is dangerously small in relation to the board’s field of work. In 1921 the staff totalled only 17, and even this was an increase of 5 over the staff five years previously. From 1904 through 1915 the total number of workers was from 8 to 11. CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRIES CONCERNING THE CARE OF DEPENDENT CHILDREN. In the history of public child-caring work in the District of Co lumbia a number o f special inquiries have been made by congres sional committees to determine the District’s needs or to secure a basis for action on proposed changes in law. The congressional documents containing reports of such hearings or of special data submitted to Congress furnish especially valuable source material on the history of public and private child-caring work in the District and on the policies that have determined the development of the public charities. The most extensive of the congressional inquiries was made by a joint committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives appointed in 1896. The resulting report dealt with the activities of the public institutions of the District and the private organizations that received Government subsidies in any form. Compiled soon after the institutions and agencies were created, this report is an especially valuable source of information on the early history of child care and protection in the District. 82 For area covered by the District board in its child-placing work see pp. 63-64. The travel incident to supervision probably compares fairly w ith th at of the Massachusetts department. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 130 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN TH E DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. A second document of very great interest in tracing the develop ment of child-caring work is the report submitted to Congress by the Commissioners of the District in 1904, in accordance with a require ment contained in an annual appropriation bill. This report dis cussed “ a plan for the future care of delinquent and dependent children in the District of Columbia.” Special consideration was given to the work of the Board of Children’s Guardians and to the relation of the Government to the work of private institutions caring for dependent children. The need for establishing a special court for children’s cases was discussed in this report, as it had been in the report of the 1896 joint congressional committee, and the recommendations made by the commissioners were soon thereafter incorporated into the law creat ing the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia. Many of the findings of these special inquiries by Congress, however, were not so quickly converted into law. Some of the provisions that were urged in 1896 and in 1904 have been debated before congressional committees at intervals up to the present time. One of the most important recommendations of the early reports was accepted by Congress in 1922, when an appropriation was made for an institution for the care and training o f the feeble-minded of the District. On certain questions concerning policies of public child-caring work in the^pistrict hearings have been held by congressional committees within the last year or two.33 In the light of recent discussions relat ing to the methods of public child-caring work in the District the earlier congressional documents are of special interest as showing the origin of some of the present policies of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The early congressional reports furnish particularly interesting opinions on such questions as the use of institutional and family-home care for public wards, the need for more adequately safeguarding dependent children, and the importance of measures for the prevention of child dependency and neglect. In 1909 there took place in Washington a gathering of people from all parts of the country who had been invited by President Roosevelt to discuss the question of the best methods of caring for dependent children. The report of the so-called White House Conference on Dependent Children was submitted to Congress by President Roose velt and was made available as a Senate document.34 While this conference did not primarily concern itself with conditions in the District of Columbia, the President made special reference to the child-caring problem in the District in his message to the Senate and the House of Representatives. These recommendations are still among the debated issues in the District, none of them having as yet been incorporated in law or practice.35 The three reports dealt with above are the most significant of the congressional documents concerned with child-caring work in the District and will therefore be discussed further in this section. Among the source material listed in the appendix to this report (pp. 158—160) will be found references to other hearings by congresn,83 ? A t ? ° ^ ®n bearmgs cited in Appendix, pp. 168-160. Investigation of the Board of Children’s F ^efo/ l t,he J“nt Subcommittee of the Senate and House of Representatives Comrmttee on^the ^ ^lct^of^Columbia, Sixty-seventh Congress, fourth session, on the Brookhart-Free hill 0/o P r°e^ d™?s,?f,tuhe Conferenee on the Care of Dependent Children, held at Washington, D. C., Jan. 25-26, 1909. Sixtieth Congress, second session, S. Doe. No. 72i. Washington, 1909. 60¡?66 pp< lo o “ lo 9 . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis DEVELOPMENT OF CHILD-CARING WORK. 131 sional committees and to reports on special subjects, most of them relating to bills introduced in Congress. JOINT CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE OF 1896. The District of Columbia appropriation act approved in June, 1896, provided for the appointment of a joint select committee, to consist of three Senators and three members of the House of Repre sentatives, to make an investigation of the charities and reformatory institutions in the District of Columbia, especially those maintained in part or entirely at public expense. As specified in the act, the inquiry was to include the relation of these institutions to the Federal and District Governments; their efficiency, management, and resources; “ whether such charitable or reformatory institutions are effective and economical in their organization, methods, and expendi ture to provide for the poor and destitute;” and whether it might be practicable for the commissioners or other authority in the District to make contracts or other arrangements with these institutions to provide such care. The report of the committee was presented to Congress July 21, 1897.36 Of the series of 11 hearings held by the committee, 4 dealt with the care of dependent children. The topics outlined for discussion at the hearings show the detail with which the congressional committee went into the questions concerning the care and protection of depend ent children: F ourth H e a r in g . Subject: Dependent children. To be heard: Officers of the Board of Children’s Guardians; officers of the Humane Society; judges of District courts. TOPICS. 1. What children are, properly speaking, dependent; and what are the duties of the District toward such as are dependent? 2. Has the District a duty toward children not officially declared dependent? 3. Methods of taking up dependent children; the limits of guardianship. 4. The proper training for dependent children. 5. The disposal of dependent children; in homes; in boarding places. 6. The need of visitation in the case of children placed out. F if t h H e a r in g . Subject: Dependent children; Institutional training. To be heard: Officers of the Board of Children’s Guardians; officers of the Industrial Home School; officers of the National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women and Children; officers of the Humane Society. TOPICS. 1. The facilities offered by aided District institutions to care for dependent children. , 2. What coordination of existing institutions and agencies is possible and desirable (a) for taking up children, (b) for training children, (c) for placing out and visiting children. 3. Changes in existing institutions necessary to adapt them for the care of all ' dependent children, properly so called. 4. Industrial training for dependent children. 5. The possibility of securing homes. Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Institutions in the District of Columbia: P art I—Hearings; Statements; Reports from Cities; Suggestions for a Board of Chanties. P a rt II—Report. P art III—Historical Sketches of the Charities and Reformatory Institutions m the District of Columbia. Fifty-fifth Congress, first session, S. Docs., vol. 8 , Doc. 185. Washington, 1898. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 132 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. S ix t h H e a r in g . Subject: Dependent children; Foundlings. To be heard: Officers of the Children’s Hospital; officers of the Washington Hospital for Foundlings; officers of St. Ann’s Infant Asylum; officers of the Board of Children’s Guardians. TOPICS. 1. 2. 3. 4. The work of the foundling institutions in the District of Columbia. Extent to which public aid may properly be granted. Mortality. Placing out and adoption of children. 5 . Visitation of children. 6. Private foundling asylums. Sev en th H e a r in g . Subject: Dependent children; Charity. To be heard: Officers of the German Orphan Asylum; officers of the Church Orphanage of St. John’s Parish; officers of St. Rose Industrial School; officers of St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum; officers of the Newsboys’ and Children’s Aid Society. TOPICS. 1. May public funds properly be used to support sectarian or private insti tutions? 2. Where grants of public money are made, ought not the District to have the right to place dependent children in the institution so aided? 3. What would be the effect of carrying out the declared policy of Congress to make no appropriations of money to sectarian institutions? 4. Does the policy of taking children from and returning them to parents stimulate dependency? 5. What becomes of children discharged from the sectarian and private insti tutions? 6. What is the length of time children are maintained at public expense and is the expense per child unduly large?87 In the discussion of the charities of the District of Columbia it was brought out that the board of trade in 1895 adopted resolutions asking Congress to abolish the office of superintendent of charities and to create a board of charities which should have supervisory control over all charity work in the District.38 The representative of the board of trade also recommended that the Board of Children’s Guardians should have general supervision over child-caring work, and that no child should become a charge on the charity appropria tions made by Congress until he had been made a ward, either per manent or temporary, of the board and subject to a proper court. He also urged that the Board of Charities should have supervision of the work of other institutions to bring into harmony, as far as pos sible, institutions that had grown up independently of each other. I t was pointed out in the hearings that nearly all institutions that received public funds began as private institutions. Emphasis was given to the importance of judicial determination of dependency when public funds were to be used. The duty of the Government toward dependent children being established, the Government itself should determine what children are to be classed as objects of its care in the various aspects in which that care is to be given. No children should be regarded as dependent without careful and authoritative determina tion of the question of their status, which determination is impracticable in its most adequate sense without recourse to judicial inquiry and decision. The courts alone have power to elicit that full information which is requisite to a 87 Ibid., https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis P art I, pp. 3-4. Ibid., Part I, p. 14. DEVELOPMENT OP CHILD-CABING WOBK. 133 proper determination of the status of the citizen. In all cases, therefore, in which the dependency of the children is in question, the question should be determined by the courts.39 This question of the determination of dependency was also urged by the agent of the Board of Children’s Guardians, as follows: There should exist in every well-regulated city one official agency to which should be referred all reports and complaints of the condition of children alleged to be in any such situation as to make them proper subjects for public protection and support. This agency should make a tentative investigation of the case, so as to ascertain whether it probably falls within the intent of the law governing the public support of children. If in the judgment of the agent it is properly such a case or might be such a case, it should be his duty to present the case before the court designated for that purpose for an authoritative examination. The court should summon before it the child and parents, if either are living, and should make a thorough investigation under oath of the facts relating to the necessity of the child, and the judgment should rest with the court as to whether the cir cumstances were such as made it absolutely necessary for the protection and safety of the child that it should be placed under public support and public guardianship. In my judgment the necessity for public support carries with it the right of public guardianship.40 ly \ Attention was called in the hearings to the fact that it was a great handicap to the work for children that dependency cases had to be brought before the police court, and mention was made of the de sirability of having them come before a tribunal “ not connected with criminals.” The statement of the president of the Board of Children’s Guardians thus described the situation that existed in 1897 in connection with the care of dependent children: At present there are two systems of admitting children to public support and protection: One through the courts and the Board of Children’s Guardians, the other through officers and managers of institutions without any formality which has effect at law. The first involves legal guardianship, permanent responsibility of the guardian, and a practical guaranty against subsequent distress and de pendency. The second involves nothing but temporary shelter and care, the child being liable to recall at the whim of the parent. The two are inimical and mutually exclusive. Since the close of 1894 the second has increased and the grg^ decreased. One or the other should receive final official approval and support. The attempt to operate both will hereafter, as heretofore, lead to confusion, con tention, and unnecessary expense. Public funds should only be disbursed in the form of specific payments for specific services rendered, and a plan embodying this principle can not be put into operation without taking charge of the admission and discharge of children. It is desirable that all applicants for care and support of children at public expense should submit to a uniform test of dependency and necessity. This can only be secured when all are received through one authority. It is desirable that the entire field be adequately covered, so that there shall be always available prompt and sufficient provision for child dependents of all sorts. This can only be secured through the maintenance of a public agency, some being undesirable subjects, not sought as inmates by any institution, such as cripples, the feeble-minded, the epileptic, and the morally depraved. It is desirable that records be kept of all child dependents, in order that their conduct and history may be known. Only through such records can we here after ascertain what has been the result of our efforts for their preservation. The only real test of general efficiency in child-saving methods is the proportion of the children dealt with which is saved to honorable self-support and the reason able performance of civic duty. Now each chartered institution works out its own ideas as to records, and there are not now in existence any records which show satisfactorily the results of their work in the past. * * * a* Ibid., Part I, p. 92. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis * * * * « Ibid., Part I, p. 110. 134 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. There is now invested in the real estate of the various child-caring institutions of the District of Columbia, exclusive of the Industrial Home School, which the District owns, over $162,000 of public money, and the appropriation bill for 1898 gives the same institutions $37,700 for maintenance. Yet there is no court of justice and no public official who has authority to put in or take out a single child, except that a child might possibly be released through proceedings under a writ of habeas corpus. The parents of these public dependents, however, can demand, and frequently do secure, the release of the children to them when the institution officers know that such parents are both unfit and unable to properly care for their children.41 The president of the board also referred to the need for different court provision and for proper detention facilities, a condition that was not corrected until many years afterward. He recommended on behalf of the board that commitments be made to the board “ by the police court or the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia holding session for orphans’ court business,” and that such courts be empowered to make and enforce orders for maintenance of children by their parents.43 I t is interesting to note that this recommendation was made two years before the establishment of the first juvenile court (in Chicago, in 1899) and almost 10 years before this suggested procedure was put into operation in the District of Columbia. The committee’s report on its findings called attention to the generosity of private benevolence in the District of Columbia, especi ally in view of the peculiar conditions affecting the District—the short residence on the part of so many people and also the large influx of persons who have no real claim to the charity of the citizens. I t was pointed out that Washington was every year attracting more persons of wealth and leisure from all parts of the country .and that it might be assumed that the amount of money available for charity in the District would increase, provided some system could be ar ranged whereby individuals could be assured that their gifts would be used wisely and effectively.43 As the first step toward efficient reorganization of the District charities the committee recommended the appointment of a board of charities which should have the power to visit and inspect all in stitutions receiving appropriations from Congress. I t stated that in 1896 there were 1,014 children in private institutions subsidized by Congress and more than 60,000 adults receiving some form of aid or medical attention in institutions or hospitals supported wholly or in part by the public treasury. None of these institutions was under public control or supervision. The committee recommended that where there is public support there should be public control. An interesting summary was presented of the two systems of caring for dependent children, which the committee defined as “ the asylum system and the placing-out system.” In this District two systems are at work—the asylum system and the placingout system. In theory, however, the asylums recognize the placing-out system; each of them has provisions in its charter for the indenture of children, and each practices that system so far as its resources will allow. On the other hand, the Board of Children’s Guardians, which makes the placing-out system its founda tion, is compelled by the nature of things to use the asylum for the reception and for thè preparation of children for homes. The mutual antagonism of the two systems appears in their practical opera tion. The placing-out system insists that before a child becomes properly a dependent—that is, a proper charge upon the public—the courts or some other official authority shall investigate the case and decide as to the facts of such dependency. The asylum system—so called for convenience—maintains that « Ibid., P art I, pp. 450, 451. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis « Ibid., P art I, p. 452. ‘a Ibid., P art II, p. 3. D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -O A R IN G W O RK . 135 it is the duty of the State to assist in caring for children whose parents may for any reason be unable to care for them; and in case the parents become able to resume the care of their offspring, under this system the children may be returned to them. Children are received without official investigation, each institution ^ or organization having its own rules in regard to the admission and dismission of children. ' . . . Again, the placing-out system is based on the theory that where the natural parents of a child have proved remiss in their duty it may be for the .best inter ests of both the child and society to have the child placed in a new home where it will grow up as a part of the community and in this way be trained in habits of self-reliance and in the duties and privileges of citizenship. Retention in an institution is contemplated only to the extent of training the individual child, so far as may be necessary, in habits of veracity, cleanliness, and order, so as to fit it for entrance into a home. The asylum system practically prolongs the training for years, during which the child is supported by the community; and endeavors in the institution to give such a training as the public schools would provide for persons placed out. Often these institutions are connected with and in part supported by religious organizations. * * * . A third difference between the placing-out and the asylum systems is found in the fact that the latter system in effect maintains no supervision over the child after it leaves the institution, whereas it is an essential part of the placingout system to visit at intervals the children so placed out and to retain control over the welfare and the persons of its wards, to the end that they shall be prop erly cared for, educated, and trained. ..... As has been said, the difference in the two systems is rather practical than theoretical, since the asylum does not intend to provide for the unworthy, nor to keep children beyond the time when good^homes can be found for them, nor to neglect children placed out. The weak point in the system is that it is not so organized as to protect.itself against fraud, to search for suitable homes, or to make systematic visitations. Its entire energies and resources are required to maintain the institution itself.43a The placing-out system is credited with a much lower mortality rate for children under 2 years of age than is found among children of the same age group in institutions. During 1896, of the children under 2 years of age who were under the care of the Board of Chil dren’s Guardians, 35.9 per cent died; for an institution which placed out with nurses a considerable proportion of the babies under its charge, the percentage of children who died was 56.3 and for a second institution the percentage was given as 70.44 . One of the largest institutions, it was said, as a rule and seemingly as a result of policy, had no knowledge of the parents of the children received by it.45 Another institution secured information regarding the parentage of its children, many of whom were half orphans cared for temporarily. The Board of Children’s Guardians investi gated each case coming to its attention and if possible induced the parents to provide support for their children. Attention was called to the need for combatting the evils of the “ foundhng-asylum system by finding homes where mothers and children could be placed together. . The last section of the publication by the Congressional committee contains historical sketches of the institutions in the District and brief outlines of their fields of activity. The descriptions include 14 private institutions caring for dependent children and the Board ot Children’s Guardians. <»* I b id ., P a r t I I , p p . 24-25. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis « I b id ., P a r t II, p p . 38-39. « I b i d ., P a r t I I , p . 40. 136 C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E DISTRICT OF COLU M BIA . to report to Congress at the first regular session of the Fifty-eighth Congress a general plan for the future care of the delinquent and dependent children in the District of Columbia.” In compliance with this provision, the commissioners submitted a report early in January, 1904, which was printed as a House document and re printed as a Senate document.46 The first recommendation made in this report related to the establishment of a separate court for children’s cases: Congress should provide for a juvenile tribunal before which all children, delinquent or dependent, who are to become a charge upon the public funds should be brought. This tribunal should be entirely separate from all existing courts. It should be accommodated in a separate building, which should also contain the house of detention. The District government should own the building to be thus used for a house of detention and a juvenile tribunal. No child should be placed in any institution at public expense until the fact of delinquency or dependency has been first ascertained and declared by the juvenile tribunal. All children of the class now committed to the Reform School for Boys and the Reform School for Girls should be committed by the juvenile tribunal to those schools. All other children, delinquent or dependent (with exception of a class noted later), should be placed by the tribunal in the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, which board should be appointed by the Commissioners of the District of Columbia. Thejuvenile tribunal should place upon probation under the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians and its probation officers, who should be as numerous as may be necessary, such children as are now so placed by the police court. All other children committed to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians should be made its wards until maturity, as is now done, with provision for the relinquishment of the guardianship in individual cases by the Board of Children’s Guardians with the approval of the juvenile tribunal. Most cases where a parent (or parents) desires to have a child temporarily cared for in some period of family distress can, and would, be handled by private charitable institutions without public aid.47 The commissioners recommended that the Board of Children’s Guardians, which had been in operation for 10 years, be given what ever additional authority and enlargement of its force was necessary. Approval was given to the board’s policy of providing homes m families for its infant wards and for other children “ who are fitted for home life and for whom fitting homes with due regard for racial and religious considerations can be found,” and it was added that “ in general, in the future as in the past, the board should place in institu tions only those who are not fitted for home life or for whom suitable homes can not be immediately provided.” The report stated that the board, applying these principles, would place the larger number of its wards in families, either as boarders or otherwise, and would place in institutions only special classes of children, and these usually for limited periods. I t was pointed out that the board should be given an adequate number of employees to supervise properly the care of its wards in families and that ample institutional facilities should be provided, under the control of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, to care for the children who could not be placed in families immediately. I t was also rec ommended that the board be authorized to make contracts for serv ice that it might require from institutions supported by private funds. « C a r e o f D e lin q u e n t M id D e p e n d e n t C h ild r e n in t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia ; le t t e r fr o m t h e C o m m is ®* j ^ D ^ t r i c t o f C o lu m b ia s u b m it t in g a p la n fo r t h e f u t u r e c a r e o f d e li n q u e n t a n d d e p e n d e n t in * ° * G o t a n b f a . F if t y - e ig h t h C o n g r e ss, s e c o n d s e s s io n , S . D o c . N o . 8 5 , J a n . 6 , 1904. 7 l b id ., p . 1 . T h e J u v e n ile C o u r t o f t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia w a s c r e a te d in 1906 b y a c t o f C o n g r e ss. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -O A R IN G W O RK . 137 An especially urgent need reported was more adequate provision for colored wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians. The establishment of two institutions for negro children was suggested, one a temporary home for children who would be returned to their parents within a short time (such care being provided for white children in private institutions) and the other an industrial home for negro children to accommodate both boys and girls.48 Attention was called to the need for institutional provision for feeble-minded children and for children afflicted with epilepsy.49 The need for individual case work and the relation between the public and private organizations for child care were stated by the commissioners as follows: So far as the children are concerned the object to be kept in view should be the development of the individual from a state of dependence to a state of inde pendence, including a reformation in case of delinquency—and excluding the hopelessly feeble-minded—by such education through the environment and formal instruction as will best fit the child for good citizenship and private usefulness. Each case must be treated separately so as to be treated appro priately; therefore it should first be sifted out by a proper tribunal and then having been committed to a public guardian, the child should be placed for nurture and instruction wherever in the whole range of the system it may be most advantageous for the child. The State can not and would not discourage private philanthropy, and the outhned system leaves a perfectly free field for private institutions; but they should receive neither public dependents nor public money, except through public channels and under public supervision. * * * * * * * The declared purpose of Congress in establishing the Board of Children’s Guardians was to reform the administration of the public child-caring work in the District of Columbia, then in the hands of private institutions, not coordi nated into a system and not under governmental control, and also to improve the treatment of dependent children. The principle Congress had in view Was to provide for a judicial ascertainment of the need of public support for children and then to centralize authority and responsibility for the care of children properly chargeable to public funds. All classes of dependent and delinquent children except those properly belonging to the reform schools, and including the feeble minded, were placed in the care of this board.50 The commissioners’ report listed six institutions maintained or aided by public funds which cared for dependent children.51 The Industrial Home School was the only public institution. In spite of the fact that it was supported entirely by public funds, this school could not under the law at that time be required to admit children W any public authority. I t received wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians and also received other children with no other action than that of its own committee on admissions. The one institution for colored children was conducted under private auspices but was maintained almost entirely at public expense (receiving $9,800 annually). I t was not, however, under public control and received children through its own board of management without reference to public authorities. The daily average number of children cared for was about 100. Four other private institutions, receiving from the Government annual appropriations of $1,000 to $6,000, also received children 48 T h e Industrial Home School for Colored Children was established as a public institution in has been equipped to care for boys only. 1907- it « I t w a s n o t u n t i l 1922 t h a t C o n g r e s s m a d e a n a p p r o p r ia t io n fo r a n in s t it u t io n fo r t h e f e e b le -m in d e d 80 C a re o f D e lin q u e n t a n d D e p e n d e n t C h ild r e n in t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia . F if t y - e ig h t h C o n g ress s e c o n d s e s sio n , S . D o c . N o . 85, p . 4 . ’ 61 I b i d ., p p . 5 -6 . 88962°—24t- -10 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 138 C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTRICT OF CO LU M BIA . without reference to public authorities. In regard to one ^of^ these institutions it was stated, “ I t receives an annual appropriation of $6,000, and about $1,500 is contributed from private sources. The daily average number of children cared for was 35. An insti tution receiving $5,400 annually from public funds had a daily average number of about 100. The third institution received $1 800 annually from Congress. I t had “ a considerable endowment fund, and for years the private contributions had been more than sufficient to meet the running expenses.” The fourth had a daily average of about 25 children and received $1,000 annually from public funds, having a somewhat larger income from private sources. Besides these institutions there were some conducted under private auspices in which the Board of Children’s Guardians boarded children, making contracts for payment for the care needed. _# In 1906 the recommendations that had been made by the joint congressional committee in 1897 and by the commissioners m their 1904 report to Congress, bore fruit in the enactment of a law creating the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia and providing for the court commitment to the Board of Children’s Guardians ot children who were not proper subjects for the two national training schools. T H E “ W H IT E H O U S E C O N F E R E N C E ,” 1909. •Closely related to the foregoing inquiry by Congress into the care of dependent children was the conference called by President Roosevelt in 1909, popularly known as the “ White House Con ference on Dependent Children.” 52 .. . , In the request for such a conference made to the President ot me United States by a number of the leading child-welfare workers of the country the introductory sentences referred to progress in the District of Columbia, The letter addressed to the President began: In your message to Congress December 6, 1904, urging the establishment u fa juvenile court for the District of Columbia you said: ‘ No Christian and civilized community can afford to show a happy-go-lucky lack of concern for the youth of to-day; for, if so, the community will have to pay a terrible penalty of financial burden and social degradation in the to-morrow. ^ Congress promptly responded and enacted an excellent juvenile-court law. The wisdom of this step has already been proven by the work of the court. In his special message to the Senate and House of Representatives, February 15, 1909, presenting the conclusions of the Conference on the Care of Dependent Children, President Roosevelt included the following special references to the needs of the District of Columbia. I further urge that such legislation be enacted as may be necessary in order to bring the laws and practices in regard to the care of dependent children m all Federal territory into harmony with the other conclusions reached by the Congress took a step in the direction of the conclusions of this conference in 1893, when, on the recommendation of the late Amos G. Warner, then superin tendent of charities for the District of Columbia, the Board of Children s Guar dians was created, with authority, among other things, to place children m family homes. That board has made commendable progress, and its work should be strengthened and extended. * ' ; ... „ I recommend legislation for the District of Columbia in accordance with the fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth sections of the conclusions of the conference, as follows: 62 p r o c e e d in g s o f t h e C o n fe r e n c e o n t h e C a r e o f D e p e n d e n t C h ild r e n , h e ld a t W a s h in g t o n , D . C ., J a n u a r y 2 5 -2 6 , 1909. S ix t ie t h C o n g r e ss, s e c o n d s e s s io n , S . D o c . N o . 721. W a s h in g to n , 190». »«I b i d ., p. 17. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis D E V E L O PM E N T OF C H IL D -C A R IN G W O RK . 139 1. That the approval of the Board of Charities be required for the incorpora tion of all child-caring agencies, as well as amendments of the charter of any benevolent corporation which includes child-caring .work, and that other than duly incorporated agencies be forbidden to engage in the care of needy children. This legislation is needed in order to insure the fitness and responsibility of those who propose to undertake the care of helpless children. Such laws have long been in satisfactory operation in several of the larger States of the Union. 2. That the Board of Charities, through its duly authorized agents, shall in spect the work of all agencies which care for dependent children, whether by institutional or by home-finding methods, and whether supported by public or private funds. The .State has always jealously guarded the interests of children whose parents have been able to leave them property by requiring the appoint ment of a guardian, under bond, accountable directly to the courts, even though there be a competent surviving parent. Surely the interests of the child who is not only an orphan but penniless ought to be no less sacred than those of the more fortunate orphan who inherits property. If the protection of the Government-is necessary in the one case, it is even more necessary in the other. If we are to require that only incorporated institutions shall be allowed to engage in this responsible work, it is necessary to provide for public inspection, lest the State should become the unconscious partner of those who either from ignorance or inefficiency are unsuited to deal with the problem. 3. That the education of children in orphan asylums and other similar insti tutions in the District of Columbia be under the supervision of the Board of Education, in order that these children may enjoy educational advantages equal to those of the other children. Normal school life comes next to normal home life in the process of securing the fullest development of the child. 4. That all agencies engaged in child-caring work in the District of Columbia be required by law to adopt adequate methods of investigation and make per manent records relative to children under their care, and to exercise faithful personal supervision over their wards until legally adopted or otherwise clearly beyond the need of further supervision; the forms and methods of such investition, records, and supervision to be prescribed and enforced by the Board of Charities. I deem such legislation as is herein recommended not only important for the welfare of the children immediately concerned but important as setting an example of a high standard of child protection by the National Government to the several States of the Union, which should be able to look to the Nation for leadership in such matters.54 The summary of the conclusions reached by the conference in cluded the following: 1. Home care.— Children of worthy parents or deserving mothers should, as a rule, be kept with their parents at home. 2. Preventive work.—The effort should be made to eradicate causes of depend ency, such as disease and accident, and to substitute compensation and insur ance for relief. 3. Home finding.—Homeless and neglected children, if normal, should be cared for in families, when practicable. 4. Cottage system.—Institutions should be on the cottage plan with small units, as far as possible. 5. Incorporation.—Agencies caring for dependent children should be incorpo rated, on approval of a suitable State board. 6. State inspection.—The State should inspect the work of all agencies which care for dependent children. 7. Inspection of educational work.—Educational work of institutions and agencies caring for dependent children should be supervised by State educa tional authorities. 8. Facts and records.—Complete histories of dependent children and their parents, based upon personal investigation and supervision, should be recorded for guidance of child-caring agencies. 9. Physical care.—Every needy child should receive the best medical and surgical attention and be instructed in health and hygiene. 10. Cooperation.—Local child-caring agencies should cooperate and establish joint bureaus of information.55 6< I b id ., p p . 7 -8 . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis “ I b i d ., p p . 8 -9 . https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis APPENDIX A.—GENERAL TABLES. T able 1 .— Number and per cent distribution in various types of placement at end of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians under minority commitment. T o t a l.» B o a r d in g hom es. Free h o m e s .3 I n s titu t io n s . Y ear. T o ta l: 1895............ 1896______ 1897............ 1898............ 1899............ 1900______ 1 9 0 1 ........... 1902............ 1903______ 1904______ 1905............ 1906______ 1907______ 1908______ 1909______ 1910............ 1911............ 1912............ 1913______ 1914______ 1915______ 1916______ 1917______ 1918______ 1919............ 1920............ 1921............ 1922............ 1923............ W h ite : 1904............ 1 9 0 5 ...... 1906_____ 1907............ 1908______ 1909............ 1910______ 1911............ 1 9 1 2 ...... 1913............ 1914______ 1915............ 1916______ 1917............ 1 9 1 8 ........... 1919............ 1920______ 1921............ 1922............ 1923............ C o lo re d : 1904............ 1905............ 1906............ 1907______ 1908______ 1909______ 1910______ 1911:........... 1 9 1 2 ........... 1913............ 1914______ 1915............ 1916............ 1 9 1 7 .. . 1918______ 1919............ 1 9 2 0 ...... 1921............ 1922 1923............ I n d e n tu r e , a p p r e n tic e , and w age h o m e s .3 H o s p it a ls . N o. Per ct. N o. Per c t. N o. Per c t. N o. Per c t. N o. Per c t. N o. 255 312 380 445 552 634 720 898 993 1,134 1,267 1 ,364 1,390 1 ,526 1,625 1,523 1 ,452 1 ,439 1,515 1 ,732 1 ,644 1,587 1,593 1 ,664 1 ,530 1, 537 1, 610 1, 535 1 ,370 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 58 66 89 129 108 109 114 141 135 152 157 122 113 137 121 144 132 153 243 292 238 278 344 333 377 428 328 375 240 23 21 23 29 20 17 16 16 13 13 12 9 8 9 7 9 9 11 16 17 15 17 22 20 25 28 20 25 18 47 64 59 72 111 155 175 202 275 291 425 551 588 648 713 637 582 520 503 541 514 461 454 599 545 501 690 682 814 18 21 16 16 20 24 24 22 28 25 34 40 42 43 44 42 40 36 33 31 31 29 29 36 36 33 43 44 59 46 47 57 73 104 110 138 146 158 237 192 168 138 166 198 177 209 256 284 413 444 397 326 272 188 234 233 214 132 18 15 15 16 19 17 19 16 16 21 15 12 10 11 12 12 14 18 19 24 27 25 20 16 12 15 15 14 10 96 124 159 147 200 227 245 357 375 394 438 457 473 478 464 446 407 375 339 313 286 218 188 177 125 109 119 79 65 38 40 42 33 36 36 34 40 38 35 35 34 34 31 29 30 28 26 22 18 17 14 12 11 8 7 7 5 5 4 1 3 2 3 3 1 4 7 6 7 2 7 13 . 7 10 5 15 23 11 27 36 38 21 29 37 26 30 400 436 486 493 532 565 515 473 463 488 599 578 560 542 532 520 531 606 583 512 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 17 22 24 21 24 16 22 23 30 33 42 31 47 58 70 71 107 126 176 107 4 5 5 4 5 3 4 5 7 7 7 5 8 11 13 14 20 21 30 21 107 168 211 223 252 280 244 216 191 178 208 198 181 190 197 224 184 256 278 312 27 38 43 45 47 50 47 46 41 36 35 34 32 35 37 43 35 42 48 61 108 87 91 82 84 96 98 102 117 152 227 234 204 153 122 93 117 111 62 41 27 20 19 17 16 17 19 21 25 31 38 41 36 28 23 18 22 18 11 8 155 144 144 152 151 143 128 111 97 91 88 86 64 65 66 50 40 35 21 21 39 33 29 31 28 25 25 23 21 19 15 15 12 12 13 9 8 6 4 4 4 3 3 1 3 8 2 2 4 7 7 5 5 10 6 5 7 9 8 8 734 831 878 897 994 1 ,060 1 ,008 979 976 1 ,027 1 ,1 3 3 1 ,066 1 ,027 1,051 1 ,1 3 2 1 ,0 1 0 1 ,0 0 6 1 ,0 0 4 952 858 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100- 135 135 98 92 113 105 122 109 123 210 250 207 231 286 263 306 321 202 199 133 18 16 11 10 12 10 12 11 13 20 22 19 23 27 23 30 32 20 21 15 184 257 340 365 396 433 393 366 329 325 333 316 280 264 402 321 317 434 404 502 25 31 39 41 40 41 39 37 34 32 29 30 27 25 36 32 31 43 42 58 129 105 77 56 82 102 79 107 139 132 186 210 193 173 150 95 117 122 152 91 18 13 9 6 8 10 8 11 14 13 17 20 19 16 13 9 12 12 16 11 239 294 313 321 327 321 318 296 278 248 225 200 154 123 111 75 69 84 58 44 33 35 36 36 33 30 32 30 28 24 20 19 15 12 10 7 7 9 6 5 3 3 4 1 4 6 6 8 1 8 16 6 22 26 32 16 22 28 18 22 Per ct. A bscon d er s. N o. Per ct. 1 8 7 15 21 27 30 45 51 46 53 49 59 76 90 116 112 112 8 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 131 150 151 206 245 245 274 236 203 159 89 9 9 9 13 15 15 18 15 13 10 6 1 1 9 12 13 14 18 22 21 19 24 27 27 24 59 66 71 77 76 69 38 23 2 3 - 3 44 37 46 62 72 94 91 . 93 106 104 123 127 147 179 174 197 160 134 121 66 6 5 5 7 7 9 9 10 11 10 11 12 14 17 15 20 16 13 13 8 i i i i i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 2 2 3 2 3 3 2 5 6 6 5 4 7 3 4 4 4 5 6 4 4 11 12 13 15 14 11 6 4 1 F r o m 1916 o n , in c lu d in g fe e b le -m in d e d w a r d s. 2 I n c lu d in g w o r k in g c h ild r e n w h o w e r e p a y in g th e ir o w n b o a r d a n d c h ild r e n w h o w e r e i n t h e h o m e s o f th e ir p a r e n ts . 3 B e g in n in g w it h t h e y e a r 1914 n o c h ild r e n w e r e p la c e d o n in d e n t u r e a n d a p p r e n tic e a g r e e m e n t. 143 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis C H IL D D E PE N D E N C Y IN T H E D ISTR IC T OF COLUM BIA, 144 T able 2. — Number and per cent distribution in various types of placement at end of each fiscal year; wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians under temporary commitment. T o t a l.1 F ree h o m e s .2 B o a r d in g h o m e s. In d en tu re, a p p r e n tic e , and w age h o m e s .3 ' I n s t it u t io n s . A b scon d ers. H o s p it a ls . Y ear. N o. T o t a l: Per ct. N o. P er c t. 71 142 182 174 190 197 102 132 80 39 42 45 35 38 44 34 48 42 11 16 12 24 45 49 75 50 32 6 5 3 5 9 11 25 19 17 122 101 62 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 12 23 39 41 33 50 47 58 43 16 16 26 24 17 29 38 57 69 11 14 9 15 30 28 24 23 14 14 10 6 9 16 16 20 23 . 22 107 200 254 225 206 279 122 173 129 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 59 119 143 133 157 147 56 74 37 55 59 56 41 51 53 31 43 29 2 3 9 15 21 51 27 18 1 1 3 5 8 28 15 13 404 495 49fi 451 1 9 2 2 . . . ____ 1923.............. W h ite : 274 191 1 9 2 2 ............. N o. 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 1917.............. 1918.............. 1919 1920_______ 1917.............. 1918.............. Per c t. 76 141 150 170 190 C olored: 1918 1010 1920.............. 1 9 2 2 ....... ' 1923.............. Per c t. N o. 94 171 182 223 201 155 96 76 70 51 50 45 45 41 34 31 28 37 50 98 91 94 97 76 40 16 3 66 70 61 55 51 44 33 16 5 41 36 36 40 34 28 31 35 52 44 73 91 129 104 79 56 60 67 Per ct. N o. Per c t. N o. 2 3 1 3 1 1 4 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 Per c t. 2 1 1 5 2 2 3 3 1 4 7 20 44 48 36 22 4 5 2 2 5 9 10 8 7 1 2 1 2 4 1 8 7 4 1 1 1 3 1 4 4 3 1 2 4 5 18 22 11 7 1 1 3 3 3 10 12 7 6 1 2 2 3 2 26 3 4 4 7 2 2 2 1 8 1 1 2 4 2 2 3 15 26 26 25 15 3 4 2 2 6 8 9 9 8 2 3 3 5 6 27 11 11 8 8 2 1 N o. ■ 1 F r o m 1916 o n , in c lu d in g f e e b le -m in d e d w a r d s . _ . a I n c lu d in g w o r k in g c h ild r e n w h o w e r e p a y in g th e ir o w n b o a r d a n d c h ild r e n w h o w e r e i n t h e h o m e s o f le ir p a r e n ts . v , _ ■■ * N o n e w in d e n tu r e or a p p r e n tic e c a se s, a s n o c h ild r e n s o p la c e d a fte r 1916. T able 3. — Color and sex of dependent and delinquent children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, by type of com mitment. C o lo re d . W h ite . T y p e o f c o m m itm e n t . T o t a l------- -------- ---------------- ----------- T o ta l. B oys. G ir ls . 2 ,4 4 4 1 ,5 5 8 886 G irls. T o ta l. B oys. G ir ls. T o ta l B oys. 916 567 349 1 ,5 2 8 991 537 1 ,6 8 6 945 741 706 396 310 980 549 431 M in o r it y c o m m itm e n t - ....................... 1 ,3 1 6 280 T e m p o r a r y c o m m itm e n t --------------2 90 F e e b le - m in d e d 1.................................... - 741 160 44 575 120 46 521 149 36 296 82 18 225 67 18 795 131 54 445 7§ 26 350 53 28 D e lin q u e n t ........................................................... 758 613 145 210 171 39 548 442 106 M in o r it y c o m m itm e n t ......................... T e m p o r a r y c o m m itm e n t _________ F e e b le - m in d e d 1___________________ 382 334 342 298 286 29 84 48 13 96 100 14 80 82 9 16 18 5 286 234 28 218 204 20 68 30 8 D e p e n d e n t ............................... ................... — 1 T h e fe e b le -m in d e d a r e c o m m itt e d n o t w a r d s ; i t h a s b e e n c o n s id e r e d a d v is a b le , s p e c ia l c a r e 2 I n c lu d in g 7 w h o h a d b e e n c o m m itt e d 3 I n c lu d in g 5 w h o h a d b e e n c o m m itt e d https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis o n ly a s d e p e n d e n t o r d e lin q u e n t b u t a s te m p o r a r y o r p e r m a n e n t h o w e v e r , t o m a k e a s e p a r a te g r o u p o f t h e s e c h ild r e n m n e e d o f a s t e m p o r a r y w a r d s. a s t e m p o r a r y w a r d s. T able 4.— Institutions caring for wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians on June 30 of each year.1 W a r d s o n m in o r it y c o m m itm e n t . N a m e o f in s t it u t io n .2 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 46 57 73 104 110 138 146 158 237 192 168 138 166 198 177 209 256 284 413 12 8 14 14 . 26 26 19 23 37 38 42 30 18 32 15 47 34 36 44 43 40 44 55 42 93 50 22 26 35 43 1 38 32 63 21 44 19 68 15 47 24 45 43 50 29 35 29 31 39 39 55 26 60 55 42 13 47 4 52 4 48 6 60 8 60 6 57 3 8 8 5 5 8 6 21 1 1 4 8 10 11 9 1 9 4 6 3 4 1 5 6 1 7 3 4 10 1 '1 7 4 3 2 4 3 1 18 22 23 14 12 17 8 3 1 5 6 14 1 3 1 5 4 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 1 2 11 3 14 4 8 3 5 2 10 4 7 6 20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 9 36 7 47 11 49 1895 T o t a l------ -------------------------------------------------------- 1896 U n d e r p u b l ic co n tr o l: U n d e r p r iv a t e co n tro l: 1914 2 21 5 H o u s e o f t h e G o o d S h e p h e r d , B a ltim o r e (C o l.) 2 1 M a n a s sa s I n d u s t r ia l S ch o o l, M a n a s sa s , V a . (C o l.) 1 2 1 6 S t . J o s e p h ’s M a le O r p h a n A s y l u m __________ 2 29 15 16 2 1 4 1 4 3 3 3 6 5 4 1 Ì 2 1 1 S t. P a u f s N o r m a l a n d I n d u s t r ia l S c h o o l ( C o l.) T u s k e g e e N o r m a l a n d I n d u s t r ia l, T u s k e g e e , A la . ( C o l ) S c h o o ls fo r t h e fe e b le -m in d e d : T r a in in g S c h o o l for F e e b le -m in d e d B o y s a n d G ir ls , V in e la n d , N . J ________________________ 1 1 18 10 1 *6 1 5 1 1 1 1 4 1 3 1 8 1 3 1 1 2 2 27 53 — 2 1 145 1 I n c lu d in g w a r d s p la c e d i n t h e s e in s t it u t io n s b y t h e b o a r d w h e t h e r “ o n e x p e n s e ” or “ n o t o n e x p e n s e .” S o m e o f t h e s e i n s t it u t io n s r e c e iv e d lu m p - s u m s u b s id ie s th r o u g h a p p r o p r ia tio n s b y C o n g r e ss, b u t c h ild r e n ca r e d for b y t h e m n o t w a r d s o f t h e b o a r d a r e n o t i n c lu d e d i n t h is t a b le . 2 L o c a tio n i n W a s h in g to n u n le s s o th e r w is e s p e c ifie d . A n u m b e r o f t h e in s t it u t io n s u s e d d u r in g t h e ea r lier y e a r s h a v e g o n e o u t o f e x iste n c e . 3 C a r in g o n ly fo r w a r d s o f t h e b o a r d . 4 I n t h e 1895 r e p o r t o f th e b o a r d d e s ig n a te d a s “ N e w s b o y s a n d C h ild r e n ’s A id S o c ie t y H o m e ” ; i n t h e 1897 a n d 1898 r e p o r ts a s “ G e o rg e M a u ls b y M e m o r ia l H o m e .’ 3 I n t h e e a r lie r r e p o r ts o f t h e b o a r d d e s ig n a te d a s “ S t . R o s e ’s I n d u s tr ia l S c h o o l.” 3 I n t h e 1895 r e p o r t o f t h e b o a r d d e s ig n a te d a s “ N a t io n a l A s s o c ia tio n for t h e R e lie f o f D e s t it u t e C o lo r e d W o m e n a n d C h ild r e n ” ; i n 1912 a n d 1913 r e p o r ts as “ N a t io n a l A ss o c ia t io n H o m e .” https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis a p p e n d ix e s . H o u se o f t h e G ood S h ep h erd , W a s h in g to n ... 3 T able 4.— Institutions caring for wards of the Board of Children's Guardians on June SO of each year—Continued. i—* Wards on minority and temporary commitment. • Total................................................... 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 Tem Tem Tem Minor Tem Minor Tem Minor Tem Minor Tem Minor Tem Minor Tem po Minor po Minor po Minor po po po po po po ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. ity. rary. 444 94 397 171 326 182 102 18 3 99 27 2 68 47 78 13 68 18 79 22 45 39 9 12 3 40 1 40 15 23 3 39 6 1 4 21 33 272 223 188 59 51 60 40 49 214 76 27 1 4 66 20 69 32 31 52 201 234 155 233 96 47 52 61 45 57 48 42 49 35 36 54 52 38 132 70 17 53 37 40 26 29 1 1 1 1 1 20 1 12 1 2 15 1 1 1 11 10 1 2 2 24 5 1 22 2 5 1 6 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 5 18 5 7 1 3 5 i 1 1 7 7 1 2 1 6 8 8 i 6 2 14 4 17 i 3 7 1 7 4 1 2 9 3 5 2 3 1 1 4 16 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 12 3 2 9 4 9 12 8 11 2 ÌÌ 16 ÌÒ 10 8 \ I Co l u m b ia . 5 5 2 4 2 1 6 1 1 6 4 t h e d is t r ic t o f https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1916 in Under public control: National Training School for Girls......... Industrial Home School_________ Industrial Home School for Colored Children......... - ........ ...... .................. Under private control: Bruen Home_________ ______ _______ Children’s Temporary Home (Col. ) 3___ Convent of Our Lady, Baltimore (Col.). Elizabeth Ricks Foundation (Col.)____ Franciscan Convent, Baltimore (Col.) Holy Cross Academy............................ House of the Good Shepherd, New York C ity....................... .............. .............. . House of the Good Shepherd, Baltimore (Col.)._____ _____ ________________ House of th e Good Shepherd, Baltimore. House of the Good Shepherd, Philadelphia (C o l.)..._____ _______________ House of the Good Shepherd, Philadelphia............. ......................... . House of th e Good Shepherd, Washingto n .......................................................... House of Mercy......................................... Industrial Home for Colored Girls, Melvale, M d......... ......................... Jewish Foster Hom e........... ................. National Junior Republic, M d....... ........ St. Emm a Industrial School, Rock Castie, Va. (Col.)........................................ St. Francis dó Sales Institute, Rock Castle, Va. (Col.)_____________ ; St. Joseph’s Institute, Manassas, V a___ St. Joseph’s Male Orphan Asylum___ St. M ary’s Industrial' School, Baltimore. 1915 c h il d d e p e n d e n c y Name of institution .2 ) St. Michael’s Home.............................................. St. Rose’s Technical School8................... 1 St. Vincent’s Female Orphan A sylum ... 4 Suburban Training School (Col.)____________ Free institutions (names not indicated). 33 National Colored Home 6.................. ...... 61 St. Ann’s Infant Asylum....... .............................. Washington Home for Foundlings..... .............. . Schools for the feeble-minded: Grundy Home and Training School for Feeble-minded, Falls Church, Va_________ Training School for Feeble-minded Boys and Girls, Vineland, N . J .................................. Training School for Feeble-minded, Elwyn, P a........................................................... 2 1 3 7 8 4 14 35 38 1 1 38 28 5 1 3 36 35 33 8 11 11 15 11 6 1 4 1 1 2 3 2 3 17 1 20 1 33 16 13 24 2 1 8 2 4 2 6 1 5 1 9 11 1 13 1 10 7 5 1 9 1 8 4 1 4 8 8 4 11 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 7 1 12 15 10 6 1 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis APPENDIXES, 1 Including wards placed in these institutions by the board whether “ on expense” or “ not on expense.” Some of these institutions received lump-sum subsidies through appropriations b y Congress, b u t children cared for by them n ot wards of the board are not included in this table. 2 Location in Washington unless otherwise specified. A num ber of the institutions used during the earlier years have gone out of existence. * Caring only for wards of the board. 8 In th e earlier reports of the board designated as “ St. Rose’s Industrial School.” 6 In the 1895 report of the board designated as “ National Association for the Relief of Destitute Colored Women and Children in 1912 and 1913 reports as “ National Asso ciation Home.” 148 CHILD DEPENDENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA, T able 5.— Age at time of commitment of children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, hy type of commitment. Type of commitment. Dependent. Age at commitment. Total. Delinquent. Tem Total. porary. Per ma nent. Total.............................. 2,444 1,6 8 6 280 1,316 Under 6 m o n th s.................... 6 -11 m onths..................»........ 1 year....................................... 2 years...................................... 3 years.................... ................ 4 years................... .................. 5 years...................................... 6 years...................................... 7 years................. .................... 8 years..... ................................ 9 years___ ________ ______ 10 years..... .............................. 11 years____ _____________ 12 years.......... ......................... 13 years.................... .............. 14 years___ ______________ 15 years........ ........ .................. 16 years................................... 128 69 128 69 24 13 16 16 18 16 99 53 83 87 83 74 99 91 106 108 82 81 71 53 54 53 38 100 105 109 95 119 113 129 152 153 209 199 208 214 196 123 23 100 105 109 95 119 113 127 134 102 113 98 77 75 71 49 2 12 18 11 19 15 21 21 19 17 15 9 1 Feeble Tem mind Total. porary. ed.» »90 758 334 Per ma nent. Feeble mind ed . 1 382 »42 5 3 1 2 8 5 8 4 10 7 5 11 6 5 4 3 2 1 2 18 51 96 g 21 2 10 24 33 44 * 6 131 139 125 74 59 50 56 67 40 25 82 43 3 21 8 10 3 101 68 66 4 7 7 6 6 1 The feeble-minded are committed not only as dependent or delinquent b ut as temporary or permanent wards; it has been considered advisable, however, to make a separate group of these children in need of special care. The figures do pot include feeble-minded children who were voluntarily placed under super vision of the board by their parents without court commitment. » Including 7 who had been committed as temporary wards. 3 Including 5 who had been committed as temporary wards. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis APPENDIXES. 149 T aele 6. Age when received, type of commitment, color, and sex• children re15, *1921 ^ Board f Chlldren s Guardians during the year May 16, 1920-May Age at commitment. Type of commitment, color, Total. and sex. Under year. 1 T otal............ 520 Perm anent___ W hite.. M ale.............. Female........... Colored__ M ale___ Temporary........... M ale___ Female.............. Colored........ M ale........ Female.. 1 year. 2 years. 3 years. 4 years. 5 years. 34 223 8 98 51 47 125 75 50 7 18 12 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 i 295 26 142 91 51 15 6 6 5 153 113 11 9 10 17 7 6 3 11 3 2 1 1 1 2 6 2 1 2 3 2 1 , ■ --------- ■ 13 -5 --- 5 3 3 1 2 2 1 i 2 1 1 i 2 8 ii 11 7 6 8 2 8 2 6 3 3 5 5 3 4 1 2 5 3 1 1 1 4 3 years. 7 years. 5 3 6 3 6 2 3 Feeble-minded 1_ 17 6 i 6 2 2 4 3 1 2 1 1 2 White: Male.................... Colored: Male. 1 1 Age a t commitment. Type of commitment, color, and sex. ' 8 10 years. years. 23 43 TotalPerm anent. 11 years. 15 12 years. 13 years. 68 65 62 32" ÜT ÜT 7 8 15 9 19 7 3 6 12 2 1 2 2 Colored___ M a le... Female. 27 27 W hite.......... Male__ Female.. Colored........ Male__ F em aleFeeble-minded i. White: Male__ Colored: M a le.. . irie feeble-minded are committed as temporary or permanent wards- it ha however, to make a separate group of these ^ i l d r e n i ^ ™ o f s p e c i f l c a r e https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 16 years. 18 4 4 17 15 years. 44 W hite____ M a le ... Female- Temporary. 14 years. 14 24 19 12 12 8 11 19 14 5 35 31 24 7 11 10 1 17 10 12 5 14 3 7 14 . 4 10 11 24 19 5 4 3 4 1 3 3 1 2 1 ............. ............ CHILD DEPENDENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. 150 T able 7 .— Type of placement, by color and sex and by age, of children under care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, May 15, 1921. Type of placement. Color and sex, and age. House of Inden tured Own Insti Hospi deten tion or ap homes. tu tions. tals. (tem pren po ticed. rary). Pro spec Board Free Wage tive Total. ing homes, homes. adop homes. tive homes TotalBoys. Girls. 1,941 440 527 18 95 Army, Navy, Type or M a not re rine ported. Corps. 29 270 29 1,215 726 297 230 251 189 180 90 344 106 736 204 132 125 204 24 130 74 24 COLOR AND SEX. W hite............... Boys......... G irls......... 447 289 110 Colored........... 1,205 323 308 Boys......... Girls......... 768 437 187 136 179 129 3 9 24 12 94 45 246 214 32 AGE. Under 6 months 6 -1 1 m onths— 1 year.......... 2 years......... 3 years____ 4years....... Syears........ 6 years-----7years........ Syears___ flyears........ 10 years---11 years---12 years---13 years---14 years---15 years---16 years---17 years— 18 years---19 years— 20 years— 21 years or over. 21 32 38 38 51 42 71 62 85 104 122 159 183 183 183 153 134 112 119 13 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 6 11 17 30 25 36 31 35 28 35 43 40 47 43 43 18 12 4 3 5 1 2 7 8 1 2 2 6 5 12 18 23 12 22 33 43 34 49 52 41 32 46 4 10 5 7 5 2 7 5 3 1 2 3 17 37 39 60 67 65 47 32 23 19 21 4 T able 8.— Length of time under care of children who were wards of the Board of Children’s Guardians at some time during the year May 16, 1920-May 15, 1921, by age at discharge or at the end of the year. 21 years or 242 218 165 146 116 121 138 159 183 183 183 153 134 112 119 13 2 2 1 4 4 3 4 4 4 9 5 7 7 2 2 1 6 3 2 1 1 10 2 2 4 6 8 0 21 1 2 2 11 19 13 6 10 11 21 6 9 9 14 25 29 3 7 7 4 3 7 2 8 12 4 5 ft 0 8 6 13 3 7 173 227 155 166 116 67 119 214 141 84 197 81 3 Discharged.......................................................... 503 7 7 7 Less than 1 m o n th ................... ...... ........ 1 -2 m o n th s............................................. 3-5 m onths........................ ........................... 6 -1 1 months______ _____ __________ 1 year, less than 2 ....................................... 2 years, less th an 3_______ ___________ 3 years,less than 4........... ......................... 4 years,less than 5..................... ................ 5 years,less than 6 ............................ ........ . 6 years, less than 7....................................... 7 years, 1ess than 8 ........................ ............ 8 years, less th an 9...................................... 9 years, less th an 10______ ____________ 10 years, less than 15____________ _____ 15 years or over_________ _______ ____ 65 48 33 38 44 76 26 15 7 27 3 1 1 2 4 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 50 80 3 68 22 9 17 37 39 3 1 1 1 7 3 2 9 9 2 1 2 1 5 3 8 ft 3 1 9 5 7 7 3 6 8 8 4 5 9 4 8 4 3 9 4 4 4_ 2 4 4 4 14 gl s 7 5 17 4 5 5 14 4 3 5 4 7 ftj 11 4 4 2 ft 1 2 1 1 3 1 1 1 5 13 6 4 9 10 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 3 4 2 1 1 1 ..... 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 4 3 12 16 9 7 11 11 21 7 lift U 4 9 13 10 23 5 19 4 1 8 1 19 11 1 17 19 12 12 4 2 1 1 1 1 0 17 10 10 34 37 64 59 35 6 5 7 8 11 12 8 0 3 4 3 4 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 3 1 4 1 1 5 3 11 . 3 4 7 1 10 2 1 5 5 7 16 0 4 5 0 7 17 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 ■7 5 3 1 4 2 2 1 19 1 1 125 1 3 8 1 1 1 23 21 3 1 14 11 1 1 1 ' 4 12 15 12 20 6 8 2 2 APPENDIXES Less than 1 m onth..................... ............. 1 -2 m onths..................... ....................... 3-5 m onths....... ........ ............................. 6 -1 1 m onths.................................... ...... 1 year, less than 2 ................................. 2 years, less th an 3 . ........................... ........ 3 years, less th an 4............. ....................... 4 years,less th an 5____________ _____ 5 years, 1ess than 6 ........... ............... ........... 6 years, 1ess th an 7_______ ___________ 7 y ears,lessth an 8 . . ....... ..................... . 8 years,less th an 9 . ..................... ............. 9 years, less th an 10.______ ___________ 10 years, less than 15.................................. 15 years or over.......................................... Time not reported_________ __________ over. 196 247 122 years. 156 104 19 years. 125 85 18 years. 100 17 years. 15 years. 74 62 16 years. 14 years. 81 71 13 years. 10 years. 12 years. 11 years. 9 years. 51 42 years. 54 51 7 years. 42 38 years. 44 32 . 38 5 years. 4 years. 45 21 years. 26 24 2 31 9 year. 16 3 1 10 6 -1 1 Total........ ................................... ............ 2,444 Under care M ay 15,1921.................. ................. 1,941 Total. 3 years. months. Length of time under care. Under 6 months. 1 Age at discharge or on M ay 15,1921 mm 1 3 2 2 7 1 1 17 1 27 APPENDIX B.—LAWS RELATING TO THE BOARD OF CHIL DREN’S GUARDIANS OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. [27 Stat. 268-270 (Act of July 26, 1892).] An Act To provide for the care of dependent children in the District of Columbia and to create a board of children’s guardians. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That there shall be created, in and. for the District of Columbia, a board to be known as the Board of Children s Cuardians, composed of nine members who shall serve without compensation, the said, board to be a body politic and corporate and to have the powers and to be constituted in the manner hereinafter provided. mu , f S e c . 2. Appointment; sex representation; term; removal.—lh a t the members ol the Board of Children’s Guardians shall be appointed by the judges of the police court1 and the judge holding the criminal court of the District of Columbia, met together for that purpose; the assent of a majority of such judges being neces sary to appointment in each case: Provided, That there shall always be at least three representatives of each sex upon the board. Of the nine members first appointed after the passage of this act, three shall be appointed for one year, three for two years, and three for three years. Thereafter all appointments, except such as shall be made for the remainder of unexpired 4erms, shall be for the term of three years. The judges of the police court and the judge holding the criminal court, or a majority of them, when met together for that purpose, may remove for cause any member of the boards Pvovidedy That such member shall be given an opportunity to be heard in his own defense. S e c . 3. Officers; agents.—That the board shall elect from its own members a president, vice president, and secretary, who shall severally discharge the duties usual to such offices, or such as the by-laws of the board may prescribe, lh e board shall have the power, subject to the approval of the commissioners, to employ not more than two agents,2 at an annual compensation not exceeding two thousand four hundred dollars for the two, and prescribe their duties, and to conclude arrangements with persons or institutions for the care of dependent children at such rates as may be agreed upon. S e c . 4. Duties; children committed.—That said board shall have the care^ and supervision of the following classes of children: First. All children committed under section two of the act approved February thirteenth, eighteen hundred and eighty-five, entitled “ An act for the protection of children in the District of Columbia, and for other purposes.” Second. All children who are destitute of suitable homes and adequate means of earning an honest living, all children abandoned by their parents or guardians, all children of habitually drunken or vicious or unfit parents, all children habitually begging on the streets or from door to door, all children kept in vicious or immoral associations, all children known by their language or life to be vicious or incorrigible, whenever such children may be committed to the care of the board by the police court or the criminal court of the District; 3 and power is hereby given to these courts to commit such chil dren when not over sixteen years of age to said board: Provided, That the laws regulating the commitment of children to the reform schools of the District shall not be deemed to be repealed in any part by this act. Third. Such children as the board of trustees of the reform school for boys or the reform school for girls may, in their discretion, commit to the Board of Children’s Guardians; and power is hereby given the board of trustees of the said reform school to commit any inmate of their respective institutions to the said board of guardians, condition ally upon the good behavior of the child so committed. Fourth. Under the rules to be established by the board children may be received and temporarily cared for pending investigation or judgment of the court. i After Feb. 28, 1923, appointed by Commissioners of the District of Columbia. See 42 Stat. 1361 (Act of Feb. 28, 1923). . f ... . a The number and salary of agents have been changed by later appropriation acts. 8 The juvenile court has exercised this jurisdiction since 1906. 152 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis APPENDIXES. 153 S e c . 5. Legal guardian of children committed; supervision of wards.—That the board shall be the legal guardian of all children committed to it by the courts, and shall have full power to board them in private families, to board them in institutions willing to receive them, to bind them out or apprentice them, or to give them in adoption to foster parents. Children received from the reform school shall be placed at work, bound out, or apprenticed, and at any time before attaining majority may be returned to the school from which they came if, in the judgment of the board of guardians, such a course is demanded by the interest of the community or the welfare of the child. All children under the guardianship of the board shall be visited not less than once a year by an agent of the board, and as much oftener as the welfare of the child demands. Children received temporarily may not be kept longer than one week, except by order of the police court or the criminal court. i Sec. 6. Investigations^ to he made.—That the antecedents, character, and con dition of life of each child received by the board shall be investigated as fully as possible and the facts learned entered in permanent records, in which shall also be noted the subsequent history of each child, so far as it can be ascertained. S e c . 7. Records; annual reports.—That the Commissioners of the District shall have authority to prescribe the form of records to be kept by the board of guardians, and the methods to be employed by them in paying bills and audit ing accounts: and an annual report of its operations hereunder shall be made by the board to the superintendent of charities.4 The superintendent of chari ties shall have full powers of investigation and report regarding all branches of the work of the board, as well as over all institutions in which children are placed by the board; and it shall be his duty to recommend annually the appropria tions which in his judgment are necessary to the carrying on of its work. [23 Stat. 302 (Act of Feb. 13,1885).] An Act For the protection of children in the District of Columbia and for other purposes. Sec. 2. * * * And such agents or officers shall have power to arrest, without warrant, all persons violating in their presence or sight any law relating to or affecting the protection of children, or other parties so offending by virtue of a warrant issued by the police court of the District of Columbia, which of fenders shall be taken by such agents or officers before the said police court of the District of Columbia for trial. Said agents or officers are also hereby em powered to bring before the said court6 any child who is subjected to cruel treat ment, willful abuse, or neglect, or any child under sixteen years of age found in a house of ill fame; and said court may commit such child to an orphan asylum or other public charitable institution in the District of Columbia, with the consent of the constituted authorities of such asylum or institution, or make such other disposition thereof as now is or hereafter may be provided by law in cases of vagrant, destitute, or abandoned children: Provided, That any parent, guardian, or near relative who may feel aggrieved by any order of said court m the premises may appeal therefrom to the criminal court of the District of Columbia. [27 Stat. 552 (Act of Mar. 3, 1893).] An Act Making appropriations for the expenses of the government of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, eighteen hundred and ninety-four, and for other purposes. Placing the care of feeble-minded children under the hoard of children's guardians.— * * * Provided, Tha,t the authority for placing feeble-minded children of the District of Columbia, heretofore given to the Secretary of the Interior, is hereby transferred to the Board of Children’s Guardians. [31 Stat. 1095 (Act of M ar 3,1901) .] An Act To enlarge the powers of the courts of the District of Columbia in cases involving delinquent children, and for other purposes. Children■convicted of petty crimes and misdemeanors may be committed to board of children s guardians; authority of board in regard to such children; nonsupport proceedings, authority of board to receive and pay funds.— Be it enacted by the Senate ttTia House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembledy That the judges of the criminal and police courts 6 of the District of Columbia t 6 Superseded b y the Board of Charities in 1900. The juvenile court, created by Act of March 19,1906, now exercises this jurisdiction. The juvenile court now exercises this jurisdiction. 88962°—24t-----11 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 154 C H ILD DEPEND ENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OF COLUM BIA, are hereby authorized and empowered, at their discretion, to commit to the custody and care of the Board of Children’s Guardians of the District of Colum bia children under seventeen years of age who shall be convicted of petty crimes or misdemeanors which may be punishable with fine or imprisonment; and said Board of Children’ll Guardians shall place, under contract, such children in such suitable homes, institutions, or training schools for the care of children as its may deem wise and proper. S e c . 2. That no court shall commit a child under seventeen years of age, charged with or convicted of a petty crime or misdemeanor punishable by fine or imprisonment, to a jail, workhouse, or police station, but if such child be unable to give bail or pay a fine, it may be committed to the Board of Children’s Guardians temporarily or permanently, in the discretion of the court, and said board shall make some suitable provision for said child outside the inclosure of any jail, workhouse, or police station, or said court may commit such child to the Reform School under the laws now providing for such commitment. S e c . 3. That for the purpose of aiding the court in a proper disposition of cases referred to in section one the Board of Children’s Guardians is hereby author ized and directed to designate one of its employees as a probation officer,7 whose duty shall be to make such investigation in cases involving children under seven teen years of age as the court may direct, to be present in court in order to repre sent the interests of the child when the case is heard, to furnish the court such information and assistance as the judge may require, and to take charge of any child before and after trial as may be directed by the court. S e c . 4 . That any person within the District of Columbia, of sufficient financial ability, who shall refuse or neglect to provide for any child under the age of fourteen years, of which he or she shall be the parent or guardian, such food, clothing, and shelter as will prevent the suffering and secure the safety of such child, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be subject to punishment by a fine of not more than one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment in the workhouse of the District of Columbia for not more than three months, or both such fine and imprisonment. S e c . 5. That whenever petition or information shall have been filed in any court of the District of Columbia authorized to commit children to the care, custody, and guardianship of the Board of Children’s Guardians for such com mitment of any child, and upon the hearing of the same before said court it shall appear to the satisfaction of the court that such child is entitled to be committed as aforesaid under or by virtue of any of the provisions of the act of Congress approved July twenty-six, eighteen hundred and ninety-two, entitled “ An Act to provide for the care of dependent children in the District of Columbia and to create a board of children’s guardians,” and if said evidence tends to show that such child has a father or a mother, either of whom is able to contribute to the support of such child, either by reason of having means or property or having an income consisting of wages or salary due for personal services or labor or other wise, but fails or neglects so to do, then the proper prosecuting officer shall file in the police court of the District of Columbia an information charging said father or mother, or both, with such failure or neglect, and upon conviction thereof the said court shall require the father or the mother of such child, or both such father and mother, to contribute by stated payments, to be made to said board of children’s guardians, toward the support of such child such sum or sums, monthly, weekly, or otherwise, as in the judgment of said court either or both such father and mother should and may be able to pay; and the courts aforesaid may at any time hear and determine any petition for an order for contribution toward maintenance of any child who has heretofore been or who may hereafter be committed to the guardianship of the board of children’s guardians, or for modifying or suspending the operation of any such order previously made. S e c . 6. That any person against whom an order for contribution toward main tenance may have been made, as provided for in this a<?t, who shall refuse or neglect to make such payments as ordered, shall be deemed guilty of contempt and upon conviction thereof*shall be sentenced to suffer imprisonment in the workhouse of the District of Columbia for not less than three months nor more than one year; and such imprisonment shall not exempt such person from addi tional imprisonment for further neglect or refusal to make contribution as afore said: Provided, however, That if, after such conviction, any such parent sha appear before the court before which such conviction shall have taken place and shall show to the satisfaction of the court that the amount due under such order, up to the time of conviction, has b^en paid, and further, with good and sufficient ¡r ftinpA 1906 the probation officers of the juvenile court have performed these duties. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A P P E N D IX E S . 155 surety, to be approved by said court, shall enter into bond to the United States in the penal sum of five hundred dollars, conditioned that he will thereafter pay such sums as may have been ordered or that may thereafter be ordered to be paid by said court until such order shall be revoked, the said court may suspend sentence therein during the continuance of such bond. S e c . 7. That the disbursing officer of the board of children’s guardians shall receive and shall be responsible under his bond for all moneys paid to said board under the provisions of this act, and shall pay the amount so received by him into the Treasury of the United States, within twenty days after the close of each fiscal quarter. S e c . 8. That all acts and portions of acts inconsistent with the provisions mentioned above are hereby repealed, and the terms of the provisions in the above sections shall become law on and after the date of approval. [31 Stat. 843 (Act of Mar. 1,1901).] A n A c t M a k in g a p p r o p r ia tio n s t o p r o v id e for t h e e x p e n se s o f t h e g o v e r n m e n t o f t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia for t h e fisc a l y e a r e n d in g J u n e th ir t ie t h , n in e te e n h u n d r e d a n d tw o , a n d for o th e r p u r p o s e s . Religious faith of parents to be regarded in placing children in 'private families.— * * * Provided, That when the Board of Children’s Guardians place any of such children in private families, as far as practicable, such children shall be placed only in such families as are of the same religious denomination or belief as the parents or last surviving parent of the child. [34 Stat. 73-78 (Act of Mar. 19, 1906)., A n A c t T o c r e a te a j u v e n ile c o u r t in a n d for t h e D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia . S e c . 8 . That the juvenile court of the District of Columbia shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all crimes and offenses of persons under seventeen years of age hereafter committed against the United States, not capital or other wise infamous, and not punishable by imprisonment in the penitentiary, committed within the District of Columbia, except libel, conspiracy, and violations of the post-office and pension laws of the United States, and also of all offenses of per sons under seventeen years of age hereafter committed against the laws, ordi nances, and regulations of the District of Columbia, and shall have power to examine and commit or hold to bail all persons under seventeen years of age, either for trial or further examination, in all cases, whether cognizable therein or in the supreme court of the District of Columbia. Said juvenile court shall have all the powers and jurisdiction conferred by the act entitled “ An act for the protection of children, and so forth,” approved February thirteenth, eighteen hundred and eighty-five, upon the police^ court of the District of Columbia, and shall also have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases involving the legal punishment of children under the provisions of “ An act to provide for the care of dependent children in the District of Columbia and to create a Board of Chil dren’s Guardians,” approved July twenty-sixth, eighteen hundred and ninetytwo (Twenty-seventh Statutes, page two hundred and sixty-eight), and of the acts amendatory thereof; also of all cases under the provisions of “ An act to enlarge the powers of the courts of the District of Columbia in cases involving delinquent children, and for other purposes,” approved March third, nineteen hundred and one (Thirty-first Statutes, page ten hundred and ninety-three [ 1095]), and said juvenile court may hereafter, concurrently with the criminal court, have and exercise all the powers and jurisdiction conferred by said last-mentioned act upon the police court of the District of Columbia in the case of parents or guard ians who shall refuse or neglect to provide food, clothing, and shelter for any child under the age of fourteen years. And it is further provided, That the court may impose conditions upon any person found guilty under the said lastmentioned act, and so long as such person shall comply therewith to the satisfac tion of the court the sentence imposed may be suspended, and may impose similar conditions in all cases of dependent or delinquent children cognizable under existing laws in any court of the District of Columbia, except in the cases hereinbefore already excepted; and the said juvenile court may also hear, try, and^determine all cases of persons less than seventeen years of age charged with habitual truancy from school, and in its discretion to commit them to the Board of Children’s Guardians, who are hereby given the care and supervision thereof when so committed. No person under seventeen years of age shall hereafter be placed in any institution supported wholly or in part at the public expense until the fact of delinquency or dependency has been ascertained and declared by the said juvenile court. All children of the class now liable to be committed to the https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 156 CHILD DEPEND ENCY IN T H E DISTRICT OE COLUMBIA. Reform School for Boys and the Reform School for Girls shall hereafter be committed by the juvenile court to said schools respectively. All other children delinquent, neglected, or dependent (with the exceptions hereinbefore stated) phaD hereafter be committed by the juvenile court to the care of the Board of Children’s Guardians, either for a limited period on probation or during minonw, as circumstances may require, and no child once committed to any puhnc insti tution by the order of the juvenile court shall be discharged or paroled therefrom or transferred to another institution without the consent and approval of tbe SalSEC°9 That the terms “ dependent” or “ neglected” children as used in this act shall be held to mean and include any child who is destitute or homeless or abandoned or dependent upon the public for support, or who has not the proper parental care or guardianship, or who habitually begs or receives alms, or whose home, by reason of neglect or cruelty or depravity of the parents, is^an unnt> place for such a child, or any child under eight years of age found peddling on the streets. The term “ delinquent” child or children as used in this act shall be held to mean and include any child who has been convicted more than once of violating any law of the United States, or any laws, ordinances, or regulations in force in the District of Columbia. Sec. 10. T h a t any unlawful removal or attempt to remove any child committed by the juvenile court to any institution or agency shall be a misdemeanor, which, if committed by any person or persons over seventeen years of age, shall be punishable, on conviction in the police court, by a fine not exceeding fifty dollars, or imprisonment not more than three months; but if committed by a person or persons under seventeen years of age, shall be punishable, on conviction m the juvenile court, by a like fine, or by imprisonment in some correctional institution to be designated by said court, other than the jail or workhouse, for such reason able period as such court shall direct. [41 Stat. 1137 (Act of Feb. 22,1921).] An Act Making appropriations to provide for the expenses of the government of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1922, and for other purposes. Wards of the hoard placed outside the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia, visitation; hoard authorized to discharge from guardianship child committed to its care.— * * *, and no part of the moneys herein appropriated shall be used for the purpose of visiting any ward of the Board of Children’s Guardians placed outside the District of Columbia and the States of Virginia and Maryland, and a ward placed outside said District and the States of Virginia and Maryland shall be visited not less than once a year by a voluntary agent or correspondent of said board and that said board shall have power, upon proper showing, m its discretion, to discharge from guardianship any child committed to its care. [42 Stat. 1361 (Act of Feb. 28,1923).] An Act Making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1924, and for other purposes. Board of children's guardians appointed hy commissioners; powers of trustees of industrial home school transferred to board.—* * * Provided, That the board of trustees of the Industrial Home School of the District of Columbia is abolished on and after the date of the approval of this act, and thereafter the powers and duties of such board as specified and restricted by law shall be transferred to and vested in the Board of Children’s Guardians: Provided further, That on and after the date of the approval of this act the authority to appoint and remove members of the Board of Children’s Guardians is transferred from the judges of the police court and the judge holding the criminal court of the District of Colum bia to the commissioners of the District of Columbia, and shall be exercised by them in accordance with section 2 of the act of July 26, 1892 (Twenty-seventh Statutes, page 268), and the powers and duties of the Board of Children’s Guard ians as prescribed by or pursuant to law shall thereafter be performed under such regulations as may be made by said board and approved by the commis sioners. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis APPENDIX C.—LIST OF REFERENCES TO MATERIAL ON THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE CHILD-CARING WORK IN THE D IS TRICT. GENERAL SOURCES. National Conference of Charities and Correction: Proceedings. Reports to the National Conference of Charities and Correction on the Charities of the District of Columbia: Spencer, Sara A. [representing the Associated Charities]: 1881, p. 55: 1882, pp. 164-169; 1884, pp. 24-27; 1885, pp. 39-42; 1887, pp. 3035; 1888, pp. 310-314- 1889, pp. 183-185. Warner, Amos G. [U. S. Superintendent of Charities]: 1889, p. 36; 1892, pp. 254, 259, 271, 277, 286, 299, 304^305; 1893, pp. 307-309. Macfarland, Henry B. F.: 1895, pp. 333-335; 1896, pp. 32-33; 1897, pp. 386-388; 1898, pp. 39-43; 1900, pp. 303-304; 1901, pp. 48-49; 1902, pp. 37-40; 1905, pp. 41-42. Lewis, H. W. [agent, Board of Children’s Guardians]: 1895, pp. 338340. Tracey, John [Superintendent of Charities]: 1895, pp. 335-338 Wilson, George S.: 1910, pp. 568-570. Papers and discussions: Lewis, Herbert W. [agent, Board of Children’s Guardians]: Terms on which children should be placed in families. 1894, pp. 140-146. ------ —: Report of the Committee on Child Saving: The rescue and relief of children—outline of an ideal system. 1896, pp. 314-318. Douglass, John W.: The Board of Children’s Guardians, District of Columbia. 1901, pp. 239-244. ---------: Placing out by the Board of Children’s Guardians. 1904, pp. 522-523. Macfarland, Henry B. F. [president, Board of Commissioners, D. C.]: Public subsidies to private charities. 1906, pp. 227-234. Includes history of the development of public charities in the District of Columbia. Wilson, George S.: Supervision of private charities—from the point of view of an official board. 1911, pp. 35-41. Children’s Bureau, U. S. Department of Labor: Mental Defectives in the District of Columbia; a brief description of local conditions and the need for custodial care and training. Publication No. 13. Washington, 1915. Folks, Homer: The Care of Destitute, Neglected, and Delinquent Children. The Macmillan Co., New York, 1902. The system of public support in private institutions—District of Columbia, pp. 135-139. Warner, Amos G.: American Charities; a study in philanthropy and econom ics. Thomas Y. Crowell & Co., New York, 1894. Public subsidies to private charities in the District of Columbia, pp. 334-337; 340-344; 349-355 ; 371 . ---------: “ Public subsidies to private charities.” Proceedings, International Congress of Charities, Correction and Philanthropy, Chicago, June, 1893, Section VI.— The Organization of Charities, pp. 120-132. The Johns Hop kins Press, Baltimore, 1894. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce: Benevolent Institutions, 1904; same, 1910. Washington, 1905 and 1913. Contain data regarding public and private child-caring institutions and agp-ncfes in the District of Columbia. Directory of Social Agencies of Washington, D. C. The Washington Council of Social Agencies, Room 330, State Building, 1922. ANNUAL REPORTS OF PUBLIC AGENCIES. Board of Charities, District .Commissioners, and Superintendent of Charities. Report on the condition of charitable institutions in the District of Co lumbia receiving aid from District revenues. Washington, 1886. Report of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia respecting the charitable and reformatory institutions in said District receiving aid from District appropriations for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1887. Washington, 1888. 157 https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 158 C H IL D DEPENDENCY IN TH E D IS T R IC T OE C O L U M B IA . Board of Charities, District Commissioners, and Superintendent of Charities— Continued. . ’ Reports of charitable and reformatory institutions of the District of Columbia for the years 1888 and 1889. Washington, 1889, 1890. Report of the Superintendent of Charities for the District of Columbia for the year ending June 30, 1892. [Washington.] Charities Superintendent: Reports on charitable and reformatory insti tutions of the District of Columbia, 1893-1900. [Include reports of the several institutions receiving public subsidy.] Washington. Estimates for the department of charities and corrections, with a prelimi nary report, 1900. [Washington, 1900.] Board of Charities of the District of Columbia: Annual reports, 1901 to date. [Contain the annual reports of the Board of Children’s Guardians and of institutions receiving public subsidy.] Washington. ---------Also in Annual reports of the Commissioners of the District of Co lumbia, 1901 to date. Washington. Board of Children’s Guardians: Annual reports, 1894 to date. Washington. Institutions. _ , . , TT The annual reports of the Industrial Home School, the Industrial Home School for Colored Children, the National Association for Relief of Desti tute Colored Women and Children, St. Ann’s Infant Asylum, and the Washington Home for Foundlings, in the Annual Reports of the Super intendent of Charities and in the Annual Reports of the Board of Charities of the District of Columbia. Juvenile Court: Annual reports published as House of Representatives or Senate documents. [First report made in 1907. Not all years available.] CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRIES AND DISCUSSIONS OF BILLS. Charitable institutions and agencies. Joint Select Committee to Investigate the Charities and Reformatory Insti tutions in the District of Columbia: Part I—Hearings; statements; reports from cities; suggestions for a board of charities. Part II—Re port. Part III—Historical sketches of the charities and reformatory in stitutions in the District of Columbia. Fifty-fifth Congress, first session, S. Docs., vol. 8, Doc. 185. Washington, 1898. Care of delinquent and dependent children in the District of Columbia; letter from the Commissioners of the District of Columbia submitting a plan for the future care of delinquent and dependent children in the Dis trict of Columbia, January 7,1904. Fifty-eighth Congress, second session : S. Docs., vol. 3, Doc. 85; H. Docs., vol. 47, Doc. 355. Public and private hospitals and charities in the District of Columbia; report of Walter C. Clephane, chairman of the committee on charities and corrections of the Washington Board of Trade, relative to conditions of public and private hospitals and charities in the District of Columbia and of appropriations necessary therefor. Sixty-second Congress, second session, S. Docs., vol. 42, Doc. 614. Washington, 1912. Care of dependent children. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring Senate bill 2426 [to amend act to create board of children’s guardians so as to commit to board indigent feeble-minded children], April 10, 1896. Fifty-fourth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 658. 2 pp. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, under resolution directing investigation of law relating to custody of minor children in the District, January 13, 1896. Fifty-fourth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 42. 21 pp. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 5055 [for com pulsory support of children by parents in District], January 21, 1899. Fifty-fifth Congress, third session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 1,506. 3 pp. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending H. R. 7663 [to establish Board of -Charities for the District], February 22, 1900. Fifty-sixth Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 2, Rept, 415 (5 pp.); 31 Stat. 664. : i I Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 2029 [for appointment of members of Board of Charities of the District and of the Board of Children’s Guardians], January 14, 1908. Sixtieth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 46. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A P P E N D IX E S . 159 Care of dependent children—Continued. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending S. 3890 [rel ative to abandonment of wife and minor children, to include suppoYt of illegitimate children], February 4, 1910. Sixty-first Congress, second session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 185. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 3890 [amend ment to include support of illegitimate children]. Sixty-first Congress, second session, H. Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 1374. District of Columbia Commissioners: Report on H. R. 22922 [to provide for a director of education for the District of Columbia and for a director of charities, and for other purposes]. Sixty-first Congress, second session. Washington, 1910. House of Representatives debate on appropriation bill for the Board of Children’s Guardians. Congressional Record, Sixty-seventh Congress, fourth session, vol. 64, No. 28, January 8, 1923, pp. 1,450-1,463. Investigation of the Board of Children’s Guardians; hearings before the joint subcommittee of the Senate and House of Representatives Committee on the District of Columbia, Sixty-Seventh Congress, Fourth Session, on the Brookhart-Free bill (H. R. 13537), February 8, 1923. Washington, 1923. Juvenile court. f Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending S. 126 [for com pulsory support of children by parents in the District], February 9, 1900. Fifty-sixth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 2, Rept. 337. 3 pp. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, recommending H. R. 13067 [to enlarge the powers of the courts in the District of Columbia in cases involving delinquent children], January 12, 1901. Fifty-sixth Con gress, second session, H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 2281. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending H. R. 13067 [to enlarge power of courts of the District in cases involving delinquent children], February 8, 1901. Fifty-sixth Congress, second session, S. Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 2193 (31 Stat. 1095). Report from Committee on District of Columbia, amending S. 5443 [to create juvenile court in the District], February 10, 1905. Fifty-eighth Congress, third session, S. Repts., vol. 2, Rept. 3812. Report from Committee on District of Columbia, favoring S. 51 [to create juvenile court in the District], December 8, 1905. Fifty-ninth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 18 (34 Stat. 1, 73). Report from Committee on District of Columbia amending S. 51 [to create juvenile court in the District], March 8, 1906. Fifth-ninth Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 2169 (34 Stat. 1, 73). 13 pp. Supplement to annual. report of the Attorney General of the United States for the year 1914, embodying the first report of committee appointed by the Attorney General to study need for legislation affecting children in the District of Columbia, March 3,1915 [including drafts of juvenilecourt laws]. Sixty-third Congress, third session, H. Docs., vol. 104, Doc. 1661. [Also published separately.] Hearing before the Committee on District of Columbia (United States Senate, Sixty-fourth Congress, first session) on H. R. 8348 [amending an act relative to the juvenile court of the District of Columbia] and H. R. 9803, February 1, 1916. Report from Committee on District of Columbia to accompany H. R. 8348, February 4,1916. Sixty-fourth Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 120. Report from Committee on District of Columbia to accompany H. R. 9803 [emancipating from certain disabilities children who have been convicted of crime in the juvenile court]. Sixty-fourth Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 1, Rept. 121. Hearing before Committee on District of Columbia, House of Represen tatives, on H. R. 8348 [amending an act relative to the juvenile court in the District of Columbia] and H. R. 9803 [providing for the removing of disabilities resting upon children who have been convicted of crime in the juvenile court], February 1, 1916. Juvenile court in the District of Columbia; hearing before a subcommittee of the Committee on the District of Columbia (United States Senate, Sixty-fourth Congress, first session) on H. R. 8348 [an act to amend an act entitled “An act to create a juvenile court in and for the District of Columbia,” and for other purposes], May 11, 1916. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 160 C H IL D D E P E N D E N C Y IN T H E D IS T R IC T O F C O L U M B IA . Juvenile court—Continued. Juvenile court in the District of Columbia; report to accompany H. R. ' 8348, August 21, 1916. Sixty-fourth Congress, first session, S. Repts., vol. 3, Rept. 815. Report of Committee on District of Columbia on H. R. 7883 [examination of persons brought before the juvenile court], April 11-November 23, 1921. Sixty-seventh Congress, first session, H. Repts., vol. 2, Rept. 309. Prevention of venereal diseases in the District of Columbia; hearings before Committee on District of Columbia (House of Representatives, Sixtyseventh Congress, first session) on H. R. 4118, June 9, 1921. Includes statem ents on m ental and physical examinations of children passing through the juvenile court, pp. 22-39. Provision for the feeble-minded. Interior Department: Opinion of Attorney General [on relationship of Secretary of the Interior to certain institutions in District as affected by establishment of Board of Children’s Guardians]. Interior Department, Report of Secretary, 1900, pp. 192-198. School and Home for Feeble-Minded Persons; hearing before Committee, on District of Columbia (House of Representatives, Sixty-fourth Congress, first session) on H. R. 13666 [to establish a school and home for feeble minded persons in the District of Columbia, to be known as the Columbia Training School, and providing for the legal commitment of feeble-minded persons, and for other purposes], May 4, 1916. https://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
@FedFRASER