View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.



Q\K) v.j Aa


The Outlook for Women

Social Case Work
With Children

Bulletin of the Women’s Bureau No. 235-3
Social Work Series


For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government
Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. Price 25 cents


This bulletin is No. 235-3 in the

No. 235-1
No. 235-2
No. 235-3

The Outlook for Women in Social Case Work in a Medi­
cal Setting.
The Outlook for Women in Social Case Work in a
Psychiatric Setting.
The Outlook for Women in Social Case Work with


United States Department of Labor,
Women’s Bureau,

Washington, December 28, 1950.
SIR: I have the honor of transmitting this report on the
outlook for women in social case work with children. It is the
third in a series of bulletins, on the need for women in the
social services, resulting from our current employment opportu­
nities study. The project is planned and directed by Marguerite
W. Zapoleon.
Grateful acknowledgment is made to the many individuals
and agencies who cooperated so generously in supplying informa­
tion and helpful criticism for this report, which was prepared
and written by Mary H. Brilla.
Respectfully submitted.
Frieda S. Miller, Director.
Hon. Maurice J. Tobin,

Secretary of Labor.










The social well-being of our people, like their health, has
received growing attention over the years. Of the increasing
numbers in our economy engaged in rendering professional
social service, two-thirds or more are women. The story of their
progress and the current and future needs for their services
have been the subject of a Women’s Bureau study which is being
reported in a series of bulletins of which this is the third.
The others, like this report on social case work with children,
describe the employment outlook for women in an area of spe­
cialization within the field of social work. The final bulletin in
the series will describe the outlook for women in the entire field
of social work, showing its relation to other ■ professions of
women and comparing the specializations within the field. Unlike
the usual monograph which describes an occupation in detail
at a particular point in time, this study, like the earlier Women’s
Bureau series on occupations in the medical and health services
and the sciences, is concerned primarily with changes and trends.
Although more than 2,400 books, articles, or pamphlets have
been culled for information, the principal information for this
series has been obtained from professional organizations, public
and voluntary social agencies, schools of social work, and in­
dividual social workers. The following sources have contributed
to the study thus far:
Fifty-two national professional organizations. For help on
this particular report, the Bureau is indebted especially
to the Child Welfare League of America.
Fifty-six schools of social work and other colleges and uni­
One hundred and thirty-nine agencies employing social
workers, including 31 community chests and councils of
social agencies and the American National Red Cross.
Sixty Government agencies concerned with social service
programs or employment in this field, including interna­
tional, State, and local agencies, and such Federal agen­
cies as the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the United
States Employment Service in the United States Depart­
ment of Labor; the United States Civil Service Commis­




sion; the United States Veterans’ Administration; and
the Bureau of Public Assistance, the Office of Education,
the Office of Vocational Rehabilitation, and the Public
Health Service in the Federal Security Agency. Special
acknowledgement is due the Children’s Bureau of the last
named agency for its generous and expert help with this
The Bureau is indebted to the above contributors for the raw
material which made this report possible and to the following for
illustrations used in the Bulletin: Boston University School of
Social Work (cover picture) ; Cincinnati Enquirer (fig. 4) ; Cin­
cinnati Post (fig. 15) ; Detroit Public Schools (figs. 2, 6, 10, 14) ;
Hamilton County Welfare Department, Ohio (figs. 8, 9) ; Nash­
ville School of Social Work (figs. 3, 12) ; New Jersey State Board
of Child Welfare (figs. 1, 5, 13) ; Philadelphia Community Chest
(fig. 17) ; University of North Dakota (figs. 7, 11, 16).
Although the reader will recognize gaps in our statistical
knowledge of employment in case work with children and the
unsurmounted difficulty of distinguishing always those individ­
uals who are fully qualified for the profession from those who
are not, it is hoped that she will find here a useful synthesis
of existing knowledge on an important field of work in which
more women are needed.


Letter of transmittal .........................................................
Foreword ...................................................................................................................
Definitions .........................................
The setting.................................................................................................................
Public child welfare agencies ....................................................................
Private child welfare agencies....................................................................
School systems .....
Day care facilities ...............................................................................
Correctional agencies ...................................................................................
The outlook ...............................................................................................................
Child welfare agencies ................................................................................
School social work .........................................................................................
Correctional work with children ................................................................
Demand .....................................................................................................................
Public child welfare agencies .............................................................
Private child welfare agencies.................................................................
School systems ..................................................................................................
Correctional and other settings ................................................................
Teaching and research .................................................................................
Geographic variations in employment ........
Supply .........................................................................
Training .....................
Child welfare agencies........................................................................
School social work .......
Correctional work with children ................................................................
Student aid and fellowships ..............
Earnings, hours, and advancement.................................................................
Earnings ........................................................................................
Hours ............................................................................
Advancement ................
Organizations .............................................................................................................
Suggestions to those considering training for case work with children
Employment before World War II ............
Child welfare agencies .....
School social work ..........................................................................................
Correctional work with children ....................
Wartime changes -----------Volunteers.......................................................................................................
Minimum requirements for beginning civil service position as
child welfare worker in the Board of Public Welfare and as
social worker in the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia.
Schools of social work in the continental United States accredit­
ed by the American Association of Schools of Social Work ....






Sources to which reference is made in the text .................................
1. A social case worker interviews a couple about a foster home
2. A school principal discusses a child whom she is referring to
a school social worker for assistance ..........................................
3. A student, as part of her supervised field practice, discusses
plans with a mother ............................................................................
4. A social worker assists child, to be given temporary shelter in
a public child care center, as matron examines him ................
5. A social case worker becomes familiar with the interests and
qualifications of prospective foster parents ..............................
6. Visiting teachers meet with the principal, a juvenile officer
from the Police Department’s Crime Prevention Bureau, the
school nurse, and a counselor to discuss pupils needing help
V. A social work student talks with a child referred for consulta­
tion .............................................................................................................
8. Case workers with a public children’s agency give a tea for
foster parents .......................................................................................
9. A social worker gives final instructions to worker taking child
from emergency center to a foster home ....................................
10. A school social worker confers with a pupil .................................
11. A student talks with child in a rural county welfare office
where she is getting field practice ................................................
12. A student gets better acquainted with a child, to be placed
in foster home .......................................................................................
13. A supervisor confers with a case worker to plan further ser­
vices to families ...................................................................................
14. A school social worker confers with parents in their home ....
15. A case worker talks with a foster mother and children in their
home ..........................................................................................................
16. Undergraduate students in social work at a State university
observe and assist at a local clinic for crippled children ........
17. A volunteer at a community chest agency and a child get better
acquainted ............................................... ................................ ...........








Figure 1.—A social case worker employed by a State Board of Public Welfare
interviewing a couple about a foster home.

Case Worker (Professional and Kindred) 0-27.20
As Defined In The Dictionary Of Occupational Titles (73)
“Performs any one or a combination of the following socialservice duties, usually requiring a college degree and applying
techniques acquired through postgraduate training in social-serv­
ice work, in pursuance of a welfare program organized by a public
or private agency or organization: Studies physical and social
environment of a family, person, or persons in order to deter­
mine and execute practical plans for alleviating existing un­
desirable conditions. Visits persons in need of assistance or
receives clients at intake desk of agency. Interviews clients to
ascertain nature of their problem. Diagnoses problems, consider­
ing factors involved, and plans treatment. Makes necessary
contacts to ascertain background and needs of clients and their
eligibility for financial, medical, and material assistance. Helps
clients understand their situations more clearly and assists them
to reach satisfactory solutions for their problems. Refers clients
to community resources, such as hospitals, clinics, recreational
facilities, and schools, which may assist in rectifying the mal­
adjustments. Endeavors to foster self-development of individuals
in order that they may successfully meet social exigencies.
Follows progress of cases beyond solution of immediate prob­
lems. Keeps case histories and other records.”


Child-Welfare Worker (Professional and Kindred)
As Defined In The Dictionary Of Occupational Titles (73)
“Specializes in the alleviation of child welfare problems, per­
forming any combination of the following duties: Endeavors to
prevent exploitation of minors in industry. Participates in pro­
grams to assist physically handicapped children. Investigates
environment to discover factors that may retard satisfactory
physical, mental, and social development of children and rec­
ommends remedial measures. Places children in foster homes,
orphanages, and other institutions (Case Worker, Child Place­
ment). Guides juvenile delinquents (Case Worker, Juvenile De­
linquency). Assists school authorities in solution of social prob­
lems affecting pupils. May advise community planning body or
members of other organizations on requirements for children’s
recreational and educational facilities.”
Case Worker, Child Placement (Professional and Kindred)
As Defined In The Dictionary Of Occupational Titles (73)
“Places children in institutions and homes, such as orphan­
ages, foster homes, day nurseries, hospitals, and homes of adop­
tion in order to protect them from abuse, neglect, and improper
rearing, and to provide them with adequate shelter, schooling,
medical care, and recreation: Discusses children’s problems with
parents, guardians, teachers, and other interested persons.
Studies child’s physical, mental, and psychological make-up to
determine his needs. Prepares child psychologically for placement
in an institution or home. Locates agency that best suits the
needs of the child and arranges for placement in that agency.
Interviews and evaluates qualifications of persons who wish to
become foster or adoptive parents considering such factors as
financial status, housing, general intelligence, emotional stability,
and general suitability. Visits institutions and homes to follow
progress of cases. Arranges for removal of children from place­
ment agencies if desirable.”
Social Worker, School (Professional and Kindred) Home
Visitor; School Counselor; School Visitor; Visiting Teacher
As Defined In The Dictionary Of Occupational Titles (73)
“Assists children in adapting themselves to school life and in
availing themselves of school educational and recreational op­
portunities: Counsels children whose behavior or school prog­
ress indicates need for individual guidance. Consults with
parents, teachers, schoolmates, and others to determine causes



Figure 2.—-A school principal discusses a child whom she is referring to a school
social worker for assistance.

of problems and to devise satisfactory solutions. Arranges for
medical, psychiatric, and other examinations that may disclose
causes of difficulties and indicate remedial measures. Attempts
to alter attitudes of parents, teachers, and classmates that may
have caused or aggravated problems. Recommends change of
class or school, special tutoring, or other treatment to effect a
remedy. Cooperates with other agencies, such as child guidance
clinics, hospitals, boys’ clubs, family welfare agencies, and set­
tlement houses, to assist in solution of problems. May enforce
school attendance laws (Truant Officer).”
Probation Officer (Professional and Kindred)
As Defined In The Dictionary Of Occupational Titles (73)
“Engages in activities related to the probation of delinquents:
Makes presentence investigations of offenders’ personal histories
background, and environments to ascertain causes of delinquency
and maladjustment. Reports findings to court and suggests pos­
sibilities of probation. Periodically interviews probationers to
determine effectiveness of probation. Refers probationers to
social resources of community that may assist in effecting re­
habilitation. Recommends revocation of probations if necessary.”



Case Worker, Juvenile Delinquency (Professional and Kindred)
As Defined In The Dictionary Of Occupational Titles (73)
“Performs any combination of the following duties: Makes
investigations of predelinquent children and attempts to divert
antisocial tendencies through guidance and by use of community
resources. Refers juveniles to community agencies, such as settle­
ment houses and child guidance clinics, for mental, physical, and
social rehabilitation. Places delinquent children in homes or cor­
rective institutions (Case Worker, Child Placement). Assists
civil authorities in solving problems concerning conditional re­
lease of delinquents from corrective institutions (Parole Officer).
Assists court in determining advisability of probation and guides
children on probation (Probation Officer).”

a” il '


Figure 3.—A student in a graduate school of social work, as part of her supervised
field practice, discusses plans with a mother who is helping to support three
children by sewing.

In 1949, there were about 17,000 workers in the United States
specializing in social case work for children. This included nearly
4,000 child welfare workers—about 3,000 of them case workers—
in State and local public welfare agencies and an estimated 9,000
in private agencies. There were over 1,000 social workers in
schools, about 3,000 probation officers serving children in a cor­
rectional setting, and a relatively few workers in day nurseries
and nursery schools and in other settings where children are
served. Most of the workers were women, who comprised about
75 percent of the child welfare group, about half of the proba­
tion officers in juvenile courts, and 90 percent of the school social
For the most part, these workers were concerned primarily
with children who needed help in addition to that given by their
parents and teachers, if they were to make satisfactory personal
and social adjustments.
In 1949 there were over 51,000,000 children and young people
under the age of 20 in the United States (72), many of whom
required social case work services. Included in the group of
children needing help are those “dependent” because their
families are unable to provide adequately for them, those who
are mistreated or neglected or whose environment menaces their
health or morals, children whose behavior has brought them
into conflict with society, and those whose physical or mental
handicaps impair their ability to function normally. There are
also children with less tangible, and sometimes less obvious, but
equally serious problems—chiefly emotional or psychological—
who must have trained help if they are to develop into welladjusted persons (91).
Although the social case worker specializing in work with
children is concerned with the well-being of all children, her



special concern is with those whose parents are unable to carry
out their parental responsibility for rearing the child, who
consequently may be mistreated or neglected, dependent, or
otherwise handicapped. In common with all case workers, her
aim is to build and maintain a dynamic relationship with the
child and the adults responsible for him that will enable them
to recognize and remobilize their own resources in meeting
problems. She works with the child, his parents, teachers, and
others who are concerned with his welfare, to try to help him
by rendering one of the following types of service:
1. Case work services to children in their own homes:
a. Services to children with mental and physical handi­
caps, with behavior problems, and those whose home
and family conditions need to be improved.
b. Protective services to children—services to neglected
or mistreated children.
2. Services to children who need care away from their own
a. Services related to placement in adoptive homes.
b. Services related to placement in foster (boarding)
c. Services to children in institutions.
3. Social case work services as part of other programs for
a. Case work services for children receiving day care in
nursery schools or day care centers.
b. Medical case work services in clinics, health centers,
hospitals, and convalescent homes. (See Bulletin 1
in this series.)
c. Case work services related to maternity home care, in­
cluding services to unmarried mothers.
d. Psychiatric case work services in mental health pro­
e. Social work in school programs.
/. Social case work services for children under the care
of institutions for the delinquent, the mentally de­
ficient, and other institutions for children with
special needs.
The services described in 1 and 2 are administered almost
exclusively by social case work agencies, public or private. The
others are usually administered by a hospital, a clinic, a school,
a court, or other agency within which social case work is only
one of several services given. Recreation agencies, housing




agencies, and the Indian Service also employ people skilled in
work with children (13).


Figure 4.—A social worker assists child, to be given temporary shelter in a public
child care center, as matron examines him.


Public Child Welfare Agencies

The most widespread type of public agency offering services
to children is the local (county or municipal) welfare depart­
* ment, which sometimes provides child welfare, as well as other
i welfare services to the community, and which sometimes emH pl°ys one or more child welfare workers who give full time
to work with children. But in many local welfare departments
public assistance workers are responsible for aid to children
along with aid to the blind, the aged, and other groups. (See
Bulletin 235-4 in this series.) Their primary emphasis is on
- administering financial aid programs, rather than on case work,
r and most of them have not had training as case workers, nor
can they give full time to work with children’s cases. However,
many of the larger local departments of welfare have special divir sl0ns for work with children, in which trained child welfare case
workers are employed. Nearly all State departments of social
t welfare have a special bureau or division to deal with child



welfare problems (52). The child welfare worker in a State,
county, or municipal department of welfare works with childien
needing help and arranges for appropriate service for them.
She may work directly with children or, less frequently, be em­
ployed in a supervisory or consulting capacity in the development and administration of services.
Workers in local areas study problems of the child refeired to
them by the school, police, juvenile court, and family, to see
what the child’s needs are; they work with the child and his
parents to meet his needs at home, at school, in the community,
or, if necessary, in a hospital, foster home, or a children s insti­
tution. They maintain case records and make necessary reports.
They also stimulate community awareness of children’s problems
and the organization of resources to deal with them.
At the State level, the worker assists in carrying out the
responsibilities of the State agency for child welfare, which inelude
. . establishing standards of child welfare services
State-wide in scope; providing leadership in developing State
and local services for children; help with funds when necessary,
to establish specialized programs local units cannot provide; and
. . . supervising of both public and private programs of child
care.” (32) Typical duties of State child welfare divisions in­
clude the licensing of private child placing agencies and institu­
tions, the supervision of private and county institutions for the
care of children, interpretation of the child welfare program,
and direct services, by case workers assigned to counties, in local
county offices.
Federal participation in child welfare programs includes,
among other things, setting of standards, publishing of information regarding child welfare, research concerning the extent and
variety of means and methods of providing services, consultation service for agencies, and administering and developing child
welfare services, including demonstrations of particular services
or methods of administering services (32). At the Federal level,
the most important single agency dealing exclusively with
children’s problems is the Children’s Bureau, which publishes
information relating to the welfare of children, develops standards for their protection, and adminsters grants to States under
the maternal and child welfare provisions of the Social Security
Act. Among the other important functions of the Bureau are
investigating and reporting upon all matters pertaining to the
welfare of children and child life, as well as cooperating in
international programs for child welfare (80). “The Bureau’s












emphasis is upon those aspects of security which come from the
promotion of the health and personal development of the child.

Private Child Welfare Agencies

Theoretically and ideally, public agencies render all child
welfare services provided for by law and take all cases except
as limited by statutes; private agencies are free to experiment
and to develop techniques and standards. Actually, the child
welfare worker in a private social agency is often concerned with
the same problems that confront the worker in a public agency.
Both public and private agencies render protective services for
children, provide care for children dependent by reason of their
parents’ inability to provide adequately for them and for children
mentally and physically handicapped, and provide services for
emotionally disturbed children. Both public and private agencies
also render social services connected with adoption, and in many
places private agencies engaged in such work are subject to
State or local regulation through licensing.
The worker’s duties in private, as in public, agencies depend
upon the kinds of services offered by the employing agency, and
its size makes a difference in the scope and degree of specializa­
tion of her work. For instance, the various functions of a child­
placing agency may be combined into one job in a small agency,
but are done by several specialized types of workers in a larger
agency. An intake worker has the first contact with those seek­
ing the agency’s services. These may be parents wanting to place
a child either temporarily in a foster home, or permanently in
an adoptive home; or they may be prospective foster parents,
who want to care for a child on a temporary basis; or they may
be prospective adoptive parents. In any case, the worker dis­
cusses with the applicants the kind of service sought and de­
scribes the services offered by the agency. She discusses with
them their reasons for requesting service and, on the basis of
the discussion, may accept the application for the type of service
requested, or recommend that another type of service be given
by the agency; she may refer the applicant to another agency,
or reject the case. The decision may be made at the time of the
interview, or after consultation with other staff. Sometimes two
or three interviews are necessary before a decision is made. If
the case is accepted for service, the intake worker obtains certain
necessary information from the applicants and arranges for
another interview.




Figure 5.—Through home interviews, the social case worker becomes familiar with
the interests and qualifications of prospective foster parents.

The homefinder locates homes in which children are placed
while their parents are temporarily unable to care for them or
while they are being studied and prepared for adoption. She
visits these homes and those offered for adoption purposes, to
study the physical facilities and the prospective foster or adop­
tive family and its relationships. She evaluates the home in
terms of its suitability for use by the agency in child placement.
Before a child is placed, considerable case work must be
done with him and his parents and with the prospective foster
parents, to prepare each for the placement. This is the job of the
placement worker, who maintains contact with the child and his
parents—-natural and foster—after placement, to see that it is
working out satisfactorily and to help in building a good rela­
tionship in the new situation. The exact role of the case worker
will vary with the type of placement and with the individuals
The role of a worker in a protective agency is quite different.
In such an agency the worker acts upon a complaint “. . . that a
parent is cruel to his child or is neglecting him so that the care



of children is below the minimal standards of that community.”
(18) In this case the worker must first ascertain the validity of
the complaint and explain to the parent the nature of the com­
plaint and what must be done to correct the condition that led
to it. She must explain what help the agency is prepared to give
in correcting the condition, or what action will be taken if it is
not corrected. She must try to help the parent to carry out his
parental responsibilities more adequately but, if the parent can­
not or will not cooperate, must petition the court to remedy the
situation. The worker then has the responsibility of presenting
all facts of the case to the court and of making recommendations
for appropriate action, although the final disposition of the case
rests with the court (18).
In work with children in institutions, in work with unmarried
mothers, and in giving various other case work services to
children, the case worker has certain specialized duties and
responsibilities. In each, however, she must work with the child
and his parents and others who are influential in his life, fre­
quently helping with the personal problems of the parents apart
from the needs of the child, as well as giving service directly
related to the child’s needs.
School Systems

The social worker specializing in the treatment of children’s
problems may work in a school system as a school social worker.
The National Association of School Social Workers describes
school social work as follows:
School social work is a social case work service offered in the
school setting. It is a skilled method of working with indi­
vidual children and their families when difficulties in the
school experience develop or important choices are to be
made which require individual case work help. This service
supplements the contribution of the teacher and other
school personnel and is carried out in cooperation with them.
As a liaison service, it helps to integrate school and com­
munity services for the benefit of children.
Like the medical social worker in a hospital or a probation
worker in a court, the school social worker is in a setting where
the majority of her co-workers are trained in a discipline other
than her own. Hers is an additional contribution, different from
that of her fellow workers and with an aim that is compatible,
but not identical, with that of the other school staff. She must
understand the purpose of the setting in which she works and



Figure 6.—The visiting teachers of a high school and an elementary school in a
large city school system (second and third from the left) meeting with the
school principal, a juvenile officer from the Police Department’s Crime Preven­
tion Bureau, the school nurse, and a counselor to discuss pupils needing help in
making adjustments.

. . must take a major responsibility for coordinating her work
with that of all the professional disciplines represented in the
school. The school social worker is part of a working relation­
ship that has often been referred to as the ‘team relationship’.”
Although school social workers are by definition employed
in a school setting, their titles and the content of their jobs
vary greatly. At least thirteen different titles—including school
social worker, visiting teacher, counselor, home-school counselor
or visitor, visiting counselor—are used to designate these
workers. They perform a variety of combinations of services, and
there is not yet unanimity of opinion about their function, al­
though efforts are being made to define more clearly their duties
and areas of responsibility (61).
Until very recently school social workers were employed almost
exclusively in fairly large school systems, which still provide
the greatest number of opportunities in this field, although small
school systems and rural areas now offer opportunities also.



Ordinarily, the worker is a member of the administrative staff,
assigned to individual schools. She may spend all of her time
in one school or divide her time between two or more schools.
The latter practice is more common; most schools have the
services of such a worker only a half day to two full days per
week (.4-4).
She is responsible to the school board, the superintendent, and
generally also to the principal of the school to which she is
assigned. She is also responsible to a supervisor, who generally
has both administrative and consultative functions, although a
worker in a rural area or one who is the only social worker in
a school usually works without direct supervision. The school
social worker cooperates with other staff members who are con­
cerned with individual pupils. In large schools and large school
systems others besides the teacher and the principal with whom
the child and therefore the social worker may be involved are
the curriculum supervisor, the teacher supervisor, special educa­
tion supervisor, nurse, psychologist, psychiatrist, and attendance
worker. In the secondary schools others may be involved, such
as a counselor, an adviser, or a dean. There is a growing tendency
in the larger city school systems for all such special services to
be coordinated under a director of student personnel (68).
The worker may be in an attendance department, where her
responsibilities may include enforcement of the school attendance
law, as well as dealing with other problems of pupil adjustment.
In other cases there may be a separation of functions, with one
or more people assigned exclusively to attendance work. In such
cases the school social worker deals with the truant to try to
discover and solve the causes of the child’s staying out of school.
Cases requiring legal action are referred to the attendance officer.
In a few communities attendance officers are social workers
trained to deal constructively with children’s problems; they are
replacing the “truant officer” whose job was merely to locate
truants and return them to school. In one community it was
recommended that attendance officers should be gradually re­
placed by social workers (39), and officials of several school sys­
tems reported that they were working toward the professionali­
zation of this work, as are some State departments of education.
More often, though, the school social worker works chiefly
with children having other difficulties in school. “Principals and
teachers, parents, and community agencies refer to the school
social worker those children who show academic or emotional
maladjustment, socially unacceptable behavior or other difficul­



ties which need attention.” (88) Besides working with the
problems of the individual child, the social worker also works
with parents and others in discussion groups. She interprets
the resources of the community to the school, to children, and
to parents. “She also interprets to the social agencies the pur­
pose and philosophy of education and the problems of the school
in working with some of its children.” (88)
In a very few programs the worker may be part of a child
guidance clinic which offers psychiatric treatment to children in
the school. In this case, she is usually expected to have had
specialized training as a psychiatric social worker. (See Bulletin
235-2 in this series.)
Day Care Facilities

Day care centers in public or private schools, day nurseries,
child care centers, or other facilities primarily for children
whose mothers are unable to care for them during the day, some­
times employ social case workers (16).
The case worker in a day nursery helps parents who apply
for admission of their child to the day nursery to decide whether
or not nursery care is appropriate for their child. She is re­
sponsible, with other staff members, for determining whether
the child could benefit from the nursery’s care, and, when neces­
sary, refers parents to other community resources. The case
worker explains to the parents what services the nursery offers
and the limitations of its service—such as its inability to care for
children when they are ill, and the hours during which service
is given. “The caseworker will interpret the nursery program
as a ‘supplement’ to the home, explaining the source of its sup­
port and the cost of care. She also will give the parent a descrip­
tion of group life activities and philosophy.” (94) She advises the
parents of their responsibility regarding fees, periodic interviews
with the case worker, and attendance at parent-teacher meetings.
Before the child enters the nursery, the case worker must obtain
all essential information and share this with the teacher. The
case worker helps to introduce the child to the nursery and,
throughout the child’s stay, continues to use her case work skills
to assist him with his problems and his family relationships. She
has regular conferences with the teacher and the school nurse
for a sharing of information and to help the teacher achieve
better understanding of the child’s behavior (94-). The worker
has the responsibility, at the end of the child’s stay in the
nursery, to see the parents again and to participate with



them in any way to help the parents support the child “in leav­
ing this experience and in moving on constructively to the next.”
(16) Nursery schools may also employ social case workers, who
confer with both parents and teachers on the child’s behavior
and help them to achieve a better understanding of the child.

Figure 7.—A social work student talks with child referred for consultation.

Correctional Agencies

A case worker with children may specialize in work with
children or young people whose behavior has brought them into
conflict with the law. In 1947 there were 3,681 State and local
probation officers dealing with children’s cases only or with both
juveniles and adults. About half of the probation officers in
juvenile courts were women. (Women usually handle only cases
involving girls or very young children of both sexes. Older boys
are usually referred to male probation officers.) Not all of the
3,681 were serving as full-time probation officers; some of them
had additional duties as welfare workers, sheriffs, clerks of the
court, etc. (66).
A report of the National Conference on Prevention and Con­
trol of Juvenile Delinquency describes the work of the probation



officer as follows: “Social workers, known as probation officers
or counselors, administer this program (probation supervision)
. . . following well-established case-work techniques . . . Pro­
bation treatment therefore is essentially a task of reorientation,
reeducation, a process of guidance and reconditioning in which
the relationship between probation officer and child is the vital
element which affects the changes or modification in attitudes,
habit, and environment needed to bring him into closer harmony
with the requirements of society.” (57)
The probation officer, who may also be called a juvenile officer
or probation counselor, makes a preliminary investigation, to
determine whether the child can safely remain in his own home,
pending further study and court action, and arranges for deten­
tion or other temporary care when necessary; he makes a social
study of the child’s situation and incorporates his findings in a
report to the judge, often with his own evaluation and recom­
mendation, so that it can be used as a guide for the disposition
of the case; he supervises the child who has been placed on pro­
bation and helps the family to understand the situation and to
correct the conditions responsible for the child’s having been
brought to court (58).
In 1947, 1,610 of the Nation’s more than 3,000 counties had
no probation service for juveniles (66). Often “children are sent
to training schools . . . because there are no probation officers
to supervise them and adjust their problems in the community.”
(9) “In many States, only the few large cities or populous
counties have full-time probation officers.” (58) In most cases
probation officers are appointed by the juvenile court judges,
and larger probation departments are headed by a chief proba­
tion officer. This field is gradually becoming professionalized, and
an increasing number of probation officers, particularly in urban
areas, are now trained social workers.
Child Welfare Agencies

There is a growing recognition of the importance of social
services for children and of the need for people with specialized
training and skills to do this work. But there is still a great
deal to be done before all the needs of children for social work
assistance are met adequately. According to the U. S. Children’s
Bureau, “Although significant progress has resulted from the
increase in Federal funds, public child-welfare services are still
not available to a majority of the children who may need them.”



Outstanding needs are for services to children in their own
homes; for foster-care services; and for facilities for mentally
retarded children, children with emotional and behavior prob­
lems, children in minority groups, and chronically ill or convales­
cent children. Also needed are services for unmarried mothers,
emergency and detention care for children, and special institu­
tional facilities (27).
Children whose homes have been broken by divorce, separa­
tion, or desertion may need the assistance of a case worker in
adjusting to the situation and sometimes in obtaining other
needed services. One estimate places the number of children in
broken homes at 700,000 (52). Not all of these children will
need help from a child welfare worker, but for some of them
such assistance will be necessary if they are not to be deprived of
the opportunity to lead normal lives.

Figure 8.—Case workers with a public children’s agency give a tea for foster

It was estimated that on December 31, 1943, about 225,000
dependent children were being cared for away from their own
homes (86). However, many children are placed in foster homes
without agency intervention, so that the total number of children



receiving such care is without doubt far greater than the figure
given here (52).
There are about 130,000 illegitimate births annually in the
United States, and about two-fifths of the unwed mothers are un­
der 20 years of age. This means that in a large proportion of the
cases, not only the babies, but the mothers also require the help
of a case worker specializing in work with children and young
No community has yet made adequate provision for services
to all its children who need the social worker’s help. Moreover,
there are not enough trained workers to give all of the needed
services, and the personnel shortage is likely to continue for
years to come (85). The Child Welfare League of America re­
ported early in 1949 that there was hardly an agency in its
membership that did not have openings for case workers with
professional social work training. In 1948, the head of the
United States Children’s Bureau estimated that at least 15,000
additional child welfare workers would be needed within the
following decade. Personnel shortages existed in practically all
phases of social work with children (49), and an expanding need
for specialists to work with children was indicated by the high
birthrate of the 1940’s, which was expected to increase the
elementary school population by 5,000,000 children. These and
other postwar sociological statistics indicate that there will be a
continuing and probably expanding need for the services of social
workers trained to help children with their problems.
One effort to meet these needs of children has been the set­
ting up of more public care programs for them. The increase in
the number of child-serving agencies since the depression has
been in the number of Federal, State, and local government
rather than of private agencies (51). The opinions of social work
administrators interviewed by representatives of the Women’s
Bureau indicate that the largest number of jobs in this field will
continue to be with private agencies. Nevertheless, public employ­
ment will become increasingly important and may be expected
to furnish a relatively larger proportion of all jobs than it has
in the past.
The resources made available to the States under the Social
Security Act have made possible much more comprehensive
State programs for children— programs of maternal and child
health, of care of crippled children, and of other child welfare
services. These resources are encouraging the States to extend



their programs both geographically and with respect to types of
service given and children reached (5).
By 1945, every State had “established a State public welfare
agency or a separate division or bureau of welfare in a State
department to carry out welfare functions, including those of
child welfare,” and in practically every State the number of
staff members providing State services increased between 1935
and 1945. “In Maine, the child welfare State staff consisted of
two district supervisors when the Social Security Act became
operative. By 1945, this staff had gradually been increased to
include a supervisor, an assistant, four district supervisors, and
a consultant for child-caring agencies and institutions and a
psychologist.” (85) Mississippi had no legal basis for establish­
ment of a child welfare division in 1935, but by 1945 legislation
provided for a child welfare division with a director, two super­
visors, a consultant on foster care, and a child welfare con­
sultant (85).
A number of States employ, in addition to child welfare con­
sultants, specialized personnel for technical consultation in
adoption, foster care, and day care, for mental health services,
and for special service to State institutions (85).
Federal funds were budgeted by a number of States in 1948
for personnel to develop special services for foster care. In 15
of these States, the personnel were to work with children’s
institutions, especially State institutions; in 12, to give special
services in adoption programs; in 18, to improve such services
as foster-family care, day care, or licensing of child-placing
and child-caring agencies (27).
Before passage of the Social Security Act in 1935, only onefourth of the States had provision for local public services for
children through county organizations under State leadership.
By 1948, every State provided “. . . in at least some localities,
public child welfare services by local child welfare workers.”
The expansion of local public service in adoption is noteworthy.
Some States in which adoption services were formerly provided
only by private agencies are making adoptive services part of
the public-welfare program, to meet the requests for such service
(27), although this remains primarily a private agency function.
Both public and private agencies make a social investigation
before an adoption is approved, and this creates a greater need
for services.
At all levels, from the international to the small local unit,
there is interest and activity in the field of child welfare. In



1947, the Social Commission of the United Nations gave top
priority to child welfare on its list of social problems suitable
for international action. At that time it approved the short term
program of the International Children’s Emergency Fund and
gave precedence to the organization of long range child and
youth welfare services and to plans for machinery to put them
into effect (71). United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Ad­
ministration, when it was in operation, also included child wel­
fare activities.
All reports obtained by the Women’s Bureau in the late 1940’s
and in 1950, in connection with the present study indicated a
continuing demand for workers in this field. Case workers were
being used increasingly in child serving agencies; and institu­
tions, as well as child-placing and other agencies, were relying
more and more upon them (52). The demand was great for
State directors and for consultative services.
The demand for child welfare services in the future will de­
pend to a large extent on the degree to which communities
undertake to meet the needs of all those children who have
encountered obstacles in the way of leading a normal and happy
existence. But the literature and the reports made directly to the
Women’s Bureau all point to an existing and continuing de­
mand for more well-trained child-welfare workers than are now
in the field.
School Social Work

The comparatively new specialization of school social work
offers and will continue to offer many opportunities for women
who want to use their case work training in a school setting.
As mental hygiene principles have gained widespread acceptance,
there has been an increasing recognition of the value of school
social workers’ services and consequently a greater demand for
them. The director of a school of social work reported that
graduates with the master’s degree were being quickly picked
up by schools for this work. Especially since World War II, the
number of school social work programs being set up throughout
the country has increased rapidly.
War conditions and the rise of juvenile delinquency in the war
and postwar period contributed to the increased demand (14).
In this period, there was increasing interest in the disturbed
condition of family life and in the prevention of juvenile delin­
quency. School social work programs were looked upon as one
way to deal with these problems, and several cities that were not



yet employing school social workers expected to do so in the
future {62).
School social work is done both in elementary and secondary
. with concentration on its use at the elementary
level as a factor in the preventive mental health program.”
{68) School systems are rarely able to begin a school social work
program with a large enough staff to serve all of the grades
adequately. Often, even if the school budget permitted, there
would not be enough qualified workers available to fill the need.
Instead of superficial services to all of the grades, good case
work service is usually given first in the elementary grades and,
as additional qualified staff can be hired, moves upward into the
secondary grades. School social work for high school students,
especially to prevent early leaving of school, is increasingly
being stressed.
Early in 1950, seven States—Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Mary­
land, Michigan, Texas and Virginia—and Puerto Rico had legis­
lation providing for some type of State-wide school social worker
service. In addition, many local school systems had added this
service {69). Four hundred and thirty-eight cities of 10,000 or
more reported some full-time school social worker service in 1949.
Those who train people for this work and those who employ
them agree that school social work is a rapidly expanding field
and one in which there will continue to be plenty of opportunities
for trained workers.
Correctional Work With Children

An estimated 275,000 children appear in juvenile court each
year because of delinquency, according to the Children’s Bureau.
Many more come to the attention of police, but because of incom­
plete reporting and the difficulty of defining delinquent behavior,
there is no accurate estimate of the number of juvenile delin­
quents or predelinquents. One Federal law enforcement officer
said, in 1946, that three-fourths of all juvenile complaints were
handled by the cop on the beat,” who went to the parents with
the child and straightened out the matter. (For a description of
the work of police women, see Women’s Bureau Bulletin 231.)
Inadequate though they may be as an index of the need for
services for delinquent children, statistics on numbers of children
coming to the attention of the authorities are the most reliable
measure available. It was estimated that about 23,000 children
were in public State and local training schools for delinquents
at the end of 1947. Every year 300,000 children “. . . are de­



tained overnight or longer by police and juvenile courts, in
detention homes of various kinds or in jails.” (52)
All States now have legislation providing either for separate
juvenile courts or for specialized jurisdiction and procedures in
children’s cases (58), so that young people who have come into
conflict with society can be helped to overcome their difficulties
and to correct their delinquent behavior. This reflects the changed
attitude of the public and of people working with children, and
a shift in emphasis from primarily punitive measures to correc­
tive or therapeutic measures and greater use of probation officers
or case workers to do correctional work with children. From
1933 to 1947 there was a 29 percent decrease in the number of
children in institutions for delinquent children (77), partly as
a result of the increased use of probation and parole, which per­
mits children to live normal lives with their families or in foster
homes while they remain under the supervision of the court.
A Children’s Bureau report, based on nearly 115,000 juvenile
court cases, showed that in about 30 percent of the cases the chil­
dren were placed under the supervision of a probation officer (66).
Although most probation officers are not trained social workers
and many are political appointees with no special training for
the job, progress is being made in raising standards and requir­
ing professional training. Judges are increasingly using the
services of social workers in departments of public welfare for
cases under investigation or on probation to the court, and the
increase in the number of children reported to courts has re­
sulted in more specialized intake services and the addition of
case work supervisors (33). Undoubtedly there will be increased
opportunities in this field for social workers skilled in case work
with children.
In 1949 approximately 12,000 case workers were employed in
public and private child welfare agencies, in addition to about
a thousand others in administrative, consultive, and other related
categories in these agencies. There were perhaps another 4,000
social workers in schools, day-care centers, and nursery schools,
and in correctional work with children. Through the United
States Children’s Bureau detailed information is available on
public child-welfare agencies, but figures on private agencies are
estimates based on a variety of miscellaneous and scattered



it :mm


Figure 9.—A social worker gives final instructions to worker taking child from
emergency center to a foster home.

Public Child Welfare Agencies

Although private agencies have done much of the pioneer
work in child welfare, public agencies have assumed an increas­



ingly important role in this field. There is likely to be increasing
emphasis on employment in public agencies, even though private
agencies will continue to employ many more case workers, as in
1949 when they employed more than twice as many as did State
and local public child welfare agencies (51).
According to the Children’s Bureau, there were 2,899 full­
time case workers, including 100 administrators who carried
case loads, employed on June 30, 1949, in State and local public
child welfare agencies. There were no separate statistics for
men and women workers, but if their employment in the State
of Michigan is representative of the entire country, about threefourths of the 2,899 child welfare workers were women. On this
same date there were 403 vacancies for case workers in such
agencies, 14 of them for administrator case workers.
Most case workers with children in public agencies are em­
ployed in local communities by large city or county welfare
departments. But some are also employed by States to give
service in local communities; for example, in 1949, 36 workers
on a Midwestern State child welfare staff were serving 114
counties. In addition to the State supervisor of child welfare, this
State also employed a field supervisor and five district supervi­
sors, each of whom covered 6 counties; they gave consultive
service on child welfare problems to public assistance workers
who carried child welfare cases. In 12 counties, there were local
child welfare units, to each of which one person was assigned.
There were also nine child-welfare workers in two large cities
in the State. The remaining eight staff members were supervi­
sors. In 12 additional counties, there was a program under
which public assistance workers carried a “protected” or limited
load of child welfare cases.
In addition to child-welfare case workers and supervisors,
States often employ child-welfare consultants to assist workers
in local units and to consult with local officials and with com­
munity groups interested in services to children and in the ways
in which such services may be provided (6). In some States
consultants are specialists in some particular field, such as foster­
home care, adoptions, or institutions; and they usually have had
experience in community organization as well as in children’s
problems. Three hundred and five child welfare consultants were
employed on June 30, 1949, in State and local public agencies,
the majority of them in State agencies. This is probably a type
of service that will offer increasing opportunity to women with
training and experience in child welfare, as evidenced by the



trend in the States toward a general field staff, supplemented
by special consultants in various areas, including child welfare
Statistics on 1948 employment in the Michigan State civil
service indicate the importance of child welfare services in the
total picture of public social services at the State level. Of 963
persons with a Michigan State civil-service social-work classifica­
tion in 1948, 105 or 10 percent of the total were engaged in childwelfare activities. Most of these, 68, had the title of child welfare
worker, and 21 were child welfare administrators. The others
were: 3 youth-guidance field representatives, a youth-guidance
executive, 10 child-guidance social workers, a child-placement ad­
ministrator, and a child day-care administrator {59).
Many of the States on which information was available on
employment of child welfare staff, reported vacancies on their
staffs. In a few cases there was not enough money to fill these
vacancies. Other reasons given for the shortages were: the
scarcity of qualified workers; State residence requirements,
which sometimes disqualified otherwise well-qualified workers;
the lack of an effective educational leave program in the State;
and low salaries—especially at the beginning level.
For specialized jobs, such as research, there was only a limited
supply of qualified workers, and it was difficult to fill such jobs.
The United States Children’s Bureau received requests for such
specialized workers from States, councils of social agencies, and
other employers.
There are practically no opportunities for the beginning
worker in the Children’s Bureau, which employs only highly
specialized people, trained and experienced in their particular
field, to serve in a consultive and advisory capacity to States
and other agencies concerned with child welfare programs. In
1949 the Bureau employed 27 such specialists, 22 of them women.
These child welfare specialists are recruited directly from State,
large city, or other local agencies, when a civil-service register
of qualified persons is not available. In August 1950 the United
States Civil Service Commission announced an examination for
Child Welfare Adviser and Child Welfare Specialist, to establish
a register from which appointments to these positions would be
made in Federal agencies. These are positions for which people
with experience, rather than beginning workers, were sought.
Qualifications included 2 years of study in an accredited school
of social work, plus social work experience, including some ex­
perience in a supervisory, consultative, or administrative capac­



ity. For Public Welfare Research Analyst, Child Welfare option,
1 year of study in an accredited school of social work, plus ex­
perience in research in the field of social services carried on in
a research unit were required.
Private Child Welfare Agencies

Despite the increasing importance of public agencies in child
welfare, the largest number of child welfare workers in 1949
were employed by private agencies. No exact figures were avail­
able, but estimates placed their number at about 9,000. The
results of special studies made in various areas and some figures
on employment in a few private agencies were obtained by the
Women’s Bureau, and they help to give the employment picture
in these areas.
About 200 such agencies are affiliated with the Child Welfare
League of America, which, like the Children’s Bureau, is a
standard-setting, research, and reporting agency, employing
only trained and experienced specialists. In 1948, there were
nine workers, five of them women, on the League’s staff. One
of the women worked on information and publications; one was
a special consultant for public welfare; another was a consultant
for institutes and conferences; and one was a consultant in day
care. Another woman was serving as a consultant on surveys,
with the emphasis on surveys of child placement and adoption.
Operating agencies, performing direct services to clients, are
employers of case workers, and these are the agencies in which
the beginning child welfare worker will find her opportunities.
A few scattered statistics give some idea of the numbers and
kinds of jobs available in such agencies and of the relationship
of child welfare to other social work activities.
In the spring of 1946 the Greater Boston Community Council
made a study of private social agencies (exclusive of hospital
social-service departments) in Boston, Newton, and Cambridge.
Forty-four agencies, each employing a total of 20 or more full­
time and part-time workers, were included. Among the 450
heads, assistant heads, and case workers, about one-fourth were
identified with child welfare. There were no separate figures for
men and women (34).
Typical of many private children’s agencies in 1949 was one
in the Midwest employing 10 social workers, all women. Two
were administrators, and eight were case workers who did some
home finding and adoption work in addition to other case work.
This agency had one vacancy at the time of the report, late in



1949, and it was expected that there would be another vacancy
in the spring of 1950. The director said that it was difficult to
get qualified social workers because there was no social work
school in the State until 1949 and because salaries were low.
Religious groups have long counted children’s welfare among
their major concerns. “Child-care institutions and agencies were
among the earliest social service institutions established and
operated in large numbers by the churches.” (60) A striking
illustration of the prevalence of religious agencies in the childwelfare field is a report of jobs listed with the California Depart­
ment of Employment, Social Workers Placement Service, late
in 1947 and early in 1948. About half of the private agency
openings for work with children were with sectarian agencies,
as compared with less than one-third of all social work jobs
listed by the department during that period. Statistics on chil­
dren served also show the numerical importance of sectarian
groups in the field. In 1947 Catholic child-care services were
provided to over 19,000 children in foster homes and about
42.000 children in 369 Catholic institutions. It was reported that
there was increasing interest in expanding facilities for foster­
home care of dependent children, and foster-agency staffs had
been increased. In 146 Catholic institutions that year nearly
17.000 children were receiving protective care and other treat­
ment, and referral services for children were being expanded
Because of increasing governmental responsibility for financial
assistance since the 1930’s, Jewish family and children’s services
have largely tended to concentrate on supplementary, exper­
imental, and demonstration programs. In 1948, 30 specialized
Jewish welfare agencies employed over 200 social case workers
in child welfare work. There was a trend toward greater use of
foster homes rather than institutions. This will undoubtedly
affect the number and kinds of child welfare specialists hired
by Jewish agencies, since home finding and supervision of foster
homes are an essential part of a foster-home program.
Many Protestant institutions and agencies caring for children
provide case work services, and trained social workers, usually
people with strong religious motivation, are increasingly being
employed for such work. Although there are no summary statis­
tics on the numbers of social workers employed or of the children
under their care, a few scattered statistics are available on the
facilities for child care provided by some of the Protestant de­
nominations. In 1948, 46 homes and agencies for children and 9



homes for youth were reported by the Board of Hospitals and
Homes of the Methodist Church; there were 62 Episcopal institu­
tions and agencies for child care; and there were 85 child-care
and child-placing institutions under the National Lutheran
Council (10).

■ • • ....

Figure 10.—School social worker confers with a pupil.

School Systems

In 1949, 438 cities with a population of 10,000 or more, and 4
of the 7 States organized on a county-district basis, employed
1,083 school social workers—or visiting teachers, as they are
frequently called—on a full-time basis, according to a United
States Office of Education survey. Other estimates indicate that
there were at least 1,500 such workers. There are no separate
statistics for men and women workers, but men have traditional­
ly held only a small proportion of these jobs (11), although
their number in this field has increased since the end of the war.
In 1950, 11 percent of the approximately 600 members of the
National Association of School Social Workers were men. In
Illinois, which had a State-wide program, about half of the
school social workers were men, and men were employed as
school social workers in a number of other States.



Among large employers of school social workers were Phila­
delphia with 224 workers, 80 percent of them women; Detroit,
with 32 workers, about three-fourths of them women; and Minne­
apolis, with 31 women serving as school social workers. In one
up-State New York city in 1950 it was reported that the visiting
teacher program, which had started about 6 years before, em­
ployed 10 social workers and 1 supervisor, a woman. It was ex­
pected that three or four more workers would be added as soon
as the budget permitted and properly trained personnel was
Large cities were not alone in their use of social workers in
schools. There are many opportunities in rural areas in the
States that have some State-wide school social work program,
and a number of school systems of 5,000-15,000 school population
are establishing school social work programs. In one midwestern
town, for instance, with a public school enrollment of 2,000, a
woman became a full-time school social worker. Having worked
for 5 years in a State public welfare department and having
taught in an elementary school for 8 years, she saw the need in
her school system for a full-time social worker to help children
with behavior, attendance, and other school problems. She con­
vinced the local school board of the need and was appointed to
the job.
There is a growing need in school social work not only
for those who work directly with children but also for super­
visors and consultants. A few States have provided for con­
sultants in this field. One State has had a State consultant for
the visiting teacher program since the inception of the program.
Another State established such a position and tried for a year
and a half to find a well-qualified social worker for the job. By
1950 it was employing one full-time and one part-time consul­
tant, both qualified social workers. The State visiting-teacher
association in another State has requested the State to appoint
such a consultant (68).
Correctional and Other Settings

In 1949 there were approximately 3,000 probation officers,
about half of them women, working with children. Most of the
women were employed by local juvenile courts, if 1947 figures
are indicative. At that time, 1,056 of the 1,972 women probation
officers in the entire country were working in local juvenile
courts. Only 58 of the women were State probation officers, 24
in juvenile and 34 in other types of courts (55). In 1950 the



Federal court system employed 304 probation officers, only 3 of
whom were women. For the most part these officers were deal­
ing with adults, since juvenile cases are referred to a local ju­
risdiction whenever possible. The Federal courts handle only
about 2,000-3,000 juvenile cases annually, and the bulk of these
involve boys between the ages of 15 and 18 and are handled by
men probation officers. Very little of the women officers’ work
is with juveniles.
That social workers are sought for correctional work is in­
dicated by calls for social workers to work with delinquents
listed with the California Department of Employment, Social
Workers Placement Service, in 3 months of 1947 and 1948. Six
jobs were listed, one with a State agency and five with local public
agencies. Two of these jobs were in institutions.
Comparatively small sources of employment for social workers
were nursery schools and day care centers. Although many
authorities believe that a really complete day-care service must
include social case work and are spreading interest in the educa­
tion and training of workers for this field, it still afforded only
a few opportunities for case workers in 1949.
Teaching and Research

In 1948-49, 38 of the 46 graduate schools of social work in the
United States then accredited by the American Association of
Schools of Social Work offered courses in child welfare. Reports
from these 38 schools showed a total of 3 men and 23 women
teaching courses in child welfare full time and 11 men and 34
women teaching such courses on a part-time basis, either as full­
time faculty teaching more than one field or as part-time mem­
bers of the faculty.
Relatively few persons are engaged full time in research in
this field, and there are no statistics on their exact number.
However, the Children’s Bureau indicated that there were
occasional openings in both public and private agencies for people
trained in research and with a knowledge of child welfare.
Geographic Variations in Employment

Child welfare services are not evenly distributed throughout
the country. On June 30, 1947, over half of the 2,487 case
workers then employed in State and local public agencies giving
service to children were in 7 States—Illinois, Indiana, Mas­
sachusetts, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and Washington—which
together contained a little more than one-fourth of the total



child population under 21 years of age. The remaining 1,232
workers were scattered over the 41 States and 5 Territories and
Possessions which contained three-fourths of the child popula­
tion (82).
Of the 1947 increase over 1946 in the number of public child
welfare employees, the Children’s Bureau stated: “Every section
of the country shared in the increase in the number of child wel­
fare employees in 1947 as compared with 1946, with an over-all
increase of close to 12 percent for the United States as a whole.
The Southern States, where the need for additional child welfare
personnel is probably the greatest, showed the most growth,
with a 15 percent increase in employees. The North Atlantic
States showed a 13 percent increase, due chiefly to New York,
which added more employees than any other State in this area.
The Mountain States as a unit expanded the least, with Nevada
and Wyoming showing no change and Arizona and Utah losing
child welfare employees.” (82).

Figure 11.—A senior student majoring in social work at a State university talks
with child in a rural county welfare office where she is getting practice and
where she will be employed after graduation.

In general, many more child welfare services are available
to urban than to rural areas. Private agencies tend to confine



their activities largely to cities, and there seems to be little
indication that this situation will change. Large cities offer
many kinds of services for children, and workers specializing
in all phases of child welfare are employed. On the other hand,
only a public welfare worker, or sometimes a juvenile court
worker, may be available in a rural area to serve children. The
need for more child welfare services in rural areas is recognized
but opportunities for child welfare workers in rural areas are
still limited. On June 30, 1947, more than half of all public
child welfare case workers paid from State and local funds were
located in counties with cities having a population of 100,000
or more, although only 5 percent of all counties in the United
States are that large. However, it is to the smaller, rural areas
that the Federal Government hopes to bring much needed serv­
ices. Federal grants have enabled the States to hire child welfare
workers for case work service to children in public institutions
and State training schools and for work with delinquent children
in rural areas. These funds have been used especially in counties
with no large cities.
That some progress has already been made in bringing service
to children in rural communities is shown by the employment in
1947 of full-time child welfare workers, paid from public funds,
in one-fifth of the counties, although child welfare workers were
very scarce outside of metropolitan areas a decade before. It was
pointed out that this record “. . . is poor indeed until it is re­
alized that at no time before 1946 has more than $1,510,000 a year
of Federal money been available to help States and communities
with this work.” (49)
“Progress in development of individualized service to rural
people through State and county welfare departments has been
phenomenal since passage of the Social Security Act.” (14.) The
stimulus of programs of Federal assistance, plus the increasing
concern of the community for the welfare of children, will un­
questionably serve to increase the provision of service to children
in all communities. Meanwhile, the trained child welfare worker
will find that despite the great need for staff in rural areas, the
largest number of jobs is in urban areas and particularly in
the larger cities.
All reports show that there were not enough trained child
welfare case workers to meet the demand in 1949, and author­
ities were agreed that existing graduate schools of social work



could not possibly train as many people as were required to close
the gap between the number of workers needed and the number
available. Although there were no complete statistics on the
numbers of. persons needed annually for new and vacant posi­
tions, or the number of workers entering the field, there are
some scattered data that help to give some indication of these
A study of 115 member agencies of the Child Welfare League
of America in the period January 1 to September 1, 1941, shows
that 204 case workers and 32 supervisors left their jobs during
those 8 months. Only one of these jobs, that of a case work
supervisor, was eliminated, and at the end of the period there
were—including vacancies by reason of loss of personnel and
new jobs—40 case workers’ and 11 supervisors’ jobs open.
If the other approximately 2,400 private child welfare agencies
in the United States were similar to these 115 agencies in the
number of vacancies remaining in 1941, there were over 1,000
positions open in private child welfare agencies even before World
War II. As early as 1945 the National Commission on Children
and Youth found a serious shortage of qualified child welfare
workers. It estimated the supply of child welfare workers with
somewhere near adequate training at 1,800 and indicated that
at least 13,000 trained workers were needed to give all essential
services to children (53).
On June 30, 1949, there were, as noted earlier, 403 vacancies
in public State and local child welfare agencies, which employ
over twice as many case workers as private agencies do. If the
same ratio of vacancies to total jobs existed in private agencies
as in public agencies at that time, then it seems reasonable to
expect that, as in 1941, there were about 1,000 vacancies in pri­
vate child welfare agencies in 1949. If this conservative estimate
is correct, there were approximately 1,500 vacancies in public and
private agencies at the end of June 1949.
No statistics are available on the attrition rate among workers
in this field. If it is similar to the known rate for nurses in the
decade of the 1930’s, about 1,000 workers would be needed just
to replace personnel leaving the field each year, another indica­
tion that the estimate of 1,500 vacancies in child welfare agencies
in 1949 is a conservative one.
In 1949 there were obviously not enough people graduated
from schools of social work with specialization in child welfare
to meet this demand. Although nearly 2,050 people, including
about 1,450 women, received degrees from graduate schools of



social work in 1948-49, an analysis of data from a few schools
that place strong emphasis on child welfare specialization in­
dicates that perhaps a fourth, or about 500 graduates, were em­
ployed as case workers with children.
The number entering this field may be decreasing. The dean
of the school of social work of one large university said that
there had been a wartime and postwar decrease in the number
specializing in child welfare, but some of the increasing number
in psychiatric social work will undoubtedly work primarily with
children. The need for interesting more young people in child wel­
fare work is recognized, and many schools of social work co­
operate with the division of child welfare in the State depart­
ment of public welfare to provide information to high school
students on this work.
Personnel for supervisory and consultant and executive posi­
tions was also scarce in 1949. An acute shortage of State direc­
tors and State consultants was reported, and many jobs were
unfilled for lack of suitable applicants. One reason for this was
reported to be the lack of a central agency to which States
could go for workers when needed. The lack of qualified work­
ers appeared to be general, although agencies in a few areas,
notably large cities like New York, were reported to have little
difficulty obtaining trained workers.
Another factor, mentioned by employers in both public and
private agencies, was nearness to a school of social work. Agen­
cies close to schools were at an advantage in obtaining person­
nel. For example, the chairman of the department of social work
in one midwestern university said that most of the students
wanted to remain in the Midwest.and work there. Quite a few
of them were interested in work in small communities, although
those who came from smaller communities expressed a prefer­
ence for work in larger cities. The director of this school agreed
with others who reported that the shortage of qualified child
welfare workers was so acute that the well-trained worker had
an attractive choice of jobs.
Child Welfare Agencies

Despite agreement on the value of graduate social work train­
ing for case workers with children, there have been obstacles at
various times in the way of requiring training for all profession­
al staff. Prior to the expansion of public welfare programs dur­
ing the depression, the social work profession was well on its



way to staffing most private agencies with professionally trained
people. But when the public welfare program was expanded
rapidly in the 30’s, large numbers of case workers were suddenly
needed, and many workers without professional training were
Later, during World War II, there was again an increased
demand, the effect of which was apparent in children’s agencies
as early as 1942. A study made by the Washington, D. C., branch
of the American Association of Social Workers showed that,
while 63 percent of all workers newly appointed in 1941 to chil­
dren’s agencies in the District were graduates of schools of social
work, only 58 percent of those in 1942 had this amount of train­
ing (70).
The Children’s Bureau reported that, in 1946, an examination
of child welfare positions under the merit system in a 25-percent
sampling of States showed less lowering of standards than was
feared. But changes in standards were more marked for case
workers, the group most seriously affected by wartime loss of
staff, than for the higher classifications, such as child welfare
director, or supervisor, or consultant (78).
Since the end of the war, graduation from an accredited school
of social work has again become predominantly required of new
workers, even though it will be some time before all case workers
in child-serving agencies are fully trained. Despite the fact that
many child welfare workers today lack professional training, the
woman who is planning to enter the field will be at a great dis­
advantage without it. Even now, with many untrained workers
in the field and with an unmet demand for more workers, many
agencies seek people who hold the master’s degree in social work
to fill vacancies, preferring to leave jobs vacant until such work­
ers are found rather than hire unqualified personnel. Indications
point unmistakably to the fact that, in the future, there will be
no place in professional case work with children for the un­
trained worker.
Private agencies have generally been ahead of public child
welfare agencies in requiring full professional training. But the
requirement of training for workers in public agencies has be­
come more common since Federal funds have made it possible for
State agencies to provide educational leave stipends for staff
members for professional education at schools of social work. In
administering the child welfare services program, the Children’s
Bureau has emphasized the employment by State agencies of staff
with professional competence to provide the necessary services.



The Children’s Bureau recommends as a minimum standard
for local child welfare supervisor: “Satisfactory completion of
three quarters or two semesters of graduate training in an ac­
credited school of social work, including supervised field work in
case work, and 3 years (within the last 10 years) of successful
employment in supervised social case work in an agency main­
taining acceptable standards of supervision and service, of which
2 years must have been in case work with children.” Substitution
of graduate training in an accredited school of social work is
permitted for 1 of the 3 years of employment in supervised case
work, but not for the 2 years of case work with children. (For
a list of accredited schools, see appendix, p. 62).
The academic requirements for senior child welfare worker are
the same as those for supervisor, and the worker must have had
2 years of successful employment in a social case work agency
maintaining acceptable standards of supervision and service, in­
cluding at least 1 year in case work with children. Graduate
social work training may be substituted for 1 year of the speci­
fied employment, but not for the year of case work with children.
The minimum recommended training for the child welfare
worker is satisfactory completion of 3 quarters or 2 semesters of
graduate training in an accredited school of social work, includ­
ing supervised field work in case work (87).
A study in 1947 of announcements of State civil service exam­
inations showed that, although graduate training was infrequent­
ly required for case workers, it was required more often for
child welfare workers than for some of the other categories (67).
The Child Welfare League of America urges its member agen­
cies to require full professional education and training for all
case work positions. Recognizing that the supply of such work­
ers is limited, the League does not make a completely trained
staff a rigid condition of membership. However, insistence is
laid on filling the more strategic professional positions—such as
those of case work supervisors, intake workers, and all those
responsible for the training and supervision of case workers—
with professionally qualified people. The League also stresses
the importance of working towards improving the educational
qualifications of staffs of agencies through scholarships, workstudy plans, educational leaves for staff members whose training
is incomplete, and through adequate supervision and in-service
training programs.
The League also expects member agencies to be committed to
the advancement of professional training for social work and to



lend their resources of funds and leadership to such advance­
ment in their own communities and in their own programs.
In addition, statements of standards resulting from local per­
sonnel studies invariably recommend graduation from a graduate
school of social work. In institutional work, the Personnel Prac­
tices Committee of the Children’s Council, Welfare Federation
of Cleveland, recommended that the minimum qualification for
case workers be “. . . . graduation from an accredited 2-year
school of social work, preferably with a specialization in child
welfare and an additional understanding of children in group
care.” The Committee also recommended that a case work
supervisor be graduated from a 2-year accredited school of social
work, and have a minimum of 4 years’ experience in an agency
of recognized standards, at least two of them in a supervisory
capacity and in the field of child welfare. “It is advisable that
some of this experience should have been in the field of work with
children in the foster home and institution, and that he have an
additional understanding of children in group care.” (89)
Students specializing in child welfare are given basic social
work training and courses aimed at giving them an understand­
ing of children and their behavior. Supervised field experience,
preferably at least half of it in child welfare agencies or in school
or juvenile court situations, helps the student to acquire skill in
working with children and a greater understanding of them.
School Social Work

The National Association of School Social Workers recom­
mends as desirable training for school social workers a master’s
degree from an accredited school of social work and a 9-month
field-training placement in the social work department of a pub­
lic school system (69). In addition to the courses required of
all social workers and all social case workers, and those courses
specifically related to school social work, the student should
choose electives from among the following fields: child welfare,
child labor, vocational guidance, special services to school chil­
dren, tests and measurements, and group work, as well as “. . . a
concentration of courses on growth and development of the in­
At least half of the time allotted to field work should be in
school social work, and it is preferable that this be in the second,
rather than the first, year of training. In this placement the
student should have a case load of various types of school prob­
lems, such as truancy, behavior problems, personality problems,



learning difficulties, social problems of a retarded or handicapped
child, emotional problems, school leaving, etc. A knowledge of
the methods and uses of social research is also necessary, and
the student should work on individual or group research projects,
preferably in the field of school social work.
For those who take only 1 year of social work training, courses
in the regular first-year basic core curriculum, including the se­
quence in social case work, are recommended. Electives should
be selected with consideration of what the student needs to know
about social work in a school setting. The field work placement
should be in a school setting.
For students who are taking less than 1 year of social work
training to meet State legislation requirements for certification,
courses in growth and development of the individual, social case
work, and community organization with special reference to child
welfare services are especially desirable. There should be a su­
pervised field work placement in a school or social agency; and
if a regular plan is not possible, an 8-week summer placement of
this type is suggested.
In 1945 suggestions for certification of visiting teachers were
made at a national conference held at the United States Office of
Education. It was recommended that there be a minimum, a
standard, and a professional certificate. Requisites for a mini­
mum certificate would be a 4-year college course with emphasis
on education and the social sciences, including sociology, applied
sociology, and psychology. For a standard certificate, require­
ments would include, in addition to those for the minimum certi­
ficate, 1 year of full-time work in advanced courses, preferably in
an accredited school of social work or in a cooperative arrange­
ment between schools of education and social work. Holders of
the professional certificate would be required to meet the stand­
ards for a minimum certificate and to be graduated from a 2-year
graduate curriculum in an accredited school of social work, spe­
cializing in social case work with children; they would also be
required to have had at least 1 year of successful experience as
a visiting teacher or school social worker (74).
Although all classroom teachers are required to be certified for
their work, it was reported in a 1945 Office of Education study
that of all the cities covered that maintained organized visiting
teacher services, only a little over half required any professional
certificate of visiting teachers. Usually this was a teacher’s cer­
tificate1 ; only 3 percent required a special visiting teacher’s certi­
ficate, although a number of States now issue special visiting



teacher certificates (74.). In some cities, school social workers
had little or no professional training or experience in either edu­
cation or social work (20). But by 1949 all of the States that
provided for some kind of State-wide school social worker serv­
ice required that the workers have some courses in social work,
and some are identifying this as the kind of training necessary
or desirable. Some States also require teaching experience or an
emergency type of teacher’s certificate. One requires a master’s
degree in education together with a certain number of hours of
credit from a school of social work. Another State has indicated
the most desirable qualifications as a master’s degree in social
work, preferably with training in school social work. Local city
or rural school systems usually require the equivalent of at least
one full year of social work training, and some require a master’s
degree in social work as well as experience in a children’s case
work agency (68).
Untrained or partially trained workers can, if they want to
obtain full professional training, take the beginning basic courses
in summer school; but to complete the training, a leave of ab­
sence and attendance at regular sessions of a school of social
work are necessary.
“A number of schools of social work, such as Denver, Tulane,
Our Lady of the Lake, Illinois, offer summer sessions for indi­
viduals interested in beginning training.” (68) The School of
Social Work of the University of Pittsburgh has a work-study
plan. The Nashville School of Social Work, which has been of­
fering training in cooperation with the Visiting Teacher Division
of the Nashville city schools since 1942, also experimented in
1949 with a training unit in the Demonstration School of the
Peabody Teacher Training Institution.
It is sometimes possible for students in a school of education
to plan their undergraduate curriculum to meet the requirements
for entrance to a school of social work. “At Indiana University
and the University of Illinois the schools of social work and the
schools of education have jointly worked out an undergraduate
curriculum in the school of education which gives a provisional
teacher’s certificate enabling students to meet academic require­
ments for admission to the school of social work. In the plan,
the social work field placement in the school is accepted as a sub­
stitute for the practice teaching requirement.” (68)1
1 For requirements for teaching certificates, see: U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics. Employment outlook for elementary and secondary school teachers. Washing­
ton, D. C., U. S. Government Printing Office, 1949. 89 pp. (Bull. No. 972.)



Correctional Work With Children

In many places probation officers are still appointed because of
political influence, and few States and communities have adopted
minimum standards for their appointment. However, a commit­
tee of the National Probation and Parole Association in 1945
recommended that probation officers have a bachelor’s degree
from a college or university of recognized standing or its educa­
tional equivalent, with courses in the social sciences, and 1 year
of paid full-time experience under competent supervision in an
approved social agency or related field.
Although in a few areas probation officers have social work
training, and many feel that such training is desirable, it is sel­
dom required. In-service training has been used frequently to
develop the specialized skills required. In some cases the pro­
bation departments themselves offer this training, with instruc­
tion given by supervisory personnel or specially assigned instruc­
tors. Another type of arrangement is one in which the State
provides training, as in Pennsylvania, where the State Depart­
ment of Public Instruction, reimbursed in part by Federal funds
under the George-Deen Act, has conducted in-service training
courses for correctional workers on the State and local level since
the late 1930’s. Some colleges and universities have conducted
in-service training courses or institutes, open to the probation
officers of local courts. Among these schools are the University
of California at Berkeley, the University of Southern California,
the University of New Hampshire, the College of William and
Mary in Williamsburg, Va., and the University of Minnesota
Agencies still hire, although less often than during the war,
workers who have had only undergraduate training, to whom
they grant educational leave to obtain graduate training in social
work. Sometimes a fellowship or other financial assistance is
given to the worker. In recent years councils of social agencies
have set up revolving funds for professional training (46‘).
In 1949 the Child Welfare League of America reported that all
but 40 of the 150 private and public agencies participating in a
League survey had some arrangement for full- or part-time
study. To help secure enough qualified workers, agencies were
making more and larger grants to help workers obtain the needed
training. There were various types of arrangements, but gener-




i *



SS !*>.*

Figure 12.—Social work student gets better acquainted with child to be placed
in foster home by visiting library with her.

ally the student agreed to work with the agency for a stated
period after completion of training (46).
Public agencies have been encouraged by the United States
Children’s Bureau to use Federal funds to finance educational
leave for staff members, both newly employed and others, for
either the full 2 years of study, or for 1 year, which may be either
the first or second year in the graduate social work curriculum.
Stipends vary in the different States; in some instances $125 to
$175 per month is paid to the worker, and in others tuition,
travel, and maintenance are paid. In 1948-49 each of the 48
States provided for professional training for staff members.
Three States provided for use of Federal funds for payment of
salaries to staff on work-study arrangements (an arrangement
under which workers carry a reduced case load and go to school
at the same time). The funds budgeted probably provided edu­
cational leave for about 475 staff members (3).
One State reported to the Women’s Bureau that, in the 9 school
years up to 1949, during which the United States Children’s
Bureau funds had been available to States for educational leave



programs, stipends had been given to 62 persons, of whom 27
were still employed by the department as of January 1, 1949.
Three were still in school on a second-year stipend.
Some child welfare apprenticeships are also made possible by
Social Security Act funds. This is a 2-year plan. The first year
is given to training, with 6 months or more at a school of social
work, and the remaining time given to work in a rural county
with a limited case load under the general supervision of the
training unit and day-to-day supervision by the local supervisor.
The second year is devoted to full-time employment in a rural
public child welfare agency, with continuing supervision by the
training unit. The Department of Social Welfare pays $100 per
month for the first year, as well as tuition when necessary. In
the second year the local public-welfare unit pays the worker’s
salary, 40 percent of which, for qualified personnel, is reimbursed
from State funds. Apprenticeships are usually taken by recent
college graduates interested in social work but without funds for
further training (65).
In 1949 the Child Welfare League of America revealed that
only one member agency reported making a scholarship available
through a school of social work to a student selected by the
school and having no connection with the agency or any obliga­
tion to accept employment with the agency. However, this was
the only 1 of the 150 reporting agencies, public and private, that
made the grant directly to the school, on the theory that the best
way to assure a supply of trained workers in one agency was to
increase the number of qualified workers in the entire field. The
majority of the League members used all or part of their scholar­
ship funds for the professional training of incumbent or potential
staff members (4-6).
The typical practice was to make funds available to the agen­
cy’s staff or to those applying for positions, with the stipulation
that they must return to the agency for a full year of paid em­
ployment or refund the tuition payment. Professional employees
of the agency were allowed to attend a graduate school of social
work at one-half their annual salary after 3 years of work and
at full salary after 5 years of service and were expected to re­
turn to the agency for at least 1 year following the training
period (46).
“There is unfortunately a serious dearth of scholarships that
may be used for the training of social workers for the public
schools.” (12) Among the few scholarships available are those
offered by the California State P.T.A. for training in psychiatric



social work and for social work in the children’s field, including
school social work. “Individuals using these stipends are pledged
to accept employment in children’s agencies or in school systems
following training.” (68)
In Illinois and Georgia the State Mental Health Authority has
granted stipends to members of the school social work staff for
graduate training in school social work, with the stipulation that
they must return to the staff for a time. The Hogg Foundation
in Texas is also making scholarships available for school social
work training for people currently employed, but not fully
trained, in this field. In addition, some schools of social work
have fellowships and scholarships which may be awarded to stu­
dents specializing in school social work.
In-service training is provided in some places, and various
States and local units have workshops, institutes, etc., to provide
this type of training for their workers (68).

On June 30, 1949, according to the United States Children’s
Bureau, salaries of child welfare case workers in public State
and local agencies ranged from less than $1,500 to over $3,600;
their median salary was $2,670. This corresponds with the median
salary of $2,640 received in 1948 by women social workers pro­
viding direct services to individuals in public agencies in Michi­
gan. The same median was reported for women engaged in
similar work in private Michigan agencies; in both public and
private agencies average earnings of men doing similar work
were higher—$720 more in public, and $540 more in private
agencies (2U) ■
Nation-wide information on women engaged in child welfare
work will be available in 1951 from the United States Bureau
of Labor Statistics’ current study of the earnings and workingconditions of social workers. Meanwhile, only fragmentary in­
formation is available on earnings in private agencies in this
The California Department of Employment, Social Workers
Placement Service, reported salaries offered by various west coast
agencies on positions for which workers were sought in late 1947
and early 1948. A range was usually quoted, the exact amount
paid to be determined by the worker’s qualifications. Salaries



offered by private agencies varied considerably; they ranged
from less than $2,400 to as high as $3,600 for case workers.
There was one opening for a case work supervisor at a salary of
$3,780 to $4,200, and one for an executive director at $4,800 to
$6,000. Some of these agencies quoted different salaries for
workers with minimum training and workers with full profes­
sional training, with differences in annual salary from as little
as $120 to as high as $600. Most agencies, however, quoted a
differential of $300 to $360 per year for the two groups of
A large family and children’s agency on the west coast, visited
by a representative of the Women’s Bureau, was paying its direc­
tor $8,000 and its assistant director $6,000. Salaries of eight
experienced case workers in this agency ranged from $3,240 to
$3,600. Forty-eight other case workers, who had completed 2
years of graduate social work training, were receiving $2,700 to
$3,200; 68 case workers, who had completed at least 1 year but
not the full 2 years of training, were paid from $2,520 to $2,880.
In addition, all workers were receiving a $240 per year cost-ofliving bonus. A small children’s aid society in the West em­
ployed three women social workers: a supervisor at $3,600 per
year; one case worker at $3,200; and one part-time case worker
at a rate equivalent to $3,500 full time.
In 13 Greater Boston private family and children’s agencies,
114 persons were employed as case workers and case work super­
visors in 1948. Ninety-eight of the 114 were graduates of a pro­
fessional school of social work, and all of the others, except one,
had had at least some courses in such a school. The salaries of
these case workers and supervisors ranged from $2,100 to $4,500,
with the majority of supervisors receiving between $3,000 and
$4,000 and most of the case workers receiving from $2,200 to
$3,000. Of 282 case workers employed in both public and private
agencies in Boston, 17 were being paid less than $1,500 per year.
Only 17 workers received $3,000 or more, and none received as
much as $4,000. In the spring of 1948 the Personnel Practices
Committee of the Children’s Council, Welfare Federation of
Cleveland, recommended that, for a 40-hour week, case workers
in children’s agencies be paid from $2,700 to $4,500 a year, and
that case work supervisors be paid from $3,300 to $4,500. For
supervisors of day nurseries the recommended salary was $3,000
to $4,500 (89).
There is wide variation in salaries paid to school social work­
ers in different school systems, but generally they are the same as



those of classroom teachers, or higher. Differentials known to
the Women’s Bureau ranged from $160 to $500 a year. In
1949-50 visiting teachers’ salaries in one southern city ranged
from $3,050 to $3,650; this was about $300 higher than salaries
of regular teachers with minimum training and no experience.
These visiting teachers had a 39-hour, 5-day week, and were
employed 9V2 months per year. In one west coast city 12 women
and 6 men were employed as social workers in the school attend­
ance department. Those who had only the A. B. degree were
paid from $2,700 to $4,800; those with an A. B. plus 1 additional
year of training received $3,000 to $5,275; and those who had 2
years of training in addition to the bachelor’s degree were re­
ceiving salaries that ranged from $3,300 to $5,700. School social
workers in an up-State New York city were paid between $2,500
and $4,150 a year—$100 more than classroom teachers with the
master’s degree and with the same amount of experience were
receiving. Because the school social workers were chiefly people
with at least 5 years of elementary teaching experience, they re­
ceived more than the minimum rate. Those who had 30 semes­
ter hours of graduate training in addition to the master’s degree
received an additional $200. The well-trained visiting teacher
could reach a salary of about $5,000 through annual increments.
In May 1949 probation officers, in juvenile and other courts
handling juvenile cases in cities and counties of 100,000 or more
population, were being paid between $1,200 and $4,320; super­
visors and others in intermediate positions were receiving $1,800
to $5,905; and those holding the position of director or chief re­
ceived from $2,410 to $9,600 (56). In a salary study covering
291 local probation departments in 41 States and including only
cities with a population of 25,000 or more, the National Proba­
tion and Parole Association found “. . . a wide discrepancy in
salaries paid to Negro and white officers holding the same rela­
tive positions. In most cases Negro officers receive $300 to $500
less per year than their white colleagues.” (30) A similar dis­
crepancy existed in salaries paid to men and women. Maximum
salaries for women were the same as minimum salaries for men.
In only one place, a municipal court, were comparable salaries
paid to both sexes. Here the minimum salary for women proba­
tion officers was $100 more than for men, and top salaries were
equal. Sixty-three of the 291 local probation departments specifi­
cally stated that no regular or dependable provision was made
for salary increases, and 80 reported that no pension or retire­
ment plan was operative (30).



Prior to the passage of the 1950 amendments to the Social
Security Act, most social workers, as employees of nonprofit or­
ganizations, were excluded from Federal Old Age and Survivors
Insurance coverage. The new legislation provides, however, for
coverage of workers who seek inclusion in the Federal program,
upon request or with the approval of at least two-thirds of the
agency’s employees.
Until the National Health and Welfare Retirement Asssociation was formed in 1945, few agencies provided any retirement
plan for their employees. But by 1950 several thousand social
workers were covered by this association, which provides secur­
ity under a group annuity plan for the professional worker on his
retirement from practice. Both employer and worker contrib­
ute. The plan includes death benefit, privilege of worker to
change jobs without losing benefits, and, if the worker leaves the
profession for a few years, privilege upon reemployment of be­
ginning benefits again (37). Undoubtedly in 1951 many private
social agencies will provide coverage for their case workers un­
der the Social Security Act amendment.

Generally the hours in this field are from 8:30 or 9 a. m. to 5
p. m., with some overtime, and sometimes a half day on Saturday.
Vacations are usually a month. In school social work the hours
are likely to be about the same as those of teachers, although in
some school systems social workers may be on a central office, 9
to 5, schedule. There may also be some night work for calls on
parents in their homes, since often the most convenient time for
both parents to see the worker is in the evening.
Comprehensive information on hours and other working con­
ditions will be available in a 1951 report of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics on the economic status of social workers.

Child welfare is a field in which women are in the majority,
and this in itself is a help to them in advancing. However, men
hold more administrative and executive jobs in proportion to
their numbers in this field than do women. Women are more
likely to go through the regular channels for advancement—
from case worker to senior case worker, supervisor to director
of a division or agency—while men often skip some of the steps
and become administrators without ever having been supervisors.
Nonetheless, women do hold some top jobs in this field, both in





Figure 13.—A case worker supervisor conferring with a case worker to plan for
further service to the families for which case worker carries responsibility.

public and private agencies. The membership of the Child Wel­
fare League of America, which represents only a small percent­
age of all those engaged in social case work with children, had 237
directors of child welfare agencies among its members in 1948.
Of the 175 directors who headed public agencies, almost twothirds were women; of the 62 who headed private agencies, half
were women (17). A directory of social agencies in Chicago
in August 1946 listed 79 executives of children’s agencies, 55 of
them women (23).
Women were also in the majority as officials administering
public child welfare services in State agencies. Early in 1948
there were 37 women and 20 men administering services to chil­
dren, exclusive of all services to crippled children and other
health services, in State agencies (4). The children’s divisions
of public welfare agencies in such widely scattered States as
Alabama, Wisconsin, and New York in 1950 were headed by
women. The children’s services division in city and county wel­
fare agencies were also commonly administered by women. The
Portland, Oreg., and Hamilton County, Ohio, agencies were
among the many local public agencies in which this was true.



The United States Children’s Bureau has also always been direc­
ted by a woman, and women headed some sections and divisions
of the agency in 1950.
The most inclusive child welfare organization is the Child
Welfare League of America, established in 1920, following the
suggestion of a White House Conference that there be a national,
private organization devoted to the problems of the dependent
child. In 1948 the league had a membership of more than 200
child-care agencies and other organizations whose primary con­
cern was child welfare. Approximately 15 percent of these
agencies were municipal, county, or State bureaus (63). The
Public Administration Clearing House describes the activities of
the league as follows: “Serves as a consultant to member agen­
cies ; lends staff members as teachers to universities, colleges, and
schools of social work; makes surveys at request of members and
nonmembers, including civic, fraternal, religious, and legislative
groups, for purpose of studying needs of dependent children and
of reshaping and strengthening child welfare programs to meet
these needs; formulates standards for child welfare agencies;
holds national and regional conferences.” (63) Membership is
open to both governmental and voluntary agencies, and associate
membership is open to such groups as councils of social agencies,
schools of social work, clubs, committees not operating programs
of child care or protection (36).
There is no separate professional organization for all child
welfare workers; those who are qualified by training and experi­
ence may join the over-all American Association of Social Work­
ers, described in the final bulletin in this series.
The National Association of School Social Workers, organized
in 1919 as the American Association of Visiting Teachers, had
early in 1950 approximately 600 members, 89 percent of them
women. There is a senior membership for those with at least
a year of professional education plus some experience in teach­
ing or as school social workers. Active members are persons in
practice meeting the following requirements: A bachelor’s de­
gree or its equivalent or standard teacher’s certificate in the
State where training is completed or in which the worker is now
employed, plus 1 year of evaluated successful teaching experi­
ence. Substitutions accepted for the teaching experience are:
Practice teaching in an accredited school of education or teach­
ers’ college, such as meets the requirements of the particular in­



stitution, or 1 year of evaluated successful experience as a school
social worker, or 1 school year of field work placement in school
social work while a student in an accredited school of social
work. Associate and contributing members are professional and
lay persons interested in helping to promote the purposes of the
association. The association has these main purposes:
—improve the quality of social service in the schools;
—interpret the need for such service;
—help define and raise standards for personnel, professional
education, organization, and administration affecting
—increase the body of knowledge and skill relating to
—help in adapting mental hygiene principles to the educa­
tive process in elementary and secondary schools (69).
The National League to Promote School Attendance is “an
organization for education, pupil adjustment, attendance, and
school social welfare service.” In 1948 it had about 750 mem­
bers, including attendance officers, principals, teachers, child wel­
fare workers, and others interested in the welfare of children (63).
Specialized child welfare workers may join other special or­
ganizations in this field. The National Association for Nursery
Education, with a membership of 900 individual members in
1948, was organized “To provide a medium through which those
who are interested in nursery education can exchange ideas, and
through which they can cooperate as a group with other agencies
concerned with the education and developmental welfare of early
childhood.” (36)
For probation officers there is the National Probation and
Parole Association, which in 1948 had a membership of 34,000
individuals and corporations. The association is concerned with
problems of juvenile delinquency, as well as with adult offenses;
it conducts studies, carries on campaigns for improved legislation
and administration, conducts an annual conference, and recom­
mends standards for personnel (36).
The National Child Labor Committee is not a professional or­
ganization but is composed of 18,000 members “. . . interested in
protecting children against premature employment and improv­
ing their educational opportunities.” The agency advocates and
works for legislation relating to the employment of minors, con­
ducts investigations and surveys, and “encourages adaptations of
secondary school curricula to meet needs of students and exten­
sion of counseling and guidance services.” (63)



Basic to success in child welfare work, as in any other field,
are adequate training and certain personal attributes. Ideally,
the worker comes to the field equipped with a bachelor’s degree,
the symbol of her preprofessional training, which should have
included courses in such disciplines as economics, political
science, psychology, sociology, statistics, biology, and other fields
(2). Following this, she should have taken 2 years of study at
a school of social work, including field work, so that she comes to
her job with an appreciation of and some practice in actual case
work situations.
Those already working in this field warn that the prospective
child welfare worker must not confuse a fondness for children
with the desire or ability to work continuously for their welfare.
Rather, she should be sure she will be able to work effectively
with children and also with adults, with whom she will have
many contacts. Because she frequently can accomplish most for
children by working with adults, her job may involve as many or
more contacts with adults than with children, and it is important
that she be able to establish constructive working relationships
with both.
The woman who does case work with children must be pre­
pared to deal with a wide range of problems and community con­
ditions (91). She must know what community facilities are
available and should take part in community planning and action,
especially as they relate to child welfare, but she must know how
to use her energies most effectively and not spread her energy
over too many activities (32). Understanding, integrity, and
the ability to inspire confidence and establish rapport are im­
portant in this work.
The young woman just entering this field should keep in mind
that a variety of choices is open to her in case work with children
and try to focus her interest on something more specific than
“work with children.” Certain skills and personal qualities are
desirable for all those who do social case work with children, but
the emphasis varies for different specializations within the field,
and additional skills—such as legal or medical knowledge—are
sometimes necessary.
The worker in the child protection field can best offer help by
working through the parents, or through other adults who are
concerned with the child’s welfare, and it is important, there­
fore, that she really enjoy working with adults (25). She must



have respect for people, regardless of their circumstances, and a
fundamental regard for their rights. Child protection involves,
too, a knowledge of court procedure and the ability to appraise
the legal aspects of cases (19).
The worker who specializes in child placing must gain experi­
ence in the selection and supervision of foster homes. Lack of
skill may mean serious danger to the child (91). The experi­
enced child placement worker will be well grounded, not only in
generic social work and in the techniques of working with chil­
dren, but also in psychiatric social work (8). If the worker is
specializing in the placement of children in convalescent foster
homes, she needs a background of non-technical but “intelligently
useful” medical information, some idea of the cost of hospital
care, and of the “complexities of medical organizations.” (90)
The worker who is more interested in the medical than the chil­
dren’s agency phases of the work may prefer to work in a medi­
cal setting such as a children’s hospital. (See Bull. 235-1, on
Medical Social Work, in this series.)
The licensing personnel of children’s agencies should be pro­
fessionally trained social workers, sufficiently experienced to

L____ „
Figure 14.—A school social worker conferring -with parents in their home.



know voluntary and public welfare programs for children. They
should be able to evaluate case work practice, be skilled in teach­
ing professional and lay groups, and in consultation. Some in­
stitutional experience is helpful, and sound judgment and the
ability to get along with people are most important (28).
The school social worker must be a stable person, capable of
dealing constructively with the problems of children who are re­
ferred to her; and she must be able to operate in a setting in
which most of the other workers are trained in a discipline other
than her own and may be critical of her efforts, or, on the other
hand, may expect more of her than she can possibly accomplish.
She must not only know her own field of social work but must
also have a basic understanding of school organization, its his­
torical development, and emphasis given services in the educa­
tional system (43). She should become familiar with the require­
ments of the State in which she plans to work and take training
that will enable her to obtain appointment.
For probation work, intellectual and emotional maturity, in­
tegrity, and the ability to get along with people are needed. Ob­
viously, for work with juveniles, a liking for and ability to get
along with children are important. A knowledge of court pro­
cedure and the legal aspects of cases is essential.
The social worker who is engaged in work with minority
groups must bring to the job not only social work training and
experience but a knowledge of anthropology and sociology, of the
cultural factors that are involved in their life. Understanding
must be brought to work with groups who have not been assimi­
lated into the larger group and whose culture differs, often in
many and important respects, from that of the general society.
The worker must be able to understand and to accept this be­
havior, if she is to work effectively with children in this setting
and help them to achieve a stable and satisfactory life.
Social case work with children not only requires technical skill
and high personal qualifications but also makes heavy demands on
the worker’s energies, emotional as well as physical and intel­
lectual. In return, however, the worker has the tremendous satis­
faction of knowing that she is helping to build a better citizenry.
Child Welfare Agencies

Social workers’ use of case work techniques and skills to help
children is the result of a comparatively new concept of child



care and of community responsibility for the well-being of chil­
In an earlier period the responsibility of a community for its
youth hardly went beyond provision of mere subsistence for the
dependent child. In the American colonies care for the child,
whose needs were not being met in his home, followed the Eng­
lish pattern, which at that time provided for the forced appren­
ticeship of dependent children. For centuries, the child thus
apprenticed in England was given sustenance adequate for a
bare existence and sometimes received some industrial training,
but neither his education nor his well-being was a primary con­
sideration. The chief concern of the overseer of the poor was to
prevent the neglected or dependent child from becoming a public
charge and to save the government money (U2). This same
principle guided the American colonists in their planning for the
care of children who required assistance from the community,
and in 1636 the Plymouth Colony set up an indenture system for
neglected children, patterned after the system the colonists had
known in England.
Throughout the seventeenth century, the workhouse, the coun­
ty almshouse, and the endowed parish school received “poor
orphans, children being brought up improperly because of pov­
erty, disordered lives, or carelessness of their parents; and ille­
gitimate children.” (U2) The workhouse cared for the aged and
the infirm and provided a trade education for young apprentices
who were sent there, sometimes at the age of 7 or 8, in order that
they might contribute to their own support U2).
In the county almshouse infants and children were placed to­
gether with the mentally ill, the feeble-minded, the diseased, the
alcoholic, and the criminal— as well as the destitute of all ages.
It was a common practice to apprentice children from the alms­
houses to workmen, in whose homes they lived and by whom they
were to be taught a trade. The only care for those in the insti­
tution was from older inmates; the mortality rate was high.
Almshouses were established as early as 1660 (81), but it was
not until 1729 that the first orphanage was established in Amer­
ica. This was a privately supported institution, connected with
the Ursuline Convent in New Orleans. Not until 1790, when an
orphanage was established by the city of Charleston, South Caro­
lina, was there a publicly supported orphanage in this country
(29). Private religious agencies were the sponsors of most of
the early orphanages, whose greatest—and perhaps only—virtue
was their care of children exclusively, in contrast to the then



much commoner type of institution in which children and adults
of all ages and character were thrown together indiscriminately
(81). The apprenticing, or “binding out,” of children at an
eai ly age, a custom with deep roots in the public welfare practice
of an earlier period, was continued in the orphanages, as it had
been in the county almshouses. Many of these orphanages were
only temporary shelters, until the child could be apprenticed.
From 1866 on, some State and some county homes for children
provided a higher standard of care for children placed in them.
Toward the end of the nineteenth century, more than 200 years
after the appearance of the almshouses in the middle of the
seventeenth century, there was increasing emphasis on the place­
ment of children in private homes, where they would receive care
conducive to their growth and development. Some of the State
institutions even began to consider themselves only temporary
shelters for children, until homes could be found for them, and
some States provided that no child should be kept in a State
school for more than 60 days. If the child remained in the
school at the end of the 60-day period, evidence had to be pre­
sented to show that every effort had been made to place him in
a foster home (29).
Meanwhile, Children’s Aid Societies, from the middle of the
nineteenth century on, and Societies for the Prevention of Cruel­
ty to Children—beginning with the one incorporated in New
York City in 1875—sprang up all over the country and promoted
bettei care of children in need of aid. In this early period of
work for the welfare and protection of children the emphasis was
upon the enactment of laws, punishment of offenders, and the use
of police authority. For many years there was a lack of sym­
pathy with the principles of social work. But this situation
changed in about 1910, when personnel with training and ex­
pel ience in social work rather than in law enforcement were
appointed to child protection positions in certain cities. Such
appointments brought about a change of emphasis in child serv­
ices in a number of cities (19).
Standards of child care came to include “proper food, clothing,
housing, health and medical service, both general and vocational'
education adjusted to the child’s ability, play opportunities, home
training in an atmosphere of affection and loving discipline, and
effective participation in some form of group life outside the
family. (U2) And the function of the child welfare case work­
er was to work toward this goal.



In Illinois, Mothers’ Aid legislation was enacted in June 1911.
Earlier that year, in April, a Mothers’ Aid law covering Jackson
County, Mo., had been passed. By the end of 1929, 44 States, the
District of Columbia, and Alaska and Hawaii had such laws
{29). Under the Federal Social Security Act, Mothers’ Aid, now
known as Aid to Dependent Children, provided broader coverage
than was provided in most of the State laws (1). The effect of
the Social Security legislation was to make financial assistance
to children State-wide, to make more services available to a
greater number of children, and to increase the participation of
public agencies in the total child welfare program.
Although the depression had increased government participa­
tion in welfare programs, including child welfare programs,
“Prior to 1935 only 26 States had, within their State public wel­
fare agencies, divisions responsible for providing or supervising
services to children on a State-wide basis.” Many States had no
State-wide public service primarily for children, with the possi­
ble exception of a State institution for delinquent children, or,
perhaps, for dependent children {85).
Passed in 1935 and subsequently amended, the Social Security
Act made provision, in addition to other funds, for Federal


■ |

ISjjl fjf1 I

Figure 15.—A case worker talks with foster mother and children in their home.



grants-in-aid to the States to develop special services for the
protection and care of homeless, dependent, and neglected
children and to children in danger of becoming delinquent, in
predominantly rural areas and in other areas of special need.
The funds may be used by the States to pay for the graduate
social work training of staff. The Act provided also for pro­
grams of maternal and child health, for care of crippled children,
and for other child welfare service (5).
By July 1, 1940, all of the 48 States, the District of Columbia,
Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii were cooperating with the
United States Children’s Bureau in the administration of child
welfare services (76). By June 30, 1940, salaries of 735 child
welfare workers employed in State welfare departments and
cooperating units were being paid in whole or in part by Federal
funds; 495 of these workers were giving direct services in local
communities; the other 240 were engaged in State service, ineluding organization of community child welfare activities, consultation to local workers, and specialized types of services related
to the development of adequate care and protection (52). Train­
ing supervisors or consultants were employed in 40 States (35).
In some States there was also a gradual extension of local child
welfare services through larger State and local appropriations
(7). In 1941, 15 workers were employed in 5 States to make
investigations of adoptions referred to the State department con­
cerned with child welfare, and a special adoption supervisor,
devoting full time to adoption work or to the supervision of adop­
tions and foster home placements, had been appointed in Ala­
bama, in Massachusetts, and in Minnesota (SJ).





Meanwhile, private children’s agencies continued to serve the
largest number of children and to employ the largest number of
social case workers. The trend away from institutional care in­
volved more skilled case work in placing children in foster homes.
In 1938 there were in the United States 72 Catholic child­
placing agencies with some 15,000 children under foster care,
and 326 institutions for dependent and neglected children with
a total population of 39,545 children. By 1941 population in
Catholic child-caring institutions had declined to about 34,000
U5). Social workers were used in placement of children in both
private homes and institutions. In the spring of 1938 every
Catholic child-caring home in the New York City archdiocese
employed a lay social worker, and there were 11 such workers
by 1940 (U7).







In 1939 about 50 agencies reporting to the Council of Jewish
Federations and Welfare Funds were caring for 11,561 children.
Between 1929 and 1939 the proportion of these children placed
in Jewish foster homes (rather than in institutions) had in­
creased from 44.4 to 61.3 percent (22).
School Social Work




School social work began in 1906 and 1907, with programs in
Boston, New York City, and Hartford. In all three cities agencies
outside the school system financed these programs. At that time
workers in two of the cities were called visiting teachers, and
in the third, home and school visitor. In Hartford and New York
City the service has since become part of the school system.
New York City in 1913 and Rochester, N. Y., in 1914 were the
first two cities in which the board of education employed and
financed a visiting teacher service.
In 1921 the Commonwealth Fund, with the aid of the Public
Education Association of New York, established the National
Committee for Visiting Teachers and put on a demonstration
of the value of school social work in the prevention of juvenile
delinquency. This demonstration took place in 30 communities,
21 of which continued the program after the 8-year demonstra­
tion period. In 1928 one authority said of the program, “It has
been able not only to extend the work to the communities included
in the program, but also to furnish a wide variety of illustrations
for other communities which may wish to introduce it.” (US) In
this period and
. until 1942, when the work was taken
over by the public schools, the White-Williams Foundation in
Philadelphia made a definite contribution in training visiting
teachers and developing philosophy and standards, of value to
schools throughout the country.” (69) By 1930 there were 244
such workers in communities representing 31 States. For the
most part, they were in the larger cities; small communities and
rural areas often felt unable to afford trained personnel (93).
The program did not continue its growth during the depression
years; in 1941, there were only about 250 such workers in half
of the States (15).
Correctional Work with Children


In 1878 Massachusetts passed the first probation law in the
world; it provided for a probation officer for the city of Boston.
Previously probation work was done chiefly by volunteers, and,
in fact, the practice of using volunteers continued and has en­
dured to the present time. When the first juvenile court was




established in Chicago in 1899, probation was its “chief corner­
stone,” and from that time on the development of juvenile courts
and the use of probation service in the treatment of juvenile
delinquents made fairly continuous and rapid progress. The
rapid growth of specialized probation service for juveniles is
shown by the fact that, while there were only 2 States with
juvenile probation officers before 1900, 34 States and the District
of Columbia had such service by the close of 1907. Ten years
later only one State had no juvenile probation law. Although the
proportion of workers in this field who were women was smaller
than in many other social work fields (in some of which women
comprised as much as 90 percent or more of all workers), their
number was fairly large. In large cities about 40 percent of
juvenile court probation officers were women; and in smaller
places there was often a man and a woman on the staff. The
United States Children’s Bureau also employed a specialist in
delinquency and one in training schools.

Figure 16.—Undergraduate students in social work at a State university observing
and assisting at a local clinic for crippled children.

World War II increased and intensified the problems of
children and young people. Their family security was threat­



ened by migrations, separations, and uncertainties, and by the
changes in family living that resulted from the absence of
fathers in military service and the increased employment of
mothers in war work (31). In February 1944 the mothers of
nearly 41/a million children under the age of 14 were employed;
% million of these children were in homes from which the father
was absent (52). It is not surprising that expenditures for day
care for children of working mothers increased greatly; in 30
urban areas included in a United States Children’s Bureau
social statistics study, the increase between 1940 and 1942 was
more than 20 percent (79).
Nor is it strange, in view of the wartime strains on family
life and on children, that the cost of treating and caring for
juvenile delinquents rose. Expenditures increased 14 percent for
institutional care for delinquent children and 10 percent for
probation and other services for delinquents (79). To meet
the special problems arising from congested and inadequate
housing and school facilities and from lack of wholesome play
and recreation opportunities, some States added a specialized
worker in day care or juvenile delinquency to their child welfare
staffs (50). Child services for which costs changed less were
foster home care, protective services, and care of dependent
children in institutions (79).
However, child-serving agencies, public and private, were
faced with greater demands for service at the same time that
personnel was scarce and turn-over unusually high. Public
agencies were especially hard hit because of the greater expan­
sion of their services during the war. At the end of 1942, 320
of the 1,008 existing positions in public State and local child
welfare agencies were vacant (92). In April 1943 more than onethird of the total budgeted child welfare positions in public
agencies in Idaho, Utah, and Nevada were unfilled (21).
By July 31, 1944, 2,245 full-time child welfare staff members
in public welfare agencies were providing non-institutional
services to children in the 48 States, the District of Columbia,
Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico. Of these 2,245 workers, 1,734
were providing direct services to children; the others were doing
supervisory work or were specialists (83). Most of these workers
were women, although prior to World War II men were entering
this field in increasing numbers (11).
The Federal Government assisted States and local units in
providing day-care services in this period. In August 1942,
$400,000 was allocated from the President’s Emergency Fund



to the Office of Defense, Health, and Welfare Services to pay
certain expenses of a wartime child welfare program, including
allotments to the United States Office of Education and Children’s
Bureau for advisory and supervisory services and grants to
the States for State and local administrative services, but not for
the operation of programs. Under this program, the Children’s
Bureau provided a technical person in each regional office to
advise State and local welfare agencies on foster-day-care and
standards for children’s centers as well as for general child
welfare services. It was reported in January 1943 that nearly
100 trained workers had been made available to State depart­
ments of education and welfare, and a larger number were at
work in critical local areas (31).
Private agencies although they expanded less than did public
agencies, also felt the effects of greater demands for service and
of the shortage of qualified workers. By November 1943 there
were about 400 current and prospective vacancies in professional
positions reported by 242 agencies affiliated with the Child
Welfare League of America. At the end of the following year
there were orders on file at the Social Work Vocational Bureau,
which served as a national clearing house for social work jobs
and applicants, for 393 child welfare workers. Some State child
welfare departments maintained standing orders with the Bureau
for an unspecified number of workers. The total number of child
welfare jobs represented by current orders was estimated to be
at least 500 (40).
Personnel turn-over, which was greater during the war than
it had been previously, intensified the personnel problems of
child welfare agencies throughout the country. Though they
offered higher salaries, agencies frequently experienced great
difficulty in finding satisfactory replacements for staff members
who left. It was reported that apprenticeship training, as a
substitute for graduate training in an accredited school of social
work, was reappearing to an important extent in private agen­
cies, and that there was an increasing tendency in public agencies
to hire college graduates without social work training for begin­
ning case worker positions (44). In many instances, both public
and private agencies provided for current or later attendance
of untrained workers at a school of social work.
During the war, as before, sectarian care was an important
part of child welfare service. Jewish agencies continued to em­
phasize foster home care, but, like others, found the problem of
finding foster homes aggravated by the housing shortage, the



break-up of servicemen’s homes, and the withdrawal of many
foster homes because of the higher cost of living (GU) • Catholic
agencies provided day care and placed increasing emphasis on
skilled social worker services for children, both by members of
religious orders and by lay social workers. In 1943 about 25,000
“religious” were caring for children, and members of the re­
ligious orders were enrolling in increasing numbers in schools
of social work. The majority of Catholic institutions for children
had case work services attached directly to the institutions or
provided by city-wide or diocesan-wide organizations of Catholic
Charities (48).
Statistics from schools of social work give some indication of
the kinds of work women trained in social work and specializing
in case work with children were doing during the war. One large
eastern school gave some rather detailed information on the
jobs of 194 graduates, October 1940—October 1941, who were
employed March 1, 1942. Forty-eight of these graduates, 41
women and 7 men, were doing social work with children. Thirtyone of the 48 worked in children’s agencies, and the others
worked with public assistance agencies, schools, churches, and
other organizations. The majority were in private, noninstitutional agencies, which employed 24 women and 4 men. Another
4 women worked in private institutions, making a total of 32 in
private employment. Over half, 18, were with sectarian agencies.
Sixteen of the 48 graduates were employed by public agencies—
9 local, 6 State, and 1 Federal.
Of 233 graduates in the year October 1941-October 1942, who
were employed on March 1, 1943, 48—42 women and 6 men—
were doing social work with children; another 3 men were work­
ing with delinquents. Only six of the graduates—one man and
five women—working with children were employed in institu­
tions, all of them private. Thirty-seven worked for private, noninstitutional agencies, 24 of them sectarian. Only five of the
workers were employed by public agencies—one by a territorial
unit of government, one by a State agency, and three by local
government agencies. All three of the men engaged in work with
delinquents were employed by local units of government.
These figures, if typical of other schools as well, indicate that
during the war, as previously, most graduates of schools of
social work specializing in work with children found employ­
ment with private agencies, often sectarian, and largely in noninstitutional settings. Those who were employed by public
agencies were chiefly in local agencies, and only a very few



went into Federal Government service. Chief employers of child
welfare workers were children’s and family agencies, and only
a few graduates specializing in child welfare worked for such
employers as courts, schools, churches, and hospitals.

Figure 17.

A volunteer at a Community Chest Agency and a child get better
acquainted through play.

There are few opportunities to do social case work with
children as a volunteer, largely because of the nature of case
work, which involves a skilled professional service and a con­
tinuing relationship. Sometimes qualified women are used for
such work, but not in any great numbers.
A New York City children’s agency that used volunteers found
that they were especially helpful as “big brothers” or “big sis­
ters,” in work with children who presented mild behavior and
reactive problems. The volunteers were carefully selected, were
at least 20 years old, and had to promise to serve for a mini­
mum of one year. Most of them had college training. People
were chosen who liked children and enjoyed being with them,



and who were mature and emotionally integrated themselves.
They had to be flexible in their attitudes, so that they could
benefit from professional supervision. Each volunteer had a
professional case work supervisor, and it was felt that the con­
tribution made by the volunteers justified the time required to
supervise them (38).
For the most part, however, volunteers working with children
are used only in activities not involving case work, such as
transportation and clerical service.

Minimum Requirements for Beginning Civil Service Position as Child
Welfare Worker in the Board of Public Welfare and as Social
Worker in the Juvenile Court of the District of Columbia1
(As taken from Announcement No. 99 [Assembled], issued May 4 1948
amended September 21, 1948, closed October 5, 1948.)->

Age: Eighteen years of age or over but under 62 (waived for
Education and Experience:

1. (a) Completion of the following work in a college, university,
oi school of social work of recognized standing: 2 courses in
social case work theory and principles, 500 hours of supervised
eld work in social case work, and 6 additional courses in one or
more of the following fields: child welfare, juvenile delinquency,
probation and parole, psychiatric information, medical informa­
tion, social legislation, labor problems, social group work, com­
munity organization, public welfare administration, or social
research. (A year of study in an accredited school of social work
including supervised field work will be accepted as fulfilling
this requirement.) PLUS
(h) 0ne year of experience in social case work;
2. Completion of 2 years of study in an accredited school of
Physical Requirements:

A physical examination is required before appointment. Am­
putation of arm hand, leg, or foot will not disqualify an applicant
for appointment, but loss of foot or leg must be compensated
by use of satisfactory prosthesis. Vision with or without glasses
must be sufficiently acute, and near vision, glasses permitted
must be acute enough for the reading of printed material the
size of typewritten characters without strain. Applicants must
1 In June 1950 the beginning salary on this position was $3 825
- For more complete and later information, consult latest announcements of the nc
Commission in first- and second-class post offices
cements of the Civil Service




be able to hear the conversational voice, with or without a hear­
ing aid. Applicants must be free from emotional instability and
have no history or presence of serious mental diseases. Any
physical condition which would cause the applicant to be a hazard
to himself or others, or which would prevent efficient per­
formance of the duties of the position, will disqualify foi


Schools Of Social Work In The Continental United States
Accredited By The
American Association Of Schools Of Social Work3
[As of September 1950]
Atlanta University School of Social
247 Henry St., S.W.,
Atlanta, Ga.

Fordham University,
School of Social Service,
134 East 39th St.,
New York 16, N. Y.

Boston College,
School of Social Work,
126 Newbury St.,
Boston 16, Mass.

Howard University,
Graduate School of Social Work,
Washington 1, D. C.

Boston University,
School of Social Work,
264 Bay State Road,
Boston 15, Mass.



Indiana University,
Division of Social Service,
122 East Michigan St.,
Indianapolis 4, Ind.

Louisiana State University,
Bryn Mawr College,4
School of Social Welfare,
Carola Woerishoffer Graduate Depart­
Baton Rouge 3, La.
ment of Social Economy and Social
Loyola University,
Bryn Mawr, Pa.
School of Social Work,
820 North Michigan Ave.,
Carnegie Institute of Technology,
Chicago 11, 111.
Department of Social Work,


Pittsburgh 13, Pa.
Catholic University of America,4
National Catholic School of Social
Washington 17, D. C.
College of William and Mary,
Richmond School of Social Work,
901 Franklin St.,
Richmond 20, Va.
Florida State University,
Tallahassee, Fla.

Nashville School of Social Work,
412 21st Ave., South,
Nashville 4, Tenn.
New York School of Social Work of
Columbia University,4
2 East 91st St.,
New York 28, N. Y.
Ohio State University,4
School of Social Administration,
Graduate Program,
Columbus 10, Ohio.

s This list is subject to change. For more complete and later information, write to the
American Association of Schools of Social Work, 1 Park Ave., New York 16, N. Y. Catalogues
are available on request.
4 Offers doctor’s degree in social work.






Our Lady of the Lake College,
Worden School of Social Service,
San Antonio 7, Tex.

University of Kansas,
Department of Social Work,
Lawrence, Kans.

St. Louis University,
School of Social Service,
221 North Grand Blvd.,
St. Louis 3, Mo.

University of Louisville,
Raymond A. Kent School of Social
Louisville 8, Ky.


' Simmons College,
^ School of Social Work,
’ 51 Commonwealth Ave.,
Boston 16, Mass.


Smith College,
School for Social Work,
Northampton, Mass.

J4! Tulane University,
School of Social Work,
1 New Orleans 15, La.


University of Buffalo,
School of Social Work,
25 Niagara Sq.,
Buffalo 2, N. Y.


University of California,
School of Social Welfare,
Berkeley 4, Calif.


University of California at
Los Angeles,
Department of Social Welfare,
Los Angeles 24, Calif.
University of Chicago,4


School of Social Service
Chicago 37, 111.




University of Connecticut,
School of Social Work,
17 Broad St.,
Hartford 5, Conn.
University of Denver,
School of Social Work,
Denver 10, Colo. •
University of Illinois,
Division of Social Welfare
Urbana, 111.
1 Offers doctor’s degree in social work.

University of Michigan,
Institute of Social Work,
60 Farnsworth Ave.,
Detroit 2, Mich.
University of Minnesota,4
School of Social Work,
Minneapolis 14, Minn.
University of Missouri,
Department of Social Work,
Columbia, Mo.
University of Nebraska,
Graduate School of Social Work,
Lincoln 8, Nebr.
University of North Carolina,
Division of Public Welfare and
Social Work,
Chapel Hill, N. C.
University of Oklahoma,
School of Social Work,
Norman, Okla.
University of Pennsylvania,4
School of Social Work,
2410 Pine St.,
Philadelphia 3, Pa.
University of Pittsburgh,4
School of Social Work,
Pittsburgh 13, Pa.
University of South Carolina,
School of Social Welfare,
Columbia, S. C.
University of Southern California,
School of Social Work,
Los Angeles 7, Calif.
University of Utah,
School of Social Work,
Salt Lake City 1, Utah.



University of Washington,
Graduate School of Social Work,
Seattle 5, Wash.
University of Wisconsin,
Department of Social Work,
Madison 6, Wis.
Washington University,
George Warren Brown School of
Social Work,
St. Louis 5, Mo.

Wayne University,
School of Public Affairs and Social
Detroit 2, Mich.
West Virginia University,
Department of Social Work,
Morgantown, W. Va.
Western Reserve University,
School of Applied Social Sciences,
Cleveland 6, Ohio.

(1) Abbott, Grace. The child and the State. Chicago, 111., University of
Chicago Press, 1938. Vol. I, 679 pp. Vol. II, 701 pp. See especially
Mothers’ Aid,” Vol. II, pp. 229-320.
(2) American Association of Schools of Social Work. Preprofessional edu­
cation for social work. New York, N. Y„ the Association, January
1949. 5 pp.
(3) American Association of Social Workers. Social work fellowships and
scholarships offered during the year 1948-49. New York, N. Y. the
Association, October 1948. 19 pp.
(4) A“n,PubIiC Welfare Associati™- The public welfare directory,
1948. Chicago, 111., the Association, 1948. 310 pp.
(5) Arnold, Mildred. Federal services for children under reorganization.
social Service Review 21 : 309-15, September 1947.
(6) ~
The specialized consultant in child welfare services. In National
Conference of Social Work Proceedings, 1941. New York, N Y
Columbia University Press, 1941. Pp. 426-39.
(7) Atkinson, Mary Irene. Child welfare work in rural communities The
American Academy of Political and Social Science
212 : 209-215, November 1940.
(8) Baylor, Edith Miriam Hedges, and Monachesi, Elio D. The rehabilita­
tion of children: the theory and practice of child placement. New
York, N. Y., Harper & Bros., 1939. 560 pp.
(9) Book Notes. Probation 26 : 30-31, October 1947.
(10) Boyd, Beverly. Protestant social work. In Social Work Yearbook
mi r. 1949’
''°rk-’ N‘ Y’’ Russe11 Sa£e Foundation, 1949. Pp. 358-366.'
(11) Brown, Esther Lucile. Social work as a profession. New York N Y
Russell Sage Foundation, 1942. 232 pp (4th ed )
(12) Browning, Grace. Discussion of the articles on school social work by
Mildred Sikkema and Florence Poole. Social Service Review 21 •
459-461, December 1949.













(13) --------- Education for public welfare. Pitt, a Quarterly of the Uni­
versity of Pittsburgh, Spring 1944. Pp. 48-49.
(14) --------- Rural social programs. In Social Work Yearbook, 1949. New
York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1949. Pp. 446-453.
(15) Cantor, Nathaniel. Organized efforts in crime prevention. The Annals
of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 217 : 155­
163, September 1941.
(16) Child Welfare League of America, Inc. Daytime care; a partnership
of three professions. Findings of the Tri-Profession Conference on
Day Care of the League, held at Old Lyme, Conn., June 11-15, 1945.
New York, N. Y., the League, 1946. 31 pp.
(17) --------- Directory of members, 1948. New York, N. Y., the League,
1948. 52 pp.
(18) --------- Preliminary report of the function and practice of child wel­
fare. New York, N. Y., the League, March 1950. 60 pp. Mimeo.
(19) --------- Standards for child protection organizations. New York, N. Y.,
the League, 1937. 15 pp.
(20) Cook, Katherine M. National leaders conference on visiting teacher
problems. School Life 28 : 17-19, October 1945.
(21) Coughlan, Barbara C. Child welfare services in three Western States.
Social Service Review 18 : 505-20, December 1944.
(22) Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds. Yearbook of Jew­
ish Social Work, 1939, Part I. New York, N. Y., the Council, 1940.
28 pp.
(23) Council of Social Agencies of Chicago. Social service directory. Chicago, 111., the Council, 1946. 229 pp.
(24) David, Lily Mary. Salaries of social workers in Michigan, 1948.
Monthly Labor Review 68 : 398-400, April 1949.
(25) de Schweinitz, Elizabeth McCord and Karl. The place of authority in
the protective function of the public welfare agency. Child Welfare
League of America Bulletin 25 : 1-6, September 1946.
(26) de Schweinitz, Karl. People and process in social security. Wash­
ington, D. C., American Council on Education, 1948. 165 pp.
(27) Emery, Margaret A. For children who need foster care. The Child
12 : 198-201, June 1948.
(28) Fenske, Virginia. State protects children living away from their own
homes. The Child 12 : 135-7, March 1948.
(29) Fink, Arthur E. The field of social work. New York, N. Y., Henry
Holt and Company, 1949. 577 pp.
(30) For value received. Probation 26 : 29-30, October 1947.
(31) Franklin, Esther Cole. Social welfare services and the war. Contem­
porary America 4 : 1-52, January 1943.
(32) Fredericksen, Hazel. The child and his welfare. San Francisco, Calif.,
W. H. Freeman and Co., 1948. 318 pp.
(33) Gabower, Genevieve. Juvenile and domestic relations courts. In Social
Work Yearbook, 1945. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation,
1945. Pp. 224-229.
(34) Greater Boston Community Council Study. Number of employees by
positions, according to size of agency. Boston, Mass., the Council,
April 1946. 12 pp. Ms.



(35) Hendricks, Hazel A. Methods of training used by the various States
for child welfare workers. The Social Work Journal (formerly The
Compass) 21 : 8-10, May 1940.
(36) Hodges, Margaret, Ed. Directories of agencies. In Social Work Year­
book, 1949. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1949. Pp. ’
(37) Hosch, Florence I. Personnel standards in social work. In Social
Work Yearbook, 1949. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation,
1949. Pp. 346-354.
(38) Houtz, Fanny. Volunteers in treatment. Survey Midmonthly 80 : ,
285-7, October 1944.
(39) Huntley, Margaret. The school’s social responsibility to children. Edu­
cation for Victory 3 : 7-9, July 20, 1944.
(40) Hurlin, Ralph G. Current salary quotations for child welfare positions,
1945. Child Welfare League of America Bulletin 24 : 4-7, January
(41) --------- ■ The recent trend of salaries in child welfare agencies. New
York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, Department of Statistics, 1944. l
14 pp. Pamphlet St. 13.
(42) James, Arthur Wilson. The State becomes a social worker: an ad- >
ministrative interpretation. Richmond, Va., Garrett and Massie, Inc.,
1942. 368 pp.
(43) Janvier, Carmelite. Essentials of a training program for school social
workers. The Bulletin of the National Association of School Social
Workers 24 : 3-11, December 1948.
(44) Jones, Mildred S. The home and school counselor and the adminis­
trator work together. Understanding the Child 19 : 4-6, January
(45) Keegan, Robert F. Catholic social work. In Social Work Yearbook,
1941. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1941. Pp. 91-97.
(46) Keeley, Mary C. Editorial Comments. Scholarship, fellowship, and
work-study plans. Child Welfare 28 : 10-12, February 1949. ’
(47) Kirwan, Mary F. A recently developed case work program for diocesan
children’s institutions. In National Conference of Catholic Charities, 1
Proceedings of the 26 meetings, Chicago, 111., 1940. Pp. 310-317.
(48) Lauerman, Rev. Lucian L. Catholic social work. In Social Work Year­
book, 1943. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1943. Pp
(49) Lenroot, Katharine F. Health and welfare services for children. School
Life 29 : 19-21, February 1947.
(50) --------- Trends in public services for children. Public Welfare 3 :
26-29, February 1945.
(51) Lundberg, Emma O. Child welfare. In Social Work Yearbook, 1949.
New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1949. Pp. 98-109.
(52) - — Unto the least of these: social services for children. New
York, N. Y., D. Appleton-Century Co., Inc., 1947. 424 pp.
(53) Mayo, Leonard W. The findings of the National Commission on Chil- ^
dren and Youth. In Proceedings of the National Conference on
Social Work, 1946. New York, N. Y., Columbia University Press
1947. Pp. 371-8.










(54) McDonnell, James T. Catholic social work. In Social Work Yearbook,
1949. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1949. Pp. 85-92.
(55) National Probation Association, Directory of probation and parole
officers, United States and Canada, 1947. New York, N. Y., the
Association, 1947. 276 pp.
(56) National Probation and Parole Association. Salaries of probation and
parole officers in the United States in jurisdictions of 100,000 or more
population. New York, N. Y., the Association, 1949. 25 pp.
(57) Nicholson, Marian B. Juvenile behavior problems. In Social Work
Yearbook, 1949. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1949.
Pp. 276-283.
(58) Nutt, Alice Scott. Juvenile and domestic relations courts. In Social
Work Yearbook, 1949. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation,
1949. Pp. 270-276.
(59) Olander, Helen L. The Institute’s contribution to the training of social
workers in Michigan—a study to determine the extent to which the
University of Michigan Institute of Social Work is providing educa­
tion for social workers; and the use made of training facilities by
workers in Michigan. Detroit, Mich., University of Michigan, the
Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studies, Institute of Social
Work, 1948. 65 pp. Ms.
(60) Pepper, Almon R. Protestant social work. In Social Work Yearbook,
1947. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1947. Pp. 353-361.
(61) Poole, Florence. An analysis of the characteristics of school social
work. Social Service Review 21 : 454-459, December 1949.
(62) Poole, Florence, and Wilson, Charles C. Social and health work in the
schools. In Social Work Yearbook, 1947. New York, N. Y., Russell
Sage Foundation, 1947. Pp. 489-500.
(63) Public Administration Clearing House. Public Administration Organi­
zations, 1948. Chicago, 111., the Clearing House, 1948. 216 pp.
(64) Rabinoff, George W. Jewish social work. In Social Work Yearbook,
1945. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1945. Pp. 203­
(65) Reeder, Grace A. In-service development of child welfare staff in New
York State. The Child 9 : 35-9, September 1944.
(66) Reinemann, John Otto. Probation and the juvenile delinquent. The
Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
261 : 109-119, January 1949.
(67) Shyne, Ann W. The economic position of social workers in the United
States. Survey 84 : 309, October 1948.
(68) Sikkema, Mildred. An analysis of the structure and practice of school
social work today. Social Service Review 21 : 447-453, December
(69) ----------• School social services. In Social Work Yearbook, 1949. New
York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, 1949. Pp. 457-463.
(70) Terrett, Mildred. Wartime demands on the services of children’s agen­
cies in the nation’s capital. In The Impact of War on Children’s
Services. New York, N. Y., Child Welfare League of America, March
1943. Pp. 24-26.
(71) The United Nations and social work. Survey Midmonthly 83 : 320-2,
November 1947.



(72) U. S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of the Census. Current
population reports. Population estimates. Series P-25, No. 39.
Washington, D. C., the Bureau, May 1950. 9 pp.
(73) U. S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Employment Security. Dic­
tionary of Occupational Titles, Volume I: Definitions of titles. Wash- <
ington, D. C., U. S. Government printing office, 1949. Pp. 204-205
(2d ed.).
(74) (U. S.) Federal Security Agency, Office of Education. Visiting teacher
services. By Katherine M. Cook. Washington, D. C., U. S. Govern­
ment printing office, 1946. 14 pp.
(75)--------- Social Security Administration, Children’s Bureau. Child wel­
fare moves forward. Washington, D. C., the Agency. February
1947. 18 pp. (Child Welfare Reports, No. 2.)
(76)--------- ------------ ------------ Child welfare services under the Social Secur- '
ity Act; development of a program, 1936-38. Washington D. C.,
U. S. Government printing office, 1940. 82 pp. (Bureau Publication
No. 257.)
(77) --------- ■ --------- - --------- Children living in selected public institutions,
December 31, 1947. Washington, D. C., the Bureau, May 1950. >12 pp.
(78) --------- --------- --------- ■ Children’s services in the public welfare
agency. Child Welfare Reports, No. 3, May 1947. Washington
D. C., the Bureau. 7 pp. Mimeo.
(79) --------- --------- --------- Community health and welfare expenditures in
wartime—1942 and 1940, 30 urban areas. Washington, D. C., U. S.
Government printing office, 1944. 70 pp. (Bureau Publication 302.) i
(80) ------ — --------- --------- Current program of the Children’s Bureau.
Washington, D. C., the Bureau, October 1948. 15 pp.
(81) --------- --------- --------- Maternity homes for unmarried mothers—a
community service. Washington, D. C., U. S. Government printing '
office, 1946. 94 pp. (Bureau Publication 309.)
(82) --------- • --------- --------- Personnel in public child welfare programs,
June 30, 1947. Washington, D. C., the Bureau, 1949. 13 pp.
(83) --------- —----- - ---------- Personnel in public welfare agencies provid­
ing non-institutional services to children in the United States, July T
31, 1944. Washington, D. C., the Bureau, June 30, 1945. 24 pp.
(84) --------- --------- --------- Problems and procedures in adoption. Wash­
ington, D. C., U. S. Government printing office, 1941. 130 pp.
(85) ---------- --------- --------- Public social services to children, a decade '
of progress, 1935-1945. Washington, D. C., the Bureau, April 1946.
12 pp. Mimeo. (Child Welfare Report No. 1.)
(86) --------- --------- --------- Social Statistics. Supplement to Volume 9,
No. 12 (June 1945) of The Child. (Changes in volume of foster care, a
1933-43; Juvenile court statistics, 1943.) Washington, D. C., U. S.
Government printing office, 1945. 24 pp.
(87) --------- - --------- --------- Standards for child-welfare positions in rela­
tion to a merit system of personnel administration. Washington, J
D. C., the Bureau, 1940. 12 pp.
(88) Walker, Wilma. Social and health work in the schools. In Social
Work Yearbook, 1943. New York, N. Y., Russell Sage Foundation, '
1943. Pp. 482-489.



(89) The Welfare Federation of Cleveland. Report of Personnel Practices
Committee, Children’s Council, Cleveland, Ohio, April 1948. Cleve­
land, Ohio, the Federation. 14 pp., plus 2 mimeo. pp. as of June 4,
^ (90) White House Conference on Child Health and Protection. Section J.
Medical service. Committee on Medical Care for Children. New
York, N. Y., and London, England, the Century Co., 1932. 279 pp.
(91) White House Conference on Children in a Democracy. Final report.
Washington, D. C., U. S. Government printing office, 1942. 392 pp.
(Children’s Bureau publications Nos. 272-278.)
1 (92) Wisner, Elizabeth. Professional training in the light of wartime shortft,
ages. In Proceedings of National Conference of Social Work, 1943.
New York, N. Y., Columbia University Press, 1943. pp. 319-330.
(93) Worth, Charles L. A home-school coordinator. The American School
Board Journal 105 : 22, December 1942.
(94) Yoemans, Alfreda. The day nursery. Child Welfare 28 : 11-14, April

FACTS ON WOMEN WORKERS—issued monthly. 4 pages. (Latest statis­
tics on employment of women; earnings; labor laws affecting women; news
items of interest to women workers; women in the international scene.)

pp. 1950. 304.

Bull. 237.



THE AMERICAN WOMAN—Her Changing Role as Worker, Homemaker,
(Women’s Bureau Conference, 1948.) Bull. 224. 210 pp. 1948.


The Outlook for Women in Occupations in the Medical and Other Health
Services, Bull. 203:



Physical Therapists. 14 pp. 1945. Out of print.
Occupational Therapists. 15 pp. 1945. Out of print.
Professional Nurses. 66 pp. 1946. 154.
Medical Laboratory Technicians. 10 pp. 1945. 54
Practical Nurses and Hospital Attendants. 20 pp. 1945. 104.
Medical Record Librarians. 9 pp. 1945. 54.
Women Physicians.
28 pp. 1945. 104.
X-Ray Technicians. 14 pp. 1945. 104.
Women Dentists. 21 pp. 1945. 104.
Dental Hygienists. 17 pp. 1945. 104.
Physicians’ and Dentists’ Assistants. 15 pp. 1945. 104.
Trends and Their Effect Upon the Demand for Women Workers.
55 pp. 1946. 154.
The Outlook for Women in Science, Bull. 223:
1. Science. [General introduction to the series.] 81 pp. 1949. 204.
2. Chemistry. 65 pp. 1948. 254
3. Biological Sciences. 87 pp. 1948. 254.
4. Mathematics and Statistics. 21 pp. 1948. 104.



5. Architecture and Engineering. 88 pp. 1948. 25$.
6. Physics and Astronomy. 32 pp. 1948. 15$.
7. Geology, Geography, and Meteorology. 52 pp. 1948. 20<i.
8. Occupations Belated to Science. 33 pp. 1948.
The Outlook for Women in Police Work. Bull. 231. 31 pp. 1949. 15$.
Home Economics Occupations Series, Bull. 234. The Outlook for Women in:
1. Dietetics. 80 pp. 1950. 25$. (Others in preparation.)
Social Work Series, Bull. 235. The Outlook for Women in:
1. Social Case Work in a Medical Setting. 59 pp. 1950. 25$.
2. Social Case Work in a Psychiatric Setting. 60 pp. 1950. 25$.
3. Social Case Work With Children. (Instant publication.)
4. Social Case Work With Families. (In press.)
5. Community Organization in Social Work. (In press.) Others in
Your Job Future After College. Leaflet. 1947. (Rev. 1948.) 5$.
Your Job Future After High School. Leaflet. 1949. 5$.
Occupation for Girls and Women—Selected References. Bull. 229. 105 pp.
1949. 30 4.
Training for Jobs—for Women and Girls. [Under public funds available for >.
vocational training purposes.] Leaflet 1. 1947. 5$.

Summary of State Labor Laws for Women. 8 pp. 1950. Mimeo.
State Legislation of Special Interest to Women. Mimeos. for 1948 and 1949.
Minimum Wage

State Minimum-Wage Laws and Orders, 1942: An Analysis. Bull. 191.
52 pp. 1942. 20$. Supplement, July 1, 1942-July 1, 1950. Bull. 227.
Revised. 68 pp. 1950. 20$.
State Minimum-Wage Laws. Leaflet 1. 1948.
Model Bill for State minimum-wage law for women. Mimeo.
Map showing States having minimum-wage laws. (Desk size; wall size.)
State Minimum-Wage Orders Becoming Effective Since End of World War
II. 1950. Multilith.




Equal Pay

Equal Pay for Women. Leaflet 2. 1947. (Rev. 1949.) 5$; $1.75 per 100.
Chart analyzing State equal-pay laws and model Bill. Mimeo.
Texts of State Laws (separates). Mimeo.
Model Bill for State equal-pay law. Mimeo.
Selected References on Equal Pay for Women. 10 pp. 1949. Mimeo.
Movement for Equal Pay Legislation in the United States. 5 pp. 1949.


Hours of Work and Other Labor Laws

State Labor Laws for Women, with Wartime Modifications, Dec. 15, 1944.
Bull. 202:
I. Analysis of Hour Laws. 110 pp. 1945. 15<#.
II. Analysis of Plant Facilities Laws. 43 pp. 1945. 10$.
III. Analysis of Regulatory Laws, Prohibitory Laws,' Maternity Laws. ■
12 pp. 1945. 5$.




IV. Analysis of Industrial Home-Work Laws. 26 pp. 1945. 10<*.
V. Explanation and Appraisal. 66 pp. 1946. 15«S.
Working Women and Unemployment Insurance. Leaflet. 1949. 5^.
Maps of United States showing State hour laws, daily and weekly. (Desk
size; wall size.)




International Documents on the Status of Women. Bull. 217, 116 pp
1947. 25<L
Legal Status of Women in the United States of America, January 1, 1948:
United States Summary. Bull. 157. (Revised.) (In press.)
Reports for States, Territories and possessions (separates). Bulls. 157-1
through 157-50. (Revised.) 5^ and 10^ each.
The Political and Civil Status of Women in the United States of America.
Summary, including Principal Sex Distinctions as of January 1, 1948.
Leaflet. 1948.
Women’s Eligibility for Jury Duty. Leaflet. July 1, 1950. 5«S.
Reply of United States Government to Questionnaire of United Nations Eco­
nomic and Social Council on the Legal Status and Treatment of Women,
Part I. Public Law. In 6 Sections: A and B, Franchise and Public
Office; C, Public Services and Functions; D, Educational and Professional
Opportunities; E, Fiscal Laws; F, Civil Liberties; and G, Nationality.



Old-Age Insurance for Household Workers. Bull. 220. 20 pp. 1947, 10<L
Community Household Employment Programs. Bull. 221. 70 pp. 1948. 204.1





RECOMMENDED STANDARDS for women’s working conditions, safety and
Standards for Employment of Women. Leaflet. 1950.
When You Hire Women. Sp. Bull. 14. 16 pp. 1944. W<f.
The Industrial Nurse and the Woman Worker. Bull. 228. (Partial revision
of Sp. Bull. 19. 1944.) 48 pp. 1949. 15^.
Women’s Effective War Work Requires Good Posture. Sp. Bull 10 6 pp
1943. 54.
Washing and Toilet Facilities for Women in Industry. Sp. Bull. 4. 11
pp. 1942. 5«‘.
Lifting and Carrying Weights by Women in Industry. Sp. Bull. 2. (Rev.
1946.) 12 pp. 5<i.
Safety Clothing for Women in Industry. Sp. Bull. 3. 11 pp. 1941. I0<f.
Supplements: Safety Caps; Safety Shoes. 4 pp. ea. 1944. 54 ea.
Poster—Work Clothes for Safety and Efficiency.
Maternity-Benefits Under Union-Contract Health insurance Plans
19 pp. 1947. 10<j:.

Bull 214


Working Women’s Budgets in Twelve States.

Bull. 226.

36 pp.





Earnings of Women in Selected Manufacturing Industries.
14 pp. 1948. 10^.


Bull. 219.

Women’s Occupations Through Seven Decades. Bull. 218. 260 pp. 1947.
45cWomen’s Jobs: Advance and Growth. Bull. 232. 88 pp. 1949. 30<L Popu­
lar version.
Employment of Women in the Early Postwar Period, with Background of
Prewar and War Data. Bull. 211. 14 pp. 1946. 10<).
Women Workers in Ten War Production Areas and Their Postwar Employ­
ment Plans. Bull. 209. 56 pp. 1946. 154Women in Higher-Level Positions. Bull. 236. 86 pp. 1950. 25^.
Baltimore Women War Workers in the Postwar Period. 61 pp. 1948. Mimeo.
Women Workers in Power Laundries. Bull. 215. 71 pp. 1947. 20<^.
The Woman Telephone Worker [1944]. Bull. 207. 28 pp. 1946. 10<L
Typical Women’s Jobs in the Telephone Industry [1944], Bull. 207-A. 52
pp. 1947. 15(L
Women in the Federal Service. Part I. Trends in Employment, 1923-1947.
Bull. 230-1. 81 pp. 1949. 25^. Part II. Occupational Information. Bull.
230-11. 87 pp. 1950. 254Night Work for Women in Hotels and Restaurants. Bull. 233. 59 pp. 1949.
Women Workers in Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay. Bull. 195. 15 pp.
1942. 54.
Women Workers in Brazil. Bull. 206. 42 pp. 1946. 10^.
Women Workers in Paraguay. Bull. 210. 16 pp. 1946. 104.
Women Workers in Peru. Bull. 213. 41 pp. 1947. 150.
Social and Labor Problems of Peru and Uruguay. 1944. Mimeo.
Women in Latin America; Legal Rights and Restrictions. (Address before
the National Association of Women Lawyers.)
THE WOMEN’S BUREAU—Its Purpose and Functions.



For complete list of publications available for distribution, write—
The Women’s Bureau

U. S.

Department of Labor


25, D. C.


Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, One Federal Reserve Bank Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63102