]> <emph>Biennial Report of the North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare, July 1, 1938 to June 30, 1940:</emph> Electronic Edition. North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare. Funding from the Institute for Museum and Library Services supported the electronic publication of this title. Text transcribed by Apex Data Services, Inc. Images scanned by Andrew Leiter Text encoded by Apex Data Services, Inc., Andrew Leiter, and Elizabeth S. Wright First edition, 2003 ca. 640K Academic Affairs Library, UNC-CH University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 2003.

© This work is the property of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. It may be used freely by individuals for research, teaching and personal use as long as this statement of availability is included in the text.

 Biennial Report of the North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare Biennial Report of the North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare, July 1, 1938 to June 30, 1940 Biennial Report State Board of Charities and Public Welfare North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare 181 p. Raleigh Edwards & Broughton Company [1940] Call number C360 N87p 1938/1940 (North Carolina Collection, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)

The electronic edition is a part of the UNC-CH digitization project, Documenting the American South.

The text has been entered using double-keying and verified against the original.

The text has been encoded using the recommendations for Level 4 of the TEI in Libraries Guidelines.

Original grammar, punctuation, and spelling have been preserved. Encountered typographical errors have been preserved, and appear in red type.

All footnotes are inserted at the point of reference within paragraphs.

Any hyphens occurring in line breaks have been removed, and the trailing part of a word has been joined to the preceding line.

All quotation marks, em dashes and ampersand have been transcribed as entity references.

All double right and left quotation marks are encoded as ” and “ respectively.

All single right and left quotation marks are encoded as ’ and ‘ respectively.

All em dashes are encoded as —

Indentation in lines has not been preserved.

Running titles have not been preserved.

Spell-check and verification made against printed text using Author/Editor (SoftQuad) and Microsoft Word spell check programs.

 Library of Congress Subject Headings English Mentally ill -- Care -- North Carolina. Orphans -- Institutional care -- North Carolina. Public welfare -- North Carolina. Prisons -- North Carolina. Orphanages -- North Carolina. North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare. Child welfare -- North Carolina. Social service -- North Carolina. Correctional institutions -- North Carolina. Social work with African Americans -- North Carolina. Civilian Conservation Corps (U.S.) -- North Carolina. 2003-06-26, Celine Noel and Wanda Gunther revised TEIHeader and created catalog record for the electronic edition. 2003-06-25, Elizabeth S. Wright finished TEI-conformant encoding and final proofing. 2002-1-10, Andrew Leiter finished TEI/SGML encoding 2001-11-20, Apex Data Services, Inc. finished transcribing the text.

[Title Page Image]

[Title Page Verso Image]

 BIENNIAL REPORT of The North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare July 1, 1938 To June 30, 1940MRS. W. T. BOST Commissioner EDWARDS & BROUGHTON COMPANY RALEIGH TABLE OF CONTENTS State Board of Charities and Public Welfare . . . . . 4 Letter of Transmittal . . . . . 5 Constitutional Mandate . . . . . 6 Dedication . . . . . 7 Photograph of County Welfare Superintendents (Facing) . . . . . 13 Introduction . . . . . 13 Financial report of the Biennium . . . . . 17 Field Social Work Service . . . . . 21 Division Reports: Child Welfare . . . . . 31Public Assistance . . . . . 64Case Work Training and Family Rehabilitation . . . . . 87Mental Hygiene . . . . . 106Institutions and Corrections . . . . . 116 Reports of Service Units: County Organization . . . . . 139 List of County Superintendents of Public Welfare . . . . . 144Surplus Commodity Distribution . . . . . 147Selection and Certification of Applicants for Civilian Conservation Corps . . . . . 164Work Among Negroes . . . . . 173 Recapitulation of Recommendations for Legislation and Appropriation . . . . . 178 Staff of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare . . . . . 179 NORTH CAROLINA STATE BOARD OF CHARITIES AND PUBLIC WELFARE W. A. Blair, Winston-Salem, Chmn. . Term expires April 1, 1941 A. W. McAlister, Greensboro . . . . . Term expires April 1, 1941 Mrs. Walter C. Crowell, Monroe . . . . Term expires April 1, 1945 Miss Carrie McLean, Charlotte . . . . . Term expires April 1, 1943 N. E. Pepper, Danbury . . . . . Term expires April 1, 1943 E. Hervey Evans, Laurinburg . . . . . Term expires April 1, 1945 Robert Hairston, Reidsville . . . . . Term expires April 1, 1943 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL To His Excellency, Clyde R. Hoey,Governor of North Carolina.

Sir: I have the honor of handing you herewith the report of The North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare for the biennial period dating July 1, 1938, through June 30, 1940.

Very truly yours, Wm. A. Blair, Chairman. CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATE

“Beneficent provision for the poor, the unfortunate, and orphan, being one of the first duties of a civilized and Christian State, the General Assembly shall, at its first session, appoint and define the duties of a Board of Public Charities, to whom shall be entrusted the supervision of all charitable and penal state institutions, and who shall annually report to the Governor upon their condition with suggestions for their improvement.”

 DEDICATION

In grateful recognition of a combined record of seventy-three years of public service on behalf of the poor and unfortunate in North Carolina, the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare dedicates this volume jointly to

WILLIAM ALLEN BLAIR

who for forty-nine years has been a member of the board and who for thirty-six years has served as its chairman, and to

 ALEXANDER WORTH McALISTER

who for twenty-four years has aided Colonel Blair as a member and vice chairman in developing the modern, forward-looking social welfare program of the state.

[William Allen Blair]

WILLIAM ALLEN BLAIR has spoken, written, argued and thought public welfare for the forty-nine years he has spent as a member of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare, thirty-six of them as its chairman. Such service as a state welfare board member is without parallel in the country so far as it can be ascertained.

In the years subsequent to his appointment as a member in December, 1891, Mr. Blair has seen many changes come into being in the North Carolina welfare program. Sterilization of mental defectives, an expanded mental hygiene program, improvement in county jail facilities, a boarding home fund to assist juvenile courts in caring for certain dependents, abolition of apprenticeship of children by indenture, replacement of county chain gangs by a state prison system, discarding of the practices of farming out prison labor and of working women on the public roads, parole and probation facilities, social security legislation—all have come into being during the years of his chairmanship or connection with the board.

Mr. Blair is the fourth chairman of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare since it was organized under direction of the constitution of 1868, and succeeded to the direction of its activities in October, 1904, after thirteen years' experience as a board member.

He witnessed the reorganization of the old Board of Public Charities into the organization of today when the 1917 General Assembly re-vamped North Carolina's program to allow for expansion into the numerous activities supervised today by the state board.

The conceptions of Mr. Blair and his associates concerning state responsibility toward the unfortunate have passed from adolescence toward maturity by the experience of a half-century; and having grown to manhood, represent the foundations upon which the social and economic lives of North Carolinians of the next century will be based.

[Alexander Worth McAlister]

ALEXANDER WORTH MCALISTER has been a member of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare for almost a quarter of a century. Twenty-four years ago he succeeded his father on the board in December, 1916, and thus entered on an active official career in welfare work.

Mr. McAlister is known as the father of North Carolina's county unit welfare system. Before his appointment to the board, as president of the North Carolina Conference for Social Service 1915-1916 he had been in correspondence with persons of recognized authority in other states on the development of a suitable plan for North Carolina, and after his appointment the 1917 General Assembly authorized the present county unit system of state-supervised, local administration of North Carolina's care of its unfortunate.

Counties having as much as 32,000 population were required to set up regular welfare departments, while superintendents of schools were charged with part-time welfare duties in the smaller counties. This was the beginning from which grew the full-time departments in every county in the state following the passage of social security legislation.

Mr. McAlister was interested in the passage of the child labor and the juvenile court laws, the mother's aid and the parole legislation, and prison reforms that brought about a vast modernization of the state's methods of caring for its law offenders.

In all his activities he brought civic clubs and community organizations into the fights for better social legislation, for the establishment of training schools and for the opening of institutions for the defectives. He worked not alone, but as a foreman in marshalling private activities and public thought to accomplish the welfare plan North Carolina has today.

N.C. SUPERINTENDENTS OF PUBLIC WELFARE, PHOTO by Wolcotts, Black Mtn., N.C.

 INTRODUCTION

In the following pages there is a detailed accounting of the business of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare covering the biennial period July 1, 1938-June 30, 1940. It has been compiled for the information of the Governor, the legislature and for the tax supporters of the state generally. Appropriations were made to the state board to administer the public welfare program in the state and as trustees of the funds, the board, through its staff members, has set forth somewhat in detail the activities of the various divisions in justification of its biennial expenditures. Public service, it is recognized, is regarded as a public trust. In attempting to meet human needs those who are engaged in public welfare work have been entrusted with a grave responsibility.

The dominant slogan of modern social work is service, but it must be a balanced service; that is, it must be service adapted to meet community needs. Social work, it must be recognized, is only one of a number of welfare activities under public direction and the place of our agency in the whole public structure should be thoroughly understood.

With the multiplicity of social agencies today operating at the various levels of government there is a need for clearance and coordination; otherwise, services to those of our people who are in need, will be unrelated and perhaps duplicated by the various agencies in the field. As Fred Hoehler, director of the American Public Welfare Association, points out, “there is a definite need to organize every function which looks to public funds for support, which calls for large resources of personnel....We need to do the necessary things in the soundest and the simplest and in the least wasteful way possible. Public welfare organizations, therefore, should be properly directed and staffed with the best personnel it is possible to obtain at federal, state and local levels.”

The Social Security Act as amended August 10, 1939, required that the state public assistance agencies must include, after January 1, 1940, a provision for methods relating to the establishment of personnel standards on a merit basis for a merit system of personnel administration. A draft rule was therefore issued by the Social Security Board on November 13, 1939, to all state welfare departments, the standards included therein representing the minimum requirements of the Social Security Board with respect to personnel administration in state agencies. Since January 1, 1940, the North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare has submitted a merit system plan to the federal agency, setting forth rules and regulations for a merit system in conformity with the Social Security Board's draft rule. Classification and compensation plans which constitute a part of the merit system have been formulated by a committee from the staff in consultation with a technical adviser from the Society Security Board. A merit system council has been appointed, composed of three public-spirited citizens of recognized standing and of known interest in the improvement of public administration and in the impartial selection of efficient government personnel. One of the main functions of the council will be to establish general policies for the administration of merit examinations. They also have the responsibility for recommending the appointment by the state agency of the merit system supervisor.

Merit examinations under the above conditions will be held for state and local employees engaged in public assistance and child welfare services in the late fall of 1940, according to present plans.

On the basis of the North Carolina Old Age Assistance and Aid to Dependent Children Act “the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare, through the Commissioner of Welfare as the executive head of the department, is hereby empowered to organize the department into such bureaus and divisions as may be deemed advisable, not inconsistent with the provisions of this act, in order that the work of the entire department shall be coördinated on an efficiency basis and duplication of effort may be avoided.”

Every effort has been made in the interest of economy and efficiency to integrate the newer services—public assistance, referral and certification services in connection with WPA, CCC, NYA, and surplus commodities—with the older services that had been established a number of years prior to the initiation of the social security program. The field social work supervisors, for instance, serve as representatives for the various divisions within the department, thus coordinating the work on the local level. The auditing division, established in 1937 at the time the public assistance program was established, serves the entire department through a centralized accounting system, which operates in conformity with the regulations and requirements of the state Budget Bureau. The statistical unit which came into existence when certifying services in connection with the various federal programs became the responsibility of the state board, and was expanded with the advent of public assistance, likewise serves the whole department in whatever capacity the work of the functional divisions indicates.

Through the information service set up by the state board, there has been an excellent and most effective interpretation of the various welfare activities under the board's direction. This has been accomplished through the routine channel of regular news releases, radio talks, the monthly Public Welfare News, and exhibits at the annual State Fair. In view of the fact, for instance, that approximately $6,000,000 of federal, state and local funds is expended under the board's direction, it feels very definitely that the public is entitled to know how that money is spent.

One activity that, when complete, will add greatly to the efficiency of operation of the state office is the project begun in the fall of 1939 to establish a central filing unit to replace seven independent filing systems developed in the course of years. This WPA-aided operation will cover approximately 200,000 cases representing twenty years of department activity from 1919 to 1939, with the cases being filed and cross-indexed according to a standard system to promote speedy, efficient and accurate handling.

In addition, about 25,000 records of the state board from its inception in 1869 to 1919 will be prepared for proper filing. Not a normal activity of the department because no budgetary funds were provided for the work, the assistance of the Work Projects Administration was necessary. The project consequently has given employment to approximately ten needy, educational, professional and clerical workers for more than a year.

Because of cramped quarters and lack of adequate room for a central filing system, it was a physical impossibility to set up this vast and much-needed improvement until the staff offices were moved into consolidated quarters in a new office building in December, 1938.

The present quarters embracing nearly the whole of the fifth floor of the largest state office building represent the fourth home of the department since it was established. During the years following the legislature of 1869 when the work of the department was handled entirely by the secretary to the old Board of Public Charities, office space was allotted in the Capitol. Even after reorganization of the old board into the present State Board of Charities and Public Welfare by the 1917 General Assembly to provide for a commissioner to direct the administrative work of the department, the Capitol still provided office space for four years until the first move in December, 1921.

This change placed the department on the third floor of the brick building formerly standing at the head of Fayetteville Street on part of the site now occupied by the building housing the Supreme Court and department of justice. This was the site of Peter Casso's famous inn of Raleigh's first days as the capital of North Carolina.

Five years later, in the early fall of 1926, the department moved into the building provided for the department of agriculture where it stayed for twelve years, the longest time it has occupied any quarters since leaving the capitol building.

When the social security program came into North Carolina the work of the department was expanded to such an extent that space was required in five different buildings located in the Raleigh business district. It was only with the final move into the present quarters in December 1938, that the various divisions of the expanded department were brought together into efficient working space that had so long been needed.

Preparation for the country's national defense requires coöperative effort with unity of purpose throughout the country, and in the national emergency the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare stands ready with its entire organization to bear any share of the work in North Carolina that may in the future be assigned to its respective fields of activity. The nation must have strong military and naval forces, adequately trained and equipped; yet it must be realized that the economic, physical, spiritual and social well-being of the people as a whole is really its first line of defense. Without these a ‘total defense’ cannot be built. It is necessary that the state board look forward to a continuing operation of its program of aiding North Carolina's poor, unfortunate and orphan called for by the North Carolina Constitution.

Should an advisory council for state defense at any subsequent time require its assistance, the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare, along with other state agencies, is in a position to coöperate fully in any coördination activities needed to bring the general defense measures in working harmony with existing or future programs to guard the people of the state from the uncertainties of want and discrepancies of social welfare.

MRS. W. T. BOST, Commissioner. FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE BIENNIUM J. A. STEWART, Auditor STATE BOARD

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Salaries and wages. . . . . $30,996.00 $34,221.66 Supplies and materials. . . . . 581.90 531.32 Postage, telephone and telegraph. . . . . 1,526,18 1,542.87 Travel expense. . . . . 3,932.94 3,909.95 Printing. . . . . 941.41 626.29 Repairs. . . . . 41.27 35.93 General expense. . . . . 78.40 69.60 Equipment. . . . . 472.41 499.79 Psychological service. . . . . —— 52.50   $38,571.51 $41,489.91 Less estimated receipts. . . . . 356.67 2,406.64   $38,214.84 $39,083.27

OLD AGE ASSISTANCE AND AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN ADMINISTRATION

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Salaries and wages. . . . . $58,888.29 $58,304.67 Supplies and materials. . . . . 2,765.83 2,797.54 Postage, telephone and telegraph. . . . . 3,807.89 4,399.90 Printing. . . . . 3,821.17 1,978.00 Travel expense. . . . . 10,261.57 7,767.96 Rents and lights. . . . . 1,168.13 —— General expense. . . . . 400.77 86.76 Equipment. . . . . 3,466.84 499.76   $84,580.49 $75,834.59 Less estimated receipts. . . . . 11,350.00 14,550.00 Total. . . . . $73,230.49 $61,284.59

SURPLUS COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Salaries and wages. . . . . $20,560.00 $15,771.68 Office supplies. . . . . 555.50 410.61 Packing supplies. . . . . 2,555.79 5,285.50 Postage, telephone, telegraph and lights. . . . . 2,006.88 2,291.25 Travel expense. . . . . 5,579.14 3,886.82 Freight & express. . . . . 180.80 208.66 Printing. . . . . 894.09 970.79 Motor vehicle operation. . . . . 11,379.90 12,841.69 Equipment. . . . . 54.81 1,273.14 Purchase of trucks—special appropriation. . . . . —— 7,994.47   $43,766.91 $50,934.61 Less estimated receipts. . . . . 1,826.85 4,364.54   $41,940.14 $46,570.07

CERTIFYING SERVICE

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Salaries and wages. . . . . $ 24,042.33 $ 17,441.33 Supplies and materials. . . . . 407.60 346.68 Postage, telephone and telegraph. . . . . 957.34 1,307.73 Travel expense. . . . . 9,681.92 6,423.34 Printing. . . . . 244.39 174.54 General expense. . . . . 29.85 34.64 Equipment. . . . . 299.57 49.60   $ 35,663.00 $ 25,777.86 Total requirements. . . . . 202,581.91 194,036.97 Less estimated receipts. . . . . 13,533.52 21,321.18   $189,048.39 $172,715.79

SUMMARY BY OBJECTS

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Salaries and wages. . . . . $134,486.62 $125,739.34 Supplies and materials. . . . . 6,866.62 9,371.65 Postage, telephone and telegraph, freight, express and lights. . . . . 8,480.09 9,750.41 Travel expense. . . . . 29,176.68 21,667.07 Printing. . . . . 5,901.06 3,749.62 Motor vehicle operation. . . . . 11,379.90 12,841.69 Repairs. . . . . 41.27 35.93 General expense. . . . . 1,956.04 564.50 Equipment. . . . . 4,293.63 10,316.76   $202,581.91 $194,036.97

CARE DEPENDENT CHILDREN

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Care Dependent Children. . . . . $ 7,491.52 $ 7,311.36 Federal—State     Salaries. . . . . $ 2,044.67 $ 215.00 Rent. . . . . 360.00 ——

EUGENICS BOARD OF NORTH CAROLINA

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Salary—secretary. . . . . $ 330.00 —— Salary—stenographer. . . . . 1,260.00 $ 1,260.00 Supplies and materials. . . . . 24.51 39.87 Postage. . . . . 7.46 85.44 Telephone and telegraph. . . . . 6.75 9.98 Printing forms, etc. . . . . 10.55 39.27 Printing bulletins. . . . . 47.15 —— Subscriptions and dues. . . . . 6.00 5.00 Equipment. . . . . 93.31 54.39   $ 1,785.73 $ 1,493.95

ROSENWALD FUND

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Rosenwald Fund. . . . . $—— $ 168.00

CHILD WELFARE SERVICE—FEDERAL FUNDS

  Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Division Child Welfare—County     Salaries and wages. . . . . $29,526.90 $24,710.91 Travel expense. . . . . 9,261.80 1,634.58   $38,788.70 $26,345.49 Division Child Welfare—State     Salaries and wages. . . . . $10,388.33 $11,594.59 Supplies and materials. . . . . 69.62 83.83 Telephone and telegraph. . . . . 217.34 218.07 Postage. . . . . 125.00 141.00 Travel expense. . . . . 2,987.65 3,059.57 Printing. . . . . 23.55 28.26 Repairs. . . . . 17.74 14.57 Equipment. . . . . 46.75 50.00 Books and periodicals. . . . . 116.59 95.39 Training service. . . . . 1,620.33 1,781.83 Travel for Advisory Commission. . . . . 228.76 134.36   $15,841.66 $17,201.47 Division Mental Hygiene     Salaries and wages. . . . . $ 2,408.33 $ 7,141.08 Travel expense. . . . . 411.06 1,547.35 Supplies. . . . . 84.02 445.59 Equipment. . . . . 197.27 —— Telephone and telegraph. . . . . —— 11.07 Printing. . . . . —— 6.30 Postage. . . . . —— 16.50 Repairs. . . . . —— 10.72   $ 3,100.68 $ 9,178.61 Division Institutions and Corrections     Salaries and wages. . . . . $ 2,555.00 $ 1,500.00 Travel expense. . . . . 179.37 37.40   $ 2,734.37 $ 1,537.40 Total. . . . . $60,465.41 $54,262.97

FIELD SOCIAL WORK SERVICE R. EUGENE BROWNAssistant to the CommissionerandDirector of Field Social Work Service

In January 1936 the field social work service of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare was established for the purpose of serving as general staff for all divisions and services of the state office in their relationships with the county departments of public welfare. The field staff which originally consisted of five field social work representatives was increased as the state board and the county departments of public welfare were given additional responsibilities. From July 1, 1937, through June 30, 1939, the counties of the state were divided among ten field representatives. Effective July 1, 1939, funds were available for only eight field representatives, the average number on the staff from that time until June 30, 1940. The eight field representatives and the counties assigned to each as of this date are as follows:*

* One additional field social work representative was added July 1, 1940.

Miss Victoria Bell: Buncombe, Clay, Cherokee, Graham, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, Macon, Madison, Polk, Swain, Transylvania, and Yancey.

Mr. Wade N. Cashion: Alamance, Durham, Forsyth, Gaston, Guilford, Mecklenburg, Moore, Randolph, Rockingham, and Rowan.

Mr. H. D. Farrell: Bertie, Camden, Chowan, Currituck, Dare, Edgecombe, Johnston, Nash, Pasquotank, Perquimans, Wake, Wayne, and Wilson.

Mr. S. J. Hawkins: Bladen, Brunswick, Columbus, Cumberland, Harnett, Hoke, New Hanover, Onslow, Pender, Richmond, Robeson, Sampson, and Scotland.

Miss Nancy Jones: Anson, Cabarrus, Catawba, Davie, Davidson, Iredell, Lincoln, Montgomery, Stanly, Stokes, Union, and Yadkin.

Mr. Wallace H. Kuralt: Beaufort, Carteret, Craven, Duplin, Greene, Hyde, Jones, Lenoir, Martin, Pamlico, Pitt, Tyrrell, and Washington.

Miss Ada McRackan: Alexander, Alleghany, Ashe, Avery, Burke, Caldwell, Cleveland, McDowell, Mitchell, Rutherford, Surry, Watauga, and Wilkes.

Mrs. W. F. Wilson: Caswell, Chatham, Franklin, Gates, Granville, Halifax, Hertford, Lee, Northampton, Orange, Person, Vance, and Warren.

STATE OFFICE AND FIELD SERVICE

The members of the field social work service have been made directly responsible to the administrative office of the state board in order that they might be in a better position administratively to represent to the counties all divisions and services of the state office. The assistant to the commissioner was made director of this service and as director of field social work service it is his responsibility under the direction of the commissioner to give coödinating direction to the work of the field social work representatives, who are under the functional supervision of the directors of divisions and services in their respective fields.

Responsibilities of Director of Field Service

It is, therefore, the responsibility of the director of field service to plan the work of the field representatives with the directors of the divisions and services in order that their time and efforts may be utilized in the interest of the over-all program of public welfare and that due emphasis may be given to specific phases of the program at the appropriate time. To this end and that the field representatives may be kept informed of new plans, policies and procedures, the director of field service plans, and conducts in coöperation with the directors of divisions and services, periodic conferences of the field representatives in the state office for the discussion of plans, policies, procedures and problems; provides methods of clearance for the benefit of the state office staff and the field representatives on communications between the state office and the county departments of public welfare, between the state office and field representatives, and between the field representatives and the county departments of public welfare. Incidentally, it may be of interest to know that an average of more than 2,000 pieces of mail passed through the clearing house each month.

It is also the responsibility of the director of field service to have individual and group conferences with field representatives for the purpose of reviewing and planning work; discussing general problems of supervision, policies, and procedures; for the purpose of evaluating their work and the progress of the work in their respective territories; for the purpose of developing the types of reports which will be most helpful to the state office and the counties which the reports concern. Other responsibilities are of studying and evaluating reports of field representatives and presenting to the commissioner and the directors of divisions and services developments in the counties as they are reported by field representatives in their reports or in group and individual conferences; and the assignment of territories to field representatives with a view to obtaining the best results possible with a limited staff.

 Responsibilities of Field Social Work Representatives

In general, then, it may be stated that the function of the field representatives, under the coördinating direction of the director of field service and under the functional supervision of the directors of divisions and services of the state board, is to develop and coördinate in an assigned group of counties the various phases of the public welfare program to the end that each county department of public welfare may meet the needs of the people within the limitations, laws, rules and regulations.

The field representatives are carrying out this function by:

Making frequent planned or special visits to the county departments for the purpose of exercising general developmental supervision through conferences and consultations with the county superintendents.

Participating and assisting in the public welfare staff development program particularly as it relates to the county staffs.

Meeting periodically with the superintendent and his case work staff for the purpose of studying policies and procedures and case work techniques.

Reviewing case records from time to time in helping the county superintendent evaluate the work of the department.

Interpreting state policies and procedures and advising on their application.

Providing information and guidance in the use of available resources and consultant services.

Consulting with the superintendents in the selection and placement of personnel and in the annual preparation of county welfare budgets.

Meeting with county boards of public welfare and county commissioners in company with the superintendent.

Holding group meetings with county superintendents for the purpose of interpreting policies and procedures and studying common problems.

Interpreting the needs and problems of the county departments to the state office and conferring with members of the state office staff on problems, policies and procedures.

Making periodic progress reports and occasional comprehensive reports to the state office on the operation and progress of the various phases of the public welfare program in the counties.

Conferring with representatives of other agencies which depend upon the county welfare departments for the local operation of their programs, or which serve as resources to the county department.

The field representative is also responsible for holding local hearings on old age assistance and aid to dependent children appeals and making reports on such hearings to the State Board of Allotments and Appeal. He is also called upon from time to time to make investigations of complaints.

During the past two years 71 requests for appeal were referred to the field representatives. In conferences with the superintendents and clients 27 of these were disposed of satisfactorily without holding formal hearings. In the other 44 instances hearings were held by the field representatives and written reports were filed with the State Board of Allotments and Appeal for action.

 DEVELOPMENTAL SUPERVISION AS A FUNCTION OF THE FIELD REPRESENTATIVE

In describing the work of the field representative it was stated that visits are made to the county departments for the purpose of “exercising general developmental supervision.” The position of a state field social work representative is a supervisory position and one of the most responsible supervisory positions. Because of this fact and because there is considerable misapprehension in regard to its meaning and its use in public welfare administration, a brief discussion of the subject is most appropriate here. Much has been written on the subject as a social work process but only recently has it been discussed as an administrative process which both implements the smooth flow of agency work and contributes to staff development; or, we might say which contributes to staff development thus implementing a smooth flow of agency work. Our understanding of the subject will be increased if we stop to analyze the terms, developmental, supervision, and process.

Process has been defined as a systematic series of actions directed to some end; supervision, as the act of overseeing a process during performance or merely superintending, having oversight and direction of; and developmental, having the nature of bringing out latent capacities, or of bringing capacities to a more mature state, or fostering growth. Thus we might say that a developmental supervisory process is any systematic or planned series of actions performed by a worker under the oversight or direction of another person in a manner which brings out latent capacities or brings them to a more mature state in the worker, and directed to the end that the work in hand may be done more effectively and that from the present experience the worker will be better able to meet future situations and problems with a more effectively organized personal strength.

Dictionary definitions, however, frequently do not adequately describe terms which have come to have special meaning through usage. “Supervision,” for instance, with usage has become a technical term in social work which connotes the function of teaching or training as well as that of overseeing. Therefore, supervision, as an administrative process in public welfare or social work, in addition to having the derivative meaning, “to have general oversight of,” must in its application be directed toward the development and use of knowledge and skills by the agency staff in the performance of the job. The adjective “developmental” is being used now to give additional emphasis to the meaning which supervision has come to have with usage. The supervisory process, therefore, is not limited to case work practice, and it is not overstating the case to say it is indispensable in the performance of the functions of every person who serves in an administrative, executive, or supervisory capacity. Exercising supervision does not mean merely giving approval or disapproval, checking forms and procedures to see that rules are followed, assigning work or keeping a check on expenditures, but the more important responsibility of giving help in such a manner that the individual worker is left free, not to do as he pleases, but to exercise and develop initiative and skills which enable him to perform effectively the work which is assigned.

In analyzing the work done by the field social work representatives during the past two years the most essential things to know are not that a time study made during the month of March, 1940, indicated that they spent approximately 53 per cent of their time conferring with county superintendents and local boards on problems of administering old age assistance and aid to dependent children, 22 per cent on WPA referral problems and so through the various items covered by the study; that the state office received from each field representative a report on each of his counties at least once a quarter, that he visited each county at least once a month or that he filed his work reports and expense accounts regularly and in accordance with requirements. Important as these may be it is much more important to know how and wherein he measured up to his responsibilities as representative of the state agency and as professional helper to the county departments of public welfare. It is well to remember in this connection that giving supervision is not superimposing, and that supervision is a two-way process in which there is opportunity for both parties to learn and grow. For instance, an evaluation of an individual's performance is practically worthless so long as it is merely the thinking of the supervisor, and it becomes worth while only when the supervisor and the individual whose performance is being evaluated can sit down together and share their thinking. In this situation the supervisor will have an opportunity to consider critically his own performance, learn the wisdom of always reserving judgment, and of being objective in the sense of not permitting personal feelings to affect one's sense of justice. It is frequently difficult to accept this sort of help because it is difficult for one to admit and to face his weaknesses although it is an important part of developmental supervision.

 SOME FACTORS WHICH INFLUENCE EFFECTIVENESS OF FIELD SUPERVISION

There are, of course, numerous factors which influence the effectiveness of developmental supervision. If the field representative is to use successfully his leadership function, he must have “a belief in people as individuals; patience and sympathy with the shortcomings of human nature; a conviction that scrupulously fair, honest, and direct dealing with individuals is the one method which will best serve them; an open mind and an unemotional approach to the individual problem.”1

1 Gardner, Mary L., Some Factors in State Supervision for a Public Assistance Agency, Social Security Bulletin, vol. 2, no. 8.

The field representative must also have acquired a breadth of knowledge and skills in working with people, tact and resourcefulness in meeting situations; an understanding of public welfare laws, and resources and services available through public and private channels and their use in case work practice and public welfare administration; and an understanding of social case work, public welfare administration, and field supervision.

However, it makes no difference how well-equipped a field representative may be, effective help cannot be given unless his help is wanted, or unless there is a recognition of a need for help and willingness to ask for the sort of help that is needed. Therefore, it appears that the superintendent of public welfare may be using the field service to the best advantage when he presents directly and frankly agency problems not with the expectation that the field representative will make decisions for him, but that out of the objectivity which he should be able to bring to the problem plus his understanding of the limitations under which the local department works and his knowledge of policies and procedures, and an understanding of similar problems presented in other counties and how they are met there, the superintendent will be able to make his own decisions in a more effective manner.

Another factor which influences the effectiveness of the state field service is the size of the territories to be covered. With only eight field representatives, 100 counties to be covered, and contacts with state office to be maintained, it is obvious that the amount of time a field representative can give to one county is limited. Careful study of the situation reveals that with 12 or 13 counties each, a field representative is able to give only 45 or 50 per cent of his time to actual work with county staffs, which means that on the average he is able to give each county only six hours a month. If emergency situations arise in a few counties, the few must of necessity receive more of his time, leaving very little for regular work with the other counties. Office work, such as reading mail, bulletins and other material received from the state office, planning work, writing letters; and writing reports requires from 15 to 20 per cent of his time. Travel which consumes on the average 20 to 30 per cent of the field representative's time must frequently be done before and after office hours. Conferences in the state office and conferences with representative of other agencies require 15 to 18 per cent of his time.

A staff of twelve field representatives with eight or nine counties each would make it possible for each field representative to cut down the amount of time consumed in travel, thereby making it possible to give each county more of his time. It should be possible for a field representative to spend one day twice a month in each county instead of only about six hours.

The field social work service has served to bring the state and county departments of public welfare closer together and to keep the main objectives of the public welfare program in the foreground.

These objectives may be summed up in the statement that whatever assistance or service the public welfare agencies give to people it should be given in such a manner as to conserve and develop rather than to diminish the individual's own ability and right to help himself.

 DIVISIONS Child Welfare Public Assistance Case Work Training and Family Rehabilitation Mental Hygiene Institutions and Corrections DIVISION OF CHILD WELFARE LILY E. MITCHELL, Director

In the report for the biennium of 1936-38, the work of this division was defined as “emphasis on responsibility for (1) care of children outside their homes or in substitute or foster homes (2) special case-work service to children who, though living with their families, present personality and behavior problems; (3) improvement and enlargement of facilities for foster care; and (4) joining forces with all agencies in the children's field in a sincere, coöperative effort to determine what group of children in the state are most negleced by both the public and the private children's agencies and how the child welfare program can be adapted to care for their needs.”

During the biennium of 1938-40, the work of the division centered in the above four areas, and this report will summarize or record some results.

In the state advisory child welfare committee the total program has been discussed and thinking clarified on problematical situations. Through the work of the committee on the child, North Carolina Conference for Social Service, and the legislative committees of the State Association of Clerks of Court and State Association of Superintendents of Public Welfare, the adoption and illegitimacy laws, as well as the law regulating separation of infant from mother, were further strengthened and clarified through amendments. The two legislative committees collaborated in the drafting of blanks used in the adoption and separation procedures.

Several members of the division staff have served on important departmental committees. The director of the division is the chairman of the committee on filing, the project of which is described in the commissioner's report.

Two of the case consultants at two different periods have had educational leave of several months each during which they attended schools of social work. Two of the case consultants attended a seminar course in the summer of 1938, the director of the division a seminar course in the summer of 1939, and the supervisor of the special child welfare services area in June 1940.

All members of the staff attended various social service conferences held within the state during the biennium, and in 1939 several members attended national and regional conferences. Members of the staff have also attended a few sessions of the annual institute for orphanage workers conducted each summer by Duke University under the auspices of the Tri-State Orphanage Conference. This institute is an outstanding service to the private agencies in the state.

The division as a whole compiled a Manual of Procedure and Statewide Resources in Casework for use by county departments of public welfare and private children's agencies in the state.

SERVICE TO PRIVATE AGENCIES Orphanages and Other Child-Caring Institutions

The work of the consultant for children's institutions and agencies during the biennium indicates a changing emphasis in type of service sought by and given to children's agencies. In the past the emphasis has been on adequate physical care and protection of children, but as the standards of group care attained by all but a few institutions have been developed beyond the safe minimum, more attention is being given to the individual child's problems and the relationship of the institution's staff to the child. Therefore, the chief help now being requested of the consultant is in the nature of casework guidance and plan on the basis of the total child welfare program in the state. Conferences with various superintendents have resulted in a pooling of ideas on such typical problems as the following:

1. Behavior problems. A great many of these are presented by children of limited intelligence who have gone as far in school as they are able and are beginning to seek attention in anti-social ways. These children need to be trained in manual arts but neither the public school nor many of the orphanages are equipped to give this type child the training he is able to accept. This child requires a great deal of skillful understanding in order that he may not feel inadequate and resentful because he is not able to compete with the group mentally. Resources available to give this child a feeling of success in other fields are discussed.

2. A number of superintendents are beginning to find that not all children profit by group care and show by various behavior difficulties that they need more individual attention. The entire child welfare program is discussed and frequently other plans are made for this type of child.

3. More and more the orphanage executives are evaluating more carefully the type of cases for which they should be responsible and those that the counties should retain, helping through aid to dependent children fund. The child's needs are becoming the deciding factor as to the type of care planned for him.

4. Guidance is often sought from the consultant on matters of making physical improvements and in planning new, more modern cottages. The superintendents are aware of the value of making these changes in order to give the children in the cottages more modern equipment such as individual lockers, different wall paper and furnishings for each room, and more homelike living rooms and dining rooms.

5. Discussions are frequently held concerning the value of selecting cottage mothers who can best understand the individual child and his limitations which are due to lack of opportunities in his early environment. Staff education is suggested through more interesting staff meetings and attendance at conferences on child welfare.

6. Various administrative functions are brought up from time to time. Some of these include (a) means of financing various projects, (b) relationships between superintendent and staff, superintendent and children, staff and children, and superintendent and county departments of public welfare throughout the state.

7. The consultant rarely has a conference with any superintendent without touching on the subject of teaching children to grow up through gradually giving them more responsibility; teaching them to handle money and making it possible for them to have sufficient outside contacts to make good placement possible when the time comes for them to leave the institution.

In the winter of 1939 a conference for caseworkers of orphanages and members of the staff of the division of child welfare was held in Raleigh for the purpose of clarifying relationships and more completely coördinating respective services of the public and private agencies.

For each year of the biennium the superintendents of the maternity homes of the state have held a conference in Greensboro, a central location, in order to discuss mutual problems and relationship to the child-placing and casework agencies. In these conferences the director of the division and the consultant on children's agencies participated.

During the winter of 1939, the director of the division collaborated with the director of the division of adult education, State Department of Public Instruction (since nursery schools which are laboratories for parent education are located in this division) in the development of a committee on standards and supervision in pre-school education. The State Department of Public Instruction is interested in the work of such a committee because of the nursery school program and the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare because of the day nursery program. In April 1939, through this committee a statewide conference on standards was held. This conference was attended by representatives of kindergartens, nursery schools and day nurseries. This group decided it was interested in the general supervision of all pre-school education in the state through the department of public instruction. Therefore if an enabling bill is enacted by the General Assembly of North Carolina giving the State Department of Public Instruction responsibility for supervision of pre-school education, this department will have the same relationship to the educational program of day nurseries that it has to the educational program of orphanages. The State Board of Charities and Public Welfare will continue of course to have its former relationship to the day nursery on the basis of child care.

 CLASSIFICATION OF INSTITUTIONS ACCORDING TO LICENSE STATUS

The following tables give license status of instutitons for the year 1939-40:

TABLE A. ORPHANAGES OWNED BY RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS EXEMPT FROM LICENSE BECAUSE OF PROPERTY VALUATION OF $60,000.00 OR OVER

INSTITUTIONS Chief Executive Officer Location Date Founded Capacity Alexander Home. . . . . Mrs. W. R. Loving. . . . . Charlotte. . . . . 1894 40 Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . . W. E. Sweatt. . . . . Union Mills. . . . . 1925 231 Appalachian School. . . . . Rev. P. W. Lambert. . . . . Penland. . . . . 1925 60 Baptist Orphanage:         a. Mills Home. . . . . I. G. Greer. . . . . Thomasville. . . . . 1885 429 b. Kennedy Home. . . . . R. H. Hough. . . . . Kinston. . . . . 1914 136 Catholic Orphanage. . . . . Father J. A. Beshel. . . . . Nazareth. . . . . 1899 100 *Children's Home, Inc. . . . . O. V. Woosley. . . . . Winston-Salem. . . . . 1909 415 Christian Orphanage. . . . . Rev. Chas. D. Johnson. . . . . Elon College. . . . . 1904 150 Falcon Orphanage. . . . . J. A. Culbreth. . . . . Falcon. . . . . 1909 50 Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . . Rev. James A. Evans. . . . . Middlesex. . . . . 1920 75 Grandfather Orphan's Home. . . . . Miss Jane Russell. . . . . Banner Elk. . . . . 1914 86 *Methodist Orphanage. . . . . Rev. A. S. Barnes. . . . . Raleigh. . . . . 1899 300 *Methodist Protestant Children's Home. . . . . Rev. A. G. Dixon. . . . . High Point. . . . . 1910 120 Mountain Orphanage. . . . . Rev. J. H. Gruver. . . . . Black Mountain. . . . . 1904 65 Nazareth Orphans' Home. . . . . Ray P. Lyerly. . . . . Rockwell. . . . . 1906 60 Presbyterian Orphanage. . . . . Jos. B. Johnston. . . . . Barium Springs. . . . . 1891 320 Thompson Orphanage. . . . . M. D. Whisnant. . . . . Charlotte. . . . . 1887 112

* Negotiations are being made for the transference of the children in the Methodist Protestant Home at High Point to the Children's Home at Winston-Salem and the Methodist Orphanage at Raleigh, such transference depending upon the area from which the children came. The merging of the population of the Methodist Protestant Children's Home with those of the other two institutions is incident to the union or merging of all branches of the Methodist Church.

 TABLE B. ORPHANAGES OWNED BY FRATERNAL ORDERS EXEMPT FROM LICENSE BECAUSE OF PROPERTY VALUATION OF $60,000.00 OR OVER

INSTITUTIONSChief Executive OfficerLocationDate FoundedCapacityColored Orphanage of N. C.. . . . .T. K. Borders. . . . .Oxford. . . . .1883200I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .W. C. Beaman. . . . .Goldsboro. . . . .1892150*Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .W. M. Shuford. . . . .Lexington. . . . .1926250Oxford Orphanage. . . . .Rev. C. K. Proctor. . . . .Oxford. . . . .1872330Pythian Home. . . . .D. W. Huggins. . . . .Clayton. . . . .191060

* On February 1, 1940, the National Orphans' Home of the Junior Order United American Mechanics became the Children's Home of the North Carolina Junior Order United American Mechanics. Prior to that time the home was owned and operated by the National Council of the Junior Order United American Mechanics serving a national area, but when the state council of the Junior Order United American Mechanics, which is subordinate to the national council assumed ownership and control of the home, the policy was changed to serve North Carolina children only.

 TABLE C. ORPHANAGES OWNED AND CONDUCTED BY AN INDIVIDUAL SUBJECT TO LICENSE BUT FAILING TO QUALIFY AND OPERATING ON PROBATION

INSTITUTION Chief Executive Officer Location Date Founded Capacity Eliada Orphanage. . . . . Rev. L. B. Compton. . . . . Asheville. . . . . 1904 115

TABLE D. CHILD-CARING INSTITUTIONS OPERATED LOCALLY FOR CHILDREN OF COMMUNITY (COUNTY) SUBJECT TO LICENSE

1. Orphanages Licensed INSTITUTIONS Chief Executive Officer Location Date Founded Capacity Memorial Industrial School (Negro). . . . . E. R. Garrett. . . . . Winston-Salem. . . . . 1900 90
2. Orphanages Licensed—On Probation South Mountain Institute. . . . . C. L. Stoney. . . . . Nebo. . . . . 1919 54
3. Institutions for Temporary Care—Licensed Juvenile Relief Home. . . . . Mrs. M. F. Britz. . . . . Winston-Salem. . . . . 1923 18 Wright Refuge. . . . . Mrs. Octavia Evans. . . . . Durham. . . . . 1922 45
4. Day Nurseries—Licensed Bethlehem House (Negro). . . . . Miss Marion Brincefield. . . . . Winston-Salem. . . . . 1927 45 Charlotte Day Nursery. . . . . Miss Annie Ferguson. . . . . Charlotte. . . . . 1929 45 Scarborough Day Nursery (Negro). . . . . Mrs. J. C. Scarborough. . . . . Durham. . . . . 1925 24
5. County Children's Homes for Temporary Care—Licensed Buncombe County Children's Home. . . . . Mrs. Emma Sams. . . . . Asheville. . . . . 1891 28
6. County Children's Homes for Temporary Care—Failing to Qualify for License Wake County Detention Home. . . . . Mrs. W. E. Robbins. . . . . Raleigh. . . . . 1922 16

TABLE E. CONVALESCENT CRIPPLED CHILDREN'S HOME OPERATED LOCALLY FOR CHILDREN OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA SUBJECT TO LICENSE

INSTITUTION Chief Executive Officer Location Date Founded Capacity Asheville Orthopedic Home. . . . . Miss Annie F. Mercer. . . . . Asheville. . . . . 1939 20

POPULATION TABLES

The tables on population of institutions caring for dependent children, shown below, are based on the annual reports of the respective institutions for the years 1938 and 1939.

TABLE a. CHILDREN CARED FOR IN NORTH CAROLINA ORPHANAGES DURING THE YEAR 1938

INSTITUTIONSTotalBoysGirlsOrphansHalf OrphansParents LivingMother DeadFather DeadAlexander Home. . . . .471433671024Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . .2141348017466883Appalachian School (The). . . . .57411644742Baptist Orphanage of N. C. . . . .58727531219510722362Buncombe County Children's Home. . . . .361917311715Catholic Orphanage. . . . .——————————————Children's Home, Inc. . . . .40220819410814111538Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .227981293001970Christian Orphanage. . . . .87444320104116Colored Orphanage of N. C. . . . .153109447427457Falcon Orphanage. . . . .——————————————Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . .904446193653Grandfather Orphans' Home. . . . .80324815253010I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .57282960510Juvenile Relief Association, Inc. . . . .12932325Memorial Industrial School (Negro). . . . .77374024211913Methodist Orphanage. . . . .29514714847422033Methodist Protestant Children's Home. . . . .11558572624632Mountain Orphanage. . . . .6128231118302*Nazareth Orphanage. . . . .——————————————Oxford Orphanage. . . . .35117118060432426Presbyterian Orphans' Home. . . . .3131571565011012231Pythian Orphanage. . . . .36241270281South Mountain Industrial Institute. . . . .5921385112419Thompson Orphanage. . . . .107535414304023Wright Refuge. . . . .26121420519Total. . . . .3,4891,7631,7167456831,637424

* Report received too late for figures to be included.

 Table b. CHILDREN CARED FOR IN NORTH CAROLINA ORPHANAGES DURING THE YEAR 1939

INSTITUTIONSTotalBoysGirlsOrphansHalf OrphansParents LivingMother DeadFather DeadAlexander Home. . . . .40132747524Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . .2211279423495495Appalachian School (The). . . . .493316301036Baptist Orphanage of N. C. . . . .58327730618612421261Buncombe County Children's Home. . . . .2291318310Catholic Orphanage. . . . .——————————————Children's Home, Inc. . . . .41521420111115311536Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .2041001042301810Christian Orphanage. . . . .78423618113316Colored Orphanage of N. C. . . . .150113377127475Falcon Orphanage. . . . .——————————————Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . .914447185680Grandfather Orphans' Home. . . . .8034461121408I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .47262160410Juvenile Relief Association, Inc. . . . .13852236Memorial Industrial School (Negro). . . . .80364422301810Methodist Orphanage. . . . .30815315539512117Methodist Protestant Orphanage. . . . .12059612727642Mountain Orphanage. . . . .6029311121253*Nazareth Orphanage. . . . .——————————————Oxford Orphanage. . . . .35017018051412508Presbyterian Orphans' Home. . . . .3161571595011411636Pythian Orphanage. . . . .47262179283South Mountain Industrial Institute. . . . .5217354112611Thompson Orphanage. . . . .100445615293422Wright Refuge. . . . .35191612131Total. . . . .3,4611,7501,7117047421,585430

* Report received too late for figures to be included.

 TABLE c. AGES OF CHILDREN UNDER CARE

INSTITUTIONSYear Ending December 31, 1938Year Ending December 31, 1939TotalUnder 1 YearBetween 1 and 2 YearsBetween 2 and 6 YearsBetween 6 and 12 YearsOver 12 YearsOver 21 YearsTotalUnder 1 YearBetween 1 and 2 YearsBetween 2 and 6 YearsBetween 6 and 12 YearsOver 12 YearsOver 21 YearsAlexander Home. . . . .5200143440490093190Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . .34400383244143600078925113Appalachian School (The). . . . .800037520810027810Baptist Orphanage of N. C. . . . .6500012291347064800172034271Buncombe County Children's Home. . . . .77005373505901723280Catholic Orphanage. . . . .————————————————————————————Children's Home, Inc. . . . .4510047188216046401351782464Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .241003811570209003541520Christian Orphanage. . . . .96002425209700234610Colored Orphanage of N. C. . . . .16500264971174005571120Falcon Orphanage. . . . .————————————————————————————Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . .105004524909200329600Grandfather Orphans' Home. . . . .93018424209700644461I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .59000174206000219390Juvenile Relief Association, Inc. . . . .3489170003612716100Memorial Industrial School (Negro). . . . .910010354429100938431Methodist Orphanage. . . . .3400015145177333800101172038Methodist Protestant Orphanage. . . . .1260054576013200840840Mountain Orphanage. . . . .73000284507200018540*Nazareth Orphanage. . . . .————————————————————————————Oxford Orphanage. . . . .38200713723803880071402410Presbyterian Orphans' Home. . . . .3420015112211435900181102310Pythian Orphanage. . . . .37000142304700212330South Mountain Industrial Institute. . . . .86002275347801635360Thompson Orphanage. . . . .11900103772010200436620Wright Refuge. . . . .1131882757301302110356130

* Report received too late for figures to be included.

 TABLE d. POPULATION MOVEMENT

INSTITUTIONSYear Ending December 31, 1938Year Ending December 31, 1939Children in Institution Jan. 1, 1938Admissions During YearChildren Cared for During Yr.DischargeChildren in Institution Dec. 31, 1938Children in Institution Jan. 1, 1939Admissions During During Yr.Children Cared for During Yr.DischargeChildren in Institution Dec. 31, 1939Alexander Home. . . . .475521438409491237Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . .214130344123221221139360122238Appalachian School (The)57238031494932812655Baptist Orphanage of N. C. . . . .58763650675835836564877571Buncombe County Children's Home. . . . .36417755222237594118Catholic Orphanage. . . . .————————————————————Children's Home, Inc. . . . .40249451364154154946461403Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .2271424137204204520952157Christian Orphanage. . . . .8799618787818961779Colored Orphanage of N. C. . . . .15312165151501502417419155Falcon Orphanage. . . . .————————————————————Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . .90151051491911921082Grandfather Orphans' Home. . . . .80139313808017971483I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .5725912474713601050Juvenile Relief Association, Inc. . . . .12223421131323362313Memorial Industrial School (Negro). . . . .7714911180801191685Methodist Orphanage. . . . .29545340323083083033846292Methodist Protestant Orphanage. . . . .1151112661201201213210122Mountain Orphanage. . . . .61127313606012721557*Nazareth Orphanage. . . . .————————————————————Oxford Orphanage. . . . .35131382323503503838856332Presbyterian Orphans' Home. . . . .31329342263163164335943316Pythian Orphanage. . . . .36137532321547242South Mountain Industrial Institute. . . . .59278634525226783048Thompson Orphanage. . . . .107121191910010021021983Wright Refuge. . . . .2687113783535951309733

*Report received too late for figures to be included.

 TABLE e. DISPOSITION OF CHILDREN DISCHARGED FROM INSTITUTIONS—YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1938

INSTITUTIONSPlaced in HomesRelatives or ParentsColleges and SchoolsTo WorkInstitutions for DelinquentsCaswell Training SchoolRan AwayDiedHospitals or SanatoriumsOther OrphanagesOtherwiseAlexander Home. . . . .212000000000Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . .0841200400032Appalachian School (The). . . . .1281000010031Baptist Orphanage of N. C. . . . .7406100040000*Buncombe County Children's Home. . . . .11301400000000Catholic Orphanage. . . . .——————————————————————Children's Home, Inc. . . . .025400001006Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .035000000002Christian Orphanage. . . . .011060000001Colored Orphanage of N. C. . . . .010000000005Falcon Orphanage. . . . .——————————————————————Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . .111110000000Grandfather Orphans' Home. . . . .16000000006I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .07050000000Juvenile Relief Association, Inc. . . . .——————————————————————Memorial Industrial School (Negro).. . . . .28100000000Methodist Orphanage. . . . .0170140001000Methodist Protestant Children's Home. . . . .06000000000Mountain Orphanage. . . . .07300000003**Nazareth Orphanage. . . . .——————————————————————Oxford Orphanage. . . . .217350011003Presbyterian Orphans' Home. . . . .010790000000Pythian Orphanage. . . . .05000000000South Mountain Industrial Institute. . . . .025000050004Thompson Orphanage. . . . .013130010001Wright Refuge. . . . .0620000000016Total. . . . .2746942550015400110

*Placements made by Buncombe County juvenile court.

**Report received too late for figures to be included.

 TABLE f. DISPOSITION OF CHILDREN DISCHARGED FROM INSTITUTIONS—YEAR ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1939

INSTITUTIONSPlaced in HomesRelatives or ParentsColleges and SchoolsTo WorkInstitutions for DelinquentsCaswell Training SchoolRan AwayDiedHospitals or SanatoriumsOther OrphanagesOtherwiseAlexander Home. . . . .15000000006Alexander Schools, Inc. . . . .0792400800029Appalachian School (The). . . . .026000000000Baptist Orphanage of N. C. . . . .73415110052003*Buncombe County Children's Home.. . . . .2011601000030Catholic Orphanage. . . . .——————————————————————Children's Home, Inc. . . . .02913160000003Children's Home of N. C. J. O. U. A. M. . . . .0370000000015Christian Orphanage. . . . .08000000009Colored Orphanage of N. C. . . . .011150010001Falcon Orphanage. . . . .——————————————————————Free Will Baptist Orphanage. . . . .18100000000Grandfather Orphans' Home. . . . .07140000002I. O. O. F. Home. . . . .07000000003Juvenile Relief Association, Inc. . . . .——————————————————————Memorial Industrial School (Negro). . . . .04000001001Methodist Orphanage. . . . .0140000120029Methodist Protestant Children's Home. . . . .01080010000Mountain Orphanage. . . . .08500000002**Nazareth Orphanage . . . .——————————————————————Oxford Orphanage. . . . .0257170010006Presbyterian Orphans' Home. . . . .0124260000001Pythian Orphanage. . . . .05000000000South Mountain Industrial Institute. . . . .022010160000Thompson Orphanage. . . . .18250010002Wright Refuge. . . . .0770000000020Total. . . . .3043857971124503132

*Placements made by Buncombe County juvenile court.

**Report received too late for figures to be included.

 New Institutions

The Asheville Orthopedic Home was licensed on July 14, 1939, to care for crippled children and has at present a maximum capacity of 20. In addition to meeting minimum requirements for a child-caring institution set up by the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare, this institution must also comply with regulations of the State Board of Health relative to facilities for care of crippled children. The institution is the first of its type in the state, is well-equipped and is operated according to excellent standards.

 Proposed Institutions

Inquiries: During the biennium a total of 16 inquiries relative to establishment of children's agencies were received. Two inquiries were re-activated from the previous biennium. The 16 inquiries were classified as follows: 2 maternity homes; 1 day nursery; 2 homes for crippled children; 3 homes for temporary care of children; 8 orphanages; total, 16.

 Out of State Agencies Soliciting in North Carolina

Six substandard agencies from other states attempted to solicit funds in North Carolina during the past two years. Two of these agencies are located in Kentucky, one in Georgia, one in Tennessee, one in South Carolina and one in Virginia. When advised of the provisions of the North Carolina act regulating the soliciting of public aid by “charitable organizations, institutions or associations formed outside the State of North Carolina,” none of these agencies filed the necessary application for a license or otherwise attempted to comply with the law, and apparently left the state. Two other out-of-state and standard agencies were licensed to solicit memberships in this state. The purpose of the act is protection of North Carolina agencies and citizens.

 CHILD-PLACING AGENCIES Intra-state

In North Carolina child-placing is done by both public and private agencies. The juvenile court of each county is designated by law as the public child-placing agency. The superintendent of public welfare, who is the chief probation officer for the juvenile court, is usually requested by the court to make necessary placements. The actual placements may be made by a qualified case worker or a child welfare worker, a person with special training in this field, under direction of superintendent of public welfare. The private agencies must meet certain standards and are required by law to have a license from the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare in order to operate.

Licensed Child-placing Agencies

There are two private children's agencies in the state licensed by the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare to do child-placing. They are:

CHILD PLACING AGENCIES LICENSED AGENCY Chief Executive Location Date Founded Children's Service Bureau (Mecklenburg County). . . . . Miss Helen Taylor. . . . . Charlotte. . . . . 1934 N. C. Children's Home Society (State-wide). . . . . J. J. Phoenix. . . . . Greensboro. . . . . 1903

TABLES SHOWING ACTIVITIES OF CHILD-PLACING AGENCIES 1. Children Serviced—Year Ending December 31, 1938

  Foster Homes Own Homes Receiving Home Total AGENCY Children Under Supervision January 1, 1938 Children Placed During Year Children Discharged from Care During Year Children Under Supervision December 31, 1938 Children Under Supervision January 1, 1938 Children Accepted for Supervision During Year Children Discharged from Supervision During Year Children Under Supervision December 31, 1938 Children in Home January 1, 1938 Children Admitted During Year Children Discharged During Year Children Under Supervision December 31, 1938 Children Under Care During Year Children's Home Society of North Carolina. . . . . 265 97 104 258 0 0 0 0 6 105 104 7 473 Children's Service Bureau. . . . . 43 58 34 67 56 64 73 47 0 0 0 0 370 2. Children Serviced—Year Ending December 31, 1939 Children's Home Society of North Carolina. . . . . 258 96 86 268 0 0 0 0 7 93 97 3 454 Children's Service Bureau. . . . . 67 36 54 49 47 65 100 12 0 0 0 0 385

3. Caseload of Foster Homes—Year Ending December 31,1938

AGENCY Active Foster Homes Foster Home Applications Homes Under Supervision Jan. 1, 1938 Homes Placed Under Supervision During Year Homes WithDrawn from Supervision During Year Homes Under Supervision Dec. 31, 1938 Applications Pending Jan. 1, 1938 Applications Received During Year Applications Approved During Year Applications Rejected or Withdrawn During Year Applications Pending Dec. 31, 1938 Children's Home Society of North Carolina. . 12 107 10 17 12 130 107 8 17 Children's Service Bureau. . . . . 36 14 4 44 40 25 14 2 3 4. Caseload of Foster Homes—Year Ending December 31, 1939 Children's Home Society of North Carolina. . 17 126 14 24 17 156 126 9 24 Children's Service Bureau. . . . . 44 21 25 35 3 31 21 5 2

5. Disposition of Children Discharged by Agencies—Year Ending December 31, 1938

AGENCY Children Returned to Relatives Legally Adopted Attained Majority Married Referred to Another Agency Died Otherwise Children's Home Society of North Carolina. . . 0 88 5 1 0 1 9 Children's Service Bureau. . . . . 20 6 2 0 29 0 97 6. Disposition of Children Discharged by Agencies—Year Ending December 31, 1939 Children's Home Society of North Carolina. . . 1 68 10 0 0 1 6 Children's Service Bureau. . . . . 28 4 0 0 52 0 145

Inter-state

It is a growing conviction among both public and private child-placing agencies that an agency should place its wards for adoption only in territory where it can give direct supervision. There are many instances of course where an agency might place wards in the homes of kin in another state in an effort to strengthen ties of the child's own or natural family. But placements in homes of non-kin in other states are much less frequent than formerly.

On the other hand, the trend to place dependent children in need of foster care in homes of eligible kin, whether within or without the state or agency's boundaries, has gained momentum with the advent of the aid to dependent children fund.

The following tables include placement referrals in homes of kin, as well as in adoptive homes, for all requests for interstate placement of children are referred to and through this division. The referrals for placement in homes of kin totaled 84 and in homes of non-kin 51. Most of the homes of kin investigated as possible placements for the 84 children were found not suitable.

NUMBER CASES Bringing Children Into State Taking Children Out of State Total Approved. . . . . 18 11 29 Disapproved by North Carolina. . . . . 46 4 50 Disapproved by agency in other state. . . . . 1 2 3 No jurisdiction. . . . . 8 9 17 Request withdrawn. . . . . 4 2 6 Pending. . . . . 27 3 30 Totals. . . . . 104 31 135

The number of proposed importations were about 3⅓ times as many as the number of proposed deportations, as the above figures indicate.

 Placement of Refugee Children from European War Areas in North Carolina Homes

About two weeks before the close of the biennium, considerable interest was evidenced in several localities of the state in offering homes to European children, particularly those from the British Isles, for the period of the duration of the war between Germany and England. Part of the interest resulted from direct contact between citizens of England and their friends in the state for care for particular children; part was the result of activity of local committees for care of European children. Any foster placement of a dependent child in North Carolina involves the state laws regulating child-placing and the importation of children, therefore tentative plans were made to investigate all aspects of the situation with due consideration for the total child welfare program in the state as well as for special work in behalf of refugee children.

 MATERNITY HOMES

The function and program of the four maternity homes in the state are described in the report of the last biennium.

The following tables list maternity homes, capacity and license status for 1939-40 and statistics on population movements for the years 1938-39 and 1939-40:

INSTITUTIONS Superintendent Location Date Founded Capacity License Status Crittenton Home. . . . . Mrs. F. W. McGinnis. . . . . Charlotte. . . . . 1903 28 Probational Faith Cottage. . . . . Miss Christine Pratt. . . . . Asheville. . . . . 1902 17 —— Greensboro Rest Cottage. . . . . Miss Elizabeth Andrews. . . . . Greensboro. . . . . 1903 15 Probational Salvation Army Maternity Home. . . . . Miss Myrtle Marshall. . . . . Durham. . . . . 1925 31 Full License

License withheld from Faith Cottage because there is no registered nurse on staff.

 STATISTICS FROM MONTHLY REPORTS OF INSTITUTIONS Year Ending June 30, 1939

INSTITUTIONSTotal No. Girls Listed by MonthTotal No. Babies Listed by MonthAverage No. Girls Cared for Per monthAverage No. Babies Cared for Per MonthTotal No. Girls DyingTotal No. Babies Dying*Crittenton Home. . . . .22714320-plus1302Faith Cottage. . . . .614253-plus00Rest Cottage. . . . .1479312-plus8-minus00Salvation Army Maternity Home. . . . .3701993116-plus06

* Causes of death listed are: “stillborn,” “premature,” “premature-hydrocephalus,” “cause unknown.”

 [STATISTICS FROM MONTHLY REPORTS OF INSTITUTIONS-continued.] Year Ending June 30, 1939

INSTITUTIONSTotal No. Girls Listed by MonthTotal No. Babies Listed by MonthAverage No. Girls Cared for Per monthAverage No. Babies Cared for Per MonthTotal No. Girls DyingTotal No. Babies Dying*Crittenton Home. . . . .254165231503Faith Cottage. . . . .51304-plus2-plus00Rest Cottage. . . . . 1266110-plus505Salvation Army Maternity Home. . . . . 33319729-plus16-plus01

* Causes of death listed are: “premature,” “stillborn,” “hard delivery forceps,” “marasmus and pyloric spasm” “stillborn-anencephalia monster,” “bronchial pneumonia.”

 SERVICE TO COUNTY DEPARTMENTS OF PUBLIC WELFARE, JUVENILE COURTS AND COURTS OF ADOPTION (CLERKS OF SUPERIOR COURT) Casework Service

The nature of the procedure in the handling of cases between the state and county agencies is referral and advisory. In the interstate placements of dependent children, however, the state board makes the final decision. The figures given in the table below show the type and number of cases referred by the county departments of public welfare, other state agencies, citizens or agencies in other states to the division of child welfare.

TABLE OF CASES New or Re-opened During Biennium

Type Number Adoptions and Child-placing (inquiries, registrations, pending). . . . . 1,042 Applications for Assistance from State Boarding Home Fund. . . . . 52 Boarding Homes (applications for license, information, etc.). . . . . 137 Children referred as   Crippled. . . . . 22 Dependent and Neglected. . . . . 379 Delinquent (including unmarried mothers). . . . . 339 With Health Problem. . . . . 32 With Problem of Mixed Race. . . . . 15 Impostors and Solicitors. . . . . 21 Inquiries regarding proposed institutions. . . . . 16 Interstate (placement of children, requests for investigations and information). . . . . 650

Type Number Legal Settlement. . . . . 154 Miscellaneous. . . . . 74 Total new cases referred. . . . . 2,933

During the biennium of 1936-38, a total of 2,640 cases were referred. Therefore, the increase of new cases in the biennium of 1938-40 was 11-plus per cent over the number of the previous biennium.

In addition to service on the 2,933 new referrals, service was continued on an estimated 1,000 old cases active on July 1, 1938.

 REGISTRATION OF ADOPTIONS

During the biennium a total of 730 new adoption proceedings were received by the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare from the clerks of court for registration and filing. The following table shows number and nature of registrations.

Registration of Final Orders Only (Original Action in Previous Biennium) Full Registrations (Petition Through Final Orders) July 1, 1938 July 1, 1940 Registrations Through Interlocutory Order July 1, 1938 July 1, 1940 Revocations Pending (for Additional Registration Data) 392 201 472 14 57

An analysis of these 730 adoptions on the basis of persons or agencies responsible for the placement shows the following:

FOR THE YEAR JULY 1, 1938 TO JULY 1, 1939 Number Children Placed by Children's Home Society of North Carolina Number Children Placed by Children's Service Bureau, Charlotte, N. C. Number Childred Placed by Parent (or Guardian) Number Children Placed by Juvenile Court or Department Public Welfare Consents Doubtful Adoptions Consented to by Out-of-State Agencies 66 8 133 15 0 2

FOR THE YEAR JULY 1, 1939 TO JULY 1, 1940 Number Children Placed by Children's Home Society of North Carolina Number Children Placed by Children's Service Bureau, Charlotte, N. C. Number Childred Placed by Parent (or Guardian) Number Children Placed by Juvenile Court or Department Public Welfare Consents Doubtful Adoptions Consented to by Out-of-State Agencies 83 3 156 21 2 0

ADMINISTRATION OF THE STATE BOARDING HOME FUND

The administration of the state boarding home fund involves the acceptance of applications for aid for individual children from county welfare departments and juvenile courts on the basis of need and on the condition of placement in licensed boarding homes.

The fund of only $7,500 per annum is inadequate to meet all the requests for this aid received from the counties, but an effort is made to distribute the grants among the counties making application as widely and evenly as possible without upsetting plans for children already receiving aid. In the late winter of 1938 a survey was made of the number of children in care of county departments of public welfare and juvenile courts who were in need of this type of foster care. Forty-three counties of the total 100 answered the questionnaire, listing 392 children and estimating approximately $44,000.00 as the sum—state and county funds combined—needed to care for them at a boarding rate of less than $10.00 per month. On a 50-50 basis the state's share of such a sum would be $22,000.00, but an appropriation of $15,000.00 only was requested of the General Assembly of 1939, believing that the full $22,000.00 could not be absorbed. The appropriation of $7,500.00, however, was not increased

Children Aided, 1938-39

During the year 1938-39 juvenile courts in 45 counties were assisted in caring for a total of 88 children through county funds and the state boarding home fund. This number was 23 more children than could be helped in the year 1937-38. Forty-six of the 88 children received this aid for the full year. Thirty-three children were accepted for care during this period and 23 were transferred to other types of care. Seven of the 88 children are state wards and six of these wards received full maintenance from the state fund.

The total number of boarding months was 806. The average rate of board paid per month per child was $16.17. The average number of months care per child was 9.15 months.

The following table shows expenditure from both state and county funds for the year 1938-39:

BOARDING HOME CARE STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939

COUNTY PARTICIPATING STATE FUND COUNTY FUND *Alamance. . . . . $ 305.32 $ 70.00 Anson. . . . . 138.75 138.75 *Ashe. . . . . 239.35 00.00 Avery. . . . . 275.00 55.00 Burke. . . . . 168.00 168.00 Caldwell. . . . . 60.00 60.00 Caswell. . . . . 111.00 111.00 Chatham. . . . . 150.00 150.00 Cherokee. . . . . 231.00 231.00 Chowan. . . . . 100.50 60.00 Cumberland. . . . . 47.25 47.25 Davidson. . . . . 180.00 180.00 Durham. . . . . 133.88 133.88 *Edgecombe. . . . . 380.42 148.00 Forsyth. . . . . 260.63 260.63 *Gaston. . . . . 293.72 120.00 Greene. . . . . 13.63 13.63 Guilford. . . . . 144.00 144.00 Haywood. . . . . 135.00 135.00 Johnston. . . . . 120.00 120.00 Lincoln. . . . . 135.63 135.63 *Macon. . . . . 704.41 225.00 *Madison 274.02 00.00 Martin. . . . . 171.00 171.00 McDowell. . . . . 120.00 120.00 Mecklenburg. . . . . 297.00 297.00 *Moore. . . . . 180.00 00.00 Nash. . . . . 106.34 106.34 New Hanover. . . . . 111.00 111.00 Northampton. . . . . 55.00 55.00 Orange. . . . . 211.00 211.00 Pamlico. . . . . 84.00 84.00 Pasquotank. . . . . 60.00 60.00 Perquimans. . . . . 240.00 240.00

* Difference between the amount paid from state fund and amount paid from county fund in these counties is due to fact that a state ward, resident of county, is receiving full or part maintenance from the state fund in addition to amount paid from state fund to match county fund in care of other children.

[BOARDING HOME CARE, Continued]COUNTY PARTICIPATINGSTATE FUNDCOUNTY FUNDPitt. . . . . $ 105.00$ 105.00Randolph. . . . . 67.5067.50Rockingham. . . . . 60.0060.00Rowan. . . . . 87.0087.00Rutherford. . . . . 111.00111.00Surry. . . . . 91.2091.20Transylvania. . . . . 180.00180.00*Wake. . . . . 210.00180.00Wayne. . . . . 34.4634.46Wilkes. . . . . 67.5067.50Wilson. . . . . 241.01241.01Totals. . . . . $7,491.52$5,269.93

* Difference between the amount paid from state fund and amount paid from county fund in these counties is due to fact that a state ward, resident of county, is receiving full or part maintenance from the state fund in addition to amount paid from state fund to match county fund in care of other children.

 Children Aided 1939-40

During the year 1939-40 with the juvenile courts of 40 counties participating, a total of 84 children were cared for in licensed boarding homes through state and county funds. Forty-seven of these children received this aid for the entire period. Nineteen of the 84 children were transferred to other types of care during the year and 15 children were accepted for care. Seven of the total number of children are state wards and six wards received full maintenance from the state fund.

The number of boarding months totaled 779, an average of 9.27 months care per child. The average rate of board paid per month per child was $16.11.

The following table shows expenditures from both state and county funds for the year 1939-40.

BOARDING HOME CARE STATEMENT OF DISBURSEMENTS Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1940

COUNTY PARTICIPATING STATE FUND COUNTY FUND *Alamance. . . . . $ 282.00 $ 60.00 Anson. . . . . 117.09 117.09 *Ashe. . . . . 222.00 00.00 Buncombe. . . . . 57.75 57.75 Burke. . . . . 290.75 290.75 Caldwell. . . . . 90.00 90.00 Caswell. . . . . 111.00 111.00 Chatham. . . . . 150.00 150.00 Cherokee. . . . . 231.00 231.00

* Difference between the amount paid from state fund and amount paid from county fund in these counties is due to fact that a state ward, resident of county, is receiving full or part maintenance from the state fund in addition to amount paid from state fund to match county fund in care of other children.

[Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1940, Continued]COUNTY PARTICIPATINGSTATE FUNDCOUNTY FUNDChowan. . . . . $ 120.00$ 60.00Cumberland. . . . . 62.7562.75Davidson. . . . . 60.0060.00Durham. . . . . 111.00111.00*Edgecombe. . . . . 222.0000.00Forsyth. . . . . 235.97235.97*Gaston. . . . . 332.36120.00Guilford. . . . . 240.00240.00Haywood. . . . . 180.00180.00Johnston. . . . . 40.0040.00*Macon. . . . . 690.00225.00*Madison. . . . . 240.0000.00Martin. . . . . 110.13110.13McDowell. . . . . 111.00111.00*Mecklenburg. . . . . 535.97360.00*Moore. . . . . 326.4792.00Nash. . . . . 13.6713.67New Hanover. . . . . 124.43124.43Orange. . . . . 25.0025.00Pamlico. . . . . 84.0084.00Perquimans. . . . . 192.50192.50Pitt. . . . . 70.0070.00Randolph. . . . . 276.75276.75Rockingham. . . . . 315.75315.75Rowan. . . . . 105.00105.00Rutherford. . . . . 111.00111.00Surry. . . . . 112.17112.17Transylvania. . . . . 180.00180.00*Wake. . . . . 180.55156.00Wayne. . . . . 32.6032.60Wilkes. . . . . 78.7578.75Wilson. . . . . 240.00240.00Totals. . . . . $7,311.36$5,233.06

* Difference between the amount paid from state fund and amount paid from county fund in these counties is due to fact that a state ward, resident of county, is receiving full or part maintenance from the state fund in addition to amount paid from state fund to match county fund in care of other children.

 SELECTION AND LICENSING OF BOARDING HOMES

An important part of the function of the division of child welfare is the licensing of all boarding homes for children used by public agencies and private children's agencies. Standards for these homes have been set up by the state board and must be met before license can be issued. These standards deal largely with the physical aspects of the home leaving the emotional factors to be evaluated on an individual basis according to the needs of the child or children to be placed in the home. Detailed information regarding these standards have been furnished county officials and also heads of private agencies.

Application for license to board children is made by the family to the local agency, either public or private, which is responsible for children's work in the area in which the home is located. If the study made of the home by the local agency indicates that it is a suitable one in which to board children, the application and study are then forwarded to the state office. Before license can be issued, the home must be visited by a representative of the state board and his or her recommendations received. If it is not possible for a consultant from the division of child welfare to make this visit, the field supervisor for the county in which the home is located does it. A re-evaluation of the homes is made each year and new licenses issued to those homes continuing to meet the boarding home standards.

Boarding Home Statistics

There was an increase during the biennial period in the use of boarding home care for dependent, neglected and pre-delinquent children who either had no homes or whose homes were improper places for them to live. There is a growing recognition of the value of this type care as is shown by the increased number of licensed boarding homes in a larger number of counties. The Biennial Report 1936-38 shows that there were 57 approved homes in twenty-nine counties at the end of the period covered. The table given below shows that there were 71 approved homes in 32 counties and 32 additional homes in 12 counties whose applications are being considered at the end of this period covered. There is a great need for additional approved homes as is shown by the study made of the county home population on January 31, 1939, in which it was ascertained there were 97 children under 16 years of age among the 2,801 inmates. It is hoped that before the next biennium there will be no need to use this archaic type of care for our youth.

LICENSED BOARDING HOMES

COUNTY Number Homes Licensed 1938-39 Total Capacity 1938-39 Number Homes Pending 1938-39 Number Homes Licensed 1939-40 Total Capacity 1939-40 Number Homes Pending 1939-40 New Old New Old Alamance. . . . . 2 6 —— —— 2 6 —— —— Anson. . . . . —— —— —— —— 1 2 —— —— Buncombe. . . . . 3 6 —— —— 2 5 —— —— Burke. . . . . 1 2 —— —— 2 4 —— —— Caldwell. . . . . 1 1 —— —— 1 1 —— —— Chatham. . . . . 1 2 —— —— 1 2 —— —— Cherokee. . . . . 1 2 —— —— 1 2 —— —— Cleveland. . . . . 1 1 —— —— 1 1 —— —— Cumberland. . . . . 1 4 —— —— 1 2 2 —— Currituck. . . . . —— —— —— —— —— —— 2 —— Davidson. . . . . 1 4 —— —— —— —— —— 1 Duplin. . . . . 1 4 —— —— —— —— —— —— Durham. . . . . 5 2 —— —— 6 15 1 —— Edgecombe. . . . . —— —— —— —— 1 2 —— —— Forsyth. . . . . 4 11 6 —— 6 18 4 3 Gaston. . . . . 1 2 —— —— —— —— —— 1 Guilford. . . . . 2 6 1 2 2 6 2 —— Haywood. . . . . 3 9 —— —— 2 8 2 1 Iredell. . . . . —— —— —— —— 2 8 5 —— Johnston. . . . . 1 3 —— —— 1 4 —— —— Lee. . . . . —— —— 2 —— —— —— —— 2 Lenoir. . . . . 1 1 —— —— 1 1 —— —— Martin. . . . . —— —— —— 1 —— —— —— —— McDowell. . . . . 1 3 —— —— —— 3 —— 1 Moore. . . . . —— —— —— —— 1 4 —— —— Mecklenburg. . . . . 10 27 1 2 12 27 3 3 New Hanover. . . . . 1 2 —— —— 1 2 —— —— Northampton. . . . . 1 3 —— 2 2 7 —— —— Orange. . . . . 1 4 —— —— 2 6 —— —— Pamlico. . . . . 1 3 —— —— 1 3 —— —— Randolph. . . . . 1 4 —— —— 1 4 —— —— Rockingham. . . . . 1 4 —— —— 1 4 —— —— Rutherford. . . . . 1 4 —— —— 1 4 —— —— Sampson. . . . . 1 2 —— —— 1 2 —— —— Stanly. . . . . —— —— —— —— 1 2 —— —— Surry. . . . . —— —— —— —— 2 4 1 —— Transylvania. . . . . —— —— —— —— 1 2 —— —— Wake. . . . . 7 20 —— —— 10 29 —— —— Wilkes. . . . . 1 2 1 —— 1 2 —— —— Yadkin. . . . . —— —— 1 —— —— —— —— —— Total. . . . . 57 144 12 7 71 192 22 12

CHILD WELFARE SERVICES

Child welfare services incorporated within the division of child welfare has continued for the past biennium on the premises as outlined for the program in its earliest beginnings. It has continued to function under the supervision of the federal children's bureau from whence the major portion of funds comes. Within the biennium there has been an annual decrease of approximately $900 in the allotment of money from this source due to allocation of funds for setting up the child welfare services program in Puerto Rico. The counties benefiting from workers have been coöperative in assuming some financial participation in the work. It is expected that there will be further gradual participation as time goes on.

The scope of work covered for the past biennium has been:

A. Supervision of the county child welfare assistants through three case consultants on the state staff and consultant service given to a selected number of counties not having child welfare assistants.

B. Maintenance of a special area of three counties—Orange, Chatham and Durham—to provide case work services to children and to give field work placement to students in coöperation with the University of North Carolina.

C. Provision for educational leaves and in-service training.

D. Continuation of the social case worker in Morrison Training School.

E. Expansion of the mental hygiene services in the state board which provided psychiatric services for children.

F. Provision for a substitute worker placed in counties having vacancies while the child welfare assistant was away on educational leave.

G. Continuation of state advisory committee as a state-wide interpretive group with meetings held on a semiannual basis.

H. Continuation of local or county unit service through the work of county children's workers in coöperation with selected counties with increased emphasis on interpretation, integration and local participation.

Supervision and Consultation Service

The case consultants have continued to offer supervision to the child welfare assistants placed in rural county units for case work services to dependent and neglected children through periodic visits to the counties. Experience has proven consultation services to counties prior to the acceptance of a child welfare worker to be of inestimable value. For this reason consultation in counties without child welfare workers has been emphasized in the last biennium and has been made a prerequisite to the placement of a worker. This has given the consultant the opportunity to interpret the types of cases that make up a child welfare worker's load, and philosophies with regard to handling of children's cases, before the worker goes into the county. The consultant has also found it advantageous to identify with the local staff before the special worker comes to the agency. It is not expected that all counties requesting consultant service will be later provided with a child welfare worker, but that this type of service alone will meet the need of some counties.

 Special Area

There has been a continuation of the three-county unit in the vicinity of the University of North Carolina which met a two-fold need—that of serving underprivileged children in the several communities, and that of offering a training center in children's work for students in the division of social work and public welfare of the university. Even though trainees accepting field placements in child welfare services do not definitely identify with the child welfare services program when they accept positions, they will gain insight into a field that will react positively in handling children's cases that fall in their loads in the general field. It is believed that the state at large will be diffused with workers with broadened insight into children's problems by the maintenance of the training centers for children's work in coöperation between the University of North Carolina and the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare.

 CHILDREN'S UNIT—DIVISION OF MENTAL HYGIENE

There has been an expansion of mental hygiene services within the last biennium to the extent that there is now a children's unit within the division of mental hygiene of the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare. The children's unit consists of a psychiatrist and a psychologist who give their full time to children's work; the time of the psychiatrist has been divided between the child welfare services program and two mental hygiene clinics, one in Winston-Salem and the other in Charlotte. At least half of his time has been devoted to child welfare services. The service to children has been through consultation with the case consultants and the child welfare assistants, and it has been possible to carry a few extreme cases on a treatment basis. In some instances children were brought to the psychiatrist during his office hours in Raleigh; others have been seen at the two clinics. The psychiatrist attended staff meetings and lent his assistance in shaping the child welfare services program.

The work of the psychologist has continued much as in former years. Her services have been available only to children within the child welfare assistants' case loads or to children in the case loads of workers in counties where consultation service was being given but not served by child welfare services workers.

 EDUCATIONAL LEAVES AND IN-SERVICE TRAINING

The number of educational leaves decreased during this biennium from four to three a year, the reason being that with the return of a number of workers from leaves to the staff, the demand for trained people was less emergent and a smaller amount of money should, therefore, be allocated for this purpose. The worker on leave was privileged to stay nine months instead of six as formerly, the stipend being the same, which meant that those workers taking nine months' leave rather than six would supplement from their own resources. It is expected that workers taking leave from their work to study will finance their own way more and more as time goes on. Educational leaves have been supplemented by an in-service training program by means of which once a year outstanding people in the field of child welfare have come to the state to conduct a two-day institute for the workers. Case work techniques and philosophies have been stressed in these institutes which have left a definite imprint on the workers.

The case consultants in coöperation with the psychiatrist from the children's unit have held occasional institutes in their separate districts. These have been of value in educating the workers in the use of a psychiatrist.

The case consultants have coöperated with the director of the division of case work and family rehabilitation in district institutes by giving talks and leading discussion groups which were intended to give insight into the handling of children's cases.

 SERVICES TO TRAINING SCHOOLS

During the biennium workers were discontinued in the state training schools with the exception of Morrison Training School for delinquent Negro boys at Hoffman. Because of the lack of a sufficient number of Negro caseworkers over the state, it was deemed wise to retain the worker in Morrison to supplement a case work service to Negro children in the counties. The worker was originally placed in Morrison to make an intensive study of intake and discharge with a view to assisting the institution in these areas. Within the time that the worker has been in the institution, policies with regard to intake and discharge have shaped themselves fairly satisfactorily and she has been able to expand her services. She has acted in a consultative capacity to workers on the staff and has helped them to individualize the child, thus more adequately meeting his needs. She has been of assistance to the superintendent in guiding staff conferences and committees within the institution which have resulted in great benefit in the way of staff developmet and ultimately in a better service to children. She has kept development records on particular cases and has done research within the population and among parolees to determine whether or not a maximum benefit is being derived for the child from the efforts of the staff. Coöperating with the localities from which the child comes, the worker has been of assistance in planning programs to meet his needs and to help him find the best possible placement when he leaves the institution.

With the discontinuance of the workers from the other training schools in the state the consultant on intake and discharge was discontinued on the state staff. Supervision of the social worker in Morrison Training School thereby reverted to the assistant director for child welfare services.

Substitute Worker

For the last year of the biennium, a substitute worker was employed in child welfare services to be available to selected counties having vacancies while child welfare assistants were away on educational leave. Leaves were arranged so that the substitute worker could be employed full time as a temporary person. It had been planned that she would be available to other counties in emergency situations, but her time was completely absorbed in substitution for workers on leave so that it was not possible for her to function as an emergency worker. This worker served a short time in Caswell County and for about ten months in Surry County, having made a definite contribution to those counties in the absence of their regular workers.

 ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The state advisory committee representing organizations interested in child welfare has continued to function as an advisory group to the state staff. The evaluation of the program from the standpoint of the agencies represented on the committee has proved most worth while in its implications and in directing the trends in the child welfare program. A part of the time semiannual meetings have been held rather than quarterly meetings as heretofore. Membership on this committee includes a representative from each of the following organizations:

North Carolina Orphanage Association; State Association of Superintendents of Public Welfare; Children's Home Society, Greensboro, North Carolina; State Child Welfare Committee, American Legion and Auxiliary; State Parent-Teachers' Association; Committee on The Child, North Carolina Conference for Social Work; State Association of Clerks of Superior Courts; State Association of County Commissioners; State Federation of Women's Clubs; Division of Social Work and Public Welfare, School of Public Administration, University of North Carolina; North Carolina Chapter, American Association of Social Workers.

 COUNTY SERVICES

The division of child welfare has worked in coöperation with the general field staff of the state department in evaluating a county unit before it was accepted for consultation service or for the placement of a child welfare assistant. The child welfare services staff held itself responsible in great part for interpretation of the program to the superintendents of public welfare, but matters of administration were delegated largely to the general field staff while efforts to attain the integration of the child welfare assistant in the local staff was carried jointly by the case consultant and the field representative. A concerted effort has been made to stimulate the counties to become aware of their own resources in finances and their part in the utilization of other less tangible aids in developing better programs for social case work with children. During the last year of the biennium increased financial participation over previous years was assumed by county units in that all mileage incident to case work in the care of children was borne by the local department.

Child welfare workers have been placed in counties as a means of attempting a demonstration of good child care in rural areas and of promoting community understanding of problems of child welfare as well as a means of stimulating interest in adequate programs for children particularly emphasizing preventive service. They have attempted to demonstrate good case work practices in the care of dependent and neglected children and as much as possible have tried to carry on their work on a treatment basis. Workers have not found it possible to carry the entire load of children's cases within their counties, but have instead taken a cross-section of children's problems, whenever possible trying to be of service to other workers on the staff in the realm of children's cases. Although it has been the aim to keep the case loads as low as 50, the number of cases carried has gone beyond this in instances.

Counties given service within the biennium were:

Anson Buncombe Burke Caldwell Caswell Chatham Cherokee Cumberland* Durham Durham (Negro)* Edgecombe* Martin* Nash Northampton Orange Pitt Randolph* Robeson Sampson Surry

* Counties discontinued during biennium.

Qualifications for child welfare assistants during the biennium were:

A. At least two quarters social work training in a school of social work if the worker plans to complete at least six months additional social work training in an accredited school of social work not later than January 1943. and earlier if possible.**

** Quoted from the North Carolina Manual of Public Assistance which sets forth qualifications for all members of the generalized staffs of the county departments of public welfare This was the training requirement for caseworkers.

AND

B. At least twelve months' successful experience in supervised social work.

II

A. Two years' social work training in a professional school of social work.

OR

B. At least one year of social work training in an accredited school of social work with special emphasis in child welfare.

The close of the present biennium marks the end of four years of the child welfare services program. County departments of public welfare have been coöperative in use of the service. Requests for child welfare workers have continued to come in as well as requests for consultation services to counties without child welfare workers. It has been particularly gratifying that urban areas, though not eligible for child welfare workers, have shown a desire for better service to children and have asked for periodic visits from the case consultants. It has been particularly gratifying, too, that one densely populated county, Mecklenburg, though ineligible for a federal child welfare services worker, has shown keen enough interest in the welfare of its children to delegate a worker from its staff to carry children's cases altogether. This worker receives the same supervision from the case consultant as workers on whole or part federal pay. Another county, Buncombe, has put on a part-time worker at local expense to supplement the work done by the worker paid from federal funds. It is expected that this sort of expansion will materialize more in other urban areas.

 RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That the sum of $15,000 be appropriated for the state boarding home fund for each year of the biennium of 1941-43.

2. That provision be made in the annual budget or appropriation to the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare for the division of child welfare for the salary of an administrative assistant in the division of child welfare whose chief duty will be to carry on the correspondence incident to information regarding the licensing of boarding homes, to register data on compilation of boarding homes, and institutions, and to assist in correspondence relative to child-placing.

3. That provision be made in the annual budget or appropriation to the State Board of Charities and Public Welfare for the division of child welfare to absorb at least ten per cent of the cost of the state staff of the child welfare services unit of the division which has been financed in full by a grant or allotment of the social security fund for child welfare services by the children's bureau, U. S. Department of Labor, since April 1936. This program is regarded as a demonstration program and one to be absorbed gradually by state as well as county departments.

 DIVISION OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE NATHAN H. YELTON, Director

Steady progress in the achievement of a sound administration of public funds for the needy aged and dependent children in North Carolina has been accomplished in the biennium 1938-1940. The division of public assistance auditing and statistical reports with respect to the disbursement of funds and data concerning public assistance recipients account to the citizens of the state for the funds appropriated for old age assistance and aid to dependent children. The figures represent the work of 100 North Carolina county boards of commissioners and 100 North Carolina boards of public welfare, of the North Carolina State Board of Charities and Public Welfare and the federal Social Security Board—local state and federal bodies engaged in administering the old age assistance and aid to dependent children titles of the Social Security Act, passed by Congress in August 1935 and the old age assistance and dependent children act enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly in March 1937.

OLD AGE ASSISTANCE: Eligibility

An applicant must apply to the county department of public welfare in the county in which he resides and an investigation of his situation must prove that:

(1) He is sixty-five years of age and over; (2) He is a citizen of the United States or has been residing in the United States for ten years and has legally declared his intention to become a citizen; (3) He has not sufficient income, or other resources including relatives, to provide a reasonable subsistence compatible with decency and health; (4) He is not an inmate of any public institution at the time of receiving assistance; (5) He has not made an assignment or transfer of property for the purpose of rendering himself eligible for assistance; (6) He has been a resident of the state for two years out of the five years preceding his application, or for five years out of the nine years preceding his application, and for one year immediately preceding the same. Number of Recipients and Average Grants:

In June 1938 there were 33,060 recipients of old age assistance.

In June 1940 there were 35,694 recipients of old age assistance.

In May, 1940, North Carolina reported payment to 255 recipients per 1,000 estimated population 65 years and over. This number is larger by eight than the number of recipients per 1,000 estimated population 65 years and over in the nation.

The average grant has increased monthly during the biennial period. In June 1938 the average old age assistant grant was $9.51. In June 1940 the average grant had increased to $10.10. The national average grant per aged recipient is $19.96. North Carolina is ninth from the bottom in average grant paid to old age assistance recipients in the United States and territories.

 AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN: Eligibility

An applicant for aid to dependent children must apply to the county department of public welfare and an investigation must prove that:

(1) The applicant is a relative nearer than a cousin and that the child is living in the home maintained by the applicant; (2) The child has resided in North Carolina for one year immediately preceding the application; (3) The child has been deprived of parental support or care by reason of the death, physical or mental incapacity or continued absence from the home of a parent, and who has no adequate means of support. In cases of desertion every effort shall be made to apprehend the parent and charge him with the support of the child, but this provision does not affect the eligibility of the dependent child or the right of the county welfare board to make an award therefor; (4) The applicant maintains a safe and proper home for himself and the child. Number of Recipients and Average Grants:

In June 1938, a total of 7,375 families with 20,605 children received aid to dependent children. In June 1940 there were 9,352 families with 23,291 children receiving aid to dependent children. Whereas, in the nation 27 children per 1,000 estimated population under 16 years of age receive aid to dependent children grants, in North Carolina only 18 children per 1,000 estimated population under 16 years are recipients of this fund.

In June 1938 the average grant per family of children receiving aid to dependent children was $16.17. In June 1940 the average grant paid was $16.64. The national average grant paid in aid to dependent children is $32.19 per family. North Carolina is fifth from the bottom in average grant paid to aid to dependent children recipients in the United States and territories.

 APPEALS TO THE STATE BOARD OF ALLOTMENT AND APPEAL:

As a condition for receiving federal old age assistance and aid to dependent children funds, state plans for administration must provide for granting fair hearings to persons dissatisfied by failure to act, or with the action of, the county welfare board with respect to their application. The evidence presented by the applicant or recipient and the county welfare department before the field social work representative in a scheduled fair hearing is submitted to the State Board of Allotments and Appeal. During the biennium 44 appeals were acted upon by the state board. Although the decision of the county authorities was upheld in the 44 appeals formally presented to the state board, the 28 appeals which were satisfactorily adjusted without completing the formal presentation represent reversed decisions of the county authorities or successful interpretation to the appellant regarding the local decision.

 ESTABLISHED QUOTAS AND ALLOTMENTS TO COUNTIES:

The State Board of Allotments and Appeal found it necessary, during the first year of operation, to limit the allotment of funds to each county and to establish a quota of number of recipients in each county in order to keep within the limitation of the state legislative appropriation. In poorer counties the county government has not been able to raise local funds to participate adequately in the administration of old age assistance and aid to dependent children. The state equalization fund has been distributed to aid these counties and the establishment of quotas and allotments per county has been the chief method of achieving an equitable distribution of funds to the needy aged and dependent children of the state.

 SUMMARY OF PROGRESS DURING 1938-1940:

1. The second year of operation which began the biennium found the organization of the new division well established. The time and effort of the staff have been given to improving the necessary mechanics of recording and reporting.

2. The division of public assistance has maintained a correspondence service and during the biennium 13,931 letters have been received and disposed of with replies and explanation regarding the administration of public assistance.

3. A forwarding-center service has been maintained for referral of out of state inquiries to county departments. During the biennium 4,629 letters of inquiries have been acknowledged and referred to the counties.

4. Improved working relationships with other state and federal agencies have resulted from an exchange of bulletins and information with regard to the functions of the respective state and federal agencies.

5. The director and staff members of the division of public assistance have participated in district, state and national public welfare and social work conferences, receiving through this medium practical knowledge to be applied to improvement of the services of the division.

6. As a public agency, functioning within the legal structure of the state, the division of public assistance has received liberal and conservative interpretation of the public assistance laws from the office of the attorney general.

7. A merit system of personnel selection for those engaged in the administration of old age assistance and aid to dependent children has been established for state and county employees.

 CURRENT PROBLEMS AT CLOSE OF BIENNIUM 1938-1940

1. A serious handicap in achieving a sound administration of old age assistance and aid to dependent children is the absence of a statewide provision for needy persons who are not eligible for these types of assistance.

2. The inability of poorer counties to meet the financial responsibility of levying taxes for public assistance presents a major problem to the State Board of Allotments and Appeal in assisting, through the equalization fund, to meet the needs of the aged and dependent children equitably throughout the state.

3. Differences in costs of living in sections of the state present a difficulty in establishing a standard budget for state-wide use in determining need for public assistance.

4. The problem of securing relatives' support of the needy aged and dependent children is increased by the prevalent conception of public assistance as a “pension.”

5. Need for greater emphasis upon remedial and preventive service to help the needy live by their own effort without recourse to public assistance is a recognized problem which is increased by limited administrative funds which restrict the work of the staff to the original and recurrent verification of eligibility.

 STATE APPROPRIATION FOR OLD AGE ASSISTANCE, AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN, AND ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1, 1938 TO JUNE 30, 1940

Old Age Assistance   Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1939 Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1940 Total assistance payments. . . . . $3,569,188.37 $4,179,207.43 State appropriation. . . . . 1,000,000.00 1,500,000.00 State's proportion of payments for assistance. . . . . 894,532.92 1,094,524.70 Equalizing Fund payments. . . . . 15,953.33 84,237.90 Unexpended balance. . . . . 89,513.75 321,237.40*

* At the time allotments were made for old age assistance for the year 1939-40 it was estimated that $300,000.00 of the appropriation of $1,500,000.00 would be required to pay pensions to those Confederate widows who were not transferred to old age assistance.

Aid to Dependent Children Total payments for aid. . . . . $1,421,849.89 $1,608,981.35 State appropriation. . . . . 500,000.00 525,000.00 State's proportion of payments for aid. . . . . 475,030.32 463,348.78 Equalizing Fund payments 6,846.84 36,756.95 Unexpended balance. . . . . 18,122.84 24,894.27
Aid to County Administration Total payments, State and Federal. . . . . $ 293,670.64 $ 331,296.54 State appropriation. . . . . 150,000.00 150,000.00 Payments to counties—State funds. . . . . 145,460.46 148,430.25 Unexpended balance. . . . . 4,539.54 1,569.75

TOTAL CASES AND OBLIGATIONS INCURRED FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF—JULY 1938 THROUGH JUNE 1939 YEAR AND MONTH Total Old Age Assistance* Aid to Dependent Children* General Relief** Cases Expenditures Cases Expenditures Cases Child'n Expenditures Cases Expendit's 1938:                   July. . . . . 46,439 $ 470,627.78 29,942 $ 277,106.59 7,240 20,179 $ 110,971.27 6,185 $33,134.53 August. . . . . 46,464 473,843.74 30,146 277,978.09 7,308 20,265 111,087.77 5,695 31,109.79 Sept.. . . . . 46,703 479,971.07 30,698 283,976.09 7,402 20,359 112,506.27 5,422 29,758.59 Oct.. . . . . 46,737 484,396.99 31,193 288,806.11 7,471 20,445 113,520.77 4,825 26,332.73 Nov. . . . . 47,412 493,179.35 31,664 294,332.11 7,624 20,836 115,911.22 4,918 27,593.78 Dec. . . . . 48,961 506,817.82 31,964 298,924.41 7,719 21,053 117,685.52 6,111 34,926.18 1939:                   Jan.. . . . . 49,082 510,065.91 31,972 301,717.61 7,760 21,053 118,784.07 6,041 34,070.46 Feb.. . . . . 50,031 515,674.48 32,274 306,473.66 7,913 21,361 121,996.82 6,681 36,245.05 March. . . . . 50,312 524,194.80 32,291 307,962.66 8,006 21,547 123,986.42 6,774 37,812.20 April. . . . . 49,697 522,781.00 32,383 309,347.48 8,075 21,534 125,324.92 6,123 34,799.80 May. . . . . 49,754 527,763.94 32,497 311,028.48 8,139 21,556 125,643.87 5,971 35,698.36 June. . . . . 49,849 532,309.05 32,580 312,535.48 8,157 21,514 125,415.92 5,932 38,141.02 Total. . . . . —— $ 6,041,625.93 —— $ 3,570,188.77 —— —— $ 1,422,834.84 —— $399,622.49 Ave. per Mo. . 48,424 —— 31,610 —— 7,729 20,964 —— 5,890 ——

* Not corrected through June by deleting cancellations.

** Includes private agency funds.

YEAR AND MONTHBlind Assistance†HospitalizationPauper BurialsBoarding Home CareAll OtherCasesExpendituresPer.ExpendituresPer.Expendit'sPer.Expendit'sPer.Expendit's1938:          July. . . . .1,954$ 28,172.64702$ 15,670.90134$ 2,187.25188$ 2,259.1794$ 1,125.43August. . . . .2,03230,369.7485817,704.781131,738.802052,485.401071,369.37Sept.. . . . .1,98229,077.7679419,148.101041,655.062082,549.80931,299.40Oct.. . . . .1,98329,201.9282920,850.951131,844.641942,263.431291,576.44Nov.. . . . .1,96128,627.9878220,414.321362,108.802102,835.601171,355.54Dec.. . . . .1,96228,627.4677920,386.791281,857.052002,992.07981,418.341939:          Jan.. . . . .1,95328,554.6886820,688.741472,498.201772,337.651641,414.50Feb.. . . . .1,95328,639.3477816,860.651141,764.502092,696.51109997.95March. . . . .1,94028,438.3483320,084.521221,745.501972,698.471491,466.69April. . . . .1,93328,298.1874118,668.841362,227.002082,827.61981,287.17May. . . . .1,93128,232.0880421,477.871221,980.552122,840.9978861.74June.. . . . .1,90627,812.3487922,891.24881,430.312132,951.07941,131.67Total. . . . .——$344,052.46——$234,847.70——$23,037.66——$31,737.77——$15,304.24Ave. per Mo.. . . . .1,958——804——121——202——111——

† Furnished by North Carolina Commission for the Blind.

 TOTAL CASES AND OBLIGATIONS INCURRED FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF—JULY 1939 THROUGH JUNE 1940

YEAR AND MONTH Total Old Age Assistance* Aid to Dependent Children* General Relief**   Cases Expenditures Cases Expenditures Cases Child'n Expenditures Cases Expendit's 1939:                   July. . . . . 49,901 $ 543,319.09 33,580 $ 332,175.21 8,132 21,318 $ 125,137.92 4,985 $30,821.77 August. . . . . 51,350 553,941.07 34,090 337,189.71 8,129 21,162 124,050.62 5,796 35,226.21 Sept.. . . . . 51,505 555,045.88 34,431 340,822.11 8,078 20,946 122,775.62 5,727 35,762.22 Oct.. . . . . 51,882 559,122.01 34,650 343,306.31 8,072 20,869 122,572.02 5,840 38,050.13 Nov.. . . . . 52,084 563,063.84 34,859 346,250.61 8,063 20,789 122,860.97 5,911 37,297.82 Dec.. . . . . 52,741 568,181.47 35,010 349,761.51 8,128 20,847 124,223.92 6,414 39,552.93 1940:                   Jan.. . . . . 54,631 588,477.60 35,010 350,689.11 8,380 21,459 131,531.57 7,855 47,022.16 Feb.. . . . . 54,324 591,846.69 34,986 351,118.56 8,581 21,856 136,777.27 7,355 45,029.44 March. . . . . 54,608 604,801.93 35,210 354,643.84 8,854 22,504 144,057.02 7,112 43,431.60 April. . . . . 54,741 608,374.58 35,340 356,626.84 9,028 22,774 148,294.97 6,811 41,234.56 May. . . . . 55,056 618,370.20 35,566 359,004.89 9,210 23,087 153,087.00 6,705 44,076.47 June. . . . . 54,035 612,275.63 35,694 361,820.48 9,352 23,291 155,646.55 5,465 32,825.65 Total. . . . . —— $ 6,966,819.99 —— $ 4,183,409.18 —— —— $ 1,611,015.45 —— $470,330.96 Ave. per Mo.. . . . . 53,075 —— 34,848 —— 8,431 21,728 —— 6,330 ——

* Not corrected through June by deleting cancellations.

** Includes private agency funds.

YEAR AND MONTHBlind Assistance†HospitalizationPauper BurialsBoarding Home CareAll OtherCasesExpendituresPer.ExpendituresPer.Expendit'sPer.Expendit'sPer.Expendit's1939:          July. . . . . 1,953$ 28,365.08844$ 21,121.77104$ 1,696.50232$ 3,037.9171$ 962.93August. . . . .2,03031,380.5488220,451.96991,569.252413,126.0783946.71Sept.. . . . .1,97629,613.6086820,575.19871,237.752362,940.541021,318.85Oct.. . . . .1,94128,757.9893220,356.611071,796.022343,029.211061,253.73Nov.. . . . .1,95829,075.9282321,425.881271,857.592292,902.061141,392.99Dec.. . . . .1,97229,380.3274718,793.681402,214.752312,947.72991,306.641940:          Jan. . . . .1,98529,586.8889022,563.861552,448.182423,157.781141,478.06Feb. . . . .1,98829,749.1091422,435.481562,362.282383,191.111061,183.45March. . . . .1,98829,675.5897526,273.111472,319.752403,323.03821,078.00April. . . . .2,01030,329.1696524,378.561402,402.912763,523.941711,583.64May. . . . .1,98729,813.801,05223,348.021322,181.252863,766.041181,092.73June. . . . .1,94729,031.821,09026,760.271061,637.552863,606.8395946.48Total. . . . .——$354,759.78——$270,484.39——$23,723.78——$38,552.24——$14,544.21Ave. per Mo.. . . . .1,978——926——144——257——119——

† Furnished by North Carolina Commission for the Blind.

 AVERAGE MONTHLY NUMBER OF CASES AIDED AND TOTAL ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS FOR ALL PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BY TYPE AND COUNTIES, JULY 1, 1938-JUNE 30, 1939 J. S. KIRK, Statistician

COUNTIESTotal Including DuplicationsOld Age AssistanceAid to Dependent Children CasesObligationsCasesObligations*CasesChildrenObligations*1. Alamance637$ 90,147.50455$ 62,695.00116308$ 20,100.002. Alexander28525,603.6621518,253.00461186,129.003. Alleghany13812,219.511048,785.5025582,880.004. Anson40442,801.8929528,836.00611629,589.505. Ashe27426,035.0022920,159.00441155,816.006. Avery19720,782.1614014,587.00391025,281.007. Beaufort38835,573.8827523,415.00661498,684.208. Bertie38138,244.8327025,111.507218310,512.009. Bladen32335,812.9423023,631.50631619,606.0010. Brunswick20520,599.0016413,917.00391156,569.0011. Buncombe1,481238,177.44829124,857.5025564054,933.0012. Burke37946,161.3323526,204.005215411,347.0013. Cabarrus56774,944.7336849,311.008523920,232.0014. Caldwell46145,261.9030126,118.007022012,394.0015. Camden867,574.50604,754.0017362,430.5016. Carteret27826,686.3821419,422.0035985,484.0017. Caswell27930,244.1121520,610.00501678,348.0018. Catawba63472,222.8540944,424.009526717,829.0019. Chatham27325,432.9619817,933.00451116,178.7520. Cherokee24328,541.9617718,940.60471326,995.5021. Chowan13614,844.241059,751.0018362,990.0022. Clay969,310.50716,206.0019522,697.5023. Cleveland59371,093.2745751,200.508625015,510.0024. Columbus54750,077.2139333,704.0011328614,782.0025. Craven55957,160.5039135,265.008420614,511.5026. Cumberland62286,047.1740650,429.6011231220,615.6027. Currituck13914,595.56888,604.0028714,015.0028. Dare19818,439.5514413,477.5035593,015.0029. Davidson65886,829.2048558,178.0011833122,440.0030. Davie28726,793.9618617,216.00521217,048.0031. Duplin35345,769.0029132,472.006216913,297.0032. Durham926154,241.1055192,689.5018649143,097.0033. Edgecombe77891,968.9857362,370.5012635221,810.0034. Forsyth1,325245,094.11972153,146.5020459962,731.0035. Franklin34536,091.4925724,803.00591528,480.0036. Gaston1,383182,237.361,020117,218.0019252044,771.0037 Gates16316,151.0512811,693.0025573,841.5038. Graham14716,454.2511212,230.5019542,814.0039. Granville34839,277.0126828,331.00581589,734.0040. Greene26228,879.9017717,038.50551287,751.0041. Guilford1,694326,388.671,108189,513.5028275578,543.5042. Halifax70985,635.5348047,688.0010824420,917.2543. Harnett53754,782.9142137,912.509427513,934.0044. Haywood55973,683.6639851,395.308626915,021.1045. Henderson37643,661.902723,951.507922911,943.0046. Hertford23424,295.0019117,680.0031665,909.0047. Hoke23925,169.0817617,951.00421004,613.0048. Hyde12511,399.55998,408.0021462,336.5049. Iredell66381,407.2544852,891.0011231719,314.8050. Jackson28532,037.5023322,606.00521809,431.5051. Johnston87392,542.4462158,677.0014936023,861.7552. Jones16017,085.9611111,327.0634994,734.0053. Lee21124,311.2516317,051.00451227,020.00

* Corrected through June, 1939.

[AVERAGE MONTHLY NUMBER OF CASES AIDED AND TOTAL ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS FOR ALL PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BY TYPE AND COUNTIES, JULY 1, 1938-JUNE 30, 1939 J. S. KIRK, Statistician—Continued]General ReliefHospitalization†Pauper BurialsBoarding Home CareAll Other‡COUNTIESCasesObligationsPersonsObligationsPersonsObligationsPersonsObligationsPersonsObligations 46$ 3,072.2810$ 3,213.861$ 148.504378.175$ 539.691. Alamance211,043.16145.50164.50————168.502. Alexander7396.01158.001100.00————————3. Alleghany351,470.5392,396.362274.501232.0013.004. Anson160.00————————————————5. Ashe15700.661105.50145.00163.00————6. Avery341,500.97101,798.171129.24140.0016.307. Beaufort311,230.2671,388.5712.50————————8. Bertie241,151.2251,172.41————————1251.819. Bladen138.00175.00————————————10. Brunswick31435,110.066417,895.73143,912.5041,199.001209.6511. Buncombe754,768.5872,103.79180.003506.0561,151.9112. Burke1114,726.702522.531152.50————————13. Cabarrus814,566.1661,553.182510.561120.00————14. Caldwell7269.00121.001100.00————————15. Camden271,450.551234.83195.00————————16. Carteret8265.402733.53————1222.00365.1817. Caswell1166,482.1892,689.471282.503488.20127.5018. Catawba26857.581153.63110.002300.00————19. Chatham131,307.611513.002303.252462.00120.0020. Cherokee7613.7431,139.401170.50175.001104.6021. Chowan4294.00————143.00170.00————22. Clay422,851.123606.62188.75————4836.2823. Cleveland361,287.63————2220.00————383.5824. Columbus744,835.6492,365.861182.50————————25. Craven602,908.993410,444.584900.504560.702187.2026. Cumberland191,326.203638.36112.00————————27. Currituck14798.9641,098.93————————149.1628. Dare401,744.66133,911.541195.001360.00————29. Davidson461,977.302485.66167.00————————30. Davie————————————————————31. Duplin15112,205.87135.00————203,405.49172,808.2432. Durham592,840.38134,120.851113.004466.002248.2533. Edgecombe969,968.383014,660.2582,390.00142,087.981110.0034. Forsyth21760.1162,029.8818.50————110.0035. Franklin16015,540.5663,798.802478.002304.501126.5036. Gaston8487.001106.55123.00————————37 Gates141,200.75111.001198.00————————38. Graham12655.087455.92123.80————277.2139. Granville191,701.1792,355.9816.00127.25————40. Greene19322,673.807830,749.4251,525.00161,967.72121,415.7341. Guilford846,179.103410,603.183248.00————————42. Halifax14740.9472,099.47196.00————————43. Harnett614,426.8851,140.1041,066.783411.002222.5044. Haywood23679.42————————132.00155.9845. Henderson12706.00————————————————46. Hertford13424.5461,950.83169.50————1160.2147. Hoke2143.502411.551100.00————————48. Hyde784,437.36163,449.393573.455698.50142.7549. Iredell————————————————————50. Jackson743,691.19255,637.051163.953511.50————51. Johnston11672.00147.00182.00120.001203.9052. Jones2192.00————148.25————————53. Lee

† Does not include lump sum payments to hospitals nor cases aided thereby.

‡ Does not include Aid to the Blind.

AVERAGE MONTHLY NUMBER OF CASES AIDED AND TOTAL ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS FOR ALL PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BY TYPE AND COUNTIES, JULY 1, 1938-JUNE 30, 1939—ContinuedJ. S. KIRK, StatisticianCOUNTIESTotal Including DuplicationsOld Age AssistanceAid to Dependent ChildrenCasesObligationsCasesObligations*CasesChildrenObligations*54. Lenoir472$ 54,915.08310$ 36,655.00120248$ 15,091.0055. Lincoln31737,287.0823625,604.00501419,193.5056. Macon23423,829.0017716,331.50401165,996.0057. Madison40538,692.5031726,846.508821911,846.0058. Martin26932,906.9816618,073.00411438,022.0059. McDowell37143,586.0326927,563.00411008,082.0060. Mecklenburg2,038318,254.971,045175,913.0027579073,634.5061. Mitchell23625,653.0018418,654.00521336,999.0062. Montgomery23524,098.3416614,730.00431156,874.0063. Moore42944,917.4728829,765.507522111,649.5064. Nash80693,016.3759159,405.5012333418,563.5065. New Hanover56191,904.0044263,138.0011932428,766.0066. Northampton41847,689.3728727,888.508216812,111.5067. Onslow17618,774.3012811,361.00401175,655.0068. Orange33444,438.9422226,484.006519112,931.5069. Pamlico11412,317.50889,038.5026683,279.0070. Pasquotank33835,816.3317819,420.00431338,342.0071. Pender24622,534.3016514,764.00431116,266.5072. Perquimans12813,923.52937,833.5024744,214.0073. Person34538,600.5924425,784.007018510,680.0074. Pitt73585,916.6048751,562.0013734523,081.5075. Polk11216,271.309110,947.3021695,324.0076. Randolph43245,586.6231831,707.629624012,796.5077. Richmond74363,886.8237436,844.008723613,714.5078. Robeson79294,676.3553055,019.0014844025,006.6079. Rockingham61277,083.7947551,929.507622317,979.0080. Rowan76893,470.0953058,886.0012430224,443.8081. Rutherford68672,797.0352950,283.5010933517,732.0082. Sampson48452,016.5334633,344.009025114,867.0083. Scotland29825,045.5019115,799.50461176,191.5084. Stanly37743,535.4627228,695.207619912,091.0085. Stokes34141,119.3126828,539.005515110,564.5086. Surry60776,670.7344750,412.0010127417,091.0087. Swain27227,795.6918918,989.00501196,248.0088. Transylvania21220,149.8714514,037.0034934,641.1589. Tyrrell10511,481.17686,623.0021513,387.0090. Union50164,598.9134540,327.007924315,949.0091. Vance40744,328.5021322,504.25481548,902.8092. Wake1,084135,700.4157971,074.4426575352,581.0493. Warren35636,290.4825326,004.00441207,612.0094. Washington14114,694.97958,291.0029874,711.0095. Watauga21322,118.8715914,079.00341276,718.0096. Wayne65581,683.0346555,571.5011027521,640.0097. Wilkes58562,600.0945544,944.0010129916,369.0098. Wilson84389,800.7664761,360.008726214,490.0099. Yadkin25724,959.4619115,675.00481457,935.00100. Yancey24324,426.2418816,777.00471256,629.00Total46,467$5,693.899.0731,610$3,567,517.877,72920,964$1,421,821.34Wilmington Asso. Char.193$ 10,029.03——————————Winston-Salem Assoc. Char.57944,175.15——————————

* Corrected through June, 1939.

[AVERAGE MONTHLY NUMBER OF CASES AIDED AND TOTAL ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS FOR ALL PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BY TYPE AND COUNTIES, JULY 1, 1938-JUNE 30, 1939J. S. KIRK, Statistician—Continued]General ReliefHospitalization†Pauper BurialsBoarding Home CareAll Other‡COUNTIESCasesObligationsPersonsObligationsPersonsObligationsPersonsObligationsPersonsObligations38$ 2,594.94——$ ——2$ 228.00——$ ——2$ 346.1454. Lenoir241,490.091114.191301.503350.502233.3055. Lincoln10377.50————1200.005900.00124.0056. Macon————————————————————57. Madison412,236.82173,823.661148.002598.5015.0058. Martin464,383.10112,503.632473.001240.001341.3059. McDowell65058,523.392305.30131,569.00538,309.78————60. Mecklenburg————————————————————61. Mitchell211,530.382793.96120.60————2149.4062. Montgomery623,139.862304.11130.00————128.5063. Moore472,509.93238,455.622206.001240.00193,635.8264. Nash————————————————————65. New Hanover271,926.63174,719.14167.003958.60118.0066. Northampton4167.0031,576.30115.00————————67. Onslow311,762.2692,202.19175.004693.662290.3368. Orange————————————————————69. Pamlico963,270.65184,436.182287.50160.00————70. Pasquotank371,346.801157.00————————————71. Pender5180.8521,072.171133.002480.00110.0072. Perquimans23885.0351,081.56————2140.00130.0073. Person723,511.82347,255.284296.001210.00————74. Pitt————————————————————75. Polk181,082.50————————————————76. Randolph26710,644.79132,511.532172.00————————77. Richmond723,509.504211,141.25————————————78. Robeson402,564.37154,066.321217.004302.40125.2079. Rockingham975,776.71133,752.081348.502254.0019.0080. Rowan382,311.1151,478.421200.004792.00————81. Rutherford391,381.1393,424.40————————————82. Sampson613,054.50————————————————83. Scotland201,341.4581,376.31131.50————————84. Stanly12622.4841,198.831134.50160.00————85. Stokes312,751.02255,820.282414.251182.18————86. Surry291,840.241145.751411.7016.001155.0087. Swain29766.211269.61175.902360.00————88. Transylvania10582.624741.051135.00————112.5089. Tyrrell552,795.88185,225.501105.003196.53————90. Union1269,244.16133,226.89191.75————6358.6591. Vance23811,869.98147.95————————1127.0092. Wake551,531.062987.33138.00————1118.0993. Warren12590.442788.902255.50158.13————94. Washington12816.69————1235.00————7270.1895. Watauga723,289.495878.362183.751119.93————96. Wayne23668.833475.56125.001112.5015.2097. Wilkes715,493.46277,222.302195.0091,040.00————98. Wilson161,225.96162.00161.50————————99. Yadkin4395.501179.561354.18165.00126.00100. Yancey5,890$399,622.49804$234,847.70121$ 23,037.66202$ 31,737.77111$ 15,304.24Total193$ 10,029.03————————————————Wilmington Asso. Char.57944,175.15————————————————Winston-Salem Assoc. Char.

† Does not include lump sum payments to hospitals nor cases aided thereby.

‡ Does not include Aid to the Blind.

 AVERAGE MONTHLY NUMBER OF CASES AIDED AND TOTAL ANNUAL OBLIGATIONS FOR ALL PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BY TYPE AND COUNTIES, JULY 1, 1939-JUNE 30, 1940 J. S. KIRK, Statistician

COUNTIESTotal Including DuplicationsOld Age AssistanceAid to Dependent ChildrenCasesObligations*CasesObligations*CasesChildrenObligations*1. Alamance700$ 105,073.09532$ 77,505.00126312$ 22,302.002. Alexander31530,458.2424022,647.00611257,258.003. Alleghany17418,149.9013013,122.0036834,378.004. Anson44451,007.0932934,759.007017511,953.005. Ashe33135,300.0027528,168.00551277,072.006. Avery25927,564.6519420,300.50481076,221.007. Beaufort43441,759.7729426,470.007916310,606.508. Bertie41047,921.4330233,006.007518212,496.009. Bladen32837,715.4922725,342.50661609,677.0010. Brunswick24124,048.0018616,264.00421196,837.0011. Buncombe1,663277,420.83913152,513.5025668160,603.0012. Burke45761,313.4231537,837.006718014,489.0013. Cabarrus61684,542.2141556,087.508823822,060.0014. Caldwell50055,346.1732632,802.008824215,145.0015. Camden10311,724.50788,646.0019372,793.0016. Carteret29829,860.1622120,758.00401046,015.0017. Caswell29432,836.3023522,994.54481548,473.5018. Catawba66681,409.2344953,630.509525317,827.0019. Chatham28330,561.8820721,101.00481218,315.5020. Cherokee28236,965.3521224,924.40501419,297.0021. Chowan14816,778.5711110,693.0021413,624.0022. Clay11313,572.009510,520.0018553,052.0023. Cleveland69886,766.6851159,907.0012231121,269.0024. Columbus54255,596.5039838,004.0012530516,841.0025. Craven63370,343.3244643,393.009823618,592.0026. Cumberland706101,486.9047063,121.5011732222,001.1027. Currituck15919,141.4810110,785.0030774,716.0028. Dare18921,197.7914315,962.0034574,357.0029. Davidson70598,918.3051564,562.0013032725,432.0030. Davie31432,613.5121622,184.00531147,782.0031. Duplin38751,050.5030235,593.007417815,009.0032. Durham1,021171,837.68617102,550.0017745141,727.0033. Edgecombe80396,354.4859364,853.0013733923,278.0034. Forsyth1,441279,325.841,032169,225.0022865573,972.5035. Franklin40143,748.2930130,443.00601629,440.0036. Gaston1,474203,131.391,095127,468.0022356752,405.5037. Gates17219,577.8013013,497.5029604,966.5038. Graham15317,927.0013214,821.0021553,106.0039. Granville38947,346.8430032,896.756114810,395.5040. Greene25732,520.6817318,357.50511168,794.5041. Guilford1,800352,382.451,120194,793.5030478689,010.0042. Halifax72391,841.0446349,194.5010923322,005.5043. Harnett57765,385.6245546,271.009626315,400.0044. Haywood61480,626.5044357,987.609226316,055.4045. Henderson43051,110.4131636,111.009024314,208.0046. Hertford25228,513.5719719,816.0038847,566.5047. Hoke25528,056.0619220,281.92441055,611.8048. Hyde13714,478.5011110,870.0021452,909.5049. Iredell73193,203.8749962,610.0011430621,133.4050. Jackson33340,119.5027428,820.505919611,299.00