WORKS

10* z

Research Monographs

of the Division of Social Research

Works Progress Administration

|. Six Rural Problem Areas, Relief—Resources—Rehabilitation

II. Comparative Study of Rural Relief and Non-Relief

Households

III. The Transient Unemployed

IV. Urban Workers on Relief

V. Landlord and Tenant on the Cotton Plantation

VI. Chronology of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, May 12, 1933, to December 31, 1935

VII. The Migratory-Casual Worker

VIII. Farmers on Relief and Rehabilitation

IX. Part-Time Farming in the Southeast

X. Trends in Relief Expenditures, 1910-1935
0

VM

WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION

Harry L. Hopkins, Administrator

Corrington Gill, Assistant Administrator DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH

Howard B. Myers, Director

TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES

1910-1935

By

ANNE E. GEDDES

•

RESEARCH MONOGRAPH X

1937

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON

OVu ±05 i. &OK SI

Letter of Transmittal

Works Progress Administration,

Washington, D. C, July 15, 1987.

Sir: I have the honor to submit herewith a report entitled. Trends in

Relief Expenditures, 1910-1935. The object of this report is to give

perspective to recent relief developments by relating them to long-time

trends.

In the study are collected, for the first time, scattered and fragmentary data on outdoor relief expenditures prior to the recent depression.

Taken singly, these relief series for individual States, cities, and groups

of cities are too limited in coverage to warrant any generalizations

concerning long-time relief trends in the United States. Taken to- gether, they offer convincing evidence of a strong underlying upward

trend in expenditures for at least two decades before the precipitous

rise beginning in 1930. They show also a progressive tendency toward

increased specialization in the forms of aid and relatively greater

dependence on public than on private resources long before the period

of Federal participation in emergency unemployment relief measures. This report was prepared by Anne E. Geddes under the direction of

Howard B. Myers, Director of the Division of Social Research, Works

Progress Administration. Enid Baird and Franklin Aaronson co- operated in the preparation of the report. The Division of Research,

Statistics, and Records, in addition to making available the basic- statistical data for the FERA, the CWA, and the Works Program,

prepared various special tabulations of the data for use in Part II of the report.

Acknowledgment is made to Ralph G. Hurlin of the Russell Sage

Foundation and to Paul Webbink of the Social Science Research

Council, who have rendered invaluable advisory and critical assistance.

Respectfully submitted.

CORRINGTON GlLL,

Assistant Administrator.

Hon. Harry L. Hopkins,

Works Progress Administrator.

Ill

Contents

Page

Introduction - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- XI Summary ---- - XIII PART I Outdoor Relief, 1910-1935 - 1 Available data on long-time relief trends - 1 Legislative trends affecting relief expenditures - - - - 2

Sources of statistical data --- - 5

Trends in relief expenditures in selected areas, 1910-1935 - 6

Governmental-cost payments for outdoor relief in 16 cities,

1911-1931 ------ - - - - 6

Trends in relief expenditures in 36 large cities, 1916-1925 - 12

Rise in relief costs in 16 cities between 1924 and 1929 - - 15

Outdoor relief expenditures in New Haven, 1910-1925 - - 16

Outdoor relief expenditures in New York City, 1910-1934 - 18

Expenditures for public outdoor relief in New York State,

1910-1934 21

Expenditures for public outdoor poor relief in Indiana,

1910-1931 - - _ - . 23

Tbe rise in relief expenditures since 1929 25

Expansion in urban relief between 1929 and 1931 - - - 25

Relief expenditures in 120 urban areas, 1929-1935 - - - 29

General rise in urban relief - - 31

Relative proportions of general public and private relief - 33

Rise in special allowances - -- -- 35

Relative proportions of work and direct relief- - - - 37

Relief expenditures in 385 rural-town areas, 1932-1935 - - 40

Relief expenditures in rural and urban United States, 1932-

1935 42

Comparison of trends of public outdoor relief in all selected areas- - - t-- - -- -- - 45

PART II

Public Outdoor Relief and Wage Assistance, 1933-1935 - - - 51

Measurement of the combined relief and wage assistance

burden - -- -- -- 51

Comparability of case-load data - - - 54

Limitations of expenditure series - -- -- -- -- 59

V
VI • CONTENTS

Page

Component parts of the public assistance burden ----- GO

Emergency relief - -- - - 62

Direct relief ----------- 67

Work relief - - 67

Special program relief - -- -- -- -- - G8

Wage assistance - -- -- -- -- 70

Civilian Conservation Corps - 72

Civil Works Administration - -- -- -- -- -- - 72

Works Program -- 73

Categorical relief --------- 74

The combined trend of public assistance - _ - - 75

Effects of administrative shifts in relief and assistance

programs - 70

Interdependence of relief and wage assistance trends - - 70

Variability in underlying State trends - - - - 78

Extension of the proposed integrated series beyond 1935 - - 80

Appendix A—Supplementary tables - -- -- -- -- -- - 91

Appendix B—Distribution of 385 sample counties and townships

represented in the rural-town relief series - - - - 103

Appendix C—Federal Government units participating in the Works

Program, December 31, 1935 -

- 105

Appendix D—Methodological note on the estimates of expenditures

for categorical relief in the United States, 1933-

1935 - 107

Index - Ill

FIGURES

Figure

1. Trends of population and of governmental-cost payments for operation and maintenance of outdoor relief departments

and of all general departments, 16 cities, 1911-1931 - - 11

2. Relief expenditures, cost of living, and population, 1916-

1925 (selected agencies in 36 cities) - -- -- -- -- 13

3. Relief expenditures of public and private organizations,

1916-1925 (selected agencies in 36 cities) - -- -- -- 14

4. Outdoor relief expenditures in New Haven, 1910-1925 - - 17

5. Expenditures for outdoor relief from public and private re- sources in New York City, 1910-1929 - - 19

6. Expenditures for public outdoor relief, New York State,

1910-1934 - - 22

7. Expenditures for public outdoor poor relief in Indiana,

1910-1931 24

8. Trend of relief expenditures from public and private funds

in 120 urban areas, 1929-1935 ----------- 30
CONTENTS • VII

Figure Page

9. Percent distribution of relief expenditures from public

and private funds in 120 urban areas, 1929-1935 - - - 32

10. Expenditures for general public relief and for private relief in 120 urban areas, expressed as relative numbers, 1929-

1935 34

11. Expenditures for 3 categories of relief in 120 urban areas, 1929-1935 36

12. Expenditures from public and private funds for direct

relief and for work relief in 120 urban areas, 1929-1935 - 39

13. Trends of expenditures for outdoor relief in rural-town

areas, urban areas, and total United States, January

1932-December 1935 4.3 14. Trends of expenditures for public outdoor relief in selected

areas, 1910-1935 - - 40

15. Percent distribution of total expenditures for public

relief and wage assistance in the United States, 1933-

1935 - - 61

16. Obligations incurred for emergency relief extended to cases, FERA, January 1933-December 1935 -------- 06

17. Expenditures for wage assistance in the United States,

April 1933-December 1935 - - - - 71

18. Trend of monthly expenditures for public relief and wage

assistance in the United States, January 1933-December

1935 75

19. Percent distribution of monthly expenditures for public

relief and wage assistance in the United States, January

1933-December 1935 - 77

20. Trends of relief cases and of obligations incurred for relief extended to cases, general relief program, as reported to the FERA, July 1933-December 1935 81

21. Obligations incurred per inhabitant for relief extended to

cases, by States, general relief program, FERA, halfyearly intervals, July 1933-July 1935 - - 87

22. Percent of population receiving relief, by States, general

relief program, FERA, half-yearly intervals, July 1933-

July 1935 88

23. Average monthly relief benefit per family case, by States,

general relief program, FERA, half-yearly intervals,

July 1933-July 1935 - 8!) 24. Distribution of 385 sample counties and townships repre- sented in the rural-town relief series - 103

Trends in Relief Expenditures

1910-1935

IX

INTRODUCTION

During THE recent depression, which has been of greater intensity

and longer duration than any previous depression in the history of

the United States, the relief of unemployment and distress has been

a major national problem. The tremendous increase in the extent

of need and the assumption by the Federal Government of a substantial share of the responsibility for meeting the need have focused

attention on the administration of relief during the depression years

and have made the general public aware of the issues involved.

Although much has been written concerning the scope and nature

of the contemporary relief problem, little is known of the extent of

the burden in the United States in the decades preceding the depression of the 1930's. The purpose of this study is to give as much

perspective as possible to recent developments by viewing them in

relation to long-time trends. The report is restricted to aid extended

to families and individuals outside of institutions and does not include

foster-home care or welfare services. The relief burden has been

measured, in so far as possible, in terms of the amount of aid distributed

to relief cases rather than in terms of the cost of relief plus its administration.

The term relief is a generic one covering many types and forms of

aid. Since this report has been compiled from secondary sources, it has not been feasible to standardize terminology. Different terms

designating the same or similar forms of relief have been used in the

original sources and have been retained in the present discussion.

Outdoor relief is an inclusive term in general use, referring to all types of relief extended to families and individuals outside of institutions. Wage assistance is a term devised especially for this report

to refer to assistance of a modified relief character, extended in the

form of wages to persons employed on the work programs operated

during 1933, 1934, and 1935 by the Civil Works Administration, the

Civilian Conservation Corps, the Works Progress Administration,

and other agencies participating in the Works Program. An effort has been made to explain other terms as they arise and to make clear

the distinctions between them.

This report is divided into two parts. Part I deals with the trend

of public and private expenditures for outdoor relief in the quarter

of a century from 1910 through 1935, while Part II develops trends

XI
XII • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

for public assistance during the last 3 years of that period and incorporates both outdoor relief and wage assistance. The year 1910 was selected as a starting date for Part I because it is the earliest

year for which any substantial body of relief data is available. The

relief scries in Part II have been extended only through 1935, the last

full calendar year for which data were available at the time the

report was prepared.

The task of the study has been to assemble and analyze existing

relief scries which would shed light on relief trends during the depression, and particularly during the period of Federal participation in financing and administering relief programs. No original collection

of data was undertaken. The analysis presented is original, except in a few instances where findings have been abstracted or adapted from

published sources with the permission of the authors and publishers.

Acknowledgments and source references have been given in the text

for such secondary material.

The analysis in Part I is purposely much fuller than that in Part II, since the various Federal agencies administering relief and assistance

programs in recent years have individually published much statistical data concerning their operations.

Statistical data concerning the operations of the Federal Emergency

Relief Administration; the Civil Works Administration, including the

Civil Works Service ; and the Works Program, exclusive of the Civilian

Conservation Corps, were supplied by the Division of Research, Statistics, and Records of the Works Progress Administration. Data for the Civilian Conservation Corps were obtained from the Office of the

Emergency Conservation Work and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Data for the Resettlement Administration were obtained directly

from that agency. The major contribution of Part II is to bring these

data together in a readily accessible form and to combine them into an integrated relief and wage assistance series which will give a more

complete measure of the total burden of public assistance, exclusive of

institutional relief, than has hitherto been supplied.

Emphasis has been placed throughout the report on the measure- ment of expenditures for relief and wage assistance during the period

covered. No attempt has been made to evaluate the effectiveness of

the various relief measures in meeting need, to describe the policies or operations of the several agencies administering public assistance, or

to interpret expenditure trends in terms of underlying economic or

social conditions.
SUMMARY

PART I Available DATA on long-time relief trends have been assembled

and analyzed in Part I of this report to supply a factual background of

relief experience in the United States prior to the recent depression

and the participation of the Federal Government in emergency relief activities. Information concerning past relief trends is limited for

the most part to scattered data on relief expenditures in selected areas since 1910. The relief series presented cover various types of

relief in different areas; they are exclusive of institutional relief and,

as far as possible, of expenditures for administrative purposes.

The expenditure data for different areas show marked similarity in

trend. Considered in conjunction with trends in relief legislation

since 1910, they present a consistent picture of gradually increasing

relief burdens prior to the precipitous upward movement in 1930. The

assembled pieces of evidence are believed to support a number of

conclusions concerning the trend of relief expenditures in the United

States in the 26 years from 1910 through 1935. Although these

generalizations have considerable historical significance, their greatest

value lies in their bearing upon future developments. The following

basic tendencies may be noted.

1. The forms of public relief have tended to become more and more

differentiated through the enactment of special legislation.

2. There has been a progressive tendency to widen the base of

governmental responsibility for relief beyond the local units, first through State and then through Federal participation.

3. At least since 1910 there has been a strong underlying upward

trend in relief expenditures. The very great increase in expenditures

in the depression years represents a sharp acceleration of a tendency

manifest throughout the preceding two decades.

4. The increase in both public and private relief expenditures has

been far greater than the growth in population.

5. The rate of increase of public relief expenditures, at least in

large urban areas, has greatly exceeded that of all governmental

expenditures combined.

6. While expenditures for general public relief have increased

steadily, the most rapid expansion in public relief prior to the depression occurred in aid to dependent children.

XIII
XIV • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

7. There is little evidence that the introduction of aid to special

classes, such as the aged, the blind, and dependent children, has resulted

in the past in reduction of the general relief burden. Although there

has been some shifting of cases from general relief rolls to the rolls of

agencies providing statutory relief, to a considerable extent the special

types of assistance have tapped new reservoirs of need. The influx of new cases to the general relief rolls, combined with rising standards of

care, has largely offset such absorption as has occurred.

8. Following the 1921-1922 depression, relief expenditures did not

return to the predepression level. There was a temporary recession

from the depression peak but relief expenditures continued to mount

in subsequent years.

9. There have been wide regional and local variations in the relative

proportions of public and private relief, but public agencies bore an

important share of the burden long before the onset of the recent

depression. Since the assumption of a share of the responsibility for

relief by the Federal Government in 1932 the proportion of the burden

borne by private agencies has been very slight. 10. Work relief and work projects in the recent depression have

assumed a new and increasing importance as a means of assisting

the destitute unemployed.

1 1 . The expansion in expenditures for outdoor relief has, since 1932,

been relatively greater in rural and town areas than in urban areas. PART II The evidence presented in Part I on outdoor relief expenditures in

selected areas is supplemented hi Part II by a more comprehensive

record of public assistance expenditures in the United States as a whole

in the years 1933, 1934, and 1935. During this period the Federal

Government was participating in a variety of programs for the relief of unemployment and distress. The series wliich are presented in Part I include public expenditures

for general (emergency) relief and for categorical relief—i. e., for aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children—but expenditures for wage assistance are not included.

In order to give a more complete measure of the total public assist- ance burden in this period an integrated relief series has been constructed which includes the three major classes of outdoor public aid: emergency relief, categorical relief, and wage assistance.

In 1933, 1934, and 1935 wage assistance constituted a very important part of the total public assistance structure. Expenditures for

all forms of relief and wage assistance in this period totaled approximately $5,375,000,000. Of this amount more than 65 percent was

for emergency relief, 30 percent was for wage assistance, and less than

5 percent was for categorical relief.
SUMMARY • XV

During the 3-year period there were frequent changes in Federal

programs inaugurated for the relief of unemployment and distress,

involving important shifts in emphasis from emergency relief to wage

assistance and vice versa. There was also a very close interplay

between the case loads of the emergency relief and the wage assistance

programs. Hence, changes in one form of aid can be interpreted only

in the light of changes in the other.

The following data are indicative of the effect on the public assist- ance structure of changes in program development. In January 1933

emergency relief constituted 91 percent of the total expenditures for outdoor public assistance, and wage assistance had not yet been

developed as a means of meeting the needs of the unemployed. In

January 1934 emergency relief had shrunk to 17 percent of the total

while wage assistance constituted 81 percent. Emergency relief again

accounted for the major share of expenditures in January 1935, with

wage assistance only 10 percent of the total. Throughout the 3-year period expenditures for categorical relief were fairly stable and constituted a very small proportion of the total

burden.

The expenditure series in Part I and in Part II display wide differ- ences in trend over the 36 months from January 1933 through December 1935. The peak of expenditures for emergency and categorical

relief occurred in January 1935, while the peak of expenditures for

these two forms of relief and wage assistance combined was reached a year earlier, in January 1934. In this month the Civil Works program was at its height and the emergency relief program was at its lowest

ebb.

Any expenditure series necessarily supplies an imperfect measure

of need. During the Federal period variations in the standards of care of the different emergency programs were very marked. Fluctuations in total expenditures, therefore, cannot be linked to fluctuations in the extent of need.

An integrated case series registering the total number of families

and individuals receiving emergency relief, categorical relief, and

wage assistance would serve as a far more sensitive and reliable index

of the extent of need than an expenditure series. Unfortunately,

reported data cannot be added directly to obtain an unduplicated case

series for the entire 3-year period, although two estimated series

representing households and individuals aided have recently been

constructed.

The integrated expenditure series which has been developed for

the United States is based on an aggregate of data for the 48 States,

which had widely varied public assistance structures. The differences

in State relief patterns suggest the need for developing integrated

series for the separate States to supplement the national series which

is presented here.

Part I

Outdoor Relief, 1910-1935

XVII

21G12°—37 2

Part I

OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935

EMERGENCY RELIEF operations since midsummer of 1932, when the

Federal Government first made funds available for relief, can be

viewed in proper perspective only against a background of previous

relief experience in the United States. Unfortunately, there are no

Nation-wide statistics of the incidence, cost, and trend of relief operations before the period of Federal participation in relief. AVAILABLE DATA ON LONG-TIME RELIEF TRENDS

Information available on long-time relief trends is limited principally to scattered data on relief expenditures covering different areas and different types of relief and extending over varying periods of

time. Continuous data on case loads are entirely too fragmentary in

coverage to establish past relief trends in terms of the number of cases receiving assistance. Individual public and private agencies have

maintained records of case loads over long periods of time, and some

significant case series have been developed, but combined case-load

figures covering all agencies in given areas are conspicuously lacking. 1 Although the early statistics on relief expenditures that have been

assembled in this report are both crude and fragmentary and relate

for the most part to large urban areas, when pieced together against a background of legislative trends, they tell a consistent story of relief costs in the past and help to ihuniinate the current relief situation. In

brief, the story is one of continued expansion in relief expenditures for at least two decades before the beginning of Federal emergency relief activities for the unemployed. More liberal relief practices and new

legislative provisions for public relief have contributed to the upward

trend, but there is also evidence that the level of need has risen progressively higher with the passage of time. Relief expenditures have

registered new peaks in business depressions and have not receded to

their old levels with business recovery. Instead, after each depression

they have again moved upward from a new and higher base.

1 The most significant case series is that of the Department of Statistics of the

Russell Sage Foundation covering the operations of selected family case-work

agencies. This series was initiated in 1926.

1
2 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

The unprecedented scope of the recent depression and the participation of the Federal Government in unemployment relief have

greatly accelerated the expansion in relief expenditures during recent

years, but the effect upon relief trends has been primarily one of rate

of change rather than of direction. The changes in types of relief and

in distribution of the relief burden that have accompanied this rapid

rise in relief expenditures have been more extensive in scope, but are not radically different in character from changes that have taken

place over longer periods of time in the past.

Legislative Trends Affecting Relief Expenditures

Since relief trends are much affected by prevailing statutory provisions for public relief, it seems desirable to examine legislative

trends in the States since 1910 to see how they have contributed to changes in the volume of relief and to tlirow some light on the origin

and significance of the different types and forms of relief included in

the composite relief series presented in later sections of the report.

Prior to the twentieth century, public outdoor relief in the United

States was extended almost exclusively under the provisions of local poor laws, modeled for the most part after the English poor laws of

Queen Elizabeth's time.2 Many of these laws date from early Colonial

days and have undergone only minor change during the intervening

years. In some States the laws have been modernized and embody

more progressive concepts of relief administration.

Traditionally a local responsibility, poor relief usually has been

financed from local property taxes and dispensed by local overseers

of the poor with little or no State supervision or control. Applicants

for relief were frequently required to take a pauper's oath and to waive various political and civil rights as a prerequisite to receiving

aid. The social stigma attached to poor relief has led gradually to the introduction of new statutory forms of relief for special classes who are in need obviously through no fault of their own or are deemed

to have a special claim on society for consideration and care. Relief

extended under these statutes to persons not in institutions has com- monly been termed "categorical relief" or "aid to special classes," 3

2 See Lowe, Robert C. and Associates, Digest of Poor Relief Laws of the Several

States and Territories as of May 1, 1936, Division of Social Research, Works

Progress Administration, 1936.

3 Usage differs widely as to the designation of the statutory forms of assistance. Thus, relief for the needy aged is variously known as "aid to the aged," or "old- age assistance"; relief for dependent children in their homes as "aid to dependent

children," "child welfare allowances," "aid to widowed mothers," or "mothers'

aid"; and blind relief as "aid to the blind" or "blind assistance." LTsage also

differs regarding the inclusion of veteran relief as a form of categorical relief. In this report, the term "categorical" is confined to three special classes of statu- tory relief: aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children. It

is, therefore, synonymous with the term "special allowances" as used in the Urban Relief Series.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 3

to distinguish it from general outdoor relief given to paupers in

accordance with the local poor laws.4 Needy soldiers and sailors were among the first to benefit from

special legislation. By 1910 all but six States had made statutory

provision for relief of Civil War veterans. Many States had enacted

similar laws providing relief to veterans of the Mexican, Indian, and

Spanish-American Wars and the Boxer Rebellion. Since 1918 relief for World War veterans has been provided by statute in 30 States.5 Legislation for aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent

children dates largely after 1910. The expansion of relief activities

in the United States through the enactment of State laws providing

assistance for these three special classes 6 is shown in appendix table

1, which gives the year of original enactment of enabling legislation for each of these forms of relief. Table 1 indicates by 5-year periods

the spread of legislation for public assistance in their homes to the

aged, to the blind, and to dependent children.

Table 1. —Number of States 1 Enacting First Legislation for Aid to the Aged, Aid to the

Blind, and Aid to Dependent Children, in Specified Periods

Year of original enactment

Type of assistance

Aid to the Aid to the

blind

Aid to dependent

children

All years...

Before 1910 1910 through 1914 1915 through 1919 1920 through 1924 1925 through 1929 1930 through 1934

1935...

39 33 46

20

193

3

1

1 Includes the District of Columbia.

Illinois, Ohio, and Wisconsin enacted laws providing aid to the

needy blind prior to 1910 but the further spread of such legislation was distributed over a wide span of years. A total of 33 States provided such aid by the close of 1935.

Aid for dependent children appeared somewhat later than blind

relief, the first law being passed in Illinois in 1911, but this form of

assistance spread more rapidly. Twenty States enacted laws of this

type during the 5 years from 1910 through 1914, and nineteen States

from 1915 through 1919. Only 7 of the 46 States 7 providing such aid

in December 1935 introduced this form of legislation after 1919.

4 It should be noted that in many localities individuals who might be eligible for some form of categorical relief, if there were legal provisions for it, still receive

relief under the regular poor laws.

6 Data on veteran relief legislation compiled by Robert C. Lowe, Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration.

8 For sources of data, see footnotes, appendix table 1.

7 Including the District of Columbia.
4 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

The first laws authorizing aid to the aged were enacted in Montana

and Nevada in 1923, but the period of greatest development in this

type of legislation has been since 1930. Eight States enacted oldage legislation in the 5 years from 1925 through 1929, and nineteen

States from 1930 through 1934. Under the stimulus of the Social

Security Act 10 additional States passed laws during 1935, bringing

the total number of States which had enacted old-age relief laws to 39. The above tabulation gives an accurate picture of the spread of

enabling legislation for categorical relief since 1910, but it cannot show

important changes that have occurred in the application and coverage

of the laws. In many instances, the date of enactment of a law does

not coincide with the first year of operation. Furthermore, many of

the State laws are, or were, optional in character and have been inoperative in many of the county units for part or all of the period since

their enactment. Revisions in the laws, and qualitative changes in

their administration and application, including eligibility requirements and the amount of assistance rendered, could be ascertained

only by a survey of individual counties in the States with enabling

legislation. The requirements of the Social Security Act that all counties must participate in extending relief to a particular category

before the State can benefit from Federal grants-in-aid for that type

of relief have induced many States to make their laws mandatory upon

the county units and will contribute to the continued growth of ex- penditures for these forms of relief. Simultaneously with the differentiation in the types of relief has

occurred a gradual widening in the base of financial and administrative responsibility for relief activities. 8 This shift to larger governmental units has come about partly through a desire for more efficient administration and partly through the necessity of making available

for relief purposes a greater variety of revenue resources than could be

tapped by the local governments. Poor relief has, with few exceptions,

remained a function of the local units. Veteran relief, on the other

hand, was initiated and has been supported predominantly by the

States. The newer forms of public assistance, including aid to the

aged, to the blind, and to dependent children, have commonly been

administered by county governments, with the State assuming partial or complete fiscal responsibility as well as a degree of supervisory

control.

The extension, first to the States and then to the Federal Government, of part of the financial and administrative responsibility for

unemployment relief was a logical step in this evolutionary process. Special legislation financing emergency unemployment relief was

enacted in 14 States during 1931, or before the period of Federal

8 See Lowe, Robert C. and Holcombe, John L., Legislative Trends in State and

Local Responsibility for Public Assistance, Division of Social Research, Works

Progress Administration, 1936.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 5

participation. Four States made initial appropriations for unemployment relief in 1 932. By the end of 1935, all but five States, Georgia,

North Carolina, South Carolina, Vermont, and Virginia, had accepted some responsibility for providing State funds for unemployment

relief.9 The practical effect of State and Federal participation in emergency

relief activities was to bring almost to a halt in most localities the

extension of outdoor poor relief by municipal and township units.

The poor laws remained in effect but were virtually inoperative. With

the withdrawal of the Federal Government from the support of

direct relief at the end of 1935, extension of relief in many of the States

reverted to the traditional poor laws, but a few States have merged

unemployment relief activities with poor relief under permanent

State Welfare Departments. It appears highly probable that other

States will follow this example.

Sources of Statistical Data For a long-time view of the public relief burden the most inclusive

relief data are those on governmental-cost payments collected annually by the United States Bureau of the Census and published in

Financial Statistics of Cities. 10 Additional data on relief expenditures over extended periods of years for public agencies and for public and

private agencies combined are available for individual States, notably

New York and Indiana, for individual cities, and for groups of cities. 11 A special inquiry of the United States Bureau of the Census covering

relief expenditures in 308 cities during the first quarters of 1929 and

of 1931 has supplied 2 bench marks against which to measure the

rise in relief expenditures during the recent depression. 12 The most

comprehensive data on relief costs for the early depression years are supplied by the Urban Relief Series of the U. S. Children's Bureau.13 This series is based on monthly data from 120 large urban areas and

extends back to January 1929. A relief series for rural and town areas

9 See appendix table 1 for dates of first legislation financing unemployment

relief in individual States. For a complete record of such laws, see Lowe, Robert

C, Digest of State Legislation for the Financing of Emergency Relief, January 1, 1981-June SO, 1935, Municipal Finance Section, Federal Emergency Relief Administration, and Lowe, Robert C. and Staff, Supplement for Period July 1, 1935-February 29, 1936, Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration.

10 U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, annual reports, Financial Statistics of Cities Having a Population of Over 100,000, 1911-1931.

11 Sources for these data are given in footnote references at the beginning of the

sections in which they are discussed.

12 U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, special report, Relief Expenditures by Governmental and Private Organizations, 1929 and 1931, 1932.

13 Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-35, Publication No. 237, U. S. Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, 1937. The Urban Relief Series was transferred to the Social Security

Board as of July 1936.
6 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

was developed during 193G by the Division of Social Research of the

Works Progress Administration to complement the existing Urban

Relief Series. Monthly data from these two scries have recently been

utilized by the Division of Social Research to establish the combined

urban-rural trend of total relief expenditures in the United States

since January 1932. 14 The statistical data from these several sources are presented in

succeeding sections of Part I to indicate the basis of generalizations

that have been made concerning relief trends from 1910 through 1935.

Long-time trends are treated first, followed by a more detailed analysis

of changes since 1929.

TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES IN SELECTED AREAS, 1910-1935

Governmental-Cost Payments for Outdoor Relief in 16 Cities, 1911-1931

An early relief scries disclosing the upward trend of relief costs in 10 largo cities from 1911 through 1931, the two decades preceding the

period of Federal participation, has been developed for this study from

data on governmental-cost payments for relief, collected by the Bureau

of the Census and published in Financial Statistics of Cities. Governmental-cost payments include not only payments made to relief clients,

but also the costs incident to the operation and maintenance of relief services. 15 Payments for "outdoor care of poor," "aid to soldiers

and sailors," and "aid to mothers," separately recorded by the Bureau

of the Census, have been combined into a single series for outdoor

relief. Aid to the aged and aid to the blind are not separately tabu14 See Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration, Current

Statistics of Relief in Rural and Town Areas, Vol. I, Nos. 1-10, 1936. Data for the combined Rural-LT rban Series supplied in unpublished form by T. J. Woofter, Jr., Coordinator of Rural Research, Division cf Social Research, Works Progress

Administration. For methodology of combined scries, see Woofter, T. J., Jr.; Aaronson, Franklin; and Mangus, A. R.: Relief in Urban and Rural-Town Areas, 1932-1936, Research Bulletin, Series III, No. 3 (in preparation), Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration, 1937.

15 The figures for governmental-cost payments include a share of county

payments for relief as well as city payments. In 8 of the 16 cities for which data

are given—namely, New York, Philadelphia, St. Louis, Baltimore, Boston, San

Francisco, Washington, and New Orleans—county and city government units have been merged so that the figures collected automatically include both city

and county payments. To insure comparability for the eight remaining cities, the Bureau of the Census has allotted to each city its share of county expenditures

for the specified functions, prorating the county payments to the city in the ratio of assessed valuations of the city to assessed valuations of the entire county.

A share of the county-cost payments has been allocated by the Bureau of the Census only to ciites in Groups I and II in which the city and county governments

are not merged. The eight cities included here are the only ones with separate

city and county governments which have been continuously in Group I or II since 1911. Thus, they are the only large cities for which comparable data are available for the full period.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 7

lated by the Bureau of the Census, but are included with general poor

relief in the figures for "outdoor care of poor." 16 The 16 cities included in the series are widely distributed geographically and had a combined popidation according to the 1930 Census

of 21,500,000, representing 17.5 percent of the total population and

31 percent of the urban population in the United States. Considerable significance can, therefore, be attached to the trend of relief costs for the group. The cities, listed in the order of size, are: New York Cleveland Pittsburgh Washington, D. C. Chicago St. Louis San Francisco New Orleans

Philadelphia Baltimore Milwaukee Cincinnati

Detroit Boston Buffalo Newark

Total governmental-cost payments for outdoor relief for the years

from 1911 through 1931 supply evidence of a continuing rise in the

public relief burden in these cities over the entire period, with the

upward movement greatly accelerated after 1929." Aggregate payments in the 16 cities amounted in 1911 to $1,559,000, in 1929 to $18,989,000, and in 1931 to $64,142,000; payments per inhabitant in

these 3 years were $0.10, $0.90, and $2.94, respectively. Data for

individual cities, given in table 2, show that every city except Washington, D. C, experienced an extensive rise in per capita relief costs over the 21-year period. The increase in Washington was comparatively slight. Governmental-cost payments for relief per inhabitant

varied sharply in the different cities. A breakdown of payments by class of relief indicates that expansion

in "aid to mothers" 18 shares with "outdoor care of poor" the major

responsibility for the accelerated growth of relief costs over the period.

This rise in expenditures for aid to mothers, attributable to new legislative provisions, was particularly important prior to 1929. It is significant that despite the increase in amounts expended for this

special category, there was no accompanying decline in expenditures

for "outdoor care of poor," either in total amount or per inhabitant.

Total governmental-cost payments for outdoor relief and payments

per inhabitant for "aid to mothers," "aid to soldiers and sailors,"

16 In Financial Statistics of Cities, "Outdoor Care of Poor" is a subdivision of Group VI, "Charities, Hospitals, and Corrections"; "Aid to Soldiers and Sailors" and "Aid to Mothers" are subdivisions of Group IX, "Miscellaneous Cost Payments." Aid to soldiers and sailors includes only relief and burial for needy

veterans and docs not include pensions or bonus payments; aid to mothers covers

assistance in the home for the care of dependent children. It does not include such care in institutions.

17 Data are for fiscal years ending during the calendar year. The annual

collection of Financial Statistics of Cities was suspended by the Bureau of the Census for 2 years, 1914 and 1920; the collection was incomplete in 1921. For

other years for which data are missing, the classifications were not uniform.

18 Comparable to "aid to dependent children." See footnote 3, p. 2.
8 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

pjmmVmm

5S888

«pf m

33813

pf 858S2ex

I

mis

I

pf

SVf pi 2 = §23

p.-

3HSS!

«5-

of pf

fSSSR S22SS S§S2| S

SICS9 "Sgss ess^s

|gS25 -2|S2 gg8*£3

I

2ji

111

8

m --oipi

.4 * •«! *

p) * *«f '

2ssgt;

- • X

828?;??

ssssa

:p5gSS

S2S3S

2

1 1 Eh |hli
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 9

• ui • • <N<N • "l4rH

• •« • rtrt • •

•

• •« • •

•

• •

"rt • • •

•

assess ssgsss

"ei

• -i

'

* oooS 22ggg?2

" g^Sg 22gg22
10 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

and "outdoor care of poor" 19 in the 16 cities combined are shown in table 3. Aggregate governmental-cost payments for all types of outdoor

relief combined are compared in the accompanying diagram with payments for the maintenance and operation of all general governmental

departments, and with growth in population. Although it is possible

to establish trends over the period, there are certain definite breaks in the curves in years for which data are not available.20 It is particularly

Table 3.—Aggregate Governmental-Cost Payments for Outdoor Relief in 16 Cities, by

Class of Relief, 191 1-1931 1

[Includes operation and maintenance costs]

Year Total Outdoor

care of poor

Aid to mothers Aid to

soldiers and sailors

Amount in thousands

1911 $1,559

1,700

3, 488

3, 980

6, 183 11,640

12,818

14,709

14,814

17,059 20,014

18, 989

28,004

64, 142

$1,042

1, 177 1,801 1.991

2, 139 3,205

3,699

4, 671 5,415

6,534

7,364

6, 733 13,553 42,998

$14

53

1,054 1,258 3,317 7,450

7,986

8, 825 8,261 9,288

11,201 10,543 11,430

15, 051

$503 470

633

731 727

985

1,133

1,213 1,138

1,237

1, 449

1, 713

3, 021 6,093

1912

1917 1918

1919

1923 1924

1925

1927

1928 1929 1930

1931

Amount per inhabitant 1

1911 $0. 10 $0.07 $0.03

1912 . 11 .08 • .03

1917 .21 . 11 $0.06 .04 1918 .23 .12 .07 .04 1919 .35 .12 .19 .04

1923 .62 .17 .40 .05 1924... .67 .19 .42 .06

1925 .75 .24 .45 .06

1926 .75 .27 .42 .06

1927.- .85 .33 .46 .06

1928 .96 .35 .54 .07

1929.. .90 .32 .50 .08

1930 - 1.30 .63 .53 . 14 1931 _ - 2.94 1. 97 .69 .28

• Less than $0,005.

1 Data for fiscal years ending in calendar year. Data not available, or not available on a comparable

basis, for the years omitted from this table.

1 Based on annual population estimates of the Bureau of the Census.

Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, annual reports, Financial Statistic* of

Cities Having a Population of Oxer 100,000, 1911-1931.

19 Although "outdoor care of poor" includes some aid to the aged and to the

blind, cost payments for these two special classes are believed to be relatively small until 1930. Of the 16 cities, only 3, Baltimore, San Francisco, and

Milwaukee, gave aid to the aged prior to 1930. Aid to the blind is not an important category.

20 The curves in this diagram are plotted on a semilogarithmic or ratio scale, and are therefore comparable for rate of change, although not for volume. The

slope of the curves indicates the rate of change: the steeper the slope the greater the rate of change.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 11

unfortunate that gaps in the relief curve occur in the depression years

of 1914-1915 and of 1921-1922. However, data for public relief expenditures for these same and additional cities, compiled by Ralph

G. Hurlin and shown later in this report, probably reflect what happened in the 1921-1922 depression period.21

It is apparent from figure 1 and from table 4 that relief payments

mounted during the 21 -year period at a much more rapid rate than

5000 4000

3000

2000

1000

500 400

300

200

100

0

-

Comilrt/inrithmi/* MINIernlo

-

' -

1

1

1

11

1

1

1

c

d

>utd epcoor

rtrt

re Ten

lief

Is

/—

-

/

/

/

-/\\\ lep<

i i

c jrtmenfs

V

/f

4 :

A

F jlat ion

5000 4000

2000

1000

500 ~

m 400 %a

300

200

100

1911 1913 1915 1917 1919 1921 1923 1925 1927 1929 1931

FIG. I -TRENDS OF POPULATION AND OF GOVERNMENTAL- COST

PAYMENTS FOR OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF

OUTDOOR RELIEF DEPARTMENTS AND OF

ALL GENERAL DEPARTMENTS

16 Cities, 191 1 -1931

Note: Broken lines indicate data not available or

not avoilable in comparable form for these years. Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, annual reports, Financial Statistics of

Cities Having a Population of Over 100,000, 1911- 1931. af-1349, w p a.

21 See p. 12 ff.
12 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

payments for the support of all general departments of government 22 and increased out of all proportion to population growth.

Whereas population in the 16 cities increased 45 percent, governmental-cost payments for all general departments 23 increased 300

percent and for relief more than 4,000 percent.

Table 4.—Population and Governmental-Cost Payments for Operation and Maintenance

of All General Departments and of Outdoor Relief Departments in 16 Cities, 1911,

1929, and 1931

Percent increase Item 1911 1929 1931

1911 to

1929

1911 to

1931

Figures in thousands

15, 032 21, 120 21,821 41 46

$303, 166 $1,080, 191 $1,220,412 256 303

1,659 18,989 64, 142 1,118 4, 014 1,042 6,733 42,998 546 4,026

503 1,713 6,093 241 1,111 14 10,543 15,051 t t

Population

All Keneral departments Outdoor relief Outdoor care of poor 1 Aid to soldiers and sailors. Aid to mothers

tPercent increase not computed because of smallness of base. 'Includes aid to the aged and aid to the blind where given.

Trends in Relief Expenditures in 36 Large Cities, 1916-1925

The long-time view of public relief trends afforded by the data on

governmental-cost payments for the 21 years ending in 1931 cannot be

matched by similar comprehensive records of private relief or of total

public and private relief expenditures for the period. But further

knowledge of past trends is afforded by data for a group of selected

agencies in 36 large cities for the 10 years from 1916 through 1925.

The data, the results of a study made in 1926 by Ralph G. Hurlin,24 of the Russell Sage Foundation, serve the further valuable purpose of

telling what happened to urban relief expenditures during the depression of 1921-1922, when the census compilations are not available.

This study represents the first attempt to develop trends in the field of

outdoor relief. Reports on relief expenditures were obtained from

selected public and private agencies in 35 of the 68 cities in the United

States having populations in 1920 of more than 100, 000.25 With the

exception of Los Angeles, these included the 10 largest cities: New

York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, Cleveland, St. Louis, Boston,

Baltimore, and Pittsburgh.

22 Although not necessarily more rapidly than for some individual departments.

23 Operation and maintenance only; excludes capital outlays and interest.

2* Hurlin, Ralph G., "The Mounting Bill for Relief," The Survey, Vol. LVII, No. 4, November 15, 1926, pp. 207-209.

25 Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with a population of 75,000 was the other city

included in the study.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 13

The relief expenditures for 96 agencies show a distinct upward

trend over the 10-year period. The accompanying diagram, reproduced from Mr. Hurlin's article, compares this upward movement with

changes in the cost of living 26 and in population and shows the relief trend adjusted to reflect the influence of these two variables, which

necessarily affect relief costs. 27 The 71-percent rise shown by the

400 400

300 300

" 200

100

- 200 S

1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925

FIG. 2 - RELIEF EXPENDITURES, COST OF LIVING,

AND POPULATION

1916-1925

Source: Reproduced from Hurlin, Rolph 6., "The Mounting Bill for Relief," The Survey,

Vol. LVII, No.4, November 15, 1926, pp. 207-209. AF-1029, W.P.A.

26 Adjustment made on the basis of the Bureau of Labor Statistics cost of living index.

27 In order that the curves in fig. 2 might reflect a central tendency in relief expenditures rather than the tendencies of the few largest agencies, the amounts

expended by each agency were converted by Mr. Hurlin to relative numbers and

averaged for each year.
14 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

corrected curve is substantially less than the 215-percent rise of the

original. The war-time inflation in living costs accounts for the

early dip in the adjusted trend. Both curves register the impact of

the 1921-1922 depression. It is significant that relief expenditures

did not return to predepression levels after the upswing of the business

cycle, and that they resumed an upward trend by 1924.

The trends of aggregate expenditures of 17 public agencies and of

48 private agencies, expressed as relative numbers, are compared in

figure 3 with the trend of combined expenditures of these agencies.

During the first half of the period the upward trends are almost

identical. The depression of 1921-1922 led naturally to increases in

expenditures of both groups of agencies, but public expenditures

increased at a distinctly more rapid rate than private. This steeper

trend of public as compared with private expenditures for relief was

not limited to the depression years but was continued and accentuated

in subseepjent years. 400

300

200

100

Note: The curve representing totol expenditures is based on data of 65 agencies; the curves representing public and private agencies are based on

data of 17 and 48 organizations, respectively.

400

300

200 if

100

1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925

Fig. 3 -relief expenditures of public and

private organizations

1916-1925

Source: Reproduced from Hurhn, Rolph 6 , "The Mounting Bill for Relief," The Survey,

Vol LVII, No 4, November 15, 1926, pp 207-209 AF-I03I, W P.A.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 15

Aggregate expenditures for the two groups of agencies were about

equal in 1916 and showed a combined increase of 181 percent by 1925.

Amounts expended by public agencies increased 215 percent, from

$1,685,000 to more than $5,300,000; private expenditures increased

143 percent, from approximately $1,507,000 to $3,661,000.

Rise in Relief Costs in 16 Cities Between 1924 and 1929

An important pathfinding study of the volume and cost of com- munity welfare, made by Raymond Clapp for the year 1924 under the

auspices of the American Association of Community Organization,

gives further evidence of the long-time rise in relief expenditures.

Nineteen cities were included in this survey. For 16 of these—Akron,

Buffalo, Canton, Cleveland, Dayton, Des Moines, Detroit, Grand

Eapids, Indianapolis, Kansas City (Mo.), Milwaukee, Minneapolis,

Omaha, Rochester, St. Paul, and Toledo—comparison can be made of

relief expenditures in 1924 with those for the year 1929, as reported to the United States Children's Bureau. The 1924 data cover both

private and public outdoor relief, including mothers' aid and blind

relief. They may not be entirely comparable with those for recent

years,

28 but they are believed to be approximately so and to support

the conclusion that there was a general expansion in relief costs beTable 5.—Relief Expenditures in 16 Cities, 1924 and 1929

Source of data

City Territory included 1 Raymond

Clapp 2 V. S. Chil- dren's Bureau

Percent

increase, 1924 to 1929 3

1924 1929

Amount in thousands

Akron

Buffalo Canton

Cleveland Dayton Des Moines

Detroit Grand Rapids.

Indianapolis. .. Kansas City... Milwaukee

Minneapolis. .

.

Omaha

Rochester

St. Paul Toledo

County. County.

County.

County. County.

County.

County.

County.

County.

City.... County.

City County.

City County.

County.

$138 $181 31 739 1,415 91

65 152 134 741 1,179 69

103 225 118

142 161 13

1, 183 3,040 157

107 130 21

128 255 99

158 231 46

354 686 94

306 422 38

101 181 79 342 855 150 335 394 18

121 220 82

1 These are the territories included in the Children's Bureau Series; the Clapp data represented all agencies operating in the city, which include county agencies.

» Clapp, Raymond, "Relief in 19 Cities," The Survey, Vol. LVII, No. 4, November 15, 1926, pp. 209-210.

• Since the 2 sets of data are not completely comparable these percentages should be interpreted as an

approximate measure of the actual change between the 2 dates.

28 The data for 1924 were collected for a particular study and were not the result of a continuous reporting system whicli offers an opportunity for subsequent re- finement and check. 21C12"—37 :'.
16 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

tween 1924 and 1929 which antedated the rise to present depression

levels. Every one of the 16 cities showed marked increases in expenditures

during the interval from 1924 to 1929. In six of the cities the hurden

increased less than 50 percent, in six others from 50 to 100 percent,

and in the remaining four from 100 to 160 percent. The median

increase for the group was approximately 80 percent.

Outdoor Relief Expenditures in New Haven, 1910-1925

A prevailing upward trend in outdoor relief expenditures in the city

of New Haven (Conn.) for the 26 years extending from 1900 through

1925 is revealed by data compiled in 1928 by Willford I. King.29 The

course of relief expenditures of both public and private agencies during

the period 1910 through 1925 is shown in figure 4.30 The curves in figure 4a represent actual expenditures, inclusive of administrative

cost; those in figure 4b reflect adjustment for population growth and

conversion to 1913 dollars.31 Private agencies bore a heavy share of the relief burden in New

Haven throughout the 16 years. The introduction of public relief for widowed mothers increased the proportion of public expenditures

Table 6.—Outdoor Relief Expenditures 1 in New Haven, Specified Years, 1910-1925

1910 1915 1920 1925

Expenditures in thousands

'

Total $66 $69 $168 $290 Public. 1650

145551 117112 Private. 178

Relative numbers of expenditures

Total.. 100 105 255 439

Public... _ 100

100 88110 319234 700 Private.. 356

Relative numbers of expenditures per inhabitant in terms of 1913 dollars

Total 100 92 102 196

Public is 77

97

12794 310 Private.. _ 159

1 Includes cost of administration.

29 See King, Willford I., Trends in Philanthropy, National Bureau of Economic

Research, New York, 1928.

30 Between 1900 and 1910 there was a mild rise in the expenditures of both

public and private agencies.

31 Population estimates for intercensal years were made by Mr. King. King,

Willford I., op. cit., p. 68. An index of prices of direct or consumers' goods was

used to reduce actual dollars to dollars of constant purchasing power. See King,

pp. 61-62-
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 17

Fl6. 4 -outdoor relief expenditures in new haven

I9I0-I925

Source: King, Willford I , Trends in Philanthropy,

Notional Bureau of Economic Research, New York, I928. AF-II05.W PA
18 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

somewhat after 1920 but did not greatly alter the division of the relief burden as between public and private resources. At 5-year intervals

from 1910 through 1925, private relief comprised 76, 80, 70, and 61

percent, respectively, of the total. Examination of the curves in figure 4a reveals only slight change in the volume of public and private expenditures between 1910 and 1917.

After 1917, however, there is an abrupt rise in the volume of expenditures of both types of agencies. A temporary dip downward occurred

after the 1921-1922 depression, but expenditures reached a new peak

in 1924, declining slightly thereafter. In terms of constant purchasing

power, the trend of relief per inhabitant is sharply downward during

the period of the World War. This drop, shown in figure 4b, is due

to the war-tune inflation of prices, which reached a peak in 1920.

Total expenditures for outdoor relief were more than four times as

large in 1925 as in 1910, but expenditures per inhabitant in terms of

1913 dollars were less than doubled. Public expenditures increased

relatively more than private, although still representing the smaller

fraction of the annual relief bill in the city. Relative numbers in

table 6 indicate the changes in relief expenditures at 5-year intervals

from 1910 through 1925.

Outdoor Relief Expenditures in New York City, 1910-1934

Both public and private agencies have shared in a marked upward

movement in relief costs in New York City during the past quarter

of a century. The trend of outdoor relief expenditures in New York

City for the 20 years from 1910 through 1929 is shown in the accompanying diagram, which summarizes the data from a study completed

in 1934 by Kate Huntley for the Welfare Council of New York City.32 The data include expenditures from both public and private sources and extend over a period which includes the depression of 1914-1915,

the postwar depression of 1921-1922, and the minor recession of

1927-1928.33 The trend for the combined volume of relief expenditures

and the separate trends for public and for private relief are shown

graphically in figure 5a. After 1916 there was a distinct shift in the relative levels of private

and public expenditures. Prior to that year relief expenditures from

public funds were comparatively small and confined to relief for a few

special groups, including veterans and volunteer firemen, and their

families, and the adult blind. In 1916, however, a new State law

provided relief for mothers with dependent children. From that date

there has been steady growth in relief from public funds, and since

32 Huntley, Kate, Financial Trends in Organized Social Work in New York City,

Columbia University Press, New York, 1935.

33 The figures given here exclude expenditures for service and administration

incident to relief.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 19

FIG. 5- EXPENDITURES FOR OUTDOOR RELIEF FROM

PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESOURCES

IN NEW YORK CITY

I9I0-I929

Source: Fig. 5(o) adopted, ond Fig. 5(b) reproduced, from Huntley, Kate, Financial Trends in Organized

Social Work in New York City, Columbia University Press, New York, 1935, pp 71,75. AF-1035, w.p.a.
20 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

1917 public relief expenditures have consistently exceeded those of

private agencies. Three-fourths of all expenditures for relief in 1929 were from public resources, as contrasted with less than one-fourth

in 1910.

Inasmuch as there was no provision in New York City for general

public relief during this period the increase in expenditures is attributable almost entirely to relief to special classes. The slight bulge in

the public expenditure curve for 1921-1922 probably reflects the

increase in need during the depression but docs not include any large

amounts extended specifically for unemployment relief. The growth in population in New York City and the fluctuations

in purchasing power of relief funds during the period from 1910

through 1929 contributed greatly to the increase in annual relief ex- penditures. These influences have been eliminated by Miss Huntley

from the data shown in figure 5b, in which expenditures for relief are expressed on a per-inhabitant basis, in terms of constant purchasing

power.34 The steepness of the trend in relief expenditures is materially

lessened by this adjustment. Annual expenditures per inhabitant, in

terms of 1914 dollars, increased approximately 300 percent from 1910

to 1929, as compared with an increase of 970 percent in actual expenditures for New York City.

Comparison of relief expenditures for these earlier years with data

for the 5 years ending with December 1934 35 reveals a staggering in- crease in the relief burden since 1929. Total relief expenditures in

1910 were only six-tenths of 1 percent of the expenditures for the year

1934. Even in 1930, the beginning of the depression period, they were

only 7 percent of the 1934 amount. In the intervening 3 years annual

expenditures rose rapidly in response to the needs of the unemployed.

Strenuous efforts of private organizations to meet the crisis in the

early phase of the depression are reflected in the figures for 1931 when

there was a sharp increase in the proportions of private funds. The

passage of legislation in New York State in 1931 authorizing public

relief through the Temporary Emergency Relief Administration, the

first State emergency relief organization to be created in the United

States, marked the beginning of active public participation in un- employment relief in New York City. Very substantial amounts of

relief from private sources were given during the next 2 years, but these

amounts represented a rapidly declining proportion of the total.

34 The cost of living index used to correct relief expenditures was derived from

the Bureau of Labor Statistics index of the cost of living in New York City after 1914, and earlier data on retail prices of food for the North Atlantic Division

collected by the Department of Labor. The indices were revised by Miss Huntley

to accord more weight to food and rent, which are relatively more important in a

relief budget. See Huntley, Kate, op. cit., Appendix III for a full description of the index used.

35 These data were collected by Miss Huntley for the Welfare Council of New

York City and are entirely comparable with those for earlier years.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 21

It should be noted that even without any statutory provision for

public outdoor poor relief , public resources supplied the major portion

of relief funds in' New York City for at least 14 years 36 before the

establishment of an emergency unemployment relief program. Since

1933 public resources have borne a preponderant share of the total

relief bill. Private agencies accounted for only 4 percent of the total

in 1934. The long-time shifts in the relative amounts of public and

private funds for relief purposes are shown clearly in table 7.

Table 7.—Expenditures for Outdoor Relief 1 From Public and Private Resources, New York

City, Specified Years, 1910-1934

Year !

1910

1915

1920. 1925 1929

1930

1931. 1932

1933. 1934

Amount in thousands Percent

Total as percent of Total s Public Private Public Private 1934 resources resources resources resources

$971 $229 $743 23.6 76.4 0.6

1,395 256 1,139 18.4 81.6 0.8

4,750 2,981 1,769 62.8 37. 2 2.7 7,729 5,662 2,068 73.3 26.7 4.4

10,387 7, 750 2,637 74.6 25.4 5.9

12,926 9,271 3,654 71.7 28.3 7.3

48,164 31, 665 16, 499 65. 7 34.3 27.3

82, 366 57, 870 24, 496 70.3 29.7 46.7

* 118, 361 * 101,211 17, 151 85.5 14.5 67.1

176, 514 1 169,316 7, 198 95.9 4.

1

100.0

1 Expenditures for administration excluded except as indicated in footnote 4 below.

1 Data for 1910 through 1929 from Huntley, Financial Trends in Organized Social Work in New York City those for 1930 through 1934 supplied in unpublished form by the Welfare Council of New York City.

3 Derived from data carried to more places; therefore, differs slightly from sum of items.

* Includes payments to those workers who received relief wages on staffs of relief projects. Does not include wages paid for CWA employment, which totaled $8,751,000 in 1933 and $34,467,000 in 1934.

Expenditures for Public Outdoor Relief in New York State, 1910-1934

Data on expenditures for public outdoor relief in New York State,

compiled and made available by the State Department of Social

Welfare,37 show a gradual expansion in relief costs for 20 years before

the precipitous rise beginning in 1930. The data, which arc exclusive

of administrative costs, represent expenditures for home (direct)

relief, including aid to veterans ; for work relief ; and for three types of

categorical relief—aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children.38 The figures do not include expenditures of the

Civil Works Administration, which made wage payments in New York

State in 1933 of more than $14,000,000 and in 1934 of more than

36 See fig. 5a.

37 Supplied in unpublished form. Data for 1910 through 1915 for fiscal years ending September 30; for 1916, 9 months ending June 30; for 1917-1934, fiscal years ending June 30.

38 Reimbursable expenditures for relief incurred by private agencies for public

charges are included. Expenditures for the years 1932-1934 for home and work

relief represent commitments made by the Temporary Emergency Relief Administration of New York State and hence do not cover some small amounts of

local relief not reimbursable from State funds.
22 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

FIG. 6- expenditures for public outdoor relief

NEW YORK STATE

I9I0-I934

Source : New York State, Deportment of Social Welfare, unpublished data. AP-I47I, W.P.A.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 23

$60,000,000. The combined volume of expenditures for home (direct)

relief, work relief, and categorical relief over the 25-year period are shown in figure 6. Between 1910 and 1916 little change in the total amount of rehef

is recorded, but after 1916 expenditures moimt substantially, increasing gradually until 1931 when there is an extremely sharp rise which

continues during the next 3 years. The introduction of child welfare

allowances in 1916 and of aid to the aged in 1931 accounts for the

expansion in categorical assistance. The startling increase in home

rehef and the inauguration of work relief followed the creation of the

New York Temporary Emergency Relief Administration in 1931.

The rising relief costs, even before 1930, were due only in small part

to the growth of population in New York State. Total expenditures

rose from $885,000 in 1910 to $17,786,000 in 1930 and $215,601,000 in

1934, while expenditures per inhabitant rose from $0.10 in 1910 to $1.41

and $16.51 in 1930 and 1934, respectively. Actual expenditures for

the several classes of relief and expenditures per inhabitant at 5-year

intervals from 1910 through 1930 and for the year 1934 are shown

in table 8.

Table 8.—Expenditures for Public Outdoor Relief in New York State, Specified Years, 1910-1934 1

General relief Categorical assistance

Year Total Home

relief I Workrelief Aid to the aged Aid to the blind

Aid to dependent

children

Amount in thousands

1910 $8S5 $830 $55

1915 1,277 1, 222 55

1920 4, 351 1,457 66 $2, 828

1925 8, 548 2, 184 209 6, 154 1930 17, 786 8,517 323 8,946

1934 215, 601 104,921 $35, 638 $12, 651 372 12, 019

Amount per inhabitant 3

1910 $0. 10 $0.09 $0.01 1915.— __. .13 . 12 .01 1920. .41 . 13 .01 $0.27

1925 .74 . 19 .02 .53

1930.. 1.41 .67 .03 .71 1934 16.51 8. 03 $6. 55 $0. 97 .03 .92

1 Data for 1910 and 1915 are for fiscal years ending September 30; data for other years are for fiscal years ending June 30.

2 Includes veteran relief.

3 U. S. Bureau of the Census annual State population estimates used; computed from unrounded data.

Expenditures for Public Outdoor Poor Relief in Indiana, 1910-1931

Annual expenditures for public outdoor poor relief in Indiana show

that this State shared in the general rise in public relief costs after
24 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

1910. These data were compiled by the Indiana State Board of

Charities from quarterly reports of townsliip officials for the years from

1890 through 1931, and they were presented graphically in a recent report of the Governor's Commission on Unemployment Relief.39 Analysis here is confined to the years 1910 through 1931, which come

within the scope of this report.40

1915 1920 1925 1930

FIG. 7- EXPENDITURES FOR PUBLIC OUTDOOR POOR

RELIEF IN INDIANA

1910 - 1931

Note Broken lines indicote doto not available or

not available in comparable form for these years. Source: Slote of Indiona, Governor's Commission

on Unemployment Relief, Year Book April 1933-

June 1934, July 1934 - June 1935 AF-I46I, w p a.

33 State of Indiana, Governor's Commission on Unemployment Relief, Year

Book, April 1933-June 1934, July 1934-June 1935, pp. 3-9.

40 Between 1890 and 1895 expenditures for outdoor relief were at a higher level than in any subsequent year until 1921. In 1890, the first }

r ear for which data

are available, public expenditures for outdoor poor relief totaled $560,000. By

1895 they had risen to $630,000. Thereafter there was a progressive decline, the level of expenditures between 1900 and 1910 being somewhat below that in the next decade.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 25

The annual amounts expended for outdoor poor relief increased from

$266,000 in 1910 to $4,681,000 in 1931, while expenditures per inhabi- tant rose from $0.10 to $1.44. Expenditures in selected years beginning with 1910 are given in table 9. The data are exclusive of administrative costs and represent all outdoor relief granted from public

funds, except public assistance to the blind and to mothers with

dependent children.

Rates of increase in annual expenditures and in expenditures per

inhabitant, compared in figure 7, have been very similar. The two

curves, plotted on a semilogarithmic or ratio scale, reveal a considerable increase in the rate of expansion in expenditures during the

1914-1915 and the 1921-1922 depressions, and a very sharp expansion

during the depression years of 1930 and 1931.

Table 9.—Expenditures for Public Outdoor Poor Relief 1 in Indiana, Specified Years, 1910-1931

Year Amount

in thousands

Amount

per inhabitant 1 Year Amount

in thousands

Amount

per

inhabitant 1

1910 _-- _ $266

435

417

$0. 10 .15

. 14

1925 $841

2, 506

4, 681

$0.27

.77

1.44

1915 1930. 1920 -- - 1931 -

1 U. S. Bureau of the Census State estimates of population used to compute expenditures per inhabitant.

Following the 1914-1915 depression there was almost no decline in

annual expenditures. The failure of expenditures to contract after

the revival of business is doubtless due in part to the decline in the

purchasing power of the dollar during the World War. Immediately after the 1921-1922 depression there was a drop from the peak,

but this drop was followed immediately by a marked upward movement

which continued and was greatly accelerated at the onset of the depression in 1930 and 1931.

THE RISE IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES SINCE 1929

Expansion in Urban Relief Between 1929 and 1931 Until the current depression the gradual rise in relief costs over the

years was a matter for State and local rather than national concern. But with the advent of the depression, relief costs throughout the

country moved rapidly upward, overtaxing local and State resources and thus focusing attention on the Nation-wide problems of unemployment and the relief of distress caused by unemployment. This

abrupt change in the scope and focus of the relief problem suggests

the need for a review of relief expenditures since 1929, the last year of

comparatively "normal" relief costs. The first attempt to collect statistics of the volume of relief on a Nation-wide basis was made by the United States Bureau of the
26 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Census 41 during the summer of 1931 at the request of the President's

Organization on Unemployment Relief. As the depression grew more acute and demands for relief increased sharply with decreasing

employment, need for such Nation-wide measurement of the relief problem had become evident.

Information indicating the amounts of relief disbursed by public

and private agencies to families in their homes and to homeless men 42 during the first quarters of 1929 and 1931 was collected and tabulated

separately for 308 cities of over 30,000 population, and for counties

and smaller incorporated places.43 Administrative expense was

included in the figures for some agencies but not for all so that the

amounts given understate for both periods the total expenditures

for relief and its administration.44 It is important to realize that the

first quarter of the year normally represents a seasonal peak in relief operations and hence expenditures in the first quarter of 1929 were

probably somewhat larger than those for the other quarters of the

year. In 1931, however, the growing severity of the unemployment

crisis may have more than counterbalanced the seasonal factor, leading

to higher expenditures in subsequent quarters of the year. Since returns from the counties and smaller incorporated places were incomplete, discussion here is confined to the 308 cities grouped by States

and by geographic divisions.

Country-wide expansion in urban relief expenditures between the

two periods is shown by the figures for different geographic divisions,

given in table 10. The combined expenditures of the cities in these

nine divisions rose 241 percent between the first quarter of 1929 and

the first quarter of 1931, or from $16,621,000 to $56,669,000. Governmental relief expenditures increased 217 percent and private expenditures 286 percent. Individual State aggregates are given in appendix

table 2. Striking variations are evident both in the amount of relief disbursed

and in the degree of expansion in relief in the different geographic

divisions. These variations reflect in part at least the promptness

41 The TJ. S. Children's Bureau and the Russell Sage Foundation cooperated in the survey, obtaining data for cities over 30,000 population through previouslyestablished reporting contacts. Reports for expenditures for relief in cities having

less than 30,000 population and for county governments were obtained by the Census Bureau chiefly through correspondence with postmasters and county

officials.

42 Includes relief to special classes as well as direct and work relief.

43 Returns were received from 308 of the 310 cities having 30,000 or more

inhabitants in 1930. No returns were received from Santa Ana, Calif., or from

Pawtucket, R. I. Six States, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota,

Vermont, and Wyoming, contain no cities of 30,000 or more inhabitants.

44 It was intended that administrative costs be included in every instance,

but for many agencies it was not possible to segregate the cost of administering

relief from other administrative functions, so that only the amount of relief granted was reported.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 27

Table 70.—Expenditures for Relief to Families in Their Homes and to Homeless Men

in 308 Cities,1 by Geographic Division, First Quarters of 1929 and of 1931

Amount in thousands ! Percent of

Cities in geographic division of over 30,000 population Number

of cities First quarter

of 1929

First quarter

of 1931

increase from 1929

to 1931

Total expenditures

All divisions.. New England Middle Atlantic East North Central. West North Central South Atlantic East South Central. West South Central. Mountain

Pacific

308 $16, 621 $56, 669

44 3,100 7,585 64 5, 612 21, 250

81 3,878 17, 935

21 1, 142 2, 219 34 587 1,407

13 214 698

21 281 866

8 269 447 22 1,539 4, 265

Governmental expenditures

All divisions.

.

New England Middle Atlantic East North Central. West North Central South Atlantic East South Central. West South Central. Mountain

Pacific

308 $10,802 $34, 201

44 2,532 6, 569

64 3,798 9,819

81 2,559 12,252

21 565 1, 101 34 159 364

13 40 274

21 87 392

8 193 304

22 869 3, 126

Private expenditures

All divisions ... _ . . . 308 $5,819 $22, 468 286 New England . 44 568 1,015 79 Middle Atlantic ... 64 1,814 11,431 530 East North Central.. 81 1,318 5,683 331 West North Central 21 577 1,118 94 South Atlantic 34 428 1,043 144 East South Central 13 174 422 142 West South Central.. 21 194 474 145 Mountain... . _.. _ . 8 76 144 89

Pacific 22 670 1, 138 70

1 Cities with a population of over 30,000.

2 Since figures are rounded to the nearest thousand, totals will not in all cases equal the sum of the parts. Source: TJ. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, special report, Relief Expenditures by Governmental and Private Organizations, 1929 and 1931, 1932.

and force with which the cities in these different areas felt the impact

of the depression and the extent to which organized relief met the

ensuing distress. But it should be remembered that percentage

change is definitely affected by the amount of city relief expenditures

in the several areas in the 1929 predepression base period. A rela- tively small percentage increase in expenditures may reflect a relatively

high standard of care in 1929 rather than failure to meet increasing

relief needs in 1931. This is definitely the situation in the cities in

the New England Area, which registered an increase of 145 percent

in total relief expenditures as compared with a 241 percent increase

for the combined areas. Expenditures per inhabitant in the New
28 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

England cities were, as indicated in table 11, more than double those

in other areas in the 1929 quarter, with the exception of the Mountain

Area.

Table 11.—Expenditures per Inhabitant for Relief to Families in Their Homes and to Homeless Men in 308 Cities, 1 by Geographic Division, First Quarters of 1929 and

of 1931

Geographic division Number

of cities

First quarter

of 1929

First quarter

of 1931

All divisions... 308 $0.34 $1. 17 New England 44

64

812134

13218

22

.75

.36

.31

.34 .16

.14

.11 .40

.33

1.85

1.37 1.43

.67

.39 .45

.35 .67

.91

Middle Atlantic East North Central West North Central

East South Central West South Central Mountain

1 Cities with a population of over 30,000. Wide range in the ratio of governmental relief expenditures to total expenditures for relief appears from the data for geographic divisions

and for the individual States.45 While the proportion of governmental

expenditures in all cities combined declined only slightly between

the two quarters, from 65 to 60 percent, there was significant decline

in the Middle Atlantic States, which were particularly active in the

provision of unemployment relief through private emergency organizations. A marked rise in the proportion of public relief is recorded

in the East South Central, West South Central, and Pacific Divisions.

During tho first quarter of 1929 public relief constituted less than 25

percent of the total city relief in 11 States 46 and more than 75 percent

in 8 States; governmental expenditures were from 25 to 75 percent

of the total in 23 States and the District of Columbia.

Table 12.—Governmental Relief Expenditures as Percent of Total Expenditures for Relief to Families in Their Homes and to Homeless Men in 308 Cities, 1 by Geographic

Division, First Quarters of 1929 and of 1931

Geographic division Number

of cities

All divisions.. New England Middle Atlantic East North Central. West North Central South Atlantic East South Central. West South Central Mountain

Pacific

308

First quarter

of 1929

65.0

81.7

67.7 66.0

49.5

27.2

18.6 30.9

71.8

56. 5

First quarter

of 1931

60.4

86. 6 46.2

68.3 49.6

25.8

39.4

45.3

67.8

73.3

i Cities with a population of over 30,000.

45 See table 12 and appendix table 2.

46 Cities in two of these States, Alabama and Delaware, reported no public

relief in 1929.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 29

Relief Expenditures in 120 Urban Areas, 1929-1935

An invaluable record, of urban relief trends prior to the period of

Federal participation in relief is afforded by the Urban Relief Series of

the U. S. Children's Bureau, which supplies continuous monthly data on relief expenditures from public and private funds in 120 major

city areas from January 1929.47 Not only does this series provide the

connecting link for the 34 months between the onset of the depression

and the inauguration of Federal relief but it includes some 9 months of

"prosperity" preceding the stock market crash in October 1929. It also affords the opportunity for seeing the Federal relief program in

relation to the relief operations of other public and private agencies.

Inasmuch as important shifts in emphasis on different types of relief and on various sources of relief funds have taken place in the past

several years, and are likely to continue to take place in the future,

particular value is attached to this series, which gives a picture of the

over-all relief situation in these urban areas. The series does not

include wage assistance extended through the work programs discussed

in Part II of this report.48 The urban areas represented in the series include 99 cities with

populations of over 100,000 in 1930, and 21 cities with populations

between 50,000 and 100,000. They represent two-thirds of the total

urban and somewhat more than one-third of the total population of

the United States. The cities are listed in appendix table 4. A graphic record of the major changes which have occurred in relief expenditures for these urban areas during the past 7 years is given by

the series of diagrams presented in tins section. Major changes in the

relative importance of private relief, general public relief, and special

allowances 49 appear in figure 8, which shows the monthly relief expenditures for all cities and the variations in the three main classes of relief during the period from 1929 through 1935. The annual

47 These data are exclusive of administrative cost. The Urban Relief Series was

initiated in 1929 by the Russell Sage Foundation which built up a collection of monthly data for relief agencies in 76 TJ. S. cities and 5 Canadian cities with

populations over 100,000. This series was transferred as of January 1932 to the U. S. Children's Bureau and was expanded to include other urban areas, mostly

between 50,000 and 100,000 in population, for some of which monthly statistics on

relief and transient care had been compiled since late in 1930 by the Children's Bureau at the request of the President's Organization on Unemployment Relief, or which had been collected in connection with the Bureau's project for the collec- tion of Social Statistics in Registration Areas. The Urban Relief Series was trans- ferred to the Social Security Board as of July 1936.

48 Omitted are the Civil Works Program, the Works Program, and special pro- grams administered by the FERA, including the emergency education, college student aid, rural rehabilitation, and transient programs.

49 Special allowances include expenditures made under State laws authorizing

grants from public funds for mothers' aid, old-age assistance, and aid to the blind. The term is synonymous with public categorical relief, as used in this report. See footnote 3, p. 2.
30 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

1 00

1 929 1 930 I93I 1 932 1 933 I934 I935

FIG. 8- TREND OF RELIEF EXPENDITURES FROM PUBLIC

AND PRIVATE FUNDS

IN I20 URBAN AREAS

I929-I935

* Includes old to the oged, old to the blind, ond oid to dependent children.

Source: Winslow, Emma A , Trends in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban

Areas, 1929-35, Pubhcotion 237, U.S. Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, 1937. AF-I365.W P A.

expenditures and percentage distributions by class of relief are given

in table 13. Monthly expenditures for the various types of relief,

expressed as relative numbers, are shown in appendix table 5. 50 The group of private relief agencies is comprised of nonsectarian

family societies, Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish family organizations,

emergency relief agencies under private auspices, and a number of

miscellaneous organizations giving relatively small amounts of outdoor

50 These relative numbers were constructed for this report. For absolute amounts, see Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private

Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-35, Publication No. 237, U. S. Department of Labor,

Children's Bureau, 1937, appendix table A, p. 69.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 31

relief to families in their homes. The American Red Cross and the

Salvation Army are in this last group.61 Agencies giving general public

relief include local poor relief offices, public welfare departments,

public veteran relief organizations, and local emergency relief administrations. Agencies extending special allowances are those

offices or bureaus administering public aid to the aged, to the blind,

and to dependent children. 52

Table 13.—Expenditures for Relief From Public and Private Funds in 120 Urban

Areas, 1929-1935

Public funds

Year Grand total

Total General

Special allowances

Private funds

Amount in thousands

Total, 7 years... $2, 553, 045 $2, 365, 350 $2, 104, 509 $260, 841 $187, 695

1929 43, 745 33, 449 14, 853 18, 596 10,296

1930. - 71,425 54, 754 33, 510 21, 244 16, 671

1931 _ 172, 749 123, 320 88, 594 34, 726 49, 429

1932 308, 185 251, 104 208,694 42, 410 57,081

1933 l 448, 921 i 421, 032 • 379, 722 41,310 27,889

1934 ' 667, 153 i 652, 467 ' 608, 880 43, 587 14, 686

1935 - 1 840, 867 • 829, 224 » 770, 256 58, 968 11,643

Percent distribution 3

Total, 7 years 100.0 92.6 82.4 10. 2 7.4

1929 „. 100.0 76.5 34.0 42.5 23.5 1930 100.0 76.7 46.9 29.8 23.3

1931 _._ 100. 0 71.4 51.3 20. 1 28.6

1932 _ _ 100.0 81.5 67.7 13.8 18. 5 1933 i 100.0 93. 8 i 84.6 9.2 6.2

1934 i 100.0 ' 97.8 • 91.3 6.5 2.2

1935 — 1 100.0 '98.6 2 91. 6 7.0 L 4

1 Excludes expenditures under the Civil Works Administration.

2 Excludes expenditures under the Works Program.

3 Computed from unrounded data.

General Rise in Urban Relief

The total relief bill for the 120 cities for the 7-year period was

more than $2,553,000,000. Combined annual expenditures mounted

from the 1929 low of $44,000,000 to the present all-time high of more

than $840,000,000 in 1935. It is significant to note that although

1932 represented the lowest ebb in business activity during the

depression, expenditures for relief in these urban areas have more

than doubled since that year.

53

51 Disaster relief administered by the American Red Cross is not included.

52 Statutory aid to veterans is classified with general public relief and not with special allowances. Prior to 1934 the Children's Bureau maintained a separate classification for veteran relief, but has not found it feasible to segregate the data for 1934 and 1935. For purposes of consistency, data for veteran relief have

in this report been included in general public relief for the entire period.

63 It should be remembered that these data do not include wage assistance. For a discussion of the trend of relief and wage assistance combined, see Part II.
32 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

In 1929, which may be deemed a year of comparatively normal

relief expenditures, special allowances, or public categorical relief,

constituted 42 percent of the relief bill for these urban areas. General

public relief constituted 34 percent and private relief 24 percent

of the $44,000,000 total. By 1935 these proportions had shifted

extensively, with general public relief forming 92 percent of the vastly

larger relief bill. Special allowances and private relief represented

only 7 percent and 1 percent, respectively, of the total expenditures

for the year. The percentage distribution of relief expenditures for

each of the 7 years is shown in figure 9.

Percent 40 20 0 20 40

i

1 1

1929

Private | General public oSnces

Fig. 9- PERCENT DISTRIBUTION^ RELIEF EXPENDITURES

FROM PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS

IN 120 URBAN AREAS

1929-1935

'Each bar totals i00 percent

Source: Wmslow, Emma A , Trends to Different Types of Public and Private Relief m Urban Areas, 1929-35, Publication 237, US Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, 1937. af-i043, wpa.

The important role played by the private agencies in the winters

of 1930-1931 and 1931-1932 is apparent. Existing private agencies

and newly-created emergency committees made a substantial effort to meet the increasing relief needs but the voluntary contributions

collected in emergency relief drives were expended over comparatively

short periods of time, resulting in marked fluctuations in the volume

of private relief. During this same period expenditures by general

public relief agencies increased significantly, but the most startling

rise in this type of relief occurred after July 1932, when the Reconstruction Finance Corporation was authorized by the Emergency
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 33

Relief and Construction Act to make loans to the States and local subdivisions for relief purposes.64 Resources liberated by this and

subsequent acts 66 made possible the tremendous growth in public

disbursement during the second half of the 7-year period.

Relative Proportions of General Public and Private Relief

The interplay of public and private efforts to meet the emergency

relief needs is thrown into bold relief by the series of relative numbers

plotted in figure 10. These relatives were computed on a base of

average monthly expenditures for the 3 years 1931-1933 equaling

100. The curve for public relief excludes special allowances, since

these forms of assistance are not primarily intended for families

whose dependency is due to unemployment. The expansion of private

contributions during two successive winters of voluntary relief drives contrasts sharply with the decline in those contributions after the

assumption of responsibility by the Federal Government. This

decline must be attributed in part to the exhaustion of private re- sources as well as to a diminution of private initiative after public

funds became available. Even more spectacular than the slump in

private expenditures is the concomitant rise in expenditures for

general public relief. Both general public and private relief reflect the seasonal peak in

expenditures during the first quarter of the year. Statutory relief through special allowances shows no such seasonal variation, since it

is usually given in the form of regular monthly payments.56 The relative numbers for January expenditures in each of the 7 years 67 show that private relief rose abruptly from 26 in 1929 to a peak of 233 in January 1932, and had by January 1935 fallen to 31.

General public relief rose from 7 in January 1929 to a peak of 427 in

January 1935. This peak in general public expenditures coincided

with the 7-year peak in total relief expenditures for these areas. As might be expected, the expansion in the general public relief burden for these 120 urban areas was due almost entirely to the in- crease in assistance for the unemployed. Public emergency relief was

distributed by local poor relief offices, departments of public welfare,

emergency commissions, and relief administrations, and after July 1932 was composed in part of Federal funds. Expenditures by emergency

64 By congressional action on June 18, 1934, States were relieved of any obligation to repay loans made under this Act. Hence, Federal participation in relief truly dates from the first loan from RFC funds. Loans made to local subdivisions have not been waived.

65 Federal Emergency Relief Act of 1933; National Industrial Recovery Act; Act of February 15, 1934; Emergency Appropriation Act, Fiscal Year 1935; Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935.

56 See fig. 8.

67 Relative numbers for the 84 months are given in appendix table 5.
34 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

relief administrations comprised from 97 to 99 percent of total general

public relief during the months from September 1933 through December 1935.53 The proportion of emergency relief funds dropped during

the CWA program and began to decline again with the introduction

of the Works Program and the withdrawal of the Federal Government

from direct relief in the latter part of 1935.

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

z-z

Private

relief

Average month, 1931-1933 = 100

CWA

in operation h H

Works Progrom

in operotion

General public

relief

I

1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935

FIG. 10- EXPENDITURES FOR GENERAL PUBLIC RELIEF AND

FOR PRIVATE RELIEF IN 120 URBAN AREAS,

EXPRESSED AS RELATIVE NUMBERS

1929-1935

Source: W.nslow, Emmo A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-35, Publication 237, U S Deportment of Labor, Children's Bureou, 1937 af-1363. w.p a.

53 See U. S. Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, monthly bulletins, Changes

in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas. Expenditures

"reported to FERA" include in some instances small amounts of local public

relief not administered by the Emergency Relief Administration.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 35

Table 14.—Expenditures for Relief From Public and Private Funds in 120 Urban Areas,

Expressed as Relative Numbers, January 1929-January 1935

[Average month 1931-1933=100]

Public Month and year Total Private General Special allowances

January 1929 — - 14. 9 7.1 46.5 26.3

20. 0 12.4 50.3 31.8 January 1931 --- 85. 6 37. 2 72.7 132.9 January 1932 _ 93. 8 64.4 103.5 233.4 January 1933 - 135. 1 146. 2 111.6 100. 3 January 1934 . . 118. 3 136.

1

104.6 40.8 January 1935 _ 332. 8 426.9 136.7 31.4

Rise in Special Allowances

The three types of special allowances responded only mildly to the

emergency situation created by widespread unemployment. This is apparent from table 15, which gives annual expenditures for aid to the

aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children. These forms of

relief are designed to aid classes with specific handicaps not directly

connected with unemployment. Because of their legal eligibility

requirements and financial limitations they are relatively inflexible to depression need. There is some evidence, however, that increasing

need during the depression served as an impetus both to enactment of

new legislation and to expansion of case loads for these statutory forms

Table 15.—Expenditures for Special Allowances in 120 Urban Areas, by Type of Assistance, 1929-1935

Year Total Aid to the aged Aid to the blind Aid to de- pendent

children

Amount in thousands

Total, 7 years.. $260, 841 $89, 477 $17, 864 $153, 500

1929 18, 596 9 1,514 17, 073

1930 21, 244 1,060 1,912 18, 272

1931 34, 726 10, 423 2, 196 22, 107 1932 42, 410 15, 652 2, 475 24,283

1933 41,310 15, 293 2, 674 23, 343

1934 43, 587 16. 654 3, 193 23, 740 1935 58, 968 30, 386 3,900 24, 682

Percent distribution 1

Total, 7 years 100.0 34.3 6.9 58.8

1929 100.0 8.1 91.8

1930 100.0 5.0 9.0 86.0

1931 100.0 30.0 6.3 63.7

1932 100.0 36.9 5.8 57.3

1933 100. 0 37.0 6.5 56.5

1934 100.0 38.2 7.3 51.5

1935 100.0 51.5 6.6 41.9

* Less than 0.05 percent.

' Computed from unrounded data.
36 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Source: Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Prix/ale Relief in Urban

Areas, 1929-35, Publication 237, U.S.

Deportment of Labor, Children's Bureau, 1937. ap-i369,w.p.a.

of relief. The curves in figure 1 1 show the course of expenditures in

the 120 urban areas for these 3 types of relief. Aid to the blind increased only slightly at a fairly constant rate over

the 7-year period. The steep rise in the curve for aid to dependent

children may represent, in very slight degree, expansion in the coverage

of existing legislation but suggests also that increasing numbers of

eligibles found it necessary to apply for this type of public relief because of depleted private resources, or because of the effects of the

depression on relatives or others who had formerly contributed to

their support. The rapid and substantial rise in the amount of old-
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 37

age relief is explained largely by the introduction of old-age assistance

in several cities under the provisions of new State legislation. Financial difficulties of local and State governmeDts, caused by unprecedented relief burdens combined with declining revenues from tax sources, presumably account for the slump in aid to the aged and in aid to dependent children during 1933 and 1934. Categorical relief did not

benefit from Federal grants in these years but was financed solely

from State and local funds.69 Furthermore, there has been no tendency on the part of the States to finance categorical relief by borrowing.60 Beginning in 1936, however, Federal funds for relief to the

aged, to the blind, and to dependent children were made available

under the Social Security Act to those States with laws conforming

to minimum Federal requirements. As a result, there has been a very sharp expansion in the volume and relative importance of these

types of relief since that date.

Relative Proportions of Work and Direct Relief

The relative proportions of general relief distributed in the form of

direct and work relief before and during Federal participation in

relief activities reflect a growing preference for the latter type of

relief for the unemployed. The recent development of work relief as a means of meeting the needs of the destitute unemployed is partially indicated in figure 12, but the omission of the wage assist- ance programs from the Urban Relief Series tends to obscure the

essential continuity of the policy of work projects as a means of assist- ing the needy unemployed. Thus, the drops in the work relief curve

during the winter of 1933-1934 and during the latter part of 1935

do not signify real interruptions in the development of a Federal

work relief policy, since the extensive programs of the Civil Works

Administration and the Works Program, respectively, were operated on a modified relief basis during these periods.

Work relief was by no means unknown in this country prior to the

current depression and was practiced on a small scale as early as the depression of 1914-15,61 but it was not to be found in the 120

69 FERA Rules and Regulations No. 3, issued July 11, 1933, provided that

direct relief should not include relief for widows or their dependents and/or aged

persons where provision was already made under existing law. This ruling did

not, of course, prevent the extension of general relief to needy persons in these

classes when there was no legal provision for categorical relief, or when State or

local funds were inadequate to care for all those eligible for these types of assist- ance.

80 See Lowe, Robert C, Analysis of Current State and Local Funds Specifically

Assigned to Various Welfare Activities, Division of Social Research, Works Progress

Administration, March 16, 1936.

61 Colcord, Joanna; Koplovitz, William C.J and Kurtz, Russell H.; Emergency

Work Relief, Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1932, p. 12.
38 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

cities in significant quantities in 1929 nor in 1930 until the last quarter

of the year. There were some small work projects in operation but

these were conducted primarily for purposes of administering a "work test" rather than as a means of providing systematic work

opportunity to the needy unemployed. Despite the fact that the

early work relief figures, for the reason cited, are not strictly comparable with the later figures for work relief under the Federal Emergency Relief Administration,62 they have value in affording at least a rough measure of the volume of these early work relief projects.

The data do not reveal the intermittent character of many of the

programs, which were of short duration and predicated on the hope

that prosperity and revival of private industry would occur promptly.

Table 16.—Expenditures for General Direct and Work Relief 1 in 120 Urban Areas, 1929-1935

Year

Amount in thousands Percent

Total Direct Work Direct Work

Total, 7 years

1929

1930

1931 1932

1933

1934 1935

J2,292,2C4 $1. 620. 449 1671,755 7tt 7 29.

3

25, 149

50, 181 138,023 265.775 '407.611

1 623,566

* 781, 899

25. 120 46,353 im, w,

199,677 295,412

408, 104

544, 917

29 3.828

37, 157 66.098

» 112 199

' 215. 462

« 236, 982

99. 'J 92.4

73.

1

75.

1

72 5 65.4 69.7

0. 1 7.6

26.9

24.9

» 27.5 »34.6 •30.3

1 Includes general relief expenditures by both pu; lie and pri .-ala agencies.

• Computed from unrounded data.

1 Excludes expenditures under the Civil Works Administration.

* Excludes expenditures under the Works Program.

During 1929 work relief accounted for only one-tenth of 1 percent

of relief expenditures in the 120 cities. In 1934 and 1935 approximately one-third of the total relief expenditures were in the form of

work relief wages. The annual amounts expended for work relief and

for direct relief in the 120 urban areas from 1929 through 1935 and the

relative proportions of the two forms of relief are shown in table 16. These proportions do not, of course, convey the full import of the trend

toward work and away from direct relief as a means of caring for the

able-bodied unemployed, because they do not include amounts

expended for either Civil Works Administration or Works Program

wages. The influence of these two programs in transferring large

numbers from the work relief rolls is evident from the precipitous drops

62 Instructions for FERA statistical reports were to include as "work relief" only actual 'work relief projects and not work equivalents (work for relief) or work tests required of recipients of direct relief. Direct relief was synonymous

with home relief. See FERA Form 10A General Instructions, Federal Emergency

Relief Administration, 1933.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 39

60

50

40

30

20

10

I C.\

in ope

h'

V. A. ration H

Works

Program

in operation

Direct relief / J

Work relie H-

^"

1 929 1 930 I93I I932 I933 1 934 1 935

FIG. 12- EXPENDITURES FROM PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FUNDS

FOR DIRECT RELIEF*AND FOR WORK

RELIEF**IN I20 URBAN AREAS

I929-I935

* Excludes aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children.

**Excludes C.W.A.,C.C.C.,ond Works Program.

Source: Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban

Areas, 1929-35, Publication 237, U.S.

Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, I937. AF-I367, W.P.A.

in the work relief curve in figure 12. Their effect on the total relief burden for the same periods may be seen from figure 8.63 Since the introduction of Federal relief and work programs, work

relief sponsored by private agencies has declined to a negligible per- centage of the total amount spent for this form of relief. The relative extent to which private and public relief agencies in these cities utilized work relief measures during these 7 years is shown in table 17.

63 Discussion of these work programs, sponsored by the Federal Government

during the second half of the 7-year period, will be given in Part II of this report.
40 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 17.—Expenditures for Work Relief From Public and Private Funds in 120 Urban

Areas, 1929-1935

Year

Amount In thousands Percent 1

Total Public Private Public Private

Total, 7 years

1929

1930

1931 1932

1933

1934 1935

$071,755 $632,629 $39, 126 94.2 6.8

29

3, 828

37, 157 60,098

' 112, 199

» 215, 462

> 236, 982

25

1.778

22, 570

62, 051

» 105, 463 '214.281

' 236, 461

4

2, 050

14, .587 14,047

6, 736

1, 181 621

86. 1 V,. 5

60. 7 78.7 '94.0

•99.5

'99.8

13.9 53.5 39.3

21.3 6.0

0.5 0.2

1 Computed from unrouDdcd data.

' Excludes expenditures under the Civil Woiks Administration.

• Excludes expenditures under the Works Proeram.

Relief Expenditures in 385 Rural-Town Areas, 1932-1935

The relief series so far presented relate almost exclusively to urban

areas. Unfortunately there are no comprehensive statistics for rural areas prior to 1932. Urban-rural comparisons are possible, however,

for the 4 years 1932 through 1935. The Division of Social Research

of the Works Progress Administration has recently inaugurated a

relief series for rural-town areas which provides continuous monthly

data on relief expenditures from January 1932.M This series is complementary to the series for 120 urban areas which is described in the

preceding section.

The Rural-Town Series includes expenditures for outdoor relief from both public and private sources in 385 representative rural counties and townships in 36 States. Reports cover entire counties in all States except Massachusetts and Connecticut, wluch are represented

by individual townships. Some of the counties and townships have

towns and small cities with populations up to 25,000. Together the

sample areas contain 11.5 percent of the total rural-town population

of the United States.85 Types of assistance represented in the series are general and vet- eran relief; statutory relief to the aged, to the blind, and to dependent

children; Resettlement emergency grants;66 and private relief. Excluded from the Rural-Town Series, as from the Urban Series, are all

M The Rural-Town Series was inaugurated in July 1936. Available data on

relief expenditures in the sample areas since January 1932 were collected to extend

the monthly series back to that date. For 1935 and 1936 data were obtained from

areas in 36 States; for 1932, 1933, and 1934 from areas in 24, 26, and 35 States, respectively. The series was projected backward by means of monthly link

relatives, bringing the data for the entire period up to a 36-State level.

65 See appendix B for a map showing the distribution of the sample counties and townships.

69 Grants made by the Resettlement Administration on an emergency basis to meet the immediate needs of clients.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 41

expenditures for wage assistance extended by the Civil Works Administration and the Works Program agencies and relief disbursed by the

Federal Emergency Relief Administration through its special programs. Omitted also are all loans made by the Resettlement Administration.67

Table 18.—Expenditures for Outdoor Relief From Public and Private Funds in 385

Rural-Town Areas, 1932-1935

Public funds

Year Total out- door relief Total public

General and veter- an

The aged,

the blind, and dependent children

Resettle- ment emer- gency

grants

Private funds

Amount in thousands

Total, 4 years _ $119,093 $118, 183 $108, 071 $9, 833 $279 $910

1932 10, 478 10, 223 8,163 2,060 255

1933... 22, 984 22,688 20, 737 1,951 296

1934 39, 835 39.664 37, 478 2, 186 171 1935... 45, 796 45, 608 41, 693 3, 636 279 188

Percent distribution

Total, 4 years 100.0 99.2 90.7 8.3 0.2 0.8

1932.. 100.0 97.6 77.9 19.7 2.4

1933... 100. 0 98.7 90.2 8.5 1.3

1934... 100.0 99.6 94.

1

5.5 0.4

1935 100.0 99.6 91.1 7.9 o76 0.4

Annual expenditures for each class of relief and for all classes combined in the 385 rural-town areas are given in table 18 for the years

1932 through 1935. The table shows also the relative importance of

the various classes of assistance in the successive years. Total ex- penditures for outdoor relief in the 385 rural-town areas amounted to $10,478,000 in 1932 and to $45,796,000 in 1935, an increase of approximately 337 percent. During the same interval total expenditures

in the 120 areas represented in the Urban Series rose 172 percent.68 In the rural-town areas, as in the urban areas, general public relief,

including aid to veterans, was the largest single component of the

relief structure. Expenditures for this class of relief in 1932 amounted

to $8,163,000 and constituted 78 percent of the total outdoor relief in the 385 counties and townships. In 1935 expenditures for this class of relief totaled $41,693,000 and constituted 91 percent of the

grand total. Throughout the 4-year period private funds contributed a negligible

proportion of the relief bill. Even in 1932, when large amounts of

•7 Burials, hospitalization, and loans, which are included to a small extent in the data reported for the Urban Series, are not included in the Rural-Town Series. However, the amounts for thase items in the Urban Series are small and uniform

and do not affect appreciably the trend of that series.

68 See table 13, p. 31, for data from Urban Relief Series.
42 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

private emergency funds were being raised for the relief of unemployment in the cities, private relief constituted less than 2}£ percent of

the total expenditures in the 385 rural-town areas. Statutory assistance for the aged, the blind, and dependent children was relatively more important in the rural counties and towns than

in the urban areas. While expenditures for these types of relief in 1932 represented 20 percent of the total relief in the 385 rural-town

areas, they were but 14 percent of the total in the 120 urban areas. Between 1932 and 1935 expenditures for these special classes rose appreciably in absolute amounts, but they declined substantially

in relative importance.

The expansion occurring in the combined expenditures for the

three groups was due almost entirely to increase in the amount of oldage assistance. This increase was induced by the enactment of new

State laws providing assistance to the needy aged.69 Annual expenditures for aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent

children are given in table 19. Marked shifts in the relative volume

of aid to the aged and of aid to dependent children are revealed by

the table. A similar but less pronounced shift in emphasis between

these two forms of allowances was indicated by the data for urban

areas.

Table 19.—Expenditures for Relief to the Aged, the Blind, and Dependent Children

in 385 Rural-Town Areas, 1932-1935

Year Total Aid to the aged Aid to the

blind

Aid to dependent

children

Amount in thousands

Total, 4 years $9,833 $4,868 $995 $3,970

1932 2.060

1,951 2,186

3, 636

732

742

1.024

2, 370

229

241 267

258

1,099 968

895

1,008

1933 - 1934. 1935

Percent distribution

Total, 4 years

1932

100.0

100.0 100.0

100.0

100.0

49.5

35.5

38.0

46.9

65.2

10.1

11.

1

12.4 12.2

7.

40.4

53. 4 49.6

40.9

27.7

1933

1934

1935 - -

Relief Expenditures in Rural and Urban United States, 1932-1935

The establishment of the Rural-Town Relief Series, on a basis comparable to the Urban Relief Series, has made feasible for the first time the construction of a combined Urban and Rural-Town Relief

69 See table 1. p. 3, for number of States enacting legislation during this period

to provide this form of assistance.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 43

Series reflecting fluctuations in total public and private outdoor relief expenditures in the United States and permitting direct comparisons

of the volume and trend of the various types of relief in rural and in

urban areas. Such a combined relief series has recently been built up by the

Division of Social Research on the basis of reported expenditures in

the 120 urban and 385 rural-town sample areas. Monthly data for the two relief series were generalized to represent the total urban and

total rural-town population in the United States; the resulting urban

and rural-town series were combined for each month, by type of

assistance, to give estimated monthly expenditures for the whole

United States. 70 Monthly indices of the combined expenditure series for total outdoor relief from January 1932 through December 1935

are shown in appendix table 6 together with the indices of the component urban and rural-town series. 71 The indices were originally

computed with average monthly expenditures in the fiscal year ending

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

CW A

in operatic

1

1

\A/i^rl/e Ornrtrnr

n in operation

1 i

Av ;rage monttl 193 5 = IOC

-//

1 /

V —

/ \-

Urba A- Ru

i i

1y

/»

Tote 1

ol-Town

1

1

1

1

—

I i i i i i i i 1 1 1

1

I i

180

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

Jon Apr Jul Oct Jon Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr Jul Oct Dec 1932 _i_ 1933 _i_ 1934 _l_ 1935

FIG. 13 -TRENDS OF EXPENDITURES FOR OUTDOOR RELIEF

IN RURAL-TOWN AREAS, URBAN AREAS,

AND TOTAL UNITED STATES

January 1932 - December 1935

Source: Division of Sociol Research, Rural Section, Works Progress Administration, based on data from Rural-Town Relief Series and Urban Relief Series. AF-2223, w PA

70 For complete description and methodology of the combined series and

monthly indices for the component types of relief, see Woofter, T. J., Jr. ; Aaronson,

Franklin; and Mangus, A. R.: op. cit.

71 The series for urban United States represents counties with cities of 25,000 or over and Connecticut and Massachusetts townships of 5,000 or over; the series for rural-town United States represents counties with no city of 25,000 or over and Massachusetts and Connecticut townships of less than 5,000.
44 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

June 1936 equal to 100. For the purpose of this report the indices

have been converted to an earlier base, with average monthly ex- penditures in the calendar year 1935 equal to 100. Marked similarity in the trends of outdoor relief expenditures in urban and in rural-town areas for the 48 months from January 1932

through December 1935 is displayed by the curves in figure 13. These curves, plotted from index numbers, are contrasted with a curve representing outdoor relief disbursements in urban and rural

United States combined. In January 1932 the rural-town index was

18.3, the urban index 34.5, and the combined index 30.6. After the

Federal Emergency Relief Administration was established, expenditures in rural areas increased at a somewhat more rapid rate than

expenditures in urban areas. In January 1934 the rural-town index was 50.6 and the urban index 43.6. Emergency expenditures for drought relief during the fall and winter of 1934-1935 explain in part

the rise in the rural index in that period. In January 1935 the rural

index registered 139.2 as contrasted with 122.7 for the urban index.

The effects of the Civil Works program and the Works Program in reducing expenditures for outdoor relief are reflected in each of the

curves. Estimated annual expenditures for outdoor relief in urban and in rural-town United States in the 4 years from 1932 through 1935 indi- cate that expenditures in rural-town areas have become a larger

fraction of national relief expenditures, increasing from approximately

Table 20.—Estimated Expenditures for Outdoor Relief in Rural 1 and in Urban 1 United States, by Type of Assistance, 1932-1935

Type of assistance

1932 1933 1934 1935

Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urban RuraJ Urban

Amount in thousands

Total outdoor relief $85,843 $445, 985 $198, 005 $647,424 $344,549 $965,365 $397, 169 $1, 217, 037

Percent distribution

Total outdoor relief 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Public relief 97.4 81.4 98.7 93.8 99.6 97.8 99.6 98.6 General and veteran Aid to special classes Aid to the aged

82.6

14.8

3.5

67.8

13.6 5.2

91.0

7.7 3.2

85.

1

8.7

3.1

94.5 5.1

2.5

91.5

6.3

2.4

9L1

7.9 5.5

91.8

6.8

3.5 Aid to the blind Aid to dependent

children

2.

1

9.2

0.8

7.6

1.0

3.5

0.6

5.0

0.7 L90.5

3.4

o.e

1.8

0.5

2.8 Resettlement emergency

grants 0.6 Private relief 276 1876 CI 672 oTi 272 0.4 lTi

1 Represents counties containing no city of 25,000 or over, and Massachusetts and Connecticut townships

of less than 5,000.

1 Represents counties containing cities of 25,000 or over, and Massachusetts and Connecticut townships

of 5,000 and over. Source: Unpublished data from Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration. Esti- mates based on data from Rural-Town Relief Series and Urban Relief Series.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 45

one-sixth of the total annual expenditures in 1932 to nearly one-fourth

in 1935. Differences in the relative importance of the component

types of relief in urban and in rural-town areas and distinct shifts in

importance over the 4-year period are apparent from the percentage

distribution of annual expenditures in table 20. Noteworthy is the

decrease in the percentage of private relief in urban areas and the

decline in the percentage of assistance to the aged, the blind, and

dependent children in both urban and rural-town areas. Both of

these changes can be attributed in large part to the tremendous ex- pansion in general public (emergency) relief over this period. As

has already been indicated, total assistance to the aged, to the blind,

and to dependent children has increased both in absolute and relative

importance since December 1935.

COMPARISON OF TRENDS OF PUBLIC OUTDOOR RELIEF IN ALL SELECTED

AREAS

In the previous sections analysis has been made of data on relief expenditures of public and private agencies in selected areas and groups

of areas. These data cover different spans of time within the period

1910 through 1935. In order that the separate trends may be compared to show whether they reveal similar or unlike tendencies, annual

expenditures of public agencies in the different areas or groups of areas are plotted in figure 14. Although some information on ex- penditures of private agencies has been included in the earlier analysis,

it is excluded bere in order to obtain the maximum uniformity. The

curves are plotted on a ratio or semilogarithmic background and

consequently are strictly comparable for trend.72 Examination of the diagram reveals general consistency in the

several curves—an upward movement in public relief expenditures over the entire period from 1910 through 1935, with a very pronounced acceleration of the rate of change in 1930 and in subsequent

years. There is too little evidence for the early depression of 1914—

1915 to support conclusions concerning relief expenditures in this

period of business recession. It should be noted, however, that all the curves which incorporate data for the 1921-1922 depression show

a decided bulge for those years, followed immediately or shortly

thereafter by a continued upward movement. It is apparent that

relief expenditures in the selected areas did not recede to their old

levels with the return of prosperity.

In view of the fact that the curves in figure 14 represent singly or

collectively very substantial portions of the United States, considerable significance can be attached to the agreement in the trends which

they display. Together they offer convincing evidence of an underlying upward trend in outdoor relief expenditures during the last

72 For a summary presentation of the data from which the curves were plotted,

see appendix table 7.
46 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

FIG. 14 -TRENDS OF EXPENDITURES FOR PUBLIC OUTDOOR

RELIEF IN SELECTED AREAS

I9I0-I935

Note: Broken lines indicote doto not available or

not available in comparable form for these years. Source: Compiled from sources indicated in chart. AF-1449, W.PA.
OUTDOOR RELIEF, 1910-1935 • 47

quarter of a century. New forms of public assistance have contributed to the increase in annual expenditures and to gradual shifts in the

incidence of the relief burden from private to public resources and

from local to State and Federal units of government. The assumption by the Federal Government of a part of the responsibility for caring for the needy unemployed has accelerated the upward trend in

relief expenditures during recent years and has induced further shifts in the relative importance of different types of assistance.

Two important developments in relief trends are not apparent from

the chart. One is the decline in the relative importance of private

relief to an insignificant portion of total outdoor relief. The other is the increasing emphasis on work relief and work projects as a means

of providing aid to the needy unemployed. Federal work programs

have, in some instances, departed from traditional relief concepts in

determining eligibility and earnings of employees and have extended

assistance at a higher level of adequacy than was provided by existing

relief agencies. Wage payments under these programs have been

excluded from the relief series presented in Part I, so that these series understate for 1933, 1934, and 1935 the total burden of noninstitutional assistance.

21(il2°—37 5

Part II

Public Outdoor Relief and Wage

Assistance, 1933-1935

49

Part II

PUBLIC OUTDOOR RELIEF AND

WAGE ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935

PaRT ll of this report attempts to measure the national burden of

public assistance, exclusive of institutional care, during the last 3

years of the quarter century ending December 31, 1935. The

relief series presented in Part I have related only to selected areas and have excluded wage assistance extended through the various

work programs initiated by the Federal Government during 1933 and

1935. To that extent, therefore, the series in Part I fall short of

giving a complete measure of the trend and volume of public assist- ance in the areas and periods covered.

MEASUREMENT OF THE COMBINED RELIEF AND WAGE ASSISTANCE

BURDEN

Traditional concepts of relief have assumed: (1) that relief should

be given at a subsistence level; (2) that it should be given only to persons found through a means test to be in need; and (3) that it should be continued only so long as need continues. The employment programs operated by the Civil Works Administration, the

Civilian Conservation Corps,1 the Works Progress Administration,

and other agencies participating in the Works Program have embodied some but not all of these concepts. Accordingly, wage payments

made by these agencies were not considered relief, in the strict sense

of the term, and were not incorporated in relief series currently compiled during these years. Although these work programs have not conformed to a strict

relief pattern in respect to eligibility and earnings, the wages extended

have been largely a substitute for relief. Thus, these wage payments

constitute a new form of public assistance that must be considered

1 The more familiar designation of Civilian Conservation Corps is used to refer to the Emergency Conservation Work program, which includes, in addition to CCC, conservation work on Indian reservations and in the territories. 51
52 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

in conjunction with the more traditional forms of outdoor relief if we are to have a comprehensive measure of the public burden of

caring for needy and distressed persons during this period. Only

by constructing such a comprehensive measure does it become

possible to interpret and to evaluate correctly the changes that have

taken place in the trend and volume of the component parts of the

public assistance structure. The task of Part II, therefore, is to develop an integrated outdoor

relief and wage assistance scries for the total United States by splicing together the data on three major types of public assistance ex- tended to families and individuals during 1933, 1934, and 1935—i. e., emergency relief, 3 categorical relief, and wage assistance.

Comprehensive data on the emergency relief and wage assistance

programs are available for these 3 years largely because the Federal

Government participated actively in the administration and financing

of these forms of aid. The Federal Emergency Relief Admimstration was not established until May 1933 but its collection of emergency

relief data was extended back to the beginning of that year.3 The

Federal agencies conducting wage assistance programs have also

maintained monthly statistical records of their operations and expenditures. However, the Federal Government did not participate during

these years in the administration or financing of categorical relief, and

there was no provision for Federal collection of monthly data on

categorical relief. 4 To complete the total public relief and wage

assistance structure it has been necessary to estimate the volume of

statutory relief extended monthly to the aged, to the blind, and to dependent children during this period.5 For reasons which will be

presented in the section immediately following, the consolidated

series based on expenditures has not been supplemented with a

consolidated case series. Descriptions of the data included under each of the major classes of

aid are given in succeeding sections of the report. Individual programs are discussed only as far as necessary to explain their inclusion

in the series and their relation to the total public assistance structure,

which is presented in the concluding sections of Part II.

2 The term "emergency relief" is practically analogous to the term "general

relief" as used in Part I of this report, but it includes in addition to direct and

work relief a small amount of specialized relief, which will be described subsequently.

3 These early data are partially estimated. Summary reports on monthly

expenditures were obtained directly from the States; estimates on case loads were

prepared from State records.

4 Some annual data on categorical relief were collected prior to 1936 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and by the Children's Bureau of the D. S. Department

of Labor. See appendix D. Since January 1936 data on categorical relief have

been collected by the Social Security Board for all States qualifying for Federal

grants-in-aid and for some other States reporting voluntarily.

5 See appendix D for methodological note on estimates.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 53

A group of charts analyzing the trend and volume of emergency

relief under the general relief program of the FERA is presented at the end of the report to illustrate the necessity for interpreting

changes in this one class of assistance in the light of changes occurring

concurrently in other classes. The charts serve the further important

purpose of demonstrating the extreme variations in State relief patterns which underlie the consolidated series for the total United

States. Individual judgments will differ as to the desirability or appropriateness of incorporating in an integrated series all of the items that have

been included here. The attempt has been made to include expenditures of all programs which had any definite relief attributes, but in

view of the controversial nature of various items the composition of

the series has been described in detail, and attention has been directed

to the inclusion or exclusion of specific expenditures concerning which

there is likely to be difference of opinion. Opportunity is thereby

offered for the reader to appraise the validity of the series and to make

such adjustment as he wishes within the limitations of the primary

data. Other types of integrated series could be developed which would

differ both in content and in major classifications of data. It might

be desirable in certain instances to segregate the data according to a

direct relief-work classification or to develop a series which would

exclude payments to persons not certified as in need.

The series developed here is not strictly a relief series, since it includes payments to employees whose need had not been established

by application of the means test. Payment? to uncertified employees on the Works Program and to employees of the Civil Works

Administration and Civilian Conservation Corps who were not

drawn from relief rolls have been included in order to present a complete picture of persons benefiting from the wage assistance programs. The nonrelief nonadministrative persons on the FERA

Emergency Work Program were included for a similar reason. The

wage assistance programs departed in various ways from previous

concepts of relief as regards eligibility and level of assistance, so that

it is difficult to apply any uniform criteria to determine the extent

of need of persons benefiting from them.

Even if it had seemed desirable for purposes of this report to exclude payments to cases not certified or without prior relief status,

it was not feasible for the entire 3-year period or for all of the programs that have been included in the series to segregate wage payments on that basis. Records of the Civil Works Administration did

not distinguish between employees with previous relief status and

employees drawn from the ranks of the general unemployed. Prior

to July 1935 the Civilian Conservation Corps did not report enrollees

according to relief status.
54 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

COMPARABILITY OF CASE-LOAD DATA

A consolidated series representing the number of cases receiving

emergency relief, wage assistance, and categorical relief each month

during 1933, 1934, and 1935 would afford a far more realistic measure

of the extent of need and the magnitude of the public assistance

burden than is afforded by the expenditure data, which are much

affected by changes in the value of the dollar and by differences in

standards of care.

6 Unfortunately, it is not possible to construct a composite case-load series for the period from 1933 through 1935

by direct addition of reported case figures. Comprehensive data on

the number of cases receiving emergency relief were collected monthly

over this period and records were also maintained of the number of

persons employed on wage assistance programs. However, no monthly data arc available on the number of cases receiving old-age

relief, blind relief, or aid to dependent children during these years, and it is difficult to estimate national case loads for these categories

of relief. Even for the emergency relief and wage assistance programs the

data on case loads cannot be added together because of lack of

homogeneity in the case units and because of extensive duplication

in case counts. This duplication resulted when cases received

assistance from two or more programs, either concurrently or successively during a month.7 The number of cases given emergency relief and the number of

persons receiving wage assistance under the several work programs

during 1933, 1934, and 1935 are recorded by months in table 21, but

the data there presented cannot be totaled to show a combined case- load trend. The term "case" as used in this table has a variety of

meanings. Even among the several programs comprising the broad

emergency relief program it has two distinct connotations. The case

unit under the general relief, rural rehabilitation, and transient

programs represents an individual, family, or other group of persons

treated as an entity by the relief agency, and hence is highly variable

in size and composition. Under the emergency education and college

student aid programs the case represents the individual employee.

The employee is also the case unit for the Civilian Conservation Corps,

the Civil Works, and the Works Program agencies.

6 See p. 59 for further discussion of the deficiencies of the expenditure series.

7 An estimated monthly series representing the net total number of persons aided by emergency relief and work programs during the period 1933 through

1936 has recently been developed by the Division of Research, Statistics, and

Records, Works Progress Administration. See, Ross, Emerson and Whiting,

T. E., "Changes in the Number of Relief Recipients, 1933-1936," FERA

Monthly Report for June 19S6, Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance,

Federal Emergency Relief Administration, 1936, pp. 1-21.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 55

In addition to differences in the composition of the case unit, the

case data for the separate programs cover different time intervals. In some instances the figures include all cases given assistance at any

time during the month. In other instances they represent the

number being aided at some particular period, such as the last week

of the month or the peak week in the month. Because of the constant

turnover in case loads, figures presented on either of these last two

bases constitute an understatement of the total number aided during

the month.

The fact that the case units for the different programs are not

uniform does not alone preclude the addition of the case-load data

in table 21. An even more serious obstacle is the continuous interplay between the emergency relief agencies and the wage assistance

agencies, resulting in extensive duplication in monthly case counts. This duplication is not limited to persons and families receiving

assistance from two or more agencies simultaneously, but occurs whenever cases are transferred from one program or type of assistance

to another during the course of a month. Accordingly, duplication

in case counts is greatest during the periods of transition from one major program to another. No comprehensive data are available to measure the duplication in monthly case counts arising either through

such transfers or through concurrent assistance extended by different

agencies,8 but some idea of the sources and extent of such duplication can be gained by a brief examination of the administrative relationships which existed between the various relief and wage assistance

programs.

From the time the Civilian Conservation Corps was established

in April 1933 there has been some duplication between the case counts

of that program and those of the emergency relief agencies. The

majority of the young men enrolled in the Civilian Conservation

Corps were recruited from families on emergency relief rolls. These

enrollees were, for the most part, required to contribute a substantial

share of their earnings to their families. This contribution was suffi- cient in some instances to remove the family from the emergency

relief rolls, but in other instances the family remained on relief during

8 See footnote 7, p. 54. The Administrator of the Works Progress Administration estimated the amount of duplication between cases on the rolls of the emer- gency relief agencies and on the rolls of the wage assistance agencies as 337,000

in January 1934; as 84,000 in January 1935; and as 1,020,000 in January 1936. A still greater volume of duplication unquestionably occurred in months other than those cited, when the Civil Works program was in process of organization

or liquidation and when the Works Program was in the organization stage. See statements of Harry L. Hopkins, First Deficiency Appropriation Bill for 1936,

Extract from Hearing Before the Subcommittee of House Committee on Appropriations in Charge of Deficiency Appropriations, 74th Cong., 2d sess., 1936, pp. 206-208.
56 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

ft So

ij«itl

I

l!

IIP

SIS

lit- sin

II

III

if

I I I I I II I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I

1 ^mmmz &52§§§gg§i§i

I I I I I I I I I IS3 2§ | | | | | | I I I I

111111 1 1 1 'IS I I II I I I -co" rinI 1 I I I I 1 II I f I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I II I SSnnSSSc

I I I I I "2 83S!5£: , » 0,0, 3S5S

ZLLLLLLZLZLZ ZZZ

ll§ig§§S§3§§ S3i§§§g§§§§g

- _ - - - -• -" - - - - at of ef

cm" cm" m cm cm" cm

- cm cm- - - cm" cm- cm" cm- vS co" cm" cm" cm" cm" cm" cm" cm" cm

-

!§§§§§§gi35§ i§§§ssi§§§ai

w Vo" VVVco" ro" co" co" so co cm" co" co" VV «•" VVV«J o

^ 6< S •< S >-j >-?<;

ill!
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 57

I I «5 i-t es oo —

<

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I l«

M rt iO Tf O CI C Q O O O iO _

(N N CO O iC f

^ m I» N M ci - XT <tfllQ

O - CI 1^ tfi CI C I- C N CO C5

|»T.NrtTf{*3CC'HOCIC O O "3 ifl W^'f"V *"rt M M ci"

INOMhiOO

*o us it$ io ^jT ^j? ^ eg csf

I a|a2

^ gSs«

1 SI I a

1 11° I „ -a as jo mi- rt ort,

a »o su'a

a 3 P m_ a

S * Is Pg

ox].-. »i«o a M <i> o « o in g -2 lull's 5 liktl

92 0 £

2 -OS'S .2 a pgglTMs

s a

' Q.-5J 3 S

§•1 &«

a g

3-3 « f

0 oj

03 — a 2 a

2 3

Pis ego o

*so ~pO ©a

aw>

3 a

3 S» 2ph So

ga.2 aEI-S >S 5« g So 55 9 *s*».2a § S o B

B^oiSs a 2 a

wo 0 n w S'nte-te

<3 3 SI

a "

&5

isljflillsiisi

° 3 S 3 ..a a a-«JT ®

_ e »-a^S M s.2 JjsSlfgf alios .

•So 3a

•2.2

tx.2

1 §^

3

U) . §co as

T3 3 gn

a *

ejD 3 3 »

0"!

an"

«3Pu

w.2

«9 a

P.-2 s || q

§1 8

11

=5 B

'a a a -<^5

*a^ o COo w as

•a o

® s" t~ o

lfil s:a

-9 ° 5P

— o S

O

" "S »c" o

CJ COO

Q d Q V

2>[S 2-a.9fe s lias

o & b oj*"

aa^-a

Q a M Safe's

O O to

1 « "3

K6

_

1 1

f3 P,*3

be - 3

ai*9!

• n

a Sr<j

O O <3 J

QCaCD' w Oi O ry-j ^ tH

l S S =£"'g£l2.2^P' a; « 1^-2-9 S.g ocpg^^Tja

w s §

°

if >>s 3 a "5 co o

2 o flfl °< S .|2c.g|ax3-2 ?-£a9ja?a a^W fe 3-° oZ

ffiii^ii

t y « £^

o g 3

^ ° 3 ^.2 3

to

S c

"8" 2002"" ,a"'

03 b 3 3*13 "3 i .2aa2 0

E=5 1 So 2 8

M 8

1 E|aa |

! op 55

*— *t? •a © s

ii° bo $ a> ill

gp«

Cfl © </l P 81
58 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

part or all of the cnrollee's period of enlistment.9 Even if the family was dropped from the emergency relief rolls, there was some overlap

in case counts for the month of enrollment.

Very extensive duplication existed between cases on emergency

relief rolls and cases on the rolls of the Civil Works Administration.

The latter agency, which operated for about 4 months, was expected

to draw one-half of its maximum number of employees from relief rolls before accepting applications from the general unemployed group.

Several weeks of the brief span of operation of this program were

required to bring employment to its peak of 4,192,000 persons, 10 and

several additional weeks were required for liquidation of the program

and the reabsorption into the emergency relief program of employees

able to meet the needs test. Again, with the development of the Works Program in the second

half of 1935, there was a large-scale movement of cases from the

emergency relief rolls to the rolls of the various Works Program agencies. This movement was likewise accompanied by a large amount of

duplicate recording of cases. Movement was principally to the rolls of

the Works Progress Administration, which absorbed employable

persons from the general relief program and also from the emergency

education and transient programs. The fact that emergency relief administrations were urged to furnish relief allowances to all relief cases transferred to the Works Progress Administration for a period

sufficient to maintain the cases until the receipt of the first pay check

contributed further to duplication in case counts during the period of

transfer. Not only was there duplication between the emergency relief agencies on the one hand and the wage assistance agencies on the other,

but there was also some duplication between the wage assistance

agencies themselves. This duplication existed particularly between

the Civilian Conservation Corps and the Works Progress Administration and between the Works Progress Administration and the

National Youth Administration. Duplication also arose from cases receiving some form of categorical relief in addition to emergency

relief or wage assistance.

It is evident from the above discussion that reported case data for the period from 1933 through 1935, although far more comprehensive

and adequate than any previously compiled, do not provide complete

information for an integrated monthly series measuring with precision

9 Unpublished data from a special survey made by the Division of Research,

Statistics, and Finance of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration in the

winter of 1934-35 indicate that approximately 37 percent of the families repre- sented by former CCC enrollees were removed from the relief rolls as a result

of the CCC enrollment.

10 For the week ending January 18, 1934. This figure is exclusive of persons employed on administrative projects.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 59

the unduplicated number of cases benefiting from public relief and

assistance programs. It should be equally apparent that changes

occurring in the emergency relief load during this period cannot be

properly interpreted except in the light of changes that occurred in

the case loads for other forms of aid. Until the case unit is standardized with respect to the period covered

and workable techniques are developed for eliminating duplication in case counts as between agencies, 11 it will be difficult, without extensive

estimating, to construct an integrated monthly series which will

reflect the interplay between the three forms of public assistance.

Some administrative adjustment and integration of the various

assistance programs is a necessary step in the achievement of more

adequate case data. In the meantime, the expenditure data afford a more satisfactory measure of the volume and trend of the total

public assistance burden.

LIMITATIONS OF EXPENDITURE SERIES As indicated earlier, an expenditure series also has distinct limitations. Monthly expenditures for the various programs are, of course, expressed in dollar units and can be combined without duplication

to show the total monthly expenditures for relief and wage assistance

in a given area. These monthly data provide an accurate measure

of the trend and volume of relief costs, but are not entirely satisfactory as a measure of relief need because they reflect differences in the cost

of living and in the level of care provided. Hence there is no simple

and direct relationship between changes in expenditures and changes

in case loads.

The effect of cost of living changes on the trend of relief expenditures

has been illustrated in Part I.

12 A general rise in relief standards and

the introduction of new types of relief providing more liberal relief allow- ances were also noted as having contributed to the upward trend in outdoorrelief expenditures. Since the initiation of Federal emergency relief and employment programs, these variations in standards of care have

been more pronounced, and their effect on relief trends has been accen- tuated by rapid administrative shifts from one type of assistance

program to another. Thus, the transfer of cases from the subsistence

benefits of the early FERA program to the regular wage payments of

the Civil Works Administration, the transfer of cases back to the

emergency relief rolls, and the subsequent assignment of cases to the

security wage payments of the Works Program have produced

fluctuations in the combined expenditure trend which do not coincide

with fluctuations in the combined case loads of these agencies.

11 Progress had been made by individual States in eliminating duplication in case data, but techniques for this purpose have not yet been applied nationally.

12 See pp. 13, 16, and 18 ff.
60 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

The differences in eligibility requirements and in levels of payments

under the work programs explain, in large part, the omission of wage

assistance data from current relief series. Nevertheless, these differ- ences do not seem to justify the exclusion of this type of assistance from

an integrated expenditure series intended to reflect changes in the

total burden of public assistance outside of institutions. 13 It is, of

course, extremely important to consider the effects of the higher

standards of assistance in interpreting the combined trend of expenditures for relief and wage assistance and to differentiate clearly between

changes in expenditures and changes in case loads.

COMPONENT PARTS OF THE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE BURDEN

The combined volume of public emergency relief, wage assistance,

and categorical relief extended to families and individuals in the

United States in the 3 years 1933, 1934, and 1935 is estimated as approximately $5,375,000,000. This figure does not include expenses

for administrative purposes, expenses for materials, supplies, and

equipment, or certain other expenses incident to the operation of the

relief and wage assistance programs. 14 The grand total of all expenditures of agencies administering relief and wage assistance in 1933,

1934, and 1935 would be substantially liigher. The percentage dis- tribution of the $5,375,000,000 extended to cases, shown in figure 15,

indicates that more than 65 percent of the total was for emergency

relief, 30 percent for wage assistance, and less than 5 percent for categorical relief. Obligations incurred 15 for emergency relief, including direct relief,

work relief, and some specialized aid administered by the Federal

Emergency Relief Adrninistration and State and local emergency

relief agencies, amounted to approximately $3,513,000,000. Wage

assistance, or earnings of employcesof the Civilian Conservation Corps,

the Civil Works Administration and Civil Works Service, the Works

Progress Administration, and other Works Program agencies, amounted

to $1,605,000,000. Expenditures for three categories of dependents,

the aged, the blind, and dependent children, are estimated at roughly

13 It should be noted that the relief series themselves include data from various types of private and public relief agencies, extending care at widely different levels of adequacy.

14 With the exception of small amounts of nonrelief expenditures for some of the

special programs of the FERA. In the case of these special programs data rep- resenting total obligations incurred have been used, since administrative and

other costs incident to their operation cannot be segregated over the entire period.

15 Monthly data for emergency relief represent amounts "obligated" for relief during the period; those for wage assistance and categorical relief represent

amounts "expended." This distinction is maintained in the discussion of the component parts, but in the consolidated tables and charts the term "expenditures" has been used to cover both types of financial transactions. Over a period

of time "expenditures" tend to approximate "obligations incurred."
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 61

Wage assistance -te99 %—

Emergency relief -65 3 %

Categorical relief - 4 8 %-

0.8 %

4.5 %

1 3.4 %

II.2 %

24 8 %

3 8%

36 7 %

4 8 %

/ />'\\ CCC wages and subsistence

" 1 — —

Other Works Program wages

W. PA. wages

Civil Works wages

Emergency work relief

Special program relief

Direct emergency relief

Aid to the aged, to the blind, and to dependent children

$5,375,000,000

FIG. 15-PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF TOTAL EXPENDITURES

FOR PUBLIC RELIEF AND WAGE ASSISTANCE

IN THE UNITED STATES

1933-1935

* Represents amounts extended to families and individuals. Excludes administrative and other costs incident to the operation of the relief and wage assistance programs.

Source' Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, WorKs Progress Administration, Estimates of categorical

relief based on miscellaneous sources listed in appendix D af-i463, wpa.
62 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

$257,000,000. These sums represent substantially payments in cash

or kind to families and individuals. 18 They are exclusive of the cost

of Federal surplus commodities distributed in the 3 years through the

American Red Cross, the Federal Surplus Relief, and Federal Surplus

Commodities Corporations and of the cost of commodities produced

and distributed through work relief projects set up for production for use.The technical difficulties involved in attaching a value to surplus

commodities are very great, and statistical data concerning the monthly

distribution have been compiled only in terms of quantities issued. 17 In some communities surplus commodities comprised an important

share of the relief distributed, and omission of their value would

result in a serious understatement of the total outdoor public assist- ance extended in the area. For the United States as a whole the

omission is less important.

Emergency Relief The term "emergency relief" came into common usage in the

depression when emergency appropriations were made to finance

general relief programs. It includes both direct and work relief and

a small amount of relief to special groups cared for under the FERA

program. Emergency relief has not, as its name might suggest, been

restricted to families whose need arose from the unemployment

crisis or from other hazards, such as drought or flood, but has in

practice been extended in some degree to other classes of dependents,

including some of the aged, the blind, and dependent children, not

provided for by statutory categorical relief. The period 1933 through 1935 extends over two phases of Federal

participation in emergency relief. The first phase antedates the

creation of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration ; the second

phase coincides with the period of active operation of that agency,

which began to function on May 23, 1933, and had determined final grants to the States by December 1935 in anticipation of the complete

16 The data do not include, for example, grants made for self-help cooperatives

or for the FERA land program.

17 For summary statement of quantities of goods distributed by the Red Cross,

see American Red Cross, The Distribution of Government-Owned Wheat and Cotton, June 1, 1934, pp. 80-83. The total amount expended for Government wheat

and cotton distribution in 1932 and 1933 was $73,598,452. This includes process- ing and transportation costs but excludes administrative expenses. For data on surplus commodities distributed monthly through the FSRC and FSCC from

October 4, 1933, to December 31, 1935, see Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation, Report of the Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation for the Calendar Year of 1985, April 1, 1936, pp. 10-11. Expenditures during this period, chargeable to State grants for commodities, processing, and transportation, totaled $123,397,493. Ibid., p. 8.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 63

withdrawal of the Federal Government from emergency relief operations. 18 In the first phase of Federal participation emergency relief was

administered by State and local agencies not subject to Federal

administrative control, but some of these agencies were financed in part by Federal funds advanced to the States and localities on a loan

basis through the Emergency Relief Division of the Reconstruction

Finance Corporation.19 In the second phase emergency relief was

administered primarily by State and local emergency relief administrations under the supervision of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, which made grants-in-aid to the States and prescribed rules

and regulations pertaining to eligibility, standards, and procedures.

In some instances these State and local administrations represented a continuity of organizations which had operated earlier; in other

instances they were entirely new administrative units. But in either case they were subject to some degree of Federal control. Where

new administrative machinery was set up the old machinery was

virtually displaced, even though the statutory basis for its functioning remained.

Data used in this section relating to emergency relief are those

reported to the Federal Emergency Relief Administration.20 During

the period of operation of the FERA the data represent substantially

but not exclusively obligations incurred for relief by State and local emergency relief administrations. Small amounts of local poor relief and veteran relief continued to be extended by agencies not reimbursed

from Federal funds and thus not subject to Federal regulation. Some

but not all of this local poor relief and veteran relief was reported by

the States. For the United States as a whole the data presented here

for emergency relief are believed to represent substantially the total

volume of public outdoor relief disbursed, exclusive of categorical

relief and of the value of surplus commodities.

Emergency relief was extended to needy clients on the basis of investigation, either in the form of direct relief allowances or work relief wages. Both types of benefits were adjusted in amount to the budget

deficiency of the relief case, except for those cases aided by the college

student aid, rural rehabilitation, and transient programs, and were

distributed either in cash or kind. The data reported to FERA on

18 The Federal Emergency Relief Administration was continued after December

1935, but only for purposes of liquidation.

19 See footnote 54, p. 33.

20 Except in November and December 1935 when emergency grants of the Resettlement Administration are also included. These emergency grants amounted

to $99,000 in November and to $2,442,000 in December.

21012°—:
• TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

pnjN 8'iioj piv

°1 P!V

IlJBJilOJ.J

- p v k s a J

I sdJOO UOIJBAJM

-uoj nqgAio

- 1 [ a | tu p v

(SJDBJ3 XonaSjatua) nou

Mi

lilt

la

-njs 93a|ioo

i noijBi!

Xaaaajauia

J3II3J }D3j;a

J3II0J i ' 1<S}0J,

snreiSojd hb ibjoj,

i

s 4

i

4

I

glil9§l§§§l§§il

•£ £tt n ft n m m <£ m m tt «' m m Hilfiniiiiiir

IHIMIfHIMfl

mmnumm ef jr <o 4 itf m « « gg

«i « 0 « « «

si

"TT

If

I I

5

I

I I T

I I

isiHIilif

T la

" is i i i iss

I I I I I I I I I I

Piliiiils

n" «

i i r i i i i r

TT

is i i rss

liilisiiHliiii

liHslHsmsli

llii!
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 65

lg~isll§§ill§fi

HiliiililiiMi

HlUfHIIIIIfi

mraiiiiiim

iiiiimiiiPii

Ntfffcfnri

1 1 1 1 II 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I

assss 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

iflsilPlsniii

i§8i§§§8§§§88§§

iinifinniiii

IHlHIilUflU

23

IT

2

TTTTirlilSl

|S2'2SSSc33S5SSEfS|

5 I I I I I I I g I I I I SS

TM§~l2§sl£§sl~

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I

mmw

OrftiMSMNHe'HHH

rnmrnmrnm

iiiiif yi 3 si
66 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

obligations incurred for emergency relief represent cash payments

plus the value of relief in kind.21

Work» Progrom

in operotion

Jan Apr Jul Oct Dec 1935

FIG. 16- OBLIGATIONS INCURRED FOR EMERGENCY RELIEF

EXTENDED TO CASES, F.E.R.A. January 1933- December 1935

Source: Division of Research, Statistics, ond

Records, Works Progress Administration. af-1447, w.p.a.

Obligations incurred for emergency relief extended to cases in the

3 years from 1933 through 1935 totaled $3,513,000,000, of which

$3,307,000,000, or 94 percent, was given in the form of general direct

and work relief. 22 The remaining $206,000,000 was distributed

through specialized programs operated by the Federal Emergency

Relief Administration to aid particular groups of dependents. These

special programs were the emergency education, rural rehabilitation,

college student aid, and transient programs. Amounts expended

21 Relief agencies followed diverse methods in determining the cash value of

relief commodities distributed during a month so that the data reported are not

absolutely uniform in this respect.

22 Emergency grants made by the Resettlement Administration are included

as direct relief.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 67

monthly for direct and work relief and for relief under each of the

special programs in the 3 years are given in table 22. The volume

of obligations incurred for direct and work relief and for all of the

special programs combined are recorded in figure 16. This chart

represents the first segment of a consolidated chart, presented later in this section,23 which includes also data for wage assistance and

categorical relief. Direct Relief

It is evident that direct relief formed the backbone of the emergency

relief program. It was administered in a continuous and growing

stream over the 3-year period, with a slight seasonal movement in

each of the 3 years. For 1933, 1934, and 1935 obligations incurred for

direct relief aggregated $1,973,000,000. The greatest volume of

direct relief was distributed in 1935. The peak in this type of relief was reached in January 1935, when obligations totaled $77,535,000.

That level was substantially maintained, with only a slight slump in

the summer months, until November 1935, when there was a marked

decline. The high level of direct relief during the period of organization of the Works Program is probably accounted for by the shifting

of cases from work to direct relief pending full development of the

Works Program and by the payment of direct relief to cases trans- ferred to the Works Program but awaiting their first pay checks.

The sharp drop in direct relief in December 1935 presaged the complete withdrawal of the Federal Government from emergency relief in 1936.

Work Relief

In contrast to direct relief, work relief was administered discontinuously in two separate phases: the work relief projects prior to the

Civil Works Administration and the emergency work relief program

following. The early work relief projects were initiated by the States

and localities before the Federal Emergency Relief Administration was established. They continued thereafter, subject to rules and

regulations prescribed by the Federal Emergency Relief Administration, until the creation of the Civil Works Administration in November 1933. Work projects on a straight relief basis came to a virtual

close at that time. The Emergency Work Relief Program of the FERA

was inaugurated in April 1934 when the Civil Works program was

terminated, and it tapered off gradually in the second half of 1935

with the development of the Works Program. As is evident from

figure 16, expenditures for the early work relief projects were rela- tively small in comparison with those for the Emergency Work Relief

Program.

23 See p. 75.
68 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Work relief is included as emergency relief rather than as wage

assistance, because FERA clients on work relief were subject to the same regulations in respect to need as were direct relief clients, and

their earnings were scaled to budget deficiency in the same manner as the direct relief benefit. Furthermore, FERA work relief expenditures have been commonly included in existing relief series, while

wage assistance has been excluded.

Beginning with May 1934 the data for the Emergency Work Relief

Program include work relief payments to employees without relief status who were engaged on projects of a nonadministrativo character. 24 Between May 1934 and December 1935 such payments to nonrclief persons amounted to $101,324,000.

Special Program Relief

The special programs sponsored by the FERA were separately

administered and were financed from earmarked grants, although some of them were not more specialized in character than various

work relief projects under the general relief program, notably those for professional and technical workers. Special program relief consti- tutes a very small part of the total volume of assistance. It is not

included in either the Urban Relief Series or the Rural and Town

Relief Series, but is incorporated in this consolidated series for two

reasons: one, it has a definite relief character; two, it is necessary to insure continuity between the emergency relief and wage assistance

data. Most of the activities of the special programs were taken over by the Works Program agencies, and wage assistance extended for

them is included in the data for that program during the latter months

of the series. 25

24 There is no essential difference between such payments and payments under

wage assistance programs to workers selected from the general unemployed.

They are retained in the emergency relief data because they were an integral

part of the FERA Work Relief Program.

26 An exception has been made in the case of the rural rehabilitation activities which were taken over by the Resettlement Administration in July 1935. Advances made for emergency and subsistence goods under the rural rehabilitation program of the FERA are included in emergency relief, in accordance with the

practice followed in FERA statistical reports. Loans made by the Resettlement

Administration are excluded, although the emergency grants made by that agency are included. The differentiation in treatment of loans under the two

programs is somewhat arbitrary and can be justified only by the more formal

investigation procedures and financial requirements which were gradually insti- tuted by the Resettlement Administration. Loans and commitments made by

this agency during 1935 for rehabilitation purposes were to a considerable extent

in completion of agreements made originally by the rural rehabilitation corporations and hence do not differ greatly from the "advances" prior to July 1935. Amounts loaned during 1935 were as follows: July, $12,645; August, $1,070,696;

September, $876,946; October, $1,508,987; November, $1,965,727; December,

$2,472,036. A small number of advances made by State rural rehabilitation corporations after July 1, 1935, have not been included in the data.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 69

The transient program was authorized by the Act creating the

Federal Emergency Relief Administration. Obligations incurred for

transient relief were separately reported from July 1933 although ear- marked grants were not made to the States until September 1933.26 Some transient relief distributed from State and local funds prior to April 1933 is included in the data for general relief for those months.

From April 1933 through December 1935 obligations incurred specifically for transient relief totaled approximately $99,500,000. This

sum includes not only relief extended in cash and kind to transients

but the cost of subsistence in shelters and some other expenses incident

to the operation of the Federal transient program.27 The transient

program, which was partially a work relief and partially a direct relief program, continued to operate throughout the second half of 1935,

but there was marked reduction in the volume of expenditures for

transients in September and in the ensuing months.28 The emergency education program, which was a work relief program

for needy teachers, was established in October 1933 and continued

operations throughout 1934 and 1935. Obligations incurred for this

program, amounting to $34,000,000, include some administrative

salaries and other nonrelief costs which are not separable. These items

are small and do not have any appreciable effect on the series. The

emergency education program was gradually absorbed by the Works

Progress Administration during the latter half of 1935.

From the viewpoint of expenditures the college student aid program was the smallest of the special programs. It was in effect a work relief program designed to give limited financial assistance to needy college

students. Established experimentally in Minnesota in December

1933, it was extended to other States in February 1934. Its activities were confined to the academic year. The program was transferred

to the National Youth Administration as of September 1935. Total

obligations incurred for college student aid prior to its transfer

amounted to nearly $15,000,000. This amount is exclusive of over- head costs and represents actual amounts received by students.

The rural rehabilitation program was established in April 1934 and

functioned until July 1935 when it was transferred to the Resettlement

26 Figures for April, May, and June are estimated. It should be noted that the data on obligations incurred cover all transient relief reported to the FERA, in- cluding that given by local emergency relief administrations. These data do

not match the estimated case data shown in table 22, which represent cases cared

for in transient centers and camps under the Federal transient program.

27 It is not possible to segregate administrative cost and cost of plants and equipment for the entire period. For purposes of consistency these costs have been

retained in the data throughout. Total obligations incurred from July 1934 through June 1935 were $63,791,000, of which $6,247,000, or approximately 10

percent, was for materials, plants, and equipment.

28 Intake to transient bureaus was formally closed September 20, 1935, and liquidation of case loads proceeded rapidly after that time.
70 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Administration. During this period obligations incurred for rehabilitation and subsistence goods advanced to clients and for other costs incident to the development of the program amounted to $58,000,000.

Rehabilitation and subsistence goods, for most of wluch notes were

executed by clients, do not perhaps represent relief in the strictest sense

of the term but are included with relief expenditures in view of the fact

that the assistance was given in lieu of emergency relief and that

opportunity was provided for working off a portion of the loans by

employment on work relief projects.29 Most of the loans were still outstanding as of the end of the year 1936. The rural rehabilitation

program was carried on in 45 States, but more than 75 percent of the

obligations for subsistence and rehabilitation goods were incurred in

13 States. Hence, while expenditures for the program are relatively

unimportant in the national public assistance burden, they constitute an important part of the relief structure in some areas. Wage Assistance The term "wage assistance" has been used arbitrarily in this report

to connote earnings from public work programs embodying some but

not all of the traditional concepts of relief. 30 A number of Federal

agencies created during the years 1933 and 1935 sponsored employment programs of a modified relief nature intended to assist needy

workers, either by obviating the necessity for emergency relief or by

substituting useful employment for the relief allowance. These agencies include the Civilian Conservation Corps, the Civil Works Administration, the Civil Works Service, the Works Progress Administration, and other emergency units created in connection with the

broad Works Program authorized by Congress in April 1935.31 The public works program authorized by Title II of the National

Industrial Recovery Act in June 1933 is not regarded as a wage as- sistance program but as an extension of normal public works. Projects were let by contracts to private employers, wages were at prevailing

rates, hours of work were normal, and employees were hired in the

open labor market. Accordingly, wages on these projects, including

those sponsored by the Federal Emergency Administration of Public

Works (PWA), are not included as wage assistance. Beginning in

July 1935 many of the projects sponsored by PWA were financed from

funds appropriated for the Works Program and hence were subject to the requirements that preference in employment be given to relief clients and that wages and hours be regulated to a security wage.

29 See footnote 25, p. 68.

30 See p. 51.

31 The National Youth Administration, the Resettlement Administration, and

the Rural Electrification Administration were other emergency units created in connection with the Works Program. A complete list of participating units will be found in appendix C.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 71

Apr Jul Oct I933

Jan Apr Jul 1934

Jan Apr Jul Oct Dec 1935

FIG. 17- EXPENDITURES FOR WAGE ASSISTANCE

IN THE UNITED STATES

April 1933- December 1935

Source Division of Research, Statistics, and

Records, Works Progress Administration af-I499,w.p.a.

Wages paid on these PWA projects are therefore included in the wage

assistance data.

The wage assistance programs operated over widely different spans

of time and varied greatly in magnitude. They were likewise diverse

in their methods of selecting employees and in determining earnings.

Nevertheless, each program had a definite relief aspect and affected

significantly the course of public expenditures for relief over the 3-year

period.

The combined amount of wage assistance extended under the programs during the 3-year period was approximately $1,605,000,000.

Monthly expenditures for earnings of workers employed by the

separate agencies are shown in table 22. The sequence of the programs

and the relative volume of assistance distributed by them are shown

graphically in figure 17. It is apparent from the chart that expendi-
72 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

turcs for wage assistance were not evenly dispersed over the 3 years

but were concentrated in the first half of 1934, when the CWA program was in operation, and in the second half of 1935, when the Works

Program was being developed. More than two-thirds of the total volume of wage assistance for all periods was dispensed during these

2 half-year periods.

Civilian Conservation Corps

Expenditures of the Civilian Conservation Corps, first of the modified relief agencies to be created, were more evenly distributed than

those of other wage assistance programs. Payment for wage assist- ance began in April 1933 when the CCC was created and continued

uninterrupted through 1935 and subsequently. Its activities became

a part of the Works Program after April 193 5.

32 CCC enrollees

received subsistence in camps plus the monthly wage, of which a

substantial share was allotted to dependents. Through these

allotments a large amount of family relief was released in the home

localities. Monthly expenditures varied with enrollment levels but

increased gradually over the period. Aggregate expenditures for wages and subsistence by the close of 1935 were $601,710,000, of

which $456,798,000 was for wages. Subsistence cost as well as wage

payments are included in the data, since subsistence is given as a supplementary return for the work done by enrollees and may be

considered a part of the established wage. Excluded from the data

are all administrative costs, including amounts paid to reserve officers in charge of camps.

Civil Works Administration

The Civil Works Administration operated actively for a period of

about months. It was launched in November 1933 to speed the

employment of needy workers and assist in the restoration of purchasing power as a basis for recovery. An employment goal of

4,000,000 was set for December 15, 1933. Two million of this number were to be taken from the relief loads prior to December 1 , after

which date another two million were to be taken from the general

ranks of the unemployed without the application of any means test.33

82 As of Jul}' 1, 1936, Emergency Conservation Work was removed from the Works Program and has since operated with funds provided by specific appropriations, the first of which was contained in the First Deficiency Appropriation

Act, Fiscal Year 1937. See Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works

Progress Administration, Report on Progress of the Works Program, October 15, 1936, pp. 49, 55.

33 Weekly reports on CWA employment and expenditures did not distinguish

between persons taken from relief rolls and persons not from relief rolls, so that

it is not possible, even if it were deemed desirable, to separate the amounts dis- pensed to the two groups. Informal estimates indicate that considerably more

than half of the total workers had relief status prior to their transfer to CWA.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 73

Employment on CWA projects was at prevailing wage rates for

normal hours. Thus, wages under the CWA program represent a

distinctly higher standard of assistance than was accorded under the

CCC and other wage assistance programs. The Civil Works Service was a part of the Civil Works program. It was formed to sponsor work projects for clerical and professional workers, who

could not be employed on the construction projects of the regular

CWA program. These projects were financed from FERA funds

until February 1934, when they were absorbed into the regular CWA

program.

The total amount expended for wage assistance under the shortlived CWA and CWS programs was approximately $718,000,000,34 equal to almost 45 percent of all expenditures for wage assistance

during the 3-year period. Only $24,000,000 of this amount was for

the CWS program. Monthly expenditures for wage assistance under

the CWA program reached their peak in January 1934 when they

totaled almost $212,000,000. The decision of the Federal Government to terminate the Civil Works Administration and replace it with a program of work projects operated on a straight relief basis

resulted in rapid liquidation of CWA activities and the transfer of a

residual load of needy employees to the general relief rolls of the

Federal Emergency Relief Administration. The drop in wage assist- ance payments for April 1934 and the immediate and subsequent rise in emergency relief expenditures mark this shift in administrative

policy.

Works Program

The Works Program, authorized by the Federal Emergency Relief

Act of 1935, was the third important wage assistance program of the

Federal Government. It included within its scope the existing CCC

program, as well as numerous other permanent and emergency units

of the Federal Government. Most important of the new agencies was the Works Progress Administration, created to coordinate the

entire employment program as well as to administer work projects.

For purposes of the consolidated relief series, only WPA and CCC

payments have been shown separately. Expenditures of all other

agencies participating in the Works Program have been combined.

The participating agencies are listed in appendix C.

The relief aspects of Works Program employment are clearly indicated by the enabling legislation and the rules and regulations governing eligibility and earnings. These require that preference in employment be given to able-bodied relief workers and that except where

specific exemption is made a minimum of 90 percent of the employees

34 Excludes earnings of persons employed on administrative projects. Includes

hire paid to owner-drivers of teams, trucks, and mechanical equipment.
74 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

on any project be drawn from certified relief clients. Earnings for other than supervisory and administrative employees are set at a

security level and vary in amount according to geographic location

and class of work performed. Hourly wage rates are established for different regions with hours of work adjusted to permit employees to earn the monthly wage applicable to the type of work performed.38 Except for CCC payments wage assistance dispensed under the

Works Program attained no considerable volume until August 1935.

With the rapid transfer of employables from the emergency relief rolls, expenditures for wage assistance by WPA and other participating

agencies mounted steadily, as shown by figure 17, while emergency

relief expenditures gradually declined.36 The net effect of these two

movements on the total burden of public relief and assistance will

appear from the combined trend shown later in this section.

Categorical Relief During 1933, 1934, and 1935 relief to the aged, to the blind, and to dependent children was administered by State and local agencies

operating outside the sphere of Federal financial or administrative

control. Since there was no country-wide collection of monthly

statistical data relating to categorical relief for this period,37 monthly

estimates of total expenditures for these types of aid have been pre- pared for this study from information available from miscellaneous

sources. These sources are listed in appendix D, together with a

description of the methods used in estimating the monthly expenditures for each category.

From the estimates it appears that approximately one-quarter of a billion dollars was expended in the United States during the 3-year

period for relief to the aged, to the blind, and to dependent children.

Of this total amount, the aged received about 48 percent, the blind

8 percent, and dependent children 44 percent. Estimated monthly

expenditures for each class of relief are shown in table 22. Combined expenditures for categorical relief, estimated at $34,920,000 for the first half of 1933, increased over the period approximately 70 percent to an estimated total of $59,440,000 during the sec- ond half of 1935. Most of this expansion occurred in old-age relief,

which has constituted an increasing proportion of total expenditures

for categorical relief. Estimated expenditures for this type of assist35 Section 7 of the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935 conferred upon

the President the right to fix such rates of pay as he believed would accomplish

the purpose of the legislation and "not affect adversely or tend to decrease the going rates of wages paid for work of a similar nature." After June 1936 hourly

earnings were determined in accordance with prevailing rates, in keeping with

provisions of the Emergency Relief Act of 1936.

39 See fig. 16, p. 66.

37 See Part I, pp. 35-37, for data from the 120 urban areas included in the Urban

Relief Series from 1929.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 75

ance rose from $13,090,000 during the first half of 1933 to $35,940,000

during the second half of 1935, constituting 38 percent and 60 percent,

respectively, of total categorical relief in the two periods. The

enactment in a number of States of new laws providing aid to the

aged accounts for the relatively large increase in this category.

The general expansion in categorical relief during 1935, which is indicated by the monthly estimates, is doubtless due in part to the

anticipated operation of the Social Security Act, which was approved

in August 1935 but did not function until January 1936, when the

first grant was authorized.

THE COMBINED TREND OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE

The combined trend of outdoor public assistance for the 36 months

in 1933, 1934, and 1935 reveals marked fluctuations in total monthly

expenditures as well as major changes in the amounts spent for the

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

C W A

in operation

I Works Program

in operation

Wage n

assistance

Jan Apr Jul 1933

Oct Apr Jul Oct 1934

Jan Apr Jul Oct Dec 1935

FIG. 18-TREND of monthly expenditures for public

RELIEF AND WAGE ASSISTANCE

IN THE UNITED STATES

January 1933- December 1935

Source' Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration. Estimates of categoncol

relief based on miscellaneous sources listed m oppendix D. AF-I4BI, w. PA
76 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

component types of assistance. The changes in the relative importance of emergency relief, wage assistance, and categorical relief,

shown in figure 18, are caused primarily by administrative shifts from

one form of Federal assistance to another, resulting in changes in the

type and level of assistance extended to needy individuals and families.

Effects of Administrative Shifts in Relief and Assistance Programs

Categorical relief was a relatively small and constant portion of

outdoor public assistance during this period. The bulk of expenditures was for general emergency relief and wage assistance, with

emphasis alternating between the two. Except during the comparatively brief period in which the Civil Works Administration was in

operation and the period of Works Program development, emergency

relief constituted the preponderant share of the total. Larger monthly

payments extended under these two work programs explain in part

the bulge in the combined trend during the winter of 1933-1934 and

the upward movement during the latter part of 1935. The 3-year

peak in expenditures occurred in January 1934, when the Civil Works

program was at its height. Combined expenditures for public assist- ance in that month totaled $291,454,000.

Interdependence of Relief and Wage Assistance Trends Comparison of the trend of total expenditures for the three types

of public assistance with the trend of expenditures for categorical and

Table 23.—Monthly Expenditures for Emergency and Categorical Relief and for Emer- gency Relief, Categorical Relief, and Wage Assistance, Expressed as Relative Numbers,1 Continental United States, January 1 933-December 1935

[Average month 1933—1935=100 *]

Year and month

1933 January

February March

April... May -- June

July August. September

October November

Decemberim

January February March

April May

June..

Emergency

and categorical

relief

5255

66

95

111 106

Emergency

relief, categorical relief, and wage

assistance

434755

50

55

55

515149

54

74

149

195 158

15287

90

Year and month

19U July.—

August

September

October November

Decemberms

January

February March ... April May

June

July August

September

October November

December

Emergency

and categorical

relief

109 122

116

129

143

151

167

155

161

161 159

142

134 125

106 10787

67

Emergency

relief, cate- gorical relief, and wage

assistance

90

99

95

105

114 118

130

121 124 125

124

114

111 113 108

123 132

154

1 Rounded to the nearest unit.

• Base values are as follows: Emergency and categorical relief, $104,718,611; emergency relief, categorical

relief, and wage assistance, $149,301,861.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 77

emergency relief emphasizes the limitations of the relief series in

Part I, which are exclusive of wage assistance. Obviously the trend

of public expenditures for emergency relief was as significantly affected

in these 3 years by the development of the wage assistance programs

as by the impact of unemployment and drought. The months of

lowest expenditure for categorical and emergency relief are the

months of peak expenditure for all types of assistance combined.

On the other hand, the months of peak expenditures for categorical

and emergency relief are the months in which expenditures for wage

assistance were comparatively small, thus tending to hold down the

level of the combined series. The relative numbers shown in table 23

facilitate comparison of the trends of categorical and emergency relief and of total outdoor public assistance for the 36-month period.

I oo

80

60

40

20

I ii ii irir im ii

: Wage assistance

3 3 3

7 Z

Emergency relief

MIt* It* 18 Categorical relief

"1

Jan Apr Jul. 1933

Oct Jan Apr Jul 1934

Oct Jan Apr Jul 1935

Oct Dec

FIG. 19-PERCENT distribution of monthly expenditures

FOR PUBLIC RELIEF AND WAGE ASSISTANCE

IN THE UNITED STATES

January 1933- December 1935

Source: Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration. Estimates of categorical

relief bosed on miscellaneous sources listed in appendix D. af-i483,w.p.a. The interplay and reciprocal relationship between wage assistance

and emergency relief is effectively illustrated by figure 19 which shows

the relative rather than the absolute volume of expenditures for the

three components of the public assistance structure over the 36

months. The percentage figures are given in table 24.
78 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 24.—Percent Distribution 1 of Expenditures for Emergency Relief, Wage Assistance,

and Categorical Relief, Continental United States, January 1 933-December 1935

Year and month

Total

public

assistance Kmcrgcncy

relief Wage

assistance

( . t . ' i . T i i 1 relic f

19SS January 100.0 90.6 . 9.4 February 100.0 01.6 — 8.4 March 100.0 92.0 — 7. 1 AJ

,ril May

100.0 92. 2 0.

1

7.7

100.0 82.2 10.7 7.

1

June 100.0 76.

1

17 0 6.9 July 100.0 73.8 18.8 7.4

100.0 75.8 16.7 7.5 September 100.0 75.7 16.5 7.8 October 100.0 74.6 18.4 7.0 November 100.0 60.0 34.8 6.2 December inn n 22. 9 /4. 0 2.

6

!9Si

100 0 16.6 81.4 2.0 February 100.0 21.7 75.8 2.5 March 100.0 27.5 69.8 2.7 AJ>

ril May

100.0 71.9 23.4 4.7

100.0 82.0 13.3 4.7 June 100 0 81.0 14.

1

4.9 July 100.0 80.8 14 4 4.8 August 100 0 82.0 13.7 4.3 September 100.0 81.5 13.9 4.6 October 100 0 82.2 13.6 4.2 November 100 0 84.1 11.9 4.0 December 100.0 85.2 10.6 4.2

19SS January 100.0 85.8 10.0 4.2 February 100.0 85. 1 10.4 4.5 March 100.0 86.5 8.9 4.6 May

100.0 85.6 9.7 4.7

100.0 85.2 10.0 4.8 June 100 0 82.2 12.5 6.3 July 100.0 78.8 15.6 5.6 August 100.0 72 0 22.3 6.7 September 100.0 62.4 31.6 6.0 October 100 0 55.5 39.0 5.5 November 100.0 40.9 53.9 5.2 December 100.0 26.1 69.3 4.6

1 For absolute figures upon which these percentages are based, see table 22. Emergency relief constituted more than 90 percent of total expenditures for outdoor public assistance in January 1933, at which time

wage assistance was nonexistent. By January 1934, emergency relief had dwindled to 17 percent of the monthly total while wage assistance

had risen to 81 percent. Emergency relief again accounted for the

major share of expenditures in January 1935, with wage assistance only

10 percent of the total. With the initiation of the Works Program in

the latter half of 1935 emergency relief began to decrease and wage

assistance to increase in relative importance.

VARIABILITY IN UNDERLYING STATE TRENDS

The consolidated relief and wage assistance series which has been

constructed provides a measure of the trend of expenditures in the

total United States. The development of consolidated relief and as- sistance series for the separate States and localities has not been at- tempted in this report but it is certain that if such series were built up

they would show wide variability. Evidence of such variability

among the States is supplied by the charts at the end of the report,
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 79

which trace for the general relief program only the trends of obligations incurred for relief extended to cases and of cases receiving relief in the United States, in nine geographic divisions and in the individual

States, from July 1933 through December 1935.38 The data charted

here represent the largest component element in any consolidated

series for the respective areas in these 3 years. The span of active

operation of the Civil Works Administration and of the Works

Program within the period covered is indicated by cross-hatching of

the background. This cross-hatching serves two useful purposes: it flags the major cause of the decline in the volume of emergency relief operations occurring in these two periods and it calls attention to differences among the divisions and States in the timing of the impact

of the wage-assistance programs.

Further evidence of the variability in State relief patterns, which

would be reflected in State or local consolidated series, is supplied by

figures 21, 22, and 23. These charts, all constructed on the same

general principle, provide three sets of State comparisons for the general relief program at half-yearly intervals from July 1933 through

July 1935. The first chart relates to obligations incurred for relief per inhabitant; the second, to the percent of population on relief; and

the third, to average relief benefits per family case.

39 The figures

upon which the charts are based are presented, together with figures

for additional months, in appendix tables 8, 9, and 10. In the development of State and local consolidated series, some technical problems arise which are not a source of difficulty in the construction of a national series. For example, wage assistance extended by

the Civilian Conservation Corps cannot be measured locally. Employees on this program are commonly assigned to camps which are not located in their place of residence, and statistics are not compiled

according to residence. To a lesser degree, this same problem arises

in connection with other wage assistance programs: employees on

projects do not necessarily work in the locality in which they reside.

A similar problem is presented by transient relief which probably

should be excluded from any local series.

38 Fig. 20, pp. 81-86. As a preliminary to constructing the charts the data for both cases and obligations incurred were plotted on a semilogarithmic or ratio background. Through each curve a horizontal base line was drawn representing the average month in the second half of 1933. The obligation and case curves

for each area were then paired by superimposing the base lines. Rates of changes

in cases and in obligations from this base period can therefore be readily compared.

89 In each chart individual States are represented by numbered circles. The

States are arrayed in each month according to the size of the rate or average. The arrow in each column points to the median, while the shaded area marks off the interquartile range. Approximately one-half of the States fall within this area, one-fourth above, and one-fourth below the median value. States falling either above or below the shaded area may be considered to represent extreme

situations. 21612°—37 7
80 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

EXTENSION OF THE PROPOSED INTEGRATED SERIES BEYOND 1935

The pattern which has heen developed here for an integrated relief and wage assistance series is considered experimental rather than

definitive. It has heen set up as much with a view to stimulating

discussion as for the purpose of establishing a complete measure of the

volume and trend of public assistance in the last 3 years of the 26-year

period covered by this report. Although the series has not been

extended beyond 1935 it lays a foundation for a national series to be

currentby posted. Extension of the series into 1936 would, of course, show radical changes in emphasis on the three component types of

assistance. Expenditures for wage assistance expanded markedly

with the further development of the Works Program, and emergency

relief expenditures contracted with the return of direct relief to the

States and localities. Categorical relief has increased under the stimulus of new legislation and the grants-in-aid provided by the Social

Security Act. Monthly data on categorical relief, which were estimated for 1933,

1934, and 1935, have been collected currently by the Social Security

Board since the beginning of 1936. Because of the decentralization of

general relief administration in 1936, which resulted from the withdrawal of the Federal Government from the support of emergency

relief, monthly data reported for general outdoor (emergency) relief in

1 936 are not fully comparable for all States with those for earlier years. This would necessarily result in some weakening of a national integrated series. In many States, however, the comparability of the

data has not been impaired. This fact emphasizes the desirability of

State and local series to supplement any national series.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 81

C.W.A. in Works Program C.W.A. in Works Program

operation in operation operation in operation

I933 I934 I935 I933 I934 I935 Cases Obligations

FIG. 20 -TRENDS OF RELIEF CASES AND OF OBLIGATIONS INCURRED

FOR RELIEF EXTENDED TO CASES

General Relief Program, as Reported to the FE.R.A.

July I933- December I935

Note: The horizontol line running through each pair of curves

represents the overoge month, July to December I933,

far both cases and obligations.

Source: Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration AF- I17I, W PA
82 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

CWA In Works Program CWA. In Works Program

operation inoperotion operotion in operation

I933 I934 I935 I933 I934 I935 Cases Obligations

FIG. 20- trends of relief cases and of obligations incurred

FOR RELIEF EXTENDED TO CASES

General Relief Program, as Reported to the FE.R.A.

July I933 - December I935

— Continued —

Note: The horizontal line running through each poir of curves

represents the overage month, July to December I933,

for both cases and obligations.

Source Division of Research, Statistics, ond Records, Works Progress Administration. AF-N7I.W.RA.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 83

C.W.A. in Works Program C.W.A. in Works Program

operation in operation operation in operation

Fig. 20- trends of relief cases and of obligations incurred

for relief extended to cases

General Relief Program, as Reported to the FE.R.A.

July I933 - December I935 — Continued —

Note: The horizontal line running through each pair of curves

represents the average month, July to December I933,

for both cases and obligations.

Source: Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administrolion. AF- H7I, w.RA.
84 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Works Progrom

in operation Work* Progrom

in operation V V vl

I933 I934

" Semilogorithmic scale

I L I935

• Cases

I933 I934 =

Obligations

I935

FIG. 20- trends of relief cases and of obligations incurred

FOR RELIEF EXTENDED TO CASES

General Relief Program, as Reported to the FE.R.A.

July I933 - December I935

— Continued —

Note. The horizontot tine running through eoch pair of curves

represents the overage month, July to December 1933,

for both cases and obligations.

Source. Division of Reseorch, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration AF-II7I.W.PA.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 85

C.W.A. in Works Program C.W.A. in vvorxs program

operation in operation operation in operation

Fig. 20- TRENDS OF RELIEF CASES AND OF OBLIGATIONS INCURRED

FOR RELIEF EXTENDED TO CASES

General Relief Program, as Reported to the F. E.R.A.

July I933 - December 1935

— ContinuedNote The horizontal line running through eoch pair of curves

represents the overage month, July to December I933,

for both cases ond obligations

Sourbe: Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration AF-II7I.W.RA
86 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

C.W.A In Works Progrom CWA. In Works Program

operation In operation operation in operation

Fig. 20- trends of relief cases and of obligations incurred

for relief extended to cases

General Relief Program, as Reported to the FE. R.A.

July I933 - December I935

— Continued —

Note: The horizontal line running through eoch poir of curves

'represents the overage month, July to December I933,

for both cases ond obligations.

Source. Division of Research, Statistics, ond Records, Works Progress Administration. AF-N7I, w.ra.
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 87

FIG.2I- OBLIGATIONS INCURRED PER INHABITANT FOR RELIEF

EXTENDED TO CASES. BY STATES. GENERAL

RELIEF PROGRAM. F.E.R.A. HALF-YEARLY INTERVALS. JULY I933-JULY I935

II EXPLANATORY NOTE:

Approximotely one-holf The Sfotes

fall within the shaded area The orrow indicates the medktn

CW.A.

in operation

3

®

3Xg> 3

§©

9

9

3>

2>m

3

3®@

38®

3

g®9

1l

3>

July I933 January I934 July 1934 Januory 1935 July 1935

NEW ENGLAND MIDDLE SOUTH ATLANTIC SOUTH EAST NORTH WEST NORTH MOUNTAIN

ATLANTIC CENTRAL CENTRAL CENTRAL ©Molne ©New York ©Oelowore ©Kentucky ©Ohio ©Minnesota ©Montono ©New Hampshire ©New Jersey ©Morylond ©Tennessee ©Indiana ©lowo ©Idaho

©Vermont ©Pennsylvania ©District of Columbia ©Alobomo ©Illinois ©Missouri ©Wyoming

©Massachusetts ©Virginia ©Mississippi ©Michigan ©North Dokoto ©Colorado ©Rhode lelono ©West Virginia ©Arkansas ©Wisconsin ©South Ookoto ©New Mexico ©Connecticut ©North Carolina ©Louisiono ©Nebrosko ©Arizona ©South Carolina ©Oklohomo ©Konsos ©Utah ©Georgia ©Te»o» ©Nevodo

©FlondO

PACIFIC ©Woshirvjtan ©Oregon

@Colifomio

Source: Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Admmisl ration AF-IOI7, WPA
88 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

FlG. 22- PERCENT OF POPULATION RECEIVING RELIEF, BY

STATES. GENERAL RELIEF PROGRAM.

F.E.R.A. HALF-YEARLY INTERVALS. JULY I933-JULY I935

July 1933 Jonuory 1934 July 1934 Jonuory 1935 July 1935

NEW ENGLAND MIDDLE SOUTH ATLANTIC SOUTH EAST NORTH WEST NORTH MOUNTAIN

ATLANTIC CENTRAL CENTRAL CENTRAL OMame ©N,e* York ©Delaware ©Kentucky @Oh.o (§1 Minnesota ©Montana

(T)New Hompshire ©Ne* Jersey ©Maryland @Tennessee S 1 - d ana ©lowo @Idaho

(?) Vermont (9) Pennsylvania ©District of Columbia ©Alabamo ©Illinois ©Missouri ©Wyoming

©Massachusetts ©Virginia @Mississippi @Michigan ©North Dakola ©Catoroda 0Rhode Island ©West Virginia ©Arkansas ©Wisconsin ©South Dakota ©New Mexico ©Connecticut ©North Carolmo ©Louisiana ©Nebroska @Arizona ©South Carolina ©Oklahoma ©Kansas ©Utah

©Georgia ©Teios hfmdta ©Florida

PACIFIC

©WoshinrjMn

©California

Source: Division ol Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration AF-I0I5, wpa
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 1933-1935 • 89

FIG. 23 -AVERAGE MONTHLY RELIEF BENEFIT PER FAMILY CASE.

BY STATES. GENERAL RELIEF PROGRAM.

F.E.R.A. HALF-YEARLY INTERVALS. JULY I933-JULY I935

July I933 Jonuory 1934 July 1934 Jonuory 1935 July 1935

NEW ENGLAND MIDDLE SOUTH ATLANTIC SOUTH EAST NORTH WEST NORTH MOUNTAIN

ATLANTIC CENTRAL CENTRAL CENTRAL ©Mama ©New York ©Oeicwore ©Kentucky ©Oh.o ©Minnesota ©Montano ©New Hampshire ©New Jersey ©Maryland ©Tennessee- ©Indiana ©Iowa ©Idaho ©Vermont ©Pennsylvania ©District of Columbia ©Alcbomo ©Illinois ©Missouri ©Wyoming ©Massachusetts ©Virginia ©Mississippi ©Michigan ©North Dakota @Colorado ©Rhode Islond ©West VirgmiO ©Arkansas ©Wisconsin ©South Ookoto ©New Menico ©Connecticut ©North Carolina ©Louisiana ©Nebraska ©Arizona ©South Coroimo ©Oklahoma ©Konsos ©Utah

©Georgia ©Texos ©Nevada

©Flondo

PACIFIC ©Woshmgton ©Oregon

©California

Source Division of Research, Statistics, and Records, Works Progress Administration AF- 1019. W.PA.

Appendix A

SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES

Table 1.—Year of Original Enactment of State Legislation for Categorical Relief and for Emergency Unemployment Relief, as of December 31, 1935

Categorical relief Emergency unemploy- ment relief* Aid to the aged 1 Aid to the blind*

Aid to de- pendent

children 3

1933 1915 1917 1935

1931 1915 1913 1 QQ1 1935 1935 1917 1930 »1920 1913 lyoi 1935 1923 1931

1935 i 1921 1919 1931

1930 1922 1915 1931

1931 1931 1913 1931 1933 1933 1913 1931

1933 1898 1913 1931 1933 1935 1919 1931 1935 1903 1911 1932

1933 1913 1933 1925 1907 1913 1932

1929 1913 1913 1931

1934 1915 1913 1934

1935 1923 • 1917 1933

1933 1915 1933

1913 1933

1933 1917 1913 1933

1911 1915 1933

1931 1917 1932

1927 1929 1916 1931 1935 1935 1926 1918

1931 1915 1931 1923

1935 1935 1919 1935

1926 1924 1928 1933

1915 1933

1935 1932

1934 1935 1928 1935

State and geographic division

New England: Maine New Hampshire Vermont

Massachusetts Rhode Island Connecticut Middle Atlantic: New York New Jersey Pennsylvania

East North Central: Ohio

Indiana

Illinois Michigan

Wisconsin West North Central: Minnesota Iowa

Missouri North Dakota

South Dakota

Nebraska

Kansas

South Atlantic: Delaware.- Maryland

District of Columbia.

Virginia West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Oeorgia

Florida East South Central: Kentucky

Tennessee Alabama

Mississippi

1 Data from Bureau of Labor Statistics, Parker, Florence E., "Experience Under State Old-Age Pension

Acts in 1934," Monthly Labor Review, August 1935, pp. 303-305. Information on laws enacted during remainder of 1935 supplied by Bureau.

' Data from Bureau of Labor Statistics, "Public Pensions for the Blind in 1935," Monthly Labor Review, August 1936, pp. 305-307.

3 Data from U. S. Children's Bureau, Chart No. 3, "A Tabular Summary of State Laws Relating to Public Aid to Children in Their Own Homes in Effect January 1, 1934."

4 The dates given are for the first State legislation financing emergency unemployment relief. Acts creat- ing emergency relief administrative bodies or authorizing investigations are omitted unless involving financial aid. Data from Lowe, Robert C, FERA Digest of State Legislation for the Financing of Emergency

Relief, January 1, 19Sl-June SO, 19S5, Municipal Finance Section, Federal Emergency Relief Administration, August 1, 1935; and Lowe, Robert C. and Staff, Supplement for Period July 1, 1935-February t9, 19S6, Division of Social Research, Works Progress Administration, 1936.

5 Year in which blind pension provision was added to act.

• In 19 1 1 a State law was enacted authorizing aid to dependent children in Jackson and St. Louis Counties. 91
92 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 1.—Year of Original Enactment of State Legislation for Categorical Relief and for Emergency Unemployment Relief, as of December 31 , 1 935—Continued

State and geographic division

Categorical relief

Aid to the aged Aid to the

blind

Aid to de- pendent

children

Emergency unemploy- ment relief

West South Central: Arkansas

Louisiana Oklahoma

Texas Mountain: Montana

Idaho Wyoming

Colorado New Mexico

Arizona Utah Nevada

Pacific: Washington

Oregon

California

1935

1935

1923

1931 1929 1927

1933 1929 '1923

1933 1933 1929

1931 1928

1935

1917

1935

1925

1931 1925

1933 1935

1929

1917 1920

1915

1917

1915

1913 1915

1913

1931

; 1914 1913

1913

1913

1913

1913

1935

1934

1931 1933

1933 1935

1933 1933

1935

1933

1933 1933

1933

1933

1931

7 Declared unconstitutional; next act passed 1917.

> Repealed same year; next act (Hissed 1925. Source: Compiled from miscellaneous sources listed in footnotes.

Table 2.—Expenditures for Relief to Families i n Their Homes and to Homeless Men in 308

Cities, by States, First Quarters of 1 929 and of 1 931 , With Percent From Governmental and Private Funds and Percent of Change Between 1929 and 1931

State and geographic

division

Number of

cities re- port- ing

Total expenditures

first quarter

Per

Governmental

First quarter

xnt

Private

First quarter

Percent of change

from first quarter of 1929 to first quarter

of 1931

1929 1931 1929 1931 1929 1931 Total

Oovern- mental

Pri- vate

Total New England Maine New Hampshire Vermont ' Massachusetts. . . ... Rhode Island » Connecticut Middle Atlantic. New York New Jersey Pennsylvania.. . .. _ East North Central Ohio

Indiana.. . Illinois Michigan . . Wisconsin ... .

308 $16, 621,341 $56, 669, 124 65.0 60.4 35.0 39.6 240.9 216.6 286.1

44 3, 099,842 7, 584, 543 81.7 86.6 18.3 13.4 144.7 159.5 78.6

2

2

29

38

64

85, 150 38,814

2,504,217

118,457 353,204

5,611,877

107,667

71, 797

5, 469, 708 343,502

1, 591, 869

21, 250, 354

95.5

94. 2

877T

66.2

43.6

67.7

91.9

88.7

907§

53.4 79.7

46.2

4.5 5.8

1279 33.8

56.4

32.3

8.

1

11.3

974

46.6

20.3

53.8

26.4 85.0

11871 190.0 350.7

278.7

21.7

74.1

12772

133.8 723.3

158.6

127.4 262.7

5971 300.2

62.2

529.9

22

22

20

81

3, 835, 797 553,0%

1,222,984

3, 877, 753

15, 131, 933

1, 775, 322

4,343,099

17, 934, 510

71. 2 80.8

50.6

66.0

51.3 69.6

18.8

68.3

28.8

19.2 49.4

34.0

48.7

30.4 81.2

31.7

294.5 221.0

255.1

362.5

184.4

176.5 31.8

378.7

566.9

408.1

483.7

331.0

23

1320

1510

1, 187, 575

244, 976

1, 012, 381

1, 035, 036

397, 785

3,433, 126 1,338,451

4, 135, 889

7, 289, 698

1, 737, 346

45.8

51.5

64.

1

88.0

82.8

36.2

71.3

35.

1

96.6 89.9

54.2

48.5

35.9 12.0

17.2

63.8 28.7 64.9

3.4

10.1

189.

1

446.4

308.5

604.3 336.8

128.7

657.3

123.7 672.5 374.0

240.1 222.7 638.0

101.7

156.9

1 No incorporated areas of over 30,000 in this State

J No report from Pawtucket.
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES • 93

Table 2.—Expenditures for Relief to Families in Their Homes and to Homeless Men in 308

Cities, by States, First Quarters of 1929 and 1931, With Percent From Governmental and Private Funds and Percent of Change Between 1929 and 1931 —Continued

State and geographic

division

West North Cen

tral Minnesota Iowa

Missouri North Dakota'

South Dakota

Nebraska

Kansas

South Atlantic- Delaware Maryland

District of Columbia-.

Virginia West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia

FloridaEast South Cen

tral Kentucky

Tennessee Alabama

Mississippi West South Cen

tral Arkansas

Louisiana Oklahoma

TexasMountain Montana

Idaho i Wyoming i Colorado New Mexico ' Arizona Utah Nevada 1

Pacific Washington

Oregon

California 3

Number of

cities re- port- ing

Total expenditures

first quarter

1929

$1, 142, 443

435, 000

180, 019

365, 764

14,887

77,317

69, 456

587, 031

13,711

135, 196

89, 894

92, 985

46, 577

72, 409

20, 716

44, 036

71, 507

213, G66

78, 571

90, 651

39, 897 4,547

280, 539

22, 991

33, 704

80, 624

143, 220

269, 111

33, 427

155, 081

24,316

56, 287

1, 539, 079

267, 504 91,981

1, 179, 594

1931

$2, 219, 126

728, 472 326,610

919, 875

12,914 115,628

115, 627

1, 406, 687

198, 618

378, 394

188, 873

140, 755

113, 730

145, 956

28, 250

118, 660

93, 451

695, 418

272, 192

238, 893 171,332

13, 001

866, 156

104, 790

60, 381

359, 713

341, 272

447, 477

54, 492

201, 815

48, 013

143, 157

4, 264, 853

521, 569

399, 052

3, 344, 232

Percent

Govern- mental

First quarter

1929

49.5

58.5 66.2

24.6

947b"

51. 4 69.5

27.2

12. 7 39.9

14. 1 50.4

26.7

24. 2

8. 2 58.4

18.6

19.9 26.5

2TH

30.9

21. 0

1.8 55.2

25.7

71.8

93.9

42.8

74.4

56.5

49.0

44. 1 59. 1

1931

57.7

56.8 39.0

9376

45.8

61.4

25.8

5.0 32.6

21. 1 16. 7 32.3

29. 0

27.6 22.0

57. 7

39.4

53. 2 22.4 43.6 6.0

45. 3

55.8

1. 5 55.9 38.6

67.8

76.6

74.1

37.8

65.8

73.3

53.9

76.6 75.9

Private

First quarter

1929

50.5

41.5 33.8

75.4

6Tb" 48.6

30.5

72.8

100.0 87.3

60.

1

85.9

49.6

73.3 75.8

91.8

41. 6

81.4

80.

1

73.5

100. 0

97. 5

69.

1

79.0

98. 2 44.8

74.3

28. 2

29. 4

57.2

25.6

43.5

51. 0 55.9

40.9

42.3 43.2

61.0 6A

54.2

38.6

74.2

95. 0 67.4 78.9

83.3

67. 7 71.0

72.4

78.0

42.3

46.8

77.6

56. 4 94.0

54.7

44. 2

98. 5

44.

1

61.4

32. 2

23.4

25.9

62. 2

34. 2

26.7

46.

1

23.4

24. 1

Percent of change

from first quarter of

1929 to first quarter

of 1931

Total

94. 2

67.5

81.4

151.5 -1373

49.6 66.5

139.6

, 348. 6 179.9

110. 1 51. 4 144.2

101.6 36.4

169. 5 30.7

225.5

246.4

163.5 329.4

185.9

8.7

355.8

79. 2 346.2

138.3

63.0

30.

1

97.5

154.3

177.1

95. 0 333.8

183. 5

1 No incorporated areas of over 30,000 in this State.

3 No report from Santa Ana.

Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, special report, Relief Expenditures by Governmental and Private Organizations, 19Z9 and 19S1, 1932.
94 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 3.—Expenditures per Inhabitant for Relief to Families in Their Homes and to Homeless Men in 308 Cities, by States, First Quarters of 1929 and of 1931

State and geographic division

Total New England Maine New Hampshire Vermont 1 Massachusetts Rhode Island » Connecticut Middle Atlantic... New York New Jersey Pennsylvania

East North Central. Ohio

Indiana

Illinois Michigan

Wisconsin West North Central Minnesota Iowa

Missouri North Dakota'

South Dakota

Nebraska Kansas

South Atlantic Delaware. Maryland

District of Columbia

Virginia West Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia

FloridaEast South Central. Kentucky

Tennessee Alabama

Mississippi West South Central Arkansas

Louisiana Oklahoma

TexasMountain Montana—

Idaho'... Wyoming 1 _ Colorado New Mexico '_ Arizona Utah. Nevada ' Pacific Washington

Oregon

California 4

Total Oovernmental Private Number

of cities First quarter First quarter First quarter

reporting

1929 1931 1929 1931 1929 1931

308 $0. 34 $1. 17 $0. 22 $0.71 $0. 12 $0. 46

44 .75 1.85 .61 1.60 . 14 .25

2 . 81 L 02 . 77 . 94 .04 . 08

2 .36 . 66 . 34 . 59 . 02 .07 —

29 . 90 1.96 .78 L 78 .12 .18

3 .34 .99 . 23 . 53 . 1

1

. 46

8 . 46 2. 09 . 20 L 66 . 26 '. 43 M A 1 IT 1. At . 24 . M»» . 12 . 74 22 1 fil 1 . OO . A\J Q4 . oO . 12 . 80

22 . 26 . 83 . 21 . 58 . 05 . 25 20 . 29 L 03 . 15 . 19 . 14 . 84

81 . 31 L 43 . 20 .98 . 11 .45

23 . 36 1. 04 . 16 .38 . 20 . 66

13 . 20 L 10 . 10 .79 . 10 , 3i 20 . 23 .94 . 15 .33 . 08 . 61

16 . 41 2.86 .36 2 76 .05 10

10 .36 1.59 .30 1.43 .06 .16

21 .34 .67 .17 .33 .17 .34 3 . 52 . 87 . 30 . 50 . 22 . 37

7 . 38 . 70 . 25 . 40 . 13 '. 30

S . 26 .66 . 06 . 26 . 20 , 40 1 .45 .39 .42 .36 .03 .03

2 . 27 . w . 14 . lo . 13 . 22

3 . 23 . 39 . 16 . 24 . 07 . 15

34 . 16 . 39 . 04 . 10 . 12 .29

1 . 13 1.86 .09 . 13 1.77

3 . 15 .43 .02 .14 .13 .29

1

lfi

. dOtf . 07 — . 11 . 31 6 .19 .28 .03 .05 . 16 .23

3 .24 58 . 12 19 12 . 39 8 .18 .35 .05 . 10 .13 .25

2 .18 .25 .04 .07 .14 .18

5 .09 . 23 .01 .05 .08 18 5 . 17 . 23 . 10 . 13 . 07 . 10

13 .14 .45 .03 . 18 . 11 .27

4 .17 .60 .03 .32 . 14 .28

4 . 14 . 38 . 04 . 08 . 10 . 30

3 . 10 . 43 . 19 . 10 . 24

2 06 . 16 v / . 01 . 06 . 15

21 . 11 .35 .03 . 16 .08 . 19 2 .20 .93 .04 .52 . 16 .41 3 .06 . 11 (') (') .06 . 11 3 .22 1.00 .12 .56 .10 .44

13 .10 .24 .03 .09 .07 .15 8 .40 .67 .29 .45 . 11 .22

1 .84 1.38 .79 1.06 .05 .32

~3 .42 .54 .30 .40 .12 .14 ~2

.30 .60 .13 .23 .17 .37

2 .31 .79 .23 .52 .08 .27

22 .33 .91 .19 .67 . 14 .24

5 .41 .80 . 20 .43 .21 .37

1 .30 1.32 .13 1.01 .17 .31

16 .32 .90 . 19 .68 .13 .22

1 No incorporated areas of over 30,000 in this State.

1 No report from Pawtucket.

» Less than $0,005.

4 No report from Santa Ana.

Source: U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, special report, Relief Expenditure* by Governmental and Private Organizations, 1S£9 and 19S1, 1932.
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES • 95

Table 4.—Cities Represented in Urban Relief Series, U. S. Children's Bureau

State and city

Birmingham

Mobile

California: Berkeley Los Angeles Oakland

Sacramento San Diego San Francisco

Colorado: Denver

Connecticut: Bridgeport Hartford New Britain New Haven

Delaware: Wilmington

District of Columbia: Washington

Florida: Jacksonville Miami

Georgia: Atlanta

Illinois: Chicago

Springfield Indiana: Evansville Fort Wayne

Indianapolis South Bend

Terre Haute

Iowa:Des Moines

Sioux City Kansas: Kansas City

Topeka

Wichita Kentucky:

Louisville Louisiana: New Orleans Shreveport Maine:

Portland Maryland:

Baltimore

Massachusetts: Boston

Brockton Cambridge

Fall River Lawrence

Lowell Lynn

Maiden New Bedford Newton

Springfield Worcester Michigan:

Detroit

Flint Grand Rapids

Pontiac Saginaw

Minnesota: Duluth

Minneapolis

St. Paul

Missouri: Kansas City

St. Louis Nebraska: Omaha New Jersey: Jersey City Newark

Trenton New York: Albany

Buffalo New Rochelle New York

Niagara Falls Rochester

Syracuse

Utica Yonkers North Carolina: Asheville Charlotte Greensboro Winston-Salem

Ohio:Akron

Canton

Cincinnati Cleveland Columbus

Dayton

Ohio—Continued

Springfield Toledo Youngstown

Oklahoma:

Tulsa

Oregon: Portland Pennsylvania: Allentown

Altoona Bethlehem

Chester

Erie Harrisburg Johnstown

Lancaster

Philadelphia Pittsburgh Reading

Scranton Sharon

Wilkes-Barre Rhode Island: Providence South Carolina: Charleston Tennessee:

Knoxville Memphis

Nashville Texas:

Dallas El Paso

Fort Worth

Houston

San Antonio

Utah:

Salt Lake City

Virginia: Norfolk Richmond

Roanoke

Washington:

Seattle Tacoma

West Virginia: Huntington

Wisconsin: Kenosha Madison

Milwaukee

Racine

Source: Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-35, Publication No. 237, U. S. Department of Labor, Children's Bureau, 1937.

21612°—37-
96 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 5. —Monthly Expenditures (or Relief From Public and Private Funds in 120 Urban

Areas, Expressed as Relative Numbers, January 1 929-December 1935 1

[Average month 1031-1933-100']

January

February... March

April May

June

July August

September.

October November.

December..

January

February... March

April May

June

July August

SeptemberOctober November

December.

January

February... March

April May

June

July August

September.

October November.

December..

January

February...

March....... April May

June

July August

September.

October November.

December..

January

February... March

April May.

June

July... August

September.

October November. DecemberYear and month

1929

19,0

tm

193t

1933

1 OUH pui>-

lie and

private

Public Total

private Total Genera! Allowances

14.9 13.0 7.

1

46.5 26.3

14. 9 13. 1 7.3 45.8 26.0

15. 0 13. 2 7.3 46.9 25.5

14. 0 12. 5 6.6 46. 7 22.9

13. 5 12. 2 6.0 47.3 21.4

12. 8 11. 7 6.5 4«. 9 19.8

12. 7 11.5 6.4 46.8 19.8

12. 8 11.6 6.4 47. 3 19.6

12. 6 11.5 5.3 47.0 19.4

13. 5 12. 3 6.

1

47. 7 20.9

14. 7 13. 3 7.2 47. 6 23.0

17.9 15.6 9.8 48.7 31.3

20.0 18.0 12. 4 50. 3 31.8

20.4 18. 7 13. 1 50. 5 30. 9

21. 9 20. 2 14. 7 52. 1 31.5

21. 2 19. 5 13.8 52.0 31.0

19. 2 17. 6 11. 4 52. 7 29.2

18.

1

16. 5 10. 1 53. 2 27.3

18.

1

16.7 10. 1 64.5 26.4

18.6 17. 5 11.0 54. 5 25. 6

19. 8 18.7 12.4 65. 1 26. 3 23.0 22.0 16. 1 55.8 28.9

28. 3 25.8 20. 5 56. 4 42. 5 47.9 36. 5 32.6 58.6 115.2

55.6 42. 5 37. 2 72. 7 13Z9

58.6 43. 5 38.0 75.0 147.8

C4. 7 47. 3 41. 5 80. 2 167.8

55. 5 43. 3 36. 4 82.8 127.8

51. 2 44. 4 37.2 85.9 91.6

47. 7 43. 9 36. 1 88.3 70.0

46.8 44.6 36.5 90.6 59.9

43. 1 40. 6 31. 7 91. 6 57.8

45. 5 42.8 310 93.2 61.7

50.4 46. 2 37.6 95.5 75.3 61.0 52. 1 44. 2 97.5 113.5 88.7 66.9 60. 7 102.3 218.0

93. 8 70. 2 64. 4 103. 5 233.4

102.0 83. 2 79. 3 105.4 212.9

113.8 96. 7 94. 9 107. 6 214.9

96. 1 88.

1

84. 7 107.5 143.3 91.0 89. 2 86.

1

106.9 98.7

91. 2 90. 8 88. 0 106.8 93.6

83. 5 82. 4 78. 2 106.

0

90.4

90. 9 91.5 88.8 106.9 87.6

92. 2 93.3 90.8 107.5 85.3

96.

1

100. 2 98.7 108. 5 71.

8

111.8 115.9 116.9 110.3 87.3

131.3 134.9 138.9 111.9 109.8

135.1 141.0 146.2 111.6 100.3

145.3 152.7 160.6 107.4 101.5

167.9 179. 7 192.4 107.6 98.1 154.9 168.6 179.7 105.5 73.7

153. 1 169.2 180.4 105.0 58.0

148.4 164.6 175.3 103.4 52.4

135.6 150.6 159.0 102.3 47.3

140.4 156. 1 165.5 102.4 47.4

134.3 149.5 157.8 101.8 44.4

145.6 163.3 174. 1 101.6 40.5

153.9 173.3 185.7 102.7 39.2

123.5 136.9 142.6 104.3 44.2

1 For absolute amounts see original source of data.

1 Base values are as follows: Total public and private, $25,829,314; total public, $22,096,018; general public,

$18,805,842; public special allowances, $3,290,176; and total private, $3,733,296.
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES • 97

Table 5.—Monthly Expenditures for Relief From Public and Private Funds in 120 Urban

Areas, Expressed as Relative Numbers, January 1 929-December 1935—Cont'd

[Average month 1931-1933=100]

Year and month

Total public and

private Total

Public

General Special allowances

Total

private

1934 January . 118. 3 131. 4 136. 1 104 6 40.8 February 123. 7 138. 6 144. 8 103 S 35.3 March 146 7 165. 1 175. 5 105. G 38.0 April 217. 0 247. 7 272. 8 104 4 35.3 May 233 7 267. 3 295 5 105. 5 35.3 June _ 221. 5 253. 7 279. 3 107. 7 30.8 July... 229 9 263. 8 290 9 108 s 29.4 August 246 4 283. 1 313 3 110 6 28.8 September 231 0 265. 2 292 2 111 1 28.3 October 253 3 291. 3 322 2 114. 2 28.9 November 272 1 313. 1 347. 6 116. 4 29 2 December 289 2 332. 4 367. 4 132 6 33! i

1935 January 332 8 383. 7 426 9 136 7 31.4 February 304 8 351. 4 388 7 138 4 29.0 March 311 1 358. 8 396 9 141 5 28.8 April... 308 1 355. 4 392 4 144 1 27.8 May 304 4 351. 3 387 2 146 1 26.5 June 284 0 328. 0 359. 3 149 0 23.4 July 298 0 344. 4 378 1 151 8 23.1 August _ 277 2 320 1 349 2 153 4 23.2 September 236 : 272. 9 293 8 153 7 22.2 October 238 5 274. 8 295 5 156 2 23.7 November 198 5 228. 1 240 2 159 0 23.7 December 161 5 183. S 187. 6 162 3 29.3

Source: Derived from absolute amounts published by Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas, 19H9-S5, Publication No. 237, U. S. Department of Labor,

Children's Bureau, 1937.
98 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 6.—Indices of Monthly Expenditures for Outdoor Relief in Rural-Town Areas, 1 Urban Areas,2 and Total United States, January 1 932-December 1935

(Average month 1(13.1=100]

Year

1931 January

February March

April May

June

July August. September

October November

December

11)33 January

February March

April May

June

July August

September.

October November

December

Rural- town

areas 1

18. 3

19. 3 20.6

20.7

18.0 17.6

17.8

17. 1 19.3 23.4 31.5

35.6

42.8

43. 6 47.4

47. 9 46.6

42. 1 51. 1 54.4

50.0 58.3

63.7

50. 3

Urban

areas >

34. 5 37.6 42.0

35.4

33 4 33.6

30.8

33.5

34.0

3.1. 4 41.2

48.4

49.6

.13. 4 61.7

56.9

56.2 54.5

49.8

51.6

49.3

53.5

56.6

45.3

Total United

.States

30.6

33. 1 36.7 31.8

29. 6

29. 7 27 6 29.5

30.3

32. 4 38.8

45.3

47.9

50.9

58. 1 54. 7 53.9

51.4

50. 1 52.3 49.5

54.7

58.3 46.5

Year

January

February March.

April May

June

July August September

October November

December

1936 January

February March

April May

June

July... August

September

October November

December

Rural- town

areas 1

50.6

47. 1 56.3 73.7 82.2

85. 7 92 4

103. 3 ioa e

10.1. 2

1 18. 0

125.5

139.2

130. 6

128.0

122.9

119. 1 101. 2 96.3

89.0

73.3

76.9

68. 1 55. 1

Urban

areas '

43.6

45.6 54.0

80.0

86.2

81. 6 84.8

90.8

85.2

93. 4 100. 3

106.6

122.7

112. 4 114.8

113.6

112. 2

104. 7 109.9

102. 2 87.2

87.9

73. 1 59.5

Total United

States

45. 3

45. 9 54.6

78.4

85. 2 82.6 86.6

93.8

88.9

96.3

104. 7 111.2

126.7

116.9

118.0

115.9 113.9

103. 8

106.5 98.9

83.8 85.2

71.9

58.3

i Represents counties containing no city of 25,000 or over, and Massachusetts and Connecticut townships

of less than 5,000.

• Represents counties containing cities of 25,000 or over, and Massachusetts and Connecticut townships of

5,000 and over. Source: Unpublished data from the Division of Social Research, Rural Section, Works Progress Administration. Indices based on data from Rural-Town Relief Series and Urban Relief Series.
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES • 99

Table 7.—Summary of Expenditures for Public Outdoor Relief in Selected Areas, 1910-1935

Year

Financial MountStatis- ing

tics of Bill for Cities Relief U.S. Hurlin Census 36

16 Cities'

Cities

Cost of Relief

in 16 Cities Clapp- USCB

16 Cities

Trends

in Philan- thropy

in New

Haven W.

King

Financial Trends New

in Or- York

ganized State Indiana

Social Depart- State Work ment Board

in New of of Char- York Social ities City Wel- K.Hunt- fare ley

Special Report

U. S. Census

308

Cities

U. S. Chil- dren's Bureau

120 Urban

Areas

WPA

Division of

Social Research

385 Rural- Town

Areas

Amount in thousands

1910..

_

$16 $229 $885 $266

1911_._ $1, 559 17 241 921 271 1912... 1,700 18 248 945 306 1913... (

3

) (

3 )

16 253 956 302 1914... 15 223 1,084 3C3 1915... m 14 256 1,277 435

1916. __ (

3

) $1, 685 16 646 1, 158 391 1917... 3, 488 1,904 15 1,472 2, 107 427 1918... 3,980 2, 071 17 2, 087 3,094 426 1919... 6, 183 2,386 28 2, 391 3, 653 388 1920... (

3 ) 2, 957 51 2,981 4, 351 417

1921... (3

) 5, 343 79 4, 140 5,703 610

1922. .

.

(

3

) 4,742 92 4,932 7, 252 741 1923... 11, 640 3,877 97 4,984 7,278 524 1924... 12, 818 4, 553 $4, 671 111 5, 316 7,799 619

1925. .

.

14, 709 5, 301 112 5,662 8,548 841 1926. _. 14, 814 5, 909 8, 966 (

s

) 1927... 17, 059 6, 301 10, 036 1, 104 1928... 20, 014 7,293 11, 789 ( 3

) 1929. __ 18, 989 7, 636 7, 750 13,083 1,446 2$10,802 $33, 449 1930... 28, 004 9, 271 17, 786 2,506 54, 754 1931... 64, 142 31, 665 41, 277 4, 681 ! 34, 201 123, 320 1932... (

3

) 57, 870 88, 203 (

3

) 251, 104 $10, 223 $446, 846

1933... m ' 101,211 '156,376 (

3

) '421,032 '22, 688 « 802, 423

1934... (

3 )

' 169,316 '215,601 (

3

) '652,467 '39, 664 ' 1, 287, 139

1935. .

_

(

3 ) (') (

3) (

3

) '829,224 5 45,608 « 1, 595, 694

1 Figures interpolated; selected agencies in these cities.

1 Figures are for the first quarter of year.

3 Figures not available or not available in comparable form.

* Excludes CWA expenditures.

{ Excludes Works Program expenditures.

Source: Compiled from sources indicated in table heading. Full source references given in Part I, p. 5 fl.
100 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 8.—Obligations Incurred per Inhabitant 1 for Relief Extended to Cases, General

Relief Program, FERA, by States,2 Quarterly Intervals, July 1933-October 1935

8tatc and geographic division July

1933

Octo1933Januarv til jr 1934

April

1934 July1934

October

1934

January

1935

April

1935 July

1935

Octo1935

United States total $0. 45 $0. 48 $0. 36 |Q 70 $0. tl $0. 90 $1. 16 $1. 04 $0 00 $0. 74 New England:

. 40 . 36 . 33 . 84 . 64 . 78 . 87 . 80 . 67 . 57

. 20 . 26 . 32 . 53 . 37 . 56 . 55 . 93 . 79 . 63 Vermont ... . 23 . 16 . 11 . 31 . 32 . 37 . 62 . 65 . 48 . 18

. 70 . 63 . 52 1. 1

1

1. 21 1. 42 L 86 L 77 1. 69 1. 48 Knode Island . 49 . 41 . 21 . 76 . 69 . 78 1. 11 . 89 . 80 . 85

. 42 . 38 . 26 . 79 . 66 . 83 1. 11 1. 07 . 99 . 82 Middle Atlantic:

. 85 . 91 . 57 1 . 61 1. 61 1 . 72 1 . 95 1. 86 1. 85 1. 19 New Jersey . 46 . 47 . 48 1 . 21 . 89 1 . 21 1. 23 1. 12 1. 03 . 94

. 70 . 67 . 67 L 09 . 89 1 . 02 1. 75 L 73 1. 64 1. 41 East North Central:

. 53 . 50 . 28 . 68 . 81 . 95 1. 35 1. 11 1. 24 . 72

. 31 . 36 . 21 . 44 . 59 . 86 1. 01 92 . 62 . 30

. 66 . 75 . 54 . 77 L 02 1. 07 I. 44 1. 26 1. 06 1. 01

. 57 . 76 . 46 . 68 . 82 1 . 22 L 38 1. 02 . 94 . 90

. 51 . 48 . 37 . 71 1 . 04 1 . 23 1. 37 1. 18 . 99 . 81 west iNortii i enirai. Minnesota. , . *o rtn

. £1 . 66 1. 11 1. 49 1 . 25 . 92 . 76

. 20 . 22 . 1

1

. 23 . 39 . 43 . 63 . 53 . 34 . 33 Missouri . 22 . 21 . 17 . 33 . 40 . 59 . 81 . 69 . 58 . 52

. 16 . 33 . 71 1. 72 . 95 I. 63 1 . 84 1. 84 . 94 . 84

1 , . 1 1 , 1 ,, 1 ...

. 21 . 67 . no 1. 00 1 . 93 2. 43 2. 34 1. 94 . 71 . 55

. 07 . 15 . 18 . 42 . 35 . 65 . 96 . 89 . 59 . 58

. 27 . 27 . 10 . 36 . 61 . 72 1. 17 1. 01 . 69 . 08

fiouiii Atlantic.

. 74 . Ov AO „. 33 . 35 . 38 . 42 . 31 mm

. 36 . 26 Maryland . 41 . 56 . 61 . 94 . 72 . 75 . 90 . 79 . 61 . 56

District of Columbia . 42 . 59 . 28 1. 19 . 94 L 16 1. 17 1. 04 . 93 . 66

V lrginia . 04 . 05 . 06 . 06 . 15 . 17 . 24 . 32 . 32 . 23 AY est Virginia . 62 . 68 . 40 . 34 . 64 . 75 . 96 . 76 . 62 . 62 North Carolina . 16 . 15 . 15 . 18 . 22 . 21 . 32 . 28 . 25 . 20 South Carolina . 31 . 51 . 13 . 38 . 37 . 53 . 37 . 23 . 23 . 10 Oeorgia . 10 . 32 . 18 . 28 . 31 . 39 . 38 . 41 . 30 . 21

. 35 . 80 . 11 1 . 06 . 84 . 88 . 68 . 45 . 34 . 30 East South Central: Kentucky . 27 . 20 . 32 . 15 . 26 . 33 . 42 . 42 . 36 . <5o Tennessee . 12 . 13 . 09 . 14 . 44 . 19 . 36 . 43 . 27 . 17 Alabama . 16 . 37 . 25 . 33 . 42 . 38 . 37 . 37 . 41 . 25 Mississippi . 14 . 18 . 34 . 30 . 42 . 32 . 47 . 32 . 29 . 30 West South Central:

. 18 . 27 1Q . 07 . 29 . 49 . 50 . 39 . 45 . 10 Louisiana . 44 . 52 . 74 . 50 . 51 . 51 . 58 . 64 . 65 . 41 Oklahoma _ .22 .30 . 10 .33 .29 .52 .63 .37 .33 .3« Texas . 22 . 16 . 12 .24 .39 .49 . 74 . 52 .33 .23 Mountain: Montana .53 .50 .47 1.22 1.22 1.38 1.86 1.35 1.03 .68 Idaho _ .27 .13 .20 .44 .40 .80 1.35 1.03 .74 .57 Wyoming .09 .09 .07 .49 .76 1.03 .92 .89 .74 .33 Colorado .35 .29 . 15 .77 1.26 1.40 1.72 1.42 1. 13 .88 New Mexico .06 .08 .23 .38 1.41 .93 1.69 .90 .82 .54 Arizona .62 .62 .46 .91 1.09 L 13 1.14 1.29 1.16 .81 Utah .42 .46 .43 .79 1.03 1.47 1.63 1.50 1.06 .91 Nevada .32 .33 .19 .30 .90 1.45 1.91 1.38 1.07 .47

Pacific: Washington _ .60 .39 .37 .57 .61 .51 .88 .79 .76 .57 Oregon .32 .22 .30 .50 .68 .72 1.09 .80 .62 .37 California .53 .40 .24 .51 .82 .92 1. 67 1.59 1.55 1.44

1 Based on population estimates of the Bureau of the Census.

1 Includes the District of Columbia.

Source: Compiled from official data on obligations incurred as reported to the Division of Research,

Statistics, and Finance of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. Note: This table was based on latest revised figures available at the date of analysis, November 1936.
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES • 101

Table 9.—Percent of Population 1 Receiving Relief, General Relief Program, FERA, by

States,2 Quarterly Intervals, July 1933-October 1935

State and geographic division July

1933

Octo- ber

1933

January

1934

April

1934 July1934

Octo- ber

1934

January

1935

April

1935 July

1935

October

1935

United States total 12.

2

10.

8

8. 7 13. 2 13.

5

14.

2

15.

8

14.

8

12. 7 10. 5 New England: Maine 6. 5 5.7 4. 8 10.9 7. 5 8.8 10.

1

10. 8 12.

1

9.

2

New Hampshire 7.

8

6.

5

6.

0

8.

4

5.

3

6.

6

7. 4 11. 2 9. 6 7. 9 Vermont 4.9 3! 1 Z. 2 6.3 5.

4

5.6 8. 7 9. 0 8.

6

4.

3

Massachusetts 9.

1

8. 5 7. 2 13. 0 13.

6

14. 7 16. 4 16. 7 16. 3 14. 2 Rhode Island 8.

9

7.

3

4.

5

10.

1

10.

3

11.

1

11.

4

11.

6

10. 9 10.

1

Connecticut 8. 5 6.

7

5.

8

12. 5 8.9 10. 3 11. 5 ll! 1 10.

0

8.

6

Middle Atlantic: New York 11.

6

10.

4

7.

6

16.

2

15.

4

15. 3 16.

8

16.

3

15.

0

10. 5 New Jersey _ 10. 2 8.

9

8.

1

16.

4

12.

5

13] 8 15. 0 14] 3 12. 7 11. 2 Pennsylvania 18.

8

15. 4 14. 6 15. 7 15.

3

15. 4 17. 9 18. 5 17.

4

16. 4 East North Central: Ohio 14.

2

12.

0

8.

8

14.

8

14.

1

16. 2 18.

1

16. 7 15.

8

12. 6 Indiana 9.3 10.

1

6.

3

11.

4

10. 7 12. 5 14. 4 13. 5 11. 5 7. 3

Illinois 12.

8

11.

0

8.

8

13. 0 13. 7 13. 6 14. 7 14. 3 12. 2 12.

1

Michigan 12. 5 13.9 11. 8 13. 2 12.3 16. 0 17. 1 14.

1

12. 8 11. 8 Wisconsin

.

10. 7 9.

1

6. 9 12.

1

12. 7 13. 8 15. 9 14. 3 11. 4 10.

8

West North Central: Minnesota 6. 4 5.

8

5.2 16.

3

16.

4

16. 8 18. 5 16.

3

11. 4 9.

6

6.9 5.

8

3.

3

7.

1

8.

9

8. 6 10. 8 9. 8 6. 5 5.

6

Missouri 6.

6

5.

6

5.0 9. 8 11.

7

14. 7 16. 5 15. 2 11. 5 11. 8 North Dakota 5. 5 9. 2 19.

6

32. 0 21. 2 28. 3 29. 7 30. 5 20. 0 16. 1 South Dakota 6.

1

16. 2 16. 7 30. 8 35. 4 35.9 40. 1 36. 7 12. 0 9] 0 Nebraska 4.

3

5.

4

4.

9

8. 6 7.

7

11.

6

15. 3 13.

1

9. 2 7. 8 Kansas 11. 2 9.

4

3.8 10. 9 11.

4

14.

6

17. 4 17. 5 12.

1

11. 8 South Atlantic: Delaware 14.2 9.

1

10.2 11.8 6. 4 6. 6 7. 2 6. 2 6. 0 4. 2 Maryland 8. 2 8.

0

10. 3 15.

0

10. 4 9. 8 11. 4 10. 9 7. 9 7. 6 District of Columbia 7. 5 9.

4

5.

1

12. 6 11. 4 11. 9 12.

0

10. 6 8. 5 5.

6

Virginia 2.8 2. 6 3.3 4.9 6. 3 6.

8

8' 2 9.

0

8. 2 6.

1

^Vest Virginia 30 5 23. 6 14. 0 14. 4 18.

9

20. 3 22. 4 20. 9 20. 0 17] 4 North Carolina 9. 8 7.8 9.6 9. 5 9.8 7.

8

10. 0 9. 7 8. 0 6.3 South Carolina 21.0 22.

8

8.7 15.

8

15.

4

18. 0 14. 7 10. 7 8.

1

5. 0 Georgia 6. 6 9. 7 6.

2

8.

7

10.

0

12.

0

10. 4 9. 7 7. 3 4. 2 Florida 23. 7 26. 8 6.2 21.4 23.3 22. 6 18. 5 12.9 12. 5 10. 4 East South Central: Kentucky 20.

0

13.

1

13.8 11.

5

16. 3 15.

8

17. 5 18. 0 16. 6 15.

3

Tennessee 9. 5 7.

2

4.3 10.

1

13.

1

10. 0 11. 2 12. 0 10. 5 8.

1

Alabama 14. 6 17. 5 13.

1

16.

9

14. 3 12.

1

8. 5 8. 6 9. 4 6. 7 Mississippi 14.0 10. 0 14. 7 12.8 14.

9

11.

8

13. 7 9.

4

7. 9 7. 3 West South Central: Arkansas 11.2 12.

1

16.2 5. 8 10. 2 13. 0 17.8 12. 2 11.

4

4.

6

Louisiana 13. 5 14. 9 18.

6

10.3 9. 2 9 0 8. 4 9 0 9 6 8. 7 Oklahoma 20.

1

19.0 8.0 17.0 18.5 23.2 26.5 22.6 17.1 15.3 Texas 13.6 7.8 7.0 13.0 15.0 16.0 18.9 15.3 9.7 7.0 Mountain: Montana 15.2 12.5 11.0 17.9 17.9 17.5 20.3 20.1 15.5 10.4 Idaho 8.5 4.2 6.7 12.2 10.7 13.6 22.0 20.0 12.7 10.0 Wyoming 2.7 2.5 2.3 9.1 12.8 11.2 15.4 16.0 7.9 5.

1

Colorado 13.2 10.7 9.5 18.7 19.5 19.8 22.8 21.2 15. 7 12.6 New Mexico 6.

1

6.0 9.8 14.2 28.

1

25.3 33.7 26.7 28.9 21.2 Arizona 23.1 18.6 12.

1

23.5 26.9 23.6 23.5 22.6 20.9 15.3 Utah 19.8 13.8 11.9 20.7 21.0 21.2 24.0 24.2 18.6 16.5 Nevada - 6.1 5.5 3.5 5.4 7.5 9.9 13.1 10.2 7.4 4.9

Pacific: Washington 14.4 8.5 7.9 12.2 11.0 10.3 13.1 12.9 12.4 8.5 Oregon 8.0 5.7 7.3 10.0 10.4 9.6 13.6 12.3 8.2 5.5

California 9.9 8.8 5.4 9.3 10.3 11.

1

14.4 13.8 12.2 10.4

' Based on estimates of the Bureau of the Census.

1 Includes the District of Columbia.

Source: Compiled from official data on case loads as reported to the Division of Research, Statistics, and

Finance of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. Note: This table was based on latest revised figures available at the date of analysis, November 1936.
102 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Table 10.—Average Monthly Relief Benefit per Family Case,' General Relief Program,

FERA, by States,2 Quarterly Intervals, July 1933-October 1935

State and geographic division July

1933

October

1933

January

1934

April

1934 July1934

October

1934

January

1935

April

1935 July1935

October

1936

united states total $15. 51 ^iy. uo pj /. 10 $22 12 $24 34 iOA 41 t30 45 $28 96 120 (H $27 84 New I'. Ill' ri H 1

1 ! OA 91 27 36 29 09 35. 94 36. 82 39. 97 38. 26 31. 44 24. 62 26 47

10. 06 1 1 7*1 10. io 19 64 26 20 25. 94 35. 04 28 58 33 88 31 52 32 70 on Gi 21 52 15 36 22. 49 27. 74 29. 44 32 20 32 24 'i\ Ml 20 53

IO 07 oi a 1 1 oo 01. a oo_7J. ooU 34 32 37 22 40 07 47 84 44 97 44 60 46 02

io. >r» OA 70 _JO. iff 19 60 31 21 30. 68 30 78 43 05 34 04 32 13 36 52

21. 30 24. 70 Ifi Al io. Ol 27 49 33 27 35 54 43 38 44 43 45 44 43 48

iwiU'iie Atlantic. New York .............. _ in IB 17 1 41. 64

A

Oi. io 32 16 44. 93 16 03 47 91 46 31 49 06 43 39

19. 86 OO 7fi 01 i o 4*0. 14- 30 06 29 98 35 77 33 30 31 55 31 96 32 82

1 /. 01 on k7 21 65 32. 79 27. 35 29 53 42 50 40 18 37 80 36 52 East North Central:

10. 17 Q1 13 03 19. 23 24. 19 24 24 30 60 26 71 31 15 22 05

1 _ oo 10. 4/ 12 54 16. 15 22. 87 28. 59 28 65 27 82 21 73 15 22

20 77 26 84 22 45 22. 34 28 14 28. 41 35 06 30 99 29 42 27. 26

19 80 23 72 15 90 21. 50 28. 17 31. 88 32. 73 29 49 29 58 30. 54

Ol S17 £i. O/ Ol 77 24 23 20. 43 36 06 38 16 36 94 35 63 36 53 30 72 M innesota. ..............

1Ain. 4Aio on fi4 20 78 17. 33 22 78 29 26 34 82 31 86 32 03 30 82

12 91 16. 85 12. 73 13. 38 18. 37 21. 01 25. 36 22. 99 22. 18 25. 28

i ^ mm 14. oo 14 57 12 22 13 33 14 06 16 12 20 20 18 53 18 61 171 / . 04_H

1 "3 10 10. Oi 1A OA io. 40 17 15 25 51 21 09 27 63 29 08 28 81 22 11 25 22 Rnnth 1 )[.. , 18 07 19 07 13 73 23 17 27 93 25 04 22 53 23 34 24 27

O. DO 12 56 14 87 20 92 19 03 23 49 26 59 26 83 25 18 ofi 4TO. niUO W i r i v, v 9 25 1 L 31 8 94 13. 67 18. 45 19. 72 26. 95 23 40 22 10 21 88 Gnu t h \

1

1 t

'

i 22. 26 21 26. 04 13 11 21 06 22. 82 23. 20 19 40 25 14 22 78 OO OA 30 91 25 56 26 61 29 46 32. 69 33. 54 30 14 31 95 30 95

on on 21 57 on i i _JU. On 35 71 30 09 32 73 37 61 io nn Oi. uu 41 04 44 HI 11. Ol 6 94 8 60 7 93 5 69 11 13 12 10 13 91 16 88 17 66 (A A4 IO. 04

9 22 12 95 J

_*. Ul m 71 1U. ( 1 14 94 16 40 18 82 1 1 fiO 10. o* 1 1 17 10. At 15. 07

7 A4 8 75 A OH o. vo 8 65 10 60 12 01 14 93 111.5. anOU 1 4 IO 14. oi 1 A AA 14. 44

5 61 10 18 6 13 10 52 10 43 12 96 1 1 06 O 41 w. 11 1 O 0*7 14. H fi 4 1 o. 4.1 0. M 11 40 1 1 Q"l 1 1 . vo 13 19 13 19 io. 1 1 70i £

i £ no io. u_. 16. 90 16. 63 20. 07 FlnriHa 0. OO 1 1 92 6 64 19 14 13 82 14. 41 11 oo 11 Ifi 10. lo 10. 06 10. 26

I

" t >. ,i i i H Cunt *-o 1

• a 4n o. w 7 ifi /. 10 in oo 1U. oo a no o. w 7 11 #. Ol v. iv 1 1 OA 1 1 . 00 10. 13 9. 93 Tennessee . 5. 87 8 45 O. OO 6 35 15 61 8 98 14. 49 16. 75 1 1. 60 9. 46 A labama --____.____

c: i o 0. lo in1U. hauo 7 Ol /. W4 8 78 12 81 13 22 18. 06 17. 34 17. 70 16. 13

3. 83 7 AH 7. 00 9. 28 a aa V. 44 11.12 10. 14 13. 56 13. 10 12. 96 14. 30

v» cm douiii ^ entraj. 6 44 8 97 O Oft W. 4IO 5 00 12 33 16 28 1 1 40 10. 44 16. 35 11 AA 10. UO Lou isiana 13. 89 10. 1

1

Ifi JA lo. IO 21 64 ooii- Onn _.-». 4*0 26. 71 27. 68 26. 17 18. 30 Oklahoma.... 4.38 6. 14 4.95 8.41 7.35 10. 32 11. 16 7.50 8. 79 10.38 Texas 6.93 8.59 6. 76 7.83 11.07 13. 18 16 14. 61 13. 92 IX 19 Mountain:

13. 31 15. 38 J5.20 25. 30 25. 72 32.26 36. 62 26.89 27.38 28.77

11.91 11. 70 12. 65 13.84 15.50 24.94 25.03 20 M 23. 91 22.56 Wyoming _ 11.93 12. 11 11.46 22.80 23.15 37.80 24.53 22. 35 34.24 26.08

10.56 10.61 5. 70 17.08 26.83 29. 02 30.69 26.52 28.38 27.84 New Mexico __ 4. 37 5. 57 10. 05 12.55 22. 10 16.31 22. 12 14.77 12. 40 10.73 Arizona 10.20 13.88 14. 55 15.65 16. 28 19. 36 19.58 23.55 24.99 23.97 Utah 9.85 15. 39 14. 87 17.28 21.45 30.33 29.84 26.93 24.58 23.73

13.64 18.27 14. 22 17.30 33.24 39. 61 48.84 44.00 46.27 30.43

Pacific: Washington 15.96 17.90 16.96 18.18 21. 10 19.54 25.18 23. 43 23. 21 25.58 Oregon _ 14. 19 14. 34 13.66 17.84 24.31 26.64 30.33 24.38 26.80 24.77 California 18.77 19. 62 17.93 19.97 29.95 32.09 40.00 41.39 45.38 48.34

1 Based on a net unduplicated count of relief cases; some cases received both direct and work relief during

a given month, either successively or concurrently.

1 Includes the District of Columbia.

Source: Compiled from official data on obligations incurred and case loads as reported to the Division of Research, Statistics, and Finance of the Federal Emergency Relief Administration. Note: This table was based on latest revised figures available at the date of analysis, November 1936.
Appendix B

103

Appendix C

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT UNITS PARTICIPATING IN THE WORKS PROGRAM,

DECEMBER 37, 1935 1

Legislative Establishments:

Library of Congress

Executive Departments:

Department of Agriculture

Bureau of Agricultural Engineering

Bureau of Animal Industry

Bureau of Biological Survey

Bureau of Entomology and. Plant Quarantine

Bureau of Chemistry and Soils

Bureau of Dairy Industry

Bureau of Plant Industry

Bureau of Public Roads

Extension Service

Forest Service

Soil Conservation Service

Weather Bureau

Department of Commerce

Bureau of the Census

Bureau of Fisheries

Bureau of Lighthouses

National Bureau of Standards

1 This list was compiled from the following sources: The Report of the President

of the United States to the Congress of the Operations under the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935, January 9, 1936; Report on the Works Program, March

16, 1936; and United States Government Manual, 1936. 105
106 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

Executive Departments—Continued.

Department of the Interior

Alaska Road Commission

All-American Canal

Bureau of Reclamation

Bituminous Coal Commission

Geological Survey

National Park Service

Office of Education

Puerto Rico Reconstruction Administration

St. Elizabeths Hospital

Temporary Government of the Virgin Islands

Department of Justice

Department of Labor

Bureau of Immigration and Naturalization

Bureau of Labor Statistics

United States Employment Service

Department of the Navy

Bureau of Yards and Docks

Department of the Treasury

Bureau of Internal Revenue

Bureau of Public Health Service

Coast Guard

Procurement Division

Department of War

Office of the Chief of Engineers

Office of the Quartermaster General

Independent Establishments:

Advisory Committee on Allotments

Alley Dwelling Authority

Civil Service Commission

Emergency Conservation Work

Employees' Compensation Commission

Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works (PWA) , Non-Federal Division

Housing Division

Federal Emergency Relief Administration

General Accounting Office

National Emergency Council

National Resources Committee

Prison Industries Reorganization Administration

Resettlement A dministration

Rural Electrification Administration

Veterans' Administration

Works Progress Administration
Appendix D

METHODOLOGICAL NOTE ON THE

ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURES FOR

CATEGORICAL RELIEF IN THE

UNITED STATES, 1933-1935

ESTIMATES OF the amounts expended in the United States during

1933, 1934, and 1935 for aid to the aged, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children are based on State data available from various

sources. State expenditures for old-age relief in 1933 and 1934 and

partial data for 1935 were obtained from surveys made by the United

States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Data on State expenditures for

blind relief for 1933 were obtained largely from the American Foundation for the Blind, and for 1934 and 1935 from annual surveys made

by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Comprehensive

data on aid to dependent children were available only for the years

1931 and 1934 from surveys made by the United States Children's

Bureau. Information from the above sources was supplemented by

data collected or published by State Departments of Welfare or in State

Treasurers' reports. In some instances it was necessary to adjust

data from a fiscal to a calendar year basis and to include some esti- mated figures to build up annual State totals for each category of

relief. For those years for which expenditure data were not available—i. e., aid to dependent children in 1933 and 1935—annual totals were

estimated by using existing annual figures and applying the percentage

change indicated by the Children's Bureau Urban Relief Series for

that category of relief.1

1 See Part I, p. 29, for a description of this series, and table 14 for relative numbers indicating trends in categorical relief since January 1929. 107
108 • TRENDS IN RELIEF EXPENDITURES, 1910-1935

After the annual totals for the United States were obtained by

combining the State data for each category, monthly estimates were

derived by spreading the expenditures over the months in accordance

with trends established for the 120 areas included in the Urban Relief

Series. Because of differences in data available for the three types of

relief, the procedure followed in adjusting monthly expenditures

varied somewhat,2 but in every case the urban relief trends were used

to check the accuracy of the estimates. Use of this trend as an adjustment factor was believed to be justified by the fact that a very substantial share of the total volume of relief to special classes during

these years was extended in the 120 urban areas represented in the

series. The adjusted figures are undoubtedly more accurate than could

be secured by spreading annual expenditures evenly over the months.

The resulting estimates are necessarily rough, but they are believed

to give a fairly adequate measure of the trend and volume of categorical assistance in the United States as a whole during the 3-year

period. It is apparent from the trends shown in Part I that expenditures for aid to the aged, to the blind, and to dependent children are remarkably stable except as they are affected by new State legislation.

A list of recent laws providing for old-age relief and aid to dependent

children in an additional number of States is given in Part I. The

effect of these laws is reflected in the monthly estimates.

Estimates of expenditures in individual States are not presented

here since they are necessarily imperfect, and in some cases they

undoubtedly represent serious understatement or overstatement of

expenditures. It is believed, however, that these errors tend to cancel each other in the estimates for total United States. Source materials used in constructing the estimates are listed below:

Aid to the Aged:

1. Parker, Florence E., "Experience Under State Old-Age Pension

Act of 1934," Monthly Labor Review, August 1935. Also reprint of same article, U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Serial No. R 270.

2. Unpublished data supplied by Bureau of Labor Statistics,

Summary of Operations Under Old-Age Pension Acts, 1935.

3. Economic Security Act, Hearings before the Committee on Ways

and Means, H. R., 1935, Table 14, "Operation of Old-Age Pension

Laws of the United States, 1934," p. 77. Aid to the Blind:

1. Unpublished data supplied by the American Foundation for the

Blind, Inc., New York City.

2 For example, monthly estimates for old-age relief expenditures during 1933

and 1934 were adjusted according to case-load data for old-age relief during those

years.
METHODOLOGICAL NOTE • 109

2. Public Provision for Pensions jor the Blind in 1984, Serial No.

R 257, U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

3. Public Pensions for the Blind, Serial No. R 422, U. S. Bureau of

Labor Statistics.

4. State of Illinois, Biennial Report of the Treasurer, 1934.

5. State of Wisconsin, Blind Pensions in Wisconsin, 1907-1934-

Aid to Dependent Children:

1. Mothers' Aid, 1931, Publication No. 220, U. S. Children's

Bureau.

2. Economic Security Act, Hearings before the Committee on Ways

and Means, H. R., 1935, Table 18, "Estimated Number of Families

and Children Receiving Mothers' Aid and Estimated Expenditures

for this Purpose," p. 80. (Based on figures of November 1934 from

U. S. Children's Bureau.)

Index

21612°—37 !)

INDEX

Aaronson, Franklin. See Woofter, T. J., Jr. page Act of February 15, 1934 33n

Acts relating to relief disbursements 33 Act of February 15, 1934 33n

Economic Security Act 108, 109 Emergency Appropriation Act, Fiscal Year 1935 33n

Emergency Relief Act of 1936 74n

Emergency Relief and Construction Act 32-33

Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935 33n, 74n

Federal Emergency Relief Act of 1933 33n

First Deficiency Appropriation Act, Fiscal Year 1937 72n

National Industrial Recovery Act 33n, 70

Social Security Act 4 Administrative shifts in relief programs, effect of 76 Aid to aged, to blind, and to dependent children. See Categorical relief. Aid, types of, included in study xi American Association of Community Organization. See Clapp, Raymond.

American Foundation for the Blind 108 American Red Cross, The Distribution of Government-Owned Wheat and

Cotton 62n

Case, defined 54, 57n

Case-load data, comparability of 54-59

Cases receiving relief: Average monthly amount received by 89, 102

Obligations compared to 81-86

Number of, by type of relief 56-57

Categorical relief: Administration of 74-75

Defined 2n, 29 Expenditures 7, 10, 23, 35-37, 42, 45 Emergency and wage assistance, compared with 61, 75-78

Private and public relief, compared with 30-32, 41 Social Security Act, effect on 4, 37, 75 Federal participation in 4-5, 37, 74-75

Legislation for 3-4, 91-92

Source material 107-109

Civil Works Administration 21, 72-73

Civilian Conservation Corps 5 In, 72

Clapp, Raymond, "Relief in 19 Cities" 15-16, 46, 99

Colcord, Joanna; Koplovitz, William C; and Kurtz, Russell H.: Emergency Work Relief 37n

College student aid program 69

Comparison of relief trends, selected areas 45-47

113
114 • INDEX

Page Concepts of relief. 47f 51 Conclusions concerning trends in relief expenditures.. xiii-xiv Cost of living, relation of, to relief expenditures. 13-14

Current Statistics of Relief in Rural and Town Areas On

Depression, effect of, on relief 2, 25

Direct relief (see also Emergency relief; Work relief) 07 Duplication on relief rolls. 55, 58

Economic Security Act.. 108, 109 Emergency Appropriation Act, Fiscal Year 1935 33n

Emergency education program fi9 Emergency relief (see also Direct relief; Private relief; Public relief; Special program relief; Work relief). 62-70

Cases, number of, receiving __ 56-57

Defined 52n, 62

Expenditures 64-67

Categorical and, compared with emergency, categorical, and

wage assistance 76 Wage assistance and categorical compared with 64-65,75,77-78

Wage assistance trends compared with 76-78

Obligations incurred for 66

State legislation for 91-92

Emergency Relief Act of 1936 74n

Emergency Relief and Construction Act.. 32-33

Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935 33n, 74n Expenditure series, limitations of 59-60

Expenditures, defined 60n

FERA Form 10 A General Instructions 38n

FERA Rules and Regulations No. 3 37n

Families in their homes, relief to 26-28, 92-94

Federal Emergency Relief Act of 1933 33n

Federal Emergency Relief Administration. See Emergency relief. Federal participation in relief 2, 4-5, 52, 60-78

Administrative shifts 76

Categorical 74-75

Emergency 62-70

Direct 67

Special program 68-70

Work 67-68

Wage assistance 70-74

Civilian Conservation Corps 72

Civil Works Administration 72-73

Works Program 73-74

Federal Government units participating in Works Program 51, 105-106

Federal Surplus Commodities Corporation, Report * * * 1935 62n

Financial Statistics of Cities * * *. See United States Bureau of the

Census.

First Deficiency Appropriation Bill for 1936 55n

First Deficiency Appropriation Act, Fiscal Year 1937 72n

Geographic variations 26-28

Governmental-cost payments 10-12
INDEX • 115

Holcombe, John L. See Lowe, Robert C. page Homeless men, relief to 26-28, 92-94

Hopkins, Harry L., statements of, on appropriation bill 55n

Huntley, Kate, Financial Trends in Organized Social Work in New York

City 18-21, 46, 99

Hurlin, Ralph G., "The Mounting Bill for Relief" 12-15, 46, 99

Indiana State Board of Charities 23-25, 46, 99

Indices, monthly relief expenditures 98

King, Wihford L, Trends in Philanthropy 16-18, 46, 99

Koplovitz, William C. See Colcord, Joanna.

Kurtz, Russell H. See Colcord, Joanna.

Legislative trends 2-5

Local administration of relief 2-4

Lowe, Robert C:

Analysis of Current State and Local Funds Specifically Assigned to Various Welfare Activities 37n

Data on veteran relief legislation compiled by 3n

Digest of State Legislation for the Financing of Emergency Relief, January 1, 1931-June SO, 1935 5n

FERA Digest of State Legislation for the Financing of Emergency Relief, January 1, 1931-June SO, 1935 91n

and Associates, Digest of Poor Relief Laws of the Several States and

Territories as of May 1, 1936 2n

and Holcombe, John L., Legislative Trends in State and Local Responsibility for Public Assistance 4n

and Staff

:

Supplement to Digest of State Legislation * * * 5n

Supplement to FERA Digest of State Legislation * * * 91n

Mangus, A. R., See Woofter, T. J., Jr. Measurement of relief burden xi, 51-53

Methodology 51-53

Categorical relief expenditure estimates 107-109

Monthly benefits, per family case 89, 102 Monthly combined relief expenditures 76

Mothers' Aid, 1931 109

National aspects of relief xi National Industrial Recovery Act 33n

New Haven. See King, Willford I. New York City. See Huntley, Kate. New York State Department of Social Welfare 21-23, 46, 99

Obligations incurred 66-67

Defined 60n

Per inhabitant 87, 100 Trends of, compared to cases 81-86

Outdoor relief, defined xi

Parker, Florence E., "Experience Under State Old Age Pension Acts in 1934" 91n, 108
116 • INDEX

Population: Page Increase in, relation of, to relief cost rise 10-13

Percent of, receiving relief. 88, 101 President's Organization on Unemployment Relief.. 26, 29n

Private relief: Agencies, types of, giving 30-31

Public compared with 14-15, 18-21, 30-35, 40-41, 47, 92-93, 94, 96-97

Public assistance burden, component parts of 00-75

Public assistance, combined trend of 75-78

Public Pensions for the Blind 109 "Public Pensions for the Blind in 1935".. 91n

Public Provision for Pensions for the Blind in 1934 109

Public relief (see aUo Private relief), types of agencies giving.. 31 Purpose of study xi

Reconstruction Finance Corporation 32-33

Relief, defined xi Report of the President of the United States to the Congress of the Operations under the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935, January 9, 1936, The 105n

Report on Progress of the Works Program 72n

Report on the Works Program, March 16, 1936 105n

Ross, Emerson, and Whiting, T. E., "Changes in the Number of Relief Recipients, 1933-1936" 54n

Rural rehabilitation program 68n, 69-70

Rural-Town Relief Series.. 40-42, 43, 46, 99 Sample counties, distribution of 103

Rural, urban, and total United States trends 43-44

Russell Sage Foundation (see also Hurlin, Ralph G., "The Mounting Bill for Relief"). In, 26n, 29n

Series, relief, included in study:

Clapp, Raymond, "Relief in 19 Cities" 15-16 Huntley, Kate, Financial Trends in Organized Social Work in New

York City 18-21

Hurlin, Ralph G., "The Mounting Bill for Relief" 12-15 Indiana State Board of Charities 23-25

King, Willford I., Trends in Philanthropy 16-18 New York State Department of Social Welfare 21-23

Rural-Town Relief Series 40-42

United States Bureau of the Census, Financial Statistics of Cities Having a Population of Over 100,000, 1911-1931 6-12

United States Bureau of the Census, Relief Expenditures by Govern- mental and Private Organizations, 1929 and 1931 25-28

Urban and Rural-Town Relief Series 42-45

Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private

Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-35 29-40

Trends of, compared 45-47

Series, relief, compiled 80

Social Security Act 4, 75

Social Security Board 5n, 29n, 52n

Sources of data xii, 1, 5-6, 52, 107-109

Special allowances. See Categorical relief

.

Special classes. See Categorical relief. Special program relief 68-70

State of Illinois, Biennial Report of the Treasurer, 1934 109
INDEX • 117

Page State of Indiana, Governor's Commission on Unemployment Relief, Year Book * * * 1934, 1935 24n

State of Wisconsin, Blind Pensions in Wisconsin, 1907-1934 109

State trends, variability in 78-79

Statutory forms of assistance, variation in terms for 2n

Surplus commodities, value of, in relief distribution 62

Terms used, defined (see also specific terms) xi Transient program - 69

United States Bureau of Labor Statistics 13n, 20n, 52n

United States Bureau of the Census:

Financial Statistics of Cities Having a Population of Over 100,000,

1911-1931 5n, 6-12, 46, 99

Relief Expenditures by Governmental and Private Organizations, 1929

and 1931 5n, 25-28, 46, 93n, 94n, 99

State population estimates 23n, 25n

United States Children's Bureau:

Changes in Different Types of Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas 34n

Chart No. 3, "A Tabular Summary of State Laws Relating to Public

Aid to Children * * *" 91n

Urban Relief Series (see also Winslow, Emma) 15, 29-40, 41, 46, 99

United States Government Manual, 1936 105n

Urban and Rural-Town Relief Series 42-45, 46, 99 Urban, rural, and total United States trends 43

Veteran relief 3, 10, 41

Wage assistance xi, 70-74

Cases, number of, receiving 56-57

Defined xi, 70

Expenditures 60-62, 64-65, 71-72

Emergency and categorical, compared with 60-62, 64-65, 77-78

Relation of, to total relief burden 60-62

Trend of monthly 75 Welfare Council of New York City. See Huntley, Kate.

Whiting, T. E. See Ross, Emerson.

Winslow, Emma A., Trends in Different Types of Public and Private

Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-35 5n, 30n, 32n, 34n, 36n, 39n, 95n, 97n

Woofter, T. J., Jr.; Aaronson, Franklin; and Mangus, A. R.: Relief in Urban and Rural-Town Areas, 1932-1936 (see also Urban and Rural- Town Relief Series) 6n, 43n

Work programs, agencies sponsoring 70 Work relief (see also Emergency relief) 40, 47, 67-68

Compared with direct 22-23,37-39

Works Program 73-74

Employment requirements of 73-74

Federal Government units participating in 70, 105-106

o