Evening star., 1947-01-10
Chest and Social Survey


Chest and Social Survey
The function of the Community
Chest is to conduct a single, organ
lied appeal for welfare funds in
Washington: to allocate the funds
among member agencies and to
budget their expenditures.
The Community Chest is being
criticized now because it supplied
the money for the series of Social
Survey reports, notably the report on
race relations, made under the gen.
eral direction of the Council of
Social Agencies. This use of Chest
funds is regarded by a disturbing
number of contributors as a perver-
sion of the Chests function.
This criticism must be dealt with
candidly or the Chest will suffer. 1t
has already been hurt. Washington
cannot permit any lasting injury to
the Community Chest. 1t is the
most logical. efficient and econom-
ical machinery yet designed for the
purposes outlined above. Our COM
munity job is to strive for its per-
fection and to profit from mistakes.
Any Community Chest action that
lessons confidence in and support of
the Chest is mistake. Some of the
Social Survey reports have had that
effect and the Chests part in financ-
ing them Is seen now as mistake.
The Community Chest did not
finance the Social Survey from funds
collected from campaign contrib
utors. 1t was financed "trom funds
accrued as the income on unre-
stricted endoa0ments and unre-
stricted legacies in the endowment
funds" The principal of these funds
remained intact. The funds were
given by benefactors for such use
as the trustees desired to make of
them and there is no question as to
the trustees authority in appropriat-
ing the money.
The Star does not believe, how
ever, that the majority of trustees
who voted for the Social Survey un-
derstood its purpose, as revealed
later in the reports themselves. The
Star believes that the trustees, or
most of them, regarded the survey
as sort of audit of welfare work,
as distinct from welfare funds,
and that one result Of this outside
appraisal might be the suggestion of
economies through elimination Of
preventable duplication and substi-
tuition of new undertakings for those
of questionable value.
The cause of this misconception
by the trustees-a misconception
that was recognized as the reports
were issued-resulted from proce-
dure in the conduct of the survey
rather than from any intent to mis-
lead the trustees. 1t is not the pur-
pose of this editorial to impugn the
good faith of anybody connected
with the survey.
The purpose of this editorial is to
point out that the Community Chest
made mistake when it authorized
a survey which was directed by those
who have no responsibility in the
conduct of the Community Chest
itself and that the mistake cannot
be repeated if the Community Chest
is to survive. Broadly speaking, the
mistake was in permitting the use Of
any Community Chest funds for a
purpose which, as shown by develop
ments, has little if any valid connec-
ton with what is commonly under
stood as welfare work.
It will be said that the survey fell
within the function of the Council
of Social Agencies, a Community
Chest agency. That may be true. If
SO, then the conduct of the survey
was mistake. The eighteen-year
history of the Washington Com
munity Chest has given ample
demonstration of the fact that
member agencies, deriving their sup
port from one public appeal in the
name of charity, cannot exploit one
side of controversial questions unless
they have the wisdom to do 1t with
out offense to the people who sup
port the Community Chest.
That is fact which must be con-
sidered in itself. It has nothing to
do with the nobility or the high
purposes which crusaders may at
tach to their various causes. The
crusaders have every right to crusade
for anything that appeals to them.
But once they do it under financial
auspices of the Community Chest
primarily a financial agency an
pealing to people for money in the
name of philanthropy-they hurt
the Chest. When they hurt the
Chest they had best get out and go
it alone.
MorshaII's Task