[152] It will be noted that the totals of this table are considerably larger than the corresponding totals of [Tables 33] and [34]. The difference seems to be due to the fact that in preparing [Table 47] two or more refusals of aid on a single application were treated as separate refusals.
PART III
BUSINESS REHABILITATION
Part III
BUSINESS REHABILITATION
| PAGE | |||
| I. | The People Aided and the Results Obtained | [171] | |
| 1. | The Plan Itself | [171] | |
| 2. | The Study of Results | [173] | |
| 3. | The Families and Individuals Aided | [174] | |
| 4. | Changes in Family and Business Life | [176] | |
| 5. | Occupations | [183] | |
| 6. | Homogeneity of Grantees | [185] | |
| 7. | Results of Business Rehabilitation | [186] | |
| 8. | Reasons for Success and Failure | [187] | |
| II. | Analysis by Occupations, Study of Refusals, and Summary | [196] | |
| 1. | Success or Failure in Relation to Occupations | [196] | |
| 2. | Study of Refusals | [208] | |
| 3. | Summary of the Results of Business Rehabilitation | [210] | |
I
THE PEOPLE AIDED AND THE RESULTS OBTAINED
1. THE PLAN ITSELF
Business rehabilitation grants were made from the beginning of the relief work in cases where assistance in another form would have been less effective. Thus, on May 16 and 18, within a month after the disaster, the Rehabilitation Bureau made a grant of $75 for a shoe repairing shop, and another of $100 for a restaurant, and on May 30 and June 29, 1906, grants of from $250 to $500 each for a restaurant, a rooming house, a book store, and a grocery. It is interesting to note that to no one of these first six business cases was it found necessary to give additional aid. The Rehabilitation Committee soon after its organization, July 2, 1906, roughly formulated its business rehabilitation policy, which is embodied in the following notes from the minutes of July 19: