Headquarters Department of Relief and Rehabilitation, Gough and Geary Streets
Another subject that called for anxious debate was as to the degree of power that should be given by the Rehabilitation Committee to the section committees to make grants of money for emergency need. On July 12, the Committee resolved that in an emergency case a requisition might be made on the treasurer for a sum not to exceed $50, provided the request were signed by two members of the section committee. The Committee reserved the right to review such grants and at any time to withdraw the privilege from the sections. At a meeting held a day or so afterward this matter was reconsidered and laid over because several members of the Committee expressed themselves forcibly as opposed to any division of responsibility. At a joint meeting of the Rehabilitation Committee with the members of the section committees, held on July 19, 1906, the question of placing small funds in the hands of the section committees was again informally considered. Some of the section members strongly urged this plan and cited illustrations of necessary delays incident upon the ordinary procedure,—illustrations which proved that the delay was a source of embarrassment. As a member of the Committee recently said, a great amount of unpleasantness was caused by complaints of delay in comparatively small matters. Objections still being made by some members, the Committee asked the Associated Charities to present a plan, but though such a plan was drawn up it was never presented for action to the Committee because of the objections that were raised against it.
This source of friction was removed in the course of events. When the Bureau of Special Relief[113] was established on August 15, 1906, applications for emergency relief in kind were referred to it. On the closing of the section headquarters, Committee I of the centralized system[114] was prepared to give small money grants on short notice. The Associated Charities, from almost the beginning of the rehabilitation work, also stood ready to make small gifts of money to persons in need, or to make immediate purchase of necessities. It was from time to time reimbursed for these expenditures, though no formal arrangement was made by which it could draw on any regular fund for petty cash expenditures.
[113] See [Part II], [p. 145] ff.
[114] See [Part II], [p. 125].
Anyone who has had experience in a charity organization society which has district offices knows that the common rule is to empower a district superintendent or committee to make emergency expenditures of comparatively limited amounts and to draw for reimbursement on the society’s general relief fund. Such special expenditures are subject to audit. The principle underlying them is at stated periods to have their issuance made the subject of a careful review by the general secretary, the district supervisor or some other central office official. In case of continuous indiscreet expenditures the question raised is not whether the power shall be withdrawn but whether there shall be some change in the district force or some calling of volunteers to account. In other words, the principle has been recognized that though there can be no division of final responsibility as to expenditures, as a matter of practical efficiency, districts must be given a certain amount of discretion in the making of small emergency grants.
The extent of the task of investigating and reviewing cases can be measured by the following showing. When the Rehabilitation Committee settled to its task on July 7, 1906, the formative period of rehabilitation work closed. The second period was inaugurated by public announcement of the Rehabilitation Committee’s plans. During July, 1906, the work increased by leaps and bounds. Though the Committee might wish to feel its way there was no time for deliberate action as the members had simply to speed up in order to keep ahead of the applications awaiting action. By August 1 the Committee had passed upon 3,000 applications. On that same date there were about 9,000 applications in the sections which either were awaiting investigation or had been partially or fully investigated, but awaited action by the section committees. The original estimate of families that would need rehabilitation was 15,000. To pass on one-fifth of the whole may be considered to be fairly good progress for the first three weeks of a committee’s real work. During the next twelve days, as the news of the grants began to circulate widely, came the high-water mark of applications. On August 13, at the request of the chairman of the Committee, a complete return was made which showed that there were then 8,916 applications pending, and that the average rate of applications was somewhat over 200 a day. The danger of swamping the work was evident.
At the time when the number of applications for rehabilitation was heaviest came the uncertainty as to whether funds would be available. The chairman of the Rehabilitation Committee, therefore, at an important meeting held on August 12, requested members to present a definite plan as to the amount of money that they would request the Executive Committee to set aside for rehabilitation. Accordingly, on August 16, the following estimate was presented as the minimum amount that would be required for carrying on the work of the Department:
TABLE 29.—ESTIMATE OF AMOUNT REQUIRED FOR CARRYING ON WORK OF RELIEF, PRESENTED AUGUST 16, 1906[115]