NEW YORK (Jul. 5)
With more than half of the annual Spring campaigns of Jewish federations and welfare funds completed and the remainder in the final stages, the record shows that many welfare funds achieved gratifying results while a few, mostly larger cities, received setbacks in their first war-time drives, according to information published by the Council of Jewish Federations and Welfare Funds.
Most of the increases–55 out of 102 campaigns reporting exceeded their 1941 results–occurred in the intermediate and smaller cities. The larger cities, with the exception of Detroit, did not fare so well, although the big city drives are not yet completed, the Council announced.
The 34 communities for which complete campaign figures are available, raised $2,183,400, an increase of 10.9 per cent over the total of $1,968,521 for these communities last year. In the big cities, Detroit set the pace, coming through with $885,000, an increase of $50,000 over last year. Of these 34 cities, the biggest gains were made in the groups raising under $10,000 and in those raising between $25,000 and $49,999. These two categories realized increases of 24.7 per cent and 20 per cent, respectively.
REDUCTION IN “BIG GIFTS” CATEGORY IS NOTICED
The largest increase in the country was made by Newark, which raised $386,000, about 51 per cent more than the $255,786 realized last year. The Newark drive is still continuing. Minneapolis ended its campaign with $183,000, about $40,000 more than last year. Indianapolis attained $171,234, a healthy increase over its 1941 figure of $140,071. Hartford reports $205,093 against $164,253 last year. Wilkes Barre hung up a total of $74,087, bettering its 1941 figure by approximately $20,000. Akron, O., which netted $70,573 in 1941, reports $90,900 for 1942, with money still coming in. Among other cities which reported substantial gains were Louisville, New Haven, Oklahoma City, Winnipeg, Houston, Lynn, Worcester and Peoria.
A major deterrent to the first war-time campaigns appeared to be the almost uniform reduction in the “big gifts” class. Adversely affected by this factor were Chicago, San Francisco, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and Cleveland. Many of the intermediate and smaller communities were able to overcome this handicap by increasing the volume and size of the gifts in the lower categories.