Recommendations to Forty Federations in U.S. Submitted by Information Service on Appeals

A series of recommendations which aim to introduce order in the collection of funds for the needs of many Jewish organizations–American, European and Palestinian–which seek to raise their budgets in the Jewish communities of the United States, were presented to forty Jewish Federations of social service by the National Appeals Information Service for Jewish Federations, states a report of the Bureau of Jewish Social Research.

There are at present 31 organizations or institutions resident in the United States which are raising funds from time to time in the Jewish communities. These organizations deal mainly with the problems of health, immigration, Jewish agricultural activities, the spreading of Jewish culture, with the effort of coordinating and standardizing Jewish social service and training leadership for Jewish religious life. In addition, there are 160 Palestinian charitable institutions, many of which endeavor to raise funds in the American Jewish communities in one fashion or another.

The recommendations submitted to the eforty Federations by the National Appeals Information Service would pave the way for what is termed a National Budgeting Plan. The Jewish national organizations carrying on work in the United States, outside of the local Federations and the various Congregational and and other agencies, have a gross annual expenditure of about $3,875,000, according to the Information Service.

Discussion of the necessity of evolving a plan by which some system might be introduced into these national collections has been going on for the past five years. At the 1927 meeting of the National Conference of Jewish Social Service held in Des Moines, representatives of forty Jewish Federations organized the National Appeals Information Service and the Bureau of Jewish Social Research was asked to make a study of the problem and to present its findings of facts and recommendations. These findings were presented and recommendations were made at a meeting of the National Appeals Information Service held recently at the Cincinnati meeting of the Jewish Social Service Conference.

An Executive Committee to direct the work of the National Appeals Information Service until the next meeting was chosen and is composed as follows: Irvin Bettmann. St. Louis. Mo.; S. C. Blumenthl. Dallas, Texas; Samuel Goldhamer, Clevelend. Ohio; Irvin F. Lehman, Pittsburgh, Pa.: I. Irving Lipsitch, Los Angeles, Cailf.; Solomon Lowenstein, New York, N. Y.; Eugene Warner, Buffalo, N. Y. William J. Shroder, Cincinnati, is Chairman of the Executive Committee and George J. Rabinoff of Indianapolis is Secretary-Treasurer.

The recommendations of the Bureau of Jewish Social Research, as adopted, were to the effect:

1. That with regard to certain European organizations making appeals the studies should be continued during this year and that special studies should be made of any changes contemplated by national organizations in either expansion of building programs or expansion of the service programs. This should be done in order that communities may be advised with respect to the reasons for any contemplated expansions.

2. That no attempt be made for the present at the adoption of a general uniform method of financing national organizations, but that the National Appeals Information Service make a start in the direction of minimizing collection costs and promoting a more equitable basis of support, suggest the following plan to apply to the four Denver Organizations, the Hias and the J. C. R. A. of Californai:

(a) That in the largest Jewish Communities, to wit: New York, Philadelphia and Chicago, where the Federations do not support national organizations directly and where a number of these agencies maintain independent offices for raising funds, joint offices be established by the National Organizations.

(b) That in communities other than mentioned in Section “A” where the Jewish Federations are averse to accepting responsibility for financing the requirements of national organizations, the development of local National Welfare Funds be stimulated.

(c) That in communities other than those in Section “A” and “B” and where the attitude of Federation is favorable to direct financing and where local conditions are promising, the Federation accept responsibility for including adequate allotments in its budget. This group would doubtless refer, in the main, to the smaller communities.

(d) That for the large mass of unorganized territory there be developed a joint collection service whereby the country would be divided into definite sections, and individual collectors or field secretaries engaged to raise quotas established for those territories in the interest of all participating organizations.

(d) That before proceeding to a country-wide initiation of the financing plan above outlined, an experiment be made in the selected district, such as the State of Ohio or perhpas the Pacific coast, — Welfare Funds and direct Federation subsidies in the important cities of the State and the joint collection service in the intervening territory, and that the results be reported upon at the end of the year.

3. It was strongly urged by the N.A.L.S. that all national agencies organize their finances on a budgetary basis and they be urged to submit annually to the N.A.L.S. an itemized budget of their needs. It is understood that if such budgets are submitted they should very clearly segregate budgetary items that have to do with activities limited to a single community.

4. That, insofar as proposed expansions of plans of building or of program are concerned, the organizations are asked to study the situation from the standpoint of the problem as a whole and not from the standpoint of the single organization. Thus, if it were contemplated by any national organization to add facilities for the care of the Jewish sick, either tubercular or otherwise, the national agencies would be asked to study the problem from the standpoint of the problem throughout the country, rather than from the standpoint of the individual desires of the particular organization concerned.

5. It was strongly recommended that the work of national organizations particularly referring to those that deal with matters of philanthropic interest be linked up with local Jewish medical, and social service facilities in the interests of both a selective admission policy and in the interest of effective planning on behalf of the recipients of the service.

6. That the service of the health organizations, immigration agencies, and agricultural organizations be coordinated through their own efforts by centralizing their work, eliminating duplication of activity, and by cooperative working relationships being established.

The report of the Bureau of Jewish Social Research states that the communities represented by the forty Federations which have agreed to the recommendations of the National Appeals Information Service constitute approximately three-quarters of the contributions received by the national organizations, and in a larger sense the communities represented amount to about 85 per cent of the total Jewish population in the United States.

For many years the local Jewish communities, particularly those that have organized Federations of Jewish Philanthropies, have been confronted with the problems of support, for the various national organizations. These problems initially concerned but a few important Jewish organizations whose work centered mainly in Denver and in New York.

The work of these organizations had to do with the problem of the Jewish tuberculous and with the problems of the Jewish immigrant. The immigrant welfare work was centralized at the principal port of entry to the United States, and the work of the Jewish tuberculous–insofar as national work was concerned–became centralized in Denver.

There were problems engendered by the fact that these national organizations and later on a number of other national organizations as well as certain European and Palestinian organizations came into the various communities of the United States and asked for funds. The appeals for funds became so frequent that in self-protection the Jewish contributing public in certain communities organized Jewish Welfare Funds. In these Funds, single collections are made once a year, or funds are set aside for such purposes. From these funds, either set aside or raised, the community makes its contributions to the budgets of various national organizations which in the opinion of the leaders of the community should receive support.

There was also a source of irritation in some of the larger communities in connection with actual work or service rendered by these organizations. It was felt from time to time that these organizations did not relate their activities to the activities of the local communities on behalf of their own sick, their own immigrants, or persons that presented other problems in which national organizations were interested.

About five years ago the National Conference of Jewish Social Service became interested in the problem and asked the Bureau of Jewish Social Research to make the study. This study was limited to seven large and important national organizations. As a result of this effort there was for some time agitation for what was popularly called a National Budget or a National Budgeting Plan.