Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T16:59:47.133Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental Social Policymaking During World War II: The United Service Organizations (USO) and American War-Community Services (AWCS)1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 April 2009

Gretchen Knapp
Gretchen Knapp
Affiliation:
Illinois State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Winning the war on the home front and overseas meant that citizens of different races, religions, and ethnic appellations needed to work together peacefully in the “arsenal of democracy.” Prior to America's entrance into the war, community leaders recognized that selected social problems must be addressed in order to promote domestic harmony and boost urgently needed defense production in war communities. Instead of viewing the war years as distracting community interest from social problems, social welfare organizations pressed localities to acknowledge and act to alleviate ongoing difficulties that presented themselves, sometimes in dramatic fashion, as serious obstacles to the war effort. Race riots in Harlem and Detroit, the “zoot-suit” struggles on the West Coast, “khaki-wacky” girls who chased after servicemen, the erosion of child labor laws, significant population shifts across the nation, and a record number of teenage dropouts highlighted the structural cracks in American society. Clear understanding of the expedient nature of wartime social work mobilized efforts to establish national and local strategies that would enable wartime programs to continue into the postwar era.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 12 , Issue 3 , July 2000 , pp. 321 - 338
Copyright
Copyright © The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

2. ODHWS (Office of Defense Health & Welfare Services), “Memo re Facilities and Services ‘Locally Needed,’” 5 April 1943, Family Service Association of America (FSAA), B(ox) 36, Social Welfare History Archives (hereafter SWHA), University of Minnesota. This instruction authorized area War Manpower directors to determine the essential needs for activities and services required to meet basic manpower needs and respond in conjunction with other local agencies, particularly for matters of health and welfare.

3. Leighninger, Leslie, Social Work: Search for Identity (New York, 1987), 103–114.Google Scholar

4. The original name, National United Welfare Committee for Defense, became the United Service Organizations for National Defense in 1941. The five charter members were the YMCA, the YWCA, the Jewish Welfare Board, the Knights of Columbus, and the Salvation Army. “Minutes NUWCD,” 15 November 1940 to 9 January 1941, “Interim Report on Plans of National Religiously Affiliated Private Agencies in the Morale Aspects of the National Defense Program,” 5 February 1941, USO-YMCA, Box 1, YMCA Archives, University of Minnesota.

5. Lynn, Rita L., The National Catholic Community Services in World War II (Washington, D.C., 1952), 43.Google Scholar

6. Ibid., 19–20.

7. The National Catholic Community Services (NCCS) and the National Traveler's Aid Association (NTAA) joined the USO shortly after incorporation. The NCCS was an umbrella organization that included the Knights of Columbus. The NTAA had been under the YWCA until the interwar era, when individual Traveler's Aid Societies became independent, a process not completed until after World War II.

8. “YW-WCS Report, 1945,” YW-WCS, National Board, YWCA Archives, New York.

9. The original founders included John Manley (YMCA), Luke Hart (NCCS), Frank Weil (JEB), Edward Parker (SA), and Emma Hirth (YWCA). Manley and Hart had been involved in World War I welfare activities. The Jewish Welfare Board became the National Jewish Welfare Board in 1944. Kanowsky, Oscar, The JWB Survey (New York, 1948), 51.Google Scholar

10. Eugene E. Barnett, “Memo,” n.d., USO-YMCA, B9, YMCA Archives. During World War I, the Knights of Columbus had spearheaded aid to servicemen by encouraging the formation of the National Catholic War Council. See Piper, John F. Jr.'sThe American Churches in World War I (Athens, Ohio, 1985)Google Scholar for a description of the role of Christian churches in World War I. Jewish Welfare Board activity in World War I is covered briefly in Kanowsky, The JWB Survey, 45–53.

11. John E. Manley to Eugene E. Barnett, 27 March 1941, USO-YMCA, Box 9, YMCA Archives. Piper, American Churches, 77–83.

12. Piper's The American Churches in World War I is the best account of the World War I experiences of the member agencies.

13. Emma P. Hirth, “History of the Participation of the YWCA in the USO,” 15–16, typescript, USO-YWCA, B9, SWHA. The National Education-Recreation Council conducted the tour through Trenton, New Jersey, and Norfolk, Virginia.

14. Hirth, “History of YWCA in the USO,” USO-YMCA, B9, SWHA, 16.

15. Ibid., 58.

16. George C. Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, to Army and Navy Committee of the YMCA, 2 August 1940. Quoted in Hirth, “History of the YWCA in the USO,” USO-YMCA, B9, SWHA, 17.

17. Hirth, “History of YWCA in the USO,” USO-YWCA, B9, SWHA, 17.

18. George C. Marshall to Harper Sibley, President of USO, 19 December 1941, as reprinted in Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 261.

19. George C. Marshall to Chester I. Barnard, President of USO, 31 May 1942, and “A Joint Statement of the American Red Cross and the United Service Organizations, Inc.” reprinted in The NCCS in World War II, 262–69.

20. Adjutant General's Office to Generals, memorandum, 25 September 1940. Quoted in Hirth, “Hx of YWCA in the USO,” USO-YWCA, B9, SWHA, 18.

21. Hirth, “History of YWCA in the USO,” B9, USO-YWCA, SWHA, 48–50. At first, only the YMCA and the Jewish Welfare Board met to explore cooperative projects.

22. Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 18–19.

23. Hirth, “History of YWCA in the USO,” USO-YWCA, B9, SWHA, 62–70. Community Chests & Councils eventually became the United Way.

24. Lynn, , The NCCS in World War II, 19–20.Google Scholar

25. R. S. Hosking, General Secretary, National Council, YMCA (Canada) to E. E. Barnett, National Council, YMCA (USA), 3 April 1941, B41, USO-YMCA, YMCA Archives.

26. The Canadian government may have forced the five organizations into a merger in early 1941 by prohibiting separate fund-raising campaigns. O. E. Pence to E. E. Barnett, 10 January 1941, USO-YMCA, Box 41, YMCA Archives.

27. John W. Beaton, National War Service Committee of the YMCA (Canada) to Eugene E. Barnett, YMCA (USA), B41, USO-YMCA, YMCA Archives.

28. Hirth, “History of the YWCA in the USO,” B9, USO-YWCA, SWHA, 59–72.

29. Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 34.

30. USO Field Operations, “USO Units and Personnel as of November 10, 1941,” and “Final Report of the USO,” November 1947, B48, USO-YMCA, YMCA Archives. These were referred to as Mobile and Maneuvers Services, the sole USO operation (outside of USO-Camp Shows) established on military property under the Army's supervision. (Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 40.) Military training programs on college campuses were excluded from the USO program. [Francis Keppel, Joint Army & Navy Committee, War Department, to Ray Johns, Director of Field Services, USO, 23 March 1943 and 26 March 1943, RG 225, B50, National Archives (hereafter NARA).] A special USO program of religious service on college campuses under military use began in 1943, but was not advertised as a USO project. (USO [unsigned] to Charles P. Taft, Assistant Director, ODHWS, 26 April 1943, RG 225, B50, NARA.)

31. Shifting Scenes (NTAA) 37 (January 1946), 2.

32. “Final Report of the USO,” November 1947, B50, USO-YMCA, YMCA Archives, 10.

33. “Final Report of the USO,” November 1947, B50, USO-YMCA, YMCA Archives, 12–13.

34. Kimball, Lindsey F., “Community and Campaign Relationships of the USO,” 44–46, 15 08 1942, USO-YMCA, B65, YMCA ArchivesGoogle Scholar. Kimball was the first president of the USO. Chester Barnard, a well-known industrialist, succeeded him.

35. Division of Community Operations, Field Operations Department, USO Manual: Community Conducted Organizations, (May 1945), 7, 9, 103–4.

36. “Principles and Policies for the Conduct of Religious Activities in USO,” USO Field Service Bulletin No. 27, 22 October 1942, as reprinted in Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 77–79. Certain USO-NCCS centers were criticized as having a “semi-official Catholic status” and thus not open to Protestants. (“Meeting of Sub-Committee on Religious Activities,” 19 March 1942, RG 225, B50, NARA.)

37. Johns, Ray, “Current Problems Facing USO Leadership,” 4 November 1942, Release #3, RG 225, B50, NARA.Google Scholar

38. “Principles and Policies for the Conduct of Religious Activities in USO,” USO Field Service Bulletin No. 27, 22 October 1942, as reprinted in Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 77–79.

39. “Minutes, Special Meeting of USO Committee on Services to Women and Girls,” 16 May 1943, USO-YMCA, B43, YMCA Archives. The Stage Door Canteen barred servicewomen as a matter of written policy because they “len(t) further military appearance” to the club. They were permitted to briefly enter the Canteen, but not to sit, eat, or remain in the center. (Bertha F. Stone, Stage Door Canteen, to Cdr. J. L. Reynolds, U.S. Navy, 14 April 1943, USO-YMCA, B43, YMCA Archives.)

40. Negro Service Committee, “Statement of Policy Regarding USO Services to Negroes,” 7 07 1942Google Scholar, and “Minutes,” 12 November 1942, USO-YMCA, B47, YMCA Archives.

41. “Meeting of Advisory Group of Church Representatives,” 23 November 1943, RG 225, B50, NARA.

42. “Minutes of Committee on Work with Women and Girls,” 18 May 1943, and “Minutes of Negro Service Committee,” 12 November 1942, USO-YMCA, B47, YMCA Archives.

43. “USO Literature Distribution Policy,” 1942?, USO-YMCA, B65, YMCA Archives. Jay Urice, a former Association secretary, was instrumental in developed USO-YMCA policies.

44. John W. Pontius, YMCA (Buffalo) to E. E. Barnett, YMCA (USA), 31 October 1941, USO-YMCA, B41, YMCA Archives.

45. John Pontius to Eugene Barnett, 31 October 1941, B41, USO-YMCA, YMCA Archives. The first USO campaign erroneously presented its operations as entirely joint endeavors without individual agency assignments. (Lynn, The NCCS in World War II, 36.)

46. Kimball, Lindsley F., “Community and Campaign Relationships of the USO,” 15 08 1942, 46, USO-YMCA, B66, YMCA Archives, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar

47. Kimball, Lindsley F., “Community and Campaign Relationships of the USO,” 15 08 1942, 46, USO-YMCA, B66, YMCA Archives, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar

48. “A Statement Concerning the U.S.O.” in The Watchman Examiner (June 1942) as quoted in Rev. Marion J. Creeger's “Church-Y.M.C.A. Co-operation in the USO” (press release of FCC), 7 May 1943, USO-YMCA, B70, E572, YMCA Archives, University of Minnesota.

49. No one seemed to have complained about the Salvation Army.

50. Kimball, , “Community and Campaign Relationships of the USO,” 15 08 1942, USO-YMCA, B65, YMCA Archives, 50.Google Scholar

51. Ibid.

52. Ibid., 30–83.

53. “Some Notes on NSWC Meeting,” 1 November 1940, NSWA, Suppl. 1, F75, SWHA.

54. National Social Welfare Council, Special Meeting, Minutes, 15 October 1940, NSWA, Suppl. 1, F75, SWHA.

55. “Community Organization of Health and Welfare Activities in the National Defense Program,” 5 April 1941, NSWA, Suppl. 1, F75, SWHA.

56. 7 October 1942, 8 October 1942, 10 October 1942, and 16 October 1942, Allen T. Burn, consultant, to David Holbrook, NSWC; NSWA, Suppl. 1, F75, SWHA.

57. See Meyer, Agnes, Journey Through Chaos (New York, 1944)Google Scholar, for an edited compilation of the series.

58. See Creedy, Brooks Spivey, Women Behind the Lines: YWCA Program with War Production Workers, 1940–1947 (New York, 1947)Google Scholar. for a popular (and highly edited) account of the YWCA's activities during the war, both through AWCS and independently.

59. After the war the name changed to Family Service Association of America.

60. See Weiss, Nancy J., The National Urban League: 1910–1940 (New York: Oxford, 1974).Google Scholar

61. The International Institutes were under the YWCA until the interwar period. The AFII began the war as the National Institute of Immigrant Welfare (NIIW). See Mohl, Raymond A., “The International Institute Movement and Ethnic Pluralism,” Social Science 56 (1981), 14–21.Google Scholar

62. Southard, Gladys Kitchel, “YW-WCS Report,” 07 1945, National Social Work Assembly (NSWA), F148, SWHA.Google Scholar

63. 4 June 1943, NSWC Minutes, NSWA, Suppl. 1, F75, SWHA.

64. “Special War Funds, 1 July 1943–30 June 1944,” AWCS, YW-WCS, National Board, YWCA.

65. “Minutes, Board of Directors, 5 October 1943,” National Board, YWCA, and “Memo,” 25 May 1943, “Status of War Services Project,” FSAA, B14, SWHA. Each agency contributed to AWCS on a pro rata basis in relation to the budgetary recommendation.

66. “Final Report, AWCS,” National Social Work Assembly (NSWA), B14, SWHA; B. Creedy, Women Behind the Lines, 87–91.

67. AWCS, “Final Report,” 7 05 1943–1931 December 1946, National Board, YMCA.Google ScholarPubMed

68. AWCS, “Final Report,” 31 12 1946, 193.3, National Board, YMCA.Google ScholarPubMed

69. “Proposed By-Laws for American War-Community Services,” 30 September 1943, FWAA, B37, SWHA.

70. “Cooperative Agreements and Procedures in Effect Between the National Agencies Constituting AWCS,” 6 March 1944, NSWA, B14, SWHA.

71. What Councils of Social Agencies Do (New York, 1939)Google Scholar. The first CSA's were established in 1909; by 1939, 306 CSAs had been organized. The majority of CSAs and CCCs shared a single staff.

72. The Council of Social Agencies was defined as a delegate body representing most, if not all, of the local public and private social and health agencies. Civic organizations (such as the League of Women Voters, the Parent-Teacher Association) often participated. Each group provided one lay and one professional delegate. Theoretically, the Chest raised funds and the CSA planned programs, although neither had legal authority over members. (What Council of Social Agencies Do, 1939)

73. “Final Report,” AWCS, YW-WCS, 193.3, National Board, YWCA. Richmond's operation included FSAA, CC&C, and the YWCA. “Minutes, AWCS Board of Directors,” 16 October 1944, AWCS, YW-WCS, 193.3, National Board, YWCA.

74. “Minutes, Board of Directors, AWCS,” 5 October 1943, FWAA, B37, SWHA.

75. “Final Report, AWCS,” 7 05 1943–1931 December 1946, YW-WCS, 193.3, National Board, YWCA.Google Scholar

76. “Final Report,” and “AWCS Central Office,” 1 02 1945, AWCS, YW-WCS, 193.3, National Board, YWCA.Google Scholar

77. “Final Report,” AWCS, YW-WCS, 193.3, National Board, YWCA.

78. Swoverland, Leonard, “Gary Studies Its No. 1 Problem,” Public Welfare in Indiana 50 (08 1945): 3–5Google Scholar. For comparison, Gary's black population was 2.3 percent of the total population in 1910. Mable Grover, “Field Report,” January 1946, NOPHN, NSWA, B15, SWHA; “Third & Final YWCA-WCS Report,” 1945–46, NSWA, B14, SWHA; and Hazel Ormsbee, “Summary of Situation in Gary,” FWAA, B37, SWHA.

79. “Statement on the Relationship of National Agencies to Local Welfare Planning,” Meeting of Advisory Committee on Health and Welfare Planning of Community Chests and Councils, 19 May 1946, AWCS, NSWA, B15, SWHA.

80. See Leighninger, Social Work: Search for Identity, 103–14, for a discussion of the two opposing schools of thought in social work, and the wartime manifestation of the struggle for dominance within professional social work organizations.

81. Ibid., 113–14. Both the interim committee and AWCS were absorbed by the National Social Work Assembly, which represented professional organizations rather than individuals, in 1946.

82. “Report of AWCS,” 1947, FSAA, B14, SWHA).

83. M. Grover, A. Heningburg, NOPHN & NUL field reports, Gary, Indiana, 1946, NSWA, B30, SWHA.

84. See TIDBITS, a newsletter taken from the YWCA's war community service field reports, for descriptions of the new YW's arising from WCS work: Richmond, California, with 500 members; Clinton, East Tennessee with 700 members, Huntington, West Virginia, with 500 members; Waterbury, Connecticut, with 725, etc. (NSWA, B15 (148), SWHA.)

85. McMillan, Community Organization in Social Welfare, 440–41.

86. Ibid., 449–50. Agreements among the Community Chests, the CIO, and the AFL were reached after a series of meetings in 1942. (“Bulletin on Labor Relations,” On the Alert, 17 August 1942, reprinted in McMillan, Community Organization in Social Welfare, 504–6.)

87. McMillan, Community Organization in Social Welfare, 53.

88. Boynton, Opal, “Housing and Migration Problems Face USO,” Better Times (2 10 1942), 7.Google Scholar