Class ___lA^Ai_ 
 
 Book _ll_Jv_ 
 
 Ccpiglit 14?__ 
 
 COPXRIGHT DEPOSm 
 
THE 
 GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 COSTS 
 
 SCHOOL YEAR 1915-1916 
 
 By 
 FRANK P. BACHMAN 
 
 AND 
 
 RALPH BOWMAN 
 
 GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD 
 
 61 Broadway New York 
 
 1918 
 
OS- 
 7o» 
 
 COSTS 
 
 SCHOOL YEAR 1915-1916 
 
THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 The results of the study of the Gary Public 
 Schools, undertaken on the invitation of the Super- 
 intendent and the Board of Education of Gary, will 
 be published in eight parts, as follows: 
 
 The Gary Schools: A General Account 
 
 By Abraham Flexner and Frank P. Bachman 
 
 (25 Cents) 
 
 Organization and Administration 
 George D. Strayer and Frank P. Bachman 
 
 (IS Cents) 
 
 Costs 
 Frank P. Bachman and Ralph Bowman 
 
 (25 Cents) 
 
 Industrial Work 
 Charles R. Richards 
 
 (25 Cents) 
 
 Household Arts 
 Eva W. White 
 
 (10 Cents) 
 
 Physical Training and Play 
 
 Lee F. Hanmer 
 
 (10 Cents) 
 
 Science Teaching 
 
 Otis W. Caldwell 
 
 (10 Cents) 
 
 Measurement of Classroom Products 
 
 Stuart A. Courtis 
 
 (30 Cents) 
 
 Any report will be sent postpaid on receipt of the 
 amount above specified. 
 
THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 COSTS 
 
 SCHOOL YEAR 1915-1916 
 
 BY 
 FRANK P. $ACHMAN 
 
 AND 
 
 RALPH BOWMAN 
 
 GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD 
 
 61 Broadway New York 
 
 1918 
 

 COPYRIGHT, I918, 
 BY 
 
 General Education Board 
 
 1 CI. A 5 U 853 
 
 DEC 12 1918 
 
 \ 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PA(JE 
 
 Introduction vii 
 
 I. Accounting Methods 3 
 
 II. Current Cost of Entire System . . 7 
 
 III. Current Cost of Regular Day Schools 9 
 
 IV. Current Cost of Larger Day Schools . 44 
 
 V. Current Cost of the School Shops . . 50 
 
 VI. Capital Outlay for Grounds, Buildings, 
 
 and Equipment 64 
 
 VII. Fixed Charges 69 
 
 VIII. Financing the System 72 
 
 IX. Appendix 85 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 The Gary Plan 
 
 In the last few years both laymen and professional 
 educators have engaged in a lively controversy as to the 
 merits and defects, advantages and disadvantages of 
 what has come to be called the Gary idea or the Gary 
 plan. The rapidly increasing literature bearing on the 
 subject is, however, deficient in details and too often 
 partisan in tone. The present study was undertaken 
 by the General Education Board at the request of the 
 Gary school authorities for the purpose of presenting an 
 accurate and comprehensive account of the Gary schools 
 in their significant aspects. 
 
 In the several volumes in which the main features of 
 the Gary schools are separately considered, the reader 
 will observe that, after presenting facts, each of the 
 authors discusses or — in technical phrase — attempts to 
 evaluate the Gary plan from the angle of his particular 
 interest. Facts were gathered in a patient, painstaking, 
 and objective fashion; and those who want facts, and 
 facts only, will, it is believed, find them in the descriptive 
 and statistical portions of the respective studies. But 
 the successive volumes will discuss principles, as well as 
 
viii INTRODUCTION 
 
 state facts. That is, the authors will not only describe 
 the Gary schools in the frankest manner, as they found 
 them, but they will also endeavor to interpret them in the 
 light of the large educational movement of which they 
 are part. An educational conception may be sound or 
 unsound; any particular effort to embody an educa- 
 tional conception may be adequate or inadequate, effec- 
 tive or ineffective. The public is interested in knowing 
 whether the Gary schools as now conducted are efficient 
 or inefficient; the public is also interested in knowing 
 whether the plan as such is sound or unsound. The 
 present study tries to do justice to both points. 
 
 What is the Gary plan? 
 
 Perhaps, in the first instance, the essential features of 
 the Gary plan can be made clear, if, instead of trying to 
 tell what the Gary plan is, we tell what it is not. Ex- 
 cept for its recent origin and the unusual situation as 
 respects its foreign population, Gary resembles many 
 other industrial centers that are to be found throughout 
 the country. Now, had Gary provided itself with the 
 type of school commonly found in other small industrial 
 American towns, we should find there half a dozen or 
 more square brick "soap-box" buildings, each accom- 
 modating a dozen classes pursuing the usual book studies, 
 a playground, with little or no equipment, perhaps a 
 basement room for manual training, a laboratory, and a 
 cooking room for the girls. Had Gary played safe, this 
 is the sort of school and school equipment that it would 
 now possess. Provided with this conventional school 
 
& 
 
 pq 
 
 Pi 
 
INTRODUCTION ix 
 
 system, the town would have led a conventional school 
 life — quiet, unoffending, and negatively happy — doing 
 as many others do, doing it about as well as they do it 
 and satisfied to do just that. 
 
 As contrasted with education of this meager type, the 
 Gary plan is distinguished by two features, intimately 
 connected with each other: 
 
 First — the enrichment and diversification of the 
 curriculum; 
 
 Second — the administrative device that, for want of a 
 better name, will be tentatively termed the duplicate 
 school organization. 
 These two features must first be considered in general 
 terms, if the reader is to understand the detailed descrip- 
 tion and discussion. 
 
 As to the curriculum and school activities. While 
 the practice of education has in large part continued 
 to follow traditional paths, the progressive literature of 
 the subject has abounded in constructive suggestions 
 of far-reaching practical significance. Social, political, 
 and industrial changes have forced upon the school 
 responsibilities formerly laid upon the home. Once the 
 school had mainly to teach the elements of knowledge; 
 now the school is charged with the physical, mental, and 
 social training of the child. To meet these needs a 
 changed and enriched curriculum, including community 
 activities, facilities for recreation, shop work, and house- 
 hold arts, has been urged on the content side of school 
 work; the transformation of school aims and discipline 
 
x INTRODUCTION 
 
 on the basis of modern psychology, ethics, and social 
 philosophy has been for similar reasons recommended on 
 the side of attitude and method. 
 
 These things have been in the air. Every one of them 
 has been tried and is being practised in some form or 
 other, somewhere or other. In probably every large 
 city in the country efforts have been made, especially in 
 the more recent school plants, to develop some of the 
 features above mentioned. There has been a distinct, 
 unmistakable, and general trend toward making the 
 school a place where children "live" as well as "learn." 
 This movement did not originate at Gary; nor is Gary its 
 only evidence. It is none the less true that perhaps no- 
 where else have the schools so deliberately and explicitly 
 avowed this modern policy. The Gary schools are offi- 
 cially described as "work, study, and play" schools — 
 schools, that is, that try to respond adequately to a many- 
 sided responsibility; how far and with what success, the 
 successive reports of the Gary survey will show. 
 
 It must not, however, be supposed that the enriched 
 curriculum was applied in its present form at the out- 
 set or that it is equally well developed in all the Gary 
 schools. Far from it. There has been a distinct and 
 uneven process of development at Gary; sometimes, as 
 subsequent chapters will show, such rapid and unstable 
 development that our account may in certain respects 
 be obsolete before it is printed. When the Emerson 
 school was opened in 1909, the equipment in laboratories, 
 shops, and museums, while doubtless superior to what 
 
 
tf 
 
INTRODUCTION xi 
 
 was offered by other towns of the Gary type, could have 
 been matched by what was to be found in many of the 
 better favored larger towns and cities at the same period. 
 The gymnasium, for example, was not more than one 
 third its present size; the industrial work was not un- 
 precedented in kind or extent; the boys had woodwork, 
 the girls cooking and sewing. But progress was rapid: 
 painting and printing were added in 191 1; the foundry, 
 forge, and machine shop in 1913. The opportunities 
 for girls were enlarged by the addition of the cafeteria in 
 1 9 13. The auditorium reached its present extended use 
 as recently as the school year 1913-14. The Froebel 
 school, first occupied in the fall of 191 2, started with 
 facilities similar to those previously introduced piecemeal 
 into the Emerson. 
 
 These facilities, covering in their development a period 
 of years, represent the effort to create an elementary 
 school more nearly adequate to the needs of modern 
 urban life. The curriculum is enriched by various ac- 
 tivities in the fields of industry, science, and recreation. 
 Questions as to the efficiency with which these varied 
 activities have been administered will be discussed by 
 the various contributors to the present study. Mean- 
 while, it is perhaps only fair to point out that the modern 
 movement calls not only for additions to, but elimina- 
 tions from, the curriculum and for a critical attitude 
 toward the products of classroom teaching. How far, on 
 the academic side, the Gary schools reflect this aspect 
 of the modern movement will also presently appear. 
 
xii INTRODUCTION 
 
 The administrative device — the "duplicate" organiza- 
 tion, noted above as the second characteristic feature of 
 the Gary plan — stands on a somewhat different footing, 
 as the following considerations make plain. 
 
 Once more, Mr. Wirt was not the inventor of the in- 
 tensive use of school buildings, though he was among the 
 first — if not the very first — to perceive the purely educa- 
 tional advantage to which the situation could be turned. 
 The rapidity with which American cities have grown has 
 created a difficult problem for school administrators — 
 the problem of providing space and instruction for chil- 
 dren who increase in number faster than buildings are 
 constructed. The problem has been handled in various 
 ways. In one place, the regular school day has been 
 shortened and two different sets of children attending at 
 different hours have been taught daily in one building 
 and by one group of teachers. Elsewhere, as in certain 
 high schools, a complete double session has been con- 
 ducted. The use of one set of schoolrooms for more than 
 one set of children each day did not therefore originate 
 at Gary. 
 
 Another point needs to be considered before we discuss 
 the so-called duplicate feature of the Gary plan. In 
 American colleges, subjects have commonly been taught 
 by specialists, not by class teachers. The work is "de- 
 partmentalized" — to use the technical term. There is 
 a teacher of Latin, a teacher of mathematics, a teacher 
 of physics, who together instruct every class — not a 
 separate teacher of each class in all subjects. Latterly, 
 
INTRODUCTION xiii 
 
 departmentalization has spread from the college into 
 the high school, until nowadays well organized high 
 schools and the upper grades of elementary schools are 
 quite generally "departmentalized," i.e., organized with 
 special teachers for the several subjects, rather than 
 with one teacher for each grade. 
 
 Out of these two elements, Gary has evolved an admin- 
 istrative device, the so-called duplicate school, which, 
 from the standpoint of its present educational signifi- 
 cance, does indeed represent a definite innovation. 
 
 For the sake of clearness, it will be well to explain the 
 theory of the duplicate school by a simplified imaginary 
 example : 
 
 Let us suppose that elementary school facilities have 
 to be provided for, say, 1,600 children. If each class is 
 to contain a maximum of 40 children, a schoolhouse of 
 40 rooms would formerly have been built, with perhaps 
 a few additional rooms, little used, for special activities; 
 except during the recess (12 to 1:30) each recitation 
 room would be in practically continuous use in the old- 
 line subjects from 9 to 3 30, when school is adjourned till 
 next morning. A school plant of this kind may be 
 represented by Figure I, each square representing a 
 schoolroom. 
 
 The "duplicate" school proposes a different solution. 
 Instead of providing 40 classrooms for 40 classes, it 
 requires 20 classrooms, capable of holding 800 children; 
 and further, playgrounds, laboratories, shops, gardens, 
 gymnasium, and auditorium, also capable of holding 
 
XIV 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 
 800 children. If, now, 800 children use the classrooms 
 while 800 are using the other facilities, morning and after- 
 noon, the entire plant accommodates 1,600 pupils 
 throughout the school day; and the curriculum is greatly- 
 enriched, since, without taking away anything from their 
 classroom work, they are getting other branches also. A 
 school thus equipped and organized may be represented 
 
 FIGURE I 
 REPRESENTS OLD-FASHIONED SCHOOLHOUSE 
 
 40 rooms for 40 classes, of 40 children each, i. e., facilities for the academic instruc- 
 tion of 1,600 children. A school yard and an extra room or two, little used, for special 
 activities, are also usually found. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 by Figure II, in which A represents 20 classes taking 
 care of 40 children each (800 children) , and B represents 
 special facilities taking care of 800 children. As A 
 and B are in simultaneous operation, 1,600 children are 
 cared for. 
 
 This method of visualizing the "duplicate" school 
 serves to correct a common misconception. The plan 
 aims to intensify the use of schoolrooms; yet it would be 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 xv 
 
 incorrect to say that 20 classrooms, instead of 40, 
 as under the old plan, accommodate 1,600 children. 
 For while the number of classrooms has been reduced 
 from 40 to 20, special facilities of equal capacity have 
 been added in the form of auditorium, shops, play- 
 ground, etc. The 20 classrooms apparently saved 
 
 FIGURE 11 
 REPRESENTS THE GARY EQUIPMENT 
 A B 
 
 20 classrooms for academic instruction Special facilities, taking care of 800 chil- 
 
 of 20 classes of 40 children each (800 chil- dren in the morning hours and an equal 
 dren) -in the morning hours and an equal number in the afternoon hours (1,600 in all 
 number in the afternoon (1 ,600 in all daily) daily) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Auditorium 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Shops 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Laboratories 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Playground, gardens, 
 ; gymnasium and library 
 
 have been replaced by special facilities of one kind or 
 another. The so-called duplicate organization and 
 the longer school day make it possible to give larger 
 facilities to twice as many children as the classrooms alone 
 would accommodate. The duplicate school, as devel- 
 oped at Gary, is not therefore a device to relieve conges- 
 tion or to reduce expense, but the natural result of 
 efforts to provide a richer school life for all children. 
 
xvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 The enriched curriculum and the duplicate organ- 
 ization support each other. The social situation re- 
 quires a scheme of education fairly adequate to the 
 entire scope of the child's activities and possibilities; 
 this cannot be achieved without a longer school day and 
 a more varied school equipment. The duplicate school 
 endeavors to give the longer day, the richer curriculum, 
 and the more varied activities with the lowest possible 
 investment in, and the most intensive use of, the school 
 plant. The so-called duplicate school is thus a single 
 school with two different types of facilities in more or less 
 constant and simultaneous operation, morning and 
 afternoon. 
 
 Such is the Gary plan in conception. What about the 
 execution? Is it realized at Gary? Does it work? 
 What is involved as respects space, investment, etc., 
 when ordinary classrooms are replaced by shops, play- 
 grounds, and laboratories? Can a given equipment in 
 the way of auditorium, shops, etc., handle precisely 
 the same number of children accommodated in the class- 
 rooms without doing violence to their educational needs 
 on the one hand, and without waste through temporary 
 disuse of the special facilities, on the other? To what 
 extent has Gary modified or reorganized on modern lines 
 the treatment of the common classroom subjects? How 
 efficient is instruction in the usual academic studies as 
 well as in the newer or so-called modern subjects and 
 activities? Is the plan economical in the sense that 
 equal educational advantages cannot be procured by 
 
pq 
 
INTRODUCTION xvii 
 
 any other scheme except at greater cost? These and 
 other questions as to the execution of the Gary plan are, 
 as far as data were obtainable, discussed in the separate 
 volumes making up the present survey. 
 
 The concrete questions above mentioned do not, how- 
 ever, exhaust the educational values of a given school 
 situation. From every school system there come im- 
 ponderable products, bad as well as good. Aside from 
 all else, many observers of the Gary schools report one 
 such imponderable in the form of a spiritual something 
 which can hardly be included in a study of administra- 
 tion and eludes the testing of classroom work. These 
 observers have no way of knowing whether Gary school 
 costs are high or low; whether the pupils spell and add as 
 well as children do elsewhere; but, however these things 
 may be, they usually describe the pupils as characterized 
 by self-possession, resourcefulness, and happiness to an 
 unusual degree. While different schools and indeed 
 different parts of the same school vary in this respect, 
 the members of the survey staff agree that, on the whole, 
 there is a basis of fact for these observations. Gary is 
 thus something more than a school organization charac- 
 terized by the two main features above discussed. 
 
 The reason is not far to seek. Innovation is stimu- 
 lating, just as conformity is deadening. Experiment 
 is in this sense a thing wholesome in itself. Of course 
 it must be held to strict accountability for results; and 
 this study is the work of persons who, convinced of the 
 necessity of educational progress, are at the same time 
 
xviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 solicitous that the outcome be carefully observed. 
 The fact that customary school procedure does not rest 
 upon a scientific basis, does not willingly submit itself 
 to thorough scrutiny, is no reason for exempting educa- 
 tional innovations from strict accountability. The very 
 reverse is indeed true; for otherwise innovation may im- 
 peril or sacrifice essential educational values, without 
 actually knowing whether or not it has achieved definite 
 values of its own. Faith in a new program does not 
 absolve the reformer from a watchful and critical atti- 
 tude toward results. Moreover, if the innovator for- 
 mulates his purposes in definite terms and measures his 
 results in the light of his professed aims, the conservative 
 cannot permanently escape the same process. Gary, like 
 all other educational experiments, must be held account- 
 able in this fashion. Subject however to such ac- 
 countability, the breaking of the conventional school 
 framework, the introduction of new subject matter or 
 equipment, even administrative reorganization, at Gary as 
 elsewhere, tend to favor a fresher, more vigorous interest 
 and spirit. Defects will in the following pages be pointed 
 out in the Gary schools — defects of organization, of ad- 
 ministration, of instruction. But there is for the reasons 
 just suggested something in the Gary schools over and 
 above the Gary plan. Problems abound, as in every 
 living and developing situation. But the problems 
 are the problems of life, and, as such, are in the long 
 run perhaps more hopeful than the relatively smooth 
 functioning of a stationary school system. Thus, not- 
 
INTRODUCTION xix 
 
 withstanding the defects and shortcomings which this 
 study will candidly point out, the experiment at Gary 
 rightly observed and interpreted is both interesting and 
 stimulating. 
 
COSTS 
 
 SCHOOL YEAR 1916-1916 
 
COSTS 
 
 I. ACCOUNTING METHODS 
 
 THE basic financial record of the Gary schools 
 consists of a single-entry cash book of receipts 
 and disbursements, prescribed by the State 
 Bureau of Public Accounts, and the original documents 
 supporting the several entries. 
 
 In recording receipts and expenditures, the cash rec- 
 ord makes no fund divisions other than the Common 
 School Tuition Fund, available only for teachers' salaries; 
 Special School Fund, available for any school purposes 
 whatsoever; Bond Principal and Interest Fund, avail- 
 able only to redeem bonds and pay interest thereon; and 
 Loan Funds, the proceeds of bonds. 
 
 Distribution of expenditures to show the character 
 of the expense — that is, whether for operation, upkeep, 
 fixed charges, or capital outlay — is made on records 
 supplementary to the cash book, and these are worked 
 out mostly by students, as a laboratory exercise in the 
 commercial department, from invoices, payrolls, requisi- 
 tions, work orders, and the like. 
 
 Finally, the cash record takes cognizance of revenues 
 only when they are received, and of expenditures only 
 
 3 
 
4 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 when paid, with the result that revenues credited against 
 one school year may belong to the preceding or suc- 
 ceeding year, and an expenditure paid in 1915-1916 
 may represent an obligation incurred in 1914-1915; 
 thus, to some extent, accounts of different school years 
 overlap. 
 
 The methods employed do not adequately meet the 
 requirements of a school system such as that of Gary, 
 organized into day, Saturday, night, summer, and Sun- 
 day schools, and conducting numerous instructional 
 and industrial activities. For example, from the rec- 
 ords as they stood July 31, 191 6, it was impossible to 
 draw either a balance sheet or a specific revenue and 
 expenditure statement for the school year 1915-1916. 
 Furthermore, an examination of the cost reports de- 
 veloped the fact that these are not reports of total 
 direct expenditures, but tabulations of expenses after 
 the direct expenditure has been apportioned among a 
 number of organizations or activities on a theoretical 
 or empirical basis. 
 
 Therefore, to determine the expenditures of the schools 
 for the fiscal year August 1, 191 5, to July 31, 191 6, it 
 was necessary to canvass all expenditures for the period 
 in order to eliminate such items as belonged to other 
 years and to add such invoices and payrolls as remained 
 unpaid at the year's end. 
 
 It was also necessary to analyze anew all cost reports. 
 In the course of this analysis, original documents were 
 often encountered which did not contain the required 
 
ACCOUNTING METHODS 5 
 
 information. Store records were not infrequently lack- 
 ing. Inventories showing materials on hand at the 
 beginning and end of the year were either not at hand or 
 were inaccurate and incomplete. Expenditures were 
 not carefully divided as between plants, organizations, 
 and services, and often the character of the expenditures 
 was not clearly defined. 
 
 The analysis in question required, as the first step, 
 the preparation of an adequate expenditure code. The 
 code prepared takes into consideration: 
 
 (1) Divisions by school plants. 
 
 (2) Character of expenditure. 
 
 (3) Services. 
 
 Services were subdivided into 
 
 (a) Services relating to administration, the expendi- 
 ture for which can not advantageously be distributed to 
 any other service division. 
 
 (b) Other general services, such as compulsory at- 
 tendance and medical inspection. 
 
 (c) Services relating specifically to property — Its 
 acquisition, obligations of ownership, operation, and up- 
 keep. 
 
 (d) Services relating specifically to instruction. 
 
 The expenses of the Gary schools as compiled on the 
 basis of this code and our analysis of the cost, along 
 with related data, are reported in the appendix in the 
 following tables: 
 
 A. Expenditures and Revenues in Summary. 
 
 B. Balance Sheet. 
 
6 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 C. Operation Statement. 
 
 D. Revenue Statement. 
 
 E. Fund Statement. 
 
 F. Inventory Statement. 
 
 G. Bond Statement. 
 
 H. Expenditures by Organization in Summary and 
 in Detail. 
 
 These tables, it will be noted, are the result of our 
 own work, and are independent of what the Gary au- 
 thorities may have compiled or published, although it 
 should be stated that in distributing expenditures we 
 did not depart from the bases of distribution employed 
 at Gary. 1 
 
 The present report is confined entirely to the descrip- 
 tion and discussion of Gary expenditures. Comparison 
 with other cities is not attempted. To have assembled 
 data strictly comparable with Gary would have in- 
 volved an equally thoroughgoing financial study of other 
 cities. Nevertheless, those wishing to institute com- 
 parisons between Gary and any other school system 
 will find the required detail for the Gary schools in 
 the tables of the appendix, and will only need to make 
 a similar cost classification and distribution for the system 
 to be compared. 
 
 1 For example, the plant operation expense at the Jefferson School 
 is distributed, 72 per cent, to the day school, 10 per cent, to the Satur- 
 day school, and 18 per cent, to the night school, and we did not alter 
 these bases of distribution. 
 
II. CURRENT COST OF ENTIRE SYSTEM 
 
 PUBLIC school costs embrace capital outlays for 
 grounds, buildings, and permanent equipment, 
 current expenses for operation and upkeep, 
 and fixed charges (that is, interest, pensions, etc.). 
 Undoubtedly, a complete cost 1 report should also 
 include a reasonable charge on capital invested, and 
 an allowance for depreciation, inasmuch as time and 
 use antiquate the best of buildings and equipment, 
 but we have no means of determining what these 
 charges should be at Gary. This report, therefore, 
 treats each of these several items of expense, with the 
 exception of allowances for depreciation and charges 
 on capital invested. But we are concerned chiefly 
 with the operation cost of the Gary schools, and it is 
 important to make clear at the outset what this in- 
 cludes. As we use the term, operation cost covers upkeep 
 (that is, repairs and replacements), and current expenses 
 other than upkeep, but does not include fixed charges. 
 
 The current expenses of the entire Gary system for 
 the school year 1915-1916 were $255,438.41. This 
 amount was distributed as follows: 
 
 1 Cost should be distinguished from expenditures, for a report of ex- 
 penditures would also cover debt payments. 
 
THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 TABLE I 1 
 
 Current Cost of the Entire System 
 
 ORGANIZATION 
 DIVISIONS 
 
 EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER 
 
 THAN 
 
 UPKEEP 
 
 UPKEEP 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 PER CENT. 
 OF TOTAL 
 
 Administrative 
 and General 
 Services 2 
 
 Day School 
 
 Saturday School. . 
 
 Night School 
 
 Summer School. . . 
 
 Sunday School . . . 
 
 $ 21,047.72 
 
 166,841.30 
 
 12,427.45 
 
 22,641.76 
 
 13,544.64 
 
 3,142.18 
 
 $ 630.27 
 15,163.09 
 
 $ 21,677.99 
 
 182,004.39 
 
 12,427.45 
 
 22,641.76 
 
 13,544.64 
 
 3,142.18 
 
 9 
 71 
 
 5 
 9 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 Total 
 
 $239,645.05 
 
 $15,793.36 
 
 $255,438.41 
 
 100 
 
 iThis table is based on Table H of the Appendix. 
 
 Administrative and General Services include the Board of Education, the Super- 
 intendent, Supervision of Heat and Power Plants, Attendance Enforcement, Medical 
 Inspection, etc.; in short, items which it is customary to report under General Adminis- 
 tration. See Schedule H-i of the Appendix. 
 
 A review of the total current expenses of a system is 
 not only interesting but yields the perspective needed 
 if judgment is to be passed on the expenditure for any 
 single kind of school. But at Gary, as elsewhere, the 
 day schools are the heart of the system, the direct cost 
 amounting to 71 per cent, of the total current expendi- 
 ture for public education. For this reason, and be- 
 cause of the widespread popular interest, the analyses 
 and discussions of this report center chiefly on the 
 operation cost of the Gary day schools. However, 
 other types of schools are considered incidentally, 
 and the appendix supplies detailed financial data on 
 each branch of the system. 
 
III. CURRENT COST OF REGULAR DAY 
 SCHOOLS 
 
 Ik LTHOUGH we shall shortly question its pro- 
 /-\ priety, common practice charges the entire cost 
 «*- -^ of administrative and general services (which 
 includes the expense of the board of education, the 
 superintendent, and the like) against the day school. 
 If, then, $21,677.99, the current expenditure for admin- 
 istrative and general services, be added to $182,004.39, 
 the direct operating cost of the day school (Table I), 
 the total current day school expense becomes $203,682.38. 
 This is equal to a current expense of $49.29 per pupil 
 in average daily attendance (4,132), or of $36.02 per 
 pupil on total enrollment (5,654). The per pupil ex- 
 pense in average daily attendance may be divided as 
 in Table II. 
 
 Each item of Table II requires analysis and comment, 
 but before we undertake this, it is necessary to explain 
 the difference in the reported expenditures under Ad- 
 ministrative and General Services as given in Table I 
 ($21,677.99) an d in Table II ($36,046.55). Adminis- 
 trative and General Services in Table I include the over- 
 head for the system as a whole. In contrast, Admin- 
 istrative and General Services in Table II include the 
 
io THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 TABLE II 
 
 Division of Expense Per Pupil in Average Daily 
 Attendance at Regular Day Schools 
 
 A. Administrative and General 
 
 Services $36,046.55 
 
 TOTAL PER PUPIL 
 EXPENDITURE EXPENSE 
 
 Administration: 
 
 (i) The Board 1 
 
 (2) The Superintendent 1 . . 
 
 (3) Supervision: 
 
 (a) Of Property 1 
 
 (b) Of Instruction 2 
 
 (4) Principals 2 
 
 (5) Total 
 
 General Services: 
 
 (1) Provision and Storage of 
 Supplies 1 . 
 
 (2) Transportation Service 1 
 
 (3) Compulsory Attendance 1 
 
 (4) Medical Inspection 1 
 
 (5) Library Service 1 
 
 (6) Instruction in Other In- 
 stitutions 1 
 
 (7) Total 
 
 B. Operation and Maintenance of 
 Plant 
 
 1. Operation of Buildings and 
 
 Grounds 2 
 
 2. Upkeep of Buildings, 
 Grounds, and General Equip 
 
 ment 2 
 
 C. Instruction. 
 
 1. Teachers' Salaries 2 
 
 2. Supplies and Equipment 
 
 Upkeep 2 
 
 D. Grand Total $203,682.38 
 
 4,853.79 
 7,640.14 
 
 1,821.75 
 
 7,462.42 
 
 6,906.14 
 
 28,684.24 
 
 681.12 
 
 654.88 
 
 730.84 
 
 5,009.74 
 
 18.70 
 
 267.03 
 7,362.31 
 
 39,633.45 
 
 26,423.27 
 
 13,210.18 
 
 128,002.38 
 
 120,652.20 
 7,350.18 
 
 $ 8.72 
 
 PER CENT. 
 OF TOTAL 
 
 1.17 
 1.85 
 
 .44 
 1.81 
 1.67 
 6.94 
 
 .16 
 
 .16 
 
 .18 
 
 1.21 
 
 .07 
 
 1.78 
 
 9.59 
 
 6.39 
 
 3.20 
 
 30.98 
 
 29.20 
 1.78 
 
 $49.29 
 
 17.7 
 
 2.4 
 3.7 
 
 .9 
 
 3.7 
 
 3.4 
 
 14.1 
 
 .3 
 
 .3 
 
 .4 
 
 2.5 
 
 .1 
 
 3.6 
 
 19.5 
 
 13.0 
 
 6.5 
 
 62.8 
 
 59.2 
 3.6 
 
 100. 
 
 1 AU items marked " 1 " are from Schedule H-i of the Appendix. 
 * AU items marked " a " are from Schedule H-a of the Appendix. 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS n 
 
 overhead expenditures for the system as a whole, and 
 also the direct overhead of the day schools (expenditures 
 for day school supervision and principals), and pre- 
 sents the total as the overhead of the day school. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION 
 
 An expense per pupil in average daily attendance of 
 $6.94 for administration (Table II) is higher than is 
 generally reported for such service. However, before 
 judgment is passed the services covered should be care- 
 fully scrutinized. Administration, as the term is em- 
 ployed here, draws a clear line between the services of 
 those who direct and control the work of others, and 
 the services of those actually engaged in doing things, 
 whether it be running a boiler or teaching a class. On 
 the basis of this division, this report includes under ad- 
 ministration services not ordinarily covered (for ex- 
 ample, supervision), and omits other services ordinarily 
 included (such as compulsory attendance and medical 
 inspection). Therefore, when the per pupil expense for 
 administration is reported as $6.94, it should be under- 
 stood that this covers all services having to do with the 
 direction and control of the day schools, whether the 
 legislative direction and control of the board of educa- 
 tion, the executive direction and control of the super- 
 intendent, the supervisory control of property or in- 
 struction, or the managerial direction and control of 
 school principals. For this reason, it is not out of place to 
 caution against hasty comparisons of administration cost. 
 
12 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 It is equally important before passing judgment 
 to understand how expense charges are made; that 
 is, whether the day schools carry the entire expense 
 of a given kind of administrative service or only a 
 part of it. 
 
 For example, the board of education and the super- 
 intendent direct and control the day schools, but they 
 perform a like service for the Saturday schools, the night 
 schools, the summer schools, and the Sunday schools. 
 Nevertheless, the Gary auditor charges the totals of all 
 such expense — as is the common practice — against the 
 day school. Hence, the reported expenses of the board 
 and of the superintendent of schools (Tables II and III) 
 are the totals for these purposes. 
 
 Certain public school accountants hold that it is 
 unfair to charge the entire expense of the board and 
 superintendent against the day school, on the ground 
 that such expenses should be apportioned among the dif- 
 ferent types of schools. While we agree with this posi- 
 tion in theory, we have not seen any satisfactory basis 
 for such distribution — whether the proposed basis is the 
 total direct cost of the several activities, or teacher in- 
 struction hours, 1 or pupil instruction hours. 2 Therefore, 
 
 1 A teacher instruction hour is a clock hour's service on the part of a 
 single teacher. 
 
 J A pupil instruction hour is the reception on the part of a single pupil 
 of a clock hour's instruction. 
 
 The pupil instruction hours, exclusive of the Sunday schools, rendered 
 by the different branches of the service in 1915-1916, were: 
 
 Day schools . . . 5,515,575 
 Saturday schools . . 106,978 
 Night schools . . . 167,984 
 
 Summer schools . . 80,465 
 
 Total ..... 5,871,002 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 !3 
 
 sag £ 
 « , < ss 
 
 E2 ti f* H S 
 
 iz s w 8 S 
 
 w g > 2 w 
 
 ft S < t 
 
 <5 COM in 
 W OO 00 
 
 
 S &• v o X 
 
 °73 
 
 
 ^^r ft a 
 
 'J1 rr. • 
 
 w 
 
 
 ID 
 
 ^ 
 
 (ON 
 
 rf 
 
 W 
 
 
 (M 
 
 
 
 
 CM-* 
 
 to 
 
 t> 
 
 TtO) 
 
 t> 
 
 H 
 O 
 
 -# 
 
 in 
 
 
 c~ 
 
 
 
 
 $ 
 
 
 -tfO> 
 
 w 
 
 CXI 
 
 
 
 ■"1 
 
 CO 
 
 (O 
 
 CO 
 
 -*co 
 
 ■* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tXO 
 
 on 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CM 
 
 
 3 
 
 ,_i 
 
 ION 
 
 t> 
 
 1° 
 
 t^cq 
 
 
 gw 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 ^1-1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 wm 
 
 -# 
 
 N 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •<*co 
 
 N 
 
 60- 
 
 
 
 t-H 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 STANTS 
 AND 
 KATIVE 
 3RCE 
 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 in-* 
 
 •-105 
 
 S3 
 
 a? 
 
 ID 
 
 ID 
 
 
 in 
 
 9 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 $ P< 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 < O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 01 
 0) W 
 
 in 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 8 
 
 88 
 
 in 
 
 CO 
 
 3 O H 
 
 CO 
 
 5 
 
 S 
 
 00 
 
 g 
 
 8 
 
 100 
 
 <D 
 
 H 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 00 
 
 IflO 
 
 Tf 
 
 
 
 
 10 
 
 
 <0!O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 g s 
 
 8- & 
 
 s s 
 
 a s 
 
 B s 
 
i 4 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 until an appropriate basis of distribution is experimen- 
 tally determined it is altogether proper, we believe, 
 either to treat the expenses of the board and of the 
 superintendent as an overhead charge against the entire 
 system, or to debit such expenses — as is now the com- 
 mon practice as well as the practice at Gary — against 
 the day school. 
 
 The Gary authorities likewise charge the entire ex- 
 pense of property supervision against the day school. 
 That is, the 44 cents per pupil for property supervision 
 (Tables II and III) represents the total amount spent on 
 this service, which at Gary has to do with the oversight of 
 heat and power plants only. Since several kinds of 
 schools use the same heat and power equipment, it 
 would seem proper to apportion such supervision among 
 the different organizations occupying the same building. 
 But an equitable distribution of such expense is now, 
 as we shall see in connection with the operation and up- 
 keep of buildings, next to an impossible task. At any 
 rate, we have made no attempt to apportion it, leaving 
 the entire expense of property supervision against the 
 day school as debited by the Gary authorities. 
 
 The expense of instructional supervision is, however, 
 handled differently. The $1.81 per pupil for instruc- 
 tional supervision (Tables II and III) is only such part 
 of the total expense for the system as the Gary authori- 
 ties have charged or apportioned to the day school. 
 In fact, the contracts of the supervisors are so drawn as 
 to divide this expense. For example, the director of 
 
Uh 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 IS 
 
 night schools is also engaged for part day and full 
 Saturday service; another is employed for regular day, 
 Saturday, and evening schools; and still others, for the 
 day school only. Again, supervisors are guaranteed work 
 beyond what their contracts call for, and they receive 
 additional pay for what they do. To illustrate: B's con- 
 tract is for the day and Saturday schools at a salary of 
 $2,000, which is apportioned $1,800 to the day school and 
 $200 to the Saturday school. But B works also in the 
 summer, earning $408 (Table IV). Similarly, D's regular 
 day school salary is $1,100, but Saturday, evening, 
 summer, and Sunday service raises the total to $1,964. 
 As a result of so employing supervisors and of so dis- 
 tributing their salaries, only $7,462, or 67 per cent, of 
 the total for supervision, is chargeable to the day school. x 
 The growing diversity of public education furnishes 
 good reasons for engaging supervisors for specific tasks 
 and for dividing the cost on a service base. But the 
 respective charges at Gary — 67 per cent, to the regular 
 day school, 8 per cent, to the Saturday school, 8 per 
 
 1 Supervisors receive pay only for what they do in the summer and 
 Sunday schools. This also holds for the Saturday and night schools 
 in the case of supervisors C and D. The salaries and expenses of the 
 remaining three are apportioned as follows: 
 
 SUPERVISORS 
 
 (see table rv) 
 
 DAY SCHOOL 
 
 SATURDAY SCHOOL 
 
 NIGHT SCHOOL 
 
 A* (theoretically) 
 
 B 
 
 E 
 
 33f% 
 
 90 % 
 70% 
 
 3l% 
 
 10% 
 10% 
 
 20% 
 
 •A receives theoretically 62J per cent, of his salary as director of night school. 
 
i6 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 > 
 i— i 
 
 W 
 
 PQ 
 
 < 
 
 o 
 
 h-l 
 CO 
 
 > 
 
 w 
 
 m 
 
 «: 
 o 
 
 H 
 U 
 
 « 
 H 
 
 < 
 H 
 O 
 
 H 
 
 ft 
 
 o 
 
 5? 
 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 H 
 
 
 hH 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tn 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 IG 
 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 o 
 
 o" 
 
 
 
 lO 
 
 irf 
 
 
 id 
 
 
 >■ 
 
 lO 
 
 w 
 
 
 U3 
 
 
 
 < 
 a 
 g 
 
 €«• 
 
 so- 
 
 
 ««■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 tn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 OS ^ ^ ^ 
 
 tj< oq toco 
 
 
 t- 
 
 CM 
 
 o 
 
 
 Q 
 
 a 
 
 t- 
 
 p 
 
 t- 
 
 ia 
 
 T—I 
 
 
 u 
 
 cmco oood 
 
 C\ 
 
 i-i 
 
 t^ 
 
 i-i 
 
 t> 
 
 en 
 
 too «oo 
 
 Tt 
 
 oo 
 
 00 
 
 i—i 
 
 1—1 
 
 O 
 
 « 
 
 uo "<* cm ia 
 
 t~ 
 
 * 
 
 
 °1 
 
 
 H 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 
 
 1-4" 
 
 
 « 
 
 
 eo- 
 
 «3- 
 
 
 €«■ 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ft 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 o 
 
 tn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 h1 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 oo 
 
 c 
 
 OS 
 
 i-H 
 
 o 
 
 
 Eh 
 
 a 
 
 pp 
 
 c 
 
 00 
 
 "tf 
 
 oo 
 
 CO 
 
 u 
 
 CJO 
 
 C\ 
 
 CO 
 
 rji 
 
 ■* 
 
 oo 
 
 g 
 
 tn 
 
 CO o 
 
 CC 
 
 Oi 
 
 co 
 
 CM 
 
 
 H 
 
 CO"* 
 
 t~ 
 
 
 
 Oi 
 
 
 
 
 se- 
 
 €«• 
 
 
 €«• 
 
 
 < 
 
 Q 
 W 
 O 
 « 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hi 
 O 
 
 o 
 W 
 o 
 
 OO 100 
 
 IH 
 
 co 
 
 CO 
 
 (O 
 
 IT. 
 
 
 u 
 
 < 
 
 a 
 
 H 
 
 op cmo 
 
 CN 
 
 r-j 
 
 co 
 
 t^; 
 
 I> 
 
 
 100 ^io 
 
 o 
 
 <D 
 
 t-^ 
 
 (M 
 
 
 H 
 
 CM O 00 O 
 
 c 
 
 CD 
 
 CO 
 
 ■** 
 
 
 « 
 
 i-KM t-ICM 
 
 t- 
 
 
 
 co 
 
 
 < 
 fa 
 
 6^ 
 
 €/3- 
 
 
 €«■ 
 
 
 
 «< 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Hi 
 
 o 
 
 OOOOO 
 
 C 
 
 itO 
 
 t- 
 
 CM 
 
 co 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 oppop 
 
 c 
 
 T-H 
 
 CM 
 
 •^ 
 
 ?D 
 
 
 W 
 
 LOOOOO 
 
 lit 
 
 co 
 
 oi 
 
 CM 
 
 CO 
 
 
 o 
 
 CM O to O O 
 
 t- 
 
 ■* 
 
 00 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 i -L cc L r ~L y ~~L'^l. 
 
 iT. 
 
 *tf 
 
 "* 
 
 ■<# 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 TH^i-T-r-Tr-l i-T 
 
 cc 
 
 
 
 t-" 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 €«■ 
 
 €«• 
 
 
 €©■ 
 
 
 
 Q 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 OS""#OOStj< 
 
 cr 
 
 " OS 
 
 CO 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 ■ j a 
 
 rj< 00 O fc-; 00 
 
 cr 
 
 t-; 
 
 t-; 
 
 ■"*. 
 
 
 
 < « 
 
 oaooo "# co 
 
 cc 
 
 co 
 
 00 
 
 «o 
 
 
 
 H < 
 
 ,-ioiocoo 
 
 Tj 
 
 OS 
 
 U5 
 
 OS 
 
 
 
 ° d 
 
 CO Tl<_THC^kO 
 
 cc 
 
 CO 
 
 «o 
 
 T— < 
 
 
 
 H < 
 tn 
 
 i-TcM^i-Ti-TcNf 
 
 os" 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 CD • T3 
 
 H : 
 
 
 o 
 
 tn 
 O 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 y ■ d 
 
 sfl : * 
 
 g 
 
 l 
 
 H 
 *o 
 
 ft 
 
 <JpqUQf£] 
 
 B 
 
 c 
 
 -SJ 
 
 en 
 
 S d 
 
 d 
 
 a 
 
 -H 
 
 d 
 <u 
 u 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 E- 
 
 cT fa g-o a 
 
 ^ CO 
 
 u 
 
 P. 
 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 17 
 
 cent, to the night school, and 1 7 per cent, to the summer 
 school (Table IV) — suggest either inadequate provision 
 in some directions, or an unequal distribution. 
 
 The differences in cost for the same unit of supervisory 
 service in the several branches of the service point to the 
 latter view. For when supervision expense as now dis- 
 tributed is compared on the basis of teacher instruction 
 hours, supervision costs 5.0 cents per teacher instruction 
 hour in the regular day school; 13.4 cents in the Satur- 
 day school; 9.3 cents in the night school; and 26.4 cents 
 in the summer school. 1 (Table V.) 
 
 These differences are striking. Yet the comparison 
 can hardly be called unfair. There are enough teachers 2 
 in any one of these different kinds of schools to consume 
 the full time of a supervisor , so that the cost of a reason- 
 able amount of supervision in any type of school should 
 not be unusual. 
 
 Under these conditions, it is certainly difficult to 
 justify a relatively higher expenditure for Saturday and 
 summer school supervision, where instruction is chiefly 
 drill and review, than for regular day school supervision. 
 Besides, summer service on the part of supervisors is 
 regarded in most systems as essential to the efficiency 
 of the regular day school, and is provided for as part 
 of their regular service and pay. During the vacation 
 months, plans are matured and materials prepared, in 
 
 'Teacher instruction hours are taken as the basis of comparison, 
 for the reason that supervisors deal principally with teachers. 
 2 See The Gary Public Schools: A General Account. 
 
i8 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 53 S^3 SS 
 
 S H SU 
 
 ■2 «j t-i Ed 
 
 o « « " 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 19 
 
 order that supervision may not suffer during the regular 
 school time. The wording of the contracts with the 
 supervisors does not really alter the fact that the prac- 
 tice at Gary conforms to common usage. As elsewhere, 
 the day school is the arch of the system, and to the 
 policies and practices of the day school, supervisors 
 give the lion's share of their energies during both the 
 regular school year and the summer. 
 
 In any case it is not apparent why supervision should 
 not be provided in the different types of schools at ap- 
 proximately the same cost per teacher instruction hour 
 rate. Were this done, the amounts now charged to 
 the different schools would be materially altered. To 
 illustrate: Should the total now spent on supervision, 
 exclusive of the charge against the Sunday school, be 
 distributed among the various branches of the system 
 on the basis of the present average cost per teacher in- 
 struction hour for supervision (6.4 cents), $9,640.76, or 
 86 per cent, of the entire expenditure, would go to the 
 regular day school (Table VI), and the per pupil cost of 
 day school supervision would become $2.33 instead of 
 $1.81, as reported above. 
 
 The Gary authorities pursue a similar method in 
 charging and apportioning the salaries of school prin- 
 cipals. In the first place, the contracts of principals 
 and supervisors are much alike. Those of the principals 
 call for full week-day service and salaries are apportioned 
 90 per cent, to the regular day and 10 per cent, to 
 the Saturday school. Summer service is guaranteed 
 
20 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 
 PS 
 
 ►j 
 
 _, 
 
 
 w 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 
 U5 U5 
 
 H 
 
 w 
 
 Ph S °5 
 
 
 CJ 
 
 u 
 
 u H 
 
 
 < 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 * 
 
 « 1 
 
 o o 
 
 H 
 
 <! 
 
 § 
 
 o p 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 U3 U3 
 
 
 p 
 
 en 
 
 1! 
 
 to >o 
 
 09- 
 
 Ph 
 
 
 
 
 w 
 
 i-) 
 
 o 
 
 m +J oi 
 
 tH r-j 
 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 
 o 
 
 £ S <=,o 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 O CM 
 
 1 
 
 Pi 
 W 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 iq co 
 
 t— I CO 
 
 fH -—v 
 
 3 
 
 en 
 
 6 
 
 °i. ""* 
 
 5£ 
 
 < 
 
 os- 
 
 co 5? 
 
 
 
 
 S3 8 
 
 o 
 
 eu d ^! ii 
 
 oo t-; 
 
 o 
 a 
 o 
 
 en 
 
 fL, S o o 
 
 " o E-h 
 
 co «i 
 
 !z:3 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 O CO 
 
 co < 
 
 H 
 
 c 
 
 2 
 
 00 U3 
 
 ->* co 
 
 CM CO 
 
 <ji co 
 
 «/3- 
 
 o 
 o 
 W 
 u 
 en 
 
 J-* 4-J ci 
 
 lO CO 
 
 ^ 
 
 ^ U E-H 
 
 t> co 
 
 2* 
 
 co o 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 eo t- 
 
 t-; 00 
 
 w P 
 
 b 
 
 O 
 
 CNl oi 
 
 H 
 < 
 en 
 
 a 
 < 
 
 "* o 
 CO ■<# 
 ©9- 
 
 
 c/o £ 
 
 
 l 
 
 
 £ 
 
 
 M -i-5 . oi 
 
 CO !-j 
 
 H 
 
 i-l 
 O 
 
 o 
 X 
 u 
 
 
 co co 
 co oo 
 
 o 
 
 -4-> 
 
 (M CO 
 
 H 
 
 en 
 
 a 
 
 Tt< t-; 
 
 
 !* 
 
 3 
 
 CNJ O 
 
 P>h 
 
 <! 
 
 O 
 
 co -^ 
 
 O 
 
 Q 
 
 a 
 
 "**„ «» 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 t-" <jf 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 ©9- 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 p 
 
 
 
 40 -d • 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 -3 3 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 0-° : 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 -iS 
 
 co 
 
 
 
 «* "S h 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 3 .2 * 
 
 P 
 
 
 
 '5b T3?^ 
 
 P4 
 
 1 
 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 21 
 
 besides, and there is also opportunity for night 
 work. To illustrate: Of A's regular salary, $2,000, 
 $1,800 is charged to the day and $200 to the Satur- 
 day school; while the summer netted him $370. Again, 
 D earned a total of $1,422, apportioned and charged 
 as follows: day school, $990; Saturday school, $110; 
 night school, $104; and summer school, $2i8. 1 (Table 
 VII.) 
 
 Sound business policy requires the division of mana- 
 gerial expense among the different organizations operat- 
 ing in the same building. Where the personnel of the 
 management is the same in the regular day, Saturday, 
 and summer schools, as it is at Gary, the cost for the 
 same unit of similar service ought not to vary greatly 
 for the different organizations. But as apportioned 
 and charged at Gary, building management costs, per 
 100 pupil instruction hours, 12^ cents in the regular 
 day schools, 74 cents in both Saturday and night schools, 
 and $1.57 in the summer schools. These radical differ- 
 ences suggest that the charge against the Saturday 
 and summer schools is too heavy, thus lessening the load 
 of the regular day schools. 
 
 Experience may demonstrate that the pupil instruc- 
 tion hour is not a fair base on which to apportion build- 
 
 1 Supplies and clerical assistance are in part charged direct and in 
 part apportioned. For example, summer school supplies are charged 
 to the summer schools; all others are apportioned, 80 per cent, to the 
 day schools, 10 per cent, to the Saturday schools, and 10 per cent, to 
 the night schools. Clerical assistance for night and summer schools is 
 charged direct, but that for the day and Saturday schools is divided 
 90 per cent, to the one and 10 per cent, to the other. 
 
22 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 >-) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ o co io 
 
 <M 
 
 t- 
 
 05 
 
 
 u 
 
 oopoqt-^ 
 
 •«* 
 
 00 
 
 t- 
 
 CO 
 
 Cfl 
 
 Oirfood 
 
 lO 
 
 ^J< 
 
 O* 
 
 OJ 
 
 
 t-OJt-H 
 
 OS 
 
 <o 
 
 kO 
 
 rH 
 
 MMNN 
 
 rH 
 
 
 N 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 T-T 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 
 ««- 
 
 &■ 
 
 
 evs- 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i-l 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 O O 
 
 o 
 
 lOO 
 
 lO 
 
 
 M 
 
 O O 
 
 o 
 
 t-; 6 -: 
 
 -* 
 
 (M 
 
 o 
 
 ->* O 
 
 ■<*' 
 
 COrH 
 
 oS 
 
 e>i 
 
 C/3 
 
 O i-( 
 
 T- 1 
 
 -<*oo 
 
 co 
 
 rH 
 
 
 rH ©„ 
 
 r-j 
 
 
 <M„ 
 
 
 w 
 
 o 
 
 rH~ 
 
 r-i 
 
 
 tH" 
 
 
 «9- 
 
 o* 
 
 
 «9- 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 hi 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ooooooo 
 
 o 
 
 coo 
 
 co 
 
 
 en 
 
 ppppooo 
 
 o 
 
 CD U3 
 
 T-J 
 
 00 
 
 :* 
 
 ooooooo 
 
 o 
 
 o'o 
 
 rH 
 
 t-^ 
 
 ooeoHrtHH 
 
 c~ 
 
 «o co 
 
 <3> 
 
 
 < 
 
 CM CM rHrH 
 
 co 
 
 
 tr- 
 
 
 3 
 5 
 
 <y> 
 
 09 
 
 
 ee- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 i-l 
 
 ooooooo 
 
 o 
 
 TfO 
 
 •"* 
 
 
 O 
 O 
 W 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 ppppopo 
 
 o 
 
 C5CM 
 
 1-1 
 
 t- 
 
 ooooooo 
 
 o 
 
 co'oS 
 
 CO 
 
 t^ 
 
 OO t-05 05C35 
 
 CO 
 
 -<*<M 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 o0 J x L T ~l. ai 
 
 o 
 
 IOCO 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 i-Tt-Tr-T 
 
 co 
 
 
 co" 
 
 
 >< 
 
 ©9- 
 
 ©9- 
 
 60- 
 
 
 <! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 'JOMIOOOOO 
 
 CM 
 
 NO 
 
 s 
 
 
 k) 
 
 ooooot-oooo 
 
 "^ 
 
 t-T# 
 
 
 2 
 
 dlOONCJOOO 
 
 OS 
 
 la-i-i 
 
 co 
 
 
 H 
 
 t»Mt«NOOOH 
 
 o 
 
 Ht- 
 
 o 
 
 
 O 
 H 
 
 eo_co io^hhhO, 
 
 o 
 
 t-T* 
 
 1-t 
 
 
 WOfiHt-T rH 
 
 05 
 
 
 o" 
 
 
 
 *9- 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 
 
 w- 
 
 «©• 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 1 • 
 
 
 03 
 
 1-1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *j . in 
 
 3 
 
 s 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 en • O 
 
 o 
 
 
 g 
 
 < 
 
 PC 
 
 c 
 
 p 
 
 £ 
 
 pt 
 
 c 
 
 1-c 
 
 6 
 
 3 
 
 £ 
 
 ages of A 
 ants 
 ther Expe 
 
 H 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 a 
 
 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 & 6 
 
 
 ■a a 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 23 
 
 ing administration expense. Yet in the absence of 
 scientific proof to the contrary, there is much to com- 
 mend it. Should the average total building administra- 
 tion expenditure in all branches of the system for each 
 100 pupil instruction hours (17.4 cents) be used as the 
 base for redistributing the total spent during 1915-1916 
 on principals, $9,579, or 94 per cent., would be charged 
 to the regular day school, where our experience with 
 principals convinces us that it belongs; for, although on 
 duty Saturdays and during the summer, principals are 
 at all times engrossed chiefly in regular day school 
 problems. But so to redistribute the cost of managerial 
 direction and control would raise the per pupil cost for 
 principals from $1.67, as now reported (Tables II and 
 III), to $2.32. 
 
 GENERAL SERVICES 
 
 As pointed out before, we have grouped all overhead 
 expenditures, other than expenditures for administra- 
 tion, under General Services. Of these overhead charges, 
 it is enough to say that, with the exception of the items 
 Provision and Storage of Supplies, and Transportation, 
 the reported expenditures (Table II) are the totals for 
 these purposes. In the case of Provision and Storage 
 of Supplies, and Transportation, the reported amounts 
 are the undistributed balances after all legitimate charges 
 against specific organizations have been made. 
 
 The only item requiring special comment is the 18 
 cents per pupil for Attendance Enforcement (Table II), 
 
24 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 which is unusually small. Taking the country as a 
 whole, attendance enforcement is a local matter, for 
 which the local school organization bears the entire 
 expense. In Indiana, however, attendance enforce- 
 ment is largely a county affair, the county paying the 
 bulk of the cost. Accordingly, Gary is at little expense 
 for compulsory attendance, the total expenditure for 
 1915-1916 amounting to $730. Even this sum includes 
 $485 allowed to principals as a special fund on the 
 ground that teachers make the annual school enumera- 
 tion. In fact, the salary and contingent expenses of the 
 attendance officer paid by Gary aggregated only $245; 
 this is, of course, in addition to what he receives from 
 the county. Nothing could show more clearly than this 
 simple item of attendance enforcement the danger of 
 making cost comparisons between various cities unless 
 the person making the comparison is familiar with the 
 service, the conditions under which it is rendered, and 
 how it is financed in the different cities compared. 
 
 OPERATION OF BUILDINGS AND GROUNDS 
 
 If we now turn to other than overhead expenditures, 
 we find an even greater variety of ways of making charges 
 and we also perceive that in a complex system such as 
 that of Gary it is extremely difficult to report with ex- 
 actness the actual cost of specific services. This is well 
 illustrated in the attempt to determine the cost of 
 plant operation. 
 
 The per pupil building and ground operation cost is 
 

COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 25 
 
 reported as $6.39 (Table II). This covers the usual 
 items of personal service, such as engineers and jani- 
 tors, and also fuel, water, light, supplies, and miscellane- 
 ous expenses. (Table VIII.) But this amount does 
 not represent the direct expenditure in respect to these 
 objects for the day schools; it is merely an estimate of 
 the portion of the total expense of building and ground 
 operation that the day school should bear. 
 
 The necessity of apportioning such expenses arises 
 from the fact that each large building houses a number 
 of separate school organizations. For example, the 
 Emerson building shelters four kinds of schools; but 
 there is only one coal-bin, one water-meter, and one 
 gas-meter. Even under these circumstances, some 
 operation expenditures become a direct debit against 
 particular activities; for the most part, however, ex- 
 penses incurred must be apportioned. Obviously, the 
 reliability of the apportionment depends on the care 
 and judgment exercised; obviously, good public school 
 accounting depends not only on having well-determined 
 bases of apportionment, but also on having proper classi- 
 fication of expenditures. 
 
 Generally speaking, building operation expenditures 
 at Gary are apportioned on the basis of the relative 
 amount of time each kind of school uses each plant. 
 These proportions differ with the building, owing to the 
 different uses to which the various plants are put. 
 (Table LX.) For example, at Emerson the theoretical 
 base (with the summer school excluded) was, for 19 15- 
 
26 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 p 
 
 o 
 O 
 
 Q 
 
 s 
 
 o 
 
 W 
 
 CM 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 
 X 
 P4 
 
 m d ^ 
 
 lis 
 
 K * •< 
 
 w o as 
 u a w 
 
 gig 
 
 IaS 
 
 ' rid 
 
 8 wow 
 
 3L 
 
 o5„ 
 
 §8 
 
 sg 
 
 OS 
 
 (0 
 
 o) H u 
 
 8 £ H 
 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 CO 00 
 
 «£ 
 
 in 
 
 
 S0 
 
 CO 00 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 :| : :! 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Grounds 
 ght, and 
 
 e 
 
 il Servic 
 uilding 
 
 
 
 o^S- 
 
 "t3 
 
 Heat 
 
 Sei 
 
 Janit 
 
 Othe 
 
 £ 
 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 27 
 
 1916, 56 per cent, to the day school, 12 per cent, to the 
 Saturday school, 20 per cent, to the night school, and 
 12 per cent, to the Sunday school. In contrast, at Jef- 
 ferson 72 per cent, went to the day school, 10 per cent, 
 to the Saturday school, and 18 per cent, to the night 
 school. 
 
 TABLE LX 
 
 Theoretical Bases (1915-1916) for Distributing Plant 
 Operation Cost, Exclusive of the Summer School 
 
 Plant 
 
 Emerson 
 
 Froebel 
 
 Jefferson 
 
 Beveridge .... 
 Glen Park. . . 
 Other Schools 
 
 TO THE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 TO THE 
 
 DAY 
 
 SATURDAY 
 
 NIGHT 
 
 SCHOOL 
 
 SCHOOL 
 
 SCHOOL 
 
 56% 
 
 12% 
 
 20% 
 
 56% 
 
 12% 
 
 20% 
 
 72% 
 
 10% 
 
 18% 
 
 80% 
 
 12% 
 
 8% 
 
 80% 
 
 12% 
 
 8% 
 
 85% 
 
 10% 
 
 5% 
 
 TO THE 
 SUNDAY 
 SCHOOL 
 
 12% 
 12% 
 
 These bases of apportionment are called theoretical, 
 because they do not conform to the actual use of build- 
 ings and because in actual accounting there are numerous 
 deviations from them. (Table X.) For example, engineers 
 and janitors are, as a rule, paid direct for night and Sunday 
 work, which leaves only their regular wages to be divided 
 between the day and Saturday schools, generally 87^ 
 per cent, to the one and i2§ per cent, to the other. 
 Again, in some schools 10 per cent, of the water expense 
 is charged to the summer school and the balance is 
 apportioned 72 per cent, to the day, 10 per cent, to the 
 
28 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 
 o 
 o 
 W 
 o 
 
 F=H 
 O 
 
 cfl 
 
 Q 
 
 s 
 
 & & 
 
 coco 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■8-9 
 
 o g 
 
 5 ■" 
 
 S-9 
 3 ca 
 
 
 "3 3 
 
 M Q 
 
 ca d 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 29 
 
 Saturday, and 18 per cent, to the night school. At 
 other buildings, for example, Emerson and Froebel, 
 water charges are divided 50 per cent, to the day, 12 
 per cent, to the Saturday, 20 per cent, to the night, 
 12 per cent, to the Sunday, and 6 per cent, to the sum- 
 mer school. The result is that the reported plant opera- 
 tion expenditures for the day schools — and for all schools, 
 for that matter — are made up of two classes of items, 
 direct charges for specific services and charges made 
 after the cost of the service is divided among a few or 
 all of the different kinds of schools. The amount and 
 the per cent, of the total plant operation expenditures 
 actually charged and apportioned at each plant to 
 each kind of school were as in Table XI. 
 
 To apportion plant operation expenditures is in the 
 highest degree difficult. For example, how shall the 
 coal bill be divided? Modern school buildings must be 
 kept at all times above the freezing point, whether or 
 not there is a Saturday or night or Sunday school. What 
 is the additional fuel cost to raise the temperature to 
 the point of comfort for these activities? The wages of 
 engineers and janitors are equally difficult to handle. 
 Ordinarily, engineers and janitors are hired by the month 
 or by the year, working six or seven days a week. They 
 use Saturday for general cleaning and minor repairs, and 
 must keep the fires under their boilers on Sunday; during 
 the summer they are busy overhauling buildings and 
 equipment. When Saturday and summer schools are 
 inaugurated, shall the wages of engineers and janitors, 
 
30 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 X 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 O 
 
 H 
 | 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 H 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 P 
 
 m 
 i— i 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 IO00 00 
 
 t) 0) <u JJ 
 
 ££33 
 
 NMinN N 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 u 
 
 0) 
 
 ssss 
 
 - 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 31 
 
 as is the common practice, be charged entirely against 
 the day schools, or shall, as at Gary, their salaries for 
 two months be charged to the summer schools, and 
 a sixth of their wages for the remaining ten months be 
 debited to the Saturday schools? No satisfactory 
 answer is at hand to these and other questions. 
 
 At all events, experience has demonstrated that plant 
 operation expenditures cannot be apportioned equit- 
 ably, at least at Gary, on the base of plant instruction 
 hour use. This base equalizes, for all kinds of schools, 
 plant instruction hour cost, irrespective of whether the 
 school is conducted in the daytime, at night, in the 
 winter, or in the summer. Obviously, the cost is 
 not the same. Summer schools burn little or no fuel, 
 day schools do not use as much light as night schools, 
 nor do the different kinds of schools require an equal 
 amount of janitorial service. The Gary authorities, 
 therefore, in apportioning operation cost, make many 
 departures from the single base of plant instruction 
 hour use, although they adopt it as their guide. 
 
 To apportion plant operation expenditures on the base 
 of pupil instruction hours would hardly prove more 
 satisfactory. This base emphasizes attendance but 
 ignores the fact that there are elements of cost in heat- 
 ing, lighting, and caring for a plant altogether inde- 
 pendent of the number of pupils in attendance; hence, 
 this base tends to lessen the operation burden of auxiliary 
 activities and to overload the day school. 
 
 If a single base of distribution is to be employed, 
 
32 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 room instruction hour use has much to commend it. 
 In the first place, it minimizes attendance, so prominent 
 in the pupil instruction hour base, and, in the second 
 place, it distributes, in contrast to the plant instruction 
 hour base, the operation cost in view of the portion of the 
 plant actually employed. Nevertheless, we hesitate to 
 reapportion the building operation expenditures at Gary 
 even on this base 
 
 Ten months' contact with Gary conditions and test 
 tabulations incline us to the opinion that no single 
 basis of apportioning plant operation expenditures will 
 prove satisfactory. The solution lies, we believe, in 
 developing for each plant, depending on the uses to 
 which it is put, a number of bases built up around room 
 instruction hour use; for example, one base for heat 
 and another for light, one for engineers and still another 
 for janitors, and so on for each major item of operation 
 expenditure; but the derivation of such bases must 
 await cost accounting and detailed data on the time, 
 pupil, teacher, and room use of buildings by the different 
 school organizations. 
 
 TABLE XII 
 Plant Instruction Hour Operation Cost 
 
 PLANT 
 
 DAY 
 SCHOOL 
 
 SATURDAY 
 SCHOOL 
 
 NIGHT 
 SCHOOL 
 
 SUMMER 
 SCHOOL 
 
 SUNDAY 
 SCHOOL 
 
 Emerson 
 
 $5.73 
 6.62 
 1.18 
 
 $5.38 
 
 6.57 
 1.14 
 
 $7.74 
 8.28 
 1.85 
 
 $3.72 
 
 4.31 
 
 .58 
 
 $8.11 
 
 9.76 
 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 33 
 
 The success of the Gary authorities in apportioning 
 plant operation expenditures can probably be best 
 judged from a comparison of building instruction hour 
 operation cost charged at the largest plants against 
 each school organization. These charges for 1915-1916 
 were as in Table XII. 
 
 UPKEEP OF BUILDINGS, GROUNDS, AND GENERAL EQUIP- 
 MENT 
 
 In contrast with the method of handling plant opera- 
 tion cost, the Gary authorities have never attempted to 
 apportion upkeep expenditures. To be sure, upkeep 
 bills were formerly debited, when paid, to the day or 
 to the summer school, according as the one or the other 
 was in session; but this practice is now abandoned, as it 
 should be, so that all upkeep expenses are charged to 
 the day schools, and the reported $3.20 per pupil cost 
 (Table II) is the total expenditure for 1915-1916. (Table 
 XIII.) 
 
 But this $3.20 per pupil upkeep cost does not repre- 
 sent direct cash outlay. Repairs and replacements at 
 Gary are inseparably bound up with the school shops. 
 As pointed out elsewhere, 1 the school shops do real work. 
 They have the first chance on all repairs and replace- 
 ments, and are paid (credited) for what they do as if 
 they were privately owned and conducted. What actu- 
 ally happens is: A shop undertakes a repair job, against 
 which is charged the cost of materials used and the 
 
 1 In the volume dealing with Industrial Work. 
 
34 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 X 
 
 H 
 ►J 
 PQ 
 
 55 
 
 W 
 ft 
 X 
 
 w 
 
 Pm 
 
 M 
 P 
 
 o* 
 
 H 
 
 1-1 
 
 <! 
 
 W 
 15 
 
 W 
 
 O 
 p 
 
 55 
 
 p 
 
 55 
 P 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Pm 
 
 W 
 
 w 
 
 M 
 
 
 PER 
 PUPIL 
 COST 
 
 00i-*eo 
 
 00 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 t-JOCJ OS 
 "r-i r-i 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 ee- 
 
 «/» 
 
 
 
 PER 
 CENT. 
 
 OF 
 TOTAL 
 
 COiOr-J 00 
 
 
 
 
 kOr-iiH 1-5 
 
 
 
 
 eo co 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ht-^< CO 
 
 00 
 
 
 
 
 ■<*cocd t-. 
 
 i-H 
 
 
 
 1-5 
 < 
 H 
 O 
 
 o-**' co oo 
 
 © 
 
 
 
 -<*coco co 
 
 r-l 
 
 
 
 C- r-lrH l-j 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 Tjf oo' 
 
 CO 
 1—1 
 
 0» 
 
 
 
 H 2 
 
 i-H<M-<# co 
 
 co 
 
 
 
 ro H W 
 
 csioco cm 
 
 1—1 
 
 t-: 
 
 
 ™ h?- s 
 
 rt 3 ^ 
 
 M < CM 
 
 csieocd i« 
 
 l> 
 
 co 
 
 
 ^ ■"* eo co 
 
 lO 
 
 
 
 < •-) s 
 
 CM i-Hi-l CO 
 
 r-j 
 
 
 
 Pm Pm P 
 
 
 t-J 
 
 
 
 W O 1 
 « W 
 
 so- 
 
 «0 
 
 
 
 
 us o 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 55 8 Z «> 
 
 « p-J. <^ n 
 
 cc iq 
 
 00 
 
 io 
 
 
 r-i ed 
 
 ■<* 
 
 t^ 
 
 
 EPAI 
 BUI 
 GS A 
 
 LAN' 
 
 4,02 
 7 53 
 
 T- 
 
 00 
 
 
 «OgPH 
 
 «©• 
 
 1-1 
 
 
 
 03 « 
 
 B _ z 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 CM 
 
 <M 
 
 CO 
 
 
 REPA 
 
 TC 
 
 GROU 
 
 CO 
 
 co 
 
 CO 
 
 
 OS 
 
 as 
 
 
 
 -<* 
 
 ■«* 
 
 
 
 ee- 
 
 «/3 
 
 
 
 
 • H ts 
 
 
 
 
 
 . u 
 
 c 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■"> 
 
 si 
 
 
 
 
 
 • 1H 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 • <D 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 ;CO 
 
 en 
 If 
 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 . 0> 
 • & 
 
 3 4. 
 
 PA £ 
 
 a c 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 CO 
 
 w 
 o 
 
 I 
 
 • o 
 
 1 9 I 
 
 < 
 
 o 
 H 
 
 
 Is*,** 
 
 
 <+H 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 •S 
 " 
 
 £ 
 
 
 
 ° «o c 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 « -y .■y « 4 
 
 c 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 all 
 
 S 1 ^ 
 
 Cg 
 
 E- 
 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 35 
 
 time (paid for at the union rate) it takes the instructor 
 to do it himself, or his estimate of the time it would take 
 him even when pupils do the work. 1 The shop is then 
 credited with this amount and a corresponding debit 
 entered against upkeep. Accordingly, there is no little 
 uncertainty as to actual upkeep expenditures 2 or what 
 these would be, were repairs and replacements made as 
 in conventional systems. 
 
 Even if the reported $3.20 per pupil upkeep expendi- 
 ture is the actual cost to Gary, there is no good reason 
 why this should all be borne by the day schools. Un- 
 questionably, Saturday schools, night schools, etc., in- 
 volve additional wear and tear of grounds, buildings, 
 and general equipment. There are, however, no ap- 
 proved bases of distribution. Time and use are, of 
 course, the two chief factors in deterioration. For prac- 
 tical purposes, time may be eliminated, leaving only 
 use to be considered. Thus considered, upkeep cost for 
 each building might be apportioned on the basis of plant 
 instruction hour use, or on the basis of pupil instruc- 
 tion hours, or on the basis of room instruction hour 
 use. The first ignores difference in wear and tear due 
 to differences in attendance, and the second disregards 
 deterioration due merely to opening up a plant. The 
 last or room instruction hour base has some advan- 
 
 1 Methods of determining shop production cost and of making credits 
 and charges are discussed fully in the chapter on Shop Cost. 
 
 "This is also partially true of operation and capital outlay expen- 
 ditures, for the shops furnish operation supplies and work on new con- 
 struction as well. 
 
36 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 tages. It equalizes differences in wear and tear from 
 attendance, and it takes account, at least to a certain 
 extent, of the deteriorating effects of putting a plant 
 into operation. For these reasons, it appears to be the 
 preferable base. But if used at all, it should be em- 
 ployed advisedly, for no apportionment basis can be 
 confidently employed until its worth has been scien- 
 tifically demonstrated. 
 
 On a room instruction hour basis of distribution, 
 the regular day school would carry, even when the 
 Sunday school is eliminated, only 87 per cent, of the 
 upkeep burden, 1 and the per pupil upkeep cost would be 
 $2.77 instead of the reported $3.20. 
 
 instruction: teachers' salaries 
 
 As in other systems, the largest single item of expense 
 is teachers' salaries, amounting at Gary to 59 per cent, 
 of the total. (Table II.) However, the reported ex- 
 penditure of $29.20 per pupil in average daily attendance 
 is not an out and out cash outlay, for even here we are 
 not free from divisions and apportionments, involving 
 complicated accounting problems. (Table XIV.) 
 
 For example, at Glen Park the manual training 
 teacher's salary is first divided equally between instruc- 
 tion and plant operation. Plant operation carries a half, 
 for the reason that the instructor is expected, through 
 the boys whom he trains, to keep the boilers of the six- 
 
 1 The basis of this distribution was in fact teacher instruction hours, 
 which differs at most only slightly from room instruction hours. ' 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 37 
 
 room building going during the day. The instruction 
 burden, already halved, is further reduced by credits 
 for production. The result is that out of a regular annual 
 salary of $1,000 only $418 is charged against instruction. 
 
 At Jefferson and Beveridge the practice is reversed — 
 custodians become teachers. To illustrate: At Jefferson 
 the custodian's wage is divided one part to plant opera- 
 tion and two to instruction; this latter debit is made on 
 the ground that the custodian at times looks after boys 
 in the shop and also teaches them how to run the engine 
 and to care for the boiler. The instruction charge is 
 next subdivided, five-sixths to the day and one-sixth to 
 the Saturday school, to be reduced in each case by pro- 
 duction credits. Accordingly, the final disposition of 
 this custodian's total wage ($1,034.45) is: $283.44 as 
 custodian, divided among the day, Saturday, and night 
 schools; $423.15 as day school teacher; $24.57 f° r Satur- 
 day instruction; and $303.29 against upkeep and capital 
 outlay. 
 
 It is not worth while to attempt to unravel this tangled 
 skein to show how these salaries and wages would be 
 apportioned on a strict work-time basis, for there are 
 also far-reaching practical and educational policies in- 
 volved. It suffices for our purpose to call attention to 
 this practice as a factor that affects instruction cost. 
 
 The method of handling the wages of shopmen also 
 requires examination. The shopmen at Gary are not 
 licensed teachers; with few exceptions, they are journey- 
 men accustomed to work and to receive pay for six days 
 
38 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 > ^ 
 
 X & 
 
 1—1 w 
 
 < a 
 
 H < 
 
 t-t- 
 
 tow 
 oTcf 
 
 CO OJ CO CO CO 
 
 OKO 
 
 cow 
 odoi 
 S3 
 co"*f 
 
 {£>W 
 
 aJ W 
 
 £ s 
 
 w 
 
 i^ 
 
 & o 
 
 sS 
 
 CO 
 
 o> 
 
 ICH 
 
 00 
 
 T* 
 
 
 CO 
 
 iH 
 
 <M 
 
 
 
 
 <O«O00rHU5 
 t-; OS T* CO i-H 
 
 <«* «0 CO CM t- 
 
 ON 
 
 ooo 
 
 OCS1 
 
 oo~<m~ 
 t- 
 
 lOOOOOt- 
 
 n io p oq «-h 
 t>ooo t-oi 
 
 MOOOHIO 
 HCONOM 
 
 co"c<rco''c<fc<r 
 
 cot- t-o 
 iooo ho 
 
 csfof eo e4* 
 
 i «« j3 m 05250- 
 i^^UPqN gPfi-o, 
 
 HH 
 
 m m 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 «Hoori<Tt<«0-«ii©©t-t-oa© 
 t-;ooeoo<x>oO5Oir3eo«0-*© 
 
 «DCT>CO«d©'u3©i-iTj<i-i©«D 
 Cq»Qe<3i-HC<li-HkO©t-u30000 
 WC^O»©©C^C<1t-IOSIO<NOO 
 
 39 
 
 ©t-©ooi©g>t-(M 
 
 Wi-jNOTfOpOOO 
 t>©lOi-ioOOO©©5Tii 
 CO N © © •<* 
 i-l (M 
 
 © 
 
 ooi-it-c<>e<3c^©©ooir-coto 
 
 ©O5O5O5i-j©W-^lO©00(M 
 
 ooiG>©©©eot>co©i-i©'io 
 
 eo©c<ioocoi— ir-nooowt-w 
 
 i-l tH © CO •»* tH tH C-WNOO 
 
 8 2 
 
 • a bo oj o o^ tr 
 ■a-S g bo u B u a « » 
 
 **p 3 C5 S ii,3 R o 
 
 
4 o THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 a week. Where licensed teachers are similarly engaged, 
 although they are busy Saturdays helping boys, caring 
 for tools, and preparing materials, their salaries are 
 debited to the day schools, but at Gary only five-sixths 
 of all shop wages are so charged. The situation is fur- 
 ther complicated by the use of productive shops and 
 shop credits. In fact, the credits for production against 
 manual training and shop instructors' time in 1915-1916 
 amounted to more than half of the total shop payroll, 
 which, exclusive of mechanical drawing but including 
 manual training, amounted for both regular and Satur- 
 day schools to $17,826. 11, 1 leaving a net shop wage 
 charge against the day schools of only $7, 096.68, 2 and 
 against the Saturday schools of $i,i56.66. 3 Even if 
 these final net charges are taken at their face value, it 
 appears that manual and industrial instruction costs 
 almost as much on Saturday as on a regular school day, 
 an apportionment which can scarcely be justified in 
 view of the difference between week-day and Saturday 
 attendance. 
 
 Finally, it is necessary to keep in mind, when dis- 
 cussing instruction cost, that much of what is done in 
 the Gary Saturday schools is accomplished elsewhere 
 as a part of the regular day school work. To illustrate: 
 In other cities lessons lost by absence are made up after 
 school, and, besides classes for defectives and the tuber- 
 
 1 Table XIX. 
 
 2 Schedule H-2 of the Appendix. 
 
 3 Schedule H-3 of the Appendix. 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 41 
 
 cular, there are often classes (usually small) for fast, 
 slow, and backward children; also "coaches" in large 
 buildings for groups and individuals requiring special 
 assistance. The additional expenditures for these pur- 
 poses are included in the day school cost, making it 
 higher than it would be were most of such expense 
 charged, as at Gary, against a Saturday school. 
 
 instruction: supplies and equipment upkeep 
 
 A further element in instruction cost is the expenditure 
 for instructional supplies and equipment upkeep, amount- 
 ing to a per pupil charge of $1.78. (Table II.) The 
 actual expenditure, however, for instructional supplies 
 as this term is generally used aggregates only 52 cents 
 per pupil. (Table XIV.) The smallness of this sum 
 may come as a surprise, but it is to be remembered that 
 it covers only the incidentals used by the teachers, in- 
 cluding also paper and the like handed out by them to 
 pupils for special written work and examinations. 
 
 The Gary authorities appreciate the desirability of 
 providing all supplies and textbooks free of charge, but 
 the Indiana law prevents. To overcome this obvious 
 handicap, the teachers are allowed to collect from the 
 children fees which are turned over to the principals, 
 who buy the textbooks and other necessities called 
 for by the course of study. These fees are not included 
 in the reported cost of the Gary schools. The rates 
 at which collections are made in any one year from the 
 children are as follows: 
 
42 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Kindergarten $ .00 
 
 Grades 1 and 2 75 
 
 Grades 3 and 4 1.50 
 
 Grades 5, 6, 7, and 8 2.25 
 
 High School (all classes) 3.00 
 
 SUMMARY 
 
 To summarize: When the $49.29 current expense per 
 pupil in average daily attendance in the regular day 
 schools is thus analyzed and the make-up of the several 
 expense items described, it becomes apparent that $49.29 
 is not an exact figure, but only an approximation. All 
 that can be said is that this is the current operation ex- 
 pense per pupil in average daily attendance when com- 
 puted according to the bases of distribution prevailing 
 at Gary, with only minor deviations therefrom on our 
 part. As to the wisdom and correctness of these dis- 
 tributions, opinion will differ. Exception may easily 
 be taken to the way in which salaries of supervisors, 
 principals, custodians, and shopmen are divided, or to 
 the practice of charging the entire expense of building 
 upkeep to the day schools, or to the manner in which 
 certain other items are handled. Yet, after months of 
 the minutest study of the Gary accounts, it is impossible, 
 with the data at hand, to reconstruct them. For edu- 
 cational cost accounting is exceedingly complicated, 
 and while necessity compels the apportionment of any 
 number of items, there is not to-day a single generally 
 accepted basis of distribution, nor is there unanimity of 
 opinion as to the classification of expenses. In short, 
 
COST OF REGULAR DAY SCHOOLS 43 
 
 the whole field of public school cost accounting, at least 
 for complex school systems, is undeveloped. For this 
 reason we caution once more against cost comparisons 
 either between totals or between specific services, unless 
 it is positively known that the same methods of classi- 
 fication obtain, and that the division and apportionment 
 of salaries, wages, and other expenses, ways of financing, 
 and accounting methods are substantially identical. 
 
IV. CURRENT COST OF LARGER 
 DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 IS POINTED out elsewhere, Gary schools range 
 /-\ from portables to large modern buildings. 1 The 
 *~ -^ foregoing sections shed, therefore, little light on 
 what a fully developed Gary system would cost. The 
 nearest approach to an idea of such cost can be ob- 
 tained from the Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson schools. 
 The respective current expense per pupil in average 
 daily attendance in these schools, as operated in 1915- 
 19 1 6, was approximately as follows: 
 
 TABLE XV 
 
 Current Expense Per Pupil in Average Daily At- 
 tendance at Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson Schools 
 
 SCHOOL 
 
 KINDER- 
 GARTEN 
 
 ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 
 GRADES 
 
 HIGH 
 SCHOOL 
 
 ALL 
 GRADES 
 
 
 i to 5 
 
 6 to 8 
 
 1 to 8 
 
 Emerson 
 
 Jefferson 
 
 $46.83 
 40.17 
 31.67 
 
 $64.49 
 48.51 
 34.89 
 
 $74.58 
 57.54 
 33.97 
 
 $68.75 
 50.29 
 34.64 
 
 $90.80 
 
 79.22 
 
 $74.64 
 
 52.37 
 34.31 
 
 A more detailed statement shows wherein the opera- 
 tion expenses of these schools differ, and thus supplies 
 
 1 See report on Organization and Administration. 
 
 44 
 
COST OF LARGER DAY SCHOOLS 45 
 
 the data for school to school comparison, also for compari- 
 sons between the cost of particular services in these 
 schools and in the system as a whole. 1 
 
 When considering the respective current costs of the 
 Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson schools, it should be borne 
 in mind that Emerson — probably the best expression of 
 the Gary idea — is working at hardly more than half 
 capacity. This accounts in part for the present very 
 high cost of plant operation, and may also affect some- 
 what the per pupil instruction cost, although the teachers 
 now engaged appear to be fully occupied. Froebel is 
 
 1 In compiling the current cost of Emerson, Froebel, and Jefferson, 
 the same difficulties were encountered with respect to the division and 
 apportionment of salaries, wages, and expenditures as were met when 
 considering the cost of the system as a whole. It would be unprofitable 
 to reconsider these; suffice it to say that no redistribution was attempted. 
 It is, however, necessary to call attention to the manner in which we 
 handled particular items. In the case of the board, the superintendent, 
 supervisors both of property and of instruction; transportation; provision 
 and storage of supplies; instruction of pupils in other institutions; branch 
 libraries; compulsory attendance enforcement; and medical inspection 
 service, the cost per pupil in average daily attendance for the system 
 was charged alike in each school against the kindergarten, elementary 
 grade groups, and the high school. Managerial as well as plant opera- 
 tion and upkeep cost was handled in a like manner, except that here 
 the per pupil cost for the building became the charge. Instruction cost 
 was by far the most troublesome. As accounts are kept at Gary, there 
 is no distinction between kindergarten, elementary, and high school. 
 The same teacher, as a rule, has both elementary and secondary classes, 
 and in the same class there are often different grades. Where it was 
 necessary to apportion a teacher's salary, this was divided, when pos- 
 sible, on the basis of the instruction periods given to the classes of the 
 elementary divisions or the high school; otherwise it was divided on the 
 basis of the number of pupils in a class from each of the different grade 
 groups. Finally, instructional supplies and equipment upkeep was 
 apportioned on the basis of the relation of the present charges to the 
 different grades for supplies and textbooks; in this compilation, the 
 charge for the kindergarten was considered the same as the present 
 charge for the first and second grades. 
 
46 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 CO 
 O 
 
 
 I 
 
 X p 
 
 W w 
 
 3 2 
 
 a I 
 
 • s 
 
 Ph 
 
 P4 
 
 H 
 Ph 
 
 H 
 55 
 
 
 to 
 
 lO 
 
 t-ooo 
 
 \a 
 
 ■>* i-H 
 
 -# 
 
 CD 00 
 
 "^t 
 
 
 39 
 
 O 
 
 N01> 
 
 00 
 
 o oo 
 
 t- 
 
 t- OS 
 
 CD 
 
 o 
 
 lOCOr-i 
 
 CD 
 
 cm Tji 
 
 t- 
 
 CM ■<* 
 
 ^ 
 
 1-1 
 
 
 iH 
 
 i-H 
 
 "1< 
 
 -«1< 
 
 t- 
 
 69- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 49- 
 
 i-) 
 
 iO 
 
 t-ooo 
 
 lO 
 
 •>* T-t 
 
 o 
 
 t- CO 
 
 1® 
 
 &3 S 
 
 O 
 
 NOI> 
 
 00 
 
 o oq 
 
 OS 
 
 CD CM 
 
 OO 
 
 C5 O 
 
 SB 
 
 o 
 
 socoi-i 
 
 CD 
 
 cm -^ 
 
 CO 
 
 t-I to 
 
 S 
 
 1—1 
 
 
 i-H 
 
 tH 
 
 CD 
 
 to 
 
 os 
 
 
 1 
 
 00 
 
 lO 
 
 t-ooo 
 
 lO 
 
 -* l-l 
 
 to 
 
 OS CO 
 
 »o 
 
 
 5 
 
 p 
 
 NOI> 
 
 00 
 
 o 00 
 
 00 
 
 OS 00 
 
 t-; 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 iaco i-i 
 
 CO 
 
 CM x* 
 
 i-i 
 
 CD -<ji 
 
 oo 
 
 
 1—1 
 
 
 tH 
 
 1-1 
 
 Tf 
 
 CO 
 
 CD 
 
 M 
 
 H 
 
 €«■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ««• 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 oo 
 
 kO 
 
 t-ooo 
 
 »0 
 
 ■^t 1-4 
 
 00 
 
 r-l t- 
 
 00 
 
 8 
 
 p 
 
 NOt^ 
 
 00 
 
 o oc 
 
 CD 
 
 ■»* CM 
 
 to 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 wieoi-i 
 
 CD 
 
 cm" x* 
 
 t-^ 
 
 s! «> 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 iH 
 
 
 i-H 
 
 H 
 
 ■^ 
 
 •<* 
 
 t- 
 
 >< 
 
 o 
 
 60- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ««• 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ss 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 lO 
 
 t-ooo 
 
 ID 
 
 ■^ tH 
 
 o 
 
 CO CO 
 
 OS 
 
 3 
 
 
 O 
 
 cqpt-; 
 
 oq 
 
 o 0C 
 
 la 
 
 t> oc 
 
 ■^ 
 
 w 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 uicorA 
 
 CD 
 
 l-H 
 
 CM ** 
 
 i-H 
 
 CO 
 
 co cc 
 
 CO 
 
 s 
 
 w 
 
 M 
 
 "as- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ««• 
 
 « 55 
 
 »o 
 
 t-ooo 
 
 \a 
 
 ■«# i-l 
 
 co 
 
 O CO 
 
 cc 
 
 
 W 
 
 w 
 
 p 
 
 CM.pt- 
 
 oq 
 
 o a 
 
 (j> 
 
 ^ ©» 
 
 oo 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 iocoth 
 
 CD 
 
 CM tt 
 
 oi 
 
 OS 
 
 CD 
 
 
 1-1 
 
 
 i-H 
 
 tH 
 
 i—i 
 
 r-l 
 
 Tf 
 
 M 
 
 €©• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 «» 
 
 
 CO 
 
 U 
 
 
 
 
 
 19 
 
 
 '■a, 
 
 ■'3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 
 : cr 
 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 o 1 
 
 _^ 3 
 
 
 :ts 
 
 
 
 
 13 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 4) 
 O 
 
 C (-1 
 
 
 
 
 
 0) 
 
 C 
 
 u 
 
 O 
 
 a, 
 
 "a 
 
 ■B 
 
 Ph 
 
 d g 
 
 
 a 
 u 
 
 .9 5P c 
 
 
 • en 
 
 . a> 
 
 .a 
 
 
 
 
 T3 
 
 
 a 
 
 -3 J .£ 
 
 P5 3ft 
 
 
 •ceo j 
 
 u 
 
 
 CO 
 
 > 
 
 < 
 
 SOPh * 
 
 "2 
 .2 
 
 ! 8, 
 
 . o 
 
 <4H ^ ■— 
 
 & s 
 
 c 
 
 c 
 
 > X 
 
 ) «: 
 
 c 
 
 -SHE 
 
 "rt 
 
 a 
 2 
 O 
 
 
 
 <i 
 
 
 
 
 m 
 
 M cj 
 
 C 
 
 ) 
 
 
 
 
COST OF LARGER DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 47 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 8 
 
 in 
 
 a 
 
 w 
 M 
 W 
 O 
 
 < 
 
 < 
 O 
 S5 
 
 g 
 H 
 
 B S 
 
 > < 
 
 s § 
 
 pq « 
 
 SI 
 
 Ph 
 
 H 
 
 u 
 
 
 en 
 
 00 
 
 t-cooc 
 
 ) 00 
 
 t- rH i-H C 
 
 I— 
 
 tr- 
 
 
 lJ w 
 
 ■<* 
 
 CM^f 
 
 : c<» 
 
 oq ^ » t^ a eo 
 
 31 
 
 o 
 
 oo 
 
 lOr-ir- 
 
 1 o 
 
 co eo co r-i r-i cm 
 
 
 
 r-t 
 
 
 co 
 
 io 
 
 69- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 «<» 
 
 ^ 
 
 oo 
 
 t-eooc 
 
 ) 00 
 
 t- rH CO K5 rH CM 
 
 W o 
 
 "* 
 
 CM.TJJt- 
 
 CM 
 
 00 'j] •* H W CM 
 
 o o 
 
 en 
 
 00 
 
 io'hV 
 
 i © 
 
 co eo o co •<* o> 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 co 
 
 t- 
 
 se- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 60- 
 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 b-eooc 
 
 00 
 
 C- r- 
 
 eo cm r- 
 
 a> 
 
 03 
 
 w 
 
 O 
 
 w 
 
 o 
 
 1-3 
 
 •>* 
 
 OJ-^t- 
 
 CM 
 
 cq ■«* 
 
 lO t-; CO CM 
 
 O 
 
 CO 
 
 lOHr 
 
 o 
 
 cb « 
 
 rH CJ> r- 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 iH 
 
 
 eo 
 
 »o 
 
 H 
 
 ee- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 e& 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 t-eooc 
 
 oo 
 
 t- r- 
 
 oc 
 
 rH b" 
 
 -^ 
 
 U 
 
 "* 
 
 CM "St- 
 
 CM 
 
 oq ■>* 
 
 t- 
 
 O. t- 
 
 m 
 
 co 
 
 o 
 
 oo 
 
 ies' r-ir- 
 
 o 
 
 CD K 
 
 cc 
 
 CO CM 
 
 t-^ 
 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 o: 
 
 eo 
 
 \a 
 
 $* 
 
 VO 
 
 &> 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ee- 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 fc 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 iO 
 
 00 
 
 t-eocc 
 
 oo 
 
 t- r- 
 
 w 
 
 00 t- 
 
 rH 
 
 g 
 
 -# 
 
 CM -^tr- 
 
 CM 
 
 00. Tt 
 
 Cr- 
 
 y-t IC 
 
 lO 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 
 4-> 
 
 oo 
 
 io rH r- 
 
 o 
 
 cd ec 
 
 CT 
 
 00 r- 
 
 oo 
 
 i-l 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 o. 
 
 CM 
 
 -* 
 
 H 
 
 l-l 
 
 ee- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 60- 
 
 
 oo 
 
 t-eooc 
 
 00 
 
 t- r- 
 
 r- 
 
 cm a- 
 
 t— 
 
 "* 
 
 CM. ■<* t- 
 
 <M 
 
 oq tj 
 
 Tl 
 
 co c 
 
 7-t 
 
 13 
 
 00 
 
 iOrHr- 
 
 © 
 
 «d ec 
 
 r- 
 
 rH 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 rH 
 
 
 CN 
 
 CM 
 
 ■>* 
 
 «©• 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 €«■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 tn "rt 
 
 
 . , 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 
 •M 
 
 *2 o 
 
 
 
 .& 
 
 
 
 
 <u 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 d nj 
 
 
 
 "3 
 
 
 
 
 CJ 
 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 If 
 
 
 
 cr 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 S 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 
 C/3 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 1) 
 
 CJ 
 
 11 
 
 
 
 d 
 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 U 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 "rt 
 
 
 a 
 
 rt o +. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .& 
 
 
 d 
 
 tn c 
 
 
 
 in 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 W 
 
 '0 
 d 
 
 "G 
 
 
 d 
 
 T),g e 
 
 A 
 
 
 .4) 
 
 
 
 PS 
 W 
 CO 
 
 T3 
 
 d 
 
 > 
 
 cJ 
 
 M 
 4-1 
 
 in 
 "3 
 
 ..PL, 
 
 a a 
 
 O <sS 
 g OpH 
 
 cr 
 
 (L 
 C, 
 
 '> 
 
 >- 
 
 a 
 
 1 
 
 c 
 
 "3 
 d 
 
 CIS 
 
 d 
 
 .o 
 
 PQ Srg 
 
 ill 
 
 e 
 c 
 ■E 
 
 c. 
 
 •t- 
 c 
 
 r- 
 
 4> 3 - 
 
 •Ceo «; 
 w ^ 
 
 BJ'S £ 
 "in .2^ 
 ii 3 1 
 
 « 
 
 "5 
 
 TJ 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 >-c 
 CO 
 
 a. 
 O 
 
 OP 
 
 Hh 
 
 d 
 a 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 M C< 
 
 
 M Ci 
 
 
 H IN 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 Ph 
 
 
 L 
 
 
 
 P 
 
 
4 8 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 1-1 
 o 
 o 
 
 
 in 
 
 fc 
 o 
 
 ui 
 
 W 
 
 w 
 I— » 
 
 H 
 < 
 
 W 
 
 o 
 
 > ^ 
 <! > 
 
 G pi 
 
 B < 
 
 o 
 
 CO 
 
 T-ICJ 
 
 1—1 
 
 O 
 
 t-<MOO 
 
 U3i-i i-H 
 
 t-(MOO 
 C\j t-; t-; 
 
 lOHrH 
 
 t-NOO 
 Oq t-; C-; 
 
 iri T-i T-i 
 
 rt H 
 
 .3 
 
 gOf^ 
 
 M O O 
 
 Ph 
 
 m 
 
 to 
 
 OOiH 
 
 oo 
 i— i 
 
 00 
 i— 1 
 
 
 13 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 ■a 
 
 
 
 & 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 & 
 
 -*-> 
 
 c 
 
 3 
 
 03 
 
 
 
 Pi 
 
 a 
 
 "a 
 
 O « 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 >H T3 
 
 
 
 
 O a 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 T3 O 
 cl "- 1 
 
 
 
 H3 
 
 d 
 
 
 
 
 
 tap tn 
 
 
 
 
 d M 
 
 
 
 
 "3.5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 :3t3 
 
 
 a> & 
 
 3:3 
 
 
 •c 3 
 
 of B 
 f Bu 
 ment 
 
 
 !3 M 
 
 
 C3 "rf 
 
 cop 
 
 H 
 
 - o 
 
 ratio 
 
 eep 
 
 Eaui 
 
 
 o 
 
 S3 o 
 -a S 
 
 OP 
 
 C 
 H-l 
 
 
 
 
 H CS 
 
 
 
 u 
 
 
 
COST OF LARGER DAY SCHOOLS 49 
 
 likewise a thoroughgoing Gary school, but has never 
 had its full complement of pupils. An increased enroll- 
 ment would undoubtedly require corresponding addi- 
 tions to the teaching force, but would probably not 
 cause a corresponding increase in plant operation ex- 
 penditure. On the other hand, Jefferson, while crowded, 
 is an old-fashioned building, slightly remodeled, and 
 offers, in comparison with Emerson and Froebel, limited 
 advantages. 
 
 Accordingly, the cost at Jefferson, based on average 
 daily attendance, runs very uniformly for the different 
 grades — $31.67 for the kindergarten, $34.89 for grades 
 1 to 5, and $33.97 for grades 6 to 8. It varies, in con- 
 trast, at Froebel from $40.17 for the kindergarten to 
 $48.51 for grades 1 to 5, $57.54 for grades 6 to 8, with an 
 average of $79.22 for the different years of the high school. 
 The differences at Emerson are even greater and the 
 cost still higher: for the kindergarten, $46.83; grades 1 
 to 5, $64.49; grades 6 to 8, $74.58; and $90.80 for the 
 high school. In comparing cost at Emerson and Froebel 
 with cost at Jefferson, and particularly in comparing grade 
 cost at Emerson and Froebel with the cost of elementary 
 instruction in other cities, it should be borne in mind 
 that elementary pupils in Emerson and Froebel enjoy 
 unusual opportunities in shops and in science, and that 
 high school teachers instruct them both in science and in 
 drawing. 
 
V. CURRENT COST OF THE SCHOOL 
 SHOPS 
 
 A FINANCIAL report of the Gary schools might 
 well cover in detail each of the activities Gary 
 emphasizes. For practical reasons we confine 
 ourselves to a single special feature, the school shops. 
 
 We include under shops not only forge, foundry, etc., 
 but the manual training shops. The manual training 
 shops are included because they also do productive work 
 and the credits they receive for their products reduce 
 the cost of operating them by 12 to 31 per cent. 
 
 The Gary authorities distinguish between regular day 
 and Saturday shops, dividing the operating expense five- 
 sixths to the* day school and one-sixth to the Saturday 
 school. In our discussion, we disregard this distinction 
 and combine the cost, for there is only one set of shops and, 
 as pointed out above, the expense would be practically 
 the same whether they are open five or six days a week. 
 
 Owing to the peculiar method of handling shop cost, 
 it is especially important at the outset to fix in mind the 
 initial or total amount spent on shops. This aggregated 
 in 1915-1916, exclusive of supervision, $22,535.31, and 
 was distributed as shown in Table XIX. 
 
 This expenditure covers the wages of the manual 
 
 so' 
 
w 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 
 
 5 1 
 
 X 
 
 
 JO'-)COC<ll/5m.-<QTj'0)eMCO**0©(£> 
 
 ncjco co^cot^ScoSSco 5 
 ■=j<ocg" cococ\j<ocoaic>c>a> 
 
 O'-l-^t>C0CJ>C0C0f>(N"*9a)»-l 
 
 !2Sq8288888838888 
 
 oo o ■* <o cr> <o pj^i a> c- w s « o 25 co 
 
 co © n co >^ t£> o -a; co a> ifl ■>* 55 © .-< © «5 
 
 jtpTtStoco 
 
 JOr-t^CCCO 
 fHMHNH 
 
 ^"3- 
 
 -si" 3 :- 
 
 ■a S-fl*3 S_8 P .yen u-fl 3 
 
 V (Lj A [* A Ph w Cm Pk| PL, w Cli 
 
52 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 training teachers and of the shopmen, the outlay for all 
 materials used in instruction and in productive work, as 
 well as for supplies, upkeep of shops, and shop equipment. 
 
 While Gary actually spent during 1915-1916 $22,535.31 
 on regular day and Saturday shops, the final or net cost 
 to be charged against instruction was much less. The 
 shops, as stated before, do productive work for which they 
 receive credit. 1 The credits, as computed by us, amounted 
 in 1915-1916 to a total of $12,217.62. (Table XX.) 
 The soundness of thus reducing instruction cost must 
 now be discussed. 
 
 The Gary authorities credit the shops to the extent 
 of the estimated market value of their products; but, 
 for reasons that will appear as we proceed, we credit 
 them only with production cost. To illustrate: If 
 lumber, hardware, etc., including operation supplies, 
 to the amount of $15, and labor to the amount of $35 
 go into the construction of a school desk, the production 
 cost of the desk is $50, and we credit the shop with 
 $50, regardless of whether the market value of the desk is 
 $25, $75, or what not. However, the credits thus al- 
 lowed include not only the productive work of the regu- 
 lar day and Saturday schools, but also such products as 
 the night schools turn out. 2 
 
 In order to compute on the basis of production cost the 
 
 1 The shoe shop and the pottery are the only shops that receive no 
 such credit. 
 
 2 The amount of productive work done in the night schools is small 
 and so interwoven with the productive work of the regular day and 
 Saturday schools that it was impossible to separate it and erect a separate 
 account. 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 
 
 53 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 o 
 
 u 
 
 a 8 
 
 « 5 
 o < 
 
 13 
 
 W ft 
 
 O 
 
 •«3 
 
 M 
 
 gg°2 
 
 S W 
 
 w 3 
 
 a o. 
 
 rt >> 
 
 U O 
 
 £ 
 
 LOCO LOCO 
 
 CO 00 .-100 
 
 o> cm *-<cm 
 id in cood 
 
 *o >> o 
 
 00 
 CO 
 
 &St> 8 
 
 in 
 
 8 ftC a. 
 
 a> 
 
 
 w 
 
 ee- 
 
 co omoo cm 
 
 O rHCOCO t> 
 
 co oSog? to 
 
 o t-55 in 
 
 •* ^coco cm 
 
 t^co 
 
 00 <» 
 
 rj n in 
 
 OO500M in cot^-cn oil cm 
 
 CO N tOt 
 
 
 
 
 
 • a 
 
 • o 
 
 • B 
 
 :"S ■§ 
 
 ".a 
 
 roe- 
 
 liool 
 rson 
 
 . O 
 . O 
 
 
 
 
 
 .ja_; m 
 
 
 .ja 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,\M . u V 
 
 
 
 
 o . 
 CO ._ 
 
 "3 o 
 
 • s 
 
 ,coog 
 
 :fe 
 
 : :co g 
 
 : & :"3w 
 
 .CO 
 
 !"3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .ja 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 .a 
 
 CO 
 
 "c3 
 1 
 
 .9 § Mu u a : o; : g g a : S .'co j g : g 
 
 " «SScu o o K."r i mOsPokScogo 
 a pia st •> sco Bco s vjaco^coj-ixi-w^or)^, 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 On 
 
 3 E?3 
 o o« 
 
 3 
 
 s 
 
 8 .3 S 
 
 CO PhPh 
 
 .S 
 
 
 CM 
 
 oooo co in 
 inco^rineM 
 
 CO 
 
 t^aiai 
 
 CM 
 
 s as 
 
 
 
 
 M 1 
 
 OO^HOO 
 
 CM 
 
 Tl> 
 
 
 I> 
 
 
 
 CM CO CO 
 
 g 
 
 CM rHt^ 
 
 
 o 
 H 
 
 CM 
 
 NNt-Nt» 
 CMC0>-lr-c* 
 
 t> 
 
 gsjs 
 
 co Enin 
 
 s 
 
 CM 
 
 
 
 
 
 •-I i-lr-l 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 09- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "3 
 
 in 
 
 00 
 
 CMQQt^t-l 
 COlOOCMeM 
 
 as 
 
 00 
 
 in©-* 
 
 >-l->*© 
 
 CM 
 CM 
 
 in co>-i 
 cm i-itn 
 
 s 
 
 ■g 
 
 s 
 
 COSTS' 00 ■* 
 irfCNrlNt- 
 
 CT) 
 
 CO 
 
 rH 
 
 23E3 
 
 CO 
 
 cm ^-m 
 
 O ■*(£) 
 
 
 a 
 
 u 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 g 
 
 
 oooopcD^! 
 
 OOCM^CMO 
 
 En 
 
 gses 
 
 8 
 
 IB O-f 
 
 in cmcm 
 
 s 
 
 J3 
 
 N 
 
 COCO-^COQ 
 
 t-oiocno 
 
 r-(CO>-l CM 
 
 en 
 
 CM COO 
 
 r^ 
 
 o r~cM 
 
 
 m 
 
 s 
 
 3$9 
 
 CO 
 
 *l H.^ 
 
 C£$ 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 rt 
 
 
 
 
 fH iH 
 
 
 
 •oja 
 
 »"d 
 
 is 
 
 .2 3 
 
 •OT3 
 
 toCO 
 
 o *• 
 
 •B.g 
 
 °T3 
 
 a-a 
 
 
 3 
 
54 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 credits to be granted the several shops, it became neces- 
 sary for us to determine as exactly as possible two factors: 
 (a) the time, and (b) the materials, distributed against 
 production. Each of these factors calls for consideration. 
 
 In a well-managed industrial concern, it is a simple 
 matter to decide on the labor cost of production, but in 
 the Gary school shops it was extremely difficult. In the 
 first place, there are in the school shops, as a rule, two 
 kinds of workers — the pupils and the instructors. The 
 pupils may be busy on something for themselves, but 
 more often they are working — especially the older ones — 
 on building and equipment repairs, on additions to 
 buildings, on new equipment, or on supplies. These 
 older pupils fill out time slips in a formal manner, but 
 their time, except when pupils are paid as helpers, 
 is rarely distributed against construction work. In a 
 word, their time is not considered and does not enter 
 directly as a factor in reporting production cost. 
 
 In the second place, the teacher may be busy with in- 
 struction and shop routine; he may be engaged along with 
 his pupils on constructive work; he may be engaged on a 
 job independently, meanwhile supervising also the work 
 of pupils; or he may be absent from the shop altogether, 
 on a special assignment, such as repairing a roof, power 
 plant, or the like. In whatever capacity he is engaged — 
 and the records are not always clear — it is the time of 
 the instructor only, not the time of pupils, except when 
 they are paid as helpers, that is taken into account. 
 
 The artisan-instructor first reports his time on a time 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 55 
 
 slip, 1 which covers his entire period of duty. The time 
 thus reported is distributed between non-productive 
 and productive hours. But the productive hours as 
 here given do not have the same meaning as productive 
 time entered on similar slips in industry. In industry, 
 productive time on time-slip reports indicates the actual 
 time that the workman himself gave to the job. Pro- 
 ductive time as recorded on the Gary time slips may 
 mean one of several things — it is impossible to tell which. 
 It may mean (a) the hours the instructor himself worked 
 on the job; or (b) the instructor's estimate of the time he 
 gave to supervision, instruction, and assistance while his 
 pupils worked; or (c) the instructor's estimate of how long 
 it would have taken him to do the task himself, regard- 
 less of the attention he gave to supervision and instruction 
 while his pupils were doing the work, and regardless of 
 the time they actually gave to it. Obviously, when the 
 record of productive time on the time slips is thus ambigu- 
 ous, it is impossible to determine the amount of time the 
 artisan-teachers themselves give to production. There- 
 fore, if productive time at Gary as reported on time 
 slips is construed as equivalent to productive time in in- 
 dustry, such an interpretation involves the assumption 
 that the time of the instructor devoted to supervision 
 and instruction of children is offset by their labor. 
 
 While the Gary authorities require their artisan- 
 instructors to make the time report in question, they com- 
 pute the labor cost of production on the basis of a second 
 1 Manual training teachers do not make this time slip report. 
 
56 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 report in which productive hours of service are entered 
 against specific jobs. But even the productive time of 
 this second report 1 does not have the same meaning 
 as productive time in industry. It may and does in- 
 clude such items as "instruction," that is, attendance 
 on teachers' conferences and the like. Moreover, the 
 time so reported may be and often is an estimate made 
 at the completion of the job, not a record, made step by 
 step, as the work progresses. Hence, even the produc- 
 
 TABLE XXI 
 
 PRODUCTIVE TIME FROM TIME SLIPS AND PRODUCTIVE TIME 
 FROM PRODUCTION REPORTS 
 
 Regular Day and Saturday Schools Combined 
 
 
 PRODUCTIVE TIME 
 
 PRODUCTIVE TIME 
 
 
 SHOPS 
 
 FROM 
 
 FROM 
 
 DIFFERENCE 
 
 
 TIME SLIPS f 
 
 PRODUCTION REPORTS* 
 
 
 Cabinet Shop 
 
 $ 1,327.95 
 
 $1,200.04 
 
 $ 127.91 
 
 Pattern Shop 
 
 588.59 
 
 549.57 
 
 39.02 
 
 Foundry 
 
 867.92 
 
 492.72 
 
 375.20 
 
 
 1,365.00 
 
 988.79 
 
 37621 
 
 Machine Shop 
 
 744.25 
 
 420.85 
 
 323.40 
 
 Plumbing Shop 
 
 1,661.69 
 
 1,627.00 
 
 34.69 
 
 Sheet Metal 
 
 
 
 
 Shop 
 
 1,225.55 
 
 1,130.55 
 
 95.00 
 
 Paint Shop . . . 
 
 1,093.94 
 
 1,037.20 
 
 56.74 
 
 Print Shop, 
 
 
 
 
 Emerson.. . 
 
 920.04 
 
 752.24 
 
 167.80 
 
 Print Shop, 
 
 
 
 
 Froebel 
 
 648.73 
 
 633.90 
 
 14.83 
 
 Total 
 
 $10,443.66 
 
 $8,832.86 
 
 $1,610.80 
 
 fThis tabulation does not include the non-productive time reported on time slips. 
 
 •In this calculation the $739.91 of productive time credited to manual training teachers 
 is not included because they are paid on a monthly basis and do not make .time-slip 
 reports. 
 
 1 This report is made also by manual training teachers. 
 
I 
 
 Oh 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 57 
 
 tive time recorded on the second report may have any- 
 one or all of the meanings mentioned in connection with 
 the productive time reported on the previous time slips. 
 
 These two separate reports on productive time are not 
 checked one with the other, and hence do not agree. 
 When expressed in terms of money, there is a difference 
 between them of $1,610.80 (Table XXI) — a difference 
 which it was impossible for us to reconcile. 
 
 Therefore, in attempting to determine the labor cost 
 of production we were compelled to take the reports 
 of productive time at their face value, treating the pro- 
 ductive time so reported — which in most cases is an 
 estimate of unknown meaning — just as if it had the same 
 definiteness and significance as productive time in in- 
 dustry. We were also compelled, inasmuch as we had 
 no definite basis which would enable us to augment the 
 time of the instructor in respect to particular jobs, to 
 base our credit allowances on the productive time given 
 in the second time report, which is less, as pointed out, 
 by $1,610 than that given in the first or time-slip report. 
 In consequence, the sum in question, representing the 
 difference between the productive time of the two re- 
 ports, became a charge against instruction. 
 
 Similar difficulties were encountered in attempting to 
 determine the cost of materials. Theoretically, all ma- 
 terials and supplies are first assembled in a storeroom 
 and afterwards distributed to the shops on requisition. 
 In practice, while some materials go through the store- 
 room, much goes directly to the shops; and in the case 
 
S 8 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 of special construction or repair jobs material may even 
 be delivered directly to the building where the work is 
 to be done. For example, paper and printing ink are 
 stored on open shelves in the print shops; pig-iron, coke, 
 and foundry supplies, in bins in the foundry; bar-iron and 
 steel, on open racks in the forge shop; pipes and plumb- 
 ing supplies, in the plumbing shop. When needed, these 
 are used by the instructor of the shop in which they 
 are stored, and by the instructors of other shops as well. 
 
 Under these circumstances, there is no little oppor- 
 tunity for error. An instructor who has used material 
 may forget to make out a requisition; again, in estimat- 
 ing the value of the material there may be inaccuracies 
 in respect to quality, quantity, price, and extensions; 
 with the result that correct charges may not be made or 
 materials may be charged against the wrong job. In a 
 word, the control over materials and supplies is not 
 rigorous. This is evidenced by the reported deficits 
 in the storeroom — $9,486 in 1913-1914, 1 and $5,240 in 
 1914-1915 2 . Nor is the total value of the materials 
 received checked against the value of the materials 
 used and on hand. Thus, without proper inventories, 
 invoices, and requisitions, it was impossible for us to do 
 more than accept the values of the materials consumed in 
 construction as reported by the shop instructors. 
 
 The production credits as computed by us and given 
 in Table XX are based, therefore, on productive time 
 
 1 Financial Report of the Gary Public Schools, 1913-1914. 
 1 Financial Report of the Gary Public Schools, 1914-1915. 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 59 
 
 and purchase value of materials as entered by the shop 
 instructors in their production reports. While these 
 were generally accepted, no effort was spared to examine 
 payrolls, invoices, requisitions, or whatever might throw 
 light on the question at issue. While it is frankly ad- 
 mitted that there may be errors in some of the details of 
 these analyses, it is believed that they are as accurate as 
 it is possible to make them from existing data. 
 
 In determining the character of the credit — that is, 
 whether it should be charged to operation, upkeep, or 
 capital outlay — the Gary distribution was followed; 
 the only departures arise from an occasional difference 
 of judgment as to classification of items. 
 
 With credits allowed and their distribution deter- 
 mined, it is a short road to the final cost of the Gary 
 school shops. Their final or net cost represents the dif- 
 ference between the total initial expenditure, $22,535.31, 
 and the production credits allowed, $12,217.62, a dif- 
 ference of $10,317.69. Taken as a whole, the Gary 
 school shops thus appear, without counting educational 
 supervision, to be 54 per cent, self-supporting; that is, 
 there is an abatement, by reason of productive work, of 
 54 per cent, of the total initial cost. 
 
 The final cost of the respective shops, when credit is 
 given for only the labor and material value of these 
 products, is as given in Table XXII. 
 
 However, if credit is given on the basis of the estimated 
 market value of their products, as fixed by the instructors, 
 the final cost of the shops would be quite different. The 
 
6o 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 
 H S 
 
 osooifliflot^oogiQa)£-Qe9 
 
 N-3'(Mt>a3!-l<NO'<tf , OO0005© 
 
 ^HC^t-'dt-'toirii-iooodtdoitdoQ 
 
 rHr-1 COCOCMOtO^" tO OJ(N 
 
 coiMioaiooi'fl''-(mt>(NO(ncooto 
 NO>i-ioOi-<coco>-;iocoiotDU3(r)oc5 
 co co co od rj o co t> to n r-' © £3 to c4 ■* 
 
 
 
 J3 ft e «> 
 
 CO 
 
 s; ft 3 ft 
 
 !> 
 
 O 3 « 
 «5 W 
 
 & 
 
 NNr-llNONQffHO 
 
 coc^cor-cncoLnioco 
 co'coc-qtocofficiogj 
 
 O O ci 
 
 O ft (U 
 
 H 3 sg 
 
 O u rt 
 
 s SPHJS 
 
 OLnrf CT>CO**a>©00t>f~tOtOg> tO 
 
 ■<* ti> to c-- (j> a> co t> to ■* o co t> © to 
 
 S'NNOOQdt^t^COC^'-ItON^ oi 
 
 C^NCS->*MC0C0OLt5Q00rl"a'00pO 
 
 t^Mint>HOMHHOONnHc5q 
 cq'dco^d^Mt>JtOrHf~^<55?P9y? 
 
 in^^to^LnLft-Hocoto-^Ntooto 
 ^^©mcotdcoooLOQcooai-tfeNiTji 
 ■*t--oScocooBt-csicoLnooooNtDtDco 
 
 t~-tflCOtOCMNOt~t^CMN>HtOlOtDCO 
 
 & 
 CO ._ 
 
 CO oca<*> 
 "3 OCO u u 
 
 2w a 8,-S, 
 
 -.2 SS'C^. 
 
 ;IIlg|ll.s = agS 
 
 'la U 5 o52jStt£o 
 
 OPntufe^PHCOMliftHCOfe 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 61 
 
 shop instructors, in 1915-1916, placed a market value on 
 their products of $16,268, which is alone 72 per cent, of the 
 initial cost of all shops; but it should be noted that this 
 amount (Table XX) does not include the market value 
 of the products of the manual training shops or of the 
 paint shop, as the records of these shops were incomplete. 
 
 The market value estimates furnished by the instruc- 
 tors are in many cases higher than the labor and material 
 cost of the products; the difference represents the sup- 
 posed work of the pupils over and above the productive 
 time lost by the instructor in teaching and supervising 
 them, or the supposed profit of a vendor, or both. 
 
 Owing to the diversity of the products and the un- 
 certainty with regard to the productive time and the 
 materials charged against particular jobs, it was impos- 
 sible to check these estimates from the reports themselves 
 or from outside sources. But the question may fairly be 
 raised as to whether Gary is not paying high for all its 
 productive work, even when this is charged to the system 
 at actual labor and material cost. Without doubt the 
 market value estimates made by the instructors would 
 in trade often be regarded as high. (Table XXIII.) 
 
 Finally, crediting the shops for what they do at the 
 actual labor and material cost of production amounts 
 simply to charging other departments and divisions of 
 the system for an expenditure actually made. But 
 adding to the original expense an imaginary profit of 
 25 to 150 per cent, is equivalent to charging other de- 
 partments and divisions of the system with an expense 
 
62 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Si 3 
 
 OOQOOOMfflOO 
 
 oioooioioi><ooo 
 
 HH nNHOOUTfCO 
 «9- 
 
 OOOOOO^OJCClfl 
 
 ^<j>popoqc<i«qeooq 
 
 HH NHH»(BHN 
 60- 
 
 wioo eoNtoo 
 
 *r-ir-J '<DNo6 
 
 iHCM 
 
 OOOOOOOOCOU5 
 ©9- 
 
 ^ 
 
 a 
 
 a 
 
 ■8* 
 
 .» h jh >- .s a 
 
 bp'ea'd'aJ tn3 
 
 O D< CU cves !? 
 
 ci v V 4) n h 
 
 "o 4> 
 
 O ** 
 <-> 3 
 
 ,M o o O 
 
 Pico:: U 
 
 . o 
 
 o„n 
 
 ; o u m 
 
 ■••;:: a,-£S 2 S 
 
 g^ : :&§^&:s 
 
 03 CO O O M l«rH ■— < 43 *-• *H 
 
H 
 
 « 
 
COST OF SCHOOL SHOPS 63 
 
 that was never incurred, and makes the reported expen- 
 diture larger than the real expenditure. On the other 
 hand, crediting the shops to the extent of this imaginary 
 profit reduces their operation cost far below what the 
 cost actually is. In a word, administrative policies 
 and school accounting run into all kinds of inconsisten- 
 cies when based on anything besides actual expenditures. 
 Hence, we believe that we are justified in basing credits 
 on actual labor and material cost, and reporting the 
 Gary school shops as 54 per cent, self-supporting. 
 
 It should, however, be remembered that this estimate 
 is derived by taking all shops together, including even the 
 shoe shop and the pottery, though they do no produc- 
 tive work for which they receive credit. On the other 
 hand, while the manual training shops do receive credit 
 for their products, they are not operated primarily on 
 a production basis, as are the following shops: 
 
 1 Cabinet shop 
 
 (Froebel) 
 
 Plumbing shop 
 
 (Froebel) 
 
 Pattern shop 
 
 (Emerson) 
 
 Sheet metal shop 
 
 (Froebel) 
 
 Foundry 
 
 (Emerson) 
 
 Paint shop 
 
 (Froebel) 
 
 Forge 
 
 (Emerson) 
 
 Print shop 
 
 (Emerson) 
 
 Machine shop 
 
 (Emerson) 
 
 Print shop 
 
 (Froebel) 
 
 If, therefore, these essentially productive shops are con- 
 sidered by themselves, and credited on the basis of the 
 labor and material cost of their products, they are 69 
 per cent, self-supporting; that is, there is an abatement, 
 by reason of productive work, of 69 per cent, of their 
 total initial cost. (Tables XIX and XXII.) 
 
 1 After April, 19 16, the cabinet shop was operated as a manual train- 
 ing shop. 
 
VI. CAPITAL OUTLAY FOR GROUNDS, BUILD- 
 INGS, AND EQUIPMENT 
 
 WE HAVE been engaged up to this point in see- 
 ing what it cost to operate the Gary schools 
 in a given year. The Gary plan requires more 
 extensive school grounds, a new type of school building, 
 and more abundant equipment than the old-type edu- 
 cation. Now, what capital outlay has been involved in 
 thus instituting these schools? 
 
 Gary's capital investment in grounds, buildings, and 
 equipment at the end of the school year 1915-1916 
 aggregated $1,016,319 (Table XXIV), equal to a capital 
 outlay of $246* per pupil in average daily attendance. 
 But this city-wide average, although suggestive, sheds 
 little light on the per capita outlay which a thorough- 
 going Gary system would require; for the widest dis- 
 parity exists in building facilities, as is clearly revealed 
 in the differences in per pupil plant investment, ranging, 
 as it does, from $38 in the poorest schools to $524 at 
 Emerson. 
 
 Nor does the per capita investment of $135 at Jeffer- 
 
 1 We are aware that per pupil capital outlay should be expressed in 
 terms of pupil building capacity. But, as will be pointed out, the dem- 
 onstrated pupil capacity of at least the larger Gary buildings is not known, 
 and for this reason we fall back on average daily attendance. 
 
 64 
 
GROUNDS, BUILDINGS, AND EQUIPMENT 65 
 
 
 CO i-H COrJ< OS 
 
 OS-"* 
 
 PER PUJ 
 
 AVERAGE 
 ATTEND 
 
 COHTfO'* 
 
 lOt- 
 
 •«i<oo woo 
 
 tot- 
 
 N 00 co tj< 
 
 
 
 r-l 
 
 CO t- «i OS O U3 t^ 
 t> O W O) 05 o «o 
 O jg t> oi -^ -^J 10 
 
 ■^OOHOHOIO) 
 
 co"oo~eo~oo~c\fco~o 
 
 00 CO CT5 N tH co 
 
 co-* 
 
 00 
 to o 
 to o^ 
 
 U3~© 
 
 OOOfN^OS 
 
 -* t- co i— 1 10 
 
 t#00«D«O(M 
 
 10 01 
 
 OO) 
 
 0000 
 
 "'tf.OO^ 
 
 ococoot- 
 
 oooooud 
 
 ©O^N^CO^ 
 
 T-T©«o~fc-~co~ 
 
 <MC0 
 
 co 00 
 ©I> 
 
 to© 
 
 U3(M 
 
 WIOtKHIO^HO 
 Tft>NOOU3HO 
 
 odi-ixoo6">#c<i©©' 
 
 OSt-OOOOitfiTjt© 
 
 qweqawa <m o 
 ©"t-~cxnoeo" , oo"c\f©~ 
 
 «Dt-H i-( i-H 
 
 ©13 
 
 o to Jt^a S3— C 
 
 h 3 <U O ~5 a c« 
 
 «8 
 
 •9.9 
 
 rt-g 
 3 3^ 
 
 in C O 
 
 hi 
 
 S.s <« 
 
 "a 
 
 o rt oj 
 &*>•* 
 
 &o« 
 
 $*$ 
 
 2 p 5 
 J.SO 
 
 £~S 
 
 1*1 
 
 w a a 
 
 -< S 
 
 5) o a) 
 
 «^£ 
 SB'S 
 
 s«* 
 
 W a* 
 m m u 
 
 <2§ 
 
 •2 m 
 
66 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 son, or $288 at Froebel, or of $524 at Emerson supply a 
 reliable basis for judgment as to what the necessary out- 
 lay would be. As pointed out above, Jefferson is an 
 old-style, remodeled building, affording simply conven- 
 tional facilities. Emerson and Froebel meet the re- 
 quirements of a Gary school, but, as stated before, neither 
 of these buildings has ever been used to capacity on the 
 Gary plan. Consequently, on the basis of present use, 
 the per capita investment as shown for Jefferson is prob- 
 ably lower, and that for Emerson and Froebel is consider- 
 ably/ higher, especially that for Emerson, than would 
 be required by a thoroughgoing Gary system. 
 
 In the absence of positive data on the capital outlay 
 required by a Gary school, we must at present content 
 ourselves with an estimate. Obviously, the estimate 
 will vary with the amount and price of land provided 
 for outside activities, as also with the type and character 
 of the proposed building. Even a more important factor 
 is the pupil capacity of the plant on the Gary plan. 
 This will vary according to the proposed length of the 
 school day, the proposed size of classes in the old-line 
 studies, the time division between the "fundamentals" 
 and the "special branches," the amount and extent of 
 departmentalization, the number of children placed at 
 one time in auditorium, music rooms, laboratories, 
 shops, and the like, and according to the indoor provi- 
 sions for the accommodation of children in bad weather, 
 when outside facilities cannot be used. 
 
 With these different factors affecting the estimate, 
 
GROUNDS, BUILDINGS, AND EQUIPMENT 67 
 
 r ^ CO 
 
 w w 
 
 PQ o 
 
 s s 
 
 o 
 
 M 
 
 51 
 u 
 
68 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 there is no likelihood at present of agreement on the 
 pupil capacity of a building operated on the Gary plan, 
 and positive knowledge must await experimentation and 
 experience with a definite program. 
 
 In the meantime, an idea of the required per pupil 
 capital outlay may be obtained from an estimate based 
 on the present capital investment in the two largest 
 Gary plants, and on the superintendent's judgment of 
 their respective capacities. On this basis, assuming 
 that the present equipment is adequate for the maximum 
 estimated enrollment, the per pupil capital outlay at 
 Emerson would be $169, and at Froebel, $188. (Table 
 XXV.) Of course Emerson and Froebel could not be 
 duplicated to-day at anything like their original cost, 
 and, as stated before, the pupil capacity will differ with 
 the requirements of the program followed. 1 
 
 J For an analysis of the superintendent's estimate, see report on 
 Organization and Administration. 
 
VII. FIXED CHARGES 
 
 IN ADDITION to the current expense of operating a 
 school system and to the capital invested in grounds, 
 buildings, and equipment, there is a type of school 
 expenditure which we have not included as part of cur- 
 rent cost, nor as part of capital outlay, though it is 
 unquestionably part of the current school burden upon 
 the community. All such expenditures are grouped 
 under Fixed Charges and ordinarily embrace rent, in- 
 surance, pensions, taxes for local improvements, and 
 interest on funded and floating debt. 
 
 Gary does not maintain a local teachers' pension 
 fund, and rentals for school purposes have been negli- 
 gible, amounting in 1915-1916 to only $30 for a storage 
 coal yard. The usual building, security and liability 
 insurance is carried, the premiums for 1915-1916 being 
 $619.59. But the interest charges appear always to 
 have been heavy. In 1915-1916 alone, they amounted 
 to $33,248.85, equal to 8.6 per cent, of the total revenues 
 for the year. (Table XXVI, and Schedule H-i of the 
 Appendix.) 
 
 It is not difficult to understand this fact. The Gary 
 authorities had the task of creating an entire school 
 system in a brief period. Bonds have been issued for 
 
 69 
 
7o 
 
 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 > 2 
 
 M 
 ON 
 H 
 
 \o 
 o 
 
 H 
 
 n pq 
 w 
 
 (4 
 
 w 
 
 H 
 
 doNt^idododdooo 
 
 pq 
 
 05 D 
 
 W *_ cl 
 
 w o 5 
 
 o 5 
 
 P5 
 
 
 t-oo 
 
 rHCO 
 
 «ot>io<jieoc<ii-icoi-ica 
 
 H^TfoecoiOesoa 
 
 
 O^^l-HOO 1-1 \Q fc-^ 
 
 i-Tcf©-«*coo'ar c<1 ~ 
 
 hhhnSn 
 
 «Ot-00«OHNnrillO 
 OOOOHrtrtHHH 
 
FIXED CHARGES 71 
 
 buildings, but the half million 1 secured in this way was 
 not adequate to erect enough buildings of the proposed 
 type to keep pace with the school population. 
 
 To carry out the proposed building program, large 
 sums, as we shall see in the next section, have been 
 taken from current taxes for permanent improvements. 
 Indeed, this has been done to such an extent that the 
 funds for ordinary current expenses have been continu- 
 ously depleted, with the result that it has been necessary, 
 in order to keep the schools going, either to raise large 
 amounts on temporary loans, or to defer the payment 
 of school warrants. For example, at one time in 1914 
 there were outstanding unpaid warrants to the amount 
 of $100,000. Whether the money was obtained on short- 
 term notes, or whether the payment of school warrants 
 was deferred, interest had to be paid. The heavy inter- 
 est burden of the Gary schools is thus due to the size of 
 the floating debt as well as to the bond issues. 
 
 1 See Table XXVII and Table G of the Appendix. 
 
VIII. FINANCING THE SYSTEM 
 
 GARY'S total school expenditure up to the end of 
 1915-1916 amounted to two and a half million 
 dollars. It remains to inquire how this sum was 
 raised. 
 
 As elsewhere, school funds are derived chiefly from 
 three sources, viz., the state apportionment, 1 local taxa- 
 tion, and bond issues. Between 1906 and 1916 the 
 state paid over to the Gary board of education 
 $356,016.63 ; direct local taxation provided $1,614,284.74; 
 and bonds account for $509,728.07. (Table XXVII.) 
 Hence, for the period, 14.4 per cent, of the board's entire 
 income came from the state, 65.1 per cent, from direct 
 local taxation, and 20.5 per cent, from bonds. Sixty- 
 five per cent, is not only a good proportion to raise 
 locally, but the actual amounts produced — $15,725.97 
 in the first year of her corporate existence and $323,786.70 
 in 1915-1916 — are large. 
 
 Gary has been able to raise large amounts for public 
 education, in the first place because she has always com- 
 manded relatively large resources. Millions were in- 
 vested in the industrial plants giving birth to the city, 
 
 1 The state holds'in trust certain vested funds and levies a state-wide 
 school tax; the income from the former and the proceeds from the latter 
 are apportioned annually to the separate school districts. 
 
 72 
 
H 
 
FINANCING THE SYSTEM 
 
 73 
 
 Q 
 P 
 
 Hi 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 K 
 
 H g 
 
 < 
 o 
 
 & 
 o 
 
 C/3 
 
 th T-joqp 
 oi odco«r> 
 
 tOlMIMCO 
 
 C(OH 
 
 HOMN 
 
 osqccH 
 
 t-i-itd od 
 
 ooco t- <Ni 
 
 CO^C^r-^p 
 
 oTcTo'io' 
 
 COtOiDIM 
 
 OW«5 
 pr-HlO 
 
 ciioo 
 
 OtOH 
 ONO 
 
 II 
 
 oooo-rfcDi— loooac 
 
 lot-oo-^oqcooo-^covs 
 
 MOfCOOUlO^tCOOO 
 
 t-^tq^oo^pfc-^peo.peq,^ 
 to~to~to~c>f -*i<"oo~ of co~taco~ 
 
 t— icoooi-nu3t-05-^<<x>oa 
 
 i-l i-H iH l-H C<1 O] CO 
 
 * 9 
 
 2 g g w 
 
 ° W § < 
 
 oi u E H 
 
 w a 
 
 NN<OC0HqO«q'>*05 
 
 od«o-<*05U3co'T-iedt^Tii 
 
 tH tH i-H W tH tH t-H 
 
 OUDSOO^iaoOiOO--* 
 
 ppirt-^T-jT-Hpoacqp 
 «oeo^ododooot>^'r-i 
 
 T-l t- ^i< lO tO T)< 7— i co ai oo 
 
 ■^«,oq,«D c-^co N 'i-^CT^in i oq_"<* s 
 
 0)0 
 
 co oo 
 
 i-Hcnco 
 oo, tap 
 
 ooc-j 
 
 p-r-j^CO 
 
 ta ofco 
 co t- us 
 
 HTfOOO 
 
 oo, t-j ta, tjj co 
 •<*" od r-i id od 
 t-^<M ta^co <M^ 
 
 oo'cvf-^CTrt-" 
 
 Tj< tO «5-*J(C0 
 
 cooacoco-* 
 
 • ■ ■ © rH CS1 CO "*f» tQ «S> 
 
 t-OOOlHHHHHHH 
 
 «at>-o6oiOTHCNieo-<*td 
 
 OOOOi— ItHtHt— IHH 
 
 Cj OS O Oi Oi OS OS os os os 
 
 Ob, H 
 
 Ill 
 
 Is 5 
 
 3"« 
 
 ■5 x 
 
 W g H 
 - E «• 
 
74 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 before there were any schools. When the schools were 
 organized, this wealth lay at hand ready to be taxed 
 for their support. Meanwhile, the wealth of the city 
 has increased rapidly, additional millions going into 
 industry and still further millions into the upbuilding 
 of the city itself, with the result that Gary has probably 
 had from the beginning greater resources back of each 
 child to educate than the majority of cities of similar 
 size and character. 1 For example, in the school year 
 1908-1909, the taxable property back of each child in 
 average daily attendance amounted to $7,984. Attend- 
 ance has increased more rapidly than taxable wealth, 
 but even so there was in 1915-1916 $5,387 of taxables 
 for each child in daily attendance. (Table XXVIII.) 
 Among Gary's nearest neighbors approaching compara- 
 ble size, Hammond had, in 1914-1915, $3,053 for each 
 child in attendance, and East Chicago, $3,033. 
 
 In the second place, Gary has contributed freely in 
 support of public education, the local tax levy often 
 reaching well up toward the limit permitted by law. 
 (Table XXLX.) The very first year of the system, 1906, 
 saw the lowest levy, 80 cents on each $100, whereas for 
 the last three years the rate has remained uniformly 
 
 1 When the assessed property values for 1 913 in seventy-four cities 
 with a population of 30,000 and less than 50,000 reported in Financial 
 Statistics for Cities, 1913, are placed against the average daily attendance 
 for 1914-1915 as given in the Report of the U. S. Commissioner of Educa- 
 tion for 1915-1916, the median wealth back of each child is $4,901, as 
 compared with $5,252 at Gary. Undoubtedly, the greatest differences 
 prevail in methods of assessment and in reporting attendance. These 
 are, however, the best and only data available to show Gary's relative 
 financial strength. 
 
FINANCING THE SYSTEM 
 
 75 
 
 Q 
 
 ■J 
 
 n 
 u 
 
 B 
 
 < 
 w 
 
 o 
 
 > « 
 
 Hi 
 
 a 
 
 w 
 p 
 
 1-1 
 
 >< 
 H 
 ft 
 
 W 
 
 Q 
 W 
 
 
 fa 
 
 
 
 5* 
 
 rHT*CNlOO0T-(©eNb- 
 
 
 ■^oocot-oooeousoo 
 
 
 5 a 
 
 <x> o^o^o^o^o^o^eq^ 
 
 
 ■5 3 
 Ph 
 
 ot^ > t-"^«o'«o , io»o'»o' 
 
 1 
 
 «9- 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 .as 
 
 
 < 
 
 P c 
 3-S 
 
 0Cirl<t-<CcMU3eOt-<M 
 
 r* 
 
 t-»-iu3coeMi-ijgooco 
 
 ►J 
 
 CM t- 05 O^O^i-J^..© H 
 
 < 
 Q 
 
 W 
 O 
 
 2 
 
 S< 
 
 t-TcnT co~co ■^T><!jr 
 
 
 
 > 
 
 
 O *-< <M CO "* U3 «0 
 
 < 
 
 
 00 05i— iH^Hi- IHH 
 
 
 rt 
 
 t^o6o5©i-nc<ieO"<*io 
 
 
 £ 
 
 OOOiHHHHH 
 
 
 OJ0505050505050505 
 
 
 
 t-HtHt— |iH,-Ht-Ii-1i— It— 1 
 
 
 ja2 
 
 CM«Di-iTfOi-ioOi-ieo 
 
 
 lOCOONCOCOt-tOO 
 
 
 aa 
 
 oq^T-^oq^Mt-^o^oq^T-^u^ 
 
 o 
 
 gu 
 
 co~^eo~co~«Tco~c<foo'co' s 
 
 £ 
 
 6(9- 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 
 oJ> 
 
 
 o 
 
 "£>.« 
 
 00CDCOTHt-i-IU3Tj<Ub 
 
 Pi 
 
 ° 
 
 hJ 
 
 u tn 
 
 rJUDWOOH'JOO 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 •a cs 
 
 HHNTjHO(Dt-t-W 
 
 o 
 
 ra « 
 
 
 m 
 o 
 
 J3>H 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 t-0005©T-lcNJCO-*i«iO«0 
 
 
 
 OOOHHHHHHH 
 
 
 £ 
 
 05050505050505050505 
 
 G 
 
 § 
 
 lQujotoioioomiooo 
 
 OOHtOtDlOCSlOCDTtilO 
 
 tf 
 
 1 
 
 o^o^eo^^^^cq^CN^eNi^ oo 
 
 W 
 
 ■^oaiyHt^'cSoocoairHoo 
 
 P< 
 
 T3 
 
 oo->*cocoTj<ir5t£>u3T-io 
 
 Si 
 
 Si 
 
 05^t~ OS^CO^O^O^C^CNI CO 
 
 t> 
 
 oi"u3cxroTco"'otrcrT-rcsrod'cxr 
 
 w H 
 
 3 
 
 rtHNNCNWN 
 
 O < 
 
 < 
 
 CO- 
 
 « > 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 Cfl 
 
 
 
 
 
 i/i 
 
 
 
 CO 
 
 < 
 
 l-l 
 
 s 
 
 S£Sr922?oi-i-cNico-<*iotx> 
 
 
 OOOOriHriHHHH 
 
 
 £ 
 
 050505050505050505050) 
 
76 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 at $i .25. 1 The present levy for current operation, which 
 includes the supplementary tuition tax and special taxes, 
 is alone $1.15. There are two points in this connection 
 worthy of comment. The supplementary tuition tax, 
 which must be used for teachers' salaries, is kept uni- 
 formly below the maximum, whereas special taxes, more 
 or less flexible in that they are at times used for purposes 
 other than those for which they are levied, approximate 
 the maximum. 
 
 Gary has also bonded herself to the legal limit — 2 per 
 cent, of all taxable property. Besides issuing bonds 
 aggregating $506,500, Gary inherited through annexa- 
 tion a bond debt of $12,804.60, all but $1,000 of which 
 has been extinguished, leaving bonds outstanding on 
 July 31, 1916, of $507,500. (Table G of the Appendix.) 
 
 In addition to these bonds, there were other liabilities 
 on July 31, 1916, amounting to $122,030.43, or total 
 liabilities of $629,530.43. As an offset there were, be- 
 sides the $1,016,319.81 in grounds, buildings, and equip- 
 ment, other assets aggregating $21,181.50, or total as- 
 sets of $1,037,501.31. Hence, the difference between the 
 total assets and the total liabilities, $407,970.88, repre- 
 sents the Gary equity in school property. (Table B 
 of Appendix.) 
 
 The financial history of the Gary schools to date may 
 therefore be summarized as follows: The state has con- 
 
 1 A high tax rate usually accompanies a low assessed property value 
 and vice versa; property at Gary, as previously stated, is assessed at 
 about one-sixth of its cash value. 
 
B 
 
 1-1 
 
 W 
 ffl 
 
 fa 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 w 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Ox 
 
 M 
 CO 
 
 w 
 
 £ 
 
 w 
 ►J 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 I-} 
 
 FINANCING THE SYSTEM 
 
 oaumaad 
 
 HfllOXVH 
 
 n_ 
 
 * • • 
 
 WONNOOONNN 
 ^ i-l iH i-H i-H FHlH i-H ,-h i-l 
 
 Da 
 
 iS a 
 
 poniuuaj 
 tunuhxBjij 
 
 oououuuoou 
 
 inLominLnoooooooooo 
 
 WINCgCMINiHi-lrHrtrH 
 
 XA31 
 
 ouooejocjo 
 
 winmuiinooo 
 
 8.2 
 
 pa«tuua,j 
 
 iCAS-J 
 
 JO o o o o o u 
 
 JOOOOOOO 
 
 oyoouyoo 
 
 oooooiniom 
 
 ^3 K 
 
 §«H 
 
 
 "9 S.2 
 
 T)W^ 
 
 < CO 
 
 pajiraua,! 
 uinuiix'Bj^ 
 
 AWJ 
 
 iiStniK 
 
 
 a _ 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 
 Sh 
 
 w 
 
 60 
 
 psunnisj 
 umunxup^ 
 
 yyyyyyuy 
 
 itA37 
 
 p3?;raua,j 
 umuiprej^ 
 
 iCA8^ 
 
 ^cfioSSfio^OiOiOidoi 
 
 ?-tiHi-Hi-(i-<*Hi-|iHi— li-l . 
 
 77 
 
78 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 tributed a total of $356,016. Gary has provided from 
 local taxes the remainder of the funds required for their 
 current operation expenses, also for fixed charges, and 
 has raised, besides, the equivalent of 39 per cent, of the 
 present investment in grounds, buildings, equipment, 
 and other property, which leaves the schools in debt for 
 61 per cent, of their present assets. 
 
 So much for the financial past. What now of the 
 financial future? The amount of money Gary can raise 
 for public education is limited by state law. Operating 
 under this law, Gary has at no time up to the present 
 been financially able to provide for all the children of the 
 city educational opportunities and facilities such as Emer- 
 son and Froebel afford. This, however, is no reason why 
 in the initiation of the proposed system such schools as 
 Emerson and Froebel should not have been built. But 
 it goes without saying that the present inequalities in 
 educational opportunities, except in so far as they arise 
 from the scattered character of the school population, 
 cannot continue indefinitely. In a word, the problem 
 of financing a system of schools such as Gary proposes 
 to establish must sooner or later be faced squarely. 
 
 When account is taken of the recent origin, extent, 
 and rapid growth of the city, it is not at all surprising 
 that Gary up to now has not been able to provide equal 
 facilities in all her schools. But will the city be able 
 to do this within, say, the next ten years? The ques- 
 tion, of course, can only be answered on the basis of a 
 number of accepted assumptions, such as the following: 
 
FINANCING THE SYSTEM 79 
 
 (a) That the annual increases in school enrollment 
 for the next ten years — that is, between 1916 and 1926 — 
 be the same as the average annual increase between 
 1911 and 1916; 
 
 (b) That the annual increases in the assessed value of 
 property for the decade 1915-1925 be the same as the 
 average annual increase between 191 1 and 1915; 1 
 
 (c) That bonds be issued to the maximum amount? 
 2 per cent, of the taxable wealth, and that the local 
 school tax be kept continuously at the maximum, $1.55 
 on each $100 of the tax duplicates; 
 
 (d) That the present apportionment of state school 
 funds and the present state laws controlling local school 
 taxes and bond issues for school purposes remain un- 
 changed; 
 
 (e) That the present official estimate of the per pupil 
 capacity of buildings like Emerson and Froebel (2,300) 
 be made the basis in computing future building needs; 
 
 (f) That the present cost per pupil in average daily 
 attendance at Froebel be taken as the basis of computing 
 future administration, operation, and instruction ex- 
 pense; and, finally, 
 
 1 The dates for the enrollment and the increase therein are one year 
 later than the dates for the assessed value of property and the increase 
 in such wealth, as the taxes for the support of the schools for any given 
 year are levied on the assessed value of property as of the preceding 
 year; also, a four-year period instead of a five is taken in estimating the 
 annual increase in taxables, because the basis of assessment changes 
 at the end of each fourth year, and the five-year period preceding 1015 
 covers two such changes, whereas only two will occur in the succeeding 
 ten years. Hence, to base the estimated increase on a five-year period 
 would augment unduly the estimate. 
 
80 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 (g) That the present ratio between the current ex- 
 penditures for administrative and general services and 
 the day school combined, and for all other activities, 
 such as night schools and the like, remain the same — 
 80 per cent, and 20 per cent, respectively. 
 
 Proceeding on these assumptions, we shall first con- 
 sider building needs and the possibility of financing 
 them. The new buildings required by 1926 will de- 
 pend on the school enrollment at that time, which we 
 estimate at 11,878. This number is arrived at in this 
 way: During the five years 1911-1916 the school en- 
 rollment increased 3,112. At the same average annual 
 increase, the increase for the ten-year period 1916-1926 
 would be double, or 6,224. Adding this estimated increase 
 to the actual enrollment for 1915-1916 (5,654) we obtain 
 a probable enrollment for 1926 of 11,878. 
 
 To accommodate this number of pupils at least three 
 new buildings of the Emerson and Froebel type must be 
 provided, even if Glen Park and Jefferson continue to 
 be operated, for experience has demonstrated that school 
 buildings cannot be used in a changing and rapidly 
 growing city at their maximum capacity. 1 To provide 
 three new buildings of the kind contemplated will call, 
 on the basis of the cost of the Froebel plant ($433,517.55), 
 for a capital outlay by 1926 of not less than $1,300,552.65. 
 
 The natural source of income for new grounds and 
 buildings is bonds issued against the taxable wealth of 
 
 1 It is interesting to note that to meet present needs and the needs of 
 the immediate future, plans are now under way for two new buildings. 
 
FINANCING THE SYSTEM 81 
 
 the community. The taxable wealth of Gary by 1925 
 should approximate $51,383,403, for, as taxables increased 
 during the four years 1911-1915 $9,268,785, the increase 
 for the ten years 191 5-1925 would at the same average 
 annual increase be $23,171,963. This sum plus the actual 
 duplicate of 191 5 ($28,211,440) gives assessed property 
 by 1925 to the amount of $51,383,403. 
 
 Against this sum bonds may be issued up to 2 per 
 cent. Gary may therefore raise for new buildings from 
 bonds a total of $1,027,668.06 — $272,884.59 less than 
 will be required. Moreover, it is to be remembered 
 that there were on July 31, 191 6, bonds outstanding 
 against taxables to the amount of $507,500. Unless 
 these are taken up in the meantime — and for the sake of 
 simplicity we assume they are not — new bonds can be 
 issued only to the extent of $520,168.06, which leaves 
 $780,384.59 to be raised from other sources if the new 
 permanent equipment required by 1926 is to be provided. 
 
 The only remaining source of income for grounds and 
 buildings is local taxation. Whether any such amount 
 can be provided from local taxation depends on the 
 margin of income remaining after the current operation 
 expense and the fixed charges of the system are provided 
 out of funds received from the state and raised locally. 
 We estimate 1 that such margin of current income over 
 current expenses will aggregate by 1926 $1,749,824.11. 
 (Table XXX— Appendix). 
 
 In addition to the funds that may be raised by bonds, 
 
 1 For the assumptions on which this estimate is based, see pp. 79-80. 
 
82 THE GARY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 only $780,384.59 is required, as pointed out, to complete 
 the building program we have in mind. Hence, not 
 only this sum can be provided out of the possible margin 
 of income over current expenses, but there will remain a 
 surplus of $969,439.52, which is almost enough to liqui- 
 date the bonds now outstanding to the amount of 
 $507,500 and also the bonds aggregating $520,168.06 
 to be issued to provide by 1926 the required new build- 
 ings. In a word, on the bases of the foregoing assump- 
 tions, Gary can not only finance within the period in 
 question the proposed school system, but will at the 
 end of the period be practically free of debt for grounds, 
 buildings, and permanent equipment — this, moreover, 
 on the basis of a local school tax rate not appreciably 
 higher, when differences in methods of assessment are 
 taken into account and both operation expense and 
 capital outlay are considered, than the prevailing rate 
 in our larger cities. 
 
 Admittedly, material change in any one of a half dozen 
 factors — a more rapid increase in enrollment than is 
 provided for, the possible need of an additional plant 
 owing to the development of widely separated sections, 
 a less rapid and less uniform growth in taxable wealth, 
 higher current operation cost, local opposition to liberal 
 school taxes, and so on — may upset these calculations. 
 Nevertheless, when the future is projected on the basis 
 of known facts, it is clearly evident that Gary is not 
 launched upon a financially impossible educational en- 
 terprise. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 TABLE 
 
 A Expenditures and Revenues in Summary — 
 
 From August i, 1915, to July 31, 1916 
 B Balance Sheet as of July 31, 191 6 
 
 C Operation Statement from August 1, 1915, to 
 
 July 31, 1916 
 D Revenue Statement from August 1 , 1 91 5, to July 
 
 31, 1916 
 E Fund Statement from August 1, 191 5, to 
 
 July 31, 1916 
 F Inventory as of July 31, 191 6 
 
 G Statement of Outstanding Bonds as of July 31, 
 
 1916 
 H Expenditures by Organizations in Summary 
 
 from August 1, 1915, to July 31, 1916 
 
 SCHEDULE 
 
 H-i Expenditures: Administrative and General Ser- 
 vices 
 H-2 Expenditures: Day Schools 
 H-2-a Expenditures: Emerson Day School 
 H-2-b Expenditures: Froebel Day School 
 H-2-c Expenditures: Jefferson Day School 
 H-2-d Expenditures: Other Day Schools 
 
 8s 
 
86 CONTENTS 
 
 SCHEDULE 
 
 H-3 Expenditures: Saturday Schools 
 
 H-3-a Expenditures: Emerson Saturday School 
 
 H-3-b Expenditures: Froebel Saturday School 
 
 H-3-c Expenditures: Jefferson Saturday School 
 
 H-3-d Expenditures: Other Saturday Schools 
 
 H-4 Expenditures: Night Schools 
 
 H-4-a Expenditures: Emerson Night School 
 
 H-4-b Expenditures: Froebel Night School 
 
 H-4-C Expenditures: Jefferson Night School 
 
 H-4-d Expenditures: Other Night Schools 
 
 H-5 Expenditures: Summer Schools 
 
 H-5-a Expenditures: Emerson Summer School 
 
 H-5-b Expenditures: Froebel Summer School 
 
 H-5-c Expenditures: Jefferson Summer School 
 
 H-5-d Expenditures: Other Summer Schools 
 
 H-6 Expenditures: Sunday Schools 
 
 H-7 Capital Outlay and Debt Payment 
 
 Table XXX Estimated Margin of Income Free for 
 Permanent Improvements 
 
THE PUBLICATIONS OF THE 
 GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD 
 
 REPORTS: 
 
 THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD: AN ACCOUNT OF ITS ACTIV- 
 ITIES, I902- 1914. 254 PAGES. 
 
 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, 
 1914-1915. 82 PAGES. 
 
 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, 
 I9I5-I916. 86 PAGES. 
 
 REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION BOARD, 
 I916-I917. 87 PAGES. 
 
 STUDIES: 
 
 PUBLIC EDUCATION IN MARYLAND, BY ABRAHAM FLEXNER AND 
 FRANK P. BACHMAN. 2ND EDITION. 176 PAGES, WITH APPEN- 
 DIX. 
 THE JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL, BY THOMAS H. BRIGGS.* 
 COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY FINANCE, BY TREVOR ARNETT.* 
 
 OCCASIONAL PAPERS: 
 
 1. THE COUNTRY SCHOOL OF TO-MORROW, BY FREDERICK T. 
 
 GATES. 15 PAGES. 
 
 2. CHANGES NEEDED IN AMERICAN SECONDARY EDUCATION, 
 
 BY CHARLES W. ELIOT. 29 PAGES. 
 
 3. A MODERN SCHOOL, BY ABRAHAM FLEXNER. 23 PAGES. 
 
 4. THE FUNCTION AND NEEDS OF SCHOOLS OF EDUCATION IN 
 
 UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES, BY EDWIN A. ALDERMAN. 
 31 PAGES, WITH APPENDIX. 
 
 5. LATIN AND THE A. B. DEGREE, BY CHARLES W. ELIOT. 
 
 21 PAGES, WITH APPENDIX. 
 
 6. THE WORTH OF ANCIENT LITERATURE TO THE MODERN 
 
 WORLD, BY VISCOUNT BRYCE. 20 PAGES. 
 
 * In Preparation. 
 
 The REPORTS issued by the Board are official accounts of its ac- 
 tivities and expenditures. The STUDIES represent work in the field 
 of educational investigation and research which the Board has made 
 possible by appropriations defraying all or part of the expense involved. 
 The OCCASIONAL PAPERS are essays on matters of current edu- 
 cational discussion, presenting topics of immediate interest from vari- 
 ous points of view. In issuing the STUDIES and OCCASIONAL 
 PAPERS, the Board acts simply as publisher, assuming no responsibil- 
 ity for the opinions of the authors. 
 
 The publications of the Board may be obtained on request 
 
TABLE A 
 
 Expenditures and Revenues in Summary — From Augu; 
 Analysis by Objects of Expenditure, Funds, and Char 
 
 EXPENDITURES 
 
 Objects of Expenditure 
 
 Total. 
 
 Personal Services 
 
 Services Other than Personal > . . . 
 
 Supplies and Materials 
 
 Equipment 
 
 Land and Improvements to Land. 
 
 Buildings 
 
 Rent, Insurance, Taxes, Interest . . 
 
 Pensions 
 
 Payment of Debt 3 
 
 Revenues and Unfunded Expenditures., 
 
 Revenues. 
 
 $335,962.81 
 
 205,584.14 
 4,725.95 
 29,334.96 
 12,725.50 
 1,510.54 
 18,824.42 
 33,898.44 
 Note 2 
 29,358.86 
 
 335,962.81 
 
 274,375.06 
 
 Current Expense 
 
 Other than 
 Upkeep and 
 Depreciation 
 
 $239,645.05 
 
 205,584.14 
 
 4,725.95 
 
 29,334.96 
 
 239,645.05 
 
 184,878.75 
 
 Upkeep of 
 Property 
 
 $15,793.36 
 
 3,551.36 
 
 498.20 
 
 11,743.80 
 
 15,793.36 
 
 14,957.39 
 
 No 
 
 Funds Raised by Taxation and from Mis- 
 cellaneous Sources 
 
 Loan Funds (Bond Proceeds) 
 
 223,364.50 
 51,010.56 
 
 180,908.47 
 3,970.28 
 
 1,627.00 
 13,330.39 
 
 Unfunded Expenditures 61,587.75 
 
 54,766.30 
 
 835.97 
 
 * Services of a contractual nature, such as railroad and vehicular transportation, telegraph and telephone servi 
 1 No pension system or teachers' pension fund is maintained. 
 
 1 Includes deficiencies of previous school years. 
 
 * No property records are available upon which to determine the obsolescence of the school property. This 
 
Assets 
 
 Cash — In Banks 
 
 Cashier's Fund. 
 
 Delinquent Taxes Receivable 
 
 Estimated 
 
 Less Reserve for Estimated 
 Uncollectible 
 
 10,728.92 
 500.00 
 
 3,000.00 
 500.00 
 
 Land, Buildings, and Equipment 
 
 Land and Improvements to 
 
 Land 208,466.91 
 
 Buildings 698,733.33 
 
 Equipment 120,079.64 
 
 1,027,279.88 
 10,960.07 
 
 Less Farm Loss . 
 
 Stores (Estimated) 
 
 Work in Progress (Estimated) . . 
 Insurance (Unearned Premium) . 
 
 TABLE B 
 
 Balance Sheet 
 (as of July 31, igi6) 
 
 $ 11,228.92 
 
 2,500.00 
 
 1,016,319.81 
 
 5,000.00 
 
 500.00 
 
 1,952.58 
 
 Total .-. $1,037,501.31 
 
 Liabilities 
 
 Invoices and Payrolls Payable 
 
 Warrants Payable 
 
 Contracts Payable 1 \\ 
 
 Bonds Payable 
 
 Fund Reserves (19V6-17 Funds coUectedin 1915-16)' 
 Special School Tuition Fund ... . $35,588.50 
 Bond^ Principal and Interest 
 
 4,642.21 
 
 Fund. 
 
 Reserves for Property Depreciation. 
 
 Land and Buildings 00,000 00 
 
 Equipment 0.00f) on 
 
 00,000.00 
 
 Surplus 
 
 Assets over Liabilities. 
 
 Total. 
 
 10,699.31 
 
 21,386.65 
 
 49,713.76 
 
 507,500.00 
 
 40,230.71 
 
 00,000.00 
 407,970.88 
 
 $1,037,501.31 
 
 1 Jefferson School building and grounds are being taken over bv the Schonl r,t-u f-™ n,. n t j ^ 
 rental of $9,000.00, which by io» will give the School City a title to the property ^ * n a ° d Com P an y ° n a «ntal basis, i. e., the School City 
 
 paying an annual 
 
TABLE C 
 
 Operation Statement 
 For August i, 1915, to July 31, 1916 
 
 Expenditures 
 
 Current Expenses $255,438.41 
 
 Other than Upkeep and Depre- 
 ciation . . $239,645.05 
 
 Upkeep of Property 15,793.36 
 
 Depreciation of Property 00,000.00 
 
 Fixed Charges 
 
 Capital Outlays and Debt Payments . 
 
 Capital Outlays 
 
 Debt Payments 
 
 17,267.10 
 29,358.86 
 
 33,898.44 
 46,625.96 
 
 Total $335,962.81 
 
 Revenues 
 
 Revenues Applicable to School Year 
 
 IOI 5-* 6 •■■••■ $437,278.30 
 
 Revenues from State $ 62,481 04 
 
 Local Taxes 317,594.52 
 
 Miscellaneous Revenues 6,192.18 
 
 Bond Issues (proceeds) 51,010.56 
 
 Less Amount Used in School Year 
 1914-15 
 
 Balance Available for School Year 
 1915-16 
 
 Deficit ...!!!!!!! 
 
 Borrowed from 1916-17 Funds. . 
 
 1915-16 Warrants Unpaid 
 
 Unpaid Invoices 
 
 29,501.79 
 21,386.65 
 10,699.31 
 
 162,903.24 
 
 274,375.06 
 61,587.75 
 
 Total $335,962.81 
 
-J* 
 
 i«oS 
 
 <3& 
 
 lU ^S 
 
 c&\ 
 
 ■!&* 
 
 a*** 
 
 ,\-\ 
 
 00^ 
 
Common 
 Reveni 
 Con 
 Con 
 Liqv 
 Dog 
 
 Local ' 
 Tax 
 
 Miscel 
 Pup 
 Dep 
 
 Special Z 
 Local 
 Tax 
 Miscel 
 To? 
 Sale 
 Sho 
 Mis 
 
 Compuls 
 
 Local 
 
 Taj 
 
 Vocation 
 
 Local 
 
 Taj 
 
 Buildini 
 
 Local 
 
 Ta; 
 
 Bond Pi 
 
 Local 
 
 Bal 
 
TABLE D 
 
 Revenue Statement 
 Revenues Applicable to School Year 1915-16, Collected in 1914-15 and 1915-16 
 
 Common School Tuition Fund $162,997.43 
 
 Revenues from State $ 62,481.04 
 
 Common School Revenue $ 30,066.07 
 
 Congressional Fund Interest 142.90 
 
 Liquor License Revenues 31,691.65 
 
 Dog Fund (Schools' proportion of Dog License Revenues) 681.42 
 
 Local Tax 89,952.07 
 
 Tax Levy (.35) plus Delinquent Taxes 89,952.07 
 
 Miscellaneous Revenues 564.32 
 
 Pupils' Tuition Fees (Transfers from Other School Districts). . . 512.35 
 
 Depository Interest 51.97 
 
 Special School Fund 133,681.58 
 
 Local Tax 128,053.72 
 
 Tax Levy (.50) plus Delinquent Taxes 128,053.72 
 
 Miscellaneous Revenues 5,627.86 
 
 Township Refund of Expenditures for Indigent Children 384.70 
 
 Sales of School Farm Equipment 4,603.21 
 
 Shop Sales 584.75 
 
 Miscellaneous Sales of Supplies 55.20 
 
 Compulsory Education Fund 12,805.37 
 
 Local Tax 12,805.37 
 
 Tax Levy (.05) plus Delinquent Taxes 12,805.37 
 
 Vocational Instruction Fund 25,610.75 
 
 Local Tax oc K 25,610.75 
 
 Tax Levy (.10) plus Delinquent Taxes 25,610.75 
 
 Building Fund 38,416.11 
 
 Local Tax 38,416.11 
 
 Tax Levy (.15) plus Delinquent Taxes 38,416.11 
 
 Bond Principal and Interest Fund „ „„ „ 22,766.50 
 
 Local Tax , nau ^ 22,756.50 
 
 Balance available from previous school year 1,787.95 
 
 Tax Levy (.10) plus Delinquent Taxes $25,610.76 
 
 Less amount in excess of requirements and therefore not 
 available until ensuing school year 4,642.21 20,968.55 
 
 Loan Funds «««« 51 > 010 - 66 
 
 Bond Issues M «« « 51,010.56 
 
 Bond Proceeds 51,010.56 
 
 Summary ToUl W ., 1M 437,278.30 
 
 Revenues from State „?S'?Sl?„ 
 
 Local Taxes ($1.25) 31 l$X 
 
 Hr^:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;: «SKS 437,278.80 
 
IQIJ 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 i9i( 
 O 
 
 Reve 
 Defi( 
 
TABLE E 
 
 FUND STATEMENT 
 
 August i, 1915, to July 31, 1916 
 
 Common School Tuition Fund 
 
 (as of July 31, 1916) 
 
 Receipts 
 
 1915-16 Revenues 
 Collections in 1914-15 . 
 Collections in 1915-16. 
 
 1916-17 Revenues 
 Collections in 1915-16. 
 
 $ 31,499.00 
 
 Warrants 1914-15. 
 Warrants 1915-16 
 
 Surplus 
 
 Disbursements 
 
 
 121,498.43 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 $152,997.43 
 
 
 35,588.50 
 
 
 
 
 $188,585.93 
 
 $188,585.93 
 
 Special School Fund* 
 (as of July 31, 1916) 
 
 Receipts 
 
 Disbursements 
 
 Revenues 19^-16 $210,513.81 
 
 Deficit (unpaid 1915-16 Warrants). . . . 21,386.65 
 
 Warrants 1914-15. 
 Warrants 1915-16. 
 
 $231,900.46 
 
 $135,781.94 
 96,118.52 
 
 $231,900.46 
 
 'Includes Compulsory Education Fund, Vocational Instruction Fund, and Building Fund. 
 
 Bond Principal and Interest Fund 
 (as of July 31, 1916) 
 Receipts Disbursements 
 
 Surplus from 1914-15 $ 1,787.95 
 
 Revenues 1915-16 
 
 Available 1915-16 $20,968.55 
 
 Available 1916-17 4,642.21* 25,610.76 
 
 Warrants r9rs-i6. 
 Surplus 
 
 Cash 
 
 $27,398.71 
 
 $22,756.50 
 4,642.21 
 
 $27,398.71 
 
 'Amount in excess of 1015-16 Bond principal and interest requirements. 
 
 Loan Funds 
 (as of July 31, 1916) 
 Receipts 
 
 Disbursements 
 
 Revenues 
 Bond Proceeds $51,010.56 
 
 Warrants 1915-16 $51,010.56 
 

 Total 
 
 Administration Pla 
 Emerson School. . . 
 Froebel School. . . . 
 Jefferson School. . . 
 Beveridge School. . 
 Tolleston School . . 
 Glen Park School . 
 24th Ave. School . . 
 West Gary School. 
 
 Clarke School 
 
 Ambridge School. . 
 School Farm 
 
 ■Genera] offices, barn 
 
Inventory of Land, 
 
 {Estimated — < 
 
 PLANT 
 
 TO 
 
 Total 
 
 $1 016 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 433 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 5 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 'General offices, bams, and storehouses. 
 
Sta: 
 
 Issuec 
 Aug. 1, 1! 
 Nov. 1, 1! 
 Apr. 24, 1 
 Oct. 15, 1 
 Feb. 15, 1 
 Oct 2, 19: 
 Feb. 17, 1 
 Nov. 1, IS 
 Nov. 2, 1! 
 Dec. 1, 19 
 
 Total Issue 
 Inherited 
 Townsb 
 
TABLE H— THE SYSTEM AS A WHOLE 1 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN SUMMARY FROM AUGUST I, 1915, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY ORGANIZATION DIVISIONS 
 
 AND CHARACTER OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 ORGANIZATION DIVISIONS 
 
 Total 
 
 Administrative and General 
 
 Day School 
 
 Saturday School 
 
 Night School 
 
 Summer School 
 
 Sunday School 
 
 Capital Outlays and Debt Payments. 
 
 $335,962.81 
 
 55,576.43 
 182,004.39 
 12,427.45 
 22,641.76 
 13,544.64 
 3,142.18 
 46,625.96 
 
 CHARACTER OP EXPENDITURES 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER THAN 
 UPKEEP AND 
 DEPRECIATION 
 
 $239,645.05 
 
 21,047.72 
 166,841.30 
 12,427.45 
 22,641.76 
 13,544.64 
 3,142.18 
 
 $15,793.36 
 
 630.27 
 15,163.09* 
 
 $255,438.41 
 
 21,677.99 
 182,004.39 
 12,427.45 
 22,641.76 
 13,544.64 
 3,142.18 
 
 CAPITAL OUTLAYS AND DEBT PAYMENTS 
 
 $33,898.44 
 
 33,898.44 
 
 CAPITAL OUTLAYS 
 
 $17,267.10 
 
 17,267.10 
 
 DEBT PAYMENTS 
 
 $29,358.86 
 
 29,358.86 
 
 'See details supporting this table in schedules H-i, 3,3.4, S. 6, and 7 and their subdivisions. 
 
 The item of upkeep is distributable to all school organizations but is here distributed to day school only. 
 
SCHEDULE H-l— ADMINISTRATIVE AND GENERAL SERVICES 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQI S , TO JULY 3 I, l 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 
 — 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPER! 
 
 
 v '"'"""' a 
 
 
 ■Y 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 RENT 
 
 INSURANCE 
 
 INTEREST 
 
 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 POSTAGE 
 
 EXPRESS, FREIGHT 
 AND DRAYAGE 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 EQULPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE OF 
 
 BUILDINGS 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 OFFICIALS AND 
 EXECUTIVES 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 $55,576.43 
 
 $14,541.85 
 
 $2,803.42 
 
 $215.00 
 
 $85.05 
 
 $948.99 
 
 $2,453.41 
 
 $21,047.72 
 
 $94.33 
 
 $535.94 
 
 $630.27 
 
 
 
 
 
 $21,677.99 
 
 $30.00 
 
 $619.69 
 
 (33,248.85 
 
 $33,898.44 
 
 General Administration 
 
 12,402.51 
 
 8,081.85 
 
 1,636.44 
 
 215.00 
 
 85.05 
 
 719.85 
 
 1.420.98(a) 
 
 12,159.17 
 
 
 243.34 
 
 243.34 
 
 
 
 12,402.51 
 
 
 
 
 
 Staff Service 
 
 1,994.16 
 7,640.14 
 
 2,425.95 
 342.26 
 
 443.75 
 6,000.00 
 
 1,320.00 
 318.10 
 
 485.77 
 485.77 
 
 664.90 
 
 165.00 
 50.00 
 
 85.05 
 
 569.19 
 150.66 
 
 l,064.64(a) 
 322.63 
 
 9.55 
 24.16 
 
 1,994.16 
 7,627.64 
 
 2,195.11 
 342.26 
 
 
 12.50 
 230.84 
 
 12.50 
 230.84 
 
 
 
 
 1,994.16 
 7,640.14 
 
 2,425.96 
 342.26 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 37,147.61 
 
 1,800.00 
 
 810.00 
 
 
 
 84.44 
 
 207.47 
 
 2,901.91 
 
 94.33 
 
 252.93 
 
 347.26 
 
 
 
 _ 
 
 3,249.17 
 91.42 
 
 1,821.75 
 681.12 
 654.88 
 
 30.00 
 
 619.69 
 
 33,248.86 
 
 33,898.44 
 
 Custody and Disbursement of Funds (Treasurer) .... 
 
 91.42 
 33,898.44 
 
 1,821.75 
 681.12 
 654.88 
 
 1,800.00 
 
 521.53 
 
 288.47 
 
 
 
 16.94 
 67.50* 
 
 91.42 
 
 21.75 
 50.61 
 43.69* 
 
 91.42 
 
 1,821.75 
 589.08 
 399.66 
 
 92.04 
 2.29 
 
 252.93* 
 
 92.04 
 
 255.22 
 
 
 
 80.00 
 
 619.59(b) 
 
 33.248.85(c) 
 
 33,898.44 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service (Supervision) .... 
 Provision and Storage of Supplies and Materials .... 
 
 Instructional Service: 
 Instruction of Pupils in Other Institutions 
 
 267.03 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 267.03 
 
 267.03 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 267.03 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5,759.28 
 
 4,660.00 
 
 356.98 
 
 
 
 144.70 
 
 557.93 
 
 5,719.61 
 
 
 39.67 
 
 39.67 
 
 
 
 
 5,759.28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 730.84 
 
 5,009.74 
 
 18.70 
 
 230.00 
 4,430.00 
 
 356.98 
 
 
 
 15.15 
 
 110.85 
 
 18.70 
 
 485.69 
 
 72.24 
 
 730.84 
 
 4,970.07 
 
 18.70 
 
 
 39.67 
 
 39.67 
 
 
 
 
 730.84 
 
 5,009.74 
 
 18.70 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Provision of Clothing and School Supplies to Indi- 
 gent Pupils 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •Balances shown represent net cost after deduction of credits. 
 
 (a) Includes item of $790.90, part of the cost of the Gary school exhibit at Panama 
 Exposition, San Francisco. 
 
 (b) Insurance 
 
 Employees' Compensation $3(5.83 
 
 Security Insurance J7-50 
 
 Other Insurance HJaJb $biy.5y 
 
 'c) Interest 
 
 On Unpaid Warrants $ 8,344.43 
 
 On Contracts 2,147.92 
 
 On Bonds 22.7S6.50 $33,248.85 
 
SCHEDULE H-2— DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, I916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . 
 
 Property Service . 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 Care of grounds 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service . 
 
 Laundry Service 
 
 Janitorial Service. . ._ 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment. 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Instruction Supervision: 
 
 Supervision-General Instruction 
 
 Supervision-Industrial Instruction .... 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Physics 
 
 Chemistry 
 
 Botany 
 
 Zoology 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Cabinet Shop 
 
 Pattern Shop 
 
 Foundry 
 
 Forge 
 
 Machine Shop 
 
 Plumbing Shop 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop . , . - 
 
 Paint Shop - 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Shoe Shop 
 
 Pottery 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 $182,004.39 
 
 6,906.14 
 
 39,633.45 
 
 2,396.74 
 16,866.06 
 
 10,543.73 
 1,658.16 
 8,168.76 
 
 135,464.80 
 
 5,503.24 
 1,959.18 
 
 79,169.07 
 2,555.27 
 
 3,194.57 
 2,505.66 
 3,463.43 
 3,041.71 
 3,091.71 
 
 2,205.81 
 Z.669.26 
 
 3,828.36* 
 2,299.53 
 226.71* 
 259.88* 
 933.34* 
 616.94* 
 620.66* 
 215.84* 
 250.60* 
 161.50* 
 974.37* 
 551.67 
 280.49 
 14,886.00 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHEB THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 SALARIES AND 1 
 
 SUPERVISORS, 
 
 PRINCIPALS, AND 
 
 TEACHERS 
 
 $133,257.20 
 
 6,030.00 
 
 127,227.20 
 
 5,175.00 
 1,400.00 
 
 78.001.07 
 2,286.25 
 
 3,137.25 
 2,388.50 
 3,200.00 
 2,917.28 
 2,859.17 
 
 2,153.75 
 2,587.00 
 
 3,517.91* 
 
 2,200.00 
 
 138.08* 
 
 105.91* 
 
 626.97* 
 
 380.92* 
 
 430.13* 
 
 113.02* 
 
 117.26* 
 
 63.40* 
 
 780.58* 
 
 551.67 
 
 270.83 
 
 11,825.25 
 
 $15,968.16 
 
 1,631.28 
 3,935.11 
 
 8,081.80 
 
 1,773.03 
 
 152.97 
 295.18 
 
 $1,206.72 
 
 1,324.88 
 
 964.79 
 
 167.04 
 248.00 
 
 353.38 
 
 .75 
 
 19.96 
 39.07 
 25.88 
 20.78 
 31.30 
 
 .12 
 .06 
 
 10.99 
 4.65 
 3.00 
 2.12 
 
 13.75 
 2.00 
 3.22 
 1.00 
 1.36 
 
 1.92 
 
 14.44 
 
 JShops charged as "Instruction." balances shown representing net cost «%*^J ^JS^^ 
 lAbbreviations of F, G and E, end W in this column represent fuel, gas and electnaty, and water, respecuv y 
 
 PUPILS* FUEL, WATER, GAS OTHER OPERATING 
 
 SUPPLIES AND ELECTRICrrYt SUPPLTE: 
 
 $1,590.54 
 
 1,590.54 
 
 405.63 
 13.27 
 
 24.80 
 
 24.89 
 
 204.60 
 
 2.53 
 
 39.85 
 
 43.39 
 4.16 
 
 176.97* 
 29.88 
 48.33* 
 22.87* 
 9.32* 
 96.26* 
 
 100.38* 
 90.51* 
 58.08* 
 80.31* 
 95.84* 
 
 9.66 
 9.01 
 
 $9,830.28 
 
 9,830.28 
 
 f 7,735.84 
 g+e 522.69 
 
 $3,772.10 
 
 2,241.91 
 
 23.05 
 437.52 
 
 1,781.34 
 
 $1,216.30 
 
 26.04 
 65.00 
 
 2.81 
 
 78.10 
 
 76.76 
 
 38.44 
 
 3.31 
 
 7.81 
 
 7.92 
 
 41.41 
 
 1,182.59 
 
 702.89 
 
 2.00 
 70.53 
 
 543.95 
 86.41 
 
 434.32 
 
 243.39 
 
 9.58 
 
 5.62 
 61.36 
 
 18.80 
 29.68 
 
 $166,841.30 
 
 6,897.96 
 
 57.66 
 
 1,656.33 
 12,701.69 
 * 
 10,407.09 
 
 1,658.16 
 
 133,520.07 
 
 5,503.24 
 1,943.18 
 
 79,003.47 
 2,300.27 
 
 3,191.59 
 2,452.46 
 3,430.48 
 2,946.21 
 2,991.68 
 
 2,197.26 
 2,610.02 
 
 3,761.59* 
 2,299.53 
 189.41* 
 133.71* 
 728.14* 
 555.94* 
 572.17* 
 207.84* 
 184.51* 
 151.63* 
 919.75* 
 551.67* 
 280.49 
 14,413.83 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 $12,147.67 
 
 12,053.05 
 
 498.20 
 4,021.35 
 
 7,533.50 
 
 94.62 
 
 $3,015.42 
 
 94.62 
 
 8.18 
 
 1,157.13 
 
 242.21 
 143.02 
 
 136.64 
 635.26 
 
 1,850.11 
 
 16.00 
 
 165.60 
 255.00 
 
 $15,163.09 
 
 8.18 
 
 13,210.18 
 
 740.41 
 "4,164.37 
 
 136.64 
 8,168.76 
 
 1,944.73 
 
 16.00 
 
 165.60 
 255.00 
 
 472.17 
 
 2.98 
 
 2.98 
 
 53.20 
 
 53.20 
 
 32.95 
 
 32.95 
 
 95.50 
 
 95.50 
 
 100.03 
 
 100.03 
 
 8.55 
 
 8.55 
 
 59.24 
 
 59.24 
 
 66.77 
 
 66.77 
 
 37.30 
 
 37.30 
 
 31.55 
 
 126.17 
 
 205.20 
 
 205.20 
 
 61.00 
 
 61.00 
 
 48.49 
 
 48.49 
 
 8.00 
 
 8-.00 
 
 66.09 
 
 66.09 
 
 9.87 
 
 9.87 
 
 54.62 
 
 54.62 
 
 (M PltKCIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
SCHEDULE H-2-a— EMERSON DAY SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total. 
 
 General Administration: 
 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 
 
 Property Service . 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 Care of Grounds 
 
 Heat, Light and Power Service. 
 
 Laundry Service 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Maintenance of Land, Buildings and Equipment . 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Physics 
 
 Chemistry 
 
 Botany 
 
 Zoology 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Pattern Shop 
 
 Foundry 
 
 Forge 
 
 Machine Shop 
 
 Plumbing Shop 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 , $50,150.28 
 
 12,502.01 
 
 953.27 
 6,095.45 
 
 3,191.63 
 
 469.96 
 
 1,791.70 
 
 35,425.47 
 
 15,694.45 
 1,378.38 
 
 334.25 
 1,344.49 
 2,157.50 
 1,541.91 
 2,194.04 
 
 1,270.04 
 1,119.99 
 
 1,222.19 
 
 259.88* 
 
 933.34* 
 
 616.94* 
 
 620.66* 
 
 23.14* 
 
 18.14* 
 
 499.16* 
 
 4,196.97 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 r UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 $33,531.25 
 
 1,800.00 
 
 31,731.25 
 
 15,217.25 
 1,186.25 
 
 318.75 
 1,294.00 
 2,000.00 
 1,451.44 
 1,980.92 
 
 1,253.75 
 1,100.00 
 
 1,200.00 
 
 105.91 
 
 626.97* 
 
 380.92= 
 
 430.13* 
 
 23.14* 
 
 18.14* 
 
 452.93* 
 
 2,690.75 
 
 $5,563.68 
 
 214.15 
 
 4,723.33 
 
 831.59 
 
 1,587.34 
 
 • 
 
 2,304.40 
 
 $496.70 
 
 170.58 
 
 326.12 
 
 205.19 
 .75 
 
 12.46 
 31.59 
 12.45 
 13.30 
 23.03 
 
 .12 
 .0 s 
 
 1.1 
 
 %1 
 
 626.20 
 
 35 
 
 1.92 
 2.51 
 
 $590.71 
 
 $3,086.32 
 
 590.71 
 
 110.79 
 11.38 
 
 3.04 
 
 10.95 
 
 139.66 
 
 1.22 
 37.30 
 
 16.17 
 
 26 54 
 2187 
 
 ■ .* 
 J J? 
 MM 
 
 9.10* 
 1.73 
 
 $1,390.90 
 
 3,086.32 
 
 f 2,519.83 
 g+e 149.49 
 
 w 417.00 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 526.19 
 
 10.21 
 188.44 
 
 327.54 
 
 864.71 
 
 2.81 
 78.10 
 76.76 
 38.44 
 
 8.61 
 859.99 
 
 $812.55 
 
 38.07 
 
 598.66 
 
 $45,472.11 
 
 2.00 
 9.42 
 
 534.28 
 52.96 
 
 175.82 
 
 89.82 
 
 61.36 
 18.80 
 
 5.84 
 
 2,222.80 
 8,934.50 
 
 843.80 
 4,454.52 
 
 3,166.22 
 469.96 
 
 REP ALUS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 $3,361.90 
 
 3,267.28 
 
 34,314.81 
 
 15,623.05 
 1,198.38 
 
 334.25 
 1,336.54 
 2,152.11 
 1,465.96 
 2,102.61 
 
 1,270.04 
 1,118.86 
 
 1,222.19 
 133.71* 
 728.14* 
 555.94* 
 572.17* 
 23.14* 
 18.14* 
 472.56* 
 3,987.02 
 
 30.40 
 1,636.93 
 
 1,599.95 
 
 $1,316.27 
 
 94.62 
 
 94.62 
 
 300.23 
 
 79.07 
 4.00 
 
 25.41 
 191.75 
 
 1,016.04 
 
 71.40 
 180.00 
 
 7.95 
 5.39 
 75.95 
 91.43 
 
 1.13 
 
 31.55 
 
 205.20 
 
 61.00 
 
 48.49 
 
 26.60 
 209.95 
 
 $4,678.17 
 
 3,567.51 
 
 109.47 
 1,640.93 
 
 25.41 
 1,791.70 
 
 1,110.06 
 
 l»ll'HH'!.U ION in' I'KOl', It TV 
 
 71.40 
 180.00 
 
 7.95 
 5.39 
 75.95 
 91.43 
 
 1.13 
 
 126.17 
 
 205.20 
 
 61.00 
 
 48.49 
 
 26.60 
 209.95 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBBOLBSCJNCl 
 
SCHEDULE H-2-b— FROEBEL DAY SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 31, I916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total. 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) . 
 
 Property Service. 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 Care of Grounds 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service . 
 
 Laundry Service 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service ; 
 
 Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment. 
 
 Instructional Sendee. 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction. 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Physics 
 
 Chemistry 
 
 Botany 
 
 Zoology 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Cabinet Shop 
 
 Plumbing Shop 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop 
 
 Paint Shop 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Pottery 
 
 Shoe Shop 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 $68,104.41 
 
 2,155.99 
 
 15,442.72 
 
 1,079.06 
 6,414.20 
 * 
 4,386.37 
 772.11 
 2,790.98 
 
 50,505.70 
 
 30,496.29 
 1,176.89 
 
 1,349.31 
 1,161.17 
 1,305.93 
 1,499.80 
 897.67 
 
 624.39 
 791.23 
 
 1.558.81* 
 1,077.34 
 226.71* 
 192.70* 
 232.46* 
 1S1.50* 
 475.21* 
 280.49 
 551.67 
 6,446.13 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER^THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 $49,439.11 
 
 47,639.11 
 
 30,205.20 
 1,100.00 
 
 1,331.25 
 1,094.50 
 1,200.00 
 1,465.84 
 878.25 
 
 600.00 
 
 746.25 
 
 1,505.44 
 
 1,000.00 
 
 138.08 
 
 89.88 
 
 99.12 
 
 63.40 
 
 327.65 
 
 270.83 
 
 551.67 
 
 4,971.75 
 
 $6,317.89 
 
 267.95 
 
 5,351.26 
 
 791.19 
 1,221.18 
 
 3,338.89 
 
 $178.87 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 698.68 
 
 49.26 
 
 129.61 
 
 68.91 
 
 7.50 
 7.48 
 13.43 
 
 7.48 
 8.27 
 
 698.68 
 
 $643.80 
 
 $3,808.12 
 
 643.80 
 
 96.87 
 1.89 
 
 9.86 
 
 13.94 
 
 64.94 
 
 1.31 
 
 2.55 
 
 24.39 
 
 8.18 
 
 
 42.08 
 
 3.00 
 
 9.34 
 
 3.00 
 
 48.33" 
 
 1.00 
 
 90.51" 
 
 1.36 
 
 58.08" 
 
 
 80.31" 
 
 
 86.74 
 
 
 9.66 
 
 3.00 
 
 3,808.12 
 
 I f 2,847.72 
 ;g+e 190.85 
 
 $1,757.25 
 
 1,117.81 
 
 5.84 
 174.42 
 
 937.55 
 
 $223.60 
 
 639.44 
 
 G5.00 
 
 3.31 
 7.81 
 7.92 
 32.80 
 
 522.60 
 
 38.78 
 
 45.38 
 
 42.82 
 
 139.44 
 
 $62,368.64 
 
 2,155.99 
 
 10,322.57 
 
 797.03 
 4,476.99 
 
 4,276.44 
 772.11 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 49,890.08 
 
 90.38 
 
 30,461.36 
 
 
 1,101.89 
 
 .70 
 
 1,349.31 
 
 
 1,115.92 
 
 
 1,278.37 
 
 5.62 
 
 1,480.25 
 
 
 889.07 
 
 
 624.39 
 
 
 746.25 
 
 
 1,547.52 
 
 
 1,077.34 
 
 
 189.41 
 
 
 184.70 
 
 
 166.37 
 
 
 151.63 
 
 
 447.19 
 
 
 280.49 
 
 
 551.67 
 
 42.74 
 
 6,246.95 
 
 $4,594.13 
 
 4,594.13 
 
 177.43 
 1,849.73 
 
 2,566.97 
 
 $1,141.64 
 
 526.02 
 
 104.60 
 
 87.48 
 
 109.93 
 224.01 
 
 $5,735.77 
 
 5,120.15 
 
 DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUTLDLNGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 282.03 
 1,937.21 
 
 109.93 
 2,790.98 
 
 615.62 
 
 615.62 
 
 34.93 
 75.00 
 
 45.25 
 
 27.56 
 
 19.55 
 
 8.60 
 
 44.98 
 11.29 
 
 37.30 
 8.00 
 
 66.09 
 9.87 
 
 28.02 
 
 199.18 
 
 34.93 
 75.00 
 
 45.25 
 
 27.56 
 
 19.55 
 
 8.60 
 
 44.98 
 11.29 
 
 37.30 
 8.00 
 
 66.09 
 9.87 
 
 28.02 
 
 199.18 
 
SCHEDULE H-2-c— JEFFERSON DAY SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 31, I916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 . SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CURRENT 
 
 EXPENSES 
 
 
 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 
 SALARD2S AND WAGES 
 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPATRS TO 
 
 B GILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP BUILDINGS 
 
 ( Including Grounds; 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF EQUTPUENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLHCS 
 
 PUPILS' 
 
 FUEL, WATER. GAS OTHER OPERATING 
 AND ELECTRICITyt SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $19,851.04 
 1,254.64 
 
 $16,395.52 
 
 $695.83 
 
 $68.41 
 
 $130.74 
 
 $934.15 
 
 $290.13 
 
 $31.86 
 
 $18,546.64 ' 
 1,254.64 
 
 $1,104.01 
 
 $200.39 
 
 $1,304.40 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 
 
 1,170.00 
 
 64.84 
 
 17.56 
 
 
 
 
 2.24 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 3,068.43 
 
 35.55 
 
 1,310.81 
 
 578.97 
 203.16 
 939.94 
 
 
 630.99 
 
 
 934.15 
 
 264.09 
 
 14.13 
 
 1,843.36 
 
 1,104.01 
 
 121.06 
 
 1,225.07 
 
 
 
 
 Operation Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 
 7.00 
 232.45 
 391.54 
 
 
 
 { i 683.59 
 (g+e 55.03 
 
 w 195.53 
 
 2.00 
 74.66 
 187.43 
 
 6.50 
 
 7.63 
 
 9.00 
 
 1,052.23 
 
 578.97 
 203.16 
 
 20.44 
 247.84 
 
 835.73 
 
 6.11 
 10.74 
 
 104.21 
 
 26.55 
 258.58 
 
 939.94 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment 
 
 
 
 15,527.97 
 
 15,225.52 
 
 
 50.85 
 
 130.74 
 
 
 26.04 
 
 15.49 
 
 15,448.64 
 
 11,433.03 
 
 776.61 
 
 2.83 
 440.75 
 
 1,386.44* 
 1,408.98 
 
 
 79.33 
 
 79.33 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 11,454.77 
 
 776.61 
 
 2.83 
 452.98 
 
 1,403.92 
 1,436.86 
 
 11,334.87 
 770.25 
 
 440.75 
 
 1,283.15* 
 1.396.50 
 
 
 37.74 
 
 10.99* 
 2.12 
 
 51.91 
 5.46 
 2.83 
 
 66.26* 
 4.28 
 
 
 26.04 
 
 8.51 
 .90 
 
 6.08 
 
 
 21.74 
 
 12.23 
 
 17.48 
 27.88 
 
 21.74 
 
 12.23 
 
 17.48 
 27.88 
 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 ===== 
 
 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-2-d— OTHER DAY SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL-FROM AUGUST I, I 9 I S , TO JULY 3 I, I 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total. 
 
 Property Service . 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 Care of Grounds 
 
 Heat, Light and Power Service. 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Maintenance of Land, Buildings, and Equipment 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction. 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . 
 
 536,436.24 
 
 1,272.71 
 
 8,620.29 
 
 328.86 
 
 3,045.60 
 
 2,386.76 
 
 212.93 
 
 2,846.14 
 
 26,543.24 
 
 21,523.56 
 
 734.40 
 
 308.55 
 305.06 
 
 865.63* 
 2,806.04 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 $27,316.32 
 
 1,260.00 
 
 26,056.32 
 
 21,243.75 
 
 717.00 
 
 300.00 
 300.00 
 
 729.32* 
 2,766.25 
 
 $2,942.61 
 
 2,942.61 
 
 1.50 
 
 894.14 
 
 2,046.97 
 
 $47.70 $225.29 
 
 $2,001.69 
 
 4.53 
 
 43.17 
 
 41.54 
 
 1.63 
 
 2,001.69 
 
 225.29 
 
 146.06 
 
 6.44 
 
 4.16 
 68.63* 
 
 f 1,684.70 
 g+e 127.32 
 
 $333.82 
 
 333.82 
 
 5.00 
 328.82 
 
 $140.06 
 
 $33,007.49 
 
 9.67 
 23.26 
 
 95.34 
 
 54.68 
 7.98 
 
 29.68 
 3.00 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AN1 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 $3,087.63 
 
 1,264.53 
 
 5,322.84 
 
 6.50 
 
 2,717.95 
 
 2,385.46 
 212.93 
 
 26,420.12 
 
 21,486.03 
 
 731.42 
 
 300.00 
 304.16 
 
 827.63 
 2,770.88 
 
 3,087.63 
 
 269.93 
 286.85 
 
 2,530.85 
 
 $341.12 
 
 52.43 
 
 40.80 
 
 1.30 
 
 115.29 
 
 LM l lO.CIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUn-DINGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 $3,428.75 
 
 8.18 
 
 3,297.45 
 
 322.36 
 
 327.65 
 
 1.30 
 
 2,646.14 
 
 123.12 
 
 2.98 
 
 3.55 
 .90 
 
 38.00 
 35.16 
 
 37.53 
 2.98 
 
 3.55 
 .90 
 
 38.00 
 35.16 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction." balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 ^Abbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-3— SATURDAY SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, 1916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total . 
 
 General Administration 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . 
 
 Property Service. 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service . . . 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Instruction Supervision: 
 
 Supervision-General Instruction 
 
 Supervision-Industrial Instruction 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Physics 
 
 Chemistry 
 
 Botany 
 
 Zoology 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Cabinet Shop 
 
 Pattern Shop 
 
 Foundry 
 
 Forge 
 
 Machine Shop 
 
 Plumbing Shop 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop 
 
 Paint Shop 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Shoe Shop 
 
 Pottery 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 $12,427.45 
 
 791.16 
 
 4,342.08 
 
 2,458.78 
 
 1,522.46 
 360.84 
 
 7,294.21 
 
 553.63 
 289.13 
 
 i ,400.84 
 159.33 
 
 154.18 
 
 83.51 
 
 107.82 
 
 242.23 
 
 30.77 
 
 67.90 
 38.34 
 
 517.63* 
 201.31 
 11.69* 
 26.68* 
 145.20* 
 111.17* 
 114.38* 
 34.53* 
 33.01* 
 18.97* 
 219.57* 
 110.33 
 54.17 
 L567.89 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 AND WAGES 
 
 SUPERVISORS 
 
 PRINCIPALS AND 
 
 TEACHERS 
 
 $6,987.08 
 
 670.00 
 
 6,317.08 
 
 509.25 
 200.00 
 
 2,188.90 
 156.75 
 
 140.65 
 79.75 
 94.00 
 
 231.00 
 29.00 
 
 64.67 
 33.75 
 
 470.41* 
 
 183.00 
 
 2.04* 
 
 21.17* 
 
 125.26* 
 
 76.18* 
 
 86.02* 
 
 17.98* 
 
 19.82* 
 
 1.34* 
 
 171.94* 
 
 110.33 
 
 54.17 
 
 1,249.70 
 
 $1,890.79 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 t Abbreviations of F. G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 60.66 
 
 1/714.S 
 
 623.25 
 1,091.55 
 
 115.33 
 
 16.98 
 49.20 
 
 49.15 
 
 $184.60 
 
 31.39 
 
 153.21 
 
 25.76 
 39.93 
 
 62.61 
 .15 
 
 3.53 
 1.32 
 2.37 
 5.89 
 1.32 
 
 3.15 
 
 $308.42 
 
 308.42 
 
 85.13 
 2.43 
 
 8.60 
 2.44 
 11.45 
 4.21 
 .45 
 
 3.23 
 
 1.95 
 
 34.46* 
 
 2.20 
 
 16.11 
 
 
 9.65* 
 
 .38 
 
 4.57* 
 
 2.45 
 
 1.87* 
 
 .20 
 
 19.24* 
 
 
 20.08* 
 
 
 15.96* 
 
 
 11.63* 
 
 
 16.05* 
 
 
 39.09 
 
 $2,069.71 
 
 $763.27 
 
 2,089.71 
 
 S f 1,615.71 
 I g+e 107.29 
 
 w 346.71 
 
 452.36 
 
 97.46 
 354.90 
 
 310.91 
 
 5.21 
 
 .56 
 
 15.62 
 
 15.55 
 
 8.28 
 
 .59 
 
 1.56 
 
 1.58 
 
 8.54 
 
 253.42 
 
 $223 58 
 
 105.21 
 
 15.07 
 
 76.01 
 14.13 
 
 89.26 
 
 1.64 
 
 64.20 
 
 1.40 
 
 1.18 
 
 3.76 
 5.60 
 
 11.53 
 
 $12,427.45 
 
 4,342.08 
 
 2,458.78 
 
 1,522.46 
 360.84 
 
 7,294.21 
 
 553.63 
 289.13 
 
 2,400.84 
 159.33 
 
 154.18 
 
 83.51 
 
 107.82 
 
 242.23 
 
 30.77 
 
 67.90 
 38.34 
 
 517.63* 
 
 201.31 
 
 11.69* 
 
 26.68* 
 
 145.20* 
 
 111.17* 
 
 114.38* 
 
 34.53* 
 
 33.01* 
 
 18.97* 
 
 219.57* 
 
 110.33 
 
 54.17 
 
 1,567.89 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUTLDDiGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
SCHEDULE H-3-a— EMERSON SATURDAY SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL-FROM AUGUST I, I 9 I 5> TO JULY 3 I, I 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OK BXPBNDITURB8 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total. 
 
 General Admini itration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 
 
 Property Service . 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 Heat, Light and Power Service 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Botany 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Pattern Shop 
 
 Foundry 
 
 Forge 
 
 Machine Shop 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 $3,895.81 
 
 261 94 
 
 1,505.78 
 
 898.60 
 
 498.81 
 108.37 
 
 2,128.09 
 
 670.24 
 68.42 
 
 28.57 
 122.52 
 
 45.40 
 3.76 
 
 97.43 
 26.68* 
 145.20' 
 111.17* 
 114.38* 
 130.13* 
 564.19 
 
 CUXJUNT I mi s^t^ 
 
 otu::r than itk.ef.p and depreciation 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 $1,962.86 
 
 200.00 
 
 1,762.86 
 
 591.27 
 66.00 
 
 20.63 
 114.00 
 
 42.17 
 
 93.00 
 21.17* 
 125.26* 
 76.18* 
 86.02* 
 106.41* 
 420.75 
 
 $560.23 
 
 23.82 
 
 536.41 
 
 210.49 
 325.92 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 •Abbreviations of F, G and E, and W in.this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 $72.65 
 
 26.83 
 
 45.82 
 
 35.03 
 .15 
 
 2.21 
 4.57 
 
 $109.16 
 
 $740.70 
 
 109.16 
 
 22.04 
 2.27 
 
 5.73 
 3.95 
 
 3.23 
 
 740.70 
 
 f 604.75 
 g+e 35.87 
 
 w 100.08 
 
 .33 
 
 4.10 
 
 .38 
 
 4.57 
 
 2.45 
 
 1.87 
 
 .20 
 
 19.24 
 
 
 20.08 
 
 
 21.74 
 
 .50 
 
 .34 
 
 |401 64 
 
 218.12 
 
 46.23 
 172.83 
 
 183.42 
 
 .56 
 
 15.62 
 
 15.55 
 
 8.28 
 
 1.98 
 
 141.43 
 
 |48 87 
 
 1159 
 
 10.55 
 
 2.26 
 8.29 
 
 26.83 
 
 21.90 
 
 3.76 
 
 1.17 
 
 Sv^loSl 
 
 261.94 
 
 1,605.78 
 
 iTsnrr o» raonan 
 
 utadisto 
 
 buildings and 
 
 nomaa 
 
 888,60 
 
 498.81 
 108.37 
 
 .u..N ,.r norun 
 
 2,128.09 
 
 67054 
 
 68.42 
 
 2857 
 122.52 
 
 45.40 
 3.76 
 
 97.43 
 26.68* 
 145.20* 
 111.17* 
 114.38* 
 L30 18* 
 564.19 
 
 
SCHEDULE H-3-b— FROEBEL SATURDAY SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, 1915, TO JULY 3 I, 1916. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 service 
 
 function 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total . 
 
 General Administration : 
 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 
 
 Property Service 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service . . . 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction. 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Physics 
 
 Chemistry 
 
 Botany 
 
 Zoology 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Science 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training. 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Cabinet Shop 
 
 Plumbing Shop 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop 
 
 Paint Shop 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Pottery 
 
 Shoe Shop 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 $4,543.87 
 
 246.34 
 
 1,838.78 
 
 1,011.64 
 
 641.82 
 185.32 
 
 2,458.75 
 
 575 
 90 
 
 113 
 83 
 107 
 119 
 30 
 
 11.25 
 
 185 
 
 103 
 11 
 34 
 33 
 18 
 89. 
 54, 
 
 110. 
 
 683 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 $2,295.42 
 
 200.00 
 
 2,095.42 
 
 512.39 
 90.75 
 
 110.64 
 79.75 
 94.00 
 
 117.00 
 29.00 
 
 11.25 
 
 "177 33* 
 
 po'oo 
 
 2.04* 
 17.98* 
 19.82* 
 1.34* 
 65.53* 
 54.17 
 110.33 
 512.10 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 $765.95 
 
 687.16 
 
 230.25 
 456.91 
 
 49.15 
 
 $25.10 
 
 23.07 
 
 1.32 
 1.32 
 2.37 
 1.32 
 1.32 
 
 1.87 
 
 $127.53 
 
 127.53 
 
 19.37 
 .16 
 
 1.74 
 
 2.44 
 
 11.45 
 
 .26 
 
 .45 
 
 8.41 
 12.01 
 9.65 
 
 15.96 
 11.63* 
 16.05 
 17.35* 
 
 .60 
 
 $913.95 
 
 f 683.45 
 g+e 45.80 
 
 $274.39 
 
 41.86 
 110.25 
 
 .59 
 
 1.56 
 1.58 
 6.56 
 
 111.99 
 
 $141.53 
 
 14.67 
 
 85.56 
 
 10.28 
 
 74.66 
 .62 
 
 41.30 
 
 31.62 
 
 1.13 
 
 8.55 
 
 $4,543.87 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTV 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 1,838.78 
 
 1.011.64 
 
 641.82 
 185.32 
 
 2,458.75 
 
 575.55 
 90.91 
 
 113.70 
 83.51 
 107.82 
 119.71 
 30.77 
 
 11.25 
 
 185.74* 
 103.88 
 11.69* 
 34.53* 
 33.01* 
 18.97* 
 89.44 
 54.17 
 110.33 
 683.77 
 
 i'l l-Rl VIATION OP PROPERTY 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE OF 
 
 BUILDINGS 
 (Tncludiog Grounds) 
 
SCHEDULE H-3-c— JEFFERSON SATURDAY SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP BUILDINGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 pupils' 
 supplies 
 
 PUEL, WATER, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITY! 
 
 OTHER OPERAT- 
 ING SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $1,096.13 
 
 $723.08 
 
 $146.96 
 
 $4.61 
 
 $23.63 
 
 $141.00 
 
 $41.61 
 
 $15.24 
 
 $1,096.13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) 
 
 140.49 
 
 130.00 
 
 7.20 
 
 1.62 
 
 
 
 
 1.67 
 
 140.49 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 319.29 
 
 
 139.76 
 
 
 
 141.00 
 
 36.40 
 
 2.13 
 
 319.29 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 151.89 
 
 134.64 
 32.76 
 
 
 31.15 
 108.61 
 
 
 
 ( f 101.82 
 I g+e 7.65 
 
 w 31.53 
 
 10.37 
 26.03 
 
 .90 
 1.23 
 
 151.89 
 
 134.64 
 32.76 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 636.35 
 
 593.08 
 
 
 2.99 
 
 23.63 
 
 
 5.21 
 
 11.44 
 
 636.35 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 318.16 
 
 167.48* 
 150.71 
 
 297.55 
 
 147.07* 
 148.46 
 
 
 1.95 
 1.04 
 
 10.38 
 13.25* 
 
 
 5.21 
 
 10.23 
 1.21 
 
 318.16 
 
 167.48* 
 150.71 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-3-d-OTHER SATURDAY SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL-FROM AUGUST I, I 9 I 5 , TO JULY 31, I 9 l6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 Total 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 
 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 repairs TO 
 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP BUDUHNGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 PUPILS' 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 FUEL, WATER, CAS 
 AND ELECTRICITY f 
 
 OTHER OPERAT- 
 ING SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 $2,048.88 
 
 $1,296.47 
 
 $351.47 
 
 $16.55 
 
 $48.10 
 
 $274.06 
 
 $45.73 
 
 $16.50 
 
 $2,048.88 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) 
 
 142.39 
 
 140.00 
 
 
 .91 
 
 
 
 
 1.48 
 
 142.39 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 678.23 
 
 
 351.47 
 
 
 
 274.06 
 
 45.73 
 
 6.97 
 
 678.23 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 396.65 
 
 247.19 
 34.39 
 
 
 151.36 
 200.11 
 
 
 
 < f 225.69 
 ( g+e 17.97 
 
 w 30.40 
 
 45.73 
 
 1.63 
 
 1.35 
 3.99 
 
 396.65 
 
 247.19 
 34.39 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 
 
 1,228.26 
 
 1,156.47 
 
 
 15.64 
 15.41 
 
 .23 
 
 48.10 
 
 
 
 8.05 
 
 1,228.26 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 836.89 
 
 11.91 
 
 22.50 
 23.33 
 
 164.41* 
 169.22 
 
 787.69 
 
 9.38 
 
 22.50 
 22.50 
 
 146.01 
 168.39 
 
 
 33.34 
 1.13 
 
 .83 
 12.80* 
 
 
 
 .45 
 1.40 
 
 5.60 
 .60 
 
 836.89 
 
 11.91 
 
 22.50 
 23.33 
 
 164.41* 
 169.22 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 •Shops charged as " Instruction," balances shown representing net 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel 
 
 cost after deduction of credits for production, 
 gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-4-NIGHT SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQIS, TO JULY 3L W^- ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS CHARAPTP* a™ „ 
 
 =— ___ ' tHAKA CTER AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 CURBENT EXPENSES ' 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total. 
 
 General Administration 
 
 Executive Direction and Control (Asst. Supt ) 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) 
 
 Property Service 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service 
 Janitorial Service. 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service 
 
 Instruction Supervision: 
 Supervision-General Instruction 
 Supervision-Industrial Instruction 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction 
 General Instruction. . . . 
 Commercial Instruction 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study. 
 
 Chemistry, 
 
 Botany. 
 
 Zoology 
 Household Arts Instruction 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Domestic Science 
 Industrial Arts Instruction 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Cabinet Shop 
 
 Pattern Shop 
 
 Foundry 
 
 Forge 
 
 Machine Shop 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop 
 
 Paint Shop 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Shoe Shop. 
 
 Shop Electricity, 
 
 Gas Engine Operating 
 Physical Instruction .... 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production, 
 t Abbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-4-a— EMERSON NIGHT SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I9*5> TO J ULY 3 1 . x 9 l6 - ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION- 
 
 
 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 executive; 
 supplies 
 
 PUPILS' 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 FUEL, WATER, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITY t 
 
 OTHER OPERAT- 
 ING SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $6,316.22 
 
 $4,007.82 
 
 $162.31 
 
 $55.35 
 
 $176.03 
 
 $1,234.53 
 
 $470.69 
 
 $209.49 
 
 $6,316.22 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 
 
 336.36 
 
 246.00 
 
 43.75 
 
 39.08 
 
 
 
 
 7.53 
 
 336.36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 1,733.42 
 
 
 117.81 
 
 
 
 1,234.53 
 
 206.37 
 
 174.71 
 
 1,733.42 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 1,233.52 
 
 319.30 
 180.60 
 
 
 86.65 
 31.16 
 
 
 
 \ f 1,007.93 
 ( g+e 59.80 
 
 w 166.80 
 
 75.37 
 131.00 
 
 3.77 
 
 157.14 
 13.80 
 
 1,233.52 
 
 319.30 
 180.60 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 
 Instructional Service 
 
 4,246.44 
 
 3,761.82 
 
 .75 
 
 16.27 
 
 176.03 
 
 
 264.32 
 
 27.25 
 
 4,246.44 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 863.19 
 431.61 
 
 75.86 
 37.89 
 
 104.80 
 38.51 
 
 124.32 
 291.65 
 161.68 
 167.02 
 169.67 
 285.06 
 173.72* 
 80.00 
 64.75 
 1,176.71 
 
 816.21 
 429.99 
 
 60.34 
 26.73 
 
 102.64 
 36.00 
 
 124.32 
 
 288.69 
 
 158.25 
 
 143.00 
 
 133.62 
 
 260.25 
 
 98.13 
 
 80.00 
 
 64.75 
 
 938.90 
 
 .75 
 
 15.14 
 .10 
 
 .21 
 
 .22 
 
 .13 
 .13 
 
 .34 
 
 14.69 
 1.52 
 
 15.52 
 4.14 
 
 2.16 
 
 2.74 
 3.05 
 
 13.48 
 25.55 
 18.68 
 74.27* 
 
 .23 
 
 
 .38 
 10.41 
 10.37 
 6.13 
 1.32 
 
 235.71 
 
 17.15 
 
 6.81 
 2.51 
 
 .78 
 
 863.19 
 431.61 
 
 75.86 
 37.89 
 
 104.80 
 38.51 
 
 124.32 
 291.65 
 161.68 
 167.02 
 169.67 
 285.06 
 173.72 
 80.00 
 64.75 
 1,176.71 
 
 
 
 
 , : 
 
 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •Shops charged as " Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 lAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-4-b— FROEBEL NIGHT SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 pupils' 
 supplies 
 
 FUEL, WATER, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITYf 
 
 OTHER OPERATING 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $8,761.71 
 
 $5,652.84 
 
 $737.86 
 
 $49.16 
 
 $176.69 
 
 $1,523.26 
 
 $446.61 
 
 $175.29 
 
 $8,761.71 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 
 
 423.37 
 
 405.00 
 
 
 13.20 
 
 
 
 
 5.17 
 
 423.37 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2,318.20 
 
 
 398.86 
 
 
 
 1,523.26 
 
 253.50 
 
 142.58 
 
 2,318.20 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 1,630.95 
 
 378.41 
 308.84 
 
 
 328.61 
 70.25 
 
 
 
 ( f 1,139.11 
 Jg+e 76.34 
 
 w 307.81 
 
 69.76 
 183.74 
 
 17.13 
 
 124.42 
 1.03 
 
 1,630.95 
 
 378.41 
 308.84 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6,020.14 
 
 5,247.84 
 
 339.00 
 
 35.96 
 
 176.69 
 
 
 193.11 
 
 ■27.54 
 
 6,020.14 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 3,046.30 
 123.13 
 
 8.93 
 
 168.71 
 
 280.32 
 205.96 
 110.62* 
 119.37 
 114.64* 
 22.92* 
 94.00 
 1,725.24 
 
 2,976.33 
 123.02 
 
 8.00 
 
 166.00 
 
 274.71 
 204.71 
 73.71* 
 91.45 
 42.41* 
 * 
 
 94.00 
 1,193.50 
 
 339.00 
 
 35.96 
 
 12.92 
 .11 
 
 .18 
 
 2.71 
 
 5.61 
 1.25 
 36.91 
 26.88 
 71.17 
 18.55* 
 
 .40 
 
 
 1.04 
 1.06 
 4.37* 
 
 186.64 
 
 21.09 
 
 .75 
 
 5.70 
 
 3,046.30 
 123.13 
 
 8.93 
 
 168.71 
 
 280.32 
 205.96 
 110.62* 
 119.37 
 114.64 
 22.92 
 94.00 
 1,725.24 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 Household Arts Instruction : 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 l 
 
 
 1 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net c 
 tAbbreviatioos of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gi 
 
 i>st after deduction 
 s and electricity, a 
 
 of credits for produ 
 nd water, respectivel 
 
 ction. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SCHEDULE H-4-c— JEFFERSON NIGHT SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I9IS, TO J UL Y 3h 19*6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 
 
 Property Service . 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service . . . 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction ' 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 Domestic Arts 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Mechanical Drawing 
 
 Sheet Metal Shop 
 
 Shop Electricity 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 $2,296.78 
 
 282.13 
 
 414.89 
 
 258.04 
 
 97.86 
 58.99 
 
 1,599.76 
 
 475.13 
 34.44 
 
 176.25 
 
 602.53 
 
 169.49 
 
 2.33 
 
 4.43 
 94.81 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 [ UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 $1,830.60 
 
 267.00 
 
 1,563.60 
 
 455.66 
 34.44 
 
 39.83 
 
 175.93 
 
 587.49 
 
 169.49 
 
 2.33 
 
 4.43 
 
 94.00 
 
 $6.80 
 
 93.89 
 
 42.89 
 51.00 
 
 5.72 
 
 5.72 
 
 $19.33 
 
 19.33 
 
 6.92 
 
 .52 
 
 .32 
 
 11.57 
 
 $251.63 
 
 251.63 
 
 ( f 181.11 
 I g+e 13.75 
 
 w 56.77 
 
 $68.99 
 
 65.52 
 
 18. G6 
 46.86 
 
 $25.54 
 
 14.05 
 
 3.85 
 
 1.63 
 2.22 
 
 7.64 
 
 6.83 
 
 $2,296.78 
 
 282.13 
 
 414.89 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AN 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 258.04 
 
 97.86 
 58.99 
 
 1,599.76 
 
 475.13 
 34.44 
 
 40.35 
 
 176.25 
 
 602.53 
 
 169.49 
 
 2.33 
 
 4.43 
 94.81 
 
 DEPRECIATION OP PROrERTY 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 
 (Including GroundsJ 
 
 tAbbreviations of F, G aod E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 

 
SCHEDULE H-4-d— OTHER NIGHT SCHOOLS 
 
 -NDITURES IN DETAIL FROM AUGUST I, 1915, TO JULY 31, IQ16. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 
 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 ~ ' 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OF PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 
 SALARIES / 
 
 ND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 EQUIPMENT; 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 
 {Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP EQUIPMENT 
 
 " 
 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 AND TEJlCHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 FUEL, WATER, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITYt 
 
 OTHER OPERATING 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $1,804.53 
 
 $1,266.37 
 
 $283.57 
 
 $10.88 
 
 $31.03 
 
 $176.34 
 
 $28.32 
 
 $8.02 
 
 $1,804.53 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . . . 
 
 197.59 
 
 196.00 
 
 
 .61 
 
 
 
 .98 
 
 197.59 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 432.83 
 
 
 283.57 
 
 
 
 176.34 
 
 28.32 
 
 4.60 
 
 492.83 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 300.44 
 
 170.70 
 21.69 
 
 
 142.04 
 141.53 
 
 
 
 ( f 145.90 
 Ig+e 11.40 
 
 w 19.04 
 
 28.32 
 
 1.10 
 
 .85 
 2.65 
 
 300.44 
 
 170.70 
 21.69 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 
 
 
 1,114.11 
 
 1,070.37 
 
 
 10.27 
 
 31.03 
 
 
 
 2.44 
 
 1,114.11 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 619.10 
 180.72 
 
 37.36 
 37.92 
 
 150.61 
 88.40 
 
 586.93 
 180.72 
 
 37.36 
 37.36 
 
 140.00 
 88.00 
 
 
 10.27 
 
 21.90 
 
 .56 
 
 8.57 
 
 
 
 2.04 
 .40 
 
 619.10 
 180.72 
 
 37.36 
 37.92 
 
 150.61 
 
 88.40 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ==- 
 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-5— SUMMER SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST 
 
 I, IQI5> TO 
 
 JULY 3] 
 
 , 1916. 
 
 ANALYSIS 
 
 BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND 
 
 OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAT, 
 
 
 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 SUPERVISORS 
 
 PRINCIPALS 
 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 PUPILS' 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 FUEL, WATE2, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITYt 
 
 OTHER OPERATING 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $13,544.64 
 
 $9,552.86 
 
 $2,360.75 
 
 $142.85 
 
 $61.48 
 
 $885.43 
 
 $459.70 
 
 $81.57 
 
 $13,544.64 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principals) . . 
 
 1,259.79 
 
 1,195.42 
 
 64.37 
 
 
 
 
 
 1,259.79 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 3,012.85 
 
 
 1,834.60 
 
 
 
 885.43 
 
 219.46 
 
 73.36 
 
 3,012.85 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 263.73 
 
 1,184.76 
 
 * 
 
 1,354.87 
 
 209.49 
 
 
 263.73 
 450.01 
 
 1,120.86 
 
 
 
 ( f 644.11 
 I g+e 40.84 
 
 w 200.43 
 
 43.54 
 
 * 
 
 175.92 
 
 6.26 
 
 58.09 
 9.01 
 
 263.73 
 1,184.76 
 
 * 
 
 1,354.87 
 209.49 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 9,272.00 
 
 8,357.44 
 
 461.78 
 
 142.85 
 
 61.48 
 
 
 240.24 
 
 8.21 
 
 9,272.00 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Instruction Supervision: 
 
 1,303.79 
 607.71 
 
 1,962.74 
 433.36 
 
 473.81 
 192.50 
 610.84 
 475.46 
 257.99 
 
 77.50 
 
 269.97 
 
 154.17 
 
 52.93* 
 
 2,399.23 
 
 1,234.37 
 508.34 
 
 1,870.64 
 427.08 
 
 472.50 
 192.50 
 610.84 
 474.62 
 255.79 
 
 77.50 
 
 269.97 
 
 154.17 
 
 37.12 
 
 1,772.00 
 
 31.87 
 
 49.20 
 
 380.71 
 
 37.55 
 50.17 
 
 47.29 
 
 .84 
 
 7.00 
 
 39.00 
 6.28 
 
 1.31 
 .40 
 
 14.49* 
 
 
 1.32 
 
 233.92 
 
 5.81 
 
 1.80 
 
 .60 
 
 1,303.79 
 607.71 
 
 1,962.74 
 433.36 
 
 473.81 
 192.50 
 610.84 
 475.46 
 257.99 
 
 77.50 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 Nature Study 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 269.97 
 
 
 
 154.17 
 
 52.93* 
 
 2,399.23 
 
 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 tAbbreviatioas of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-5-a— EMERSON SUMMER SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 31, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SUB-FUNCT..ON 
 
 Total . 
 
 General Administration: 
 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 
 
 Property Service . 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 Care of Grounds 
 
 Heat, Light, and Power Service. 
 
 Laundry Service 
 
 Janitorial Service. . 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service. 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Physics 
 
 Chemistry 
 
 Botany 
 
 Zoology 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Print Shop 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 5,775.76 
 
 364.93 
 
 1,190.25 
 
 135.85 
 549.76 
 
 450.45 
 54.19 
 
 2,220.58 
 
 477.88 
 85.00 
 
 27.50 
 433.34 
 290.65 
 257.99 
 
 52.93* 
 595.29 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 $2,247.13 
 
 335.00 
 
 1,912.13 
 
 462.89 
 85.00 
 
 27.50 
 433.34 
 289.81 
 255.79 
 
 37.12* 
 320.68 
 
 $872.43 
 
 29.93 
 
 706.65 
 
 135.85 
 205.70 
 
 365.10 
 
 135.85 
 
 135.85 
 
 •qhnns chanted as "Instruction," balances shown representing net cost after deduction of credits for production. 
 tlbbreSs o?F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas, and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 $15.54 
 
 $15.18 
 
 14.70 
 
 $370.37 
 
 15.18 
 
 .29 
 
 .40 
 
 14.49 
 
 370.37 
 
 f 302.38 
 g+e 17.94 
 
 $247.44 
 
 107.96 
 
 22.61 
 
 85.35 
 
 139.48 
 
 1.32 
 138.16 
 
 $7.67 
 
 5.27 
 
 1.13 
 
 * 
 
 4.14 
 
 $3,775.76 
 
 364.93 
 
 2.40 
 
 .60 
 
 135.85 
 549.76 
 
 450.45 
 54.19 
 
 UPKLia- up puun urv 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BCrEDINGS AND 
 
 CROUNDS 
 
 2,220.58 
 
 477.88 
 85.00 
 
 27.50 
 433.34 
 290.65 
 257.99 
 
 52.93* 
 595.29 
 
 DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 
 
 OIISOLESCENCE 
 
 OP BUILDINGS 
 
 ( Including Grounds) 
 
SCHEDULE H-5-b-FROEBEL SUMMER SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM 
 
 AUGUST I, 
 
 1915, TO 
 
 JULY 31, 
 
 I916. ANALYSIS BY 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 DIVISIONS, 
 
 FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF 
 
 EXPENDITURES 
 
 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE OF 
 
 BUILDINGS 
 I Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE OP 
 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCIPALS AND 
 TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 PUPILS* 
 SDPPLIES 
 
 PUEL, WATER, CAS 
 AND ELECTRICITYt 
 
 OTHER OPERAT- 
 ING SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 $4,872.69 
 
 $3,081.64 
 
 $1,085.57 
 
 $20.47 
 
 $12.47 
 
 $456.96 
 
 $176.56 
 
 $39.02 
 
 $4,872.69 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration: 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal) 
 
 404.16 
 
 370.84 
 
 33.32 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 404.16 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1,379.17 
 
 
 807.39 
 
 
 
 456.96 
 
 75.80 
 
 39.02 
 
 1,379.17 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 127.88 
 
 635.00 
 
 * 
 
 523.65 
 
 92.64 
 
 
 127.88 
 244.31 
 * 
 435.20 
 
 
 
 $ f 341.73 
 \ g+e 22.90 
 
 w 92.33 
 
 20.93 
 
 54.87 
 
 5.13 
 
 * 
 
 33.58 
 .31 
 
 127.88 
 635.00 
 
 523.65 
 92.64 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ( 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3,089.36 
 
 2,710.80 
 
 244.86 
 
 20.47 
 
 12.47 
 
 
 100.76 
 
 
 3,089.36 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 326.32 
 157.64 
 
 197.50 
 165.00 
 177.50 
 184.81 
 
 38.75 
 
 216.04 
 
 154.17 
 
 1,471.63 
 
 297.48 
 153.54 
 
 197.50 
 165.00 
 177.50 
 184.81 
 
 38.75 
 
 216.04 
 
 154.17 
 
 1,126.01 
 
 244.86 
 
 20.47 
 
 8.37 
 4.10 
 
 
 100.76 
 
 
 326.32 
 157.64 
 
 197.50 
 165.00 
 177.50 
 184.81 
 
 38.75 
 
 216.04 
 
 154.17 
 
 1,471.63 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 . = 
 
 •Shops charged as "Instruction." balances shown representing net cost after deduction of "^ ££££*»• 
 t Abbrtviations of F. G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electncty, and water, respectively. 
 
SCHEDULE H-5-c— JEFFERSON SUMMER SCHOOL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL FROM 
 
 AUGUST I I0I5 TO JULY 3 1, I9* 6 - ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 Total 
 
 General Administration: 
 
 Managerial Direction and Control (Principal). 
 
 Property Service 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 Janitorial Service 
 
 Other Building Service 
 
 Instructional Service 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 General Instruction 
 
 Commercial Instruction 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 Nature Study 
 
 Industrial Arts Instruction: 
 
 Manual Training 
 
 Physical Instruction 
 
 t Abbreviation W in this column represents water. 
 
 $1,345.46 
 
 271.95 
 
 184.17 
 
 151.41 
 32.76 
 
 362.07 
 190.72 
 
 152.50 
 
 53.93 
 130.12 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 270.83 
 
 854.55 
 
 336.46 
 188.54 
 
 152.50 
 
 53.93 
 123.12 
 
 1.12 
 
 124.80 
 
 124.80 
 
 9.56 
 
 2.56 
 
 7.00 
 
 19.42 
 
 17.24 
 2.18 
 
 31.53 
 
 31.53 
 
 2.10 
 
 25.74 
 
 24.51 
 1.23 
 
 5.81 
 
 5.81 
 
 271.95 
 
 184.17 
 
 151.41 
 32.76 
 
 889.34 
 
 362.07 
 190.72 
 
 152.50 
 
 53.93 
 130.12 
 
SCHEDULE H-5-d— OTHER SUMMER SCHOOLS 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 . 
 
 FUNCTION 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP ANT* DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OP PROPERTY DEPRECIATION OP PROPERTY 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 
 CROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 1 OBSOLESCENCE 
 EQUIPMENT TOTAL OF BUILDINGS 
 
 J (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OP EQUIPMENT 
 
 
 
 SUB-FUNCTION 
 
 PRINCTPALS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 FUEL, WATER, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITY f 
 
 OTHER OPERATING 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 $1,639.23 
 
 $1,356.00 
 
 $195.76 
 
 $9.56 
 
 $14.41 
 
 $26.57 
 
 $33.60 
 
 $3.33 
 
 $1,639.23 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 General Administration : 
 
 218.75 
 
 218.75 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 218.75 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 259.26 
 
 
 195.76 
 
 
 
 26.57 
 
 33.60 
 
 3.33 
 
 259.26 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 229.36 
 29.90 
 
 
 195.76 
 
 
 
 w 26.57 
 
 33.60 
 
 3.33 
 
 229.36 
 29.90 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1,161.22 
 
 1,137.25 
 
 
 9.56 
 
 14.41 
 
 
 
 
 1,161.22 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary Instruction: 
 
 796.47 
 
 123.81 
 
 38.75 
 202.19 
 
 773.81 
 
 122.50 
 
 38.75 
 202.19 
 
 
 9.56 
 
 13.10 
 1.31 
 
 
 
 
 796.47 
 
 123.81 
 
 38.75 ] 
 202.19 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Science Instruction: 
 
 
 Household Arts Instruction: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 tAbbreviation W in this column represents water. 
 
SCHEDULE H-6— SUNDAY SCHOOLS— EMERSON AND FROEBEL 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL— FROM AUGUST I, IQI5, TO JULY 3 1, IQl6. ANALYSIS BY SERVICE DIVISIONS, FUNCTIONS, CHARACTER, AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 tAbbreviations of F, G and E, and W in this column represent fuel, gas and electricity, and water, respectively. 
 
 SERVICE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 
 
 CURRENT EXPENSES 
 
 ^— 
 
 
 OTHER THAN UPKEEP AND DEPRECIATION 
 
 UPKEEP OP PROPERTY 
 
 DEPRECIATION OF PROPERTY 
 
 
 SALARIES AND WAGES 
 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS 
 EXPENSE 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 BUILDINGS AND 
 GROUNDS 
 
 REPAIRS TO 
 
 EQUIPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 | 
 
 
 
 
 SUPERVISORS 
 AND TEACHERS 
 
 ASSISTANTS AND 
 OPERATIVE FORCE 
 
 EXECUTIVE 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 PUPILS' 
 SUPPLIES 
 
 FUEL, WATER, GAS 
 AND ELECTRICITVt 
 
 OTHER OPERAT- 
 ING SUPPLIES 
 
 OF BUILDINGS 
 (Including Grounds) 
 
 OBSOLESCENCE 
 OF EQUTPMENT 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 Total 
 
 $3,142.18 
 
 $229.75 
 
 $696.82 
 
 
 
 $1,654.65 
 
 $529.36 
 
 $31.60 
 
 $3,142.18 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Property Service 
 
 2,501.60 
 
 
 549.57 
 
 
 
 1,654.65 
 
 275.95 
 
 21.43 
 
 2,501.60 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Operation of Buildings and Grounds: 
 
 1,701.32 
 
 506.61 
 293.67 
 
 
 231.82 
 317.75 
 
 
 
 \ f 1,288.19 
 \ g+e 81.68 
 
 w 284.78 
 
 87.09 
 
 188.86 
 
 12.54 
 8.89 
 
 1,701.32 
 
 506.61 
 293.67 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 640.58 
 
 229.75 
 
 147.25 
 
 
 
 
 253.41 
 
 10.17 
 
 640.58 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Instructional Supervision: 
 
 55.00 
 
 61.17 
 524.41 
 
 55.00 
 
 51.00 
 123.75 
 
 147.25 
 
 
 
 
 253.41 
 
 10.17 
 
 55.00 
 
 61.17 
 524.41 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Elementary and Secondary Instruction: 
 
 
 
 

X 
 
SCHEDULE H-7— CAPITAL OUTLAY AND DEBT PAYMENT 
 
 EXPENDITURES IN DETAIL — FROM AUGUST I, I915, TO JULY 31, I916. ANALYSIS BY PLANTS AND OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 EXPENDITURES AND 
 
 OBLIGATIONS INCIDENT TO CURRENT YEAR 
 
 
 
 OBJECT OF EXPENDITURES 
 
 ADMINISTRATION 
 
 PLANT 
 
 (General Offices. 
 
 Barns and Storehouses) 
 
 EMERSON SCHOOL 
 PLANT 
 
 FROEBEL SCHOOL 
 PLANT 
 
 JEFFERSON SCHOOL 
 PLANT 
 
 OTHER SCHOOL 
 PLANTS 
 
 TOTAL 
 
 OF 
 PREVIOUS YEARS 
 
 
 $46,625.96 
 
 $34.65 
 
 $2,933.20 
 
 $10,628.22 
 
 $10,490.02 
 
 $3,128.62 
 
 $27,214.71 
 
 $19,411.25 
 
 
 
 Property Service: 
 
 17,267.10 
 
 34.65 
 
 2,933.20 
 
 10,628.22 
 
 542.41 
 
 3,128.62 
 
 17,267.10 
 
 
 
 
 
 8,092.96 
 
 2,419.55 
 
 1,281.25 
 
 495.04 
 
 276.77 
 
 1,360.44 
 354.97 
 877.48 
 311.48 
 
 1,217.31 
 
 569.62 
 
 10.23 
 
 24.42 
 10.23 
 
 335.45 
 
 210.99 
 406.86 
 181.13 
 120.25 
 
 398.69 
 2.00 
 477.96 
 50.97 
 493.59 
 255.31 
 
 5,237.07 
 
 1,892.28 
 
 569.37 
 
 313.91 
 
 84.54 
 
 940.70 
 195.47 
 353.93 
 242.69 
 630.34 
 167.92 
 
 390.20 
 
 75.00 
 1.19 
 
 3.60 
 
 17.25 
 3.50 
 
 46.05 
 5.62 
 
 2,130.24 
 
 216.86 
 303.83 
 
 68.38 
 
 21.05 
 157.50 
 28.34 
 14.32 
 47.33 
 140.77 
 
 8,092.96 
 
 2,419.55 
 
 1,281.25 
 
 495.04 
 
 276.77 
 
 1,360.44 
 
 354.97 
 877.48 
 311.48 
 1,217.31 
 569.62 
 10.23 
 
 
 Equipment: 
 
 
 Janitorial (including care of grounds) 
 
 Instructional: 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 $29,358.86 
 
 
 
 
 $9,947.61 
 
 
 $9,947.61 
 
 $19,411.25