WQ.7 UBLICATIONS OF WHITTIER STATE SCHOOL, V.HII/IER, CALIFORNIA FRED. C. NELLES, SU .- £R I N TE N D ENT DEPARTMENT OF RESEARCH BULLETIN NO. 5 A SCALE FOR GRADING NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITIONS BY J. HAROLD WILLIAMS, Ph. D WHITTIER ST A -CHOOL DEPARTMENT OF PRlNs G INSTRUCTION MAY 1 i i 7 _ ^ This book is DUE on the last date stamped below JAN 4 W^ JAN 3 1927 rx JUL 3 ^^'^^ AUG, 2 1929 , flUa 9 192S ^PR 7 mi JAN 5 t932 JAN 21 194b ilH ^4Af 3 ma my 2 7 1933^ to-- ^^^^ \9^'' i^^F[-,4 OfO- LD L ' 'iiiN^Mfe 4-9 4 Southern Branch of the University of California Los Angeles Form L 1 i i^ A SCALE FOR GRADING NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITIONS SUPPLEMENTING THE WHITTIER SCALE FOR GRADING HOME CONDITIONS J. HAROLD WILLIAMS, Ph.D. Director of Research, Whittier State School Since the recent publication of the Whittier Scale for Grading Home Conditions* the value and practicability of the method has been demonstrated by our subsequent investigations and verified by the tes- timony of several others who have found the scale adapted to their work. The grading of homes, neighborhoods, and other environmental conditions may come to occupy an important place in the study of social problems, and to furnish useful supplementary material to in- telligence measurements, health surveys, family history, etc. Hom.e and neighborhood conditions have long been considered i-mportant factors in the educational and moral development of children, and to be of special significance in the production and prevention of juvenile delinquency. It has been necessary, however, to express these conditions in somewhat vague and indefinite terms, because of the lack of any systematic scheme of observation and classification. An assist- ant probation officer recently reported concerning one of his charges : ' ' Boy lived in a poor home in a bad part of town. ' ' This was the extent of his report, so far as home and neighborhood conditions wei*e con- cerned. A visit by our field-worker verified his statement ; the grading of the home resulted in a detailed description and classification on the basis of (I) necessities, (II) neatness, (III) size, (IV; parental con- ditions, and (V) parental supervision. Each item^ following a com- parison with the samples on the standard score card was accorded a grade of 1 point. The home index is 5, relatively low, as suggested by the probation report, even in comparison with homes of other delin- quent boys. The neighborhood in which the home is located was ac- corded an index of 8, following the method to be described in this article. c * Journal of Delinquency, Vol. I No. 5, Nov. 1916, pp. 273-286. Reprinted as Department of Research Bulletin No. 3, Whittier State School. The Scale for Grading Home Conditions is based upon the following items: /. Necessities; II. Neatness; III. Size; IV. Parental Conditions; V. Parental Supervision. Each item is graded on a scale of five points, and the item scores added to obtain the Home Index. (1) 2 Whittier State School: Department of Research Another boy was reported to be "living in a neighborhood with bad environment." Our investigation showed the home to have an index of 10, and the neighborhood index to be 9 ; both relatively low, as expected, but much more clearly understood because of the applicatioji of a systematic method of grading. In some cases our grading is not in such close agreement with the report of the probation officer as in the cases just referred to. This is not often due to differences in accuracy of observation, but to the inadequacy of such terms as "good," "bad," "fair," "poor," etc., for comparative purposes. The application of a uniform scale minimizes the need for using descriptive adjectives in stating general conditions. Our inquiries have led to the belief that the home and neighborhood grading scales furnish reliable means for expressing the conditions which they are intended to classify. METHOD OF GEADTNG NEIGIIBOEIIOODS As in the grading of homes, a personal visit is required to obtain reliable data for grading neighborhoods. Both home and neighbor- hood, in most of our cases, are graded from data secured at the same time. The field-worker makes a careful inspection in the vicinity of the home, notes the location, the approximate number of homes, the rela- tive density of the population, the relative number of children, and other significant points. AVhile the points just men- tioned are not graded, they are of importance for both comparative and interpretative purposes. These are recorded on the individual score card with the graded data. (See samples in Fig. 2). The neighborhood is graded upon the basis of five items, as fol- lows: T, neatness, sanitation, and improvements; II, playground fa- cilities; III, institutions and establishments; IV, social status of resi- dents; V, average grade of homes. Each item is graded on a scale of five points ; 1 point representing decidedly unfavorable conditions, 5 points representing favorable conditions, and 2, 3 and 4 representing conditions of varying favorability l)etween the two extremes. The standard score card (show.^ in tentative form in Fig. 1) contains sam- ples of data descriptive of actual neighborhood conditions for each item, which grade 1 point, 3 points, and 5 points respectively. This series of samples serves as a guide? in grading the data for the individ- I 0) \ Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions < o O III a: "^ X O OS tt !2 Q £ a. oi^ -r gt-u; "■ lO < 1^ »/) UJ ^ > ■3 * ft ££:? ||| S g S s CO s£" 15 <2c-g £§3 ilS'E IT) 050 CO I 1 s 1 3 3 f .At. C «0B ss. Oll-t^ poorlu kr^pt ^a^roCS Some o^S ■^'^'■'^^'•S, *""! a^" /xyor/y City wa/t^>; no oihet convKt^iSf^ces //owSGs -^osfy Ccf*t6/9c'r> /o-ndL 3 6^aci^s c^/s^«x/r*- 2. |#;f One 6/ Neighborhood No 9 7 Name Zy x, >V/ ///«,/>, Date visited ^one >(.. ' 9/6 |„<|„ /.? ITEMS OESCRIPTION or ITEMS RECORDED B, /^ ^. ^ "»"' S;ois;„s /a^tc/zra eve// A^e/J"!- Unpa,i^scL Str-eet daacL Sia.au/a,//(i;. street li^h-ts (Sity Mcuter «-"<* ■SeM^'- 3 6'oc'^s from Ca^r /ine 4 ^■^" Ya^rcCs Of med-'cim Sl^e ^'3*^^ -tro-i^ic in streets. V^ell 6ci/t<^p region 4 •S^^fZ^,\ Tw<3 6IOCKS aroi^ soAoo/ Otheruuise. Sfcl(ySi^«'y ^€5/d^^oce- s&ct'on Two •s-tofcz cundL poof • rooA, not fa-i- «.«vixy 4 s'«Co'.«,' FoLiir/i^ iVe.ll-6a- . Mof6/y pi-opettj^ Own&'rs A6out e'pmania^ JcAoo/ &cCuca,tion^ none. 3 TAis rejion a.i/«r>.U,or Saa.le 4 XL NO OT CNKORCH AltmV*^ t.i. 3l>^f-o.rnento . Neighborhood No /<5V? Name R < ''^ K, U'^^'^e^ Dale visited /^oyemier /f,/9'.S' \„it^ 22 ,.t-s DESCRIPTION or ITEMS »ECORDIOS. /^ /^ ,(; . UO.I Z'::i^i. We.ll pa^veoc. aity S6ree.t^ or>e. b/ocK /from e^uo/i a/r tu/o OOLJ- //nes /t// O'iif I'-^pro-^ments, w/oyier /ightiiy. ^jev^er, etc Houses aun ^occei-n a^i^oL i^e/AVe/arf. 6 ritds-" fJo pubhe. plot-y^rounat.. Srr^a.// cfa,i-ei~s, cCsnSJ*'//,fea: LaM6orers, business Toer). rnodU3'a.-Zely ure/f €o-oCo 4 "0-l» A/Iost'y CLi/etayc So-JJ- on H">.rt-e/- Sca-/e s «-». -o i"^"""*" ■"" J"" -»0 "1 ""^.".X. «vr*iJ ■ ■■ Lojyin&£ie-i^ 1 FIG. 2. SAMPLES OF INDIVIDUAL NEIGHBOR- HOOD SCORE-CARDS Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions 5 ual score cards. The grading is based upon the extent to which the ((uality of the conditions to be graded resembles the quality repre- sented in the comparative samples.* If the quality of the item approximates that of the samples on the standard score card, grade 1, 3, or 5 may be accorded ; if the conditions are better than those indicated by the lowest sample, and yet not so favorable as those rep- resented by grade 3, the data may be accorded a grade of 2 points. Similarly, may be used for expressing the value of items inferior to grade 1, and 6 points may be given for conditions superior to the sample grading 5. Gradings other than points 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, how- ever, are rarely necessary. The extension of points is allowed in order that every neighborhood, no matter how inferior or superior, may be given its relative status. ITEMS FOR GRADING After analyzing, classifying and grading data on many neigh- borhoods, ranging from extremely unfavorable to very favorable, the conclusion has been reached that most neighborhoods can be reliably graded upon the basis of five lines of inquiry, all of which are believed to represent important factors in the desirability of a given locality for the social development of growing children. A description of each item follows : I. Neatness, Sanitation, and Improvements. This includes the extent to which homes, yards and streets are well cared for; whether lawns and gardens, if any, are kept up ; what sanitary provisions have been made, either by public or private enterprise ; whether streets are paved and well kept. Littered or dirty yards, shabby, un- painted buildings and fences, unsanitary barns and outbuildings, or- dinary dirt roads, if neglected, lack of street lighting, and absence of transportation facilities are considered unfavorable. Neat, clean yards, well-kept lawns, sanitary improvements, city water, neatly painted buildings, orderly gardens, flowers, trees, electric street lights and well paved streets are examples of what may be considered favor- able conditions. Rural neighborhoods usually grade lower than city neighborhoods in this item, but some of our poorest conditions are found in cities. Where there is lack of public improvements the neighborhood may still be brought up to a reasonably high level bj private improvements and neat and sanitary conditions, which are *Note that the basis of grading is resemblance in qtiality, not in specific detail. 6 Whittier State School: Department of Research possible in almost any community. However, adequate public and private improvements are most often found together. II. Playground Facilities. The purpose of this item is particu- larly for the comparison of crowded, thickly settled communities, where it is necessary for children to play in the streets, in alleys, or in small yards, with neighborhoods providing plenty of play space. Tenement districts grade low on this point, while the open rural country grades high. A city neighborhood may grade high if provided with public playgrounds, and a rural community is graded low if the open space is not adapted to play purposes. The grading is based upon the extent, desirability and equipment of the space provided. III. Institutions and Establishments. Relates particularly to in- stitutions and establishments which may be of some moral or immoral consequence. It is not the purpose of the scale to actually evaluate these consequences, but to place a numerical grade upon the extent to which they occur in the neighborhood. Public schools, colleges, churches, libraries, and public parks are usually considered favorable. Saloons, pool-rooms, breweries, houses of ill-fame, police-courts, jails and railroad yards are among the establishments which usually cause a neighborhood to grade low in this item. Factories, stores, theaters, hospitals, and other establishments may grade either high or low, depending upon their relation to the neighborhood in the judgment of the observer. There are some instances in which both favorable institutions and those which are unfavorable occur in the same vicinity. In such cases the observer determines whether their influences bal- ance each other, or whether the one quality predominates. IV. Social Status of Residents. Here consideration is given to the intelligence, education, refinement, diligence, moral character, so- cial harmony, and law-abiding qualities of persons living in the vicin- ity. This item refers to conditions most frequently found in the n<'ighl)orlioo(l. A few exceptional individuals, even if living in the home of the propositus, would not ordinarily affect the score. In Ihe vast majority of cases the social status of the residents clusters around a fairly even level. Intelligent, law-abiding and industrious I)frsons tend to settle in neigliborhoods where those virtues are com- mon. Ignorant, boisterous and immoral persons also tend to flock together. As a rule, there is a close relation between the social status score and the genernl index of the neighborhood. Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions 7 V. Average Grade of Homes. The scoring of this item is based upon an estimate of the average grade of homes by the Whittier Scale for Grading Home Conditions. Since there is always at least one home which is graded in detail, as regards both objective and subjective conditions, the trained field-worker is able to approximate the average grade of homes with a fairly high degree of reliability. Here also is evidenced the tendency for the individual parts of a neighborhood to strike a common level. There are notable exceptions, however, especially in certain neighborhoods of delinquent children, in which the home index of the propositus (which is recorded under this item) differs significantly from the neighborhood general average. RELIABILITY OF GRADING As a preliminary test of the reliability of the scale, the data on thirty unseored individual neighborhood cards, wholly uuselected, were graded independently by the writer and Mr. Cowdery, field- worker for the Department of Research. The results of the separate gradings are shown in Table I. The marks given by IMr. Cowdery (A) and the writer (B) show very close agreement, considering that only tentative standards were available for comparison. Our famili- arity with the nature and development of the scale may have affected the similarity of the gradings, but it is probable that any person who would have occasion to use the scale would score with as high a degree of reliability by following the standard score card. With Table I is given a summary of agreement, which shows that both in the individual items and in the neighborhood index there is a close similarity of grading. In 29 of the 30 cases the agreement on index was within 2 points — reliable enough for all practical purposes. In grading the separate items, A and B agree within one point in every instance and in two-thirds of the cases there is exact agreement. The use of the final score card with rep- resentative samples of items grading 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 is expected to produce still more accurate results, since nearly all cases of disagree ment occur in determining the intermediate scores of 2 and 4, samples of which do not appear among the tentative standards. Although this preliminary test indicates that different persons would probably accord gradings sufficiently alike to serve the pur- 8 Whittier State School: Department of Research TABLE I. RESULTS OF INDEPENDENT GRADINGS OF TWO PERSONS ON DATA CONCERNING 30 UNSELECTED NEIGHBOR- HOODS. (A J (B) I II III IV V Index •Slo. I II III IV V Index Differ. 1 1 1 2 6 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 2 2 1 2 8 2 2 2 1 1 2 8 2 3 2 2 10 3 1 2 2 1 2 8 2 2 1 4 4 12 4 2 1 4 2 4 13 1 2 3 3 4 13 5 3 3 3 2 4 15 2 1 5 3 2 3 14 6 1 5 3 2 3 14 1 5 3 3 3 15 7 1 5 3 3 3 15 I 5 3 2 3 14 8 1 5 3 2 4 15 1 3 5 4 1 2 15 9 3 5 4 1 3 16 1 3 4 3 2 3 15 10 2 3 2 2 4 13 2 ^ 4 3 2 3 15 11 3 4 3 2 2 14 1 2 4 3 3 3 1.- 12 2 5 2 4 3 16 J 1 5 4 2 3 IS 13 1 5 3 3 2 14 1 4 3 3 2 3 15 14 4 2 2 3 2 13 2 2 4 3 4 3 16 15 J 5 3 4 4 19 3 4 4 2 3 3 If 16 4 3 2 2 3 14 2 3 4 3 3 3 16 17 2 4 3 2 3 14 2 4 4 3 3 3 17 18 4 4 4 3 3 18 1 4 3 3 3 4 1? 19 4 4 4 3 4 19 2 4 3 3 4 4 18 20 4 2 3 3 4 16 2 3 4 4 3 4 18 21 3 3 4 3 3 16 2 3 5 3 4 4 19 22 4 4 4 4 4 20 1 4 S 3 3 4 19 23 4 5 3 4 3 19 4 3 4 3 5 19 24 5 3 4 4 4 20 1 4 4 4 4 4 20 25 5 4 3 3 4 19 1 S 3 4 5 5 22 26 5 2 4 5 4 20 2 4 5 5 4 4 22 27 4 5 5 4 4 22 5 5 4 4 4 22 28 5 5 4 3 4 21 1 4 5 5 4 4 22 29 4 5 5 5 4 23 1 5 4 4 5 5 23 30 5 4 4 5 5 23 AGREEMENT OF A AND B AS TO NEIGHBORHOOD INDEX. Total No. of cases compared 30 No. of cases in exact agreement 7 No. of cases in aRreement within 1 point 12 No. of cases in agreement within 2 points 29 No. of cases in agreement within 3 points 30 AGKl-.EMENT OF A AND P. ON SEPARATE ITEMS. Total No. of items graded (30 cases. 5 in each) LSD No. of items in exact agreenunt 100 No. f)f items in ngrccment within 1 point 50 Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions 9 pose for which the scale is intended, the fact that differing judg- ments do occur suggests giving the greater weight to the scoring of the original observer. At the same time, it is essential that the observer's report be graded as accurately as possible, to prevent any serious discrepancies between the data and the numerical value as- signed to it. THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF DELINQUENT BOYS The use of the neighborhood grading scale in the study of en- vironmental conditions associated with delinquency has brought fruit- ful results, and promises to be a highly reliable instrument for future comparisons of different social and economic levels. In Table 11 is given the distribution of the indices of 135 neighborhoods, in each of which is located the home of one or more delinquent boys. These range from Index 6, the lowest, to Index 24, the highest yet found among our cases. The median is represented by Index 16. AVhile it is possible that the study of a larger number of cases will reveal Slight differences, it is not likely that the distribution of neighbor- hoods of delinquent beys committed to AVhittier State School will be found to be much higher or lower than is indicated by this table. It is important to observe that the neigli-borhoods of delinquent boys are of varying degrees of favorability. No "type" of neighborhood can be defined which occurs with sufficient frequency as to be con- sidered representative of conditions which are supposed to cause or to be particularly associated with delinquency. Our case No. 1 (Table IV) which has an index of 6 is a filthy, dirty locality, resembling a neglected barnyard, although located in a large city. Case No. 135, our highest, having an Index 24, is neat, clean, well improved, con- tains CA'ery modern convenience, and is a highly desirable location for any home. In the distribution of individual item-points (Table III) there is seen a general tendency for the different items to grade approxi- mately the same. The medians fall at grade 3 in all items except TI (playground facilities) which has a median of 4. It seems, therefore, thH< the delinquent boys who have lived in these neighborhoods have not been seriously handicapped by lack of facilities for a normal out- let for their energies in the form of play. The scale does not indicate, however, the extent to which the boys took advantage of these oppor- tunities. Note that while playground facilities are accorded a high 10 Whittier State School: Department of Research average score, the only case in which occasion is found to use zero is in this item. TABLE II. NEIGHBORHOOD INDEX DISTRIBUTION FOR 135 DELINQUENT BOYS. Index 6 1 case Index 8 1 case Index 9 cases Index 10 4 cases Index 11 3 cases Index 13 15 cases Index 14 15 cases Index 15 18 cases Index 16 (Median) 17 cases Index 17 8 cases Index 18 9 cases Index 19 13 cases Index 20 9 cases Index 21 7 cases Index 22 5 cases Index 23 3 cases Index 24 1 case TABLE III. DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM-POINTS, NEIGHBOR- HOODS OF 135 DELINQUENT BOYS. ITEMS I II III IV V No. grading 10 No. grading 1 12 9 3 10 1 No. grading 2 25 18 23 39 16 No. grading 3 44 34 58 43 54 No. grading 4 48 54 46 41 50 No. grading 5 6 19 5 2 14 Total .... 135 135 135 135 135 Medians 3 4 3 3 3 It would lie interesting to sliow the individual item scores for each of our Viij cases. Space not permitting this, however, the ten lowest, the ten nearest the median, and the ten highest are shown in Tahh's IV, V, and VI respectively. For comparison, the Home Index (II. I.) of radi is given in the column following the Neighborhood lnd('x(N 1.) It will Ix' seen tlinl in ^cuf.'ral the neiglihoi'hoods having Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions 11 TABLE IV. LOWEST 10 CASES AMONG 135 NEIGHBORHOOODS OF DELINQUENT BOYS. SHOWING NEIGHBORHOOD INDEX (N. I.) AND HOME INDEX (H. L). No. I II III IV V N.I. H.I. 1. 1 1 2 1 1 6 6 2. 3 1 1 1 2 8 5 3. 1 2 2 1 3 9 11 4. 2 1 2 2 2 9 6 5. 2 2 2 1 2 9 6 6. 2 2 2 1 2 9 9 7. 2 2 2 1 2 9 8 8. 3 1 1 2 2 9 10 9. 2 1 2 2 3 10 14 10. 2 3 2 1 2 10 5 TABLE V. MEDIAN 10 CASES AMONG 135 NEIGHBORHOODS OF DELINQUENT BOYS SHOWING NEIGHBORHOOD INDEX (N. I.) AND HOME INDEX (H. I.). No. I II III IV V N.I. H.I. 64. 3 4 3 3 3 16 10 65. 2 3 4 3 4 16 14 66. 2 4 4 3 3 16 13 67. 2 4 4 3 3 16 15 68. 2 5 3 2 4 16 16 69. 2 5 3 2 4 16 9 70. 3 1 4 4 4 16 19 71. 3 3 3 3 4 16 20 72. 3 3 3 3 4 16 13 73. 3 3 3 3 4 16 16 TABLE VI. HIGHEST 10 OF 135 NEIGHBORHOODS OF DE- LINQUENT BOYS. SHOWING NEIGHBORHOOD INDEX (N. T.) AND HOME INDEX (H. I.). No. I II III IV V N.I. H.I 126. 5 4 3 4 5 21 21 127 4 5 5 4 4 22 17 128. 4 5 4 4 5 22 24 129. 4 5 5 4 4 22 15 130. 5 4 4 4 5 22 21 131. 5 5 4 4 4 22 15 132. 4 5 5 4 5 23 21 133. 5 4 4 5 5 23 17 134. 5 5 4 4 5 23 11 135. 5 4 5 5 5 24 17 12 Whittier State School: Department of Research a low index tend to grade low in all items; i. e., neighborhoods defi- cient in one or two items are likely to be similarly low in all; neigh- borhoods decidedly superior in one or two items are likely to grade high in all, and to have a high index. This similarity of item scores is additional assurance of the validity of the N. 1. as an expression of the quality of neighborhoods in which children live. Representative examples of the individual neighborhood score cards of delinquent boys are shown in Fig. 2. The upper card is taken from amorg the least favorable of the neighborhoods yet graded. Especially low qualities in this case are neatness, sanitation, and social status of residents. The middle card represents conditions slightly above the general average for our cases. The lower card represents relatively favorable conditions. Note that in this case grade 5 is accorded for three items, and that grades 1 and 2 are not used. NEIGHBORHOODS OF NON-DELINQUENT CHILDREN It is expected that the neighborhood grading scale may soon be applied to a sufficiently large number of unselected homes of differ- ent social levels that standards, or norms, may be secured for the general population. It is desirable to compare neighborhoods to secure racial differences ; to secure occupational differences ; to compare rural and urban communities; to compare averages for eastern cities with those of western and southern cities ; and, what may prove to be of still greater importance, to compare the neigh])orhood conditions of delinquent children with those of children who have not become delinquent. In the absence of comparative averages, we have graded fifty neighborhoods in wliieh delinquency has never oecured, 'but which have the usual proportion of children. These fifty eases can by no means be considered representative of the general population, but included among them are neighborhoods of persons of quite different social and economic levels, laboring men, 1)usiness men, tradesmen, professional men, and college professors. Data on these neighbor- hoods have been recorded and graded exactly in the same way as for the noighliorhoods of delinquent boys.* The index distribution is shown in Tal)h! \'ir. Th(> indices range from 11 to 25, with the median falling at IikIi'N ID. It is interesting to note tliat while in these few •These are the noiphborhoods of the fifty homes of the non-delinquent children used for compariHon in the recent description of the home-grading scale. Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions 13 cases none compares with the lowest in our delincjiient group, the liigliest eases compare favorahly with our highest. TABLE VII. INDEX DISTRIBUTION OF 50 NEIGHBORHOODS CONTAINING NO DELINQUENT CHILDREN. Index 11 1 case Index 14 2 cases Index 15 : 3 cases Index 16 5 cases Index 17 4 case.« Index 18 3 cases Index 19 (Median) 9 cases Index 20 10 cases Index 21 2 cases Index 22 6 cases Index 23 3 cases Index 24 1 case Index 25 1 case Tlie distribution of item-points for the neighbor Jioods. of non- delinquent children is shown in Table VIII. The median in all cases is 4, which is one point higher than the median for delinquents (Table III) in all cases except item II (playground facilities.) Note that in the distribution in Table VIII the scores of and 1 point are not used. TABLE VIII. DISTRIBUTION OF ITEM-POINTS, 50 NEIGHBOR- HOODS CONTAINING NO DELINQUENT CHILDREN. ITEMS I II III IV V No. grading No. grading 1 No. grading 2 9 1 1 4 No. grading 3 10 12 9 22 8 No. grading 4 27 30 34 19 24 No. grading 5 4 8 fi s 1,1 Total.... 50 50 50 50 50 Medians 4 4 4 4 4 The comparison of neighborhoods of the delinquent and non-delin- quent groups afforded by the distribution of item-points is shown graphically in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4. The explanation of shading is given at the bottom of the upper chart. Again it should be emphasized that these fifty neighborhoods of non-delinquent children are not to be taken as representative of the general population. u Whittier State School: Department of Research ntAJnis*. SANrTATtOn. HtP*OVLH[>VT$ CA5CS 135" * POINT* s POl^4Ta Fig. 3. Distribution of iterr.'points 135 neighborhoods of delinquent boys (compare with Fig. 4). ff^aenT 10 ia sa 4o ep 6e -yo act 90 100 Distribution of item-points, 135 neighborhoods containing non-delinquent children (compare with Fig 4). Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOMES 15 Referring again to Tables IV, V, and VI, there will be seen a tendency for the home index to approach the neighborhood index within a very few points. In some cases the two indices are identical. The relative distribution of the N. I. and H. I. for our 135 cases is shown in Fig. 5. Each dot represents one home. Its position on the y I / ' / , ,• / / 21 21 / • / ' ' J 1 <9 / 1 «i ,• 1 ' / • / ft , J / p • y 1 P 1 ,• , ^ If ^* U ,• , ^ b ' ,• Z /. ,• X »* 1* 1 ,• / I* I in V f , ,• ,• 9 V • •, • ^ ,• /. ,• / •i 5 1 / »• ( • , "7 Z V- — .— — — — — 5 A 3 Z 7 ^ — - — — — — — — « i 2 / z 10 II 12 10 14 16 17 IS 19 XO 21 22 23 24 25 2* Fig. 5. Comparative index distribution of 135 homes of delin- quent boys and the neighborhoods in which homes are located, vertical scale represents the home index ; its position on the horizontal scale represents the neighborhood index. The diagonal line through the center passes through the points at which the N. I. and H. I. are identical. The closer the dot representing a given home approaches 16 Whittier State School: Department of Research this line, the nearer the resemblance of the two indices, in number of points. Dots above the diagonal line represent homes grading higher than the neighborhood ; dots below the line represent homes which grade lower tnan tne neighborhood m wnicii tliey are located. The home indices of these 135 delinquent boys are lower, on the average, than the indices of their neighborhoods, as may be observed in the greater number of dots which fall below the diagonal line. There are a few cases of striking difference ; one case in which the liome grades 5 and the neighborhood 17, a difference of 12 points ; a case of home index 6 and nei^'hborhood index 16 • a case of home index 11 and neighborhood index 23. The cases of widest deviation in favor of the home are as follows : H. I. 14, N. I. 10 ; 11. I. 18, N. I. 14 ; Ti. I. 23, N. I. 19; differences of but four points in each case. The majority of cases, however, falls near the line of equal scores. A similar graph for the fifty homes and neighborhoods of non- delinquent children shows a general superiority of the homes. 36 cases appear above the diagonal line, 3 cases on the line, and 11 cases below the line. AVhere the home is inferior to the neighborhood in which it is located it is likely to differ more widely than do the cases in which the home is superior. There is one case of 11. I. 4, N. I. 17 ; another of H. I. 15, N. I. 22. The widest difference in favor of the home is H. I. 24, N. I. 16. The chart is not reproduced here because of the few eases represented. SUMMARY I. The Whittier Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions is offered as a means toward the future measurement of environmental factors of social and economic significance. It supplements the Whit- tier Scale for Grading Home Conditions, an account of which was recently published. II. Neighborhoods are graded by securing data from a personal visit, the observer (in our case a trained field-worker) separating tliC data into five divisions, and comparing with samples arrang^'d on the standard score-card. The grading for each of the five divisions, or items, is based upon a scale of five points, the sum of the item- scores being the Neig}i])orhood Index. Scale for Grading Neighborhood Conditions 17 III. The items graded are I, neatness, sanitation and improve- ments ; II, playground facilities ; III, institutions and establishments ; IV, social status of residents; V, average grade of homes. IV. The standard samples given bring highly reliable results, as judged by the comparative gradings of different persons. V. Neighborhoods of 135 delinquent boys at Whittier State School range from Index 6, which is very unfavorable, to Index 24, which may be considered highly favorable. The median index is 16. VI. Fifty neighborhoods in which children live, but in which no children have become delinquent, range from Index 11 to Index 25, the median being 19. These are not sufficiently unselected to repre- sent the general population, but the distribution may be considered significant for comparison with the delinquent group. VII. The homes of 135 delinquent boys grade somewhat lower, on the average, than the neighborhoods in -vvhich they are located. In 50 cases constituting the non-delinquent group the homes tend to grade higher than the neighborhoods. In the majority of cases of either group the two indices do not differ more than a few points. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY Los Angeles This bat* Is DUE oil the last date stamped below. liiTi m-^^m SEP 1 ^91^ jriii L'J- Series 444 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY AA 000 841 259 5 f » t PLEA*^t DO NOT REMOVE THIS BOOK CARD i <^^lLIBRARYQ^ ^c?/0JITV3JO^ University Research Library I Z