| A Criticism of the Central 
 - Board Plan for Ohio 
 serine aun 
 
 & 
 
 RUTHERFORD H. PLATT 
 
A CRITICISM 
 
 —— OF THE—— 
 
 Central Board Plan 
 
 For Ohio Institutions 
 
 By RUTHERFORD H. PLATT 
 
 ( From The Columbus Dispatch of Feb, 21, 1915) 
 
To The Editor of The Dispatch : 
 
 Sir: The plan of acentral board to administer 
 the State institutions of Ohio, adopted four years ago 
 and inaugurated by Governor Harmon, is receiving 
 commendation in newspaper paragraphs. Any plan 
 works well with the right men to work it, and 
 Governor Harmon selected men of the right sort for the 
 original board. The advantage of purchasing supplies 
 and equipment for all the institutions through one pur- 
 chasing agency is obvious; a considerable saving by 
 that method could be confidently predicted. In their 
 material needs the 20 State institutions are very much 
 alike; questions touching lands, buildings, equipment 
 and supplies are governed by the same practical con- 
 siderations, whether they concern a penitentiary, an 
 institution for feeble minded, a soldiers’ home, a girls’ 
 industrial school, a boys’ industrial school, a hospital 
 for the insane, a reformatory, a hospital for epileptics, 
 a hospital for the tuberculous, a school for the deaf or 
 a school for the blind. 
 
 On the other hand, these institutions differ radical- 
 ly and absolutely in the purpose they are severally de- 
 ‘signed to serve; aside from their material needs, the 
 institutions named have nothing in common; their very 
 names indicate how widely they differ; their respective 
 
 problems are entirely different; the special knowledge 
 3 
 
or science which must be availed of to deal intelligent+ 
 ly with these problems is different. The plain require- 
 ment of the work for which these 20 great institutions 
 were created and exist is specialization for each—not 
 combination or attempted combination of their unre- 
 
 lated matters. 
 
 The superintendents and professional heads of the 
 institutions are, of course, specialists; under the for- 
 mer system of administration members of the local 
 boards very generally acquired information pertinent 
 to the special work of their respective institutions; 
 many of them became qualified experts, perfectly com- 
 petent to criticise and judge the methods and work. No 
 one would claim that the local boards were in all res- 
 pects above criticism; they sometimes took their re- 
 sponsibilities rather lightly; but it was not all cakes 
 and ale, or, as an esteemed editor recalls it, ‘roast 
 beef and mince pie;’’ the members were generally able, 
 active and influential men; and, for the most part, they 
 were men who loyally and conscientiously applied 
 themselves and their abilities to any responsibilities 
 they undertook. I heard Governor Foster say (and he 
 knew whereof he spoke) that no man in Ohio would 
 refuse to serve the State in the unpaid trusteeships of 
 the State institutions. Governor Foster himself served 
 devotedly for years as a member of the Toledo State 
 Hospital Board, after he had been Governor and had 
 served as Secretary of the Treasury in President Harri- 
 
 son’s cabinet. 
 
The members of the local boards coming to their 
 ‘meetings once a month or oftener put the institution in 
 touch with the outside world; they gained something 
 in their knowledge of the State work, and that work 
 gained something from their interest and attention; 
 they were, in general, a strong helpful influence and ma- 
 terially helped to keep alive the ardor, zeal and pro- 
 fessional ambition of the superintendent and his assist- 
 ants; they carried with them into the outside commu- 
 nity some first-hand information about the institution 
 of which there is unfortunately a woeful lack. 
 
 For many years before they were abolished the 
 boards were, for the most part, free from partisan po- 
 litical influences. 
 
 The administration of the business affairs of the 
 twenty institutions by a central board, with headquar- 
 ters at Columbus, regarded frankly and simply asa 
 business proposition, will justify itself as long as com- 
 petent men are appointed to the board and as long as 
 it continues uncontaminated by political influences. 
 But the assumption that any such central agency can, 
 in addition to the business affairs and responsibilities, 
 take up in like manner and successfully deal with the 
 manifold, human, scientific and professional problems 
 of these institutions ignores the magnitude and difficul- 
 ties of such an undertaking. Such an idea does not 
 commend itself. 
 
 The institutions were organized and running 
 smoothly when the board of administration took them 
 
 over; few changes have been made; things were and are 
 5 
 
probably still going on fairly well; but when the local 
 boards dropped out this meant more responsibility for 
 the executive heads of the institutions; their daily 
 problems are more than ever in their own hands; from 
 the superintendent’s standpoint this is no objection to 
 the change—quite the reverse; but to leave him more and 
 more to go his own gait is not good for him nor his work. 
 The greatest danger the institutions are subject to is one 
 that is common to many hopeful undertakings—the dry 
 rot of routine; as that sets in, the scientific and pro- 
 gressive spirit goes out. There is an easy-going ten- 
 dency to make of an institution designed for construc- 
 tive professional work a place of mere custodial care— 
 a sort of glorified poorhouse; well ordered grounds 
 and buildings—sanitary and comfortable conditions be- 
 come the chief subject for pride; professional effort is 
 relaxed; when this becomes the prevailing condition 
 the institution is like a business enterprise which has 
 lost its earning power, it is on the way to insolvency 
 
 and failure. 
 Everyone who gives the matter any consideration 
 
 will concede that the professional, human side of the 
 work is the really important thing; the purpose for 
 which the institution exists is not to save money, but 
 to serve some human need; the degree in which that 
 human need is being served is the measure of success ; 
 honesty and efficiency on the business side are essential, 
 but a favorable financial showing—a lowered per cap- 
 
 ita cost—is no index of success. 
 There have been instances of admirable business 
 6 
 
management and well ordered material conditions with 
 rank failure in the work whose successful doing alone 
 could justify the existence of the institution; and, when 
 this is so, the institution, with all its fair appearance, 
 is a positive evil. This will be generally conceded, but 
 if space permitted it ought to be enlarged upon and em- 
 phasized, for it is not given due effect. The facts of 
 the business side are easily grasped and understood ; 
 that side alone receives attention from the man on the 
 street—it is commonly made the criterion and the sole 
 criterion of success—when, in fact, it is no criterion 
 at all—it is a mere means to the real end. 
 
 The current commendation of the central board 
 plan rests entirely on a consideration of the business 
 side of the work. 
 
 It is already proven that this central board plan has 
 at least one of the common and most vicious character- 
 istics of the political board; faithful service gives no 
 assurance of continued tenure of office; of Governor Har- 
 mon’s four appointees the first man out was promptly 
 required to walk the plank; after nearly two years 
 of devoted and zealous service, and after acquiring 
 valuable knowledge of the duties, he was _ super- 
 seded by a new appointee. It is reasonable to 
 expect that precedent to be regularly followed; each 
 succeeding governor will have ‘“‘deserving’’ friends of 
 his own for all the $5000 appointments that fall to his 
 
 hand. 
 My point of view is that of an outsider; after serv- 
 
 ing twelve years on the Board of State Charities, I re- 
 1 
 
= 
 signed from that board two years ago, and have not 
 since then been connected with the State Institutions. 
 I speak openly. The central board seems to be in fa- 
 vor just now; it has probably come to stay for some 
 time; possibly Iam the only remaining friend of the 
 separate board system; but, in my humble opinion, the 
 separate unpaid boards for Ohio’s twenty or more in- 
 stitutions of different kinds, scattered through the state, 
 were right in theory ; their defects were not radical and 
 did not weigh against their advantages; one principal 
 
 fault was their being burdened with certain business 
 
 details—contracting for supplies and approving bills— 
 which could be better performed by another agency and 
 which consumed time of the board that might be better 
 spent on other matters. That fault can be remedied, 
 and at the same time the one important feature of the 
 central administration plan preserved by appointing a 
 State purchasing agent with defined powers and duties. 
 Furthermore, with all respect and humble apologies to 
 the present members of the board and their admirable 
 organization, this central board plan seems to me 
 fraught with dangerous possibilities, and to bear the 
 
 (ase } 
 
 seeds of infinite trouble and regret—if the plan holds, — 
 
 evil days are sure to come sooner or later. 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 R. Hy Piaes: 
 February 20, 1915. 
 
 ehh > tease e 
 
4 
 4 
 
 hah" 
 
 nen. «eee 
 Date Due 
 
 Signed fr- 
 
 since the» ; 
 I speak o*¥“* 
 
 vor just n 
 time; pos 
 separate | 
 separate vu 
 stitutions 
 
 were right 
 
 did not we———— 
 fault was t 
 
 details—cc 
 
 which coul 
 
 which cons 
 
 spent on ot 
 
 and at the; 
 
 central adm 
 
 State purch 
 
 Furthermor 
 
 —_ 
 
 the present 
 
 organization 
 
 ro) 
 
 fraught with 
 
 seeds of infir 
 evil days are 
 
 —_—————— 
 
 February 20, 
 
 & 3230 @ 
 
 Beg RP 
 
i 
 
 Tae 
 
 SRA ROR