Chapter 2 — Finance

Adequacy of funding

Carriglea Park made the same submission in relation to adequacy of capitation as the other Christian Brothers’ schools and, like them, cited the Kennedy Report as support for their position. This school closed in 1954 and, according to the opening statement: A surplus of £25,225 was generated between 1940 and 1954. A number of factors contributed to this surplus, a major one being the age of the building. It was built in 1893 and was not in need of major renovation while the school remained open.......The number of boys in the school was a viable one once it reached its promised certified number of 250 but it was the rises in maintenance grants in 1947 and 1948 that finally brought the accounts out of an annual deficit situation.

This did not appear to be an adequate explanation for the surplus money in this institution at its closure and indicated a significant level of funding until 1954.

Other Congregations made submissions on the question of funding.

In their opening statement, the Oblates compared the cost of caring for a child in a residential institution today with the money paid to the Oblates for doing this job. They adjusted these figures for inflation and concluded that, by current standards, it would have cost the State £10,060 to keep one boy in Daingean in 1950. The Oblates received £52 for keeping each boy there. Much of their submission was based on valuing the work done by the Order for the benefit of the school and this is dealt with fully below.

The Sisters of Mercy made a submission on the issue of funding in its opening statement for Goldenbridge. They stated: From the interview with the former Resident Manager and from the limited records available it is clear that there was a constant struggle to provide even a basic standard of living for the children within the limits of the funding provided to Goldenbridge right through until the 1970s....

The Sisters set out what they understood the capitation grant was intended to cover: The capitation fees......were expected to cover wages and salaries for an average of eight or nine staff, and other overheads such as food and clothing, fuel and light, insurance, repairs to the buildings, purchase and replacement of furniture, recreation expenses, hardware and all the usual household appliances.

Although they did not specifically refer to capital expenses, it would appear from this opening submission that the Sisters did not expect the capitation grant to cover capital costs.

The Sisters related the expenses of Goldenbridge to ordinary household expenses at the time, which they submitted as being a valid comparator: Where annual accounts are available they show that overheads alone accounted for around 60% of the total funding received, leaving just around 40% ...for food, clothes, Medical care and recreational activities. The 1940s, 1950s and the 1960s were difficult times for every household in Ireland struggling to make ends meet on limited incomes and it was no different for the Resident Manager of Goldenbridge. Difficult decisions had to be made on competing needs.

In relation to Newtownforbes, which was a relatively small school with a maximum of 145 children and often with numbers that fell well below that, the Sisters simply asserted: The financial records of Newtownforbes have been made available to the Commission and they indicate that the finances of the industrial school operated within a range of plus or minus 5% of the capitation budget.

The Sisters of Charity ran two schools that were the subjects of detailed analysis by the Investigation Committee. The Sisters appeared to have a clearer idea of what the capitation grant was intended to cover than other Congregations. In their submission on St Joseph’s Kilkenny they stated: It appears that in the earlier years there was no Capital funding provided by the Department for Capital development.

The submission continued: Funding was provided from central funds by the Superior General in Dublin.

The Sisters quoted a letter from the Department of Education to the Department of Health dated 8th May 1978: The provision of buildings was the orders’ contribution...the capitation grant was regarded as containing an element in respect of the maintenance of buildings.

The lack of financial support did not deter the Sisters from large-scale capital developments throughout the 1950s and 1960s, which were largely funded through fund-raising activities and through contributions from the Convent. Much of this development consisted of the purchase of property for the development of group homes and these houses remained the property of the Congregation.

In general, all the opening statements that referred to finance submitted that there was a significant lack of funding by the State and this impacted upon the level of care for the children and specifically in the provision of material necessities and comforts.

There were, however, questions that remained unanswered. There were indications from documents, particularly the Visitation Reports of the Christian Brothers, that the financial position of some schools was good with substantial surpluses in some cases. There was also documentation from the Department of Finance that indicated scepticism about the pleas for funding supported by the Department of Education.