Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Companion services is not the average Public Assistance program. It’s aimed towards keeping the elderly poor in their homes and communities rather than in nursing home institutions. The people who receive Companion Services need help in coping with daily household tasks. The companion does light housekeeping, runs errands, cooks meals, shops and performs other chores. Persons who are eligible, who have incomes below $200 per month, are not given Welfare money to disperse. Instead, the money is paid directly by the Welfare Department personnel to the individual who performs the chore services.
It’s hard to be a welfare chiseler, a cheater, on Companion Services.
The Chairman of the Supervisors indicated that optional Welfare programs benefitting the elderly rather than children were fine if the county could afford to operate them. We’d like to ask him what the county intends to do with the federal anti-recessionary funds — $6,000 worth — received formally at the beginning of Thursday’s meeting.
The Board approved putting the money into the school fund in lieu of a transfer of the same amount — already budgeted — from the general fund. So now there’s $6,000 extra in the general fund above what the Supervisors anticipated.
This is money that the County Fathers didn’t expect to get. If Rappahannock’s Board had voted to grant Mrs. Buntin the money she requested to continue both mandatory and optional programs, the county would still have been ahead — with $2,600 instead of $6,000 to add to the general fund. We think the Supervisors should have voted to continue the Companion Services program and should have granted Mrs. Buntin the funds to continue ALL of her departments mandatory programs.
We’re sure that five elderly Rappahannock natives would be resting a lot easier if the Supervisors had followed that course.
84.2%