[Senate Hearing 107-409]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 107-409
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
=======================================================================
HEARING
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
LABOR, AND PENSIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
EXAMINING PROPOSED LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING FUNDS FOR THE INSTITUTE OF
MUSEUM OF LIBRARY SERVICES ACT
__________
APRIL 9, 2002
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions
__________
78-867 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2002
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire
TOM HARKIN, Iowa BILL FRIST, Tennessee
BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming
JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas
JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
PATTY MURRAY, Washington PAT ROBERTS, Kansas
JACK REED, Rhode Island SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York MIKE DeWINE, Ohio
J. Michael Myers, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Townsend Lange McNitt, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
__________
STATEMENTS
Tuesday, April 9, 2002
Page
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Massachusetts.................................................. 1
Gregg, Hon. Judd, a U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire. 2
Mikulski, Hon. Barbara A., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Maryland....................................................... 3
Lenkowsky, Leslie, Chief Executive Officer, Corporation For
National and Community Service................................. 6
Prepared statement........................................... 9
(iii)
REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
----------
TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 2002
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 o'clock a.m.,
in room SD-430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Edward M.
Kennedy (chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Kennedy, Mikulski, Jeffords, Wellstone,
and Gregg.
Opening Statement of Senator Kennedy
The Chairman. Good morning. We will come to order.
Today's hearing is about one of the greatest strengths of
the American people--our willingness to lend a helping hand to
our neighbors, our communities, our Nation, and our world.
We have welcomed and aided refugees. We have joined the
Peace Corps. We have volunteered at soup kitchens, places of
worship, community centers, and schools.
Now, with September 11, that great spirit of volunteerism
is stirring in Americans once again. We saw ordinary Americans
risk their lives to help others. And no citizen could
experience that tragic day without a renewed commitment to
country, to community, to family.
That is why today's hearing is so important. It is about
our Government's programs to provide Americans with ways to
express our common spirit through voluntary service. Our
challenge today is to match the demand for service by our
citizens with meaningful opportunities to make a difference in
people's lives.
But in many ways, we are still missing the mark. A recent
study by Robert Putnam at Harvard University found that
interest in service has risen in recent months, but only one in
seven Americans is volunteering regularly--the same level of
service as a decade ago.
Clearly, we must do more to make Americans aware of service
opportunities. A citizen's first encounter when wanting to
serve should not be a confusing Federal bureaucracy. We should
look at ways to create easy pathways so that every American can
serve.
It is now almost a decade since Congress created the
Corporation for National Service to enhance opportunities for
all Americans to contribute to their communities by actively
engaging in local service programs. Every week, I have the
privilege of reading with a student in Washington at the Brent
School in a program that my colleague and friend, Senator
Jeffords, brought to the District, Everybody Wins. I have seen
her impressive progress during the last 5 years, and I know
firsthand that those who engage in community service gain as
much as they give.
The Corporation for National Service has greatly expanded
opportunities to serve for people of all ages. Since 1996, over
150,000 adults have committed a year of service through
AmeriCorps. These Corps members have tutored and mentored
students, rebuilt communities, and improved the lives of people
of all ages.
And AmeriCorps is just part of the success story. Nearly
300,000 talented senior citizens have contributed over 125
million hours of service, giving back to the communities that
they helped to build over their lifetimes.
One of the most impressive projects of all is the Learn and
Serve program. The Corporation supports programs for more than
1.5 million students to integrate community service into the
academic curriculum. According to the Learning in Deed study
conducted by the Glenn Commission and the Kellogg Foundation
earlier this year, service learning helps students to develop
an enduring sense of civic and social responsibility, improves
student engagement in schools, and can lead to improved
achievement.
We know that lifelong habits of service have to begin at an
early age. Young children who see the positive difference that
they can make in their communities will want to continue to
make that difference throughout their lives.
Since 1995, the appropriations for Learn and Serve have
remained at $43 million. We need to expand this vital program
so that every school that wants to begin a program can get the
technical assistance that it needs.
I am encouraged that the President has called on Americans
of every generation to serve their communities. I commend him
for making service to our communities and to our country a
priority in his administration.
The programs created by the Corporation for National
Service are key avenues of service available to all Americans
through the State commissions, groups such as City Year or
Public Allies that are funded directly by the Corporation,
America's Promise, and the Points of Light Foundation. These
programs have gained impressive community and corporate support
and created new opportunities to serve. Let us build on that
support and take service to the next level.
I recognize my friend and colleague from New Hampshire,
Senator Gregg.
Opening Statement of Senator Gregg
Senator Gregg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate you holding this hearing, and I want to join
you in supporting the emphasis which the President has placed
on service, public service and community service, in his
administration and bringing forward this concept of the USA
Freedom Corps.
The initiative, in my opinion, is exactly right for our
times. After the events of September 11, I think that as a
Nation, we appreciate even more the significance of involvement
with our fellow citizens, and the President is putting his
imprimatur and his commitment behind dramatically expanding the
efforts of public service, something that I think is absolutely
appropriate.
I hope that as we hold these hearings and look at this
initiative that we will look beyond what the President has
proposed in fact. In my opinion, I think there are other
opportunities out there which could give people, especially in
our inner-city communities who may not have too many avenues
and options, more avenues and options through the use of
community service tied into the rewards and benefits which will
give them a better opportunity to participate in the American
dream.
So I do hope that we will take a look at expanding the
initiatives put forward and creating an even more dynamic
effort in the area of drawing people into community service.
So again I congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
hearing, and I especially congratulate the President and the
administration and the witnesses today who have been involved
in this for quite a while for promoting this initiative.
The Chairman. I would like to turn to my friend and
colleague, the Senator from Maryland, who has been as strong a
champion as we have had in this institution in terms of
voluntary service and she has been enormously involved in the
shaping of the original legislation and has followed it
closely, has studied it well, and has been strongly committed
during a time when the resolve of many others was flagging. We
always benefit from her guidance, and in the area of voluntary
service, if we could persuade her to say a word, we would be
very, very grateful.
Opening Statement of Senator Mikulski
Senator Mikulski. I have been persuaded, Senator Kennedy,
and I want to thank you for your generous words and also for
your steadfastness in this issue.
Dr. Lenkowsky, I really want to welcome you to this
committee, and I look forward to working with you both as the
authorizer and then as the appropriator for the Corporation for
National and Community Service.
You come with an excellent background, and you come with a
whole series of recommendations to make based on your long
history in this issue and your commitment to the issue.
As you know, and as Senator Kennedy said, I was one of the
social architects of the original legislation, but I believe we
should not be wedded to the past. I want to thank President
Bush for presenting his views to us and his guidance and his
principles. We want to work with him. What I would like to do
is work on a bipartisan basis to see how we can take community
service to the next level and how it can be an important tool
for the 21st century.
In order to get there, we want to know what the President's
vision is. I would like us to be able to review the original
mission and intent of community service and look at lessons
learned so that we can look ahead to the challenges that we are
going to be facing.
My goals in this hearing are threefold--first, to listen to
what the President has recommended; second, to look at the
lessons learned from our national service experience--did we
accomplish our goals and objectives; what are our evaluation
plans in place so we can know how well we have done, where we
have done well, what are the potholes, and what are some of the
ideas that might just need to be evaluated; and third, to
really create a road map to guide us in terms of this new
legislation.
We have certainly come a long way since 1989 when I
introduced the National and Community Service Act to establish
this Corporation and to create a series of demonstration
projects that involve what we know became AmeriCorps.
Senator Kennedy and I worked with President Bush I in 1990
to pass the National Community Service Act to include an
AmeriCorps like program, providing vouchers for full- and part-
time community service so that it could go to reducing student
debt or job training. We took it to the next level in 1993 with
the Community Service Trust Act.
When we created this legislation, it was not to be another
social program. It was to be a social invention, hopefully to
create a social movement on community service. We were deeply
disturbed in the mid-eighties that young people were losing the
habits of the heart that made our Nation so great, when
neighbor helped neighbor. We wanted to create a new ethic
around community service and instill these habits of the heart,
and at the same time address the troubling situation of the
cost of higher education, either by reducing student debt or
empowering people to help themselves.
When we created national service, and we created it around
those national goals. It has been difficult. It has been very
difficult. What we focused on was the quality, the innovation,
and whether we could sustain it. And quite frankly, the other
party--and I am so pleased that the President is engaged--has
never embraced this. It has been ridiculed. It has been
diminished, questioning why do we have to pay people to
volunteer, and so on.
But with Dr. Lendowsky's leadership and experience, the
President's vision, and our longstanding experience, I think we
can really work together and take national service to where it
needs to go in the 21st century.
So we look forward to making sure this is not again another
social program but that we create opportunities of empowerment
and maybe new ways of social glue in our society.
So I extend my hand to you in friendship and collegiality
and look forward to working with you on this.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Mikulski.
We want to welcome Les Lenkowsky to our hearing today. He
has been an important part of the Corporation since the
beginning, first as a board member and now CEO. We are
fortunate to have someone with your expertise and interest. We
enjoyed having the chance to talk with you yesterday and look
forward to your testimony and congratulate you on your
willingness to undertake this very important endeavor.
Before we begin I have statements from Senators Edwards and
Clinton.
[The prepared statements of Senators Edwards and Clinton
follow:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Edwards
Thanks to Dr. Lenkowsky for coming here today.
I want to praise the Administration for its support of
national service. For a long time, Dr. Lenkowsky was one of a
small group of Republicans who believed in AmeriCorps. It is
great to see that the program now has strong bipartisan
support.
I do want to highlight one serious concern about the
proposals offered by the Administration today. While the
support for expanding service opportunities for adults is
admirable, the Administration has not proposed any new
opportunities to the kids in high school who want to give back
to their communities. In fact, if I read the Administration's
budget correctly (see page 1088), its proposal actually
slightly cuts the ``Learn and Serve'' programs that serve kids.
In my view, this is a mistake. If we are going to inspire
Americans to serve their communities throughout their lives, we
have to start working with them while they are young.
I would go even further. Service to the community ought to
be more than just another afterschool activity, like basketball
or photography. Service should be a part of every child's
schooling, as much as math or science or anything else.
Based on that simple philosophy, I plan to introduce in the
next week or so the School Service Act of 2002. 1 appreciate
Senator Kennedy's interest in this proposal and Senator
Clinton's support. I also want to thank Rep. Harold Ford in the
House who plans to introduce a companion bill, and especially
thank all the educators who have worked with us on this
proposal, particularly at home in North Carolina. I hope we in
this chamber will be able to work together, Republicans and
Democrats, to make this bill become law.
The proposal is very simple: Say to a limited number of
states and cities-if you will make sure that all of the
students in your schools engage in high-quality service and
servicelearning before graduation, we in Washington will
support your efforts.
The service can be based in the classroom. It can be based
in an afterschool program. It can be based in a summer program.
And it can be directed or supervised by AmeriCorps members who
are leaders and coordinators.
All that we ask is that you ensure two things:
First: real service with real benefits to communities. The
Corporation's own studies show that a dollar invested in a good
service effort produces benefits worth over four dollars. We
need to keep that up.
Second: we want service that means something to young
people, service that students reflect on and talk about with
each other. We want kids seeing these experiences not as
another chore, but as an exciting initiation into long lives of
active citizenship. And we know service is oftenjust that. Kids
who serve grow up to volunteer more and to vote more throughout
their lives.
Finally, our bill will hold these programs to high
standards and require measurable success.
Let me stress: I don't think we should require any state or
city to do anything. Nor should this program operate
nationwide. My proposal is that for the select group of states
and school districts that are ready, we ought to make sure
every child has the opportunity and the responsibility to
engage in service. Here in Congress, it is our responsibility
to give those opportunities for service to our young people.
When we do, our country will be richly rewarded in the years
and decades to come.
Thank you.
Prepared Statement of Senator Clinton
Thank you Mr. Chairman for convening this hearing on this
critical topic--national and community service in our nation.
September 11 taught us some amazing lessons about the
generosity of the human spirit and the depths to which our
fellow citizens are willing to go when we are in need. I was
profoundly moved by what I witnessed in New York and I know
that we have a unique opportunity today to build upon that
generosity and sense of community by providing more
opportunities for all Americans to give back.
When we first envisioned AmeriCorps back in 1993, few of us
could have imagined what it has become today. More than 50,000
energetic people volunteer each year--a total of 250,000 since
my husband signed the bill into law. These special people who
devote years of their lives to helping others are driven to do
because early in their lives--through the influence of parents
and teachers--they are taught the value of service.
That is why I support a terrific bill that my colleague,
Senator Edwards, has developed. This bill, the School Service
Act, will promote universal community service among high school
students, which will promote a lifetime of service among all of
our young people.
One particular group of young people that I am eager to
involve in community service activities are young people coming
out of the foster care system in service opportunities. These
children have often witnessed firsthand the difficulties of
living in poverty and in abusive domestic situations. Their
compassion could be particularly meaningful to others facing
similar situations and I look forward to working with all of
you to increase opportunities for this population to serve.
I applaud President Bush's commitment to national service
by expanding the number of volunteers by 25,000. This is a
tremendously worthwhile goal, which will impact hundreds of
thousands more Americans through the spillover effects of
community service. I look forward to working with you Dr.
Lenkowsky and with all of my colleagues on the HELP Committee
on achieving this goal. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF LESLIE LENKOWSKY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
Mr. Lenkowsky. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Senator
Gregg, Senator Mikulski.
I am privileged to come before you this morning to present
President Bush's principles for a new Citizen Service Act that
would improve and enhance the programs of the Corporation for
National and Community Service.
Since the Corporation was created in 1993, it has
accomplished a great deal, but to better help build a culture
of citizenship, service, and responsibility, we must use the
lessons of the past, as Senator Mikulski has just indicated, to
strengthen the quality of the Corporation's efforts and assist
more Americans to serve their neighbors, their communities, and
their country.
In my prepared testimony which I would like to submit for
the record, I have outlined what the Corporation has achieved
since it began and what we have learned about where we need to
improve. This morning, President Bush is announcing the
principles that we believe should guide reforms of the
Corporation's programs, AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and
Serve America. I would like to submit these to you as well and
briefly summarize them.
The President's principles have four major objectives. The
first is to support and encourage greater engagement of
citizens in volunteering. In AmeriCorps, we would propose to do
this by statutorily requiring all members to focus on
generating additional unstipended volunteers; improving the
education award, such as by eliminating tax on it and allowing
it to be transferred to younger family members or even 2Ts;
testing new approaches that might give would-be members a wider
range of places in which they could serve; and encouraging
growth and greater private backing for successful AmeriCorps
programs such as Teach for America and City Year.
We would also reduce the age and income restrictions that
disqualify too many older Americans from Senior Corps, create a
special program to connect veterans with youth, and eliminate
barriers to participation in all of our programs by people with
disabilities.
Finally, we would urge Congress to amend the Higher
Education Act to require every college and university to
increase over several years the percentage of Federal work-
study funds devoted to community service to 50 percent as part
of a more comprehensive effort to enhance service learning
among all of our young people.
Our second goal is to make Federal support for service more
responsive to State and local needs. We would like to give
States more authority to select AmeriCorps programs than they
have today, as well as greater flexibility, within reasonable
limits, to allocate funds for administrative uses.
We want to see communities have more leeway for developing
Senior Corps programs that will appeal to the baby boomers who
are on the verge of retirement, including by offering
transferable Silver Scholarships to those who have made
substantial commitments of time.
And we propose to consolidate and modify Learn and Serve
programs so that they can better address barriers to high-
quality service learning programs, such as the lack of teacher
training.
Without jeopardizing our hard-won management improvements
which produced our second consecutive clean audit opinion for
fiscal year 2001, we believe that with appropriate authority,
we can do more to simplify administrative requirements and ease
the burden of our programs on State and local communities as
well as the charities at which our members serve.
At the same time, the third objective of our principles is
to make the Corporation's programs more accountable and
effective. We propose a statutory requirement that all
AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and Serve programs
establish performance goals, develop corrective plans if they
fail to meet these goals, and lose part or all of their Federal
support if corrections are not made.
We would also like to write into law the successful
agreement we have had with Congress to contain the average cost
of AmeriCorps.
One reason the agreement has been successful is that the
Corporation was able to develop some lower-cost, high-impact
ways of serving in AmeriCorps, such as the education- award-
only version, in which our members receive no Federal living
allowance.
We would like the authority to move these from the test
phase, where we are limited in how many positions we can
support, into the general AmeriCorps mix. We are also
interested in using the National Civilian Community Corps
model, which is now wholly funded by the Federal Government, as
a basis for partnerships with public agencies and nonprofits
that would primarily work on public safety, public health, and
emergency response efforts.
Last but not least, our fourth goal is to provide greater
assistance to secular and faith-based community organizations.
This has always been a priority for the Corporation's programs,
especially VISTA. By making some modest changes, such as in the
rules governing how its members are selected and placed, we
believe we can make VISTA even more helpful to groups on the
front lines of helping the poor and needy. With proper
authority, we can also do a better job of ensuring that all the
Corporation's programs do what VISTA has long been committed to
doing--helping nonprofits mobilize the resources, including
modern technology, that they need to be sustainable and
effective.
The President's budget for fiscal year 2003 proposes
increasing AmeriCorps by 25,000 members and Senior Corps by
100,000. We request that this committee authorize the
appropriations necessary to reach these ambitious targets.
While our existing legislation, together with the management
improvements we have made in recent years, would enable the
Corporation to achieve these goals, we believe that the changes
the President is calling for will produce more volunteers and
more help for nonprofit organizations for each Government
dollar spent.
We greatly appreciate the interest that members of this
committee have had in the Corporation's programs over the years
and know that many of you have ideas about what needs to be
done to improve them. We look forward to working with you to
translate these ideas and the principles the President has
articulated today into legislation that will put the
Corporation on a strong bipartisan footing for its second
decade and beyond.
The time for doing so could not be better. Since September
11, Americans of all ages and backgrounds have even more come
to recognize that this is a country worth not only defending
but serving. According to one recent survey, 81 percent of
young adults cutting across all demographic groups and
political affiliations say they would like to have a chance for
a full year of national and community service. Since the
President's State of the Union Address in which he called for
Americans to serve and created the USA Freedom Corps,
applications for AmeriCorps are twice what they were a year
earlier. Interest in Senior Corps has risen even more. And a
blue ribbon committee chaired by former Senator John Glenn has
just called upon the Nation's schools to invest more heavily in
service learning.
By improving and enhancing its programs, this committee
will enable the Corporation to respond more effectively to a
public that wants to serve; and if, together with our Volunteer
Centers, United Ways, and many other private groups, we are
successful, we will do a better job of helping people in need
and, perhaps more importantly, strengthen the spirit of civic
responsibility on which the health of American democracy rests.
Thank you very much. I would be glad to take your questions
at this point.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lenkowsky follows:]
Prepared Statement of Leslie Lenkowsky
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, Thank you for the
opportunity to discuss the views of the Administration concerning the
reauthorization of national and community service legislation--the
National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer
Service Act of 1973.
This is my first public opportunity to appear before, you, Mr.
Chairman and the other Members of the Committee, since you confirmed my
nomination by President Bush to be the Chief Executive Officer of the
Corporation for National and Community Service. Prior to that, this
Committee confirmed me to three consecutive appointments to the
Corporation's Board of Directors and to the Board of its predecessor
organization. Thank you for these opportunities.
Most importantly, this is an extraordinary moment in the history of
our country and the Agency I head. Since the terrible events of
September 11th, we have seen expressions of patriotism in tile United
States unlike any that I can remember in my lifetime. At a tragically
high price, all of us have again come to realize how precious our
freedoms are and why it is important for all of us to accept the
responsibilities of citizenship in order to preserve them.
To make this a lasting change in our civic consciousness, President
Bush has called on all Americans to give at least two years of their
lives in service to their country. As the President has said, we can
build a stronger nation and fight terrorism by making a commitment to
service in our own communities, whether that be tutoring a child,
volunteering at a hospital, or participating in a neighborhood crime
watch.
Most of our nation's civic work is being done without the aid of
the Federal Government. That is as it should be, since the Federal
Government is not the source of this civic spirit. At the same time,
the Federal Government can do a better job in helping to support and
encourage it where I can.
Therefore, through an Executive Order, the President established
the USA Freedom Corps, which will build on existing Federal programs
that engage citizens in service, as well as create new opportunities
related to homeland security and meeting other critical needs.
The USA Freedom Corps initially will have three major components,
which will be administered separately but coordinated through a White
House council. It includes an improved and enhanced set of programs
supported through the Corporation for National and Community Service,
which is the direct concern of this committee. Specifically, the
Administration has proposed providing additional community-based
service opportunities and leveraging thousands of additional volunteers
by adding 25,000 new AmeriCorps members and 100,000 new volunteers in
senior service, and by removing current barriers to service, AmeriCorps
and Senior Corps participants who assist nonprofit organizations and
public agencies in the areas of public safety, public health, and
disaster relief and preparedness will work closely with Citizen Corps,
through the coordinating efforts of the USA Freedom Corps Council.
The Corporation's programs--AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and
Serve America--will support the President's call to service by helping
to provide full-time and part-time opportunities for Americans to serve
at all stages of their lives, from when they are elementary-school
students through their retirement years. We will also work closely with
our nation's many worthwhile charities, not only in helping them
accomplish their missions, including providing security for our
homeland, but also in helping them recruit and manage additional
volunteers.
As part of the announcement of the USA Freedom Corps, the
Administration indicated its intent to work closely with the Congress
on a bill that will reform and extend the Corporation's programs and
authorities. The Administration's reforms for a Citizen Service Act of
2002 were outlined, in the USA Freedom Corp policy book released on
January 30.
For the Corporation to play the role envisioned by the President
under the USA Freedom Corps, we need to make AmeriCorps, Senior Corps,
and Learn and Serve America more responsive to state and local needs,
more accountable for results, more adept at leveraging private
resources, and more effective in assisting hard-pressed charities,
including faith-based and community organizations. I'd like to describe
these three programs briefly and explain why we are proposing reforms.
AMERICORPS
AmeriCorps engages 50,000 Americans in intensive, results-oriented
service each year, AmeriCorps members mobilize, manage, and train
volunteers to assist nonprofit groups and public agencies across the
country. The members, and the volunteers they help organize, teach
children to read, make neighborhoods safer, and help build affordable
homes for low-income families, among many other activities. When a new
class of members enrolls this fall, more than 250,000 Americans 18 and
older will have participated in AmeriCorps since it was created in 1993
through amendments to the National and Community Service Act of 1990.
There are three main components to AmeriCorps: 1) AmeriCorps--State
and National, which provides grants to states and national charitable
organizations to support members in local charities and nonprofit
groups across the country; 2) AmeriCorps--VISTA (Volunteers in Service
to America), which focuses on helping poor people overcome poverty and
assisting community and faith-based organizations in meeting the needs
of low-income neighborhoods; and 3) AmeriCorps--NCCC (National Civilian
Community Corps), a ten-month, full-time residential service program
for men and women that combines the best practices of civilian service
with the best aspects of military service, including leadership and
team building.
The President proposes to increase the annual level of 50,000
AmeriCorps members to 75,OO0 in 2003. The new AmeriCorps participants
will generate at least 75,000 additional volunteers to work with the
nation's nonprofits.
As the Congress contemplates this proposed increase, I think it is
important to explain how AmeriCorps functions, and how it can be
improved.
First, most AmeriCorps members serve with nonprofit and community
organizations like Habitat for Humanity, Teach for America, the
American Red Cross, Boys and Girls Clubs, neighborhood watch
organizations, community action agencies, local faith-based
organizations, and many others. In the majority of cases, these
organizations, not the Federal Government, select and manage the
members who serve with them, The members assist those organizations in
meeting community needs.
Second, AmariCorps is decentralized--that is, it gives a
significant amount of power and control to states and local
authorities. State commissions on national and community service, led
by citizen volunteers appointed by Governors, select or nominate most
of the projects in which AmeriCorps members serve, based on their
assessment of local needs.
Third, AmeriCorps, has both full-time and part-time members.
Slightly more than half of the individuals in these programs serve full
time and receive a modest living allowance in order to be able to
serve. The other half serve part time and generally do not receive any
living allowance from Corporation resources. Upon successful completion
of service, both types of AmeriCorps members receive an education
award, available for seven years, to help finance college or pay back
student loans. At the end of this year, the first AmeriCorps class will
have used about 72 percent of the education award amounts that were
earned.
Fourth, the Federal Government, states, local communities and the
private sector share funding for AmeriCorps members. There are various
statutory provisions that mandate such cost sharing.
Since it was created in 1993, AmeriCorps has compiled an impressive
list of accomplishments. Members have helped recruit and supervise
additional volunteers for nonprofit organizations; they have tutored
and mentored disadvantaged children; they have established or expanded
neighborhood safety programs; and they have helped communities rebuild
after dozens of natural disasters and emergencies--including the
September 11th terrorist attacks--in more than 30 states. Although
evaluation studies are not always of the highest quality, project
reports have consistently shown that AmeriCorps members are meeting
community needs in education, health and human services, public safety,
and the environment.
At the same time, the program has had its share of challenges and
problems over the last several years. Many in Congress have documented
those challenges and problems and rightfully told us to do better.
Members of Congress have identified the need to refocus the program and
create greater efficiency and accountability. As a result, AmeriCorps
has tightened its management, reduced its per-member costs from early-
year highs, adopted tough rules on political activity, and cut off
grantees that violated them. We intend to continue strengthening our
management and personnel systems, change some of the ways our programs
operate, and take additional steps to insure that each government
dollar is used more effectively, For example, upon becoming the Chief
Executive Officer, I established a new Department of Research and
Policy Development, which reports directly to the Chief Executive
Officer, specifically for the purpose of strengthening accountability.
But may of the changes we envision to make our programs more
efficient, effective, and responsive to local needs cannot take place
without legislative, authority. I would like to bring forward some
ideas for reform identified by the Administration, Members of Congress,
the national and community service field, Corporation board members,
service members, and professional staff.
States, communities, and nonprofit organizations need greater
flexibility. For example, community and faith-based organizations have
told us that the rules and requirements for receiving a grant often are
too complex and costly. States have told us that we can do even more to
devolve decision making, particularly on grant selection, to the State
level.
Nonprofit groups often find our program confusing because rules are
not consistent across different types of AmeriCorps programs. For
example, Members of one program cannot seek part-time employment or
schooling during their term of service, while members of another
AmeriCorps program can. Moreover, most (but not all) AmeriCorps
programs prohibit members from developing resources, performing routine
administrative tasks, and engage in other activities that help
nonprofit organizations increase their capacity to carry out their
service mission. Unfortunately, that is precisely the kind of help that
small grassroots charities are interested in receiving, and we need to
support them while continuing strong prohibitions on the use of support
for any political activities.
Legislative reforms can also help with accountability. Early in the
Corporation's history, the agency was not aggressive enough about
holding grantees accountable for achieving results. Failure to meet
goals did not have immediate and direct consequences. To be effective,
the organizations with which we work must understand that failure to
meet performance goals will have consequences. Although there is much
that can be done administratively in this area, the statute can make
this expectation permanent and more forceful.
Currently, some of our programs are recruiting many additional
volunteers for each government dollar spent; others are not. Our
explicit goal should be to produce more volunteers for each government
dollar spent. We should limit what the Federal Government can spend on
average per member, put into practice more low-cost approaches to using
members, and encourage more private support. When evaluating what we
fund, we should recognize that a fundamental strength of AmeriCorps is
to help mobilize and manage volunteers for our nation's charities.
Sustainability is another goal that we should make more explicit.
Currently, most AmeriCorps members (though not VISTA's) are restricted
by statute from mobilizing resources and building the service capacity
of the organizations with which they serve. We should set resource
mobilization as a fundamental purpose of AmeriCorps and increase the
types of support that AmeriCorps members can provide.
We Should Also implement new ways to support and expand programs
that are effective. One such way is a ``challenge grant,'' which would
provide Corporation funds to organizations that raise new private
money. The challenge grants would be used specifically to expand
service and volunteering. For example, a successful program such as
Teach for America, which recruits and trains recent college graduates
to work as teachers in underserved communities, could increase its
private support, in part by demonstrating to donors how private
contributions would be ``matched'' by government funds. Such approaches
would increase the flow of private dollars to such organizations and
allow them to become sustainable with non-Federal resources.
Another effective program model that should be expanded is
AmeriCorps--NCCC, which is able to dispatch teams of members on short
notice to help deal with natural disasters and other emergencies. For
example, NCCC teams from across the country were dispatched to Pier 94
in New York after the September 11th attack to provide assistance to
victims' families through the Red Cross, and several teams helped
operate an overflow homeless shelter in Salt Lake City during the
recent Olympic Games. We should use this as a model for other
programs--including those operated by public agencies and nonprofits--
that support public safety, public health, and emergency response
efforts.
We also need to reform some of the benefits we offer. Many
AmeriCorps members have been disappointed because they have found the
education award to be less valuable than they had believed it to be.
Currently, the awards are taxable. Although many AmeriCorps members are
eligible for education tax credits and deductions that fully offset any
tax liability not all members qualify. We look forward to working with
Congress to exempt the award from taxation and to provide greater
flexibility in its use.
Finally, the Corporation's Board and I want more opportunity to
test new approaches in AmeriCorps. Currently, members ran serve only in
organizations that have a grant from or an agreement with the Federal
Government. We should explore new relationships with nonprofit
organizations that will provide greater flexibility for individuals to
do their service at the organizations of their choice.
SENIOR CORPS
The Corporation for National and Community Service administers
Senior Corps, which provides opportunities for more than 500,000 older
Americans to serve in their communities. Senior Corps consists of three
major-programs: the Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP), the
Foster Grandparent Program (FGP), and the Senior Companion Program
(SCP).
President Bush spoke about expanding senior-service programs during
the Presidential campaign in 2000, and he put forth several new ideas
that would attract more seniors to service. In the 2003 budget, the
President is proposing to expand this effort by supporting an
additional 100,000 seniors in service.
RSVP, by far the largest Senior Corps program, matches older
Americans who are willing to help meet local needs With opportunities
to serve in their communities. RSVP volunteers choose how and where
they want to serve, and they determine how many hours a week they
serve. RSVP volunteers provide a wide range of important services such
as tutoring youth, responding to natural disasters, serving as citizen
patrols for local police departments, teaching parenting skills to teen
parents, getting children immunized, and mentoring troubled youth.
Foster Grandparents provide valuable aid to children and youth with
exceptional needs. Foster Grandparents serve in schools, hospitals,
drug treatment centers, correctional institutions, and Head Start and
day care centers, Foster Grandparents help abused and neglected
children, mentor troubled teenagers and young mothers, and care for
premature infants and children with physical disabilities.
Senior Companions provide assistance to frail, homebound
individuals, most of them elderly. These clients have difficulties with
daily living tasks, and Senior Companions help them retain their
dignity and independence.
These programs date back to the 1960s and were created as much to
provide support for, and supplement the incomes of the elderly as they
were to foster continued civic engagement. In fact, participants in the
Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion programs have to pass a ``means
test'' to participate. They also have to be 60 years old, instead of
the age eligibility of 55 required for RSVP. As a result, many people
who want to serve are disqualified either because their incomes are too
high or because they are too young--and many clients who need such
services are denied them.
For example, approximately 60 percent of program directors in the
Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion programs say they are having
problems recruiting participants. About 70 percent of both Foster
Grandparent and Senior Companion grantees reported turning away people
because their incomes were too high. At the same time, 95 percent of
Senior Companion projects reported having client waiting lists, and 67
percent said those lists have increased over the past year. For
children in need of a Foster Grandparent, and for frail elderly, people
in need of a companion to buy groceries or take care of other
necessities, our programs' inability to fill slots is a very serious
matter.
As we look to the future--and to a rapidly expanding population of
seniors interested in helping to meet community needs--we need to
update and modernize our programs. We need to create new roles,
opportunities, and institutions that are more flexible than they have
been in the past. We need to provide additional incentives for seniors
to serve, such as allowiug them to earn scholarship awards that can be
transferred to their grandchildren or other designated individuals.
These efforts should build on the best of the Corporation's experience
with our programs and incorporate emerging knowledge about the
preferences, education, and capacities of the coming wave of retirees.
We also must have greater accountability in our system of support
for senior projects, and a greater focus on achieving measurable
results. Since 1996, we have implemented what's known as ``programming
for impact,'' through which senior volunteer projects demonstrate how
they deliver benefits to the communities they serve and help address
high-priority local needs. Traditionally, senior volunteerism had, been
more concerned with the benefits realized by the seniors themselves. As
we move ahead, we need to ensure that grantees meet specific program
objectives and accountability standards.
The Administration's reforms will strengthen the senior service
programs administered by the Federal Government. They will also ensure
that older Americans will have expanded opportunities to serve in their
communities, including supporting the efforts of public organizations
charged with public safety, health, and emergency preparedness.
LEARN AND SERVE AMERICA
Learn and Serve America provides grants to schools, colleges, and
community groups to link academic studies to community service. Through
such programs across the country supported by Learn and Serve America,
more than 1.5 million students in kindergarten through college gain a
deeper insight into their studies, develop problem-solving and other
skills, and learn the habits of good citizenship while also helping to
improve their communities.
Service-learning and community service tied to education have
experienced rapid growth over the past decade. A 1999 U.S. Department
of Education study found that 32 percent of all public schools included
service-learning as part of their curriculum, including nearly half of
all high schools, and that 57 percent of all public, schools organized
community service activities for their students. This growth is
significant when compared to a similar study conducted in 1984 that
found that only 9 percent of all high schools offered service-learning,
and that only 27 percent of all high schools offered some type of
community service.
These programs are, critically important if we are to instill the
ethic of a lifetime of service and civic involvement in a rising
generation of Americans. And schools at all levels should seize on the
President's call to service to look for ways to integrate service and
education.
But as we look to reauthorize Federal programs that support service
and service-learning at our nation's schools and colleges, we believe
we need to reexamine the purpose of Federal support at the elementary
and secondary education level. We must make sure that funds are spent
to improve the quality of these programs through teacher development
and other means. We must make sure that the programs allow for the
practice of civic skills and lead to the development of active,
responsible citizens.
As with the recent changes to the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 that were made by the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001, we must add more accountability to the system of support for
service-learning. Grantees should have specific program objectives and
accountability requirements. The Corporation should have authority to:
1) establish performance measures for each grantee; 2) require
corrective plans for those not meeting goals; and 3) reduce or
terminate grants if corrections are not made.
At the higher education level, we propose to increase the service
goals for the Federal Work-Study Program--a popular form of financial
aid initiated in the 1960s that currently reaches nearly a million
students a year. Among the program's statutory purposes is ``to
encourage students receiving Federal student financial aid to
participate in community service activities that will benefit the
nation and engender in the students a sense of social responsibility
and commitment to the community.''
Over the years, a significant amount of work-study has been devoted
to such on-campus tasks as staffing academic departments, processing
admissions applications, and filing away library books. According to a
2000 study, about 40% of FWS students were employed as clerks or office
workers. This same study notes that \3/4\ of FWS students selected
their own jobs but it was unclear that they were offered options to do
community service. Indeed, the national average of such funds devoted
to community-serving activities is about 14%. To be sure, the work-
study percentage devoted to community service is not necessarily
reflective of a school's total commitment to service. For example, at
the University of Notre Dame, 75 to 80 percent of students get involved
in community service at some point during their undergraduate years,
while the university's community service commitment under work-study is
very small. But a pattern of minimal commitment to community service
programs under work-study by some of the nation's best schools appears
evident.
It is not just colleges and universities, however, that are
lagging. A poll of this year's freshmen at four-year colleges who
participate in a study conducted by the American Council on Education
and the University of California at Los Angeles Higher Education
Research Institute, found that more than 50 percent said they spent
less than 1 hour a week doing volunteer work during their final year of
high school--and that an additional 24 percent volunteered only 1 to 2
hours a week. That figure is troubling because, while related to
educational attainment, service and citizenship patterns are
established at a young age and persist throughout a person's lifetime.
Perhaps that explains why, despite the amount of time and relative
freedom students have, rates of volunteering among undergraduates are
less than those of the population as a whole. According to the National
Post-Secondary Student Aid Survey, in the 1999-2000 academic year 34.6
percent of all undergraduates participated in voluntary community
service the previous year. That is fully 10 percentage points less than
the national average as measured by the Independent Sector. Even taking
into account the nontraditional student, with greater responsibility
for family and work, the number of hours volunteered by the traditional
undergraduate at four-year institutions is less then the average
reported by the Independent Sector. Although college graduates are more
likely then those who do not attend college to volunteer as adults,
increasing student volunteering would likely produce even higher rates
of adult volunteering in the future.
Improving these rates will not be easy. Those who have worked with
volunteers know that it takes more than motivation to get someone to
serve; it also requires asking and creating meaningful opportunities
for people to participate. September 11th may have given many more
Americans the desire to become active citizens, and President Bush has
asked all of us to act on that desire. But whether we really do commit
to service will depend heavily on the efforts of all of us in positions
of leadership--whether in government, in colleges and universities, in
voluntary associations, and in student groups--to enlist our fellow
citizens to take responsibility for our communities.
We hope that college and university officials will work with us to
increase the percentage of Federal work-study funds devoted to
community service.
MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
All of us involved with national and community service--the
Corporation's Board, its previous CEOs, the Congress, State
Commissions, and programs across the country--have recognized the
management and administrative challenges of running the Agency over the
last decade. While more remains to be done, the organization has made
significant progress over the last couple of years.
More specifically, fiscal year 2000 was a landmark year for the
Corporation in that for the first time in its history, it received an
unqualified opinion on its financial statements. This achievement
resulted from a commitment to strong management control and
accountability for financial resources. I'm pleased to report that the
2001 audit showed that our progress continues, as we received a ``clean
opinion'' for the second year in a row. Perhaps more important, the
number of operational areas deemed to be materially weak was reduced to
zero. Not that long ago, we were cited for 10 material weaknesses.
The Corporation, in other words, has reached the point where it is
on solid financial ground. But our management and administrative work,
is not done. In general, the Congress has provided the tools and
support necessary for the Corporation to achieve management
improvements, and I would like to thank this Committee for its efforts.
We have additional ideas that are intended to strengthen the ability of
the Corporation, States, and communities to inspire people to serve and
help them find ways to improve their neighborhoods.
Finally, in support of tbe President's call to service, we ask that
the Corporation's reauthorization bill reauthorize and update existing
provisions of law that support the Points of Light Foundation and
America's Promise: The Alliance for Youth.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. We are clearly at an
opportune moment in the history of Federal support for service. I look
forward to working with you and with the other Members of Congress to
pass reforms and extend national service legislation this year. I am
available to address any questions that the Committee may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
This is very ambitious, but we like to believe this
committee is up to the challenge.
I remember very well being at the 25th anniversary of the
Peace Corps and sitting at the table with the first volunteers
and asking them how they became involved. They all gave
virtually the same answer, and that was that this was the first
time anybody had asked them to do something for others--
paraphrased in different ways, but it was a very, very powerful
message.
The way that I read what the President is talking about is
how to create more of those opportunities. People want to be
able to volunteer. We should not limit this just to those who
are financially well off. The motivation for service is there
for people with limited resources as well as those who have
substantial resources.
As I understand it, we are going to give that opportunity
to as many different citizens as we can. Building on the senior
service programs which have been in effect, actually, since the
early 1960's we can create new opportunities. In Fall River, MA
seniors work to keep neighborhood libraries and museums open,
escorting children through there and helping them to learn.
They get $2.65 an hour--but that is precious to them, and it is
really important to the community. So we want to try to do as
much as we possibly can, and then we want to make sure that
those are good programs and we want to evaluate them.
At the time that we passed the legislation, for the
Corporation, as Senator Mikulski pointed out, we brought into
the program the Points of Light Foundation into the program.
Now the Points of Light Foundation is operating and has their
own board. We also have America's Promise, Colin Powell's
program. As I understand it, although you can explain that to
me, we are now adding the Freedom Corps, and at least a good
part of that is going to be out of FEMA. We need a clearer idea
of how all these Corps are going to function.
One thing that the previous administration tried to do was
to get each of the Cabinet offices to develop programs within
the Cabinet agencies, and they had varying success depending on
whether they were really interested, but some efforts were very
important and very successful. We need to know how FEMA will
operate.
I am just trying to get a handle on how this overall
structure is going to work. We have spent time, not as
successfully as some would have liked, trying to bring programs
together, consolidate different programs, consolidate
administration, use resources in terms of the objectives, and
we want to try to work with you on this, but we want to get
some idea and understanding about how these boards will work,
how they will interact, and how we are going to avoid the kind
of inevitable struggle that I imagine will come along between
them.
I would be interested in how you look at this--and I do not
want to spend a lot of time on it, but I would like to hear you
out on it.
Mr. Lenkowsky. Thank you, Senator.
It has been a bit confusing, we know. I would like to say
sometimes that we have a corps identity crisis going on. The
Freedom Corps is a Cabinet-level organization. It is a White
House organization that will indeed do the kind of
consolidation that you are talking about. If you think of it as
an equivalent in some ways to the National Security Council or
the National Economic Council, that would be pretty close to
the mark. It would be a group of people at the Cabinet level
plus agencies like mine represented on it that will meet to
coordinate all the work that goes on within the Federal
Government related to volunteering and creating opportunities.
The President has in fact already directed the members of the
Cabinet to inventory their own programs preparatory to
identifying ways by which other Cabinet departments can
effectively promote volunteering and service.
So we will be working closely with the Freedom Corps. The
Freedom Corps does not change any of our legislative authority
or my responsibility as the CEO of the Corporation for National
and Community Service but gives us enormous opportunities to
work more closely with other Cabinet agencies, with the Peace
Corps, and with the collection of volunteer groups that are
grouped under Citizens Corps and will be focusing exclusively
on homeland security tasks.
The Points of Light Foundation is currently authorized
within our statute, and we are recommending as part of the
President's principles that America's Promise be so authorized
as well. Both of these organizations have unique status in
terms of their relationship to our mission.
I mentioned in my opening statement the Volunteer Centers.
These are wonderful organizations. There are over 500 of them
in every community. They are a kind of switchboard, so if you
are new to a community and want to find a way to get involved,
you could call up the Volunteer Center, and that is what they
help you do. They work closely with colleges and universities
as well to place students in service.
One of the principal roles of the Points of Light
Foundation is to work with, coordinate, and help enhance the
activities of those Volunteer Centers, so we feel that it is
very fitting for us to have a close relationship with them.
With America's Promise, one of the five promises of that
organization is to give young people opportunities to give
something back so that young people are not just the objectives
of attention, but they can contribute in a constructive way to
their society. We feel this is very important as well for
healthy youth development; it again fits very closely with our
core mission of helping people find opportunities to serve. So
we feel that having a good, close relationship with that
organization as well will be an asset for us to achieve our
mission of promoting greater civic engagement.
The Chairman. We welcome the opportunity to go through and
have a better sense. The Corporation now, as I understand, is
under the Freedom Corps; is that right?
Mr. Lenkowsky. That is correct. We are a component.
The Chairman. How is the Freedom Corps established--is the
President going to name those members?
Mr. Lenkowsky. It is an executive order, and the President
has already identified a number of Cabinet members plus
independent agency heads such as myself and the head of the
Peace Corps as members of it.
The Chairman. Let me just mention quickly a couple of
issues. One is the work-study program. As you know, the work-
study program is targeted generally--the only eligible children
are students identified by colleges as financially needy. The
average income for participants, at U-Mass Boston is $18,000.
They have to spend a certain amount of their work study money,
7 percent--it is not a lot--doing community service work. We
looked at this over a period of time as far as increasing that
requirement, and there are a number of issues raised, including
whether we are just going to have the neediest students in the
schools involved in community service, or whether it is going
to include the class generally so we are not bifurcating the
class. That is number one. Second, the colleges themselves are
going to have to undertake the program, so they are wondering
whether they are going to get support for the development of
these programs so they will have high-quality programs,
particularly among the smaller colleges, and there are many
smaller, independent colleges in our part of the country.
Your thoughts?
Mr. Lenkowsky. We are very sensitive to that. As you know,
Senator, I am a former college professor, and I do appreciate
how valuable the existing Federal work-study program is for
students and for the schools they attend.
We want to work with colleges and universities to build a
culture of service, citizenship, and responsibility on every
campus. Federal work-study in our view is one tool for that but
by no means the only tool. We think that some of our AmeriCorps
education award programs can be more effectively utilized at
colleges and universities. We think that traditional service
programs can also be used, as well as other things.
We have had some very promising discussions going on since
the President's proposal with the head of the Independent
Colleges Association, David Warren, with the president of Tufts
University, and with several others. I think everybody shares
the goal of trying to get more college students. I frankly
would like to see as close to 100 percent as possible engaged
in service through one means or another.
With regard specifically to the work-study program, we do
think that students ought to have an option to decide whether
they would like to do their volunteering on campus or tutor, as
you are doing, or mentor or other things off-campus.
A recent study done for the Department of Education showed
that close to 80 percent of Federal work-study students did not
know that if they wished to do so, they could use their Federal
work-study funds in the America Reads program, which is a
tutoring program that helps children gain in reading--something
that I know is very important in light of the bill that we just
passed and this committee helped to enact.
So we would like to see Federal work-study students have
that option, but we agree completely with you that service
should be an expectation for all students, not just for those
who receive Federal work-study.
The Chairman. In Massachusetts, we had the highest
percentage of volunteerism in schools of any State. California
has always been a leader in volunteerism but we managed to make
them second place. Tufts University has helped Massachusetts
lead the Nation. Their former President, John Di Biaggio was an
enthusiastic supporter. I have been to his conferences. He was
a strong believer, and he has had a very important and powerful
impact and his successor Dr. Bacon seeks to continue Tufts'
commitment and I think we can learn a good deal from this
institution.
Senator Gregg?
Senator Gregg. Thank you.
Dr. Lenkowsky, you certainly outlined a whole series of
legislative changes as part of the President's initiative. Are
you going to send us up some language or a package which
reflects those?
Mr. Lenkowsky. We would be glad to provide language if you
would like to see it, Senator. We thought we would send up
principles at this point so that we could work with you, but if
you would like to see us translate some of those principles
into language, we would be glad to do so.
Senator Gregg. Well, ``The memo does control the meeting,''
to quote Dr. Kissinger, so I think language might be helpful.
Mr. Lenkowsky. Thank you.
Senator Gregg. This Silver Certificate is a new concept. As
I understand it, somebody who works in the Senior Service Corps
can work a certain number of hours or commit a certain number
of hours to public service and earn a certain amount of
academic credits or college credits which can then be passed on
their grandchildren?
Mr. Lenkowsky. It would be similar to the education award
that we have in AmeriCorps, although at a smaller value. I
think the proposal we have in our budget is $1,000. So if you
commit a significant amount of time over the course of a year,
you would earn a Silver Scholarship that could be passed along
to 2T; it could be put in a Coverdell IRA for education
purposes for a child or grandchild. It is a way of recognizing
the contributions of seniors to service, particularly those
seniors who wish to commit a fairly substantial amount of time.
Senator Gregg. And that would have to flow to a relative?
Mr. Lenkowsky. Not necessarily. It could be set up so that
if you were tutoring somebody, as many of our Foster
Grandparents do and R.S.V.P. people, you could make that
scholarship available to the person that you were tutoring or
mentoring. Again, you would want to set it up in an education
IRA or something like that.
Senator Gregg. Do you have a cost assigned to this yet?
Mr. Lenkowsky. It is in the budget. It is a fairly modest
cost. We can get you that number.
Senator Gregg. It sounds like a very creative idea.
You said something in your testimony that I found
interesting and that was that, I believe, 87 percent of the
people in high school said they would be willing to give a year
of public service.
Mr. Lenkowsky. That is 81 percent of people between the
ages of 15 and 25. This was a new poll done for a center at the
University of Maryland.
Senator Gregg. And have you or your organization given any
thought to how you would create a year of public service that
was universal?
Mr. Lenkowsky. Well, we have certainly talked a lot about
AmeriCorps, and AmeriCorps of course does provide a service
opportunity that is close to full-time if people want to do
this, or you could do it half-time for a year or even up to 2
years.
Right now, the President is proposing an increase in the
number of AmeriCorps positions from 50,000 to 75,000. We feel
this is a step in the right direction.
We are fortunate in this country in having a lot of
opportunities for people to serve. Not everybody has to serve
in AmeriCorps, but obviously, we think that our program is a
very important way by which we can respond to that interest.
Even at 75,000, of course, there may be an even greater demand
than we can fulfill at that number, but we want to proceed
cautiously in expanding the program so that we do not create
the kinds of management problems that we have had in the past.
Senator Gregg. And of course, 81 percent of the population
would be millions.
Mr. Lenkowsky. It would be indeed. It is really very
heartening.
Senator Gregg. But there is nothing on the drawing board to
address that.
Mr. Lenkowsky. Not directly from us, but we think we are
moving in that direction. We think that by creating
opportunities--one thing, for example, that AmeriCorps members
will be doing under our proposals is that their assignments
will require them to engage other people in volunteering,
people who might not be volunteering full-time but would be
volunteering a few hours a week. We call this ``volunteer
leveraging,'' and one great example of it is what happens with
AmeriCorps members at Habitat for Humanity. Our members at
Habitat do not replace volunteers who are building houses, but
they come in early, they get the site ready, they help recruit
volunteers; they do all the things so that when the volunteers
come up to build that house on a Thursday or a Friday and spend
the weekend doing it, they have a very positive experience that
has two very good effects--one, we are engaging and responding
to those people who want to serve, but two, when people
volunteer and have a good experience volunteering, it is a good
bet they will be back again.
Senator Gregg. City Year is part of AmeriCorps, isn't it?
Mr. Lenkowsky. It is indeed.
Senator Gregg. Job Corps, however, is not involved in any
of this discussion.
Mr. Lenkowsky. Job Corps is not part of our program; I
believe it is part of the Department of Labor.
Senator Gregg. But it is not part of the USA Freedom Corps
discussion, either?
Mr. Lenkowsky. No, sir. The Department of Labor is a member
of the Freedom Corps Council, and they may be thinking of ways
to use Job Corps in relation to this, but I am not privy to
those discussions.
Senator Gregg. Well, then, you are the wrong person to ask
that question of. I am interested in how we can develop a
program that is more targeted on urban areas that are inner
city and disadvantaged, where kids in high schools who are
identified as having potential but are trapped in violence and
drugs would have the opportunity to go into a service program
for a year, which would give them some footing and would also
give them a future and give them something toward their
education when they got out.
Mr. Lenkowsky. We actually do have a lot of those programs
already within AmeriCorps. One out of five AmeriCorps members
report that their parents receive food stamps. So we are
reaching that age group.
One of my aides just visited a program called Improved
Solutions for Urban Systems in Dayton, OH. It is a charter
school that serves at-risk young people, 300 of them right now.
It is very successful. They are thinking of expanding to
Cincinnati and Columbus. These are young people who have
dropped out, in a way, of the existing high schools. They are
enrolled in this program, they are earning their GED. They all
become AmeriCorps members when they turn 17, which is our age
limit, so they could start earning that education award, and
they are receiving training in things like computer technology,
construction activities. They are putting the training to use
while they are going to school; it is service learning, and it
is a very successful program. In fact, it was called to my
attention originally by someone who had not been exactly a fan
of AmeriCorps but had seen this program in action and said,
``This is really great; I did not know you were doing this.''
Well, we have lots of programs like that already, and
certainly one of the President's principles is to increase
support for community-based organizations, and I think that is
where we will get even more and get more young people involved
that way.
Senator Gregg. Well, at some other time, I would like to
follow up on that. I would be very interested in further
initiatives like that.
The Chairman. Before leaving that issue, take a look at
young people in urban and rural areas who are prepared to work,
say, four summers so that they will have the opportunity to go
on to college; so it is not just waiting until they graduate
from high school, and do community service at least they can
begin to work, and if they do it and stay in school, something
might be out there at the end. We have some ideas----
Mr. Lenkowsky. Summer is a great unutilized resource--I say
this as a professor. We always know that things drop off in the
summer, and to keep high school students or junior high school
students engaged actively in the summer has many positive
effects.
The Chairman. Senator Mikulski?
Senator Mikulski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to return to the questions raised by Senator Kennedy
related to Freedom Corps, AmeriCorps, and the Corporation for
National and Community Service and so on.
Senator Kennedy said this lacks clarity, and he felt
confused. I felt confused. And quite frankly, if Kennedy and
Mikulski are confused about national service, America is
confused about it, because we have been so involved in it.
As I understand it, the Freedom Corps is a council of other
corps; is that right?
Mr. Lenkowsky. And Cabinet agencies, yes, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. OK--and Cabinet, or independent, like
FEMA.
Then the question becomes FEMA is involved, HHS is
involved--and I am not going into the merits of the program,
although I have some flashing yellow lights around them. So the
question is do all of those programs need to be authorized--the
Medical Reserve Corps, the Volunteers in Police Service
Program, a doubling of the Neighborhood Watch, which I did not
even know was a Federal program, the tripling of the Community
Emergency Response--do they all have to be authorized, and then
they will be funded separately?
Mr. Lenkowsky. I cannot really speak to the Citizen Corps;
I think that would probably be better directed to the head of
FEMA. I think most of those already exist. There is a
recommendation in the President's budget for some additional
funding, and I believe it goes through the HUD-VA
Appropriations Subcommittee.
Senator Mikulski. What is your role in that? Are you just
one of the guys at the table, or----
Mr. Lenkowsky. No. We run the Corporation for National and
Community Service which is a second leg of this three-legged
stool, if you will.
Senator Mikulski. Who is in charge of this Council?
Mr. Lenkowsky. There is an assistant to the President named
John Bridgeland, a special assistant to the President, who is
executive director of the Council. The President, of course, is
the chair of the Council.
Senator Mikulski. I understand that, but here is my
question. Is all the money for all of these corps in the
budget?
Mr. Lenkowsky. I believe it is in part of President Bush's
2003 budget, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. And would the head of the Freedom Corps
Council be accountable to Congress in some way so that we could
get a picture of how all this works and operates, or is this
like a Tom Ridge position? [Laughter.] I am not being
sarcastic.
Mr. Lenkowsky. As I am accountable to you and to Congress
generally for everything the Corporation for National and
Community Service does, my colleague, the head of the Peace
Corps, remains accountable to you and Congress.
Senator Mikulski. I understand that, but----
Mr. Lenkowsky. I think Mr. Bridgeland's relationship to
Congress would, I imagine, be parallel to the relationship of
Condaleezza Rice as assistant to the President in the National
Security Council.
Senator Mikulski. Well, I think we willneed to come back to
this question, because if we are going to be spending this
money, we need to all be going in the same direction.
Let me return to AmeriCorps, which is central to this. The
original goals of AmeriCorps as we established it were around
three deals. First was what I call character-building, meaning
the instillation of the habits of the heart, so you not only
volunteered to get the voucher, but you would also embrace the
spirit of national service, and you would go on--hopefully, be
involved in alumni associations like in the Peace Corps, and
you would be a potent leader.
Then, the second was community-building by what you did in
the community; and third was your own empowerment, meaning that
you would learn new skills, and you would learn a way to either
reduce your student debt or pursue higher education either
full-time or part-time, because not everybody can go away to
volunteer. A single mother working for a voucher to go to a
community college could not go away, and someone with high-tech
skills in engineering might not want to go away for a year but
could work at Habitat or as a design center/urban renewal
person.
So here are my questions. First, in the reassessment of
national service, do you feel that the goals continue to be the
same, and second, under the framework that the President is
proposing, how do you see those goals continuing to be
achieved, or do you feel they need to be revised?
Mr. Lenkowsky. I think the goals continue to be the same,
and I would actually add a little bit to one of those goals--I
think it is very consistent with it--which is that we ought to
use the members of our programs to help build the capacity of
local not-for-profit and charitable organizations, because we
are always going to be limited. As Senator Gregg pointed out,
there are lots of Americans who want to serve. We are probably
not going to have the programs ever in this agency to respond
to all of them, but we have lots of not-for-profit groups
around the United States, and by using our members who give a
significant commitment of their time to work in these groups,
we can strengthen them so that those groups in turn can engage
more people in service.
I certainly think--and as you know, Senator, I have been a
board member not only since the Corporation but going back to
the Commission on National and Community Service--and I
certainly think the three goals that you articulated--the
citizenship goal, the habits of the heart, giving useful
community service and that sense of ongoing empowerment, a
lifetime of developing real skills that you can take with you
as you go into other aspects of your career, remain central,
and I think that every one of our efforts here, every one of
the President's principles, is designed to reinforce those
objectives.
Senator Mikulski. First of all, I appreciate that, but I am
concerned that we are really going to get scattered here--I do
not mean here at the hearing--but with all of the various
corps, I think it is going to get scattered. That is number
one.
No. 2, in terms of AmeriCorps, one of the building blocks
of the program is the role of the Governors and that there
would be commissions at the gubernatorial level so that we
could have some form of training, some form of accountability,
so that people were not going in different directions with
service du jour or current fads, so that it was focused on
public issues that you are so experienced in.
Where do you see this fitting in, and do you see the
Governors then being part of something like Freedom Corps
councils?
Mr. Lenkowsky. No. The Governors----
Senator Mikulski. And I do not want to get too wonky here,
but you see what I mean.
Mr. Lenkowsky. I certainly understand and sympathize with
you on this confusion. In terms of our agency, though, as you
know, we have State commissions in each of the 50 States--well,
49; I think one of the Dakotas is just getting a State
commission now. These are all gubernatorially-appointed
commissions. That is how the Governors get involved.
We are proposing to give more authority to those
commissions and to couple that with accountability. We would
like to give them even stronger incentives to do State planning
so that the resources of the Corporation are devoted to the
most pressing State and local needs as these commissions and
therefore the Governors see them.
These commissions consist of distinguished citizens in each
State----
Senator Mikulski. I want to talk about what they are going
to do; I know who they are.
Mr. Lenkowsky. The commissions will continue to do what
they are currently doing----
Senator Mikulski. They are not, then, going to be a
coordinator for the Freedom Corps, the Neighborhood Watch, and
so on?
Mr. Lenkowsky. No, they are not. There will be another
apparatus that FEMA is responsible for that will do that. To
the extent our people will be involved at all, about 30
percent, I am told, of AmeriCorps and Senior Corps positions in
one way or another deal with public safety, health, and
disaster preparedness, and as those citizen corps, the FEMA-
coordinated councils, at the State and local level develop
their plans for responding to disasters or--we hope they will
not occur--future terrorist attacks, part of the assets they
will take into consideration will be people engaged in the
Corporation's programs.
Senator Mikulski. Well, again, I think we need a lot more
clarity here. I believe in flexibility and creativity at the
local level. I am also concerned that we could be pursuing the
volunteerism du jour issue--and I am not being critical; I am
just raising this as an issue.
I just want to make two additional points, and I know my
time has expired, and other colleagues are here, but I want to
raise two flashing yellow lights, Dr. Lenkowsky.
First, we as appropriators of national service are being
deluged by national programs for earmarks. We are earmark-
deluged by very worthwhile programs--the YMCA, Teach for
America, and others that I could elaborate on--they are
outstanding, and they are doing a great job. But I am now
becoming the authorizer-by-proxy, because we have not thought
through how the Corporation is going to be responsive to
national organizations who then do their work at the local
level.
So we are really going to look to you for guidance in the
appropriations hearing on that and then how to address that.
The second yellow flashing light is with the innovation of
how to use the voucher, I just want to alert you--not warn you;
it is not meant to be a stern word--we are heading toward being
a Finance Committee bill. And I will tell you that if this goes
to the Finance Committee, we are dead, because they have so
many other things ahead of them. The senior voucher to pass on
to the grandchildren will end up in the Finance Committee, and
they get very cranky about anything related to what they view
as compensation or a benefit.
The second issue, of course, is the proposed use of a
service voucher for either health care or a prescription drug
benefit. This committee is absolutely aware that these are
compelling national needs. But we are now very concerned that
these proposals seek to compensate for a lack of national
policy on these issues. Do we really want to use national
service where you have to become a volunteer to be able to
afford your insulin? I do not know about that.
Mr. Lenkowsky. That is certainly not the intent, Senator.
Senator Mikulski. But these are yellow flashing lights, and
perhaps you can respond in a wrap-up--I intend to stay here a
few more minutes--but I really do not want to take this bill to
the Finance Committee, and I think we are going to need to talk
about it, because it could stall what you want to do.
Senator Kennedy wants to move on a pretty good track, and I
am your appropriator, so we could really have at least, if not
the whole President's plan, a good down payment this year, and
then move right along next year.
So, know that I want to work with you, but you see my
flashing yellow lights.
Mr. Lenkowsky. I certainly do, Senator, and we are looking
forward to talking with you. I am scheduled, I think, along
with Mr. Bridgeland to see you next week, and we can talk more
about this as well as the Freedom Corps.
Let me just say that our intent here is not to use service
to compensate for other kinds of public policies. Rather, what
we are trying to do is make service as attractive as we
possibly can.
I was doing a C-SPAN call-in show one morning, and a woman
called in from Ohio, saying that she was a VISTA member at age
62, and she really felt good about her service, but the
education award that you got at the end of this service was not
exactly relevant to her.
Well, one way of making it more relevant is by making it
transferrable; another might be by exploring alternative uses
for the education award.
Another big issue that we have to deal with--and it is the
complaint I hear most often from AmeriCorps members--is that
our education award is taxable----
Senator Mikulski. Yes. That has been a decade-long thing.
Mr. Lenkowsky [continuing]. So that you have given 2 years
of your life serving in inner-city communities like Red Hook,
NY, really doing great work at community organizing in a
community that has been torn apart by a highway; you go in
there, and you put in 2 years, and most of the members, by the
way, come from that community. And then, at the end of that,
when they are trying to get going in their careers, we say,
``By the way, about 15 percent, 20 percent,'' whatever it is
going to be, ``of your education award, we are going to tax
away.'' It is not right.
Senator Mikulski. Yes. This is going to apply to another
conversation. Thank you.
The Chairman. I would just mention here, Senator Mikulski,
that one other matter I mentioned to Mr. Lenkowsky yesterday
was the McCain-Bayh 18-18-18 legislation, where you enroll in
active duty for 18 months, the reserves for 18 months, and
community service for 18 months. There may be some positive
elements here, but that goes basically to the Armed Services
Committee. The Senators feel very strongly about it, both of
them, and I have talked with them about it, and that has very,
very profound implications both in terms of recruitment as well
as the education provisions, the Montgomery provisions in the
armed services that are available to people in the Guard, and
we are obviously interested. And I am sure that whatever comes
out, that will be the first amendment that will be offered.
Obviously, we want to try to the extent we can to deal with
all of these issues. I would just underline, though, what
Senator Mikulski said about the issues that will be referred to
the Finance Committee--and we can talk about that at another
time.
Senator Jeffords, welcome.
Senator Jeffords. Good morning.
This is the first I have heard about this, and I would like
to learn more about it. Being the one in charge of FEMA, I was
surprised to see this and not know about it.
Other than that, I certainly want to commend any kind of
program which helps in these areas, and I want to learn a
little more about it.
How will the $280 million that the President announced
yesterday be administered? From what I read in this morning's
paper, the new Citizen Corps would be tied to FEMA. Will FEMA
or the Corporation for National Service implement this program?
Mr. Lenkowsky. It will be FEMA, Senator. Again, a lot of
the questions related to Citizen Corps, I would encourage you
to direct to the head of FEMA; this is their portion of it, as
I said in an earlier response.
Our relationship to Citizen Corps basically comes about as
a result of the fact that about 30 percent of our members are
doing public safety, public health and disaster preparedness,
and therefore, as State and local councils inventory the
resources that might be available in the case of an emergency,
they will take into account people who are engaged in
AmeriCorps or Senior Corps for the most part.
Senator Jeffords. I am obviously interested in FEMA's role
here. Is it the intent of the administration to use a new
Citizens Corps program in both urban and rural communities, or
just in the urban?
Mr. Lenkowsky. I believe so. I think it is really meant to
be a comprehensive program to safeguard against the great risks
that we now recognize in our country.
Senator Jeffords. And what entity will oversee it? Who will
have oversight of the program.
Mr. Lenkowsky. The Citizens Corps?
Senator Jeffords. Yes.
Mr. Lenkowsky. I think that is FEMA.
I hope you have all had a chance to receive--and we had
asked to be brought up to the committee this document, which is
the Freedom Corps booklet that was released after the
President's State of the Union. This helps a lot, but again, I
am sure that Mr. Bridgeland would be glad to come by with the
head of FEMA at an appropriate time to meet with you and go
over this.
We know there is a certain amount of confusion there. It is
a new idea. We think it all works, and from my point of view,
it is a big positive for what we do at the Corporation to be
able to work with a Cabinet-level agency like the Freedom
Corps. But obviously, like a lot of new ideas, it needs to be a
little bit clearer and better-explained.
Senator Jeffords. Well, I obviously look forward to
learning more about what the intentions are and what
responsibility FEMA will have.
Thank you.
Senator Mikulski. If I could, Senator Jeffords, as you
know, I am the appropriator for FEMA, and we are not averse to
the President's suggestions, but it is really confusing, and
FEMA has no experience in this. Its experience with
volunteerism is the volunteer fire departments, and that has
been outstanding. The President's budget request for Citizen
Corps programs is for $230 million. A year and a half ago, that
is what we were putting into the Fire Grant program to help all
the volunteer fire departments around the country.
So you and I need to talk, and maybe even hold a joint
roundtable so that we can get it right and sort this out.
Senator Jeffords. I agree with you. I think we have to get
together, obviously.
Mr. Lenkowsky. I will convey that to Mr. Bridgeland as
well.
Senator Jeffords. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Wellstone. And I would add to what you all have
just said--I think we just got this this morning.
Mr. Lenkowsky. That is a different document, Senator.
The Chairman. That brings us to the introduction of my
friend Senator Wellstone.
Senator Wellstone. Dr. Lenkowsky, welcome.
Mr. Lenkowsky. Thank you.
Senator Wellstone. I would like to raise a concern with you
about service learning. There is not a lot of emphasis or talk
about expanding service learning in this reauthorization the
way we are talking about some of the other programs. Our
colleague John Glenn headed up a really important Commission on
Service Learning, and from my 20 years teaching, all of what he
says rings true. You can reverse some of the student
disengagement and get students more involved. The whole
bringing of the real life context to the classroom can be
magic. The citizen aspects of public education--John Dewey
talked about the importance of public education to democracy.
Getting students more involved in communities--I have seen it
in Minnesota--is just incredible. Mr. Jim Keilsmeyer in
Minnesota is I think one of the really great national leaders
on this.
Overall, it has been just win-win-win. So given the
extraordinary, I think, contributions of service learning that
I have just outlined, why not more of an emphasis on the
expansion of service learning by expanding the Learn and Serve
program?
Mr. Lenkowsky. We do have a number of items in our
proposals, Senator, that do address this. First, of course, the
whole emphasis on expanding service among college students,
which is symbolized by the Federal work-study program but goes
beyond that, as I had occasion to say a bit earlier, implies
expanding service learning in higher education.
Like you, I was a college professor, and I used to do
service learning with my students as well, and it is very
valuable. I think that insofar as we are encouraging more
colleges and universities to take service seriously across the
board, that is one way that we are responding to this.
A second way is that when President Bush called on
Americans to devote 4,000 hours of service over their lifetime,
he was very careful to indicate that service learning is one
kind of activity that would qualify in his view toward those
4,000 hours.
I had a meeting with Senator Glenn and other members of the
commission at about that time, and I pointed out that this is
in fact a call on all schools to start developing service
learning programs to help students fulfill that 4,000 hours.
Also, through the expansion of AmeriCorps, we expect that a
number of AmeriCorps members will participate in various ways
in service learning. And last but by no means least, in our
proposals with regard to Learn and Serve America specifically,
we are interested in working with members of this committee in
connection with the current funding we are providing to give
more emphasis on quality improvements in service learning
programs.
I was interested to read some of your proposals, Senator,
where you put your finger on exactly the major area where we
most need help, and that is teacher training. Yet the current
way that we are doing business at the Corporation in Learn and
Serve America, my understanding is that we have a great deal of
difficulty targeting some of the funds at whatever level you
choose to appropriate them on teacher training.
So first we need to make this kind of change in how we are
allocating the funds, and then we will use that to build, at
whatever level you choose to appropriate, to build in the kind
of quality improvements that we think are necessary.
When we started Learn and Serve America, a relatively small
fraction of K-12 schools had service learning programs. Our
best data now suggest the percentage is above one-third. So we
have really had a good impact in terms of seeding. Our view, as
with our other proposals, is the next step is quality.
Senator Wellstone. I appreciate your comments, and one
piece that I am certainly hoping will be a part of this is the
Hubert Humphrey--we like that name in Minnesota--Civics
Education Act, and part of that is to bump up the authorization
for service learning, and to expand teacher training through
summer institutes.
Summer institutes have been incredibly important and
effective. When you bring people together, and people exchange
notes and renew one another, and it is a big bang for the buck.
Where I think I disagree with you, though--and I am sure
Senator Glenn has had this conversation or other members of the
commission--is that part of what you are talking about in
response to my question about why not more of an emphasis on
Learn and Serve America, you jumped to the work-study. That is
different. I am talking about K through 12 as well as college.
Work-study at the college level is a whole different concept.
First of all, people are working in work study. That is what
they do. That is not the same thing.
Service learning is sort of a synthesis, as you know,
between the experience, the community work, and the
curriculum--do the work, reflect on the work, learn--and it is
rich. In Minnesota, I am in a school every 2 weeks, and I am
telling you it is one of the most exciting things that I have
seen.
So we can work together on this, but I really want to just
call on you as we go forward to really put more of an emphasis
on what has been very successful, and I really do not think the
work-study model fulfills that need. The President's call for
citizens to be more involved is fine, too, but that does not
speak directly to what has been the heart and soul and
effectiveness of service learning, especially if we are looking
at our public school system.
So I really think we have got to do much better than what
we have here.
Mr. Lenkowsky. We certainly agree with you, Senator. As I
said a bit earlier, Federal work-study is one of may things
that we are doing. We are in active discussion with colleges
and universities now, not simply about Federal work-study but
service learning and other areas as well. So we think we are in
agreement on this, and we will be making further announcements
and further strides as we go forward, and we certainly look
forward to working with you.
We are also very interested in the civics education
portion----
Senator Wellstone. That is good.
Mr. Lenkowsky [continuing]. And without saying a lot, we
have had some discussions within the umbrella of the Freedom
Corps, and we can talk a little bit about that, too.
Senator Wellstone. I think it is terribly important that we
have good civics education, and everybody learns that they
should vote Democrat. [Laughter.] I am pushing it hard.
Mr. Lenkowsky. One of the things I am thinking about
doing--I would like to see AmeriCorps members have a basic
reading list that might include things like the Declaration of
Independence, the Constitution, things we can all agree on that
really do not create divisions, and read those while you are in
AmeriCorps.
As you and I both know from our experience in the
classroom, a lot of our students have never read the
Declaration or the Constitution, and we think that if you are
going to be in AmeriCorps, maybe that is something you should
read.
Senator Wellstone. Thank you.
The Chairman. I want to underscore what Senator Wellstone
said. Service learning has been at the same appropriation
level, $43 million, since 1994. I am familiar with the programs
up in my State, and this is not only the service, but it is
also challenging teachers to make education more relevant to
kids in these high schools. It has been working, particularly
in underserved areas. I can take you to a high school in
Springfield, MA, which had a high dropout rate, a high rate of
violence, a high teenage pregnancy rate, and they started an
aggressive service learning program, and it is now probably the
number one high school in Springfield, more directly related to
service learning than anything else.
It is challenging for the schools. They have to try to
develop something that is going to be relevant to students. In
Massachusetts, they measure acid rain in a school that I
visited recently. They look at the differences in it during
winter and spring, where it comes from, what are the different
products, what causes the poison, what is its impact on the
lakes, which fish are dying, what other water life is dying.
They have converted that into a science program that is the
most interesting program, and the kids are flocking to it. It
gets them out into the communities to start improving their
environment. They learn about the ponds, they learn about the
importance of fresh air, they learn about the value of things
which are relevant to them.
So we want to make sure these are quality programs, but I
cannot underline enough that if we have things that are
working, they ought to be strengthened, but I agree that we are
starting a lot of other programs around here, and we are
lectured constantly--not by you, but by others--about how we
have got to make sure that every Head Start child is able to
score on three different tests, and how everything has to be
done so that we are not going to waste resources. So we want to
make sure that we are finding out what programs are working
well and follow the administration in supporting those efforts;
we are interested in opening up, but we want to make sure that
proven programs that are working effectively are also going to
be strengthened.
Mr. Lenkowsky. We agree with you on that. I think one thing
we know about those habits of the heart is that they start
young, and if you do not start working on them when they are
young, it is going to be that much harder to do later on in
life.
The Chairman. Senator Mikulski?
Senator Mikulski. Just to wrap up, because I know there is
a lot more to this conversation, first of all, I am going to
ask the administration to really win support for our
appropriation on the usual and customary National Service and
AmeriCorps. This has been flat-funded for over 5 years, and
every year in Appropriations, I have to fight to keep it--and
quite frankly, it is the other side of the aisle. I am not
talking about many of my good friends on the other side of the
aisle. And in the House, they hate the program. Jim Walsh is
always zeroing it out, only because if it were coming over in
the appropriation, they would zero it out and put it in another
program, and we would lose the $400 million. So we need
support, and we need support in a big way.
The other thing--and Senator Jeffords and I will work on
FEMA--I think there is a question of whether Citizen Corps
needs to be authorized. We have been asked to spend $230
million for a new program in FEMA, Senator, I think you ought
to look at the authorizing and give me guidance in terms of
what you would like, so we can work expeditiously.
I want to put this $230 million for Citizen Corps into the
framework of an appropriator. The Fire Grant program is a new
program over the last 2 years, the goal of which is to help our
fire fighters pay for the equipment they need, to protect the
protector, to provide for their personal safety equipment, and
new types of vehicles and technology. That whole program was
authorized at $300 million, and I had to forage for the
funding. Now we are asked to spend $230 million on, quite
frankly, an ill-defined Citizen Corps including $144 million in
matching grants to form councils. Well, the volunteer fire
fighters are going to say, ``Senator Mikulski, you know, we are
volunteer fire fighters on our own dime and on our own time,
putting ourselves in the line of fire. Why don't you just put
this funding into the volunteer fire fighters? We are the
volunteers.''
These are the kinds of questions that they raise. I am not
being prickly about it, but I think there is really a lot to
sort out here--and I know it is not under your jurisdiction,
but essentially, it affects the whole climate on service, and
again, I think we need some sorting out here.
I am sorry that we are dealing with this in April. We are
going to be marking up our appropriations bill soon so we need
to sort out what is in the Finance Committee, and what is this
Cabinet-level council or agency.
Mr. Lenkowsky. I know that Mr. Bridgeland is looking
forward to chatting with you next week when we are scheduled to
see you and working on that.
Senator Mikulski. Yes, and we will be working that out.
Mr. Lenkowsky. On the first point you made, again, the real
value of being able to work with the White House on this issue
is that we have had some very productive conversations in the
other Chamber with people who have been fairly critical in the
past of what we have done. I would characterize them as
educational. One of the great things that we do is when you
actually get beyond----
Senator Mikulski. Is that a nice phrase? [Laughter.]
Mr. Lenkowsky [continuing]. You get beyond the rhetoric,
and you actually go out there and you see Sister Mary Jonas on
the corner of Stanislaus and Koskiusku in Buffalo, and you see
VISTAS coming with food so that she can run a food pantry, you
realize that this is not some Government plot to take over the
voluntary sector but is actually a way in which we here in
Washington are working to strengthen the voluntary sector, to
build good habits of citizenship that will last a lifetime, and
to help needy people in our communities.
Whenever I travel, I go to some of the worst parts of every
town, and I see some of the best people. And what most
impresses me is that our folks, the folks in the programs that
you authorize and appropriate funds for, are out there helping
those people. And the more that people see that, the more they
are going to support what we do.
The Chairman. Give us that wonderful quote of yours, Dr.
Lenkowsky, that you use in your speeches.
Mr. Lenkowsky. It is what I said--I go to the worst parts
of all communities, and I see the best people. I went to Little
Haiti in Miami not long ago, and there, we had some VISTAS
helping first-time Haitian home owners whose credit histories
begin in Port au Prince and whose native language is Creole,
navigating their way through the very complicated forms you
have to do--and I was doing it at the time myself--to buy or
sell a house. And our VISTAs were not very far-removed
socioeconomically from the people they were helping.
So you really had a win-win; you were building stable
communities, you were helping needy people, and our VISTAs were
really getting a sense of what they could do and learning some
skills. Many of them wanted to go on after their VISTA year and
get into credit counseling or real estate brokerage or some of
the other skills. So it is really heartening to see, and I
think that as people go out there and see what we are really
doing, some of the preconceptions will drop away.
The Chairman. We will include in the record at this point a
statement of Senator Bond, as well as others who may wish to
submit statements.
[The prepared statement of Senator Bond follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Bond
Thank you, Chairman Kennedy for holding this important
hearing on the reauthorization of national and community
service legislation. I also welcome Mr. Les Lenkowsky, the new
Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation for National and
Community Service (CNCS). As an appropriator and authorizer of
the Corporation, I am very interested in this issue. I look
forward to working with you, Senator Gregg, and my good
colleague and fellow appropriator Senator Mikulski in
developing a bi-partisan reauthorization bill for CNCS.
Along with the Peace Corps, CNCS plays a vital role in
leading the federal government's involvement in volunteer
activities. Out of the tragedy of the terrorist attacks of
September 11th has come a public cry for citizens to become
involved in public service and help our communities respond to
the new demands of homeland security. The demand for
volunteerism is probably at its highest ever as I have
witnessed in my home State of Missouri. As I have traveled
across Missouri, I have heard from people in all walks of life
- senior citizens, college graduates, and high school students
- who have told me that they want to serve and help their
neighborhoods. The events of September 11th have generated a
new spirit of public service, compassion, and responsibility.
We have a unique opportunity to capture and harness this new
spirit and in turn, we can improve our communities and
strengthen the bonds of all Americans in unimaginable ways.
However, the current structure and programs of the
Corporation does not lend itself to meet effectively and
efficiently the volunteer needs of Americans. The Corporation
is not getting the ``biggest bang for the buck.'' That is why I
strongly believe that the Corporation's programs need
fundamental reforms. I believe that it should perform less
``retail'' activities and focus more on ``wholesale''
activities. What do I mean? This means that instead of funding
and training volunteers directly, the Corporation should fund
and train organizations that are experienced and equipped to
train volunteers. In other words, the Corporation should
``train the trainers'' so that it can expand and widen its
reach in terms of the number of volunteers it touches today.
Before closing, I must raise the importance of management
and accountability. For too long, the Corporation has been
riddled with inadequate management systems and ineffective
oversight practices and it has been unable to provide
performance outcome data on its programs. Unfortunately, the
Corporation's top management often ignored or minimized the
importance of management and accountability and as a result,
the Corporation was unable to meet fully its mission. Further,
management problems have hurt the Corporation's credibility on
Capitol Hill and made it an easy target of criticism and budget
cuts. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is to ensure
that the Corporation is able to demonstrate that every taxpayer
dollar is maximized and spent appropriately. As the previous
Chairman and now Ranking Member of the VA-HUD and Independent
Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, I have become intimately
knowledgeable about the Corporation's long-standing management
problems.
I am pleased that the Corporation received a clean opinion
on its fiscal year 2001 financial statements audit with no
material weaknesses and I congratulate Mr. Lenkowsky for his
leadership. However, we cannot afford to back slide from this
important achievement, especially if the responsibilities and
functions of the Corporation are expanded as requested by the
Administration. I hope that the Corporation's leadership
continues to keep management a top priority.
Thank you again Chairman Kennedy for holding this hearing.
I look forward to working on the Corporation's reauthorization
this year and appreciate your leadership in addressing this
important issue.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Jeffords?
Senator Jeffords. Mr. Chairman, I just want to add that I
want to make sure we all work together. I am on the Finance
Committee along with Senator Bond, and certainly, all of us who
have a say can be better communicated with than we have been
thus far so we can all work toward making this a very workable
program.
The Chairman. Thank you.
I think you are among friends of volunteerism here, and we
want to be constructive, and we are positive, and we applaud
the President's focus on this and admire your own strong
personal commitment. And we want to make sure that whatever we
have is going to really work, and we are very eager to work
with you. I think you will find that you have a very positive
response from members of the committee to help make some sense
about some of these concerns.
Thank you very, very much.
Mr. Lenkowsky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. The committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:22 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]