National Service Programs: Two AmeriCorps Programs' Funding and Benefits
(Letter Report, 02/15/2000, GAO/HEHS-00-33).

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed two major AmeriCorps
programs', AmeriCorps State/National and AmeriCorps National Civilian
Community Corps (NCCC), funding and benefits, focusing on: (1) the costs
of the two programs and who bears those costs; (2) comparing cost data
for NCCC with similar data from the Department of Labor's Job Corps
Civilian Conservation Centers (CCC) and reasons for any major
differences; (3) comparing AmeriCorps participant benefits with those
afforded entry-level military personnel; and (4) information available
on the results of AmeriCorps programs.

GAO noted that: (1) the NCCC program is completely funded by the
Corporation for National Service (CNS), whereas the State/National
program is funded jointly by CNS, program grantees, and state
commissions; (2) for program year 1998-1999, CNS budgeted $23,426 per
NCCC participant and $14,857 per State/National participant; (3) program
grantees and state commissions added funds estimated at $8,717 per
State/National participant for program year 1998-1999; (4) CNS has the
goal of reducing its share of the costs of AmeriCorps grantee programs,
but CNS data show that while the selected participant funding that GAO
reviewed decreased between program years 1994-99 in State/National,
AmeriCorps largest program, CNS' share of those participant costs
actually increased from 52 percent to 55 percent; (5) the budgeted
participant costs of Job Corps CCC are higher than those of NCCC; (6)
for program year 1998-1999, these costs were $28,933 and $23,426; (7)
while these are both residential programs for youths, they differ in
ways that make Job Corps CCC more costly (8) AmeriCorps participants
receive less in benefits than entry-level military personnel; (9) while
both AmeriCorps and the military provide their participants a living
allowance, health benefits, child care assistance, and the opportunity
to accumulate funds to pay for education, these benefits are higher in
the military, reflecting the greater risks and responsibilities of
military service; (10) entry-level military service is potentially the
first step in a 20-to-30 year career, whereas AmeriCorps is a service
period during which some funds for college are earned; (11) most new
military recruits are legally obligated to serve at least 4 years, while
AmeriCorps' service is voluntary for a 1-year term; (12) military
personnel also receive benefits not available to AmeriCorps
participants, including enlistment bonuses, leave accrual, and
qualifying service toward retirement pay; (13) CNS generally reports
program results as the amount of service performed by AmeriCorps
participants; (14) CNS data does not measure AmeriCorps programs'
progress toward the strategic goals of strengthening communities and
improving participants' lives, as required by the Government Performance
and Results Act of 1993; and (15) a CNS evaluation identified a number
of results-oriented program accomplishments, but CNS has not yet used
this information to set useful performance measures in its strategic
planning documents.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  HEHS-00-33
     TITLE:  National Service Programs: Two AmeriCorps Programs'
	     Funding and Benefits
      DATE:  02/15/2000
   SUBJECT:  Community development programs
	     Education or training costs
	     Disadvantaged persons
	     Volunteer services
	     Federal/state relations
	     Federal aid programs
	     Grants to states
	     Cost analysis
IDENTIFIER:  AmeriCorps USA Program
	     AmeriCorps State/National Program
	     AmeriCorps National Civilian Community Corps Program

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************

GAO/HEHS-00-33

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology

22

Appendix II: Comments From the Corporation for National Service

26

29

Table 1: Budgeted and Matching Funds per AmeriCorps*NCCC and
AmeriCorps*State/National Participant for Program Year 1998-99 9

Table 2: Summary of Selected AmeriCorps*State/National Participant Funds,
Program Years 1994-95, 1996-97, and 1998-99 10

Table 3: Selected Characteristics of Job Corps CCC and
AmeriCorps*NCCC Programs and Participants 12

Table 4: Comparison of Selected Benefits Afforded Participants in Two
AmeriCorps Programs and Enlisted Personnel Entering the Military 14

Table 5: Enrollment Status and Completion and Attrition Rates for
Participants in All AmeriCorps Programs for Program Years 1994-95
to 1997-98 17

Table 6: Education Awards Earned and Used in All AmeriCorps
Programs in Program Years 1994-95 Through 1997-98 17

CCC Civilian Conservation Centers

CNS Corporation for National Service

FTE Full-time equivalent

GED General equivalency diploma

NCCC National Civilian Community Corps

OMB Office of Management and Budget

Health, Education, and Human Services Division

B-282553

February 15, 2000

The Honorable Christopher S. Bond
Chairman, Committee on Small Business
United States Senate

The Honorable Charles E. Grassley
United States Senate

The Honorable Peter Hoekstra
Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations
Committee on Education and the Workforce
House of Representatives

AmeriCorps is the largest national and community service program since the
Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s and is in its sixth year of
operation. Administered by the Corporation for National Service (CNS), which
was authorized by the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 (P.L.
103-82), AmeriCorps consists of four programs that allow participants to
earn education awards to help pay for their postsecondary education in
exchange for performing community service.1 CNS is statutorily required to
encourage citizens to engage in national service, rewarding those who serve
with educational opportunities and providing tangible benefits to the
communities in which service is performed. CNS estimates that it spent $477
million in fiscal year 1999 to support about 53,000 AmeriCorps participants.

Since 1995, we have issued seven reports focusing on AmeriCorps program
resources and benefits.2 Because of continuing concern about the average
annual cost per AmeriCorps participant, you asked us to identify and compare
these per participant costs with costs from other similar organizations
providing community service. Specifically, we agreed to (1) review costs for
AmeriCorps participants in two major AmeriCorps programs,
AmeriCorps*State/National and AmeriCorps*National Civilian Community Corps
(NCCC), and who bears those costs; (2) compare cost data for AmeriCorps*NCCC
with similar data from the Department of Labor's Job Corps Civilian
Conservation Centers (CCC) and explain reasons for any major differences;
(3) compare AmeriCorps participant benefits with those afforded entry-level
military personnel; and (4) describe information available on the results of
AmeriCorps programs.3

In this report, we provide cost and other data for the 1998-99 program year,
including information on overhead expenses, education awards, and child care
benefits. We present information on participant costs for both the
AmeriCorps*State/National and AmeriCorps*NCCC programs, including non-CNS
costs as appropriate. We were not able to report comparable participant cost
information for AmeriCorps*Education Awards and AmeriCorps*VISTA
participants because information on the non-CNS costs of these programs was
not available. We chose Job Corps CCC as the civilian program to compare
with AmeriCorps*NCCC because it is one of the few full-time residential
programs for youths that is federally operated and administered, and it does
not receive AmeriCorps grant funds, unlike many state and local youth
service and conservation corps groups. In the absence of reliable actual
expenditure data, we relied on information from CNS' budget and on data from
its grant application database to estimate the costs associated with
AmeriCorps participants.4 To verify the accuracy of the data in CNS' grants
database, we reviewed information from a random sample of 60 grant files. In
addition, we collected information from CNS on participants' rates of
completion and attrition and on their "earning" and use of education awards.
We also reviewed CNS' strategic and performance plans, which are required by
the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. For more detail on our
methodology, see appendix I.

AmeriCorps*NCCC is a full-time residential service program administered by
CNS. Service activities focus on environmental issues, disaster relief,
tutoring children, and rehabilitating public housing in urban areas.
AmeriCorps*State/National consists of a wide variety of grantee programs run
by not-for-profit organizations, local and state government entities, Indian
tribes, institutions of higher education, local school and police districts,
and partnerships among any of them. State established commissions, partly
funded by CNS, oversee most eligible grantee programs, CNS being primarily
responsible for determining programs' eligibility for federal funds and for
assisting the states in carrying out their program responsibilities. The
AmeriCorps*NCCC program is completely funded by CNS, whereas the
AmeriCorps*State/National program is funded jointly by CNS, program
grantees, and state commissions. For program year 1998-99, CNS budgeted
$23,426 per NCCC participant and $14,857 per State/National participant.
Program grantees and state commissions added funds estimated at $8,717 per
State/National participant for program year 1998-99. CNS has the goal of
reducing its share of the costs of AmeriCorps grantee programs, but CNS data
show that while the selected participant funding that we reviewed decreased
between program years 1994-95 and 1998-99 in State/National, AmeriCorps'
largest program, CNS' share of those participant costs actually increased
from 52 percent to 55 percent.

Turning to the second program we reviewed, the budgeted participant costs of
Job Corps CCC are higher than those of AmeriCorps*NCCC. For program year
1998-99, these costs were $28,933 and $23,426, respectively. While these are
both residential programs for youths, they differ in ways that make Job
Corps CCC more costly. For example, Job Corps CCC participants can receive
some assistance after leaving the program, such as help in finding
employment, entering military service, or furthering their education, and
these costs are included in the average costs for all participants. In
contrast, NCCC does not offer postservice assistance.

AmeriCorps participants receive less in benefits than entry-level military
personnel. While both AmeriCorps and the military provide their participants
a living allowance, health benefits, child care assistance, and the
opportunity to accumulate funds to pay for education, these benefits are
higher in the military, reflecting the greater risks and responsibilities of
military service. Moreover, entry-level military service is potentially the
first step in a 20-to-30-year career, whereas AmeriCorps is a service period
during which some funds for college are earned. Most new military recruits
are legally obligated to serve at least 4 years, while AmeriCorps' service
is voluntary for a 1-year (1,700-hour) term. Military personnel also receive
benefits not available to AmeriCorps participants, including enlistment
bonuses, leave accrual, and qualifying service toward retirement pay.

CNS generally reports program results as the amount of service performed by
AmeriCorps participants. In addition, CNS collects and reports data such as
the number of participants enrolled and the number who have completed
service and earned education awards. These data, however, do not measure
AmeriCorps programs' progress toward the strategic goals of strengthening
communities and improving participants' lives, as required by the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993. A CNS evaluation identified a number of
results-oriented program accomplishments, but CNS has not yet used this
information to set useful performance measures in its strategic planning
documents. We are therefore recommending that CNS establish performance
indicators that focus on program results or outcomes.

CNS administers and funds the AmeriCorps*NCCC program, which is a 10-month
full-time residential program for men and women aged 18 to 24. Participants
live on a campus and serve in teams to complete a variety of community
service projects such as tutoring children and rehabilitating public housing
in urban areas. Full-time NCCC participants receive a $4,000 living
allowance, room and board, and, if they complete their service successfully,
an education award ($4,725 for one term of service or $9,450 for the maximum
of two terms that may be served) that they can use for up to 7 years from
the date they complete their service. NCCC participants are also eligible
for forbearance on student loan obligations while in service and for some
assistance with off-campus child care expenses.5

Although AmeriCorps*State/National is funded as a single program, it
operates two distinct grant application processes: one for state program
applicants and one for national nonprofit organizations and multistate
program applicants. At least two-thirds of the federal funds appropriated
for AmeriCorps*State/National go to state program grantees through state
commissions. CNS can provide the remaining funds directly to multistate
programs and national nonprofit grantees. The governor-sponsored state
commissions, which are partly funded by CNS, are responsible for managing
and distributing funds related to AmeriCorps state programs. Since
AmeriCorps began, 48 states and Puerto Rico have created commissions.6
Eligible applicants for AmeriCorps national grants include multistate
programs, national nonprofit organizations, and professional corps
programs.7 CNS has oversight responsibility for these national grantee
programs. Grantees from both the state and national programs provide
participants with a living allowance (typically $8,730 for a full-time
participant), health insurance, child care, training, uniforms, travel,
transportation, supplies, equipment, and grantee administrative costs.
Grantees are required to contribute at least 15 percent of the living
allowance and other participant benefits.8 Grantees are also required to
provide at least 33 percent of their program operating costs such as staff
salaries, travel, and supplies. The funds furnished by the grantees are
referred to as grantee matching requirements.

AmeriCorps*State/National participants may serve full-time or part-time.9
Both NCCC and State/National participants generally earn an education award
when they successfully complete their term of service. In addition, CNS may
pay the accrued interest on participants' student loans that were in
forbearance during their service. However, State/National participants may
elect to serve part-time or in summer programs, earning smaller, prorated
education awards when they successfully complete these shorter terms of
service.

CNS is required by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 to set
goals and objectives that will effectively measure the accomplishments of
AmeriCorps programs and participants. The act outlines a series of steps in
which agencies are required to identify their goals, measure performance,
and report on the degree to which those goals were met. CNS must also
develop annual performance plans that are to include annual performance
goals linked to its budget as well as indicators the agency will use to
measure performance against results-oriented strategic goals.

Federal Resources

For program year 1998-99, CNS funded all of AmeriCorps*NCCC's $23,426 per
participant costs and $14,857 (or 63 percent) of AmeriCorps*State/
National's $23,574 per participant costs, with grantees and other non-CNS
organizations funding the remainder.10 (See table 1.) AmeriCorps*NCCC's per
participant costs were slightly lower. For example, its administrative costs
were lower, in part because they did not include any state commission costs,
while these costs were incurred by State/National. As shown in table 1, the
two programs account for comparable costs differently. For example, NCCC's
program costs were higher because its participants receive room and board in
addition to a cash living allowance. State/National participants do not
receive room and board but receive a higher cash living allowance. The net
effect of the accounting differences is a very marginal difference in the
total funds amount per participant. Neither program's budget included an
amount for paying participants' student loan interest payments, although CNS
incurred these expenses in both programs. In the State/National program, the
share of grantee matching funds per participant has decreased slightly since
the program's inception, despite CNS' goal of reducing its share of the
costs of AmeriCorps programs and increasing the share of grantee matching
funds.

Table 1: Budgeted and Matching Funds per AmeriCorps*NCCC and
AmeriCorps*State/National Participant for Program Year 1998-99

 Category                        NCCC     State/National
 Number of FTE participants      886      22,287
 CNS grant or program funds      $20,316  $10,029
 Education awards                $2,546   $2,546
 Child care                      0        $359
 Administrative costsa           $564     $1,923
 Subtotal CNS funds              $23,426  $14,857
 Grantee matching funds          0        $8,328
 State commission matching funds 0        $389
 Total funds per participant     $23,426  $23,574

Note: Excludes interest subsidies for participants with eligible student
loans.

aAdministrative costs is the allocation of CNS administrative funds to
participants, including funding for state commissions in the State/National
program.

While CNS' budgeted costs for the two programs we reviewed include education
awards and some child care costs, they do not take into account the interest
on qualified student loans.11 CNS spent $2 million on student loan interest
payments in fiscal year 1998, an average of $57 per participant.12

CNS' share of funds per State/National participant has increased slightly
since the program's inception, despite its goal of reducing its share of the
costs of AmeriCorps programs. CNS grant funds awarded per State/National
participant decreased by 6 percent from program year 1994-95 to program year
1996-97 but remained virtually unchanged in program year 1998-99. (See table
2.) State/National grantees also reported declining matching funds per
participant, a decrease of 10 percent from program year 1994-95 to program
year 1996-97 and an additional 5 percent in program year 1998-99. Because
the decrease in grantee matching funds was greater than the decrease in CNS
funding, the CNS share of participant funding increased by 2.3 percentage
points. CNS officials told us that there were several possible reasons why
CNS' share of per participant funding increased. They said that there has
been an increase in the number of new grantees in State/National and some
may have had difficulty raising matching funds above the minimum
requirements.13 In addition, grantees may be underestimating on their grant
applications the amount of matching funds they will need for the program
year.

Table 2: Summary of Selected AmeriCorps*State/National Participant Funds,
Program Years 1994-95, 1996-97, and 1998-99

                           1994-95  1996-97  1998-99 Percentage change
                                                     1994-95 to 1998-99
 Number of FTE
 participants              13,819   18,829   22,287  61%
 CNS funds per participant $10,705  $10,023  $10,029 -6%
 Grantee matching funds
 per participant           $9,740   $8,758   $8,328  -14%
 Total funds per
 participant a             $20,445  $18,781  $18,357 -10%
 Number of projectsb       298      475      589     98%

Note: Excludes interest subsidies for participants with eligible student
loans.

aInformation for program years 1994-95 and 1996-97 was reported previously
in National Service Programs: Status of AmeriCorps Reform Efforts
(GAO/HEHS-97-198R , Sept. 3, 1997). Funds per participant do not include (as
reported in table 1) administrative costs, education awards, and child care
because the data were not readily available for all three time periods.

bGrantees or subgrantees of federal funds that either CNS or state
commissions provide.

CNS has the goal of reducing its share of the costs of AmeriCorps grantee
programs. In its strategic plan for fiscal years 1997-2002, CNS states that
it is increasingly entering into collaborative ventures with local sponsors
in which CNS funds are a much-reduced, even minor part of the investment
pool supporting service opportunities. CNS thus plans to reduce its own
costs per participant by helping projects decrease their reliance on CNS
funding.14

For its largest program, AmeriCorps*State/National, CNS' planning documents
do not track with performance indicators either the reduction of its share
of participant costs or the increase of matching funds. CNS is planning to
conduct program evaluation studies during fiscal year 2000 in an effort to
create and set baselines for additional performance indicators. One planned
study is an analysis of the sources of matching funds for the
AmeriCorps*State/National grantees. Another is an analysis of the effects of
reductions in the allowable cost per participant in
AmeriCorps*State/National programs.

The Job Corps CCC's budgeted costs of $28,933 per student year for program
year 1998-99 were 24 percent greater than the $23,426 cost per participant
of NCCC. While both are federally administered residential programs for
youths, they differ in ways that make Job Corps CCC more costly. The more
at-risk population targeted by Job Corps CCC, as well as the comprehensive
services available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, provided to its
participants, contributes to the high cost of the program. In addition, Job
Corps CCC assistance can continue after participants leave the program
through such activities as helping students find employment, enter military
service, or further their education, the cost of which Job Corps CCC bears.
In contrast, NCCC does not offer postservice assistance.

Job Corps CCC is one of the few residential employment and training programs
that the federal government administers. Job Corps trains disadvantaged
young people for jobs. Since few Job Corps participants have completed high
school, one of its principal offerings is to provide its participants with
the basic education leading to a high school diploma or general equivalency
diploma (GED). Additional Job Corps CCC services include vocational skills
training, social skills instruction, counseling, room and board, and health
care. NCCC engages young people from all backgrounds in teams to perform a
variety of community service activities with minimal supervision. Because
most NCCC participants already have completed high school, the training they
receive is generally preparatory for the areas in which they will serve,
such as firefighting, disaster relief, tutoring, first-aid, and basic
construction skills. The major characteristics of the two programs and their
participants are compared in table 3.

Table 3: Selected Characteristics of Job Corps CCC and AmeriCorps*NCCC
Programs and Participants

                    AmeriCorps*NCCC              Job Corps CCC

 Term of service    1 year or 1,700 hours        Varies: averages about 7
                                                 months
 Maximum length of
 service            2 years                      2 years
 Age limits         18 to 24 years old           16 to 24 years old
 Minorities         20%                          72%
 Women              64%                          40%
 High school or GED More than 99%                22%
 Cost per
 participant        $23,426                      $28,933
 Room and board     Provided                     Provided
                                                 Typically $25 every 2
 Living allowance   $4,000 per year; benchmarked weeks
                    against the poverty level
                                                 ($650 per student year)
                                                 Students earn cash bonuses
 Completion award   $4,725 per term; $9,450      averaging $1,500 depending
                    maximum taxable benefit      on length of service and
                                                 progress toward goals
                    Must be used for higher
                    education, to repay an
 Use of completion  existing student loan, or
 award              for an approved              Not restricted
                    school-to-work program
                    within 7 years of completing
                    service
                    Up to $400 per month
 Child care         depending on need; less than Not available
                    1% usage rate in 1998
 Basic education    Rarely provided              Provided
 Social skills
 instruction        Not applicable               Provided
 Counseling                                      Provided; available 24
 services           Provided                     hours a day
 Interest
 forbearance        Provided                     Not applicable

                    Covers actual individual     Individual care; includes
 Health insurance   costs, except for $5         dental and eye care.
 and health care    copayment; limited dental    Centers have nurses,
                    and eye care coverage        doctors, and dentists on
                                                 call
                                                 Assistance with finding
 Postservice                                     employment, entering
 benefits           None                         military, or furthering
                                                 education

Participants

The benefits provided to entry-level military personnel exceed benefits that
AmeriCorps participants receive, partly because of the greater risks and
responsibilities associated with military service. Both AmeriCorps and the
military provide their participants a living allowance, health benefits,
child care assistance, and the opportunity to accumulate funds to pay for
education. However, the disparity in the amount of those benefits may
reflect AmeriCorps' shorter (1-year) term, which may be canceled at any
time, whereas the military service obligation is for at least 4 years for
most new recruits and is potentially the start of a 20-to-30-year career. In
addition, military benefits may include enlistment bonuses, a family
separation allowance, leave accrual, and a qualifying service credit toward
retirement pay, none of which is provided to AmeriCorps participants.

We compared the benefits available to AmeriCorps*State/National and
AmeriCorps*NCCC participants (including child care) with the benefits
available to entry-level military personnel. (See table 4.) AmeriCorps
participants are eligible to receive funds to use for child care; military
personnel have child care facilities made available to them at a reduced
cost. For example, data from our October 1999 report on military and
civilian child care show that, depending on their income category, for the
1998-99 school year, active duty families paid between $38 and $97 per week
for child care in a military child development center.15 The average weekly
benefit available to an AmeriCorps participant ranges from $66 to $92. In
both AmeriCorps programs and the military, however, the majority of the
participants and entry-level military personnel are not parents and do not
need child care, although the benefit is available.

Table 4: Comparison of Selected Benefits Afforded Participants in Two
AmeriCorps Programs and Enlisted Personnel Entering the Military

   Benefit    AmeriCorps*State/National  AmeriCorps*NCCC     Entry-level
                                                              militarya
 Term of                                 1 year or 1,700
 service      1 year or 1,700 hours      hours            Generally 4 years
 Maximum
 length of    2 years                    2 years          Not applicable
 service

 Room and                                Provided
 board        Not provided                                Provided

 Living       Generally $8,730 per year;                  $12,067 per year
 allowance    CNS pays 85% maximum       $4,000 per year  for the lowest
                                                          military rank
                                                          $19,008 maximum
                                                          for 3 years'
                                         $4,725 per term  service; $1,200
 Education    $4,725 per term up to      up to $9,450.    personal
 award        $9,450. Taxable benefit    Taxable benefit  contribution
              not indexed for inflation  not indexed for  required.
                                         inflation        Nontaxable
                                                          benefit indexed
                                                          for inflation
                                         Must be used for
                                         higher           May be used to
              Must be used for higher    education, to    pay for
              education, to repay an     repay an         apprenticeship,
 Use of       existing student loan, or  existing student job training, or
 education    for an approved            loan, or for an  higher education
 award        school-to-work program     approved         or to repay an
              within 7 years of          school-to-work   existing student
              completing service         program within 7 loan within 10
                                         years of         years of
                                         completing       discharge
                                         service
                                                          Partially
              Paid directly to           Up to $400 per   provided; amount
              participating, qualified   month, depending based on family
 Child care   providers, depending on    on need; less    income; family
              need; 9% usage rate in     than 1% usage    pays a weekly fee
              1998                       rate in 1998     ranging between
                                                          $38 and $97
 Interest
 forbearance  Provided                   Provided         Not providedb
                                                          Individual
              Individual coverage only;  Individual       coverage
              $100 annual deductible.    coverage only.   available at no
              CNS covers 80% of eligible CNS covers       cost, including
 Health       expenses until participant actual costs,    dental and eye
 insurance    has paid $1,000 out of     except for $5    care coverage.
              pocket (including          copayment.       Subsidized care
              deductible) and then 100%. Limited dental   available for
              Limited dental and eye     and eye care     dependents with
              care coverage              coverage         some copayments
                                                          and deductibles

aAdditional benefits may include an enlistment bonus, a family separation
allowance, leave accrual, qualifying service credit toward retirement pay,
and certain special and incentive pay, none of which AmeriCorps participants
are allowed.

bSome federal and some state guaranteed education loans provide for
deferment of interest and payments for up to 3 years while the borrower is
in the military. A federal Perkins loan borrower can also have up to 50
percent of his or her loan cancelled for military service in areas of
hostilities or imminent danger.

Pay and benefits for military personnel reflect the distinctive elements of
military service and are intended to compensate for the conditions,
hardships, unusual demands, and potential danger inherent in military
service but not normally found in civilian employment. While benefits that
support the institutional character of military service are an important
component of military compensation, determining what portion of a service
member's pay is recompense for these special conditions is highly
subjective. Entry-level military pay is intended to attract men and women to
service by offering competitive wages. Military personnel receive tax-exempt
housing and food allowances that are intended to help support current living
standards. In contrast, AmeriCorps participants generally do not receive
housing and subsistence, with the exception of participants in
AmeriCorps*NCCC, which is a residential program. The living allowance
provided in NCCC is minimal, benchmarked at the poverty level, and
considered taxable income.

CNS generally reports AmeriCorps program results as the amount of service
that AmeriCorps participants perform. CNS also collects and reports data
regarding the enrollment, service completion, and attrition of AmeriCorps
participants. However, these data do not completely measure AmeriCorps
programs' progress toward two of CNS' strategic goals: (1) to make
communities stronger through participants' service and (2) to improve the
lives of those who serve. CNS sponsored a major evaluation of the
AmeriCorps*State/National program's project activities in the 1994-95 and
1995-96 program years but has not yet used information from this evaluation
to develop useful performance indicators.16 Doing so would help measure
programs' progress toward strategic agencywide goals.

CNS generally reports the results of its programs and activities by
quantifying the amount of services AmeriCorps participants perform. Services
provided by AmeriCorps*State/National participants, for example, range from
tutoring children in pre-school or after-school programs to assisting
community policing programs to building or rehabilitating housing for the
homeless. Participants also recruit community volunteers for many of these
activities. In its fiscal year 2000 performance plan, CNS states that
AmeriCorps*State/National participants have provided benefits to 33 million
Americans in its 4 years of operation.

A CNS-sponsored evaluation of AmeriCorps*State/National program
accomplishments for program years 1994-95 and 1995-96 measured the extent to
which AmeriCorps participants provided child care, taught students in Head
Start and kindergarten, tutored students in grades 1-12, taught adults GED
and basic skills development, immunized adults and children, completed
rehabilitations and renovations of low-income and other housing, completed
new homeless shelters, performed neighborhood cleanup activities, planted
trees in urban areas and rural towns, repaired dams, and performed other
flood control activities. The evaluation categorizes these accomplishments
into four service issue areas: (1) education, (2) health and human needs,
(3) environmental and neighborhood restoration, and (4) public safety.

AmeriCorps*NCCC services have a special focus on environmental issues,
disaster relief, and leadership for large numbers of volunteers.
Participants serve in state and national forests building trails and
providing fire mitigation services. In addition to providing these services,
NCCC participants tutor children, rehabilitate public schools and public
housing in urban areas, and assist low-income residents of nursing homes
with daily living activities. CNS states in its fiscal year 2000 performance
plan that AmeriCorps*NCCC participants completed 554 service projects in
fiscal year 1998 and served in 42 disasters.

Each year, CNS collects and reports general data regarding the enrollment,
service completion, and attrition of AmeriCorps participants. CNS' planning
documents contain performance indicators regarding all three elements.

CNS reports that 61 percent of AmeriCorps participants entering AmeriCorps
during 1994-98 have completed their term of service. Twenty-eight percent of
the participants left AmeriCorps early, while the remaining 11 percent had
not yet completed their service in June 1999 but were still eligible to.
(See table 5.) Of those who left service early, 20 percent left "for cause"
and 8 percent left "for compelling personal reasons."17 CNS officials have
said that some of those leaving early do so in order to obtain jobs or to
seek other opportunities, and in some cases this is a major purpose of the
program in which an AmeriCorps participant is enrolled.

Table 5: Enrollment Status and Completion and Attrition Rates for
Participants in All AmeriCorps Programs for Program Years 1994-95 to 1997-98

                                    Percent      Participants    Percent
 Year      Participants  Completed  completed    ended service   ended
           enrolleda     service                                 service
                                    service      early
                                                                 early
 1994-95   25,232        16,433     65%          7,538           30%
 1995-96   25,157        15,699     62           8,106           32
 1996-97   25,199        16,106     64           7,127           28
 1997-98   38,026        20,888     55           8,802           23
 Total
 1994-98   113,614       69,126     61%          31,573          28%

Note: The sum of participants who completed service and participants who
ended service early does not equal the number of enrolled participants
because some participants had not yet completed but were still eligible to
complete their terms of service.

aThe number enrolled includes all full-time, part-time, and reduced
part-time participants.

Source: CNS, Office of Budget and Trust Operations.

As of June 1999, 78,022 AmeriCorps participants had earned an education
award for service in program years 1994-95 through 1997-98. Of these, 69,126
earned an education award by completing their service. Participants leaving
for compelling personal reasons receive a pro-rated award if they have
completed at least 15 percent of their term before they leave; about 8,896
AmeriCorps participants received a pro-rated award from program years
1994-98. To date, 62 percent of all those credited with an education award
for service in the first 4 program years have used at least part of their
award. The percentages range from 71 percent of those in the first program
year to 46 percent of those in the fourth program year. (See table 6.)

Table 6: Education Awards Earned and Used in All AmeriCorps Programs in
Program Years 1994-95 Through 1997-98

                                                    Percent used
     Year      Earned (as of June 1999)a   Used
                                                  (as of June 1999)
 1994-95       18,814                     13,406  71%
 1995-96       18,340                     12,747  70
 1996-97       18,047                     11,417  63
 1997-98       22,821                     10,494  46
 Total 1994-98 78,022                     48,064  62%

aIncludes awards earned by full-time, part-time, and reduced part-time
participants.

Source: CNS, Office of Budget and Trust Operations.

Results

Although CNS has enumerated and characterized a number of positive program
activities, counting them does not fully measure program results or outcomes
as required by the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993. Through
the framework and expectations of the act, CNS is required to have strategic
plans and set performance goals and indicators that will effectively measure
the accomplishments of AmeriCorps programs and participants. The act shifted
the focus for measuring progress from inputs and outputs to outcomes and
results.18 These plans must specify results or outcome-based indicators that
agencies will use to measure progress toward their goals. In addition, when
the Congress authorized CNS, it required the agency to (1) set measurable
goals for its programs' performance, (2) encourage citizens to engage in
national service and reward those who serve with greater educational
opportunity, and (3) provide tangible benefits to the communities in which
service is performed.

Even though CNS has specified its strategic goals, its planning documents do
not contain the corresponding outcome-based indicators that would allow
measurement of progress toward them. CNS' planning documents include two
strategic goals directly related to the results of service AmeriCorps
participants perform. The two strategic goals state that communities will be
made stronger through participants' service and that the lives of those who
serve will be improved because of their service experience. CNS has
identified performance indicators to measure progress toward its strategic
goals, including, for example, the average percentage of expected service
time completed by AmeriCorps participants (retention rate) and the number of
AmeriCorps participants enrolled. Although these indicators measure program
inputs and outputs and track general program initiatives, they do not
measure outcomes or program results such as community or participant
benefits. In addition, CNS has not yet determined performance goals for
retention. CNS does have one indicator--the percentage of participants who
successfully complete a term of service and become eligible to receive an
education award--that is focused on participant benefit. While this
indicator is measurable, it is not accompanied by any additional information
that could be used to measure progress toward CNS' goal of improving
participants' lives, such as the number of participants who actually use
their awards to pay for attendance at a qualified institution of higher
education.

Its Planning Documents

CNS conducted an assessment of the project accomplishments of
AmeriCorps*State/National in the 1994-95 and 1995-96 program years that, in
part, measured outcomes related to the strengthening of communities and
improvements to participants lives; however, it has yet to use this
information to develop performance indicators in its planning documents. The
evaluation reported on (1) participants who were asked to rate whether their
life skills had improved through their AmeriCorps service and (2) community
representatives who were asked to rate projects on various components of
community strengthening.

During our examination of CNS' planning documents, we found that CNS did not
use the outcomes or results identified in the evaluation to develop
performance measures as a way to help it evaluate progress toward achieving
its strategic goals. A CNS official acknowledged that previous study results
had not been used to identify or determine measurable performance indicators
for its strategic goals, although he said that results from ongoing and
future studies will be used for that purpose. CNS is conducting further
evaluations in an effort to determine the effect of the AmeriCorps programs
on both communities and participants.

CNS' information and reports show that selected AmeriCorps participant costs
have been reduced since the program's inception and that benefits have
evolved from AmeriCorps program activities. That being said, CNS' planning
and reporting, as envisioned by the Government Performance and Results Act
of 1993, could be improved to present information that would better reflect
how CNS is meeting its performance goals. While we recognize that the output
measures, as CNS reports, can be useful, we also believe that CNS'
performance could be more fully assessed with more outcome-specific
measures.

CNS has set goals to have communities benefit and participants' lives
improve as a result of AmeriCorps service. However, CNS' planning documents
contain limited performance indicators to help it demonstrate the extent to
which AmeriCorps accomplishments achieve these goals. We recognize that
developing comparable measures for its programs will be difficult, primarily
because of the range of services AmeriCorps programs provide and the
difficulty associated with isolating their effects. However, CNS could begin
working on these measures, building on information it has already gathered
from its evaluation of AmeriCorps*State/National project activities.

We recommend that the Chief Executive Officer of CNS improve the usefulness
of its performance planning by adding performance indicators that more
directly measure how AmeriCorps programs are meeting their goals to make a
difference to the communities served and to improve the lives of
participants.

In commenting on a draft of this report, CNS concurred with our
recommendation and generally agreed with our findings. (CNS' comments are
printed in appendix II.) In referring to the lack of performance goals for
program participants' retention, CNS stated that retention is not a matter
easily reduced to across-the-board goals, especially given the decentralized
and highly devolved system of national service called for under its
authorizing legislation. CNS stated that local programs have differing
purposes and strategies and that the differences in their retention rates,
if averaged together, could result in an incorrect assessment of the success
of these programs. We agree and recognize the difficulty in establishing
retention goals. When setting performance goals for retention, CNS can set
them for individual programs as it deems appropriate.

In referring to the concerns we raised about CNS' reporting under the
Government Performance and Results Act of 1993, CNS said that its primary
reporting strategy is to rely on independent evaluation data on
accomplishments. It said that it intends to provide in a forthcoming report
to the Congress significant outcome data on goals related to how its
AmeriCorps program benefits communities and participants' lives.

CNS was concerned that our report make clear that the participant cost
information we reported did not include the AmeriCorps*Education Awards
program. We agree and have included a statement to this effect. CNS also
provided a number of technical comments that we incorporated in the report
as appropriate.

As we arranged with your office, unless you announce its contents earlier,
we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days after the date
of this letter. We will then send copies to the appropriate House and Senate
committees and others who are interested. We will also make copies available
to others on request.

If you have any questions, please call me at (202) 512-7215. Major
contributors to this report include Joseph J. Eglin, Jr., Gene Kuehneman,
Monika Gomez, and Patrick DiBattista.

Barbara D. Bovbjerg
Associate Director, Education, Workforce, and
Income Security Issues

Scope and Methodology

In this appendix, we supplement the information in the report body with
additional details on the data and methods we used to meet our objectives.
We performed our work between April and September 1999 in accordance with
generally accepted government auditing standards.

Programs

We used budget data from the Corporation for National Service (CNS) to
report on the amount and source of funds available for expenditure to
support participants in two selected AmeriCorps programs,
AmeriCorps*National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC) and
Americorps*State/National, including non-CNS costs as appropriate. While we
were asked to report on the costs associated with AmeriCorps participants,
we were not able to report comparable cost information for
AmeriCorps*Education Awards and AmeriCorps*VISTA participants because
information on the non-CNS costs of these programs was not available. We
relied on data from CNS' budget and grant application database because the
agency was unable to provide reliable information on its actual program
expenditures. The funds that directly support AmeriCorps participants come
from (1) funds CNS provides to grantees on behalf of participants and the
projects, (2) funds CNS provides to the state commissions on behalf of each
participant, and (3) grantee matching funds.19 Additional funding for the
overhead cost associated with participants comes from (1) CNS for its own
administrative costs, (2) CNS funding to the state commissions for their
operating expenses, and (3) state commission matching funds.20 We were not
able to evaluate the funds available for expenditure in other AmeriCorps
programs because CNS could not provide information on their grantee matching
funds.

In developing the information on resources available in program year 1998-99
for NCCC and State/National participants, we examined CNS' budget
documentation and reviewed output from CNS' grants database for all
AmeriCorps programs. Data provided to us from the grants database included
the number of participants, expressed as full-time equivalents (FTE), that
programs expected to support, the amount of grant awards, and matching
contributions proposed and budgeted by grantees. To verify the accuracy of
the data in CNS' grants database, we reviewed information from a random
sample of 60 grant files. During that review, we found only minor
differences in the data. These minor discrepancies were within acceptable
limits.

Programs

We were asked to compare the cost of AmeriCorps*NCCC with that of another
conservation corps. In selecting a comparison group, we reviewed relevant
literature and interviewed the Director of the National Association of
Service and Conservation Corps. We chose the Job Corps Civilian Conservation
Centers (CCC) because it is a national program with centers located across
the country, whereas state and local conservation corps are more limited
geographically. Additionally, both AmeriCorps*NCCC and Job Corps CCC are
full-time residential programs for youths that are federally operated and
administered. While a few state and local programs were comparable, we ruled
them out because they were AmeriCorps grantees.

We reviewed data from the Department of Labor's budget to determine the per
participant funds available for Job Corps CCC for program year 1998-99. We
used data from Labor's budget for comparability with our use of CNS budget
data for NCCC participant funding. Our comparison used budgeted funds per
FTE participant, using each program's standard method of calculating FTEs.
Job Corps CCC uses "student year" as its measure of FTE participant for
budgeting purposes. We reviewed Job Corps CCC documents and interviewed
officials to collect the information on programs and participants we used in
our comparison. We also reviewed CNS documents, interviewed officials, and
visited the NCCC Capital Region Campus to gather similar information.

Military Personnel

Our comparison of the benefits afforded to entry-level military personnel
and to AmeriCorps participants used information from several sources. We
used published information on military pay and benefits from the 1999
Uniformed Services Almanac.21 We obtained information on benefits afforded
to AmeriCorps participants by reviewing CNS documents and interviewing
agency officials. We used information from the Office of the Secretary of
Defense that explained the principles and concepts of military compensation
in relation to national security objectives.22 We interviewed CNS officials
and reviewed our own related products to identify potential explanations for
the differences in pay and benefits.

We reviewed CNS' strategic plan for fiscal years 1997-2002 and its fiscal
year 2000 annual performance plan to identify AmeriCorps program goals and
objectives and to determine how CNS measures and reports AmeriCorps program
results. To aid us in our review, we used our May 1997 and February 1998
congressional guides and our April 1998 evaluators' guide for assessing
performance plans.23 These guides integrated criteria from the Government
Performance and Results Act of 1993, its legislative history, the Office of
Management and Budget's (OMB) guidance for developing performance plans (OMB
Circular A-11, part 2), and our guidance on implementing the act. We used
the criteria and questions contained in the guides to help us review the
performance goals and measures in the plan and to assess the plan's
usefulness for CNS and congressional decisionmakers. In addition, we
collected information from CNS' education and trust fund data system on
participant rates of completion and attrition and on the "earning" and use
of education awards for program years 1994-98.24 We did not verify the
accuracy of the data from CNS' education and trust fund database. Finally,
we reviewed recent reports by CNS' Office of the Inspector General, its
schedule of pending and planned program evaluations, and several independent
evaluations of CNS.

Comments From the Corporation for National Service

Related GAO Products

National Service Programs: Status of AmeriCorps Reform Efforts
(GAO/HEHS-97-198R , Sept. 3, 1997).

National Service Programs: Enrollment and Education Award Data on Selected
AmeriCorps Projects (GAO/HEHS-97-96R , Mar. 19, 1997).

National Service Programs: Role of State Commissions in Implementing the
AmeriCorps Program ( GAO/HEHS-97-49, Feb. 20, 1997).

National Service Programs: AmeriCorps*USA−First Year Experience and
Recent Program Initiatives ( GAO/T-HEHS-96-146, May 21, 1996).

AmeriCorps*USA Clarifications ( GAO/HEHS-95-267R, Sept. 11, 1995).

AmeriCorps*USA Benefit-Cost Study ( GAO/HEHS-95-255R, Sept. 7, 1995).

National Service Programs: AmeriCorps*USA−Early Program Resource and
Benefit Information ( GAO/HEHS-95-222, Aug. 29, 1995).

(104967)

Table 1: Budgeted and Matching Funds per AmeriCorps*NCCC and
AmeriCorps*State/National Participant for Program Year 1998-99 9

Table 2: Summary of Selected AmeriCorps*State/National Participant Funds,
Program Years 1994-95, 1996-97, and 1998-99 10

Table 3: Selected Characteristics of Job Corps CCC and
AmeriCorps*NCCC Programs and Participants 12

Table 4: Comparison of Selected Benefits Afforded Participants in Two
AmeriCorps Programs and Enlisted Personnel Entering the Military 14

Table 5: Enrollment Status and Completion and Attrition Rates for
Participants in All AmeriCorps Programs for Program Years 1994-95
to 1997-98 17

Table 6: Education Awards Earned and Used in All AmeriCorps
Programs in Program Years 1994-95 Through 1997-98 17
  

1. The four programs are AmeriCorps*State/National, which is the largest;
AmeriCorps*VISTA; AmeriCorps*National Civilian Community Corps; and
AmeriCorps*Education Awards.

2. A list of GAO products on AmeriCorps appears at the end of this report.

3. AmeriCorps*State/National receives its funding from a single
appropriation and is referred to by CNS as one program; however, the program
operates two separate grant application processes, one for state programs
and one for programs that operate in more than one state, or national
programs.

4. CNS' Office of the Inspector General has issued numerous reports on CNS'
lack of creditable financial accounting data and the Congress has directed
CNS to make financial management reforms.

5. Forbearance means an arrangement to postpone or reduce the amount of a
borrower's monthly payment for a limited and specific time period. The
borrower is charged interest during a forbearance. If AmeriCorps
participants successfully complete their term of service, CNS pays the
accrued interest on their behalf.

6. North Dakota and South Dakota and the District of Columbia do not have
state commissions. Programs in these locations may apply directly to CNS for
an AmeriCorps*State grant. CNS oversees them directly.

7. Professional corps programs may recruit and place qualified AmeriCorps
members in positions as teachers, nurses, doctors, police officers, lawyers,
engineers, or other professionals helping to meet critical needs in
communities that have inadequate numbers of such professionals.

8. The amount of the living allowance that may be paid with federal funds
may not exceed 85 percent, with the remainder paid by funds raised by the
program.

9. Full-time AmeriCorps participants must serve at least 1,700 hours during
a period of not less than 9 months and not more than 1 year. Part-time
participants must serve at least 900 hours during a period of not more than
2 years. Reduced part-time participants may also serve at least 300 hours in
a summer program, or at least 450 hours over a time not to exceed 1 year.

10. Local sponsors of NCCC projects may provide materials and other in-kind
assistance for a project. CNS does not track or report the value of this
assistance. Cost per participant is calculated on a full-time equivalent
(FTE) basis.

11. CNS budgeted $359 per State/National participant for child care and
nothing per NCCC participant. CNS estimates it spent a total of $7.3 million
on child care for State/National participants and $12,000 for NCCC
participants in fiscal year 1998.

12. These cost estimates encompass student loan interest payments made in
fiscal year 1998 for all AmeriCorps participants.

13. A CNS official told us that grantees generally report matching fund
sources above the minimum statutory requirements of 15 percent living
allowance and 33 percent operating costs. If a grantee is not providing the
minimum amounts of matching funds, CNS may take one of several actions
against the grantee program, ranging from requiring the program to correct
the problem and repay money owed to shutting the program down.

14. Throughout this report, we use the term "project" to describe the
grantees or subgrantees of federal funds that are provided either by CNS or
the state commissions. We use the term "program" to refer to AmeriCorps
projects collectively.

15. Child Care: How Do Military and Civilian Center Costs Compare?
(GAO/HEHS-00-7, Oct. 14, 1999) .

16. Aguirre International, Making a Difference: Impact of
AmeriCorps*State/National Direct on Members and Communities 1994-95 and
1995-96 (San Mateo, Calif.: 1999).

17. Participants may be released for cause or for compelling personal
reasons. Participants released for cause may leave a project early to take
advantage of significant opportunities for personal development or growth,
such as educational or professional advancement. For cause also includes a
variety of situations: felony conviction, chronic truancy, or consistent
failure to follow directions. Illness would be a compelling personal reason.

18. Inputs are measures of the resources available to carry out a program or
activity--for example, the number of teachers or dollars available. Outputs
are the amount or quality of goods, products, or services produced. Outcomes
are the results a program achieves.

19. Program grantees are required to cover at least 15 percent of a
participant's living allowance and benefits and 33 percent of the program's
operating costs (such as staff salaries, travel, and supplies).

20. AmeriCorps state commissions are required to cover half of their
administrative expenses. CNS funds the remainder.

21. 1999 Uniformed Services Almanac , 41st annual ed. (Falls Church, Va.:
1999).

22. Office of the Secretary of Defense, Military Compensation Background
Papers , 3rd ed. (Washington D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, June
1987), pp. 5-10.

23. See Agencies' Strategic Plans Under GPRA: Key Questions to Facilitate
Congressional Review (GAO/GGD-10.1.16, May 1997, Version 1 ), Agencies'
Annual Performance Plans Under the Results Act: An Assessment Guide to
Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking (GAO/GGD/AIMD-10.1.18, Feb. 1998,
Version 1 ), and The Results Act: An Evaluator's Guide to Assessing Agency
Annual Performance Plans (GAO/GGD-10.1.20, Apr. 1998, Version 1 ).

24. The National Service Trust serves as a secure repository for education
awards to be set aside for AmeriCorps participants.
*** End of document. ***