Detailed Information on the
AmeriCorps State and National Grants Assessment

Strengthen financial management practices by improving coordination between the budget and accounting offices.

Develop performance measures that quantify the benefits of AmeriCorps projects to members and the communities in which they serve.

Measure: Percent of AmeriCorps members who accepted public sector employment one-year after completing AmeriCorps service

Explanation:This outome measure addresses the long-term program goal of AmeriCorps which seeks to improve the lives of national service participants.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The purpose of the AmeriCorps State and National program is to engage Americans in service to address unmet community needs in areas such as education, public safety, health, and the environment. The program provides grants to government, private, and nonprofit entities that sponsor service programs to address locally identified needs. AmeriCorps members work in community organizations.

Evidence: National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-82)

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: In 2004, more than 64 million, or 29 percent of Americans ages 16 and older, volunteered with or for organizations, according to the Current Population Survey (CPS) Volunteer Supplement. However, an additional 6 million non-volunteering Americans indicated that having more information on available opportunities would motivate them to volunteer. AmeriCorps provides information on volunteer opportunities and creates volunteer experiences. In 2004, CNCS conducted the first national study on Volunteer Management Capacity. The study found that nonprofits lack sufficient resources and capacity to optimally use and retain volunteers. AmeriCorps helps nonprofits recruit new volunteers and use volunteers to fulfill their mission and meet community needs.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress. (Page B-99) US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey (CPS) Supplement on Volunteering. Corporation for National and Community Service, Volunteer Management Capacity in America's Charities and Congregations: A Briefing Report. Conducted by The Urban Institute. Washington, D.C. "The Civic and Public Health of the Nation: A Generational Portrait," September 2002, The Center for Information & Research on Civic Learning and Engagement

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: Although AmeriCorps' program design is unique, its goals of encouraging volunteerism, promoting civic participation, and meeting human needs through community volunteers duplicate those of other service and volunteer organizations. AmeriCorps works with many of these other organizations to achieve these shared goals. Within the federal government HHS, ED & HUD programs also focus on meeting human needs. The ED and HUD programs focus on federally determined community needs, while AmeriCorps enables local communities to determine their own needs and helps to meet them by supporting the development and management of member service. AmeriCorps supports a network of over 2,100 private nonprofits, public agencies and faith-based organizations that carry out the shared mission. Fifty percent of the criteria for receiving an AmeriCorps grant is a nonprofit's program model that must demonstrate unmet need in the community. Grantees provide local and private dollars to match their federal dollars. From 2001-2004, $888M was raised in matching resources by local and state partners to support AmeriCorps' service opportunities.

Evidence: 1) GAO Report, " At Risk and Delinquent Youth: Multiple Federal Programs Raise Efficiency Questions" March 1996, GAO/HEHS-96-34 2) White House Task Force For Disadvantaged Youth Final Report, October 2003 Corporation for National and Community Service, Volunteer Management Capacity in America's Charities and Congregations: A Briefing Report. Conducted by The Urban Institute. Washington, D.C. FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: AmeriCorps' program design effectively balances the needs of the states, communities and tribes while focusing on national priorities. The use of member stipends and education awards provides financial incentives for participation in full-time service. The grant structure, combined with the use of strengthened grant making and monitoring processes, enable the program to meet community needs while ensuring accountability. The recently published AmeriCorps final regulation included program enhancements to strengthen the impact, efficiency and reach of AmeriCorps. The objectives include: 1) Create a framework for long-term growth and sustainability of the AmeriCorps program as a public-private partnership. 2) Provide consistency, reliability, and predictability for grantees. 3) Enhance the measurable positive impact of the AmeriCorps program on: communities and beneficiaries that receive service; non-profit organizations and community infrastructures that host service; and AmeriCorps members. 4) Resolve long-standing issues relating to Federal share, CNCS cost per member service year (MSY), and sustainability of AmeriCorps projects to minimize uncertainty about annual grantee funding levels. 5) Assure fiscal and programmatic accountability and effective performance measurement.

Evidence: 2006 Congressional Budget Justification (Page. 38) 2005 AmeriCorps Final Rule; National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-82)

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: The grant application review process includes reviews by state commissions, peer review panels, and CNCS staff. Selection criteria focus on Program Design (60%) (needs and service activities, member development, strengthening communities), Org. Capacity (25%), and Budget/Cost Effectiveness (15%). The program funding priorities that AmeriCorps considers when making final selections encompass those existing needs identified in Q 1.2. In the recent rulemaking process ,the budget adequacy category in the grant application selection criteria increases from 15% to 25%. This category also includes the cost per MSY as criteria for consideration for the first time. Organizational capacity remains the same at 25% and program design decreases from 60% to 50%.

Evidence: 2005 AmeriCorps Application Guidelines. 2005 AmeriCorps Final Rule

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The AmeriCorps State and National program has developed long-term performance measures and targets, meeting the criteria for outcome measures for 2 of its long-term measures.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The AmeriCorps State and National program has 2 adequate outcome measures. Americorps has recently set ambitious long-term targets and timeframes for these measures.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: The AmeriCorps State and National program has established a number of annual output measures (e.g., number of members enrolled annually and number of community volunteers leveraged per AmeriCorps S/N member) including adequate annual outcome measures.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: As noted in Q 2.3 the AmeriCorps State and National program has 2 adequate annual outcome measures. Americorps has recently set ambitious annual targets for these measures.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: AmeriCorps has a network of 2100 grantees and sub-grantees, which each have their own performance goals. Individual grantees formulate their own performance measures, which AmeriCorps S/N evaluates and ensures are fitting with the broad scope of the federal program.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Since its inception in 1994, CNCS has conducted a number of program evaluations. Most recently, CNCS released the results from the Longitudinal Study of AmeriCorps Members, a scientifically-based research study to assess the long-term impacts of participation in AmeriCorps on members' civic engagement, education, employment, and life skills. Overall, the study found participation in AmeriCorps led to many positive and statistically significant impacts on members. Effects of participation were especially strong in the area of civic engagement, a key priority for AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps S/N is currently collecting survey data from grantees and members completing service through the National Benchmarking Initiative. This effort provides annual information on 1) grantees' assessment of the impact of AmeriCorps members on their organizational capacity and ability to serve their communities, and 2) members assessments of the impact of AmeriCorps on their educational and workplace skills. A recent report from the Longitudinal Study of Service in AmeriCorps noted statistically significant positive impacts on Americorps members' connection to community, local civic efficacy, participation in community-based activities, and future volunteering behaviors. However, the final effects of participation may not be known for several years.

Evidence: 1) www.nationalservice.org/research 2) Longitudinal Study of AmeriCorps Members 3) National Performance Benchmarking Effort, Urban Institute 4) Volunteer Management Capacity Study, 2003

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: Budget requests reflect CNCS' resources required to obtain the performance identified through the use of the logic model approach that ties inputs to outcomes. For example, AmeriCorps*S/N plans to fund 67,405 AmeriCorps members in '06 with a goal of generating and managing 650,000 community volunteers, resulting in approximately 5.8 million hours of service. Further, in addition to the direct grant costs, the 2006 budget presents AmeriCorps' share of CNCS administrative costs, including staff. Education award funding is explicitly linked to planned AmeriCorps member levels and a complete listing of related budgetary assumptions is included.

Evidence: 1) CNCS 2006 Congressional Budget Justification 2) CNCS Program Logic Models

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: During the spring of 2004 CNCS adopted a new strategic planning and budget framework based on a "logic model" methodology. AmeriCorps, in conjunction with the other programs in the agency, defined its end outcomes, intermediate outcomes, outputs, activities, and inputs; additionally, they identified corresponding outcome and output measures. Strategic plans and program logic models are reviewed and revised annually, and often more frequently, to ensure activities are well integrated within programs across CNCS. [To maintain a yes to this question, please provide an answer that specifically addresses how actual deficiencies have been identified and addressed.]

Evidence: 1) CNCS 2006 Congressional Budget 2) AmeriCorps State Profiles and Performance Report, 2003 3) CNCS Program Logic Models 4) Grantee Progress Reports

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: All grantees and subgrantees are required to report on self-nominated annual performance measures using the Web-Based Reporting System, and are also required to submit financial status reports twice a year. CNCS uses this information in managing the AmeriCorps grants and providing training and technical assistance to grantees. In addition, CNCS also collects annual standardized performance data from grantees, sponsoring organizations and current and former members from the Performance Benchmarking Initiative. CNCS uses this information to report annually on program outcomes, and to identify and address areas for continuous program and management improvement. CNCS also collects customer satisfaction information from grantees and key service partners, and uses the feedback to improve the way it manages program operations and interactions with customers.

Evidence: 1) Web-Based Reporting System (http:wbrs.net) 2) Annual Progress Reports and National Performance Benchmarking Initiative (www.nationalservice.org) 3) State Profiles and Performance Report (Program Year 2002-2003) 4) Member Enrollment Data 5) Customer Satisfaction Survey

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: CNCS managers have accountability specifically identified and assessed through the Management Appraisal System (MAS). The MAS includes a "results driven" element that encompasses numerous accountability objectives. The new financial management procedures that have been implemented since the previous PART review include properly recording education award obligations in the Trust and ensuring that CNCS has timely and accurate information on AmeriCorps enrollments in order to ensure that obligations stay within budgeted levels. Grantees must make adequate annual progress for grant continuation. Also, T/TA providers are managed to ensure services are delivered on-time and on-budget. [To maintain a yes, please provide evidence that grantees also are held accountable for cost, schedule, and performance results.]

Evidence: 1) CNCS Management Appraisal System (intranet.cns.gov/hr) 2) Member Enrollment Data 3) Grantee Progress Reports

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: AmeriCorps funds are provided as grants to states, non-profits and other organizations. CNCS obligates its funds to eligible new and continuing grantees according to a timeline established as part of the grant application and review process. Each year this timeline establishes deadlines by which the Office of Grants Management must obligate funds. An electronic database tracks the deadlines. CNCS staff track outstanding commitments to ensure obligations are made in a timely manner. Grant compliance monitoring, including improved administrative standards for state service commissions, are in place.

Evidence: Office Of Grants Management Tracking Report

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The AmeriCorps State and National Program does not meet the criteria for a yes since they do not have adequate efficiency measures. Cost sharing rates are not acceptable measures. The program, however, does use competitive sourcing to obtain training and technical assistance contractors, who provide assistance and support to CNCS grantees. In addition, CNCS has contracted out its Office of Information Technology Help Desk, payroll processing, Internet support including the merging of WBRS and eGrants (which will result in significant operational cost savings), National Service Trust phone bank support, operations and maintenance of Momentum (the accounting system). To support continued improvements in management accountability, CNCS has initiated business process reviews of many of its internal processes. Based on these reviews, CNCS identified opportunities to streamline labor-and-paper-intensive processes, eliminate redundant data entry, and reduce errors.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report CNCS 2004 Business Process Review - Deloitte; AmeriCorps Office Reorganization

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The entire premise of AmeriCorps is devolution and collaboration with a multitude of federal, state and local agencies.?? All programs collaborate on joint funding and support for resources for their matches.?? Grant announcements are disseminated to hundreds of state and local organizations for potential funding and review.?? Examples of strong collaboration:?? many state service commissions are also part of their state's Citizen Corps and FEMA outreach (we have a MOU with FEMA that specifies the support AmeriCorps will provide to emergency management efforts); programs such as Youth Build collaborate with HUD; state and local education agencies are strong partners; volunteer centers and CERT teams; The Department of Education and thousands of small grassroots and faith-based organizations are actively engaged with AmeriCorps. Finally, AmeriCorps remains a prominent partner in USA Freedom Corps and was the lead agency responsible for creating a website that includes a comprehensive on-line system for finding volunteer opportunities. [To maintain a yes, please provide additional evidence of the "strong" collaborations listed above.]

Evidence: Executive Order 13331, Feb. 27, 2004

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: Americorps has made significant improvement in its financial management practices over the last several years, however it still needs to Americorps improve the reliability of its trust model which predicts its number of members, finalize its control measures, and improve its accounting of obligations from the national service trust. A recent Senate committee report "directs the OIG to continue reviewing the Corporation's management of the Trust and directs the OIG to review monthly Trust reports and to notify the Committee on the accuracy of the reports". Since the 2002 Anti-Deficiency Act violation, CNCS has improved its procedures to govern the awarding of grants and enrollment of members, and has fully implemented the letter and spirit of the Strengthening of AmeriCorps Program Act of 2003. Specifically, CNCS uses conservative assumptions to calculate education award obligations and to obligate funds for education awards before making grant awards. CNCS has also established a reserve fund to protect the Trust's solvency in the event its liability estimates are incorrect. The Trust has received two clean audit opinions since 2002 and has implemented a set of controls (listed on pg. C-243 of the 2004 PAR) to further ensure the availability of Trust resources. Several external reviews - by GAO, OIG and an independent auditing firm - found that CNCS is 1) in compliance with the Strengthen AmeriCorps Program Act requirements; 2) is following sound business and accounting practices; and 3) is effectively addressing identified weaknesses through its major management reforms.

Evidence: 1) FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (pages C-225-229 and D-257-264) 2) GAO Report 04-225, Jan. 2004 3) OIG Report 04-10, Jan. 7, 2004

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: "CNCS is addressing each of the recommendations cited in the 2002 PART as follows: 1) CNCS' new financial management procedures to ensure obligations stay within budgeted levels are in place (explained in 3.2 and 3.6) 2) S/N is improving methodologies to quantify results as identified in 3.1. The program continuously evaluates its operations and implements improvements such as restructuring the roles of the program officers to ensure improved oversight and customer service. Americorps will improve its trust model as a next step to addressing its management deficiencies.

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress, page C-243. National Performance Benchmark Initiative; State Profiles and Performance Report, 2003 (www.nationalservice.org/research); Grant Award Certification Procedures, AmeriCorps 2004 Customer Satisfaction Survey

Does the program have oversight practices that provide sufficient knowledge of grantee activities?

Explanation: CNCS has a web-based reporting system that includes financial status reports, annual reporting of progress toward programmatic objectives, and member enrollment, attrition and completion data. CNCS performs administrative standards reviews on state commission grantees that include on-site inspection by CNCS staff and outside experts. CNCS utilizes a risk-based approach to monitoring, with annual risk assessments guiding monitoring activity. CNCS also conducts visits and annual risk assessments for national direct grantees that include education award programs and tribes. Grantee compliance with provisions is assessed and program improvement strategies are identified.

Evidence: 1) Web-based Reporting System 2) AmeriCorps Standards Report 3) Grantee Provisions

Does the program collect grantee performance data on an annual basis and make it available to the public in a transparent and meaningful manner?

Explanation: CNCS collects annual standardized performance data from grantees, sponsoring organizations and current and former members from the Performance Benchmarking Initiative. CNCS uses this information to report annually on program outcomes in its Performance Report, and to identify and address areas for continuous program and management improvement. CNCS also collects customer satisfaction information from grantees and key service partners, and uses the feedback to improve the way it manages program operations and interactions with customers.

Evidence: 1) State Profiles and Performance Report (Program Year 2002-2003) 2) Customer Satisfaction Survey

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: As was indicated in Q 2.1 and Q 2.2, the AmeriCorps State and National program has 2 long-term outcome measures. As the program continues to show progress with these measures, they will be able to better demonstrate progress toward achieving their program goals (leveraging service, improving program quality, expanding education and other opportunities for participants, and increasing service opportunities in faith based and other community organizations).

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: As was indicated in Q 2.3 and Q 2.4, the AmeriCorps State and National program has adequate annual outcome measures. As the program develops they will be able to better demonstrate progress toward achieving their program goals (leveraging service, improving program quality, expanding education and other opportunities for participants, and increasing service opportunities in faith based and other community organizations).

Evidence: FY2004 Performance and Accountability Report to Congress (PAR)

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: Although the AmeriCorps State and National program has demonstrated some cost savings over the past year, they do not meet the criteria for a yes since the do not have adequate efficiency measures. The average budgeted cost per FTE or member service year (MSY) for stipended AmeriCorps members has been steadily declining. The 2006 projected average cost per member service year for S/N stipend programs (not including EAP) is about $8,200. This amount includes CNCS' share of member and operating support and is about 19% below the level planned for 2005 (about $10,125) and 22% below the 2002 baseline level (about $10,500).

Evidence: FY2006 CNCS Congressional Budget Justification (P. 43)

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: A working paper published by the Brookings Institution analyzes the Peace Corps in the context of the President's post 9/11 call to service. The paper contrasts the two programs in terms of size and budget: AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps have had comparably sized budgets, but AmeriCorps' model is able to deploy a far greater number of members at lower costs. AmeriCorps compares favorably to the Peace Corps in terms of recruiting a diverse corps of volunteers. Approximately 36% of AmeriCorps members are minorities, compared to 16.5% of Peace Corps Volunteers. AmeriCorps' attrition rate (21%) is significantly lower than that of the Peace Corps (28%-30%), although Peace Corps volunteers serve under significantly greater hardship than do AmeriCorps members.

Evidence: 1) Peace Corps Congressional Budget Justification 2) National Performance Benchmarking Initiative 3) Brookings Institution Working Paper October, 2003

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The Longitudinal Study of AmeriCorps Members is a scientifically-based research study to assess the long-term impacts of participation in AmeriCorps on members' civic engagement, education, employment, and life skills. Overall, the study has found that participation in AmeriCorps led to many positive and statistically significant impacts on members. Effects of participation were especially strong in the area of civic engagement, a key priority for AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps S/N is also currently collecting survey data from grantees and members completing service through the National Benchmarking Initiative. This effort provides annual information on 1) grantees assessment of the impact of AmeriCorps members on their organizational capacity and ability to serve their communities, and 2) members assessments of the impact of AmeriCorps on their educational and workplace skills. A recent report from the Longitudinal Study of Service in AmeriCorps noted statistically significant positive impacts on NCCC members' connection to community, local civic efficacy, participation in community-based activities, and future volunteering behaviors. However, the final effects of participation may not be known for several years.

Evidence: www.nationalservice.org/research