United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Report to Congressional Committees

FINANCIAL 

LITERACY AND 

EDUCATION 

COMMISSION 

Further Progress 

Needed to Ensure an 

Effective National 

Strategy 

December 2006 

 

GAO-07-100 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

December 2006

FINANCIAL LITERACY AND EDUCATION 

COMMISSION 

Further Progress Needed to Ensure an 

Effective National Strategy 

Highlights of GAO-07-100, a report to 

congressional committees 

The Financial Literacy and

Education Improvement Act 

created, in December 2003, the 

Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission. Responding to the 

act’s mandate that GAO assess the 

Commission’s effectiveness, this 

report reviews its progress in (1)

developing a national strategy; (2) 

developing a Web site and hotline; 

and (3) coordinating federal efforts 

and promoting partnerships among

the federal, state, local, nonprofit, 

and private sectors. To address 

these objectives, GAO analyzed 

Commission documents, 

interviewed financial literacy 

representatives, and benchmarked 

the national strategy against GAO’s 

criteria for such strategies.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that the

Commission (1) incorporate 

additional elements into the 

national strategy to help measure 

results and ensure accountability,

(2) conduct usability tests of and 

measure customer satisfaction with 

its Web site, (3) independently 

review for duplication and evaluate

the effectiveness of federal

activities, and (4) expand upon 

current efforts to cultivate 

sustainable partnerships with 

nonprofit and private entities. 

Responding to a draft of this 

report, the Treasury Department

said it would consult with the 

Commission on addressing GAO’s 

recommendations. 

The National Strategy for Financial Literacy serves as a useful first step in 

focusing attention on financial literacy, but it is largely descriptive rather 

than strategic and lacks certain key characteristics that are desirable in a 

national strategy. The strategy provides a clear purpose, scope, and 

methodology and is comprehensive in identifying the breadth of issues 

involved and the challenges in addressing them. However, it does not serve 

as a plan of action designed to achieve specific goals, and its

recommendations are presented as “calls to action” that generally are either 

descriptions of existing initiatives or broad pronouncements that do not 

include a specific implementation plan. The strategy also does not fully 

address some of the desirable characteristics of an effective national 

strategy that GAO has previously identified. For example, it does not set 

clear and specific goals or performance measures by which to benchmark 

progress, address the resources needed to accomplish these goals, or fully 

discuss appropriate roles, responsibilities, and accountability. As a result of 

these factors, most organizations that GAO spoke with said the strategy 

would not play a meaningful role in guiding or informing their efforts. 

The Commission’s Web site and telephone hotline offer financial education 

information from numerous federal agencies. The Web site generally serves

as an effective portal to existing federal financial literacy sites. Use of the 

site has been growing, and it averaged about 57,000 visits per month from 

May through September 2006. The volume of calls to the hotline—which 

serves as an order line for a free tool kit of federal publications—has been 

limited. The Commission has not tested the Web site for usability or 

measured customer satisfaction with it; these are recommended best 

practices for federal public Web sites. As a result, the Commission does not 

know if visitors are able to find the information they are looking for 

efficiently and effectively.

The Commission has taken steps to coordinate the financial literacy efforts 

of federal agencies and has served as a useful focal point for federal 

activities. However, coordinating federal efforts has been challenging, in part 

because the Commission must achieve consensus among 20 federal 

agencies, each with its own viewpoints, programs, and constituencies, and 

because of the Commission’s limited resources. A survey of overlap and 

duplication and a review of the effectiveness of federal activities relied 

largely on agencies’ self-assessments rather than the independent review of a 

disinterested party. The Commission has taken steps to promote 

partnerships with the nonprofit and private sectors through various public 

meetings, outreach events, and other activities. The involvement of state, 

local, nonprofit, and private organizations is important in supporting and 

expanding Commission efforts to increase financial literacy. As the 

Commission continues to implement its strategy, it should consider 

expanding its activities and work to develop mutually beneficial and lasting 

partnerships that will be sustainable over the long term. 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-07-100.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Yvonne D. 

Jones (202) 512-8678 or jonesy@gao.gov. 
Contents 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 5

National Strategy Is Descriptive Rather Than Strategic, Limiting Its 

Value in Guiding the Nation’s Financial Literacy Efforts 7 

Web Site and Telephone Hotline Offer Financial Education 

Information from Federal Agencies 17 

The Commission Has Taken Steps to Coordinate Federal Agencies’ 

Efforts and Promote Partnerships but Faces Challenges 29 

Conclusions 34

Recommendations for Executive Action 36 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 37 

Appendix I Scope and Methodology 40 

Appendix II Summary of Expenditures and Funding Sources 

for the Commission 44 

Appendix III Comments from the Department of the Treasury 46 

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 48

Tables 

Table 1: Extent the National Strategy for Financial Literacy 

Addresses GAO’s Desirable Characteristics of an Effective 

National Strategy 12 

Table 2: Contents of My Money Tool Kit as of April 2006 25 

Table 3: Treasury Department’s Expenditures under Budget 

Authority for Developing and Implementing a National 

Financial Literacy Strategy, Fiscal Years 2005-2006 45 

Table 4: Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Education’s 

Support to the Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission, Fiscal Year 2006 45 

Page i GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Figures 

Figure 1: My Money Web Site Usage, Fiscal Years 2005-2006 21 

Figure 2: My Money Hotline Call Volume, Fiscal Years 2005-2006 27 

Abbreviations 

FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

GSA General Services Administration 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 

Page ii GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548 

December 4, 2006 

The Honorable Richard C. Shelby 

Chairman 

The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Michael G. Oxley 

Chairman 

The Honorable Barney Frank 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Financial Services 

United States House of Representatives 

A growing body of evidence indicates that many Americans are lacking in

financial literacy—the ability to make informed judgments and manage 

money effectively. Numerous studies published in recent years have 

shown that most adults and students have not mastered basic economic 

concepts, such as the risks associated with investment choices. Poor 

financial literacy can reduce consumers’ economic well-being and security

in a variety of ways.1

 For example, poor financial management and 

decision making can result in a lower standard of living and prevent 

families from reaching important long-term goals, such as buying a home, 

paying for college education, and adequately funding retirement. Financial 

literacy has broader public policy implications as well. For instance, 

financial markets function best when consumers understand how financial 

services providers and products work and know how to choose among 

them. Further, educating the public about the importance of saving may be 

critical to boosting our national saving rate, an important element to 

improving America’s economic growth. 

To help address this issue, Title V of the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003, cited as the Financial Literacy and Education 

Improvement Act, created the Financial Literacy and Education 

 1

For example, see Sandra Braunstein and Carolyn Welch, “Financial Literacy: An Overview 

of Practice, Research, and Policy,” Federal Reserve Bulletin, November 2002. 

Page 1 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Commission (the Commission).2

 The Commission, which is made up of 20 

federal agencies, was charged with developing a national strategy—which

is to be reviewed annually and modified as deemed necessary—to improve 

basic financial literacy and education for all Americans. The act also said

that to implement the strategy the Commission shall coordinate federal 

financial education efforts and promote partnerships between and among 

federal, state, and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and private 

enterprises. As part of the national strategy, the Department of the 

Treasury (Treasury Department) was required to develop and disseminate 

a multimedia campaign to improve financial literacy. The law also required

the Commission to create a Web site and toll-free telephone hotline to 

disseminate financial education to the public. The Commission is chaired 

by the Secretary of the Treasury and is coordinated through the 

department’s Office of Financial Education. 

The Financial Literacy Act also mandated that we assess the effectiveness 

of the Commission in promoting financial literacy and education.3

 As 

agreed with your offices, this report responds to that mandate by 

reviewing the Commission’s progress in (1) developing an effective

national strategy to promote financial literacy and education; (2) 

implementing its Web site, hotline, and multimedia campaign; and (3) 

coordinating federal financial literacy efforts and promoting partnerships 

among government, nonprofit, and commercial organizations. 

To address these objectives, we reviewed the Financial Literacy Act and 

analyzed relevant Commission documents, including the National Strategy

for Financial Literacy, comment letters on the national strategy’s 

development, and meeting minutes of the Commission and its working 

groups and subcommittees. We interviewed representatives of all 20 

federal agencies that are members of the Commission, as well as 

representatives of 12 organizations that address issues of financial literacy 

 2

Pub. L. No. 108-159, Title V, 117 Stat. 2003 (Dec. 4, 2003) (codified at 20 U.S.C. §§ 9701–08). 

Hereafter, this report refers to the Financial Literacy and Education Improvement Act as 

the “Financial Literacy Act.” 

3

We have previously issued three other reports mandated by the Fair and Accurate Credit 

Transactions Act of 2003. See GAO, Identity Theft: Some Outreach Efforts to Promote

Awareness of New Consumer Rights Are Under Way, GAO-05-710 (Washington, D.C.: June 

30, 2005); GAO, Credit Reporting Literacy: Consumers Understood the Basics but Could

Benefit from Targeted Educational Efforts, GAO-05-223 (Washington, D.C.: Mar. 16, 2005);

and GAO, Highlights of a GAO Forum: The Federal Government’s Role in Improving 

Financial Literacy, GAO-05-93SP (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 15, 2004). 

Page 2 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
in the private, nonprofit, academic, and state and local government 

sectors. We assessed the national strategy, in part, by benchmarking it 

against general characteristics of an effective national strategy we have

identified in prior work. We also gathered and analyzed data on the 

content and usage of the Commission’s Web site, telephone hotline, and 

publication tool kit. We compared the Web site against best practices for 

federal public Web sites recommended by the Web Content Managers 

Advisory Council. 

We conducted our work from January 2006 through November 2006 in

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. A 

more extensive discussion of our scope and methodology appears in 

appendix I. 

The National Strategy for Financial Literacy is comprehensive in scope 

and serves as a useful first step in focusing attention on financial literacy, 

but it is largely descriptive rather than strategic and lacks certain key 

characteristics that are desirable in a national strategy. To develop it, the

Commission created a working group of 13 agencies, issued a call for 

public comment in the Federal Register, and held public meetings. The 

Commission issued the document 10 months after the mandated release 

date, in part because the agencies had difficulty reaching consensus on its 

content. The strategy is comprehensive, discussing many of the major 

challenges in improving financial literacy, presenting an overview of key 

issues—such as target populations and subject areas—and describing a 

variety of financial literacy initiatives in the government, nonprofit, and 

private sectors. However, its recommendations are presented as “calls to

action” that are generally either descriptions of existing initiatives or 

broad pronouncements that do not include a plan for implementation. 

Further, the strategy only partially addresses some of the characteristics 

we have previously identified as desirable for any effective national 

strategy. For example, although it provides a clear purpose, scope, and 

methodology, it does not go far enough to provide a detailed discussion of 

problems and risks; establish specific goals, performance measures, and 

milestones; discuss the resources that would be needed to implement the 

strategy; or discuss, assign, or recommend roles and responsibilities for 

achieving its mission. As a result, most federal and nonfederal agencies we 

interviewed said that the national strategy was unlikely to have a 

significant impact on their financial literacy and education efforts. 

Results in Brief 

The Commission’s Web site and telephone hotline offer consumers 

financial education information from several federal agencies. The My 

Page 3 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Money Web site serves as a portal to more than 260 other federal financial 

education sites, and representatives of financial literacy organizations 

generally told us that the site served its purpose effectively. Use of the 

Web site has been growing, and it received about 628,000 visits in fiscal 

year 2006—roughly comparable to private sector financial literacy sites we 

reviewed. Largely because of competing priorities and resource 

constraints, officials responsible for developing the site have not yet 

implemented certain best practices recommended for federal public Web 

sites, such as testing for usability and measuring customer satisfaction. As 

a result, the Commission does not know if visitors are able to find the 

information they are looking for efficiently and effectively. The telephone

hotline serves as an order line for a free “tool kit,” which consists of 

publications on financial topics from several federal agencies. The volume

of calls to the hotline has been limited— for example, an average of about 

200 calls per month between February 2005 and February 2006—possibly 

because of a lack of publicity. To fulfill a Financial Literacy Act 

requirement that the Treasury Department develop a pilot national public 

service campaign for financial literacy and education, the department has 

contracted with the Advertising Council to create a campaign designed to

improve credit literacy among young people. The campaign, which is 

scheduled to be distributed to media outlets by the spring of 2007, will also 

promote the Commission’s Web site and telephone hotline. 

The Commission has played a role in coordinating federal agencies and 

promoting public-private partnerships but has faced certain challenges in 

these areas. The Commission created a single focal point for federal 

agencies to come together on the issue of financial literacy, and several of

the national strategy’s calls to action involve interagency efforts. The 

financial literacy Web site and hotline have also consolidated information 

from a number of federal agencies. However, the Commission has faced

challenges coordinating federal efforts and reaching consensus, in part 

because its member agencies have differing missions and perspectives. In

addition, the Commission’s own staff and funding resources are relatively 

small, and it has no legal authority to direct member agencies to reallocate 

resources or take other actions. To meet requirements of the Financial 

Literacy Act that it identify areas of overlap and duplication among federal 

financial literacy activities and evaluate the effectiveness of federal 

financial literacy materials, the Commission reviewed federal programs 

and resources and asked each agency to evaluate the effectiveness of its 

financial literacy materials. This process thus lacked the benefit of 

independent analysis by a disinterested third party. The Commission has 

taken some steps to promote public-private partnerships, such as 

sponsoring conferences and engaging in community outreach, but the 

Page 4 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
impact of these steps is unclear. Private and nonprofit financial literacy 

organizations we spoke to said that the Commission’s actions had been 

useful but had little impact on their overall relationship with federal 

agencies and other entities. In addition, the Commission has not been as 

active in its efforts to promote partnerships and coordinate with state and 

local governments. 

This report recommends first that the Secretary of the Treasury, in concert

with other agency representatives of the Commission, incorporate into the 

national strategy a concrete definition for financial literacy and education; 

clear, specific goals, performance measures, and benchmarks; the actions 

needed to accomplish these goals; a description of the resources required; 

and a discussion of appropriate roles and responsibilities for federal 

agencies and others. Second, we recommend that the Commission 

conduct usability testing of and measure satisfaction with the My Money 

Web site. Third, we recommend that the Treasury Department, in 

conjunction with the Commission, provide that the review of duplication 

and overlap and the evaluation of federal materials are independent and 

do not rely solely on agencies’ self-assessments. Finally, we recommend 

the Commission consider ways to expand upon current efforts to cultivate 

sustainable partnerships with nonprofit and private entities. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Treasury Department, in its 

capacity as chair of the Commission. The department noted that the 

National Strategy for Financial Literacy is the nation’s first such effort and,

as such, its calls to action are appropriately substantive and concrete. We 

acknowledge that the national strategy represents a starting point but 

believe that future iterations of the strategy would benefit from inclusion 

of the characteristics cited in our report. The Treasury Department’s 

response also said the department will consult with the Commission on 

addressing our recommendations related to clarifying the definition of 

financial literacy, improving the Web site, conducting an independent 

evaluation of federal activities, and cultivating additional partnerships. 

According to the Financial Literacy and Education Improvement Act, the 

purpose of the Financial Literacy and Education Commission is to 

“improve the financial literacy and education of persons in the United 

States through development of a national strategy to promote financial 

literacy and education.” The act states the Commission shall be composed 

Background 

Page 5 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
of the Secretary of the Treasury and the heads of 19 other federal 

departments and agencies and allows the President to appoint up to 5 

additional members.4

 The Commission must hold one public meeting at 

least every 4 months; the Commission’s first meeting was held in January

2004. 

The act specifies certain areas the Commission shall emphasize—such as 

consumer awareness of budgeting, credit, investment, and banking—and

requires the Commission to undertake certain activities, including 

• providing not later than 18 months after the date of the first meeting of the 

Commission a report to Congress on the Commission’s progress, which 

must include, among other things, a national strategy to promote financial 

literacy and education for all Americans; 

• establishing and maintaining a financial education Web site to provide a 

coordinated point of entry for information about federal financial literacy 

education programs and grants; 

• establishing a toll-free hotline available to the public seeking information 

about issues pertaining to financial literacy and education; 

• identifying areas of overlap and duplication among federal financial 

literacy and education activities and coordinating federal efforts to 

implement the national strategy; 

• assessing the availability, utilization, and impact of federal financial 

literacy and education materials; and

• promoting partnerships among federal, state, and local governments, 

nonprofit organizations, and private enterprises. 

 4

Under the act, the agencies represented on the Commission are the Departments of 

Agriculture, Defense, Education, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban

Development, Labor, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System; the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; the Office of Thrift

Supervision; the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation; the National Credit Union 

Administration; the Securities and Exchange Commission; the Federal Trade Commission;

the General Services Administration; the Small Business Administration; the Social 

Security Administration; the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; and the Office of 

Personnel Management. As of April 2006, the President had not appointed any additional 

members. 

Page 6 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
The act requires that the strategy be reviewed and modified as deemed 

necessary at least once a year. The act also requires the Secretary of the 

Treasury, after review of the Commission’s recommendations, as part of 

the national strategy, to develop, implement, and conduct a pilot national 

public service multimedia campaign to enhance the state of financial 

literacy and education in the United States. 

The Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Education lends primary 

support to the Commission and coordinates its efforts. The office has 

assigned professional staff, equivalent to 2.5 staff years, to handle work 

related to the Commission. Three other agencies have detailed seven 

government employees for between 2 months and 2 years each at the

Treasury Department to support the Commission between April 2003 and 

August 2006. The Commission has no independent budget. Most 

representatives of the Commission could not provide us with an estimate 

of the resources allocated to the Commission, most of which consisted of 

in-kind staff assistance. The act authorized appropriations to the 

Commission of “such sums as may be necessary” to carry out its work, and 

for fiscal year 2005 Congress specified that $1 million should be used for 

the development and implementation of the national strategy. Additional

information on the Commission’s budget and expenditures appears in 

appendix II.

The National Strategy for Financial Literacy serves as a useful first step in 

focusing attention on financial literacy but is largely descriptive rather 

than strategic. The strategy is comprehensive, discussing many of the 

major issues and challenges in improving financial literacy and describing

a variety of financial literacy initiatives in the government, nonprofit, and 

private sectors. However, its recommendations are presented as “calls to

action” that generally do not include a plan for implementation and the 

strategy only partially addresses most of the characteristics—such as full 

discussion of performance measures, resource needs, and roles and 

responsibilities—that we have previously identified as desirable for any 

effective national strategy. As a result, most federal and nonfederal 

agencies we interviewed said that the national strategy was unlikely to 

affect their financial literacy and education efforts. 

National Strategy Is 

Descriptive Rather 

Than Strategic, 

Limiting Its Value in 

Guiding the Nation’s 

Financial Literacy 

Efforts

Page 7 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
To develop the National Strategy for Financial Literacy, in May 2004, the 

Commission formed a national strategy working group of 13 member 

agencies.5

 According to a Treasury Department representative, the 

working group met 11 times and working group members provided 

background research and developed material for each of the strategy’s 

chapters. The Financial Literacy Act called for the participation of state 

and local governments and private, nonprofit, and public institutions in the 

creation and implementation of the national strategy.6

 To help meet this 

requirement, the working group, through the Treasury Department, issued 

a request for public comment on the development of the strategy in a 

Federal Register notice that was released in August 2004.7

 The request 

generated approximately 158 public responses from a wide array of 

federal, state, and local government entities; private companies; nonprofit 

agencies; and individuals, including academics and private citizens. The 

working group also held six public meetings in February and March 2005 

with individuals and organizations that had responded to the request for 

public comment. Each meeting was organized around a specific sector—

commercial, government, nonprofit, education, and banking—with one for 

individuals. Commission documents stated that the working group had 

considered information and ideas from the participants of these meetings

during the development of the national strategy. 

Although the Financial Literacy Act required the Commission to adopt the 

strategy within 18 months after the date of the act’s enactment, or June 

The Commission 

Developed a National 

Strategy, but Difficulty 

Reaching Consensus 

Delayed Its Release 

 5

Financial Literacy and Education Commission, Taking Ownership of the Future: The 

National Strategy for Financial Literacy (Washington, D.C.: April 2006). The agencies 

represented on the national strategy working group were the Department of Defense,

Department of Education, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of

Labor, Department of the Treasury, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal 

Reserve Board, Federal Trade Commission, General Services Administration, Office of the 

Comptroller of the Currency, Office of Personnel Management, Securities and Exchange 

Commission, and Social Security Administration. 

6

20 U.S.C. § 9703(f)(2)(A). 

7

69 Fed. Reg. 52538 (Aug. 26, 2004) (Department of the Treasury, “Comment Request for 

Financial Literacy and Education Commission National Strategy”). The notice specifically 

requested comments on (1) the three most important issues that the national strategy 

should address, (2) the existing resources that may be used to address those issues and 

how they could be employed, and (3) the best ways to improve financial literacy and 

education in the United States. 

Page 8 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
2005, the strategy was not publicly released until April 4, 2006.8

 The 

Commission sought unanimous consent on the national strategy, and 

Commission members told us that the difficulty of reaching consensus 

among all 20 member agencies had delayed the strategy. For instance, 

according to a Treasury Department official, some agencies disagreed 

about what the strategy should include, and some agency representatives 

had difficulties securing the approval of higher-level agency officials, who 

in some cases had objections. Some participants in the development of the 

national strategy told us that the process was generally collaborative and

that they were given sufficient opportunity to provide input and review 

drafts of the strategy. Other participants told us that they believed that the 

working group was not always given ample opportunity to provide input 

into important issues, such as the strategy’s overall direction,

recommendations, or implementation. Many Commission representatives 

acknowledged that the Treasury Department faced a significant challenge 

in trying to get 20 federal agencies—each with its own mission and point 

of view—to unanimously agree to a strategy. 

A particular source of disagreement among agencies was the issue of 

whether nonfederal entities should be cited by name in the strategy 

document. The national strategy includes numerous “illustrative 

programs” that provide examples of financial literacy initiatives in the 

private and nonprofit sector. According to a Treasury official, most 

Commission member agencies believed that these private and nonprofit 

entities should be cited by name, but some agencies did not. Specifically, 

two regulatory agencies that were part of the Commission said that a 

potential conflict of interest existed if they were perceived to be endorsing

a program run by an entity that was potentially the subject of an 

enforcement action. To address these issues, the Commission decided to 

remove names of private and nonprofit sector organizations from the 

national strategy. After consultation with all Commission members, the 

organizations’ names were included instead in a separate document issued 

 8

The Financial Literacy Act required the National Strategy for Financial Literacy to be 

provided to Congress as part of a report issued by the Commission called the “Strategy for 

Assuring Financial Empowerment.” U.S. Department of the Treasury, Strategy for 

Assuring Financial Empowerment (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 3, 2006). That report also

contained other elements required by the act, including a survey and assessment of certain

federal financial education materials and information on the activities and future plans of

the Commission. 20 U.S.C. § 9703 (h)(2). 

Page 9 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
by the Treasury Department, the “National Strategy for Financial Literacy: 

Quick Reference Guide.”9

The content of the National Strategy for Financial Literacy largely consists 

of a comprehensive overview of issues related to financial literacy, along 

with examples of ongoing initiatives. The strategy is organized into 13 

chapters. Seven of these chapters cover subject areas for financial 

education, such as retirement saving, credit, and taxpayer rights, while 

three others focus on specific groups—students, the unbanked, and 

multilingual and multicultural populations.10 There are also chapters on 

academic research and program evaluation, coordination efforts, and 

international initiatives. Most chapters provide a brief overview of the 

subject and the challenges the nation faces in addressing it, but most of 

the discussion involves “illustrative programs” that are already in place. 

These programs, of which the report discusses more than 80, are run by 

nonprofit organizations, academia, the private sector, and federal, state, 

and local governments. For example, the chapter on investor protection 

includes several pages describing specific resources and programs 

available through federal agencies and private entities. 

The strategy is comprehensive in its scope. It describes many major 

problems and challenges related to financial literacy in America, identifies 

key subject matter areas and target populations, and describes what it 

believes to be illustrations of potentially effective practices in financial 

education across a broad spectrum of subjects and sectors. As such, the 

strategy represents a useful first step in laying out key issues and 

highlighting the need for improved financial literacy. At the same time, as 

some representatives of the Commission told us, the strategy is 

fundamentally descriptive rather than strategic—that is, it provides 

information on disparate issues and initiatives related to financial literacy 

but is limited in presenting a long-term plan of action for achieving its 

goal. 

Most notably, the strategy’s recommendations are presented as “calls to 

action,” which it defines as concrete steps that should be taken for 

The National Strategy’s 

Content Is Comprehensive 

but Largely Descriptive 

 9

U.S. Department of the Treasury, Quick Reference Guide to the National Strategy for 

Financial Literacy (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 4, 2006).

10The term “unbanked” is widely used to describe individuals without transaction accounts

at traditional financial institutions.

Page 10 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
improving financial literacy and education in particular areas. Sixteen of

these 26 calls to action are addressed to federal entities, 5 to private or 

nonprofit organizations, and 5 to the public at large. However, many of 

these calls to action are very general and do not discuss an 

implementation strategy, and others describe initiatives that already exist.

For example, one call to action states “Investors should take advantage of 

the wealth of high quality, neutral, and unbiased information offered free 

of charge,” but it does not lay out a plan for helping ensure that investors 

will do so. Among the ongoing initiatives cited are a multimedia campaign 

that the Treasury Department is to launch that is mandated in the 

Financial Literacy Act. Another call to action states that the Department of 

Health and Human Services “will continue its public awareness campaign 

on the new Medicare drug benefit that encourages seniors to enroll in the 

program.” 

We have previously identified a set of desirable characteristics for any 

effective national strategy.

11 While national strategies are not required to 

contain a single, consistent set of attributes, we found six characteristics 

that can offer policymakers and implementing agencies a management 

tool to help ensure accountability and more effective results. These six 

characteristics are (1) a clear purpose, scope and methodology; (2) a 

detailed discussion of problems and risks; (3) desired goals, objectives, 

activities, and performance measures; (4) a description of future costs and 

resources needed to implement the strategy; (5) a clear delineation of the

government’s roles, responsibilities, and mechanisms for coordination; 

and (6) a description of how the strategy is integrated with other entities.

We found that the National Strategy for Financial Literacy generally 

addresses the first of these characteristics and partially addresses the 

other five (see table 1). 

Certain Elements of an 

Effective National Strategy 

Are Lacking 

 11GAO, Combating Terrorism: Evaluation of Selected Characteristics in National

Strategies Related to Terrorism, GAO-04-408T (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 3, 2004). 

Page 11 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Table 1: Extent the National Strategy for Financial Literacy Addresses GAO’s 

Desirable Characteristics of an Effective National Strategy 

Desirable characteristic 

Generally

addresses 

Partially 

addresses

Does not

address 

Clear purpose, scope, and methodology X 

Detailed discussion of problems and risks X 

Desired goals, objectives, activities, and 

performance measures X

Description of future costs and resources 

needed X

Organizational roles, responsibilities, and 

coordination X

Description of integration with other entities X 

Source: GAO analysis of the National Strategy for Financial Literacy. 

An effective strategy describes why the strategy was produced, the scope 

of its coverage, and how it was developed. A complete description of the 

purpose, scope, and methodology can make a document more useful to 

the implementing entities as well as to oversight organizations such as 

Congress. The National Strategy for Financial Literacy generally addresses 

this characteristic. It cites the legislative mandate that required the 

strategy, the overall purpose—improving financial literacy and education 

in the United States—and subsidiary goals such as making it easier for 

consumers to access financial education materials. A related document 

also discusses in detail the steps the Commission took to develop the 

strategy, including descriptions of working group meetings, the sectorspecific meetings, and the notice for public comment. 

The strategy’s foreword discusses its scope and defines key concepts, 

such as the document’s “calls to action” and “illustrative programs.” The 

Financial Literacy Act does not specifically define “financial literacy” or 

“financial education.” However, the act does specify a detailed and wideranging list of the elements that the Commission should emphasize—such 

as budgeting, saving, managing credit, understanding financial products, 

avoiding abusive lending, understanding investments—which the strategy 

Clear Purpose, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Page 12 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
discusses.12 Thus, while the strategy does generally have a clear purpose, 

scope, and methodology, it might benefit additionally by providing its own 

concrete definition for financial literacy and education, which would help 

define the scope of the Commission’s work. 

A strategy with this characteristic provides a detailed discussion or 

definition of the problems the strategy intends to address, their causes, 

and the risks of not addressing them. Based on our review, the National 

Strategy for Financial Literacy partially addresses this characteristic. The 

strategy identifies specific problems that indicate a need for improved 

financial literacy. For example, the chapter on general saving provides 

data on the decline in the personal saving rate over the last 35 years, and 

the chapter on consumer protection cites an estimate on the percentage of 

American adults who are scammed every year. The strategy also discusses 

some of the causes for these problems. For example, the chapter on 

education notes that teachers are often not prepared to teach financial 

education and do not know about available educational materials and 

curricula. 

While the strategy does address many key problems and risks, it might 

benefit further from a fuller discussion of the long-term risks—to both 

individual families’ well-being and the broader national economy—that 

may be associated with poor financial literacy. Moreover, a clear 

understanding of our nation’s overall financial condition and fiscal outlook 

is an indispensable part of true financial literacy. Due to current 

demographic trends, rising health care costs, and other factors, the nation

faces the possibility of decades of mounting debt, which left unchecked 

will threaten our economic security and adversely affect the quality of life 

available to future generations.13 One element of financial literacy is 

ensuring that Americans are aware of these potential developments in 

planning for their own financial futures since, for example, we can no 

longer assume that current federal entitlement programs will continue 

Detailed Discussion of 

Problems and Risks 

 12For example, the statute states that the Commission shall emphasize elements including

how to “create household budgets, initiate savings plans, and make strategic investment 

decisions for education, retirement, home ownership, wealth building, or other savings

goals” and “increase awareness of the availability and significance of credit reports and

credit scores in obtaining credit, the importance of their accuracy (and how to correct 

inaccuracies), their effect on credit terms, and the effect common financial decisions may 

have on credit scores.” 20 U.S.C. § 9703(a)(2). 

13For example, see GAO, The Nation’s Long-Term Fiscal Outlook: September 2006 Update,

GAO-06-1077R (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 15, 2006). 

Page 13 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
indefinitely in their present form. The federal government has sought to 

encourage personal saving through policies such as tax incentives, but the 

effect of these policies on the overall level of personal saving is 

uncertain—highlighting further the importance of public education in 

raising our national saving rate and ensuring that Americans enjoy a 

secure retirement.14

This characteristic deals with what goals a strategy strives to achieve and

the steps needed to meet those goals, as well as milestones and outcome 

measures to gauge results. The National Strategy for Financial Literacy 

partially addresses these characteristics. The strategy does identify and 

discuss four strategic areas needed to improve financial literacy—building

public awareness of available resources; developing tailored, targeted 

materials and dissemination strategies; tapping into public-private and 

private-private partnerships; and doing research on and evaluating 

financial education programs. As discussed earlier, it also includes the 26

calls to action that, although often lacking detail, provide a picture of the 

types of activities the strategy recommends. 

However, in general, the strategy neither sets clear and specific goals and 

subordinate objectives for what it seeks to achieve, nor does it set 

priorities or performance measures for assessing progress. Several 

stakeholders in the financial literacy community that we spoke with noted 

that the strategy would have been more useful if it had set specific 

performance measures. The Commission might also have set measurable 

goals for changing consumer behavior, such as seeking to reduce the

number of Americans without bank accounts or increase the number 

saving for their retirement to a specified figure in the next 5 or 10 years. 

Without performance measures or other evaluation mechanisms, the 

strategy lacks a good means of measuring its progress and holding 

relevant players accountable. 

A Treasury Department official told us that the Commission would be 

tracking the implementation of the “calls to action,” many of which 

represent tangible activities. He said that the department, in coordination 

with the Commission, may also track overall statistical measures that can 

serve as a gauge to the nation’s financial literacy. He also noted that it 

would be difficult to attribute the particular effect the national strategy 

Desired Goals, Objectives, 

Activities, and Performance 

Measures 

 14GAO, National Saving: Current Saving Decisions Have Profound Implications for Our

Nation’s Future Well-Being, GAO-06-628T (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 6, 2006).

Page 14 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
has had on statistics like the national saving rate, because so many 

variables affect them. While we recognize this difficulty, we believe the 

Commission should lay out a more concrete process for monitoring and 

reporting on its progress. Behavior-related outcome measures would serve 

as more effective overall indicators of the progress the nation—and by 

extension the Commission—is making in addressing financial literacy. 

This characteristic describes what a strategy will cost, the sources and 

types of resources needed, and where those resources should be targeted. 

The financial literacy strategy partially addresses this characteristic. In 

general terms, the strategy discusses the types of resources that are 

available from different sectors, including the federal and state 

governments, private companies, and community organizations. The Quick 

Reference Guide that accompanies the strategy provides a list of these 

resources along with their Web sites and contact information. 

However, the strategy does not address fundamental questions about the 

level and type of resources that are needed to implement the national 

strategy. No cost estimate is provided either for the strategy as a whole or 

for specific initiatives or activities. The strategy also does little to 

acknowledge or discuss how funding limitations could be a challenge to 

improving financial literacy and offers little detail on how existing 

resources could best be leveraged—an issue raised by some organizations

in their public comment letters on the strategy. Moreover, the strategy also

does not discuss where resources should be targeted. For example, it does 

not identify the sectors or populations most in need of additional 

resources. The strategy also might have included more discussion of how 

various “tools of government” such as regulation, standards, and tax

incentives might be used to stimulate nonfederal organizations to use their 

unique resources to implement the strategy. Without a clear description of 

resource needs, policymakers lack information helpful in allocating 

resources and directing the strategy’s implementation. 

This characteristic deals with which organizations will implement a 

strategy and describes their roles and responsibilities, as well as 

mechanisms for coordinating their efforts. The National Strategy for 

Financial Literacy partially addresses these issues. It discusses the 

involvement of various sectors—including the federal government, state 

and local governments, private companies, nonprofit and community 

organizations, academia, and private individuals—in seeking to improve 

financial literacy. It also discusses, in very general terms, the roles of the 

government in relation to the private sector and individuals. In addition, 

some of the strategy’s calls to action identify specific agencies that will or 

Description of Future Costs 

and Resources Needed 

Organizational Roles, 

Responsibilities, and 

Coordination 

Page 15 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
should implement certain tasks or initiatives. As discussed later in this 

report, the national strategy also includes a chapter on interagency 

coordination and a discussion of the need for public-private partnerships. 

The strategy is not specific about roles and responsibilities. For example, 

it does not advocate new approaches for the federal government’s role in 

promoting financial literacy or recommend changes in the roles of 

individual agencies. Addressing these issues more fully is important given 

our prior work that discussed the appropriate federal role in financial 

literacy in relation to other entities and the potential need to streamline 

federal efforts in this area.15 In addition, the strategy generally does not 

clarify implementing organizations’ relationships in terms of leading,

supporting, and partnering. The nongovernmental sector plays a 

significant role in financial education. While the strategy does emphasize 

the importance of coordination and partnership—and cites existing 

examples of such efforts—it is limited in identifying or promoting specific 

processes for coordination and collaboration between sectors and 

organizations. The lack of a detailed discussion of roles and 

responsibilities may serve as a barrier to conducting a coordinated and 

clearly defined implementation plan and to ensuring that sufficient 

accountability exists. 

This characteristic addresses how a national strategy relates to other 

federal strategies’ goals, objectives, and activities. A strategy might also 

discuss, as appropriate, various strategies and plans produced by the state, 

local, private, or international sectors. The National Strategy for Financial 

Literacy partially addresses this characteristic. It does identify and 

describe a few plans and initiatives of entities in the federal and private 

sectors, and it includes a chapter describing approaches within other 

nations and international efforts to improve financial education. However, 

the strategy is limited in identifying linkages between itself and these 

initiatives, and it does not address how it might integrate with the 

overarching plans and strategies of these state, local, and private sector 

entities. As a result, the strategy may be less effective in marshalling and 

leveraging the abilities and resources that exist outside of the federal 

government.

Description of Integration with 

Other Entities 

 15GAO-05-93SP, pp. 5-8. 

Page 16 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Because the National Strategy for Financial Literacy is more of a 

description of the current state of affairs than an action plan for the future, 

its effect on public and private entities that conduct financial education 

may be limited. We asked several major financial literacy organizations 

how the national strategy would affect their own plans and activities, and 

the majority said it would have no impact at all. Similarly, few federal 

agencies that we spoke with could identify ways in which the national

strategy was guiding their own work to address financial literacy. Most 

characterized the strategy as a description of their existing efforts. 

A Treasury Department official noted to us that the national financial 

literacy movement is still in its early stages and that the Commission itself 

is a relatively new entity. As such, he said, the national strategy—which is 

to be reviewed at least annually—was intended largely as an initial step to

call attention to the issue of financial literacy, identify the key issues 

involved, and survey the landscape of current financial literacy efforts. He 

said that subsequent versions of the strategy may look different as the 

Commission’s efforts evolve. A supplement to the national strategy states

that the initial strategy was intended to be a blueprint that is firm enough 

to give general direction but flexible enough to allow different players to 

choose their own roles in enhancing financial education. An official noted 

that the goal of many of the strategy’s calls to action is to construct a base 

of knowledge and a consensus among key players. Thus, many of the calls

to action involve conferences and other meetings, which he said are 

intended to bring players from a variety of sectors together so as to build a 

foundation of understanding and agreement. These meetings and 

discussions, the official said, are not in lieu of more precise 

recommendations, but rather a prerequisite to them. 

The Commission’s My Money Web site serves as a portal to more than 260 

other federal financial education sites, and representatives of financial

literacy organizations generally told us that the site served its purpose 

effectively. Use of the Web site has been growing, though due to resource 

constraints and competing priorities, the site has not yet implemented 

certain best practices recommended for federal public Web sites, such as 

testing for usability and measuring customer satisfaction. As a result, the 

Commission does not know if visitors are able to find the information they 

are looking for efficiently and effectively. The volume of calls to the 

Commission’s telephone hotline—which serves as an order line for a free 

“tool kit”—has been limited, possibly because of a lack of publicity. To 

meet a Financial Literacy Act requirement for conducting a public service 

multimedia campaign, the Treasury Department has contracted with the 

The Impact of the National 

Strategy May Be Limited 

Web Site and 

Telephone Hotline 

Offer Financial 

Education 

Information from 

Federal Agencies 

Page 17 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Advertising Council to develop and implement a campaign focusing on 

credit literacy among young adults. 

The Financial Literacy Act required the Commission to establish and 

maintain a Web site to serve as a clearinghouse and provide a coordinated 

point of entry for information about federal financial literacy and 

education programs, grants, and materials. To implement this requirement, 

in January 2004, the Commission created a Web site subcommittee that 

was chaired at the time by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. 

According to Treasury Department representatives, 17 member agencies

serve on the subcommittee. In October 2004, the My Money Web site 

(www.MyMoney.gov) was launched in both an English- and a Spanishlanguage version. As of July 2006, the subcommittee had met two times in 

person and had communicated through e-mail and teleconference during 

the process of developing and updating the Web site. Members of the Web 

site subcommittee told us the working relationship on the subcommittee 

was collaborative. Members of the Web site subcommittee have credited

the General Services Administration (GSA) with providing much of the 

staff time and resources to implement the Web site. GSA’s Federal Citizen 

Information Center hosts the Web site and provides most of its technical 

support. According to GSA representatives, as of August 2006, 14 GSA staff

members had spent about 4,000 staff hours to support the Commission’s 

activities, including the Web site. Other agencies told us that they have not 

tracked the amount of staff time they have devoted to the Web site. 

Agencies have primarily supported the Web site through in-kind 

contributions in the form of staff time, although GSA has provided 

additional resources by covering the costs to host and maintain the site. 

The Web site has not received a specific appropriation and Treasury 

representatives said they do not anticipate requesting dedicated funding 

for it. 

The My Money Web site serves as a “cross-agency portal”—that is, a 

gateway that gathers information and services from multiple federal 

agencies—and consists largely of links to financial literacy and education 

Web sites maintained by Commission member agencies. Updated in 

January 2006 and again in October 2006, the English-language version of 

the My Money Web site now has more than 260 links. These links are 

Financial Education Web 

Site Offers Links to 

Federal Resources

Web Site Serves as a Portal to 

Other Federal Sites 

Page 18 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
organized around 12 topics.16 For example, under “financial planning” 

consumers can find links to about a dozen Web resources, including a site 

on building wealth from the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and a site on 

finances for young adults from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

(FDIC). The Web site also includes an interactive money quiz, information 

about the Commission, and the National Strategy for Financial Literacy. 

The Spanish-language version of the Web site includes about 40 links to 

Spanish-language financial education materials provided by federal 

agencies. Many representatives of financial literacy initiatives and 

organizations that we spoke to in the private and nonprofit sectors were 

generally satisfied with the Web site, saying that it provided a clear and

useful portal for consumers to federal financial education materials. 

With the exception of the interactive quiz, the Commission did not create

any original content for the My Money Web site, but instead sought to 

coordinate existing federal agency financial education materials. As such, 

the Web site was largely intended to help market and distribute existing 

federal financial literacy resources to a wider audience. The Web site 

subcommittee also chose to limit the site’s content, in most cases, to Web

sites that are maintained or operated by federal agencies. Although the 

Financial Literacy Act allowed links to nonfederal sites if the sites have no

commercial content, the Web site subcommittee decided it wanted to 

ensure the integrity of the site by limiting it to information offered by 

federal agencies.17 The Financial Literacy Act required that the Web site 

offer information on all federal grants to promote financial literacy and 

education, and on how to target, apply for, and receive such grants.18 A 

 16The topic areas are Budgeting and Taxes; Credit; Financial Planning; Home Ownership; 

Kids; Paying for Education; Privacy, Fraud & Scams; Responding To Life Events; 

Retirement Planning; Saving and Investing; Starting a Small Business; and Financial 

Education Grants. 

17An exception was made for certain financial education sites maintained by colleges and 

universities affiliated with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Cooperative State Research

Education and Extension Service, as well as sites affiliated with the Federal Reserve Board. 

1820 U.S.C. § 9703(b)(2)(C). 

Page 19 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
section on federal financial education grants was added to the site in 

October 2006, which includes links to four grant programs.19

From its inception in October 2004 through September 2006, the My 

Money Web site has received approximately 1,041,000 visits.20 The site 

received an average of 35,000 visits per month during the first 6 months 

after its introduction in October 2004. As shown in figure 1, use of the site 

has increased since that time, reaching a peak of 78,000 visits in April 2006, 

when the Commission and the Web site received publicity associated with

the release of the national strategy. From May through September 2006, 

the site averaged about 57,000 visits per month. GSA tracks and the 

Commission reports monthly performance metrics, including the number 

of Web page views for both the English and Spanish versions of the Web 

site and the number of downloads of the national strategy. However, the 

Commission has not formulated specific goals or performance measures 

for the Web site. 

Use of the Web Site Is Growing 

 19The four federal grant programs cited on the Web site as of October 2006 were the 

Department of Education’s Excellence in Economic Education program, Department of 

Health and Human Services’ Assets for Independence program, Department of Housing and 

Urban Development’s Housing Counseling program, and National Credit Union 

Administration’s Community Development Revolving Loan Fund program.

20A “visit” is defined as all the activity of one visitor to a Web site within a specified period, 

usually 30 minutes. Because federal government Web sites are generally prohibited from

using “cookies” (small files stored on a visitor’s computer that can contain identifying 

information about the visitor), the number of unique visitors to the My Money Web site 

cannot be counted. Thus, data on total number of visits do not represent the number of

users who have visited the Web site because some users may visit the site multiple times. 

According to a GSA official, because unique visitors cannot be counted, the best measure 

of the Web site’s usage is number of visits. 

Page 20 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Figure 1: My Money Web Site Usage, Fiscal Years 2005-2006 

The number of visits to the My Money Web site has been roughly 

comparable to some recently launched private Web sites that provide 

financial education. For example, in fiscal year 2006, the My Money Web 

site received approximately 628,000 visits. During that same time period, 

the Employee Benefit Research Institute’s “Choose to Save” Web site, the 

American Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ “360 Degrees of 

Financial Literacy” Web site, and the National Endowment for Financial 

Education’s “Smart about Money” Web site received, respectively, 

1,538,000, 437,000, and 229,000 visits.21

Visits (in thousands)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

July

June

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

S

Au

ept.

g.

S

Au

ept.

g.

July

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

2004 2005

Month and year

2006

Source: GSA.

 21The Employee Benefit Research Institute’s Choose to Save Web site 

(www.choosetosave.org) was introduced in 1997. The American Institute of Certified 

Public Accountants launched its 360 Degrees of Financial Literacy Web site 

(www.360financialliteracy.org) in October 2004, and the National Endowment for Financial 

Education launched its Smart about Money Web site (www.smartaboutmoney.org) in

September 2005. We used equivalent definitions of “visits” for all of these sites. Data on the 

number of visits to these sites were provided by the organizations that sponsored them; we

did not independently verify these data. 

Page 21 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
The number of visits to other federal sites that serve as cross-agency

portals varies. Kids.gov, a gateway to federal sites for children, received 

about 1.9 million visits during fiscal year 2006. Consumeraction.gov, which 

serves as a portal for consumers seeking advice and information on how 

to solve consumer problems, received 1.3 million visits during the same 

period. While the purposes of these portals differ from the My Money Web 

site, they give some measure of the volume of usage by federal portals. 

Some representatives of financial literacy organizations we spoke with 

said that the Commission should do more to promote public awareness of 

the Web site. Commission representatives noted that the Commission has 

taken several steps to promote the site. For example, in April 2006, the 

Treasury Department and GSA funded a promotional effort that printed 

the My Money Web site address on envelopes containing federal benefits

and tax refunds. The Commission has also encouraged attendees at its 

public meetings to link to the site, and the site invites visitors to copy and

paste a specially designed logo as a means to link to the site.

The Web site subcommittee has not yet conducted usability tests or 

measured customer satisfaction—steps recommended as best practices 

for federal agency public Web sites—for the My Money Web site. 

Representatives of GSA, which operates the site, acknowledge that these 

steps are standard best practices that would be useful in improving the 

site. However, they said they had not yet been done due to competing 

priorities and a lack of funding and that there are no plans to conduct 

these steps in the near future.22 Without usability testing or measures of 

customer satisfaction, the Commission does not know whether the Web 

site’s content is organized in a manner that makes sense to the public, or 

whether the site’s visitors are able to find the information they are looking

for efficiently and effectively. 

The federal government’s Web Managers Advisory Council provides 

guidance to help federal Web managers implement recommendations and 

The Commission Has Not Yet 

Tested Web Site for Usability or

Measured Customer 

Satisfaction

 22According to a usability specialist from GSA, it might cost roughly $10,000 to $15,000 for a

basic usability study with eight participants and recommendations for redesign of the site.

Representatives of the Department of Health and Human Services told us it might be able 

to offer the Commission use of its Web testing lab at no charge, which would reduce the 

cost of usability testing. 

Page 22 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
best practices for their federal sites.23 The council recommends testing 

usability and measuring customer satisfaction to help identify 

improvements and ensure that consumers can navigate the sites efficiently

and effectively. Usability testing typically involves having users perform a 

variety of tasks with a prototype Web site while observers record notes on

what each user does and says. Testing may include collecting data on how

users do tasks, what kinds of errors they make, when and where they are 

confused or frustrated, how fast they do a task, whether they succeed in

doing it, and how satisfied they are with the experience. Measuring 

customer satisfaction provides an indication of whether consumers find a 

Web site useful, may return to the site, and may recommend the site to 

others. According to the council, organizations can measure customer 

satisfaction through online surveys, e-mail feedback, phone calls, letters, 

and other contacts with the public, such as focus groups.24

The Web Managers Advisory Council also recommends that federal Web

sites have a page entitled “Contact Us,” or something similar, that provides 

visitors with the organization’s mailing and e-mail addresses so that they 

can ask questions, get information, or report problems. The Commission 

added an “E-mail Us” link to the site in October 2006, 2 years after its 

launch, but the link is for addressing “technical issues.” Commission 

representatives told us they are still in the process of identifying an 

appropriate point of contact for the Web site that would be needed to

effectively respond to consumers’ questions and concerns. A Treasury 

Department official noted that visitors can contact individual federal 

agencies, whose Web sites are provided on the My Money Web site. 

The Financial Literacy Act required that the Commission establish a tollfree telephone number for members of the public seeking information 

related to financial literacy.25 In January 2004, the Commission created a 

Telephone Hotline Offers 

Consumers Free Tool Kit 

 23The Web Managers Advisory Council is an interagency group of about 40 senior Web

managers from every cabinet-level agency, several independent agencies, and the judicial 

and legislative branches. In 2004, the council recommended policies and guidelines for all 

federal public Web sites. See: Interagency Committee on Government Information, 

Recommended Policies and Guidelines for Federal Public Websites, submitted to the 

Office of Management and Budget (Washington, D.C.: June 9, 2004). 

24Many federal agencies and organizations in the private sector use the American Customer

Satisfaction Index online survey to measure customer satisfaction with their Web sites. 

According to a GSA official, it costs federal agencies about $25,000 a year to participate in

the survey. 

2520 U.S.C. § 9703(c). 

Page 23 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
hotline subcommittee of five member agencies and chaired by the FDIC.26

The Commission launched the telephone hotline, 1-888-My Money, 

simultaneously with the My Money Web site in October 2004. The hotline 

supports both English- and Spanish-speaking callers. A private contractor

operates the hotline’s call center and GSA’s Federal Citizen Information 

Center oversees the operation and covers its cost. According to GSA, the 

cost of providing telephone service for the hotline was about $28,000 in 

fiscal year 2006. 

The hotline serves as an order line for obtaining a free financial literacy 

“tool kit”—that is, a collection of pamphlets and booklets from various 

federal agencies on topics such as saving and investing, deposit insurance, 

and Social Security. As shown in table 2, as of April 2006, the tool kit 

consisted of eight publications provided by six federal agencies. The tool 

kit is available in English- and Spanish-language versions, and consumers 

can order it via the My Money Web site or the hotline. Representatives of 

the hotline subcommittee told us that initially they had planned to expand

the scope of the hotline—for example, by providing information and 

referrals. However, funding was not available for the additional training 

that providing these services would have required. 

Tool Kit Is a Collection of 

Publications from Multiple 

Agencies 

 26Other members of the hotline subcommittee include the Department of the Treasury, 

Department of Health and Human Services, GSA, and the Office of Thrift Supervision. 

Page 24 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Table 2: Contents of My Money Tool Kit as of April 2006 

Agency Title of publication Description 

Commodity 

Futures Trading 

Commission 

Foreign Currency Fraud One-page brochure offering 

consumers advice on how to avoid 

foreign currency market fraud. 

Department of 

Labor 

Savings Fitness: A Guide to 

Your Money and Your 

Financial Future

Twenty-nine-page booklet on

creating a personal savings plan 

and preparing for retirement. 

Insuring Your Deposits One-page brochure explaining

FDIC deposit insurance. 

FDIC 

Money Smart: An Adult 

Education Program 

One-page brochure explaining

“Money Smart,” an FDIC training 

program designed to help adults 

outside the financial mainstream

enhance their money skills. 

GSA Consumer Information Catalog Sixteen-page booklet listing free 

and low-cost government 

publications covering a variety of 

topics, including financial topics. 

Get the Facts on Saving and 

Investing 

Thirty-two-page booklet covering 

the basics of saving and investing. 

Securities and 

Exchange 

Commission Ask Questions: Questions You 

Should Ask About Your 

Investments 

One-page brochure on buying and 

monitoring investment products. 

Social Security

Administration

Social Security: Understanding 

the Benefits 

Twenty-one-page booklet 

explaining the basics of the Social 

Security retirement, disability, and 

survivors insurance programs.

Source: GAO.

Note: Most publications are available in both English and Spanish. The contents of the tool kit have 

changed over time subject to the availability of publications supplied by agencies. 

According to GSA officials, agencies that currently contribute materials to 

the tool kit have signed a memorandum of understanding outlining how 

expenses are to be shared. Each agency pays for the production and 

distribution costs of the publications it provides to the tool kit. GSA’s 

Federal Citizen Information Center distributes publications on behalf of 

agencies from the Government Printing Office facility in Pueblo, Colorado,

and agencies reimburse GSA for all costs associated with order receipt, 

processing, and mailing. According to GSA, as of September 30, 2006, 

agencies incurred approximately $688,000 in costs for having GSA 

distribute publications in the tool kit. According to representatives of the 

hotline subcommittee, other Commission agencies were invited to provide 

publications for the tool kit, but they declined to participate.

Representatives of some Commission member agencies told us that they 

Page 25 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
lacked the funds to provide publications for the tool kit or that their 

limited resources for financial education efforts would be better spent 

elsewhere. As a result, the tool kit does not currently include publications 

on certain major financial issues, such as homeownership and credit. 

The volume of calls to the My Money telephone hotline has been limited—

453 calls in September 2006 and an average of about 200 calls per month 

between February 2005 and February 2006. This call volume is

considerably lower than other federal toll-free hotlines used for ordering 

publications that GSA’s Federal Citizen Information Center supports. For 

example, according to GSA, in fiscal year 2006, the Federal Citizen 

Information Center’s hotline for ordering printed information from the 

Government Printing Office facility in Pueblo, Colorado (1-888-8-Pueblo), 

and the Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service hotline for 

requesting publications and handling general information about the 

agency’s programs and services (1-800-344-WILD) received, respectively,

an average of about 16,500 and 3,600 calls per month in fiscal year 2006.27

While the purposes of these hotlines differ from the My Money hotline, and 

they have been in existence longer, they give some measure of the volume

of usage of federal toll-free hotlines used for requesting publications. As 

shown in figure 2, calls to the My Money hotline generally declined from 

its inception in October 2004 through February 2006. Calls spiked 

markedly in April 2006 because of a marketing effort that month that put 

the hotline’s telephone number on millions of envelopes containing federal

tax refund and government benefit checks. However, GSA representatives 

told us that the overwhelming majority of consumers who called the 

hotline during that period did not order a tool kit; instead they had called 

because they erroneously believed the hotline operator could answer 

inquiries about the checks they had received. Figure 2 shows that call 

volume has decreased from a peak of about 15,000 calls in April 2006 to 

453 calls in September 2006. According to a GSA official, a hotline’s call 

volume depends largely on the promotional efforts associated with it. 

Some representatives of the Commission commented that call volume to 

the hotline has been low and attributed this to limited promotion of the 

hotline. A Treasury Department representative noted that, as with the Web 

site, the Commission had taken several steps to promote the hotline. 

These have included printing the hotline’s telephone number on envelopes 

Telephone Hotline’s Call 

Volume Has Been Limited 

 27According to GSA, data on call volume include calls serviced by a live agent or handled by

automation but do not include calls that were abandoned. 

Page 26 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
containing federal benefits and tax refunds, and publicizing the hotline at

public meetings and other financial literacy events across the country. 

Figure 2: My Money Hotline Call Volume, Fiscal Years 2005-2006 

Note: Our analysis of the number of calls to the My Money hotline is based on reports provided by the

private contractor that operates the hotline’s call center and includes calls received by automation, 

calls abandoned, and calls received by operators, in both English and Spanish. Of those calls 

received by an operator, about 12 percent were conducted in Spanish. Data were not available on the

percentage of calls received by automation that were conducted in Spanish. 

Consumers ordered many more tool kits from the My Money Web site than 

they did through the hotline. About 93 percent of the approximately 

107,000 tool kit orders in fiscal years 2005 and 2006 were submitted 

through the Web site, with the remainder submitted through the hotline.28

Spanish-language tool kits represented about 3 percent of the total 

number, and about 30 percent of them were ordered through the hotline. 

Representatives of a Hispanic advocacy organization told us that the 

July

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

June

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

S

Au

ept.

g.

S

Au

ept.

g.

July

June

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

2004 2005

Month and year

2006

2004 2005 2006

Source: GAO analysis of GSA data.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

S

Au

ept.

g.

July

S

Au

ept.

g.

July

June

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

May

Number of calls

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

 28Because a consumer may request up to three tool kits when submitting an order, the

number of tool kit orders does not equal the number of tool kits distributed.

Page 27 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
hotline might be an important venue for Hispanic consumers because 

many of them lack access to the Internet. The overall number of tool kit

orders has been declining slightly over the past year, falling from about 

60,000 in fiscal year 2005 to 47,000 in fiscal year 2006. This decline may be

in part the result of the limited publicity the tool kit has received. GSA 

sometimes partners with media outlets, such as Parade Magazine, to 

promote federal consumer publications. However, GSA officials said that 

they have not heavily promoted the My Money tool kit because budget 

considerations at the agencies providing publications have limited the 

supply of tool kits available. 

As part of the national strategy, the Financial Literacy Act required the 

Secretary of the Treasury to develop, implement, and conduct a pilot 

national public service multimedia campaign to enhance the state of 

financial literacy in the United States.

29 The act also required the Treasury 

Department to develop measures to evaluate the campaign’s effectiveness. 

The act authorized to be appropriated $3 million for the development, 

production, and distribution of the campaign for fiscal years 2004, 2005, 

and 2006. The conference report accompanying the fiscal year 2005 

appropriation for the Treasury Department’s Departmental Offices, 

Salaries, and Expenses account specified that $1 million should be used to

promote basic financial literacy and education.30 The department allocated 

$750,000 of this to support the multimedia campaign conducted as part of

the national strategy. 

The department chose to focus the multimedia campaign on credit literacy 

among young adults. Treasury representatives told us that they chose this 

topic based on feedback received from the sector-specific meetings and 

because credit literacy is an essential part of overall financial literacy.

Further, they noted that the act that created the Commission was a 

component of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, which 

addresses credit issues. The focus on young adults was due, in part, to 

findings of a survey we conducted that found that younger consumers 

Credit Literacy Campaign 

to Target Young Adults 

 2920 U.S.C. § 9707. 

30H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 108-792, at 1443 (2004). The conference report stated that it retains 

the Senate provision specifying “$1,000,000 to promote basic financial literacy and 

education.” More specifically, the Senate Committee on Appropriations, in S. Rep. No. 108-

342, 126 (2004), specified “$1,000,000 to be used for the development and implementation 

of the national strategy to promote basic financial literacy and education among all 

American consumers.” 

Page 28 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
were significantly less knowledgeable about credit reporting issues.31 The 

department has contracted with the Advertising Council to develop and 

implement the multimedia campaign, which is expected to be advertised—

using donated air time and print space—on television and radio, in print,

and online.32 The campaign is currently in the development stages, and

Advertising Council representatives said that they expected to distribute it 

to media outlets by the spring of 2007. The campaign will also promote the 

My Money Web site and hotline. The Advertising Council said that it 

expects to use standard tools to evaluate the campaign’s impact. These

include measuring the dollar value of the media resources donated to the 

campaign, surveying consumers’ attitudes and behaviors before and after 

its implementation, and monitoring the use of the Web site and hotline. 

The Commission has helped coordinate federal financial literacy efforts 

by, among other things, bringing together federal agencies on a regular 

basis and centralizing information from multiple federal agencies through 

its Web site and hotline. Further, its national strategy discusses the need

for coordination among federal agencies, and several of the calls to action 

involve interagency efforts. However, the Commission has sometimes had 

difficulty reaching consensus among its 20 participating federal agencies, 

which have different missions and perspectives. Moreover, the 

Commission’s own staff and funding resources are relatively small, and it 

has no legal authority to require agencies to redirect their resources or 

take other actions. Steps to promote public-private and private-private 

partnerships have included sponsoring or facilitating conferences and 

symposiums, but the impact of these actions is unclear, and the 

Commission has not been as active in working with state and local 

governments. 

The Financial Literacy Act required that the Commission develop a plan to

improve coordination of federal financial literacy and education activities 

and identify areas of overlap and duplication among these activities. 

Treasury Department and member agency representatives, as well as 

The Commission Has 

Taken Steps to 

Coordinate Federal 

Agencies’ Efforts and 

Promote Partnerships 

but Faces Challenges 

Coordinating Multiple 

Federal Agencies Has Been 

Challenging 

 31GAO-05-223. 

32The Advertising Council (commonly known as the Ad Council) is a private, nonprofit 

organization that produces, distributes, and promotes public service campaigns on behalf 

of nonprofit organizations and government agencies. 

Page 29 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Commission documents, have cited a number of the Commission’s 

activities as having helped coordinate financial literacy efforts within the 

federal government, such as the following: 

• Formal and informal meetings. The Commission created a single focal 

point for federal agencies to come together on the issue of financial 

literacy and education. Some representatives noted that the Commission’s 

meetings—including formal public, working group, and subcommittee 

meetings—have helped foster interagency communication and 

information sharing that had previously been lacking. 

• Web site. As we have seen, the My Money Web site, developed through an

interagency subcommittee, serves as a single portal for federal financial 

literacy and education resources. The Web site centralizes all Web-based 

federal financial education resources, making it easier for consumers to 

find this information. 

• Hotline and tool kit. The My Money hotline allows consumers, particularly 

those who do not use the Internet, to access printed financial literacy 

materials from multiple federal agencies. 

• National strategy. The national strategy includes a chapter on federal 

interagency coordination that outlines steps the Commission has taken 

and discusses the FDIC’s Money Smart education program, which multiple 

federal agencies have used. Several of the strategy’s calls to action involve 

interagency efforts, including joint conferences and other initiatives. 

In addition, to meet a requirement of the Financial Literacy Act that the 

Commission identify and propose means of eliminating areas of overlap 

and duplication, the Commission asked federal agencies to provide 

information about their financial literacy activities. After reviewing these 

resources, the Commission said it found minimal overlap and duplication 

among federal financial literacy programs. It noted that even when 

different agencies’ programs appeared similar, closer inspection revealed

important differences in things like the target audience, delivery platform, 

or specific content. As a result, the Commission did not propose the 

elimination of any federal activities. The national strategy includes a call to

action that the Treasury Department and GSA will conduct a similar 

survey of overlap and duplication every 6 months. 

To meet a requirement of the act that it assess the availability, utilization, 

and impact of federal financial literacy materials, the Commission asked 

each agency to evaluate the effectiveness of its own materials and 

programs. The Commission reported that each agency deemed its 

Page 30 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
programs and resources to be effective and worthy of continuance. 

However, rather than using an unbiased evaluator, the agencies assessed 

their own programs, which did not benefit from the use of independent 

third-party analysis. Moreover, given the large number of federal agencies 

involved in financial literacy, a concerted effort to streamline federal 

efforts is essential. As we have reported, in 2004, about 20 different federal 

agencies operated about 30 different programs or initiatives related to 

financial literacy. The federal government’s effort in this area could 

potentially benefit by focusing federal financial literacy resources on those

agencies with the most expertise and best track records.33

The Commission has faced several challenges in coordinating the efforts 

of the 20 federal agencies that form the Commission. In prior work, we 

have identified barriers to coordinating programs and initiatives across the 

federal government, including competing missions, concerns about 

protecting resources, and a lack of clearly articulated roles and 

responsibilities.34 These barriers may have affected the Commission’s 

efforts to coordinate federal programs. Each of the Commission’s 

participating federal agencies has different missions and responsibilities 

and thus different perspectives and points of view on issues of financial

literacy. In addition, the agencies differ in their levels of responsibility and

expertise with regard to financial literacy and education. A Treasury 

Department official stated that the extent to which senior policymakers 

from the Commission’s member agencies were involved in activities and 

decision making varied. In addition, because agencies tend to be 

protective of their resources, it might be very difficult to recommend 

eliminating individual agencies’ programs. 

Moreover, the Commission’s ability to coordinate such major structural 

change, if it chose to do so, would also be constrained by its limited 

resources in terms of both staff and funding. Further, the Commission has 

no legal authority to compel an agency to take any action but instead must 

work through collaboration and consensus. According to Treasury 

Department representatives, early on, the Commission decided that 

decisions on major matters would require consensus, making efforts to 

 33GAO-05-93SP, p. 8.

34GAO, Managing for Results: Barriers to Interagency Coordination, GAO/GGD-00-106 

(Washington, D.C.: Mar. 29, 2000), and GAO, Results-Oriented Government: Practices That

Can Help Enhance and Sustain Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 

(Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005). 

Page 31 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
coordinate agencies’ efforts more challenging. For example, as discussed 

earlier, the agencies disagreed about whether nonfederal organizations 

should be cited by name in the national strategy. Although the issue was 

ultimately resolved, the dispute contributed to the 10-month delay in the 

release of the strategy. Given these various constraints, a Treasury 

Department official told us that the Commission saw its role as improving 

interagency communication and coordination rather than consolidating 

federal financial education programs or fundamentally changing the 

existing federal structure. 

Partnerships between federal agencies and private sector organizations 

are widely seen as essential to making the most efficient use of scarce 

resources, facilitating the sharing of best practices among different 

organizations, and helping the federal government reach targeted 

populations via community-based organizations.35 The Financial Literacy 

Act charged the Commission with promoting partnerships between federal 

agencies and state and local governments, nonprofit organizations, and 

private enterprises. Treasury Department officials have cited several steps 

the Commission has taken to promote such partnerships: 

The Commission Has 

Taken Steps to Promote 

Partnerships, but the 

Impact of These Efforts Is 

Unclear 

• National strategy. The national strategy highlighted public-private and

private-private partnerships as one of the crucial areas that an effective 

national strategy must encompass. Treasury Department representatives 

noted that several of the strategy’s calls to action sought to promote 

partnerships by bringing together the public and private sectors at both 

the local and national levels. For example, one call to action stated that 

the Treasury and Education departments would host a summit, scheduled 

for December 2006, on integrating financial education into the core school 

curriculum, while another described a symposium of academic 

researchers specializing in financial education that is to be convened by

the end of September 2007 by the Treasury and Agriculture departments. 

• Community outreach and events. Since January 2004, Treasury 

Department representatives said they had traveled to 40 states, the District 

of Columbia, and Puerto Rico to conduct or participate in financial literacy 

activities such as panel discussions, public speeches, and press 

conferences that served to promote partnerships in various communities. 

 35For example, see GAO-05-93SP, pp. 6-8. By “partnerships,” we refer to shared, or joint,

responsibilities between organizations from the public and private sectors where there is 

otherwise no clear or established hierarchy of lead and support functions. 

Page 32 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Venues included classrooms, community centers, and military bases, and 

audiences included groups of community and business leaders, credit 

counselors, and youth educators. In coordination with other Commission

members, the department’s Office of Financial Education led a series of 

events across eight cities in April 2006 to promote the national strategy 

among different constituencies. For example, a Treasury Department 

official delivered remarks on the strategy at a California summit on 

financial literacy. 

• Public meetings. The Commission’s six sector-specific public meetings 

were designed to gather input and foster communication among various 

stakeholders from the private, nonprofit, academic, and public sectors. 

Summaries of these meetings were published and Treasury Department 

representatives said that they have played a role in influencing the 

direction of the Commission’s work. In addition, the Commission’s formal

public meetings have included guest speakers from the nonprofit and 

private sectors. 

In general, the private and nonprofit financial literacy organizations we 

spoke with said that these steps had been useful, but that, overall, their 

relationships with federal agencies and other entities have changed little 

as a result of the Commission. Some organizations noted that they had the

opportunity to attend the Commission’s public meetings and other events, 

but felt that the Commission has offered little follow-up on how to foster 

continued partnerships. Several private and nonprofit national 

organizations have extensive networks that they have developed at the

community level across the country, and some of these organizations 

suggested the Commission could do more to mobilize these resources as 

part of a national effort. For example, representatives of the American 

Institute of Certified Public Accountants told us that it has more than 

340,000 members nationwide and that the Commission would benefit from 

leveraging grassroots resources such as this to a greater degree. Similarly,

representatives of the North American Securities Administrators 

Association suggested the Commission do more to tap into that 

organization’s extensive network of state agencies. 

Although the Financial Literacy Act required the Commission to take steps 

to help promote partnerships and coordination at the state and local level, 

some stakeholders told us the Commission had done relatively little to 

involve state and local governments. The national strategy does not 

include a significant discussion on coordinating federal efforts with those 

of state and local governments, and only some state and local government

initiatives are included as illustrative examples. Some stakeholders we 

Page 33 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
spoke with suggested a variety of ways that the Commission might better 

involve state and local governments, such as meeting more often with 

state employees who deal with financial literacy issues. Greater 

collaboration by the Commission with state and local governments may be 

particularly important given the critical role that school districts can play 

in improving financial literacy. The Commission might consider how the 

federal government can influence or incentivize states or school districts 

to include financial education in school curriculums, which many experts 

believe is key to improving the nation’s financial literacy. 

Ensuring that Americans have the knowledge and skills to manage their 

money wisely is a key element in improving the economic health of our 

nation in current and future generations. Financial literacy has become 

increasingly important in recent years due to the convergence of a number 

of economic, policy, and demographic trends. For example, the number 

and complexity of financial products have grown tremendously, and 

consumers face an increasing array of options for managing their personal 

finances. In addition, technological advances have increased the capacity 

for targeted marketing to consumers, which may increase some 

consumers’ vulnerability to fraudulent financial products. Further, 

workers today are increasingly responsible for managing their own 

retirement savings—yet at the same time, the nation’s personal saving rate 

has fallen dramatically in recent decades, and household debt hovers at 

record high levels. Financial education efforts aimed at such things as 

boosting the national saving rate are key to helping improve our citizens’ 

economic security and our country’s economic growth. 

In the relatively short period since its creation, the Commission has played

a helpful role by serving as a focal point for federal efforts and making 

financial literacy a more prominent issue among the media, policymakers, 

and consumers. Its national strategy is a useful first step in highlighting 

key issues and surveying the landscape of existing financial literacy 

efforts. The Commission was also successful in rolling out the My Money 

Web site and telephone hotline in a relatively short time. We recognize the 

significant challenges confronting the Commission—most notably, the 

inherent difficulty of coordinating the efforts of 20 federal agencies. Given

the small number of staff devoted to operating the Commission and the 

limited funding it was provided to conduct any new initiatives, we believe 

early efforts undertaken by the Commission represent some positive first 

steps. At the same time, more progress is needed if we expect the 

Commission to have a meaningful impact on improving the nation’s 

financial literacy. 

Conclusions 

Page 34 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
The lack of specific recommendations on roles, funding, and activities in 

the national strategy may stem in part from the challenge of reaching 

consensus among multiple agencies, each of which has its own set of 

interests, resources, and constituencies. Moreover, the Commission is 

constrained by its own resources—with the equivalent of fewer than three 

full-time staff, there are limits to what the Commission, as an entity unto 

itself, can be expected to do. Ultimately, the effectiveness of the 

Commission will depend on the commitment and collaboration of the 20 

individual federal agencies that comprise it. 

The national strategy represents an evolving effort, as the law requires that

it be reviewed and modified, as deemed necessary, at least once a year. 

Future iterations of the strategy could be improved by modifying it to 

serve as more of a functional “strategy”— a plan of action intended to 

achieve specifically stated goals—and by including several additional 

elements desirable in any national strategy that we found to be only 

partially addressed. Because the strategy does not set clear and specific 

goals, benchmarks, or other evaluation mechanisms, it does not hold the 

Commission and its member agencies accountable or provide overall 

indicators of the nation’s progress in improving financial literacy. 

Moreover, the Commission’s work could be more complete if

consideration were given to developing a concrete definition for financial 

literacy and education to help define the scope of the Commission’s work. 

In addition, because the strategy does not include a clear description of 

the resources needed to achieve these goals, policymakers lack 

information that would be helpful in allocating resources and directing 

implementation of the strategy. Finally, the lack of a detailed discussion of 

suggested roles and responsibilities hinders the ability to conduct a 

coordinated and productive national effort. As a result of these factors, the 

strategy is likely to play a limited role in meaningfully improving the 

nation’s financial literacy. 

The My Money Web site and telephone hotline offer consumers access to a 

variety of federal financial literacy resources in a single place. However, 

without conducting usability tests and formally measuring customer 

satisfaction, the Commission and others cannot determine whether the 

Web site is meeting its intended purpose or make improvements that 

would encourage more consumers to use it. 

The Financial Literacy Act required the Commission to identify areas of 

overlap and duplication among federal financial literacy activities and 

evaluate the effectiveness of federal financial literacy materials. However, 

rather than using an independent evaluator, the Commission made a 

Page 35 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
determination on its own of the extent of overlap and duplication, and it 

asked agencies to assess their own programs. The process thus lacked the 

benefit of assessment by a disinterested party. The Commission could 

benefit from conducting a more independent review of duplication and 

overlap, and from an evaluation of federal activities that does not rely 

solely on agencies’ self-assessments.

Further, given the wide array of state, local, nonprofit, and private 

organizations providing financial literacy programs, the involvement of the

nonfederal sectors is important in supporting and expanding Commission

efforts to increase financial literacy. Thus far, the Commission has taken

some helpful steps to promote partnerships, consisting mainly of outreach 

and publicity efforts, such as conducting speaking engagements and 

holding public meetings. As the Commission continues to implement the 

strategy, it should consider expanding its activities and work to develop

mutually beneficial and lasting partnerships that will be sustainable over 

the long term. 

To help ensure that the National Strategy for Financial Literacy serves its 

goal of improving the nation’s financial literacy and education, we 

recommend that the Secretary of the Treasury, in concert with other 

agency representatives of the Financial Literacy and Education 

Commission, incorporate into the national strategy the following elements: 

Recommendations for 

Executive Action 

• a concrete definition for financial literacy and education to help define the 

scope of the Commission’s work; 

• clear, specific goals and performance measures that would serve as 

indicators of the nation’s progress in improving financial literacy and 

benchmarks for what the Commission sets out to achieve; 

• actions needed to accomplish these goals, so that the strategy serves as a 

true implementation plan; 

• a description of the resources required, which would help provide 

policymakers information on allocating resources and directing 

implementation of the strategy; and

• a discussion of appropriate roles and responsibilities for federal agencies 

and others, to help promote a coordinated and efficient effort. 

Page 36 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
To ensure that the My Money Web site best serves consumers seeking 

financial education, we recommend that the Secretary of the Treasury and 

other representatives of the Commission provide for its Web site 

subcommittee to take the following actions: 

• conduct usability testing to measure the quality of users’ experiences with 

the Commission’s Web site; and 

• measure customer satisfaction with the site, using whatever tools deemed 

appropriate, such as online surveys, focus groups, and e-mail feedback 

forms. 

To help ensure the efficient use of federal resources, we recommend that 

the Secretary of the Treasury, in conjunction with the Commission, 

provide for an independent third party to carry out the review of 

duplication and overlap among federal financial literacy activities as well 

as the review of the availability, utilization, and impact of federal financial 

literacy materials. 

To encourage effective and efficient use of scarce human and financial

resources, we recommend that the Secretary of the Treasury, in concert 

with other representatives of the Commission, consider ways to expand 

upon current efforts to cultivate sustainable partnerships with nonprofit 

and private entities. As part of these efforts, the Commission should 

consider additional ways that federal agencies could coordinate their 

efforts with those of private organizations that have wide networks of 

resources at the community level. The Commission should also explore 

additional ways that the federal government might encourage and 

facilitate the efforts of state and local governments to improve financial

literacy. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Treasury Department, in its 

capacity as chair of the Commission, for comment. The department 

provided a written response, which is reprinted in appendix III, and 

technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. In its 

response, the department noted that the National Strategy for Financial

Literacy was the nation’s first such effort and, as such, was designed to be

a blueprint that provides general direction while allowing diverse entities 

the flexibility to participate in enhancing financial education. The 

department said that the strategy’s calls to action are appropriately 

substantive and concrete—setting out specific issues for discussion, 

conferences to be convened, key constituencies, and Commission 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 

Page 37 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
members that should be responsible for each task. We acknowledge that 

the national strategy represents an early effort but continue to believe that 

future iterations of the strategy would benefit from inclusion of the 

characteristics cited in our report. The department also said that it will 

consult further with the Commission on developing definitions of 

“financial literacy” and “financial education.” 

In addition, the department said that the My Money Web site and hotline 

represent one of the Commission’s earliest successes and that these 

resources continue to be enhanced. The department said that it will ask 

the Commission to consider a usability study and a customer satisfaction 

survey of the Web site. Further, the department said it believes that the 

Commission is satisfying the statutory requirement to identify potential

overlap and duplication through the survey of agencies it does in 

conjunction with GSA. The department acknowledged that the 

Commission’s review of the effectiveness of federal financial literacy 

materials may lack independence and said it will work with the 

Commission to consider other alternatives for this process. In addition, the 

department noted that it has a long history of partnerships with nonfederal 

entities and will consult with the Commission about how to work more 

closely with the types of organizations described in our report. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of the Treasury, 

interested congressional committees, and to the heads of the other 19 

agencies that are members of the Commission. We also will make copies

available to others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at 

no charge on the GAO Web site at http://www.gao.gov. 

Page 38 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
If you or your staff have any questions concerning this report, please 

contact me at (202) 512-8678 or jonesy@gao.gov. Contact points for our 

Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the 

last page of this report. GAO staff who made major contributions are listed 

in appendix IV. 

Yvonne D. Jones 

Director, Financial Markets 

 and Community Investment 

Page 39 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Our reporting objectives were to review the Financial Literacy and 

Education Commission’s (the Commission) (1) progress in developing an 

effective national strategy to promote financial literacy and education; (2) 

progress in implementing its Web site, telephone hotline, and multimedia 

campaign; and (3) steps to coordinate federal financial literacy efforts and 

promote partnerships among and between government, nonprofit, and 

commercial organizations. 

To address all three objectives, we reviewed relevant provisions of the 

Financial Literacy and Education Improvement Act, which created the 

Commission and set out its requirements. We also reviewed and analyzed

relevant documents, including the Strategy for Assuring Financial 

Empowerment, National Strategy for Financial Literacy, the strategy’s 

Quick Reference Guide, and the Commission’s meeting transcripts and 

planning documents. In addition, we interviewed officials at the 

Department of the Treasury’s Office of Financial Education, which 

coordinates the Commission’s work, as well as representatives of each of 

the 19 other federal agencies represented on the Commission—the 

Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Education, Health and Human 

Services, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, and Veterans Affairs; 

the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; Federal Deposit Insurance 

Corporation; Federal Reserve Board; Federal Trade Commission; General

Services Administration; National Credit Union Administration; Office of 

the Comptroller of the Currency; Office of Personnel Management; Office 

of Thrift Supervision; Securities and Exchange Commission; Small 

Business Administration; and Social Security Administration. We also met 

with a range of financial literacy representatives and experts outside of the 

federal government to gather their views on the Commission’s role and 

activities. These included representatives of nonprofit organizations, such 

as the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy and National 

Endowment for Financial Education; the private sector, such as 

Citigroup’s Office of Financial Education and the American Institute of 

Certified Public Accountants; state and local governments, such as offices 

of financial education in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin; advocacy 

organizations, such as the National Council of La Raza; and an academic 

expert in the field of financial literacy. 

To review the Commission’s progress in developing an effective national 

strategy to promote financial literacy and education, we analyzed the 

national strategy and gathered feedback on it from the stakeholders 

described above. We also reviewed public comments on the national

strategy submitted to the Treasury Department, notes from meetings of 

the national strategy working group, and summaries of six sector-specific 

Page 40 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

public meetings held by the Commission. We assessed the strategy, in part,

by benchmarking it against our prior work that has identified the general 

characteristics of an effective national strategy.1

 Our recommended 

characteristics for national strategies were developed by reviewing several

sources of information, which included the Government Performance and 

Results Act of 1993; legislative and executive branch guidance for national 

strategies; general literature on strategic planning and performance; and 

our prior work on issues related to planning, integration, implementation, 

and other related subjects. To assess whether the National Strategy for 

Financial Literacy contained these desirable characteristics, two analysts 

independently assessed the strategy against each element of a

characteristic. If the analysts did not agree, their supervisor rated the 

element, and all ratings were used to determine the final rating for that 

element. We gave each of the six characteristics a rating of either 

“generally addresses,” “partially addresses,” or “does not address.” 

According to our methodology, a strategy “generally addresses” a 

characteristic when more than half of the elements of the characteristic 

are addressed. Within our designation of “partially addresses” is any 

characteristic where at least one element was judged to be partially 

addressed. A strategy “does not address” a characteristic when it does not 

explicitly cite or discuss any parts of the elements of that characteristic or 

any implicit references are either too vague or general to be useful. 

To review the Commission’s progress in implementing its Web site and 

telephone hotline, we interviewed representatives of the General Services 

Administration (GSA), which operates these resources, and members of 

the Commission’s Web site and hotline subcommittees. We also asked 

financial literacy stakeholders outside of the federal government for their 

assessment of these resources. In addition, we gathered and reviewed 

meeting minutes and planning documents of the Commission’s Web site 

and hotline subcommittees. We visited the Web site 

(http://www.mymoney.gov) and systematically recorded, categorized, and 

analyzed its content and organization. We also called the Commission’s 

toll-free telephone hotline (1-888-696-6639) to order the free financial 

literacy tool kit and spoke to the hotline’s telephone agents. To identify 

best practices for U.S. government Web sites, we reviewed policies of the 

Office of Management and Budget for federal public Web sites, as well as

recommended best practices and guidelines submitted to the office by the 

Interagency Committee on Government Information. We also visited the 

 1

GAO-04-408T. 

Page 41 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

Web Content Managers Advisory Council’s Web site 

(http://www.webcontent.gov) and reviewed information on 

implementation guidance for commonly accepted best practices. 

To determine the extent of public use of the Web site, hotline, and tool kit,

we obtained and analyzed data from GSA on their usage since their 

inception in October 2004. To determine how public use of the 

Commission’s Web site compared with similar cross-agency portals, we 

obtained and analyzed data from GSA on other Web sites hosted by its 

Federal Citizen Information Center. To provide a point of comparison for 

the usage of the Commission’s Web site, we obtained and analyzed data on

the usage of financial education Web sites offered by three private 

organizations—the Employee Benefit Research Institute, the American 

Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and the National Endowment for 

Financial Education. We compared the number of Web site “visits”—

defined as all the activity of one visitor to a site within a specified period, 

usually 30 minutes—across these sites. We did not independently verify 

the data provided by these organizations. We did review the procedures 

for collecting the data and determined that these data were sufficiently 

reliable for the purposes of our report. To review the Department of the 

Treasury’s progress in implementing its national public service multimedia 

campaign, we interviewed, and gathered documents from, representatives 

of the department’s Office of Financial Education and representatives 

from the Advertising Council. 

To review the Commission’s steps to coordinate financial literacy efforts 

and promote partnerships, we examined our prior work that discussed 

recommended practices for collaboration and partnership between and 

among federal agencies and other entities.2

 We reviewed relevant sections 

of the national strategy and related reports, and discussed with 

representatives at the Treasury Department’s Office of Financial 

Education the steps the Commission has taken to coordinate government

efforts and promote partnerships. We also asked for an assessment on the 

Commission’s progress in this area from representatives of the federal 

agencies serving on the Commission, as well as financial literacy experts 

and stakeholders in the nonprofit, private, academic, and state and local 

government sectors. 

 2

For example, GAO-06-15 and GAO-05-93SP. 

Page 42 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 

We conducted our work in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area and 

Boston, Massachusetts, from January 2006 through November 2006 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Page 43 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix II: Summary of Expenditures and Appendix II: Summary of Expenditures and Funding Sources for the Commission

Funding Sources for the Commission 

The Financial Literacy and Education Improvement Act established the 

Financial Literacy and Education Commission. The act authorized to be 

appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out its provisions, 

including administrative expenses of the Commission. In addition, the act 

authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary of the Treasury $3 million 

for fiscal years 2004, 2005, and 2006 to develop, produce, and distribute a 

pilot national public service multimedia campaign to enhance the state of

financial literacy and education in the United States. The act also required

the Treasury Department to provide assistance to the Commission upon 

request without reimbursement and authorizes any federal government 

employee to be detailed to the Commission, also without reimbursement. 

In fiscal year 2005, Congress provided $1 million to the Commission to 

develop and implement the national strategy for financial literacy. The 

Commission obligated $958,790 of the total $1 million provided to it, as 

shown in table 3. The Treasury Department advised us that it obligated 

$750,000 of the $958,790 to develop the mandated multimedia campaign.

Congress did not provide any funds for the Commission in fiscal year 2006. 

However, as shown in table 4, for fiscal year 2006, the Treasury 

Department estimates that the Office of Financial Education allocated 

approximately $350,291 to support the Commission, which included staff 

support of 2.5 staff years (full-time equivalent staff) and funds for printing, 

conferences, and travel. In addition, from April 2003 to August 2006, the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, GSA, and Department of Justice 

detailed seven staff members to the Commission for short-term periods, 

ranging from 2 months to 2 years each. However, most representatives of

the Commission could not provide us with an estimate of the resources 

their agencies had devoted to the Commission, most of which consisted of 

in-kind staff assistance. 

Page 44 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix II: Summary of Expenditures and 

Funding Sources for the Commission

Table 3: Treasury Department’s Expenditures under Budget Authority for 

Developing and Implementing a National Financial Literacy Strategy, Fiscal Year 

2005 

Expenditure Cost

Multimedia campaign $750,000

Professional editors – national strategy 85,000

Spanish translators – national strategy 20,000

Design, printing, and distribution – national strategy 80,000

Printing “My Money” logo on government envelopes 16,680

Transcripts for six public meetings 7,110

Total cost $958,790

Source: Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Education.

Table 4: Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Education’s Support to the 

Financial Literacy and Education Commission, Fiscal Year 2006 

Type of support Cost

Staff support (approximately 2.5 FTEs) $236,000

Printing and graphics 98,000

Travel 6,811

Meetings and conference transcripts 9,480

Total cost $350,291

Source: Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Education.

Page 45 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix III: Comments from the Department Appendix III: Comments from the of the Treasury 

Department of the Treasury 

Page 46 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix III: Comments from the Department 

of the Treasury 

Page 47 GAO-07-100 Financial Literacy and Education Commission
Appendix IV: 

A

GAO Contact and Staff 

cknowledgments 

Page 48 GAO-07-100

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Yvonne D. Jones, (202) 512-8678, or jonesy@gao.gov 

In addition to the individual named above, Jason Bromberg, Assistant 

Director; Nima Patel Edwards; Eric E. Petersen; William R. Chatlos; 

Amanda J. Elkin; Emily R. Chalmers; and Linda Rego made key 

contributions to this report. 

Financial Literacy and Education Commission

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(250276) 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain copyrighted images or 

other material, permission from the copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to 

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER