AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes 

Final Survey Technical Report 

August 2016 
New Methods for Assessing AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes: 

Final Survey Technical Report 

August 22, 2016 

Authors 

Eric Friedman 

Brian Freeman 

Benjamin Phillips 

Lily Rosenthal 

David Robinson 

Haleigh Miller 

Allan Porowski 

Submitted To 

Office of Research and Evaluation 

Corporation for National and Community Service 

For inquiries, please contact evaluation@cns.gov

About this Document 

This document was produced pursuant to a contract between the Corporation for National and 

Community Service and ICF International (Contract Number: GS-23F-8182H; CNSHQ13F0091). 

Abt Associates Inc. | 55 Wheeler Street | Cambridge, MA 02138 | www.icfi.com

This document was commissioned as an independent study by the Corporation for National and 

Community Service. Views expressed in the document do not necessarily reflect the official viewpoints of 

the agency or its staff. This document is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or 

in part is granted. This document has been formatted to be readable by assistive technologies, in 

accordance with Section 508 regulations. 

Recommended Citation

Friedman, E., et al. (2016). New Methods for Assessing AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes: Final Survey Technical 

Report. (Prepared for the Corporation for National and Community Service, Office of Research and 

Evaluation). Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates Inc. 

About CNCS 

The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) is a federal agency that improves lives, 

strengthens communities, and fosters civic engagement through service and volunteering. Each year, 

CNCS engages five million Americans of all ages and backgrounds through AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, 

the Social Innovation Fund, the Volunteer Generation Fund, and other programs, and leads the 

President's national call to service initiative, United We Serve. For more information, visit 

NationalService.gov
nationalservice.gov i 

Contents 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1

I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 10

Context ................................................................................................................................................... 10 

Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 10 

Organization of the Report ................................................................................................................. 11 

II. METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 11

Survey Development Process ............................................................................................................. 11 

Survey Sampling .................................................................................................................................. 14 

Survey Administration ........................................................................................................................ 15 

Response Rates ..................................................................................................................................... 18 

Nonresponse Bias Analysis ................................................................................................................ 18 

Psychometric Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 19 

Analytic Approaches ........................................................................................................................... 20 

Limitations ............................................................................................................................................ 21 

III. DEMOGRAPHICS OF AMERICORPS ALUMNI .................................................................. 22

Age ......................................................................................................................................................... 22 

Gender ................................................................................................................................................... 22 

Race and Ethnicity ............................................................................................................................... 22 

Parental Education ............................................................................................................................... 23 

Current State of Residence .................................................................................................................. 23 

IV. AMERICORPS SERVICE EXPERIENCE .................................................................................. 24

Service Setting ...................................................................................................................................... 24 

Satisfaction with Service Experience ................................................................................................. 25 

Exposure to Diversity and New Communities ................................................................................ 31 

Service Experience Measures ............................................................................................................. 31 

V. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT .............................. 33

Civic Engagement ................................................................................................................................ 33 

Civic Self-Efficacy ................................................................................................................................ 35 

Voting Behavior .................................................................................................................................... 36 

VI. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON SENSE OF COMMUNITY ......................... 37

VII. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON SELF-EFFICACY AND CAREERORIENTED SKILLS ............................................................................................................................... 40

Cultural Competency .......................................................................................................................... 40 

Self-Efficacy ........................................................................................................................................... 43 

Career-Oriented Skills ......................................................................................................................... 48 
nationalservice.gov ii

VIII. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON CAREER PATHWAYS AND 

EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES .............................................................................................................. 55

Employment Status Before and After AmeriCorps......................................................................... 55

Employment through AmeriCorps Connections ............................................................................ 56

Use of AmeriCorps Network ............................................................................................................. 58

Impact of Education Award on Career Path .................................................................................... 59

Current Career Status, Trajectory, and Transitions......................................................................... 61

IX. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION 

OUTCOMES ............................................................................................................................................ 64

Post-Secondary Education .................................................................................................................. 64

Current Educational Enrollments ...................................................................................................... 66

Use of Education Award to Continue Education ............................................................................ 67

X. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 68

Key Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 68

Successes and Challenges of Data Collection .................................................................................. 73

Recommendations for Improvements to the Data Collection Process ......................................... 74

Recommendations for Next Steps Based on Findings .................................................................... 75

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 77
nationalservice.gov iii

Table of Exhibits 

Exhibit ES-1. Employment Sector by Program ....................................................................................................... 6

Exhibit ES-2. Highest Level of Education of AmeriCorps Alumni and Their Parents ...................................... 7

Exhibit II-1: Survey Items Mapped to Research Questions .................................................................................12

Exhibit II-2. Universe and Sample Sizes for AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey ....................................15

Exhibit II-3. First Replicate Survey Sample ...........................................................................................................15

Exhibit II-4. Second Replicate Survey Sample ......................................................................................................16

Exhibit II-5. AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Responses .......................................................................16

Exhibit II-6. Cumulative Responses by Mode .......................................................................................................17

Exhibit III-1. Current Age ........................................................................................................................................22

Exhibit III-2. Highest Education Level of the Person or People Who Raised You ...........................................23

Exhibit III-3. Region of Residence...........................................................................................................................23

Exhibit IV-1. Team-based Service or Individual Placement by Program* ........................................................24

Exhibit IV-2. Type of Host Organization(s) Served in by Program ...................................................................25

Exhibit IV-3. AmeriCorps Service Experience by Program. ...............................................................................27

Exhibit IV-4. Overall Satisfaction with AmeriCorps Service ..............................................................................28

Exhibit IV-5. AmeriCorps was a Defining Personal Experience ........................................................................29

Exhibit IV-6. AmeriCorps was a Defining Professional Experience by Cohort ...............................................31

Exhibit IV-7. Team-based Service or Individual Placement ...............................................................................31

Exhibit IV-8. Type of Host Organization(s) Served in .........................................................................................32

Exhibit IV-9. Team-based Service or Individual Placement by Type of Host Organization* ........................33

Exhibit V-1. Civic Engagement Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps................................................................................34

Exhibit V-2. Civic Engagement Pre-AmeriCorps by Program ...........................................................................35

Exhibit VI-1. Sense of Community Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps ..........................................................................38

Exhibit VI-2. Sense of Community Pre-AmeriCorps by Program .....................................................................39

Exhibit VI-3. Sense of Community Post-AmeriCorps by Program ....................................................................40

Exhibit VII-1. Cultural Competency Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps .......................................................................41

Exhibit VII-2. Cultural Competency Pre-AmeriCorps by Program ...................................................................42

Exhibit VII-3. Cultural Competency Post-AmeriCorps by Program ................................................................. 43

Exhibit VII-4. Self-Efficacy Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps .......................................................................................45

Exhibit VII-5. Self-Efficacy Pre-AmeriCorps by Program ...................................................................................46

Exhibit VII-6. Self-Efficacy Post-AmeriCorps by Program .................................................................................47

Exhibit VII-7. Interpersonal Skills ...........................................................................................................................48

Exhibit VII-8. Influence of AmeriCorps on Interpersonal Skills by Program ...................................................49

Exhibit VII-9. Personal Conduct and Workplace Behaviors ...............................................................................49

Exhibit VII-10. Applied Academic Skills ...............................................................................................................50

Exhibit VII-11. Critical Thinking Skills ..................................................................................................................51

Exhibit VII-12. Applied Academic Skills by Program .........................................................................................52

Exhibit VII-13. Workplace Skills .............................................................................................................................53

Exhibit VII-14. Workplace Skills by Program .......................................................................................................54

Exhibit VIII-1. Employment Status at Three Time Points ...................................................................................56

Exhibit VIII-2. AmeriCorps Opened up a Career Path ........................................................................................58

Exhibit VIII-3. Contact with AmeriCorps Network .............................................................................................58

Exhibit VIII-4. Access AmeriCorps Network for Career Advice, Job Opportunities, or Professional 

Networking................................................................................................................................................................59

Exhibit VIII-5. Use of AmeriCorps Education Award .........................................................................................59

Exhibit VIII-6. Use of AmeriCorps Education Award by Program ...................................................................60
nationalservice.gov iv

Exhibit VIII-7. Used Education Award for Student Loan Repayment to Pursue a Career Path ....................61

Exhibit VIII-8. Current School or Career Transition by Cohort..........................................................................62

Exhibit VIII-9. Current Status by Cohort ...............................................................................................................63

Exhibit VIII-10. Employment Sector by Program ................................................................................................. 64

Exhibit IX-1. Highest Level of Education Prior to AmeriCorps* ........................................................................64

Exhibit IX-2. Highest Level of Education* .............................................................................................................65

Exhibit IX-3. Highest Level of Education of AmeriCorps Alumni and Their Parents ....................................66

Exhibit IX-4. Current Educational Enrollments by Cohort .................................................................................67

Exhibit IX-5. Used Education Award to Continue Education or Pursue Career Path ....................................67

Exhibit IX-6. AmeriCorps was a Worthwhile Experience for Furthering Educational Goals* ......................68

Exhibit X-1. Impact of Service and Variation by Service Experience and Life Stage .......................................72

Exhibit X-2. Previous Data Collection Efforts by the Abt Team Compared to AmeriCorps Alumni 

Outcomes Survey Effort ...........................................................................................................................................73
nationalservice.gov 1 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Background 

This research brief presents the results of the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey, conducted by 

Abt Associates and its research affiliate, Abt SRBI, on behalf of the Corporation for National and 

Community Service. The AmeriCorps program engages more than 80,000 Americans in intensive service 

each year at nonprofits, schools, public agencies, and community and faith-based groups across the 

country. AmeriCorps provides opportunities for individuals to carry out national service as members 

within three main program streams: AmeriCorps State and National (ASN), AmeriCorps National 

Civilian Conservation Corps (NCCC) and AmeriCorps Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA). 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey builds on CNCS’s previous research by exploring how 

national service experiences successfully encourage national service alumni to stay civically engaged, 

develop and utilize skills gained through service, and/or pursue service-oriented careers and postsecondary education and employment. Findings from this study will help CNCS and other interested 

stakeholders answer the following three core research questions: 

 Research Question #1: In what ways does participating in a national service program influence 

members’ career pathways, civic engagement, development of career-oriented soft and hard 

skills, and sense of community?; 

 Research Question #2: In what ways, if any, do member outcomes vary by life stage and by types 

of service experience?; and 

 Research Question #3: What are the post-secondary and employment outcomes of AmeriCorps 

alumni, and does national service serve as a pathway to post-secondary and/or employment 

success? 

The AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey supports CNCS’s mission to improve lives, strengthen 

communities, and foster civic engagement through service and volunteering. The survey can also inform 

future policy and program decisions by helping CNCS learn about the types of national service programs 

and service experiences that most influence the long-term civic engagement and career choices of former 

members. 

Methodology 

The development of the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey instrument began with the 

instrument used for a similar pilot survey of AmeriCorps alumni in 2015, which in turn was based in part 

on the AmeriCorps Exit Survey. The 2016 survey aimed to collect much of the same information from 

alumni as the 2015 pilot survey had and also collect more information about 1) specific hard and soft 

career skills alumni gained or developed during service; 2) how alumni used the AmeriCorps education 

award; and 3) how skills, work experience, and connections made during service influenced alumni’s 

career paths.1 Any survey questions taken from the exit survey were preserved with wording changes 

kept to a minimum to allow CNCS to perform additional analyses of responses to the same questions by 

 

1

 For more information on the process used to develop new survey items, see Appendix A (Survey Development 

Process). 
nationalservice.gov 2 

various program alumni over time. The 2016 survey instrument contains a total of 45 questions that were 

designed to collect the information needed to answer the study research questions. 

The potential respondent universe for the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey consists of alumni 

of one of the three primary AmeriCorps programs—AmeriCorps State and National (ASN),2 AmeriCorps 

National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC), or AmeriCorps Volunteers in Service to America 

(VISTA)—and whose last term of service ended in 2005, 2010, or 2013, corresponding to 10, 5, and 2 years 

before the survey administration. The respondent universe was also restricted to participants with a total 

service time greater than or equal to 84 days to ensure that participants had sufficient exposure to the 

AmeriCorps program for it to have had an impact. Finally, the survey sample was further limited to 

participants for whom an email address and one of either a mailing address or phone number was 

available. This decision was made to maximize the effectiveness of the planned outreach attempts, 

especially when seeking responses from the older cohorts. Nevertheless, out-of-date contact information 

proved to be a real challenge, with the lowest survey response rate achieved from the 2005 cohort. 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey opened on May 31, 2016, with survey invitations 

emailed and mailed to the first survey replicate of 11,917 alumni. Phone follow-up to sample members 

who had not already completed a web survey began on June 6, 2016 and continued until the survey 

closed on July 13, 2016. CNCS approved a second replicate of 5,998 alumni on June 29, 2016, which was 

deemed necessary to ensure the design quota of 3,150 total responses was met. When Abt SRBI projected 

that the survey design quota had been effectively reached for each program and cohort, a final reminder 

was sent on July 11, 2016 and the survey was closed on July 13, 2016.3

 A total of 3,772 complete responses 

were received, for an overall response rate of 21 percent. 

Survey response rates were found to vary slightly but significantly by certain alumni characteristics.4 The 

study team developed analysis weights to adjust for these differences in nonresponse by alumni 

characteristic as well as the different number of alumni in each program. 

In an effort to boost response rates, the Abt team proposed – and OMB approved – the use of a small 

charitable donation incentive as an experiment to try to boost response rates. Half of the survey sample 

was offered the incentive of a $2 donation to be made to the National Head Start Association for each 

completed survey. Unfortunately, the small incentive proved to have a negligible effect. While there is 

some evidence that more significant and prepaid incentives would help boost response rates, OMB has 

been reluctant to approve such incentives for CNCS data collection efforts in the past. 

 

2

Includes America’s Promise, Education Award Program (EAP), Homeland Security, and Tribes and Territories.

3

 Response quota was met or exceeded for every program and cohort (100 to 140 percent of quota achieved) and 

every stratum except NCCC 2005 (94 percent of quota achieved). 

4

 Alumni from NCCC were more likely to respond than were those from ASN or VISTA, controlling for other factors. 

Alumni with higher levels of education were much more likely to respond than those with lower levels of 

education. Older alumni were the most likely to respond and younger alumni the least likely to do so. 
nationalservice.gov 3 

Key Findings 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes findings are in line with those from previous studies that 

showed significant reported impacts of AmeriCorps service on future civic engagement, with 

AmeriCorps alumni contributing to their communities after service in a variety of ways. The key findings 

below are organized by research question, first presenting how participating in a national service 

program influenced members’ career pathways, civic engagement, development of career-oriented soft 

and hard skills, and sense of community (Research Question #1). Next we present the key findings related 

to post-secondary and employment outcomes of AmeriCorps alumni, exploring how national service is 

serving as a pathway to post-secondary and/or employment success (Research Question #3). Finally we 

present how member outcomes varied by life stage and by types of service experience (Research Question 

#2). 

Research Question #1: Impact of Service upon Civic Engagement, Career Skills and Sense of 

Community 

AmeriCorps service is found to have a significant positive effect on civic engagement; respondents were 

more likely to engage in all community service activities asked about in the survey post-AmeriCorps 

compared to pre-AmeriCorps. The biggest changes in likelihood of participating in civic engagement 

activities were seen in two items that indicate real action in alumni’s current communities, with 71 

percent very or completely likely to be helping to keep their communities safe and clean (compared to 42 

percent prior to AmeriCorps service) and 70 percent very or completely likely to donate money or goods 

to a cause (compared to 40 percent prior to AmeriCorps service). Also, 91 percent of AmeriCorps alumni 

were registered to vote in the last presidential election, and of those, 94 percent voted, which is much 

higher than the national average of 58 percent of eligible voters who voted in 2012.5

AmeriCorps service is also perceived to have a significant effect upon alumni’s sense of community in 

their current places of residence, with the biggest changes appearing in items that suggest an 

understanding of and a plan to address community needs. For example, 81 percent of respondents agreed 

or strongly agreed that they are aware of the important needs in their communities post-AmeriCorps, 

compared to 49 percent prior to AmeriCorps. Also, 79 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed 

that they are or plan to become actively involved in issues that positively affect their communities postAmeriCorps, compared to 47 percent prior to AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps service seems to have had the 

strongest effect upon NCCC members; NCCC alumni were least likely to answer strongly agree or agree 

across all sense of community items pre-AmeriCorps, but those differences shrink to insignificance for all 

but two of the sense of community items post-AmeriCorps. 

The survey data demonstrate a positive effect of AmeriCorps service upon cultural competency. The 

perceived impact was largest for the item “confidence interacting with people from different cultures or 

backgrounds,” with 72 percent of respondents strongly agreeing and agreeing before AmeriCorps, and 93 

percent strongly agreeing and agreeing after AmeriCorps. Again, the data suggest AmeriCorps service 

having the strongest effect in this regard on NCCC members. NCCC alumni reported more changes 

relating to broadened horizons and cross-cultural understanding than other program alumni. For 

 

5 http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/2012-voter-turnout/
nationalservice.gov 4 

example, 87 percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they “learned more about the ‘real 

world’ or ‘the rest’ of the world” compared to 79 percent and 76 percent of ASN and VISTA alumni 

respectively. Also, 80 percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they re-examined their 

beliefs and attitudes about other people compared to 68 percent and 61 percent of ASN and VISTA 

alumni respectively. One respondent described the impact of service as follows: 

“I taught 4th grade in a rural, segregated school in the Mississippi Delta for three years... Although I 

had volunteered within underserved communities before, I had never felt fully a part of these 

communities (having been raised in middle class privilege), and had not truly understood the issues and 

challenges facing children in high needs populations... My students and their families changed my life: 

after my service in the Delta I moved to Massachusetts and taught at an inner city middle school for 5 

years. I got my masters degree and have continued to teach at an elementary school in another district. I 

serve as the upper elementary representative on a district-wide Equity and Diversity Committee that 

works to help increase the cultural proficiency of teachers and staff throughout the district... My 

experiences during my time of service influence how I look at the world, work with my students, and live 

my life.”

The survey found positive effect of AmeriCorps service upon self-efficacy measures as well. Some of the 

more notable shifts in competency pertained to an increased capacity among respondents to overcome 

opposition and deal with unforeseen circumstances. Once again, of the three programs, NCCC 

participants were the least likely to answer strongly agree or agree to the various self-efficacy measures 

prior to AmeriCorps; however, these differences became insignificant post-AmeriCorps. 

Research Question #3: Impact of Service upon Members’ Post-Secondary and Employment Outcomes 

The survey found that AmeriCorps service had significant impacts upon alumni’s employment and 

career pathways. More than half of respondents (51 percent) said that serving in AmeriCorps opened up 

a career path for them that they might not have otherwise considered. More than two-fifths (42 percent) 

of alumni who were employed within six months after their AmeriCorps service said that their 

employment resulted from a connection made during their AmeriCorps service. These results did differ 

significantly by program, with 42 percent of AmeriCorps State and National alumni indicating that their 

employment resulted from a connection made during their AmeriCorps service compared to 46 percent 

for VISTA and just 15 percent for NCCC. The low percentage for NCCC may be explained by the fact that 

NCCC members serve with multiple organizations across a region during their service, whereas VISTA 

and ASN members are much more likely to serve with and build lasting connections with one 

organization. 

One respondent described the impact of AmeriCorps on their educational and career trajectory in this 

way: 
nationalservice.gov 5 

When seeking a job or career advice, one-third of alumni reported contacting their AmeriCorps network 

some of the time. Thirteen percent contact this network often or always, but more than half (53 percent) 

reported never contacting their AmeriCorps network when looking for work or career advice. This 

finding suggests some potential for growth in terms of building up an AmeriCorps alumni network and 

communicating the value of this network to alumni. Furthermore, nine percent of respondents answered 

that their AmeriCorps experience did not help them develop a career path, often citing a lack of 

knowledge and underappreciation of the AmeriCorps experience among future employers. This finding 

presents an opportunity to engage employers in a career network for alumni and to emphasize the career 

skills developed during service to interest employers in the AmeriCorps alumni talent pool. 

Almost two-fifths of employed alumni are working in the nonprofit or social service sector, while just 

over one-third are in the public sector and around one-quarter are in the private sector. In contrast, many 

more U.S. workers are employed in the private sector (76 percent) than in the public sector (15 percent) or 

the nonprofit sector (8 percent).6

 Employment by sector did vary significantly by AmeriCorps program as 

well, with the highest percentage of nonprofit employment (50 percent) seen among VISTA alumni (see 

Exhibit ES-1 below). 

“Before AmeriCorps, I had flunked out of college and was working dead end customer service and food 

service jobs. After AmeriCorps, I had my choice of several colleges who were willing to overlook my earl

struggle in school. I developed a passion for teaching while serving in a school. When I returned to 

college, I studied education and soon after school I began working with individuals with autism. I've no

received a master's degree in behavior analysis and therapy and specialize in autism and behavioral 

disorders.”

y 

w 

6

 U.S. private and public sector employment percentages are estimated using seasonally adjusted preliminary July 

2016 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS): 122 million Americans employed in the private sector 

and 22 million Americans employed in the public sector 

(http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm#ces_table1.f.p). The proportion of U.S. private sector 

employment in nonprofit organizations is estimated at 10 percent from a 2014 BLS study 

(http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20141021.htm). This figure may slightly underestimate nonprofit 

employment since only 501(c)3 organizations were counted. 
nationalservice.gov 6 

Exhibit ES-1. Employment Sector by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

100

15

26 29 80 36

 tn

60 24

cer

27

e

76 45

P

40

50 20 37

25

8

0

U.S. NCCC VISTA ASN

Nonprofit*

Private*

Public*

The education award is helping many AmeriCorps alumni further their education and pay back student 

loans. More than two-fifths (42 percent) of alumni used the education award to pursue college or 

graduate school, and one-third of alumni used the award to repay student loans. Survey respondents also 

indicated that the education award allowed them to pursue a career path, including 28 percent who used 

the award to supplement their income and allow them to continue working in lower-paying jobs at 

nonprofit organizations. 

Regarding educational outcomes, the survey corroborates a finding of an administrative data match 

completed by the Abt team on behalf of CNCS earlier this year, namely that AmeriCorps alumni are 

considerably better educated than the population at large. According to the survey responses, nearly twofifths of alumni currently have a graduate degree, and another two-fifths have a four-year degree as their 

highest educational attainment. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 33 percent of adults aged 25 or 

older had a bachelor’s degree or higher in 2015.7 AmeriCorps alumni, per the survey, more than double 

that rate with roughly 79 percent having a bachelor’s degree or higher. This current educational 

attainment did vary by program, with roughly two-fifths of AmeriCorps State and National and VISTA 

alumni reporting having a graduate degree, whereas just one-fifth of NCCC alumni had attained a 

graduate degree at the time of the survey. This also represents an improvement compared to the 

educational attainment of alumni members’ parents or primary caregivers, among whom 61 percent have 

a bachelor’s degree or higher. 

7 http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2015/tables.html
nationalservice.gov 7 

Exhibit ES-2. Highest Level of Education of AmeriCorps Alumni and Their Parents 

21

38 38

67

41

57

30

21 38

5

31

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

Alumni

Currently

Alumni Before

AmeriCorps

U.S. Parent

Percent 

less than a 4-year college degree

4-year college degree

Graduate or professional degree

Research Question #2: Variations in Impacts Based on Service Experience and Life Stage 

The 2016 survey found significant positive associations between alumni’s satisfaction level with their 

AmeriCorps service and the studied outcomes, controlling for outcomes before AmeriCorps (if 

applicable), AmeriCorps program, and demographic variables (race/ethnicity, gender, and parental 

education). The survey also showed small negative associations between the age of respondents – used as 

a proxy for life stage – and the various outcomes, with older alumni scoring slightly lower on outcomes 

than younger alumni. 

The vast majority of respondents reported high satisfaction levels with AmeriCorps; 87 percent of alumni 

were satisfied or very satisfied with their overall service experience. More than 90 percent of alumni 

strongly agreed or agreed with the statements “I felt I made a difference in the life of at least one person,” 

“I felt I made a contribution to the community,” and “I gained an understanding of the community(s) 

where I served.” Alumni who were in an individual placement had a slightly less positive service 

experience than alumni performing team-based service or in some other arrangement – an average score 

of 3.9 versus 4.1, a finding that held up when controlling for AmeriCorps program. 

While a high percentage of alumni were satisfied or very satisfied with their AmeriCorps service, there 

was some variation in the satisfaction levels which allowed for an analysis of the effect of service 

experience upon the various outcomes of interest. For example, one of the largest identified associations 

was with career-oriented skills, where a difference of one point on the service experience scale is 

associated with a difference of 0.7 points on the impact of AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills scale. 

Also, alumni who rated their service one point higher than other alumni on the service experience scale 

were four percentage points more likely to be employed and seven percentage points more likely to have 

a graduate degree than similar alumni. 
nationalservice.gov 8 

The 2016 survey found either no impact or very small negative impacts of service on the various 

outcomes of interest as respondent’s age increased. This variation by life stage could be explained by the 

fact that older alumni have had more opportunities for other significant experiences in their lives to affect 

the outcomes of interest, which minimized the impact of AmeriCorps on those same outcomes. 

Recommendations for Future Surveys 

The study team provides the following recommendations for CNCS’ future survey research based on 

their experience administering the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey: 

 Budget 15 months for survey efforts in the future to allow more time for each phase of the 

project. 

 Keep the estimated burden to a maximum of 20 minutes per survey to increase response rates. 

 Implement panel maintenance strategies to maintain up-to-date contact information for new 

cohorts of AmeriCorps alumni. 

 Include a small and creative nonmonetary incentive with a mailed survey invitation or contact 

update request. 

Recommendations for Next Steps in Research 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey effort provided a wealth of information on the perceived 

impacts of national service on range of outcomes important to alumni’s current communities. CNCS now 

has multiple descriptive studies that suggest positive impacts of national service on AmeriCorps 

members and their civic engagement and contributions to society as a whole. Some of the strongest 

impacts were seen among former NCCC members, with significant differences in pre-service scores on 

cultural competency and sense of community compared to ASN and VISTA disappearing in the higher 

post-service scores on those same scales. CNCS might explore the characteristics of NCCC program 

design – such as team vs. individual placement and multiple placements per year – to identify the 

specific factors contributing to the positive experience and positive changes NCCC members are 

reporting post-service. 

While the 2016 survey effort achieved enough responses to produce meaningful estimates of desired 

outcomes for the AmeriCorps alumni population, the strength of the evidence is limited by the selfreported and descriptive nature of the data collection effort. CNCS might explore more rigorous studies, 

involving pre- and post-service surveys or including a comparison group, for example those who 

applied to AmeriCorps but did not end up serving as members. 

CNCS may also want to review and compare the educational and employment outcome data gathered by 

the 2016 survey and by the National Student Clearinghouse and planned U.S. Census Longitudinal 

Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) administrative data matches. Based on the Abt team’s 

experience with the 2016 survey and the NSC match completed earlier this year, at least a portion of the 

outcome data of interest can be obtained via an administrative data match for a small fraction of the cost 

of a survey. The survey, of course, did gather far more information on other outcomes and is flexible 

enough – within burden constraints – to produce more in-depth data that might simply not exist in 

administrative datasets. However, if CNCS is interested in basic information on educational enrollment, 
nationalservice.gov 9 

degree attainment and fields of study, administrative data matches are relatively affordable to pursue 

year after year. 

Given the limitations of each kind of data collection effort, the Abt team recommends that CNCS continue 

to build the evidence base using a range of methods to document the impacts of national service on 

AmeriCorps members, the communities in which they serve, and the communities in which they later 

reside. These impacts are proving to be significant and important for the health of civic society and our 

country as a whole. 
nationalservice.gov 10

I. INTRODUCTION 

This technical report presents the results of the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey, conducted 

by Abt Associates Inc. and its research affiliate, Abt SRBI, on behalf of the Corporation for National and 

Community Service (CNCS). 

Context 

The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) is a federal agency that has helped 

millions of Americans improve the lives of their fellow citizens through service. The AmeriCorps 

program engages more than 80,000 Americans in intensive service each year at nonprofits, schools, public 

agencies, and community and faith-based groups across the country. AmeriCorps provides opportunities 

for individuals to carry out national service as members within three main program streams: AmeriCorps 

State and National (ASN), AmeriCorps National Civilian Conservation Corps (NCCC) and AmeriCorps 

Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA). Through the AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey, CNCS 

aims to obtain rigorous, research-based information on the experiences of former national service 

members. 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey builds on CNCS’s previous research by exploring how 

national service experiences successfully encourage a representative sample of national service alumni to 

stay civically engaged, develop and utilize skills gained through service, and/or pursue service-oriented 

careers and post-secondary and employment. Findings from this study will help CNCS and other 

interested stakeholders answer the following three core research questions: 

 Research Question #1: In what ways does participating in a national service program influence

members’ career pathways, civic engagement, development of career-oriented soft and hard

skills, and sense of community?;

 Research Question #2: In what ways, if any, do member outcomes vary by life stage and by types

of service experience?; and

 Research Question #3: What are the post-secondary and employment outcomes of AmeriCorps

alumni, and does national service serve as a pathway to post-secondary and/or employment

success?

Purpose 

The AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey supports CNCS’s mission to improve lives, strengthen 

communities, and foster civic engagement through service and volunteering. The survey documents the 

long-term civic participation, career pathways, education outcomes, and skill acquisition of AmeriCorps 

alumni. Data collected via the survey enables AmeriCorps to increase its effectiveness in encouraging 

members to stay civically engaged, develop career-focused soft and hard skills, and pursue serviceoriented careers. It can also inform future policy and program decisions by helping CNCS learn about the 

types of national service programs and service experiences that most influence the long-term civic 

engagement and career choices of former members. Further, it will provide additional insight into how 

short-term benefits of service measured by the AmeriCorps Member Exit Survey grow, diminish, or 

change over time. 

Although the survey was designed to provide direction for future AmeriCorps efforts, results from this 

survey may be of interest and use to other agencies and organizations that support or provide similar 

opportunities to address community needs through service. 
nationalservice.gov 11

Organization of the Report 

This report begins with a description of the study data collection procedure and analysis methodology. It 

then describes the demographics and service experiences of AmeriCorps alumni. The following sections 

explore the influence of national service on civic engagement, sense of community, self-efficacy and 

career-oriented skills, career pathways and employment, and post-secondary education. Differences in 

outcomes by life stage and service experience are also highlighted. The report concludes with key 

findings from the survey and recommendations for CNCS. 

II. METHODOLOGY

This section will briefly describe the AmeriCorps alumni outcomes survey data collection and analysis 

methodology. Details on the methodology can be found in the Final Survey Technical Report 

Appendixes. 

Survey Development Process 

Survey Question Sources 

The development of the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey instrument began with the 

instrument used for a similar pilot survey of AmeriCorps alumni in 2015 as a starting point. The 2015 

instrument was based in part on the AmeriCorps Exit Survey, and any questions taken from the exit 

survey and that met the 2016 survey needs were preserved with wording changes kept to a minimum. 

These minimal changes would allow CNCS to perform additional analyses of responses to the same 

questions by various program alumni over time. 

The 2016 survey aimed to collect much of the same information from alumni as the 2015 pilot survey had 

and also collect more information about 1) specific hard and soft career skills alumni gained or developed 

during service; 2) how alumni use the AmeriCorps education award; and 3) how skills, work experience, 

and connections made during service influence alumni’s career paths.8

The 2016 survey includes five new questions addressing the following career skills acquired or increased 

through AmeriCorps service: 

1. Interpersonal skills

2. Personal qualities

3. Applied academic skills

4. Critical thinking skills

5. Non-industry specific workplace skills typically learned or performed through service in the

three AmeriCorps programs (AmeriCorps State and National, VISTA, NCCC)

8

 For more information on the process used to develop new survey items, see Appendix A (Survey Development 

Process). 
nationalservice.gov 12

Survey Pilot Procedures 

To test the instrument used in 2016, a sample of 150 alumni was drawn from the sampling frame (see 

Appendix Exhibit A-1). Due to expectations that all or almost all NCCC alumni would be sampled for the 

survey, the pilot survey sample was drawn solely from ASN and VISTA. More recent cohorts were 

oversampled in an effort to obtain more responses.9

A total of 15 complete responses were obtained. The median length of response to the survey was 27.5 

minutes, excluding the pilot-only questions. Several pilot respondents had very long completion times, 

suggesting that they started the survey, put it aside, and completed it much later. Therefore, the response 

burden estimate of 25 minutes appeared reasonable. All pilot respondents indicated that the survey 

instructions were clear and easy to follow and that the order of the questions made sense. Pilot 

respondents suggested changes to several items, and while some items were clarified based on this 

feedback, it was determined that some changes should not be made in order to maintain direct 

comparability with the AmeriCorps Exit Survey. Eight of the fifteen pilot respondents felt that the survey 

was too long. In response, the Abt team and CNCS identified 12 questions to drop from the survey and 

one question was added, reducing the estimated response burden by three minutes, from 25 to 22 

minutes. 

Survey Items Mapped to Research Questions 

The 2016 survey instrument contains a total of 45 questions that were designed to collect the information 

needed to answer the study research questions, with one additional question asking if the respondent 

would be willing to be contacted for a follow-up survey in the future. Exhibit II-1 below maps each 

survey question to the study’s research questions. The exhibit also describes the analytic approaches used 

to interpret the survey results for each research question.10

Exhibit II-1: Survey Items Mapped to Research Questions 

RQ# Research Question Relevant Survey Items Analytic Approaches

1.1 In what ways does participating in a national 

service program influence members' career 

pathways?

Career Pathways:

4, 15, 16-23, 39b

Descriptive analysis

1.2 In what ways does participating in a national 

service program influence members' civic 

engagement?

Civic Engagement Pre-Service:

8

Civic Engagement Post-Service:

31, 34-37

Descriptive analysis

Paired t-test

1.3 In what ways does participating in a national 

service program influence members' 

development of career-oriented soft and hard 

skills?

Career Skills Pre-Service:

6-7

Career Skills Post-Service:

Descriptive analysis

Paired t-test

24-30

9

 For more information on the survey pilot procedures, see Appendix A (Survey Development Process). 

10 Analytic approaches are described in more detail later in this section. 
nationalservice.gov 13

RQ# Research Question Relevant Survey Items Analytic Approaches

1.4 In what ways does participating in a national 

service program influence members' sense 

of community?

Sense of Community Pre-Service:

9

Sense of Community PostService:

38

Descriptive analysis

Paired t-test

2.1 In what ways, if any, do member outcomes 

vary by life stage?

Civic Engagement, Career Skills, 

and Sense of Community 

Indicators, Pre- and Post-Service 

(see previous rows for survey item 

numbers)

Life Stage:

40

Descriptive analysis

Linear regression (life stage as 

a predictor of member postservice outcomes, controlling 

for pre-service outcomes and 

demographics)

2.2 In what ways, if any, do member outcomes 

vary by types of service experiences?

Civic Engagement, Career Skills, 

and Sense of Community 

Indicators, Pre- and Post-Service 

(see previous rows for survey item 

numbers)

Service Experiences:

10-12

Descriptive analysis

Linear regression (type of 

service experience as a 

predictor of member postservice outcomes, controlling 

for pre-service outcomes and 

demographics)

3.1 What are the employment outcomes of 

AmeriCorps alumni, and does national 

service serve as a pathway to employment 

success?

1, 1a, 1b, 1c, 2, 2a, 2a1, 15, 16-

23, 39b

Descriptive analysis

3.2 What are the post-secondary outcomes of 

AmeriCorps alumni, and does national 

service serve as a pathway to postsecondary success?

1, 2, 2b, 2b1, 3, 5, 39a, 44 Descriptive analysis

This Research Question was

also answered through the 

analysis of NSC data on 

postsecondary enrollment and 

completion (presented in a 

separate report)

Survey Domains 

The survey instrument in Appendix H is color-coded to identify which of the various survey domains 

each survey question corresponds to. The survey domains are: 

 Career Pathways

 Career Skills

 Civic Engagement

 Demographic/Service Control

 Education

 Life Stage

 Sense of Community

 Service Experience
nationalservice.gov 14

Survey Sampling 

Eligibility Criteria 

The potential respondent universe for the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey consists of alumni 

of AmeriCorps programs: 

 Whose last term of service ended in 2005, 2010, or 2013, corresponding to 10, 5, and 2 years before

the survey administration;

 Whose last term of service was in one of the following AmeriCorps programs: AmeriCorps State

and National (ASN); 11 AmeriCorps National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC); and

AmeriCorps Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA);

 For whom total length of service across all terms of service is greater than or equal to 84 days full

time equivalency (FTE), which is equivalent to completing at least one reduced half time term of

service;

 For whom length of service in most recent term was greater than zero days;

 For whom total length of service did not exceed the time elapsed between the minimum age of

service and their exit year;12

 For whom length of service of most recent term did not exceed the time elapsed between the

minimum age of service and their exit year.13

The restriction to participants with a total service time greater than or equal to 84 days FTE is to ensure 

that participants have sufficient exposure to AmeriCorps program for it to have an impact. 

The restriction to participants with a service time in their final term of greater than zero days is to ensure 

that the alumni were correctly associated with the eligible program. Information besides total length of 

service is only available regarding the most recent program; programs in which the participant served 

during earlier terms are not known. 

Sample Distributions across Programs and Cohorts 

The universe is stratified by time since last service (10, 5, and 2 years; or 2005, 2010, and 2013 alumni) and 

program (ASN, NCCC, and VISTA). The sample drawn was limited to participants for whom an email 

address and one of either a mailing address or phone number is available. The focus on participants for 

whom contact information is available represents a trade-off between coverage error on the one hand and 

nonresponse and sampling error on the other.14 The study team recognizes that restricting the sampling 

11 Includes America’s Promise, Education Award Program (EAP), Homeland Security, and Tribes and Territories. 

12 ((exit year of last term - year of birth - x) × 365.25), where x = minimum age of service - 1. For individuals who 

served multiple terms or who served one term with ASN, minimum age of service of 17 was used. For 

individuals who served one term with NCCC or VISTA, minimum age of service of 18 was used. One was 

subtracted from minimum age of service to account for rounding error due to exit year only being available 

without month and date. 

13 ((exit year of last term - year of birth - x) × 365.25), where x is as defined above and minimum date of service is 17 

for people whose last term of service was in ASN and 18 for people whose last term of service was in NCCC or 

VISTA. 

14 For more information on the tradeoff between coverage and nonresponse error, see Appendix B (Survey Sampling). 
nationalservice.gov 15

frame to participants with an email address and either a phone number or mailing address was not a 

complete solution to the problem of contact information. Much of the contact information in the sampling 

frame was collected when the participant applied to AmeriCorps and has not been updated since. As 

described below, the data collection procedure included multiple steps to improve the quality of contact 

information and increase the likelihood of successfully reaching a participant. 

Desired sample sizes for the nine program by cohort strata were calculated using optimal allocation 

procedures.15 The size of the universe, the population from which the sample was drawn, and the desired 

sample sizes for the nine strata are shown in Exhibit II-2, below. 

Exhibit II-2. Universe and Sample Sizes for AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey 

Program

Cohort ASN VISTA NCCC Total

Universe

2005 17,628 4,493 883 23,004

2010 24,954 6,294 730 31,978

2013 18,483 4,574 1,307 24,364

Total 61,065 15,361 2,920 79,346

Sample Frame

2005 7,566 2,137 527 10,230

2010 24,805 6,277 729 31,811

2013 18,479 4,573 1,304 24,356

Total 50,850 12,987 2,560 66,397

Responses Expected

2005 491 182 153 826

2010 613 356 176 1,145

2013 551 271 357 1,179

Total 1,655 808 686 3,149

Survey Administration

Summary of Data Collection Schedule 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey opened on May 31, 2016, roughly two weeks after the 

data collection effort was approved by OMB on May 15, 2016. An advance postcard was mailed to the 

first survey replicate of 11,917 alumni on May 23, 2016, and survey invitations were emailed and mailed 

on May 31, 2016, one week later after the Memorial Day holiday (see Exhibit II-3 for survey sample by 

program and cohort). Phone follow-up to sample members who had not already completed a web survey 

began on June 6 and continued until the survey closed on July 13, 2016. Email and mailed reminders were 

sent according to the Data Collection Schedule in Appendix C. 

Exhibit II-3. First Replicate Survey Sample 

Program

Cohort ASN VISTA NCCC Total

2005 1,312 447 347 2,106

2010 4,272 1,130 729 6,131

2013 2,081 567 1,032 3,680

Total 7,665 2,144 2,108 11,917

15 For more information, see Appendix B (Survey Sampling). 
nationalservice.gov 16

As of June 28, 2016, roughly two-thirds of the way through the planned data collection period, alumni in 

the first sample replicate had completed 2,079 surveys. An additional 1,071 completed interviews were 

required to reach the 3,150 called for in the design. Less the 500 expected completes (i.e., 200 phone + 300 

web) from existing sample, Abt SRBI estimated that an additional 571 completed surveys were needed.16

The projected shortfall of 571 completed surveys led the study team to recommend adding sample in 

order to reach the design quota of 3,150 total responses. Accounting for the finite pool of NCCC sample 

remaining, this yielded the following amount of sample to be added:

Exhibit II-4. Second Replicate Survey Sample 

Program

Cohort ASN VISTA NCCC Total

2005 2,853 744 180 3,777

2010 0 458 0 458

2013 1,031 552 180 1,763

Total 3,884 1,755 360 5,998

CNCS agreed to add the second replicate on June 29, 2016, and Abt SRBI sent the initial survey invitation 

email to the additional sample members on July 1, 2016. The Data Collection Schedule in Appendix C 

indicates the full set of reminders sent to both sample replicates. 

When Abt SRBI projected that the survey design quota had been effectively reached for each program 

and cohort, a final reminder was sent on July 11, 2016 and the survey was closed on July 13, 2016.17 A 

total of 3,772 complete responses were received, for an overall response rate of 21 percent. Overall, 819 

surveys were completed over the phone and 2,953 surveys were completed online. Exhibit II-5 below 

shows the number of survey responses by program and cohort. Exhibit II-6 on the next page displays 

cumulative survey responses by mode overlaid with the survey invitation and reminder timeline. 

Exhibit II-5. AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Responses 

Program

Cohort ASN VISTA NCCC Total

2005 498 188 144 830

2010 922 420 260 1,602

2013 669 295 376 1,340

Total 2,089 903 780 3,772

16 For more details on the expected completed estimates, see Appendix C (Data Collection Protocol and Schedule). 

17 Response quota was met or exceeded for every program and cohort (100 to 140 percent of quota achieved) and 

every stratum except NCCC 2005 (94 percent of quota achieved). 
nationalservice.gov 17

Exhibit II-6. Cumulative Responses by Mode

Invitation

Phone begins

Email reminder 1 Email reminder 2

Email reminder 3

Invitation (2nd replicate)

Phone begins (2nd replicate)

Email reminder 1 (2nd 

replicate)

Email reminder 2 (2nd 

replicate)

Final email reminder

Survey closed

Response quota (3150)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

5/30/20165/31/2016

6/1/20166/2/20166/3/20166/4/20166/5/20166/6/20166/7/20166/8/20166/9/2016

6/10/20166/11/20166/12/20166/13/20166/14/20166/15/20166/16/20166/17/20166/18/20166/19/20166/20/20166/21/20166/22/20166/23/20166/24/20166/25/20166/26/20166/27/20166/28/20166/29/20166/30/2016

7/1/20167/2/20167/3/20167/4/20167/5/20167/6/20167/7/20167/8/20167/9/2016

7/10/20167/11/20167/12/20167/13/2016

Phone Web
nationalservice.gov 18

The intentional sampling approach and a few other factors, such as the survey length and the shortened 

data collection period, led to the lower than expected survey response rate, which necessitated the 

addition of the second survey replicate two-thirds of the way through the data collection period. The 

factors leading to the lower than anticipated response rate are described in detail in Appendix C. 

Response Rates 

The response rate is the proportion of interviews completed out of eligible cases sampled.18 Overall, a 

weighted response rate of 22 percent was achieved.19 By cohort, the highest response rates were achieved 

for NCCC alumni (32 percent), then alumni from VISTA (25 percent), and finally ASN alumni (20 

percent).20 By cohort, response rates were equal for alumni whose last term of service was in 2010 or 2013 

(23 percent) and lowest for alumni whose last term of service was in 2005 (14 percent).21

An experiment was conducted to test whether a promise to provide a charitable donation on behalf of 

alumni who completed surveys would increase response rates. Although charitable donations have 

generally been found to be less effective than monetary incentives, it was thought that the commitment to 

public service on the part of AmeriCorps alumni might increase the effectiveness of charitable donations 

as an incentive.22 Alumni were assigned at random with 50 percent probability into two conditions: a 

treatment condition (a promised $2 donation to the National Head Start Association) and the control 

condition (no promise of an incentive). There was no statistically significant difference between the 

proportion of alumni in the treatment condition who responded (21.2 percent) and the proportion of 

alumni in the control condition who responded (20.9 percent).23

Nonresponse Bias Analysis 

The study team analyzed both unit and item nonresponse. Unit nonresponse explores the extent to which 

different characteristics of alumni were associated with nonresponse to the survey as a whole, while item 

nonresponse explores the extent to which different characteristics of alumni were associated with 

response rates to specific questions asked in the survey. 

Unit nonresponse bias—the difference between respondents and the entire sample—was generally small. 

Exceptions were education and term type. Looking first at education, alumni with a bachelor’s degree or 

 

18 The rate is described as “estimated” because an adjustment is made to account for alumni who were determined to 

be ineligible during the course of the survey. Only deceased alumni were treated as being ineligible, on the 

assumption that they had died prior to the survey being fielded. Only a very small number of deceased alumni 

were identified in the course of the survey (see Appendix D for details). 

19 Following OMB (2006), response rates are reported in both weighted and unweighted forms. The weighted 

response rate is calculated using the design weight, which is the inverse of the probability of selection. In each of 

the nine strata (i.e., the three cohorts of 2005, 2010, and 2013 by the three programs of ASN, NCCC, and VISTA), 

the design weight is calculated as N n⁄ , where N is the total number of alumni eligible for selection in that 

stratum and n is the total number of alumni actually selected in that stratum. Unweighted response rates can be 

found in Appendix D. 

20 For more detail, see Appendix Exhibit D-2.

21 For more detail, see Appendix Exhibit D-3.

22 See, e.g., Edwards et al. (2002) and Warriner et al. (1996), although both focus on mail surveys.

23 χDF=1

2 = 0.353; p > .1. Unweighted proportions; includes ineligible alumni. No significant difference is obtained 

regardless of whether design weights were used or ineligible alumni are excluded. 
nationalservice.gov 19

above prior to their last term of service were over-represented among respondents while those with 

unknown education were under-represented. Alumni who had served a full term were over-represented. 

Because bivariate analyses of survey response do not account for correlations between explanatory 

variables, survey response was modeled using logistic regression. The results of the model include the 

following: 

 Alumni from NCCC were far more likely to respond than were those from ASN or VISTA, 

controlling for other factors. 

 Alumni from more recent cohorts were much more likely to respond than those from 2005. 

 Alumni with higher levels of education were much more likely to respond than those with lower 

levels of education. 

 Older alumni were the most likely to respond and younger alumni the least likely to do so. 

 The percentage of education award used had a modest effect; a much stronger effect, however, 

was seen for those for whom the amount of the education award was not known. 

 Term type also had a modest effect, with alumni who had served full-time in their last term of 

service being somewhat more likely to respond than those who had not served full-time. 

 After controlling for other factors, gender, total term length, and number of terms of service were 

not significantly associated with survey response.

Item response rates—the percentage of eligible respondents answering a given item—were high, with an 

average of 99.7%. The lowest response rate for a specific item was 94.2%, well above the point at which 

OMB (2006) requires an item-specific nonresponse analysis. Text box items had the lowest item response 

rates and checkbox items the highest. 

Finally, the data were weighted. Weighting took place in three steps: 

 Base weights were calculated for each stratum as the inverse of probability of selection. 

 Nonresponse was adjusted for by collapsing the propensity scores (i.e., probabilities of response 

estimated from the logit model described above) into five adjustment classes which were 

weighted as the inverse of the response rate of the adjustment class. 

 Raking ensured that the weighted distribution of respondents matched the alumni population 

with respect to cohort, program, age × sex, education, last term of service type, total length of 

service, and education award usage. 

The margin of error for the whole sample was ± 2.04%. Minimum detectable effects were 6.1% for 

comparisons between ASN and NCCC, 5.6% between ASN and VISTA, 7.3% between NCCC and VISTA, 

6.4% between 2005 and 2010, 6.8% between 2005 and 2013, and 5.9% between 2010 and 2013. 

Psychometric Analysis 

The AmeriCorps alumni survey several scale questions composed of a series of items hypothesized to 

measure different aspects of a single underlying domain or construct. The survey includes a scale of 

AmeriCorps alumni’s service experience as well as scales assessing alumni’s civic engagement, sense of 

community, cultural competency, and self-efficacy both before and since AmeriCorps. The survey also 

includes scales that assess current civic self-efficacy and the extent to which AmeriCorps helped alumni 

acquire or increase career-oriented skills. 
nationalservice.gov 20

To determine how to condense the information in these scales into a limited number of composite 

measures, the study team undertook a psychometric analysis of each scale. The psychometric analyses 

involved exploratory factor analyses and examinations of internal consistency (see Appendix E for 

details). 

Overall, the scales in the survey show a high degree of internal consistency. All scales (with the exception 

of the service experience scale) appear to correspond to a single underlying theoretical construct, and all 

scales and subscales have a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.80 or higher (except for the negative aspects of service 

subscale, which will not be used in the analysis). The five domains of the career-oriented skills scale 

(interpersonal skills, personal conduct and workplace behaviors, applied academic skills, critical thinking 

skills, and workplace skills) appear to load on a single factor as well. 

Scale composites were created by taking the mean of all relevant items. The benefit of this approach is its 

transparency and interpretability (the composite is on the same scale as the constituent items). Creating 

scale composites using factor loadings would reduce transparency and interpretability and complicate 

comparisons between pre-AmeriCorps and post-AmeriCorps versions of the same scale. In addition, 

since the factor loadings for all items in a scale are positive and relatively similar, the practical difference 

between a simple mean composite and a factor-loaded composite would be minimal. 

The following scale composites were created: 

 One service experience subscale (positive aspects of service experience only, negative subscale 

omitted) 

 Two civic engagement scales (pre-AmeriCorps and post-AmeriCorps) 

 One civic self-efficacy scale 

 Two sense of community scales (pre-AmeriCorps and post-AmeriCorps, voting item omitted) 

 Two cultural competency scales (pre-AmeriCorps and post-AmeriCorps) 

 Two self-efficacy scales (pre-AmeriCorps and post-AmeriCorps) 

 One career-oriented skills scale (combining the interpersonal skills, personal conduct and 

workplace behaviors, applied academic skills, critical thinking skills, and workplace skills items) 

Analytic Approaches 

This report uses the following analytic methodologies to address the study research questions: 

Descriptive Comparisons 

Weighted percentages representing the estimated proportion of AmeriCorps alumni who fall into each 

response category are reported. Categorical survey questions are presented in text, tables, or bar charts. 

In bar charts, only a subset of response options is presented. For continuous variables, weighted median, 

mean, standard deviation, minimum, and maximum are presented. If there is a significant difference in 

response patterns by program or cohort (using a linear regression for continuous variables and a chisquare test for categorical variables), these differences are mentioned in the report.24 Complete tables for 

24 Statistical tests were conducted in SAS using the PROC SURVEYFREQ or PROC SURVEYREG procedure to 

account for the stratified sampling design and include a finite population correction (since a large proportion of 

 
nationalservice.gov 21

each survey item (overall and disaggregated by program and cohort) are presented in Appendix G. 

Significant differences by program or cohort are denoted by asterisks. 

Pre-Post Scale Comparisons 

To address Research Question #1 (In what ways does participating in a national service program 

influence members’ career pathways, civic engagement, development of career-oriented soft and hard 

skills, and sense of community?), the study team conducted comparisons of alumni outcomes before and 

after participation in AmeriCorps. All outcome scales with a pre-AmeriCorps and post-AmeriCorps 

version (civic engagement, sense of community, cultural competency, and self-efficacy) were compared 

with a paired t-test. Paired t-tests account for the correlation between pre-AmeriCorps and postAmeriCorps responses provided by the same individual. The average differences between pre and post 

scores are presented along with a p-value. 

Regression Models 

To address Research Question #2 (In what ways, if any, do member outcomes vary by life stage and by 

types of service experience?), the study team conducted linear regressions of outcome measures to test 

whether life stage and service experience measures are significant predictors of the outcome after 

controlling for the corresponding pre-AmeriCorps outcome measure (if applicable), AmeriCorps 

program, and demographic variables (race/ethnicity, gender, and parental education). Regressions where 

life stage or service experience are significant predictors of the outcome are described in the text along 

with a p-value. 

Qualitative Analysis 

The AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey contains two types of text response questions: short 

responses explaining the selection of an “other” category in a survey item, and long responses describing 

the alumna’s or alumnus’ experience in and after AmeriCorps. Where possible, the short responses were 

upcoded to existing closed-ended responses to the survey question.25 The long responses were coded to a 

set of key themes in NVivo.26 Frequencies of key themes in each item are described in the text. 

Limitations

As with any survey in which not all invited individuals participate, the accuracy of population estimates 

based on the AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey are tempered by the possibility of differential 

nonresponse. The study team weighted survey responses on all information available on the sample 

frame, but unmeasured differences between respondents and nonrespondents could lead to error in 

population estimates. Also, since the survey is cross-sectional (rather than longitudinal), it relies on 

alumni to report their attitudes and beliefs as of many years ago (before they served in AmeriCorps). 

 

the NCCC universe completed surveys). See Appendix D (Response Rates and Nonresponse Adjustment) for 

more details. 

25 Short responses to the following survey questions were upcoded: Q1.1, Q1.2, Q1.3, Q1.4, Q1c, Q2, Q3, Q5, Q10, 

Q11, Q16.1, Q16.2, Q16.3, Q16.4, Q16b, Q23, and Q44. 

26 Long responses to the following survey questions were coded in NVivo: Q2a1, Q2b1, Q13a, Q14a, Q15a, and Q21a. 
nationalservice.gov 22

Given the lag between administration of the survey and the time period referenced, it is possible that 

responses to pre-AmeriCorps attitude and belief scales will be subject to recall bias. To reduce the 

potential for respondents to purposely report higher scores on the post-AmeriCorps scales, the study 

team placed pre-AmeriCorps attitudes and belief scales at the beginning of the survey and postAmeriCorps attitudes and beliefs scales near the end of the survey. Finally, since the study lacks an 

appropriate comparison group, no inferences about the impact of AmeriCorps relative to a counterfactual 

condition can be drawn. 

III. DEMOGRAPHICS OF AMERICORPS ALUMNI 

This section describes the demographics of AmeriCorps alumni. 

Age 

The average age of AmeriCorps alumni is 34 (the median is 31). As expected, the average age differs from 

cohort to cohort, decreasing with more recent cohorts (38 for the 2005 cohort, 34 for the 2010 cohort, and 

31 for the 2013 cohort). On average, NCCC are the youngest alumni (28) compared to ASN alumni (34) 

and VISTA alumni (37). This report will use age as a proxy measurement for life stage in order to address 

Research Question #2 (In what ways, if any, do member outcomes vary by life stage and service 

experience?).

Exhibit III-1. Current Age 

Age Median Mean Standard 

Deviation Minimum Maximum

Age (in years) 31 34 48 18 91

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=20) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q40 (In what year were you born?) 

Gender 

A larger proportion of AmeriCorps alumni are female compared to male. Sixty eight percent of alumni 

are female, while only 31 percent are male. One percent of alumni identify as other gender. 

By program, VISTA had the largest proportion of female alumni (73 percent female), followed by ASN 

(68 percent) and NCCC (55 percent). The 2005 cohort had more women than the other cohorts included in 

the survey (73 percent female), followed by the 2013 cohort (68 percent) and finally the 2010 cohort (65 

percent). 

Race and Ethnicity 

The majority, 63 percent, of AmeriCorps alumni are White (not Hispanic/Latina/o). Fifteen percent are 

Black, 12 percent are Hispanic/Latino, and the remaining 10 percent are some other race. This distribution 

is similar to the race and ethnicity makeup of the United States at large. NCCC has the largest proportion 

of White (not Hispanic/Latina/o) alumni, 84 percent, compared to 69 percent White in VISTA and 61 

percent White in ASN. 
nationalservice.gov 23

Parental Education 

The parents of AmeriCorps alumni varied in their highest educational attainment. About one third of 

parents of AmeriCorps alumni had completed a graduate degree, while about one quarter had completed 

a bachelor’s degree. Twenty percent of the parents of AmeriCorps alumni had completed a high school 

diploma or less education (see Exhibit III-2). 

Exhibit III-2. Highest Education Level of the Person or People Who Raised You 

Highest Education Level of the Person 

or People Who Raised You n (%)

Less than high school 142 5

High school degree (HS Diploma or GED) 513 15

Some college 326 10

2-year college degree (AA) 199 5

Technical or vocational degree or certificate 127 3

4-year college degree (BA, BS) 1020 26

Some graduate school 124 4

Graduate or professional degree (MA, MS, MD, JD, 

Ph.D., etc.) 1294 31

Other 11 0

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=16) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q44 (What is the highest level of education completed by the person 

or people who raised you?) 

This finding suggests AmeriCorps service members are coming from families that are more educated 

than the average population across the country. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 32.5 percent of 

adults aged 25 or older in the U.S. had a bachelor’s degree or higher in 2015.27 By comparison, roughly 61 

percent of the parents of AmeriCorps members have a bachelor’s degree or higher.

Current State of Residence 

AmeriCorps alumni are now spread across the country. The largest concentrations of alumni are in 

California, New York, Texas, and Florida, which is consistent with the total population distribution 

around the country. There are also large AmeriCorps alumni populations in Washington, Pennsylvania, 

Minnesota, and Massachusetts though the concentrations in these states are less consistent with national 

population levels (See Appendix Exhibit G-131). There are fewer alumni in the Southeast and Southwest 

states than would be predicted based on the distribution of the U.S. population (see Exhibit III-3 below). 

Exhibit III-3. Region of Residence 

Current Region of Residence

AmeriCorps 

Alumni

(%)

U.S. 

Population, 

2016 Q1

(%)

 

27 https://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2015/tables.html
nationalservice.gov 24

New England (Connecticut, Maine, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, 

and Vermont)

7 5

Mideast (Delaware, District of Columbia, 

Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and 

Pennsylvania)

19 15

Great Lakes (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, 

and Wisconsin) 13 14

Plains (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) 9 7

Southeast (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, 

Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, 

North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, 

Virginia, and West Virginia)

18 26

Southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Oklahoma, 

and Texas) 7 13

Rocky Mountain (Colorado, Idaho, Montana, 

Utah, and Wyoming) 6 4

Far West (Alaska, California, Hawaii, Nevada, 

Oregon, and Washington) 20 17

U.S. Territory (American Samoa, Guam, 

Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, U.S. 

Virgin Islands) or outside the U.S.

1 N/A

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=81) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q45 (What U.S. state do you currently live in?); Bureau of Economic 

Analysis28

IV. AMERICORPS SERVICE EXPERIENCE 

This section describes AmeriCorps alumni’s service experience. 

Service Setting 

Approximately half of alumni performed their service on a team with other AmeriCorps members, while 

one-third of alumni were in individual placements and the rest had other AmeriCorps members at their 

host organization but did not work on a team with them (Appendix Exhibit G-85). As expected, nearly 

100 percent of NCCC alumni reported performing team-based service, compared to half of ASN alumni 

and 28 percent of VISTA alumni (see Exhibit IV-1 below). 

Exhibit IV-1. Team-based Service or Individual Placement by Program* 

Team-based Service or Individual 

Placement

ASN

(%)

VISTA

(%)

NCCC

(%)

Team-based service 50 28 98

Individual placement 28 46 1

 

28 http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTableHtml.cfm?reqid=70&step=30&isuri=1&7022=36&7023=0&7033=-1&7024=nonindustry&7025=0&7026=91000,92000,93000,94000,95000,96000,97000,98000&7027=2016&7001=336&7028=2&7031=

0&7040=-1&7083=levels&7029=36&7090=70
nationalservice.gov 25

There were other AmeriCorps members at my 

organization, but I did not typically work on a team 

with them

18 23 0

Other 4 3 0

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q10 (Did you perform the majority of your AmeriCorps service as 

part of a team of service members or in an individual placement?) 

Half of alumni served at a nonprofit or community-based organization, while two-fifths worked in a K-12 

public school (Appendix Exhibit G-86). NCCC and VISTA alumni were most likely to serve at a nonprofit 

or community-based organization (80 percent and 73 percent, respectively, compared to 45 percent of 

ASN alumni; see Exhibit IV-2 below). Seventy-two percent of NCCC alumni served in an environmental 

agency or park and over a third served at a public agency not related to the environment. 

Exhibit IV-2. Type of Host Organization(s) Served in by Program 

Type of Host Organization(s) Served in ASN

(%)

VISTA

(%)

NCCC

(%)

Preschool* 5 2 5

K-12 public school* 49 18 38

College campus* 4 11 5

Nonprofit or community-based organization* 45 73 80

Faith-based organization* 5 8 32

Senior center* 1 2 6

Environmental agency or park at the local, state, or 

national level* 13 5 72

Other public agency (not related to the 

environment)* 5 7 36

Other* 3 3 8

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple responses were permitted. 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q11 (In what type of service setting or for what type of host 

organization(s) did you perform your AmeriCorps service? Please select all that apply.) 

Satisfaction with Service Experience 

Question 12 in the survey contains a series of statements related to each alumni’s service experience. The 

data were collected using a Likert scale, and then analyzed based on the percent of respondents who 

strongly agreed, agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed, and strongly disagreed. Overall, a 

majority of alumni reported positive service experiences, strongly agreeing or agreeing with positive 

statements and strongly disagreeing or disagreeing with negative statements (see Appendix Exhibit G87). Over 90 percent of alumni strongly agreed or agreed with the statements “I felt I made a difference in 

the life of at least one person,” “I felt I made a contribution to the community,” and “I gained an 

understanding of the community(s) where I served.” Approximately two-thirds or fewer alumni strongly 

agreed or agreed with the statements “I did things I never thought I could do,” “I re-examined my beliefs 
nationalservice.gov 26

and attitudes about other people,” “I figured out what my next steps are in terms of career/professional 

goals,” or “I figured out what my next steps are in terms of educational goals.” Very few alumni strongly 

agreed or agreed with negative statements about their service experience. 

Responses varied slightly by AmeriCorps program (see Exhibit IV-3 below). NCCC alumni reported 

more changes relating to broadened horizons and cross-cultural understanding than other program 

alumni: 

 Eighty-seven percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they “learned more about 

the ‘real world’ or ‘the rest’ of the world” compared to 79 percent and 76 percent of ASN and 

VISTA alumni respectively. 

 Eighty percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they re-examined their beliefs 

and attitudes about other people compared to 68 percent and 61 percent of ASN and VISTA 

alumni respectively. 

NCCC alumni also reported more personal growth in the following measures: 

 Eighty-three percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they did things they never 

thought they could do compared to 69 percent and 60 percent of ASN and VISTA alumni 

respectively 

 Eighty-seven percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they re-examined beliefs 

and attitudes about themselves compared to 79 percent and 74 percent of ASN and VISTA 

alumni respectively. 
nationalservice.gov 27 

Exhibit IV-3. AmeriCorps Service Experience by Program

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

47

40

48

41

40

46

35

7

3

56

33

4

21

23

4

23

46

39

39

42

39

45

47

10

6

37

36

7

37

43

11

45

38

28

40

34

35

43

31

7

4

43

23

5

17

20

3

17

49

46

45

44

41

47

51

13

10

44

37

9

30

39

8

44

52

55

65

53

54

48

37

15

4

60

52

6

20

17

2

35

38

32

29

34

33

40

46

12

7

34

31

10

33

40

12

45

0 20 40 60 80 100

I felt I made a contribution to the community*

I re-examined my beliefs and attitudes about myself*

I was exposed to new ideas and ways of seeing the

world*

I felt part of a community*

I learned more about the “real” world or “the rest” of 

the world*

I gained an understanding of the community(s) where I

served

I gained an understanding of the solutions to the

challenges faced by the community(s) where I served*

I spent a lot of time doing meaningless “make work” 

tasks.*

The majority of my work did not make a difference in

the community.*

I felt I made a difference in the life of at least one

person*

I did things I never thought I could do*

I did not get along well with my supervisor and/or my

teammates.*

I figured out what my next steps are in terms of

educational goals*

I figured out what my next steps are in terms of

career/professional goals*

I felt defeated by the scope of the problems I worked

on.*

I re-examined my beliefs and attitudes about other

people*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 28

Eighty-seven percent of alumni were satisfied or very satisfied with their overall service experience (see 

Appendix Exhibit G-88). NCCC alumni were more likely to be very satisfied (61 percent) than ASN 

alumni (54 percent) or VISTA alumni (45 percent). There were also differences by cohort; three-fifths of 

2005 alumni were very satisfied with their overall service experience, compared to half of alumni from 

the 2010 and 2013 cohorts. 

When asked to elaborate on why AmeriCorps was or was not a satisfying service experience, respondents 

identified several contributing factors, most of which reflect a positive service experience (see Exhibit IV-4 

below). A total of 15 percent of respondents identified the relationships and connections made during 

AmeriCorps, as well as the opportunity it gave them for personal growth as important factors in their 

service experience. Respondents also viewed their opportunity to make a positive impact in their work 

(16 percent), the ability to engage in larger issues and expand their understanding (9 percent), as well as 

professional job skills in a chosen field (13 percent) and general professional skills and experience gained 

(7 percent) as primary reasons for their satisfactory service experience. One respondent’s answer 

encapsulates many of these reasons for satisfaction with the AmeriCorps service experience: 

“AmeriCorps allowed me the chance to give back, to travel, to experience new cultures and viewpoints, to 

be exposed to the issues facing various communities, to build my leadership, problem-solving and 

communication skills, to meet and work with other service-minded young people and honestly it was a huge 

resume builder.” 

Another response goes more in-depth about the impact of the service experience on the respondent: 

“I felt AmeriCorps enabled me to serve in a much-needed capacity in a struggling community. The work 

not only provided me with additional skills, experience, and brought me into contact with a new 

community, the placement also made me more aware of issues of diversity, racism, systemic inequality, and 

institutional failure. This brought more urgency and meaning to my career goals and aspirations, pushing 

me to commit to further understanding and improving the tough issues I encountered.”

However, nine percent of respondents reported being dissatisfied with their service experience. Most of 

these respondents cited dissatisfaction with their particular host organization and the lack of ability to 

engage in meaningful tasks and grow professionally, while others expressed frustration with the 

difficulty of living on such a small stipend. One respondent explains his/her frustration, saying: 

“It just wasn't [a satisfying service experience]. I enjoyed the work I was able to do when I was allowed to 

do it, but I never felt like I made much of an impact; I spent most of my time sending out form thank you 

notes to our donors. That's not what I wanted to do with my life OR what I wanted from my AmeriCorps 

experience.”

When separating the data by program, the factors mentioned above remained fairly consistent, with one 

exceptions. One is that significantly more NCCC alumni (23 percent) experienced personal growth than 

ASN (14 percent) and VISTA (11 percent) alumni. 

Exhibit IV-4. Overall Satisfaction with AmeriCorps Service 

Theme Coded from Open-Ended Responses (%)

Had a positive impact on others 16

Personal growth, clarified life direction or outlook 15

Relationships & connections formed 15
nationalservice.gov 29

Skills and experience gained, created opportunities 13

Dissatisfied with program or organization, barriers, challenges 9

Opportunity to engage in larger issues, expanded understanding 9

Professional skills and experience gained 7

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=145) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple themes could have been included in a single response. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q13a (Please tell us more about why you were [lower case fill from 

Q13] with your AmeriCorps service experience: [open-ended text box].) 

Eighty-two percent of alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a defining personal 

experience (see Appendix Exhibit G-89). NCCC alumni were more likely to strongly agree (60 percent) 

than ASN alumni (43 percent) or VISTA alumni (37 percent). When respondents were asked how 

AmeriCorps was or was not a defining personal experience, most explained that it provided general 

professional skills and experience (34 percent, see Exhibit IV-5 below) and led to personal growth (25

percent) and. One respondent provided his/her account of these two reasons: 

“AmeriCorps was a defining experience for me because it not only made me more empathetic to those in need, 

but made me realize how much of a difference can be made by a small group of dedicated people with limited 

resources. I was stretched beyond my comfort zone and knowledge/ability level and that can't help but change 

you. Having worked in journalism after my service, I think it's also given me a level of credibility and even 

surprise from people who find out I did a year of service in AmeriCorps, meaning I'm not just talking the 

talk, but have walked the walk.”

Respondents also described their AmeriCorps service as a defining personal experience because it was an 

opportunity to engage in larger issues and expand their understanding (13 percent). One respondent 

detailed, 

“It showed me that I mattered. I made friends who I still have to this day. I serve in a community that I 

started in with AmeriCorps. I trust people more. I am willing to do in order to see a difference rather than 

shrug my shoulders and walk away.”

There were no notable differences in response patterns by program and cohort. 

Exhibit IV-5. AmeriCorps was a Defining Personal Experience 

Theme Coded from Open-Ended Responses (%)

Skills and experience gained, created opportunities 34

Personal growth 25

Opportunity to engage in larger issues, expanded understanding 13

Helped clarify my career path, discovered passion (career & 

education) 7

Not sure, was not a defining personal experience, no personal impact 6

Relationships & connections formed 4

Introduced me to a new community or culture 3

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=219) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple themes could have been included in a single response. 
nationalservice.gov 30

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q14a (Please explain how AmeriCorps was or was not a defining 

personal experience: [open-ended text box]) 

Seventy-three percent of alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a defining professional 

experience, somewhat less than the proportion of alumni who agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps 

was a defining personal experience (see Appendix Exhibit G-90). Alumni from the 2005 cohort were more 

likely to strongly agree (39 percent) than alumni from the 2010 and 2013 cohorts (31 percent each). When 

asked to explain why AmeriCorps was or was not a defining professional experience, more than one 

fourth (27 percent) of respondents stated that their AmeriCorps experience helped them clarify their 

career path or discover their passion, for instance, in teaching, or in pursuing a graduate degree in a 

specific field. The following examples indicate how AmeriCorps was a defining professional experience 

for two separate respondents: 

It defined my career for me. Gave me a launch pad into a career in social services when I was struggling to 

be hired elsewhere. I feel my Americorps experience significantly changed my life. It strongly impacted my 

confidence, skill level, knowledge of community issues, and advanced my career.” 

“Americorps helped me identify the issues and beliefs I cared most about, and allowed me to inventory my 

professional strengths to help identify a career path where I could put my strengths to work on issues I 

cared about.”

Among these 27 percent, not all respondents answered that the AmeriCorps experience led them to their 

career path in their field of service. Many respondents viewed AmeriCorps as helping to define a career 

path by demonstrating to them what they did not want to pursue as a career/field of study. As one 

respondent says, 

“I learned more about what I did not want to do than what I did want to do during my time in 

AmeriCorps, which is very valuable information.”

Additionally, respondents felt that AmeriCorps was a defining professional experience because they 

gained professional experience and job skills in their chosen field (13 percent), gained more general job 

experience and professional development (12 percent), and had the opportunity to engage in larger issues 

and expand their understanding of relevant concepts such as poverty, and education (6 percent). In 

contrast, 9 percent of respondents answered that their AmeriCorps experience did not help them find a 

career path, often citing lack of knowledge and underappreciation of the AmeriCorps experience among 

future employers, as well as a lack of “hard” skills that translate into future professional opportunities: 

“The soft skills were defining, but employers don't understand AmeriCorps or know how to utilize those 

skills in the workplace.”

When looking at the data by AmeriCorps program, NCCC respondents were the least likely to state that 

their service led to a career path; a slightly lower than average percentage of the NCCC participants 

identified AmeriCorps as helping them clarify a career path (22 percent), and a higher than average 

percentage of NCCC participants (12 percent) responded that AmeriCorps did not open up a career path. 

This finding makes sense given that NCCC members spend one year working with a variety of 

organizations in a different locations, so by design these alumni may be less likely to find work for an 

organization with which they served or in the field in which they served. There were no notable 

differences when separating the data by cohort. 
nationalservice.gov 31

Exhibit IV-6. AmeriCorps was a Defining Professional Experience by Cohort 

Theme Coded from Open-Ended Responses (%)

Helped clarify my career path, discovered passion (career & education) 27

Professional skills and experience gained 13

Skills and experience gained, created opportunities 12

Not sure, didn't open a career path or didn't find a job 9

Opportunity to engage in larger issues, expanded understanding 6

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=206) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple themes could have been included in a single response. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q15a (Please explain how AmeriCorps was or was not a defining 

professional experience: [open-ended text box]) 

Exposure to Diversity and New Communities 

Eighty-three percent of alumni served on a diverse AmeriCorps team (Appendix Exhibit G-113). Among 

those alumni who served on a diverse team, 70 percent said that the experience caused a somewhat or 

very positive change in their views of people with different backgrounds (Appendix Exhibit G-114). 

NCCC alumni were most likely to report working on a diverse team (93 percent), followed by ASN 

alumni (85 percent) and VISTA alumni (76 percent). 

Eighty percent of alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps exposed them to new communities 

and cultures (Appendix Exhibit G-115). Among those 80 percent of alumni exposed to new communities, 

94 percent agree or strongly agree that the experience broadened their perspective on society and 

understanding of different communities (Appendix Exhibit G-116). NCCC alumni were most likely to 

strongly agree that AmeriCorps exposed them to new communities and cultures (63 percent, compared to 

44 percent of ASN alumni and 39 percent of VISTA alumni). Alumni from the 2005 cohort who were 

exposed to new communities and cultures were most likely to strongly agree that the experience 

broadened their perspective (57 percent, versus 48 percent for 2010 alumni and 47 percent for 2013 

alumni).

Service Experience Measures 

The second study research question (In what ways, if any, do member outcomes vary by life stage and by 

types of service experience?) necessitates the creation of a series of measures of AmeriCorps service 

experience to use as predictors of civic, career, and educational outcomes in a linear regression model. 

These service experience measures are simplified versions of survey items described earlier in this 

section. The first service experience measure indicates whether the alumna or alumnus performed teambased service, were in an individual placement, or had some other arrangement (see Exhibit IV-7 below). 

Exhibit IV-7. Team-based Service or Individual Placement 

Team-based Service or Individual 

Placement (%)

Team-based service 48

Individual placement 31
nationalservice.gov 32

There were other AmeriCorps members at my 

organization, but I did not typically work on a team 

with them or Other

22

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q10 (Did you perform the majority of your AmeriCorps service as 

part of a team of service members or in an individual placement?) 

The second service experience measure describes the type of organization(s) in which alumni served. 

Approximately half of alumni served in educational organizations, half in nonprofit organizations, and 

one-fifth in public agencies (see Exhibit IV-8 below). Note that many alumni served in more than one 

type of organization. 

Exhibit IV-8. Type of Host Organization(s) Served in 

Type of Host Organization(s) Served in n (%)

Educational organization (preschool, K-12 public 

school, or college campus) 1730 49

Nonprofit, community-based, or faith-based 

organization, or senior center 2313 54

Environmental agency or park at the local, state, or 

national level or other public agency (not related to 

the environment)

1120 19

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple responses were permitted. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q11 (In what type of service setting or for what type of host 

organization(s) did you perform your AmeriCorps service? Please select all that apply.) 

To represent alumni’s satisfaction with AmeriCorps across a range of areas, the study team constructed a 

service experience scale by taking the average of all positively-phrased items in survey question 12.29 All 

of the items were on a five-point scale (1 = Strongly Disagree to 5 = Strongly Agree). The average score on 

the positive service experience scale was 4.0. In other words, the average response across the positive 

service experience items was “Agree.”

There are several correlations between the service experience measures. Alumni who were in an 

individual placement had a slightly less positive service experience than alumni performing team-based 

service or in some other arrangement (average score of 3.9 versus 4.1), a finding that held up after 

controlling for AmeriCorps program. Alumni who served in an educational organization had slightly 

more positive service experiences than alumni who served in nonprofit or public organizations (average 

score of 4.1 versus 4.0). In addition, alumni serving in education or public organizations were more likely 

to work on a team than alumni serving in nonprofit organizations (see Exhibit IV-9 below). 

 

29 Negatively-phrased items (items 8, 9, 12, and 15) were excluded from the scale because an exploratory factor 

analysis suggested that they contributed to a different theoretical construct than the positively-phrased items. 

This construct had insufficient internal consistency to serve as a separate measure. See Appendix E 

(Psychometric Analysis) for more details. 
nationalservice.gov 33

Exhibit IV-9. Team-based Service or Individual Placement by Type of Host Organization* 

Team-based Service or Individual Education Nonprofit Public

Placement (%) (%) (%)

Team-based service 51 45 66

Individual placement 25 33 21

There were other AmeriCorps members at my 

organization, but I did not typically work on a team 

with them or Other

24 22 12

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

* Difference between type of host organizations is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q10 (Did you perform the majority of your AmeriCorps service as 

part of a team of service members or in an individual placement?) and Q11 (In what type of service setting or for 

what type of host organization(s) did you perform your AmeriCorps service? Please select all that apply.) 

V. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT 

This section describes the impact of AmeriCorps on alumni’s civic engagement, civic self-efficacy, and 

voting behavior. It also explores differences in impacts by life stage and service experience. 

Civic Engagement 

The survey included two questions (Q8 and Q31) asking respondents about their pre-AmeriCorps civic 

engagement and post-AmeriCorps civic engagement. Respondents ranked their likelihood of 

participating in a range of civic engagement activities on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 = “Not at All

Likely,” 2 = “Slightly Likely,” 3 = “Moderately Likely,” 4 = “Very Likely,” and 5 = “Completely Likely.”

Overall, respondents were more likely to engage in all activities post-AmeriCorps compared to preAmeriCorps (see Exhibit V-1). The average difference between the pre- and post-AmeriCorps answers 

was 0.6 on a 5-point scale (p < .0001). The biggest changes seen in pre- and post- AmeriCorps civic 

engagement were on two items that indicate real action in alumni’s current communities, with 71 perce

very or completely likely to be helping to keep their communities safe and clean (compared to 42 percen

prior to AmeriCorps service) and 70 percent very or completely likely to donate money or goods to a 

cause (compared to 40 percent prior to AmeriCorps service). 

nt 

t 
nationalservice.gov 34

Exhibit V-1. Civic Engagement Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps 

23

42

25

16

22

15

28

27

28

26

29

25

32

60

46

34

38

36

34

25

35

37

35

34

0 20 40 60 80 100

Participate in community organizations

(school, religious, issue-based,

recreational)

Vote in elections

Keep informed about news and public

issues

Help to keep the community safe and

clean

Volunteer for a cause or issue that you

care about

onate money or goods to a cause or issue

that you care about

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

Pre-AmeriCorps:

Post-AmeriCorps:

Completely Likely Very Likely

Completely Likely Very Likely

D

Pre-AmeriCorps, VISTA alumni were most likely to be involved across all of the civic engagement 

activities listed, followed by ASN and then NCCC (see Exhibit V-2). Post-AmeriCorps, however, the only 

significant differences between programs are on the “vote in elections” and “keep informed about news 

and public issues” items; VISTA had the highest likelihood, followed by ASN and then NCCC. On the 

same post-AmeriCorps civic engagement items, the 2005 cohort was slightly more likely to participate 

than the 2010 and 2013 cohorts (there were no significant differences pre-AmeriCorps). 
nationalservice.gov 35

Exhibit V-2. Civic Engagement Pre-AmeriCorps by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

There is a positive association between the service experience scale and civic engagement postAmeriCorps, controlling for civic engagement pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental 

education, age, and service setting (p < .0001). A difference of one point on the service experience scale is 

associated with a difference of 0.4 points on the post-AmeriCorps civic engagement scale. 

Civic Self-Efficacy 

The survey included one question (Q37) asking respondents about their civic self-efficacy. Respondents 

expressed how well they thought they would be able to do each civic activity on a scale from 1 to 5, 

where 1 = “Definitely Couldn’t,” 2 = “Probably Couldn’t,” 3 = “Not Sure,” 4 = “Probably Could,” and 5 = 

“Definitely Could.” AmeriCorps alumni reported a high degree of civic self-efficacy; on average 85 

percent of alumni said that currently they probably or definitely could do each activity, with most of the 

remainder answering “not sure.” The weighted responses had an average of 4.2 (just above “probably”). 

23

41

24

16

22

15

27

27

27

25

28

24

25

49

32

17

24

18

30

28

32

29

33

27

16

33

16

11

18

10

22

24

22

21

24

18

0 20 40 60 80 100

Participate in community organizations (school,

religious, issue-based, recreational)*

Vote in elections*

Keep informed about news and public issues*

Help to keep the community safe and clean*

Volunteer for a cause or issue that you care about*

Donate money or goods to a cause or issue that you

care about*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Completely Likely Very Likely

Completely Likely Very Likely

Completely Likely Very Likely
nationalservice.gov 36

Respondents felt most confident in their abilities to express views in front of a group of people (91 

percent probably or definitely could) and identify individuals or groups who could help with a problem 

(89 percent probably or definitely could), but they felt less confident in being able to get others to care 

about a problem and creating a plan to address a problem (79 percent indicated they probably or 

definitely could for each of these last two items). 

Exhibit V-3. Civic Self-Efficacy

How well do you think you would be 

able to do each of the following? 

Definitely 

Couldn't 

(%) 

Probably 

Couldn't 

(%) 

Not Sure 

(%) 

Probably 

Could 

(%) 

Definitely 

Could 

(%) 

Create a plan to address the problem 1 3 16 49 30

Get other people to care about the problem 1 3 17 52 27

Organize and run a meeting 1 4 10 36 49

Express your views in front of a group of people 1 1 7 33 58

Identify individuals or groups who could help you 

with the problem 0 2 8 44 45

Express your views on the Internet or through social 

media 1 3 10 36 50

Call someone on the phone you had never met 

before to get their help with the problem 1 4 12 38 45

Contact an elected official about the problem 2 3 11 39 45

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=11-13)

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q37 (If you found out about a problem in your community that you 

wanted to do something about, how well do you think you would be able to do each of the following?) 

There is a positive association between the service experience scale and civic self-efficacy, controlling for 

program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, age, and service setting (p < .0001). A difference of 

one point on the service experience scale is associated with a difference of 0.3 points on the civic selfefficacy scale. 

Voting Behavior 

The survey asked a few questions (Q34 to Q36) about current alumni voting behaviors. The responses 

showed that 91 percent of alumni registered to vote in last presidential election. Of those, 94 percent 

voted, which is much higher than the national average of 58 percent of eligible voters who voted in 

2012.30 VISTA alumni were most likely to have voted (98 percent), followed by ASN (94 percent) and 

NCCC (89 percent) alumni. The responses also showed that two-fifths of alumni voted in all elections 

offered in the last 12 months, while one-third voted in some elections. Forty-six percent of VISTA alumni 

and 48 percent of the 2005 cohort voted in all elections in the last 12 months. 

 

30 http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/2012-voter-turnout/ 
nationalservice.gov 37

VI. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON SENSE OF COMMUNITY 

This section describes the impact of AmeriCorps on alumni’s sense of community. It also explores 

differences in impacts by life stage and service experience. 

The survey included two questions (Q9 and Q38) asking respondents about their sense of community 

before and after AmeriCorps. The data were collected using a Likert scale, and then analyzed based on 

the percent of respondents who strongly agreed, agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed, and 

strongly disagreed. More alumni strongly agree or agree to all sense of community items post-service 

compared to pre-service, with the largest shift in response frequencies coming from agree to strongly 

agree (see Exhibit VI-1 below). The biggest changes appear in items that suggest an understanding of and 

a plan to address community needs: 

 Eighty-one percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of the important 

needs in their communities post-AmeriCorps, compared to 49 percent prior to AmeriCorps. 

 Seventy-nine percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are or plan to become 

actively involved in issues that positively affect their communities post-AmeriCorps, compared 

to 47 percent prior to AmeriCorps. 

There was an average difference between the pre- and post-AmeriCorps sense of community scales of 0.6 

on a 5-point scale (p < .0001).31

 

31 The item “I believed/believe that voting in elections is a very important obligation that a citizen owes to the 

country” was excluded from the sense of community scale because it appears to measure a different underlying 

construct. See Appendix E (Psychometric Analysis) for more details. 
nationalservice.gov 38

Exhibit VI-1. Sense of Community Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps 

NCCC alumni were least likely to answer strongly agree or agree across all sense of community items 

pre-AmeriCorps (see Exhibit VI-2). However, differences with other programs shrink to insignificance for 

all but two items post-AmeriCorps (see Exhibit VI-3). 

16

14

22

13

41

34

35

44

34

35

32

30

38

34

55

38

51

46

45

32

0 20 40 60 80 100

I had/have a strong and personal

attachment to a particular community

I was/am aware of the important needs in

the community

I felt/feel a personal obligation to

contribute in some way to the community

I was/am or plan to become actively

involved in issues that positively

affected/affect the community

I believed/believe that voting in elections

is a very important obligation that a

citizen owes to the country

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

Pre-AmeriCorps:

Post-AmeriCorps:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 39

Exhibit VI-2. Sense of Community Pre-AmeriCorps by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

17

14

22

13

41

34

36

43

34

35

16

15

23

15

45

34

35

47

35

35

13

7

16

8

32

25

27

38

29

35

0 20 40 60 80 100

I had a strong and personal attachment to a

particular community*

I was aware of the important needs in the

community*

I felt a personal obligation to contribute in some

way to the community*

I was actively involved in issues that positively

affected the community*

I believed that voting in elections is a very

important obligation that a citizen owes to the

country*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 40

Exhibit VI-3. Sense of Community Post-AmeriCorps by Program 

32

29

38

33

53

37

51

47

45

33

32

33

41

37

60

39

49

44

43

28

29

26

33

32

51

36

46

45

42

28

0 20 40 60 80 100

I have a strong and personal attachment to a

particular community

I am aware of the important needs in the

community*

I feel a personal obligation to contribute in some

way to the community

I am or plan to become actively involved in issues

that positively affect the community

I believe that voting in elections is a very important

obligation that a citizen owes to the country*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

There is a positive association between the service experience scale and sense of community postAmeriCorps, controlling for sense of community pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, 

parental education, age, and service setting (p < .0001). A difference of one point on the service experience 

scale is associated with a difference of 0.4 points on the post-AmeriCorps sense of community scale. 

VII. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON SELF-EFFICACY AND CAREER-ORIENTED SKILLS 

This section describes the impact of AmeriCorps on alumni’s cultural competency, self-efficacy, and 

career-oriented skills. It also explores differences in impacts by life stage and service experience. 

Cultural Competency 

One of the indicators used in the survey to measure career-oriented skills was cultural competency (Q6 

and Q29). The survey asked respondents to identify their competency on various items both before and 
nationalservice.gov 41

after their AmeriCorps experience. The data were collected using a Likert scale, and then analyzed based 

on the percent of respondents who strongly agreed, agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed, and 

strongly disagreed. 

The data demonstrate that for all cultural competency items, participants viewed themselves as more 

competent after AmeriCorps than before. This difference was largest for the item “confidence interacting 

with people from different cultures or backgrounds,” with 72 percent of respondents strongly agreeing 

and agreeing before AmeriCorps, and 93 percent strongly agreeing and agreeing after AmeriCorps (see 

Exhibit VII-1 below). The average difference between the pre- and post-AmeriCorps cultural competency 

measures was 0.3 on a 5-point scale (p < .0001). 

Exhibit VII-1. Cultural Competency Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps 

37

44

48

30

46

45

45

42

50

56

62

50

43

39

35

43

0 20 40 60 80 100

I enjoyed/enjoy exploring differences

between co-workers and/or friends from

different cultures or backgrounds and me

I enjoyed/enjoy interacting with people

from different cultures and backgrounds

I respected/respect the values of people

from different cultures and backgrounds

I felt/feel confident when interacting with

people from different cultures and

backgrounds

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

Pre-AmeriCorps:

Post-AmeriCorps:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Prior to AmeriCorps, NCCC alumni were least likely to answer strongly agree or agree to the cultural 

competency items (see Exhibit VII-2). However, these differences became insignificant post-AmeriCorps 

(see Exhibit VII-3). 
nationalservice.gov 42

Exhibit VII-2. Cultural Competency Pre-AmeriCorps by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

37

44

47

30

45

46

45

42

39

47

51

31

49

43

44

44

33

37

42

23

47

48

47

41

0 20 40 60 80 100

I enjoyed exploring differences between co-workers

and/or friends from different cultures or

backgrounds and me*

I enjoyed interacting with people from different

cultures and backgrounds*

I respected the values of people from different

cultures and backgrounds*

I felt confident when interacting with people from

different cultures and backgrounds*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 43

Exhibit VII-3. Cultural Competency Post-AmeriCorps by Program 

49

56

62

49

43

39

35

43

52

58

63

52

43

40

36

42

52

57

64

51

40

38

33

43

0 20 40 60 80 100

I enjoy exploring differences between co-workers

and/or friends from different cultures or

backgrounds and me

I enjoy interacting with people from different

cultures and backgrounds

I respect the values of people from different

cultures and backgrounds

I feel confident when interacting with people from

different cultures and backgrounds

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

There is a positive association between the service experience scale and cultural competency postAmeriCorps, controlling for cultural competency pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, 

parental education, age, and service setting (p < .0001). A difference of one point on the service experience 

scale that is associated with a difference of 0.3 points on the post-AmeriCorps cultural competency scale. 

Self-Efficacy 

Other questions in the survey (Q7 and Q30) examined self-efficacy among respondents. The survey asked 

respondents to identify their competency on various self-efficacy items both before and after their 

AmeriCorps experience. The data were collected using a Likert scale, and then analyzed based on the 

percent of respondents who strongly agreed, agreed, neither agreed nor disagreed, disagreed, and 

strongly disagreed. 
nationalservice.gov 44

There were significant increases in self-efficacy after AmeriCorps compared to before. Not only did more 

respondents shift from disagree categories to agree categories, but there was also a large shift from agree 

to strongly agree. Some of the more notable shifts in competency pertained to an increased capacity 

among respondents to overcome opposition and deal with unforeseen circumstances (see items 2, 4, 5, 

and 7 in Exhibit VII-4 below). The average difference between pre-AmeriCorps competency and postAmeriCorps competency was 0.5 on a 5-point scale (p < .0001). 
nationalservice.gov 45

Exhibit VII-4. Self-Efficacy Pre- and Post-AmeriCorps 

Similar to the findings of cultural competency measures, of the three programs, NCCC participants were 

the least likely to answer strongly agree or agree prior to AmeriCorps, however, these differences became 

insignificant post-AmeriCorps (see Exhibits VII-5 and VII-6).

16

16

16

22

18

16

15

18

54

52

52

66

52

60

69

61

35

43

44

47

43

42

42

43

52

49

49

47

49

51

53

50

0 20 40 60 80 100

I always managed/can always manage to solve

23 56 difficult problems if I tried/try hard enough

41 50

If someone opposed/opposes me, I could/can

8 35 find the means and ways to get what I wanted

23 43

It was/is easy for me to stick to my aims and

accomplish my goals

I was/am confident that I could deal efficiently

with unexpected events

Thanks to my resourcefulness, I knew/know

how to handle unforeseen situations

I could/can solve most problems if I

invested/invest the necessary effort

I could/can remain calm when facing

difficulties because I could/can rely on my

coping abilities

When I was/am confronted with a problem, I

could/can usually find several solutions

If I was/am in trouble, I could/can usually

think of a solution

I could/can usually handle whatever came my

way

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

Pre-AmeriCorps:

Post-AmeriCorps:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 46

Exhibit VII-5. Self-Efficacy Pre-AmeriCorps by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

24

8

17

16

16

22

18

17

16

19

56

35

54

52

52

66

53

59

69

60

23

6

15

16

18

21

19

16

16

15

58

35

56

54

54

65

52

62

69

64

17

6

12

11

12

17

14

11

12

15

56

30

48

47

43

67

48

56

67

58

0 20 40 60 80 100

I always managed to solve difficult problems if I

tried hard enough

If someone opposed me, I could find the means

and ways to get what I wanted*

It was easy for me to stick to my aims and

accomplish my goals*

I was confident that I could deal efficiently with

unexpected events*

Thanks to my resourcefulness, I knew how to

handle unforeseen situations*

I could solve most problems if I invested the

necessary effort*

I could remain calm when facing difficulties

because I could rely on my coping abilities*

When I was confronted with a problem, I could

usually find several solutions*

If I was in trouble, I could usually think of a

solution*

I could usually handle whatever came my way*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 47

Exhibit VII-6. Self-Efficacy Post-AmeriCorps by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

There is a positive association between the service experience scale and self-efficacy post-AmeriCorps, 

controlling for self-efficacy pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, age, 

and service setting (p < .0001). A difference of one point on the service experience scale is associated with 

a difference of 0.3 points on the post-AmeriCorps self-efficacy scale. There is also a small negative 

association between age and self-efficacy post-AmeriCorps, controlling for self-efficacy pre-AmeriCorps, 

42

23

36

43

44

48

44

42

42

44

50

43

52

49

49

47

48

50

53

50

38

19

33

44

43

43

40

40

40

42

51

44

51

49

50

50

50

52

54

50

44

22

34

46

47

51

46

45

42

48

48

42

49

47

48

44

46

46

52

46

0 20 40 60 80 100

I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I

try hard enough

If someone opposes me, I can find the means and

ways to get what I want

It is easy for me to stick to my aims and accomplish

my goals

I am confident that I could deal efficiently with

unexpected events

Thanks to my resourcefulness, I know how to

handle unforeseen situations

I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary

effort

I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I

can rely on my coping abilities*

When I am confronted with a problem, I can usually

find several solutions

If I am in trouble, I can usually think of a solution

I can usually handle whatever comes my way

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree

Strongly Agree Agree
nationalservice.gov 48

program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, service experience, and service setting (p < .05). A 

difference of ten years is associated with a difference of -0.05 on the post-AmeriCorps self-efficacy scale. 

This might be explained by the fact that older alumni could have had more personal and professional 

influences on their self-efficacy, thus minimizing the impact of their AmeriCorps service. 

Career-Oriented Skills 

Additionally, the survey examined the influence of AmeriCorps on critical career-oriented hard and soft 

skills. The survey asked respondents to rate the influence of AmeriCorps on their interpersonal skills, 

personal conduct, applied academic skills, critical thinking skills, and workplace skills (Q24 to Q28). 

Respondents ranked the influence of AmeriCorps on a scale from 1 to 4, where 1 = “not at all,” 2 = “very 

little,” 3 = “somewhat,” 4 = “a great deal.”

32

Alumni felt that AmeriCorps most helped them to develop the interpersonal skills of listening to other 

people’s opinions, getting along with others in their work environment, and collaborating on projects as a 

team member to achieve a shared goal (see Exhibit VII-7). Eighty-seven percent of respondents felt that 

these skills were developed during their service experience (they answered “somewhat” or “a great 

deal”). Across programs, NCCC alumni were most likely to say that AmeriCorps improved their 

interpersonal skills “a great deal” (see Exhibit VII-8).

Exhibit VII-7. Interpersonal Skills

Extent of AmeriCorps Influence Not at All

(%)

Very 

Little

(%)

Somewhat

(%)

A Great 

Deal

(%)

Not Sure

(%)

Verbally communicating your ideas to other people 6 7 39 46 3

Listening to other people’s opinions or position on an 

issue 6 6 33 54 2

Collaborating on projects as a team member to achieve 

a shared goal 5 6 28 59 2

Getting along with other people in your work 

environment 5 7 31 56 2

Resolving conflicts through discussion and dialog 6 9 36 48 2

Treating clients or customers with courtesy and respect 7 9 30 53 2

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=5-6)

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q24 (To what extent did your AmeriCorps experience help you 

acquire or increase each of the following interpersonal skills?) 

 

32 “Not Sure” was also an option, but it was not included in scale averages. 
nationalservice.gov 49

Exhibit VII-8. Influence of AmeriCorps on Interpersonal Skills by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

Regarding personal conduct and workplace behaviors, respondents felt that AmeriCorps most helped 

them develop skills to adapt to new situations (90 percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or 

“somewhat”), followed by seeking new information to learn new or better ways of doing things (86 

percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or “somewhat”) and setting priorities for multiple tasks 

(85 percent answered “a great deal,” or “somewhat”). Of all the skills measured in the survey, the lowest 

impact was reported on “being honest when you make a mistake.” 

Exhibit VII-9. Personal Conduct and Workplace Behaviors 

Extent of AmeriCorps Influence Not at All

(%)

Very 

Little

(%)

Somewhat

(%)

A Great 

Deal

(%)

Not Sure

(%)

Conducting yourself in a professional manner 7 10 35 47 2

46

54

59

56

49

54

39

33

28

30

36

29

43

51

54

50

40

48

38

35

30

35

37

32

52

66

71

70

62

52

37

26

22

24

30

32

0 20 40 60 80 100

Verbally communicating your ideas to other people

Listening to other people’s opinions or position on 

an issue*

Collaborating on projects as a team member to

achieve a shared goal*

Getting along with other people in your work

environment*

Resolving conflicts through discussion and dialog*

Treating clients or customers with courtesy and

respect*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

A Great Deal Somewhat

A Great Deal Somewhat

A Great Deal Somewhat
nationalservice.gov 50

Extent of AmeriCorps Influence Not at All

(%)

Very 

Little

(%)

Somewhat

(%)

A Great 

Deal

(%)

Not Sure

(%)

Setting priorities for multiple tasks 5 9 34 51 2

Adapting to new situations 4 5 27 63 1

Being honest when you make a mistake 8 10 34 44 3

Seeking new information to learn new or better ways of 

doing things 5 7 33 53 2

Following through to complete assigned tasks 6 9 33 50 2

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=4-6)

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q25 (To what extent did your AmeriCorps experience help you 

acquire or increase each of the following personal conduct and workplace behaviors?) 

Compared to other work-related skills, respondents indicated that their AmeriCorps service did the least 

to advance various applied academic skills. Sixty-one percent or more of respondents felt that 

AmeriCorps helped them at least somewhat develop their reading and writing skills, while roughly 35 

percent indicated that AmeriCorps developed these skills very little or not at all. A majority – 54 percent –

of respondents felt AmeriCorps did little or nothing to improve their basic math skills. 

Exhibit VII-10. Applied Academic Skills

Extent of AmeriCorps Influence Not at All

(%)

Very 

Little

(%)

Somewhat

(%)

A Great 

Deal

(%)

Not Sure

(%)

Reading and understanding work-related materials 

(e.g., emails, memos, reports) 16 20 32 29 3

Writing to support project- or business-related activities 

(e.g., emails, memos, reports, grant proposals) 16 18 30 34 2

Writing for public communication or educational 

purposes (e.g., newsletter articles, blog posts, 

brochures, training materials)

19 17 29 32 2

Doing basic math calculations that support project- or 

business-related activities (e.g., keeping financial 

records, estimating costs, monitoring expenditures)

29 25 26 17 3

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=5) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q26 (To what extent did your AmeriCorps experience help you 

acquire or increase each of the following applied academic skills?)

Respondents indicated that AmeriCorps service either somewhat or greatly increased many of their 

critical thinking skills, with the largest impact reported for “coming up with new ideas to make work 

more efficient or more effective” (84 percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or “somewhat”) and 

“developing plans and agendas” (82 percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or “somewhat”, see 

Exhibit VII-11). The smallest impact was reported for “summarizing information from different sources,” 

with 25 percent of respondents saying this skill was developed very little or not at all. In addition, VISTA 

alumni reported largest impacts on writing skills (see Exhibit VII-12).
nationalservice.gov 51

Exhibit VII-11. Critical Thinking Skills

Extent of AmeriCorps Influence Not at All

(%)

Very 

Little

(%)

Somewhat

(%)

A Great 

Deal

(%)

Not Sure

(%)

Gathering, organizing, and maintaining information 8 11 36 43 2

Summarizing information from different sources 11 14 37 36 2

Defining and describing a problem for your supervisor, 

team, or other stakeholders 8 10 38 42 2

Coming up with new ideas to make work more efficient 

or more effective 6 8 35 49 2

Analyzing input from others to inform decision making 7 10 39 42 2

Developing plans and agendas 7 9 33 49 2

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=3-6)

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q27 (To what extent did your AmeriCorps experience help you 

acquire or increase each of the following critical thinking skills?)
nationalservice.gov 52

Exhibit VII-12. Applied Academic Skills by Program 

29

32

30

17

32

30

28

26

29

44

41

16

34

33

33

27

20

24

22

14

34

34

29

24

0 20 40 60 80 100

Reading and understanding work-related materials

(e.g., emails, memos, reports)*

Writing to support project- or business-related

activities (e.g., emails, memos, reports, grant

proposals)*

Writing for public communication or educational

purposes (e.g., newsletter articles, blog posts,

brochures, training materials)*

Doing basic math calculations that support projector business-related activities (e.g., keeping financial

records, estimating costs, monitoring expenditures)

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

A Great Deal Somewhat

A Great Deal Somewhat

A Great Deal Somewhat

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

Regarding common workplace skills, respondents indicated that AmeriCorps most strongly developed 

their skills in community outreach (82 percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or “somewhat”), 

project management (77 percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or “somewhat”), and planning, 

coordinating and managing meetings or events (76 percent of respondents answered “a great deal,” or 

“somewhat”, see Exhibit VII-13).

The skills that respondents reported being least developed by their AmeriCorps experience include 

working with the media and public relations (57 percent of respondents answered “very little,” or “not at 

all”) and grant writing or fundraising (55 percent of respondents answered “very little,” or “not at all”). 

Across programs, VISTA alumni felt their workplace skills were most developed (see Exhibit VII-14).
nationalservice.gov 53

Exhibit VII-13. Workplace Skills

Extent of AmeriCorps Influence 

Recruiting, managing, or training volunteers

Community outreach

Project management

Planning, coordinating, and managing meetings or 

events

Using computers, software, and web-based 

applications

Finding information online

Grant writing or fundraising

Working with the media and public relations

Delivering presentations

Not at All

(%)

Very 

Little

(%)

Somewhat

(%)

A Great 

Deal

(%)

Not Sure

(%)

20 14 25 39 2

8 9 30 52 2

9 13 31 46 2

10 13 30 46 2

22 21 30 26 2

22 20 30 27 2

37 18 21 22 2

36 21 22 18 2

18 15 31 34 2

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=5-7)

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q28 (To what extent did your AmeriCorps experience help you 

acquire or increase each of the following workplace skills?)
nationalservice.gov 54

Exhibit VII-14. Workplace Skills by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

37

50

44

44

24

26

19

17

33

24

30

31

29

29

29

20

20

31

49

61

52

55

31

29

36

25

37

24

28

32

30

34

35

26

30

34

41

48

46

42

18

20

12

22

32

29

33

33

33

26

25

15

25

37

0 20 40 60 80 100

Recruiting, managing, or training volunteers*

Community outreach*

Project management*

Planning, coordinating, and managing meetings or

events*

Using computers, software, and web-based

applications*

Finding information online*

Grant writing or fundraising*

Working with the media and public relations*

Delivering presentations*

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

ASN:

VISTA:

NCCC:

A Great Deal Somewhat

A Great Deal Somewhat

A Great Deal Somewhat
nationalservice.gov 55

The average score across all of the career-oriented skills items was 3.1 of 4.33 There is a positive 

association between the service experience scale and impact of AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills, 

controlling for self-efficacy pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, age, 

and service setting (p < .0001). A difference of one point on the service experience scale is associated with 

a difference of 0.7 points on the impact of AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills scale. There is also a small 

positive association between serving at a nonprofit and impact of AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills, 

controlling for self-efficacy pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, age, 

and service setting (p < .001). Serving at a nonprofit is associated with a difference of 0.1 points on the 

impact of AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills scale. Finally, there is a small negative association 

between age and impact of AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills, controlling for self-efficacy preAmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, service experience, and service setting 

(p < .001). A difference of ten years is associated with a difference of -0.05 on the impact of AmeriCorps 

on career-oriented skills scale. Note that respondents could report that AmeriCorps had little impact on 

their skill development if they felt that a particular skill was well-developed before AmeriCorps. 

VIII. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON CAREER PATHWAYS AND EMPLOYMENT OUTCOMES 

Employment Status Before and After AmeriCorps 

The survey included two questions (Q4 and Q16) asking respondents about their employment status in 

the six months before their AmeriCorps service and six months after their AmeriCorps service. Roughly 

two-fifths were employed before their service, and roughly two-thirds reported being employed within 

six months after their service. More than four-fifths (83 percent) of respondents reported being employed 

at the time they completed the survey. While just over half of the respondents were enrolled in an 

education program prior to service, one third were furthering their education six months after their 

service and just 15 percent are currently enrolled in an education program. 

Seventeen percent of respondents were seeking work, providing caregiving or were otherwise occupied 

outside the workforce prior to their AmeriCorps service, and that percentage dropped to 12 percent both 

in the six months following their service and at the time of the survey. Around 10 percent of respondents 

reported doing non-paid work or being engaged in other service at all time points. See Exhibit VIII-1 

below for a summary of the employment status of AmeriCorps alumni at three time points (immediately 

before and after service and currently). 

 

33 “Not sure” responses were excluded. The remaining responses options were “Not at All,” “Very Little,”, 

“Somewhat,” and “A Great Deal,” so an average score of 3.1 corresponds to an average impact just above 

“Somewhat.”
nationalservice.gov 56

Exhibit VIII-1. Employment Status at Three Time Points 

There are some significant differences in these survey results by program and cohort. Six months prior to 

service, NCCC respondents were more likely to be employed (55 percent) than ASN (43 percent) or 

VISTA (40 percent). The 2005 cohort was more likely to be enrolled in education prior to service (56 

percent) than the 2010 or 2013 cohorts (48 and 49 percent) and less likely to be seeking work (13 percent 

for 2005 versus 19 percent for 2010 and 2013). 

Six months after service, ASN alumni (36 percent) and NCCC alumni (40 percent) were more likely to be 

enrolled in education than VISTA (27 percent). 

Employment through AmeriCorps Connections 

The 2016 survey asked a number of questions to determine if respondents gained employment after their 

AmeriCorps service in their AmeriCorps host organizations or as a result of a connection made during 

their service (Q17 to Q21a). Approximately one-fifth (19 percent) of respondents reported being 

employed in an existing position at their AmeriCorps host organization, and an additional four percent 

reported being employed in new position at their host organization. While around one-fifth of ASN and 

VISTA alumni reported being employed at their host organization, only five percent of NCCC alumni 

43

51

9

17

67

34

10

12

83

15

10

12

0 20 40 60 80 100

Employed part-time or full-time

Enrolled in an education program parttime or full-time

Doing non-paid work or engaged in other

volunteer, community, military, or

national service

Seeking work, providing caregiving, or

occupied outside of the workforce

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

Six Months Before AmeriCorps

Six Months After AmeriCorps

Currently
nationalservice.gov 57

were employed by one of their host organizations, which likely had to do with NCCC program design 

with service members working on a range of projects and with different organizations across a region 

over the course of one year. Alumni from earlier cohorts were more likely to have been hired by their 

host organization (22 percent 2005, 19 percent 2010) than alumni from the 2013 cohort (15 percent). 

Fifteen percent of respondents said that a new position was created at the host organization to do the 

work they were doing, whether or not they ended up being employed in that position. These results also 

varied significantly by program: fourteen percent of ASN alumni said that a new position was created at 

the host organization to do the work they were doing compared to 21 percent for VISTA and five percent 

for NCCC. 

More than two-fifths (42 percent) of alumni who were employed within six months after their 

AmeriCorps service said that their employment resulted from a connection made during AmeriCorps 

service. These results differed by program, with 42 percent of ASN alumni saying that their employment 

resulted from a connection made during AmeriCorps service compared to 46 percent for VISTA and 15 

percent for NCCC. 

More than half (51 percent) said that serving in AmeriCorps opened up a career path for them that they 

might not have otherwise considered. There were small but significant variations in the responses to this 

question by program and cohort. Roughly half of ASN and VISTA alumni indicating that AmeriCorps 

service opened up a career path for them compared to 45 percent of NCCC alumni. Fifty-five percent of 

the 2005 cohort alumni answered this question positively compared to 49 percent of the 2010 cohort and 

50 percent of the 2013 cohort. 

The open-ended responses to whether or not AmeriCorps opened up a career path (Q21a) were mixed 

(see Exhibit VIII-2 below). Nearly one-fourth (24 percent) of respondents described their AmeriCorps 

service as opening up a career path because of professional skills and experience gained. Just over onefifth (22 percent) of respondents said AmeriCorps helped clarify a career path and 16 percent respondents 

answered that it did not open up a career path. 

For those who felt that AmeriCorps opened up a career path, this was mostly attributed to the experience 

gained and the clarification they obtained as to what career path to pursue. As one of the participants 

describes, 

“My AmeriCorps experience completely defined what I have done with my career since that time. I did not 

know about capacity building in a nonprofit setting. I did not really understand that development was a 

viable career option. Thanks to my service year, I found an interest in grant writing, a way I could use my 

creative writing degree to make a living, and I would not have had the opportunity to experience this 

without serving.”

The most common reason that respondents answered that they were unsure or that AmeriCorps did not 

open up a career path – reported roughly 20 percent of the time – was that their professional interests 

remained the same. For example, one respondent explains that he/she had already defined a career path: 
nationalservice.gov 58

It did not directly open up a career path for me, as my path has not changed since before my AmeriCorps 

service, however the experience may have indirectly helped me to obtain admission to medical school. 

In addition, a number of respondents were unsure whether AmeriCorps opened up a career path because 

they went back to school after their service and might have gained employment based on the degree 

received rather than the service itself. While some respondents pursued a career in a different sector than 

their AmeriCorps service, many of them noted that while AmeriCorps might not have opened up a 

particular career path, it gave them the tools and experience necessary to excel in their personal and 

professional lives beyond their service. While not directly opening up a career path, some respondents 

acknowledge their service experience helping them in future pursuits. Other respondents identified that 

the skills gained through AmeriCorps helped them with their careers.

Exhibit VIII-2. AmeriCorps Opened up a Career Path 

Theme Coded from Open-Ended Responses (%)

Professional skills and experience gained 24

Helped clarify my career path, discovered passion (career & 

education) 22

Did not open up a career path 16

Not sure 9

Professional connections made 7

Enhanced my resume 6

Led directly to a job at host organization 5

Professional interests remained the same 5

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=204) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple themes could have been included in a single response. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q21a (Please tell us more about how your AmeriCorps service 

experience did or did not open up a career path for you) 

Use of AmeriCorps Network 

The survey included two questions regarding the use of alumni’s AmeriCorps network for pursuing or 

developing career opportunities (Q22 and Q23). Regarding the frequency of contact with their network, 

alumni responses were fairly evenly distributed across the various response options (see Exhibit VIII-3), 

with the most common response being every few months. Roughly one-fifth maintain daily or weekly 

contact with their AmeriCorps network, and one-fifth report never utilizing this network. These 

responses varied significantly by program, with NCCC alumni more likely to use the network daily or 

weekly or every few months (63 percent) than ASN or VISTA alumni (42 percent each). Also, the most 

recent 2013 cohort is more likely to use the AmeriCorps network daily or weekly or every few months (51 

percent) compared to the 2005 and 2010 cohorts (39 percent each). 

Exhibit VIII-3. Contact with AmeriCorps Network

Frequency (%)

Never 22

Once every few years 16
nationalservice.gov 59

Frequency (%)

Once or twice a year 19

Every few months 25

Daily or weekly 18

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q22 (How frequently do you maintain contact with your 

‘AmeriCorps network,’ meaning other members or people you first met or worked with through your AmeriCorps 

service (this includes people you still engage with socially, professionally, or educationally)?) 

When seeking a job or career advice, one-third of alumni reported contacting their AmeriCorps network 

some of the time. Thirteen percent contact this network often or always, but more than half (53 percent) 

reported never contacting their AmeriCorps network when looking for work or career advice. The 2013 

cohort is more likely to use AC network sometimes, often or always (54 percent), compared to the 2005 

cohort (44 percent) and the 2010 cohort (39 percent). 

Exhibit VIII-4. Access AmeriCorps Network for Career Advice, Job Opportunities, or Professional 

Networking

Frequency (%)

Never 53

Sometimes 32

Often 8

Always 5

Depends 2

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=1) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q23 (When you are seeking career advice, job opportunities, or doing 

professional networking, how frequently do you access your AmeriCorps network?) 

Impact of Education Award on Career Path 

The 2016 survey asked three questions regarding the influence of the AmeriCorps education award on 

alumni’s career paths (Q2, Q2a, and Q2a1). One quarter of alumni either did not receive, use, or have not 

yet used the education award. More than two-fifths (42 percent) of alumni used the education award to 

pursue college or graduate school, and one-third of alumni used the award to repay student loans (see 

Exhibit VIII-5).

Exhibit VIII-5. Use of AmeriCorps Education Award

AmeriCorps Education Award (%)

I did not qualify to receive an education award 7

I chose to receive a stipend instead of an education 

award 4

I did not use my education award, and I do not plan to 

use it 2

I have not yet used my education award 11

To attend college 20

To repay student loans 34
nationalservice.gov 60

AmeriCorps Education Award (%)

To attend graduate school 22

To attend a technical or vocational training program 2

I transferred my education award to a family member 1

Other 5

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple responses were permitted. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q2 (How did you use your AmeriCorps education award? Please 

select all that apply.) 

Education award use varied by AmeriCorps program and cohort. One-third of NCCC alumni used the 

award to attend college, compared to one-fifth of ASN and 12 percent of VISTA. ASN alumni were most 

likely to use the award to attend graduate school (23 percent), followed by VISTA alumni (18 percent) 

and NCCC alumni (13 percent). Around one-third of 2010 and 2013 cohort alumni have not yet used the 

education award, compared to 11 percent of the 2005 cohort alumni. 

Exhibit VIII-6. Use of AmeriCorps Education Award by Program 

AmeriCorps Education Award ASN

(%)

VISTA

(%)

NCCC

(%)

I did not qualify to receive an education award* 6 11 6

I chose to receive a stipend instead of an education 

award* 2 14 0

I did not use my education award, and I do not plan 

to use it 2 2 2

I have not yet used my education award* 12 7 13

To attend college* 21 12 33

To repay student loans 33 37 31

To attend graduate school* 23 18 13

To attend a technical or vocational training program* 2 1 6

I transferred my education award to a family member 1 0 0

Other 6 4 4

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple responses were permitted. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q2 (How did you use your AmeriCorps education award? Please 

select all that apply.) 

Just over one-fifth (22 percent) of all respondents who used the education award to repay loans said the 

award allowed them to pursue a career path that they otherwise would not have been able to pursue. 

This result did not vary significantly by program or cohort. 

Respondents who said the education award allowed them to pursue a career path were very positive, 

citing several uses in particular as helpful in furthering their career and educational paths. More than 

one-third of respondents (37 percent) used the award to pay off student loans, 28 percent used the award 
nationalservice.gov 61

to supplement their income and allow them to continue working in lower-paying jobs at nonprofit 

organizations, while 25 percent used it to pay for education or classes. An additional 7 percent of 

respondents were able to use the award to save money. 

Exhibit VIII-7. Used Education Award for Student Loan Repayment to Pursue a Career Path 

Theme Coded from Open-Ended Responses (%)

Helped payment of student loans 37

Could take a lower paying job, such as work at a non-profit 28

Could afford education or classes 25

Able to save money 7

Able to start a business or organization 2

Didn't help, no comment, not applicable 1

Notes: (N=310, Missing=2) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q2a1 (In what way did the use of the award for student loan 

repayment allow you to pursue a career path that you might otherwise not have been able to? ) 

Finally, the survey asked respondents if AmeriCorps was a worthwhile experience for furthering their 

professional goals (Q39b). Four-fifths of alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a 

worthwhile experience in terms of furthering professional goals. Alumni from the 2005 cohort were more 

likely to agree or strongly agree (85 percent) compared to 2013 cohort (81 percent) and the 2010 cohort (77 

percent). 

Current Career Status, Trajectory, and Transitions 

There were some significant differences in current employment status, satisfaction with career trajectory, 

and transition status by program and cohort. First, in one item that did not differ by program or cohort, 

seventy-nine percent of alumni reported being satisfied or very satisfied with their career trajectory. 

Roughly one-third of alumni reported being in a school or career transition, and these responses did vary 

by program and cohort. ASN (35 percent) and NCCC (37 percent) alumni are more likely to be in a 

transition than VISTA alumni (31 percent). Also, 2005 alumni are least likely to be in a transition (30 

percent), followed by 2010 alumni (34 percent) and 2013 alumni (39 percent). Among alumni in transition, 

half are changing jobs to improve career growth or pursue a different career path, and one-third are 

enrolling in or applying to an education program. Alumni in earlier cohorts are more likely to be 

changing jobs while alumni in later cohorts are more likely to be enrolling in education (see Exhibit VIII-8 

below). 
nationalservice.gov 62

Exhibit VIII-8. Current School or Career Transition by Cohort 

* Difference between cohorts is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

Current employment status does not differ significantly by program. NCCC alumni were found to be 

much more likely to be currently enrolled in education than ASN or VISTA alumni (26 percent, compared 

to 15 percent and 13 percent). Alumni in earlier cohorts are slightly more likely to be employed, and 

alumni in later cohorts are slightly more likely to be enrolled in education or doing non-paid work (see 

Exhibit VIII-9). 

12

22

7

57

16

17

32

12

48

13

16

40

14

44

11

0 20 40 60 80 100

Saving money to pursue more education

Enrolling in or applying to an education

program*

Just finished school and applying for jobs*

Changing jobs to improve career growth

or pursue a different career path*

Moving to a different locality, state, or

country to improve job prospects

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

2005

2010

2013
nationalservice.gov 63

Exhibit VIII-9. Current Status by Cohort 

* Difference between cohorts is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Almost two-fifths of employed alumni are working in the nonprofit or social service sector, while just 

over one-third are in the public sector and around one-quarter are in the private sector. In contrast, many 

more U.S. workers are employed in the private sector (76 percent) than in the public sector (15 percent) or 

the nonprofit sector (8 percent).34 Fully half of currently employed VISTA alumni are working in the 

nonprofit sector, compared to 37 percent of ASN alumni and one-quarter of NCCC alumni. Conversely, 

86

10

8

11

83

14

9

13

79

22

12

11

0 20 40 60 80 100

Employed part-time or full-time*

Enrolled in an education program parttime or full-time*

Doing non-paid work or engaged in other

volunteer, community, military, or

national service*

Seeking work, providing caregiving, or

occupied outside of the workforce

Percent of AmeriCorps Alumni

2005

2010

2013

 

34 U.S. private and public sector employment percentages are estimated using seasonally adjusted preliminary July 

2016 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS): 122 million Americans employed in the private sector 

and 22 million Americans employed in the public sector 

(http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm#ces_table1.f.p). The proportion of U.S. private sector 

employment in nonprofit organizations is estimated at 10 percent from a 2014 BLS study 

(http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20141021.htm). This figure may slightly underestimate nonprofit 

employment since only 501(c)3 organizations were counted. 
nationalservice.gov 64

45 percent of employed NCCC alumni are working in the private sector, compared to 27 percent of ASN 

alumni and 24 percent of VISTA alumni (see Exhibit VIII-10 below). 

Exhibit VIII-10. Employment Sector by Program 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level.

There is a significant positive association between the service experience scale and current employment 

status, which was found after controlling for employment status in the six months prior to AmeriCorps, 

program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, age, and service setting (p < .01). A difference of one

point on the service experience scale is associated with a 4 percentage point difference in likelihood of 

being employed. There is also a small negative association between age and current employment status, 

controlling for employment status in the six months prior to AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, 

gender, parental education, service experience, and service setting (p < .001). A difference of ten years is 

associated with a -0.7 percentage point difference in likelihood of being employed. 

IX. INFLUENCE OF NATIONAL SERVICE ON POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION OUTCOMES

Exhibit IX-1. Highest Level of Education Prior to AmeriCorps* 

Highest Level of Education Prior to 

AmeriCorps

ASN

(%)

VISTA

(%)

NCCC

(%)

Less than high school 3 0 1

Post-Secondary Education 

This section presents AmeriCorps alumni’s educational attainment pre- and post-AmeriCorps. Before 

participating in AmeriCorps, just over half of alumni had a four-year college degree. About one-fifth had 

completed some college, a two-year degree, or a technical or vocational degree or certificate. Five percent 

had a graduate degree. NCCC alumni were the least likely to have a bachelor’s degree as their highest 

level of education pre-AmeriCorps (43 percent), while VISTA alumni were most likely (65 percent). An 

additional 12 percent of VISTA alumni had completed graduate work pre-AmeriCorps (see Exhibit IX-1). 

37

50

25

8

27

24

76 45

36

26 29

15

0

20

40

60

80

100

U.S. NCCC VISTA ASN

Percent 

Nonprofit*

Private*

Public*
nationalservice.gov 65

High school degree (HS Diploma or GED) 15 8 29

Some college 18 10 20

2-year college degree (AA) 5 4 4

Technical or vocational degree or certificate 1 1 2

4-year college degree (BA, BS) 52 65 43

Some graduate school 3 3 0

Graduate or professional degree (MA, MS, MD, JD, 

Ph.D., etc.) 5 9 0

Other 0 0 0

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=1) 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q5 (What was the highest level of education you had completed prior 

to first serving in AmeriCorps?) 

Nearly two-fifths of alumni currently have a graduate degree, and another two-fifths have a four-year 

degree as their highest educational attainment. Among ASN and VISTA alumni, two-fifths have a 

graduate degree, but only one-fifth of NCCC alumni have a graduate degree (see Exhibit IX-2). 

Exhibit IX-2. Highest Level of Education* 

Highest Level of Education ASN

(%)

VISTA

(%)

NCCC

(%)

Less than high school 1 0 0

High school degree (HS Diploma or GED) 4 3 7

Some college 10 7 19

2-year college degree (AA) 5 3 9

Technical or vocational degree or certificate 1 1 7

4-year college degree (BA, BS) 31 36 33

Some graduate school 8 10 7

Graduate or professional degree (MA, MS, MD, JD, 

Ph.D., etc.) 39 40 19

Other 0 0 0

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=0) 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q3 (Please select the highest level of education you have completed.) 

When compared to their parents, AmeriCorps alumni tend to have higher educational attainment (see 

Exhibit IX-3 below). Forty one percent of AmeriCorps alumni have a bachelor’s degree, while 30 percent 

of AmeriCorps parents have a bachelor’s degree. Thirty eight percent of AmeriCorps alumni have a 

master’s degree, versus 31 percent of AmeriCorps parents. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 33 

percent of adults aged 25 or older had a bachelor’s degree or higher in 2015.35

 

35 http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2015/tables.html
nationalservice.gov 66

Exhibit IX-3. Highest Level of Education of AmeriCorps Alumni and Their Parents 

There is a small negative association between age and having at least a bachelor’s degree currently, 

controlling for attainment of a bachelor’s degree pre-AmeriCorps, which program alumni participated in, 

race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, service experience, and service setting (p < .05). A difference of 

ten years is associated with a -0.2 percentage point difference in likelihood of having attained at least a 

master’s degree.

There is a positive association between the service experience scale and having at least a master’s degree 

currently, controlling for attainment of a master’s degree pre-AmeriCorps, attainment of a bachelor’s 

degree pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, age, and service setting (p < 

.001). A difference of one point on the service experience scale is associated with a seven percentage point 

difference in likelihood of currently having a graduate degree. 

Serving in the nonprofit or public sector is negatively associated with having at least a master’s degree 

currently, controlling for attainment of a master’s degree pre-AmeriCorps, attainment of a bachelor’s 

degree pre-AmeriCorps, program, race/ethnicity, gender, parental education, and age. Non-profit sector 

service is associated with a negative 5 percentage point difference in likelihood of having a graduate 

degree (p < .05), and public sector service is associated with a negative 6 percentage point difference in 

likelihood of currently having a graduate degree (p < .05). Differences by service sector may be driven by 

alumni who have served in a K-12 setting, who may be more likely to embark on a teaching career which 

requires a master’s degree.

Current Educational Enrollments 

Among the 2005, 2010, and 2013 cohorts, there are differences in current educational enrollment (Q1.2). 

Within the 2010 cohort of AmeriCorps alumni, two-thirds of alumni currently enrolled in classes are 

working towards graduate degrees. Among the 2005 cohort, 57 percent are enrolled in graduate 

programs, as are 55 percent of the 2013 cohort. Fewer alumni from the 2005 and 2010 cohorts are 

21

38 38

67

41

57

30

21 38

5

31

12

0

20

40

60

80

Alumni

Currently

Alumni Before

AmeriCorps

U.S. Parent

Percent 

less than a 4-year college degree

4-year college degree

Graduate or professional degree

100
nationalservice.gov 67

currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree (15 percent and 13 percent, respectively) compared to 30 percent 

of the 2013 cohort who are currently working towards a bachelor’s degree.

Exhibit IX-4. Current Educational Enrollments by Cohort 

Current Enrollments by School Type 2005

(%)

2010

(%)

2013

(%)

High school or GED program 3 1 3

Earning college credits in a non-degree program 1 1 1

Enrolled in a certificate, technical, or vocational 

program

14 8 4

Attending community college* 17 8 13

Attending a university or four-year degree program* 15 13 30

Attending a graduate school program* 57 66 55

Other 1 5 0

Notes: (N=647, Missing=0) 

Percentages do not sum to 100 because multiple responses were permitted. 

* Difference between cohorts is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q1.2 (What education program are you currently engaged in? Please 

select all that apply.) 

Use of Education Award to Continue Education 

AmeriCorps alumni from different service programs elected to use their education award differently (Q2, 

Q2b, and Q2b1). Across AmeriCorps service programs, one-fifth of alumni used the Education Award to 

pay for college or graduate school. Alumni who served through NCCC were most likely to use the 

Education Award for college (33 percent). ASN alumni were most likely to use the Education Award for 

graduate school (23 percent), followed by VISTA alumni (18 percent). However, 14 percent of VISTA 

alumni chose to receive a stipend rather than the Education Award, a much higher proportion than either 

of the other programs examined. Half of the alumni who used the Education Award for graduate school 

or college said it allowed them to pursue a career path that otherwise would not have been open to them. 

Exhibit IX-5. Used Education Award to Continue Education or Pursue Career Path 

Theme Coded from Open-Ended Responses (%)

Could afford education or classes 72

Able to save money 10

Enabled career switch 9

Helped payment of student loans 4

Didn't help, no comment, not applicable 2

Could take a lower paying job, such as work at a non-profit 1

Able to start a business or organization 1

Notes: (N =972) 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q2.1a (In what ways [if not for student loan repayment] did the Ed 

Award allow you to continue your education or pursue a career path that you might otherwise not have been able 

to?)
nationalservice.gov 68

Out of the respondents who used their education award to continue education or pursue a career path, 

the majority (72 percent) used the money to continue their education, including not only paying for 

education or classes, but also covering living expenses while an individual was in school. Significant 

groups of the respondents to this question said the education award allowed them to save money (10 

percent), make a career switch (9 percent), and help pay off student loans (4 percent). 

Nearly three-quarters of AmeriCorps alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a worthwhile 

experience in terms of furthering their educational goals. One-third, 43 percent, and 42 percent of VISTA, 

ASN, and NCC alumni, respectively, strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a worthwhile experience for 

furthering their educational goals. 

Exhibit IX-6. AmeriCorps was a Worthwhile Experience for Furthering Educational Goals* 

AmeriCorps was a Worthwhile 

Experience for Furthering my 

Educational Goals and Future 

Educational Endeavors

ASN

(%)

VISTA

(%)

NCCC

(%)

Strongly Disagree 3 6 4

Disagree 5 11 8

Neither Agree nor Disagree 17 22 17

Agree 33 30 30

Strongly Agree 43 32 42

Notes: (N=3772, Missing=8) 

* Difference between programs is statistically significant at the p = 0.05 level. 

Source: AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey Q39a (How much do you agree or disagree with the following 

statement: Participating in AmeriCorps was a worthwhile experience in terms of furthering my educational goals and 

future educational endeavors.) 

X. CONCLUSION 

This section summarizes the key findings from the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes survey and 

provides recommendations for next steps should CNCS wish to continue exploring the impact of national 

service on outcomes of interest to program stakeholders. 

Key Findings 

The Abt team fielded the 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes survey, achieving enough responses for 

each program and cohort to allow for meaningful analysis and accurate estimates for the studied 

population as a whole. General findings are in line with those from previous studies and surveys that 

showed significant reported impacts of AmeriCorps service on future civic engagement, with 

AmeriCorps alumni contributing to their communities after service in a variety of ways. The 2016 survey 

provides detailed findings on each of the study’s research questions, including how AmeriCorps service 

developed specific job and self-efficacy skills, opened career pathways, and contributed directly to 

educational and employment outcomes. 

While the overall survey response rate was 21 percent, suggesting the possibility of non-response bias, 

the Abt team found that after controlling for other factors, gender, total term length, and number of terms 
nationalservice.gov 69

of service were not significantly associated with survey response. This suggests the portion of the survey 

sample that responded to the survey is not biased toward those who served long terms or multiple terms 

and therefore may have had a more positive AmeriCorps experience and feel more connected to the 

program. NCCC alumni were far more likely to respond than were alumni from ASN or VISTA, 

controlling for other factors. NCCC, with its predominant service experience involving teams of service 

members kept together for one year as they serve various organizations in multiple locations across a 

region, may foster more camaraderie, loyalty and identification with the AmeriCorps program. However, 

because NCCC is a much smaller service program than ASN and VISTA, the NCCC responses are 

appropriately weighted to avoid their skewing the overall survey results. 

The key findings below are organized by research question, first presenting how participating in a 

national service program influence members’ career pathways, civic engagement, development of careeroriented soft and hard skills, and sense of community (Research Question #1). Next we present the key 

findings related to post-secondary and employment outcomes of AmeriCorps alumni, exploring how 

national service is serving as a pathway to post-secondary and/or employment success (Research 

Question #3). Finally we present how the measured member outcomes varied by life stage and by types 

of service experience (Research Question #2). 

Research Question #1: Impact of Service upon Civic Engagement, Career Skills and Sense of 

Community 

AmeriCorps service is found to have a significant positive effect on civic engagement; respondents were 

more likely to engage in all community service activities post-AmeriCorps compared to pre-AmeriCorps. 

The biggest changes seen in pre- and post- AmeriCorps civic engagement were on two items that indicate 

real action in alumni’s current communities, with 71 percent very or completely likely to be helping to 

keep their communities safe and clean (compared to 42 percent prior to AmeriCorps service) and 70 

percent very or completely likely to donate money or goods to a cause (compared to 40 percent prior to 

AmeriCorps service). Also, 91 percent of AmeriCorps alumni were registered to vote in the last 

presidential election, and of those, 94 percent voted, which is much higher than the national average of 

58% of eligible voters who voted in 2012.36

AmeriCorps service is also perceived to have a significant effect upon alumni members’ sense of 

community in their current places of residence across the country. The biggest changes in measures from 

pre- to post-service appear in items that suggest an understanding of and a plan to address community 

needs. For example, 81 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of the 

important needs in their communities post-AmeriCorps, compared to 49 percent prior to AmeriCorps. 

Also, 79 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are or plan to become actively 

involved in issues that positively affect their communities post-AmeriCorps, compared to 47 percent 

prior to AmeriCorps. AmeriCorps service seems to have had the strongest effect upon NCCC members; 

NCCC alumni were least likely to answer strongly agree or agree across all sense of community items 

 

36 http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/2012-voter-turnout/ 
nationalservice.gov 70

pre-AmeriCorps, but those differences shrink to insignificance for all but two of the sense of community 

items post-AmeriCorps. 

The survey data demonstrate a positive effect of AmeriCorps service upon cultural competency. For all 

cultural competency items, participants viewed themselves as more competent after AmeriCorps than 

before their service. This difference was largest for the item “confidence interacting with people from 

different cultures or backgrounds,” with 72 percent of respondents strongly agreeing and agreeing before 

AmeriCorps, and 93 percent strongly agreeing and agreeing after AmeriCorps. Again the data suggest 

AmeriCorps service having the strongest effect in this regard on NCCC members. Prior to AmeriCorps, 

NCCC alumni were least likely to answer strongly agree or agree to the cultural competency items. 

However, these differences became insignificant in the post-AmeriCorps measures. 

NCCC alumni reported more changes relating to broadened horizons and cross-cultural understanding 

than other program alumni. For example, 87 percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that they 

“learned more about the ‘real world’ or ‘the rest’ of the world” compared to 79 percent and 76 percent of 

ASN and VISTA alumni respectively. Also, 80 percent of NCCC alumni agreed or strongly agreed that 

they re-examined their beliefs and attitudes about other people compared to 68 percent and 61 percent of 

ASN and VISTA alumni respectively. 

The survey found positive effect of AmeriCorps service upon self-efficacy measures as well. Some of the 

more notable shifts in competency pertained to an increased capacity among respondents to overcome 

opposition and deal with unforeseen circumstances. Once again, of the three programs, NCCC 

participants were the least likely to answer strongly agree or agree to the various self-efficacy measures 

prior to AmeriCorps, however, these differences became insignificant post-AmeriCorps. 

Research Question #3: Impact of Service upon Members’ Post-Secondary and Employment Outcomes 

The survey found that AmeriCorps service had significant impacts upon alumni’s employment and 

career pathways. More than half of respondents (51 percent) said that serving in AmeriCorps opened up 

a career path for them that they might not have otherwise considered. More than two-fifths (42 percent) 

of alumni who were employed within six months after their AmeriCorps service said that their 

employment resulted from a connection made during AmeriCorps service. These results did differ 

significantly by program, with 42 percent of ASN alumni indicating that their employment resulted from 

a connection made during AmeriCorps service compared to 46 percent for VISTA and just 15 percent for 

NCCC. The low percentage for NCCC may be explained by the fact that NCCC members serve with 

multiple organizations across a region during their service, whereas VISTA and ASN members are much 

more likely to serve with and build lasting connections with one organization. 

When seeking a job or career advice, one-third of alumni reported contacting their AmeriCorps network 

some of the time. Thirteen percent contact this network often or always, but more than half (53 percent) 

reported never contacting their AmeriCorps network when looking for work or career advice. This 

finding suggests some potential for growth in terms of building up an AmeriCorps alumni network and 

communicating the value of this network to alumni. Furthermore, nine percent of respondents answered 

that their AmeriCorps experience did not help them develop a career path, often citing a lack of 

knowledge and underappreciation of the AmeriCorps experience among future employers. This finding 
nationalservice.gov 71

presents an opportunity to engage employers in a career network for alumni and to emphasize the career 

skills developed during service to interest employers in the AmeriCorps alumni talent pool.

Almost two-fifths of employed alumni are working in the nonprofit or social service sector, while just 

over one-third are in the public sector and around one-quarter are in the private sector. In contrast, many 

more U.S. workers are employed in the private sector (76 percent) than in the public sector (15 percent) or 

the nonprofit sector (8 percent).37 Fully half of currently employed VISTA alumni are working in the 

nonprofit sector, compared to 37 percent of ASN alumni and one-quarter of NCCC alumni. Conversely, 

45 percent of employed NCCC alumni are working in the private sector, compared to 27 percent of ASN 

alumni and 24 percent of VISTA alumni.

The education award is helping many AmeriCorps alumni further their education and pay back student 

loans. More than two-fifths (42 percent) of alumni used the education award to pursue college or 

graduate school, and one-third of alumni used the award to repay student loans. Survey respondents also 

indicated that the education award allowed them to pursue a career path, including 28 percent who used 

the award to supplement their income and allow them to continue working in lower-paying jobs at 

nonprofit organizations.

The survey corroborates a finding of an administrative data match completed by the Abt team on behalf 

of CNCS earlier this year, namely that AmeriCorps alumni are considerably better educated than the 

population at large. According to the survey responses, nearly two-fifths of alumni currently have a 

graduate degree, and another two-fifths have a four-year degree as their highest educational attainment. 

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 33 percent of adults aged 25 or older had a bachelor’s degree or 

higher in 2015.38 AmeriCorps alumni, per the survey, more than double that rate with roughly 79 percent 

having a bachelor’s degree or higher. This current educational attainment did vary by program, with 

roughly two-fifths of ASN and VISTA alumni reporting having a graduate degree, whereas just one-fifth 

of NCCC alumni had attained a graduate degree at the time of the survey. 

Research Question #2: Variations in Impacts Based on Service Experience and Life Stage

The 2016 survey found significant positive associations between alumni’s satisfaction level with their 

AmeriCorps service and the studied outcomes, controlling for outcomes before AmeriCorps (if 

applicable), AmeriCorps program, and demographic variables (race/ethnicity, gender, and parental 

education). The survey also showed small negative associations between the age of respondents – used as 

a proxy for life stage – and the various outcomes, with older alumni having scoring slightly lower on 

outcomes than younger alumni.

 

37 U.S. private and public sector employment percentages are estimated using seasonally adjusted preliminary July 

2016 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS): 122 million Americans employed in the private sector 

and 22 million Americans employed in the public sector 

(http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t17.htm#ces_table1.f.p). The proportion of U.S. private sector 

employment in nonprofit organizations is estimated at 10 percent from a 2014 BLS study 

(http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20141021.htm). This figure may slightly underestimate nonprofit 

employment since only 501(c)3 organizations were counted. 

38 https://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/2015/tables.html
nationalservice.gov 72

The vast majority of respondents reported high satisfaction levels with AmeriCorps; 87 percent of alumni 

were satisfied or very satisfied with their overall service experience. More than 90 percent of alumni 

strongly agreed or agreed with the statements “I felt I made a difference in the life of at least one person,” 

“I felt I made a contribution to the community,” and “I gained an understanding of the community(s) 

where I served.” Alumni who were in an individual placement had a slightly less positive service 

experience than alumni performing team-based service or in some other arrangement – an average score 

of 3.9 versus 4.1, a finding that held up when controlling for AmeriCorps program. 

While 82 percent of alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a defining personal experience, 

a slightly lower 73 percent of alumni agree or strongly agree that AmeriCorps was a defining professional 

experience. This suggests some room for improvement in terms of communicating the value of the 

AmeriCorps experience as a means for developing service members’ career skills, pathways and 

prospects for employment. 

While a high percentage of alumni were satisfied or very satisfied with their AmeriCorps service, there 

was some variation in the satisfaction levels which allowed for an analysis of the effect of service 

experience upon the various outcomes of interest, such as alumni’s sense of community, self-efficacy, 

career skills, as well as on their educational and employment outcomes. The exhibit below summarizes 

the association of a one point difference on the service experience scale with these various outcomes. For 

example, one of the largest identified associations was with career-oriented skills, where a difference of 

one point on the service experience scale is associated with a difference of 0.7 points on the impact of 

AmeriCorps on career-oriented skills scale. Also, alumni who rated their service one point higher than 

other alumni on the service experience scale were four percentage points more likely to be employed and 

seven percentage points more likely to have a graduate degree than similar alumni. 

Exhibit X-1. Impact of Service and Variation by Service Experience and Life Stage 

Outcome of Interest

Change preservice to 

post-service*

Change per one 

point difference in 

service 

experience**

Change per tenyear difference in 

age**

Civic engagement (5-point scale) 0.6 0.4 no impact

Civic self-efficacy (4-point scale) n/a 0.3 no impact

Sense of community (5-point scale) 0.6 0.4 no impact

Cultural competency (5-point scale) 0.3 0.3 no impact

Self-efficacy (5-point scale) 0.5 0.3 -0.05

Career-oriented skills (4-point scale) n/a 0.7 -0.05

Employed (percent) 43 4 -0.7

Graduate degree (percent) 33 7 no impact

*Pre-post comparisons, no controls (see Section II for methodological details). 

**Regression models, all controls (see Section II for methodological details). 

The 2016 survey found either no impact or very small negative impacts of service on the various 

outcomes of interest as respondent’s age increased. This variation by life stage could be explained by the 
nationalservice.gov 73

fact that older alumni have had more opportunities for other significant experiences in their lives to affect 

the outcomes of interest, which minimized the impact of AmeriCorps on those same outcomes. 

Successes and Challenges of Data Collection 

Exhibit X-2. Previous Data Collection Efforts by the Abt Team Compared to AmeriCorps Alumni 

Outcomes Survey Effort 

Strategy

Health 

Profession 

Opportunity 

Grants (HPOG)

Career Pathways 

Intermediate 

Outcomes

(CPIO)

AmeriCorps 

Alumni 

Outcomes 

Survey

Elapsed time between program and survey 15 months 36 months 24, 60, or 120 

months

Collect full contact info and 3 alternate contacts Yes Yes No

Contact information updates 3 ($5 postpaid) 4 ($2 prepaid) 0

Accurint lookup Multiple Multiple Single

Advance mailing Yes (no incentive) Yes ($5 prepaid) Yes (no incentive)

Survey completion incentive $30 $40 $2 charitable (50%)

Telephone calls

Up to 10 per phone 

number, with multiple 

numbers being called 

per person

Up to 10 per phone 

number, with multiple 

numbers being called 

per person

Up to five per person

Completion rate after telephone calls 34% 28% 21%

In-person follow-up after telephone calls Yes Yes No

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes survey achieved an overall response rate that is in line with 

recent survey efforts for the population and with similar web surveys with a significant amount of phone 

follow-up. The AmeriCorps Alumni Pilot Survey in 2015, which was fielded similarly to three different 

cohorts of AmeriCorps alumni over a similar data collection period, achieved a 20 percent overall 

response rate. The 2016 survey improved just slightly on last years’ experience – with a 21 percent 

response rate – despite a significantly increased survey length. Exhibit X-2 below presents two recent 

survey efforts conducted by the Abt team and shows how their strategies and results compare with this 

year’s AmeriCorps Alumni outcome survey. 

While the AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes survey achieved a lower response rate than the other two 

surveys above, there were considerably more resources invested in the other surveys in collecting full 

contact information for the survey sample, providing cash incentives for survey completion, and in phone 

and in-person follow-up. 

One of the challenges with the 2016 survey effort and with survey data collection more generally is the 

time required to design the survey materials, request and receive both IRB and OMB approval, field the 

survey and analyze and report the results. The 2016 project timeline of 12 months allowed for little 

flexibility once the OMB approval process took longer than expected. This necessitated a shortened data 

collection period – from a planned three months down to six weeks – which did not allow for the ideal 

sequence of email followed by phone outreach once the series of email reminders had been completed. If 
nationalservice.gov 74

possible, CNCS might budget 15 months for survey efforts in the future to allow more time for each 

phase of the project. 

Another significant challenge with the 2016 survey effort was the survey length; the survey completion 

time was estimated at 22 minutes but ended up taking closer to 25 minutes by web and more than 30 

minutes by phone. In the Abt team’s experience, potential respondents are reluctant to begin surveys that 

take longer than 20 minutes to complete. Future survey efforts might aim to keep the estimated burden to 

a maximum of 20 minutes per survey to increase response rates. 

Finally, a known challenge going into the 2016 survey effort was the quality of the alumni contact 

information, especially for the older cohorts. While an Accurint check improved some of the address and 

phone information, many alumni were likely attempted via old email accounts that would not produce 

“bounceback” messages but were likely no longer the primary email addresses for alumni sample 

members. Without an ongoing effort to maintain contact information for alumni, it will be difficult to 

reach older cohorts of alumni based on their contact information collected during their service. 

The Abt team proposed – and OMB approved – the use of a small charitable donation incentive as an 

experiment to try to boost response rates. Unfortunately the small incentive proved to have a negligible 

effect. While there is some evidence that more significant and prepaid incentives would help boost 

response rates, OMB has been reluctant to approve such incentives for CNCS data collection efforts in the 

past. 

Recommendations for Improvements to the Data Collection Process

As mentioned in the previous section, two recommendations for improvements to survey data collection 

are 1) allow 15 months or more for a new survey data collection effort; and 2) limit the estimated survey 

completion time to a maximum of 20 minutes. As also mentioned in the previous section, a major hurdle 

to improving response rates to CNCS surveys is the lack of current contact information for many 

AmeriCorps alumni. In the years after their service, many alumni move and change their phone numbers 

and email addresses. Even if phone numbers or email addresses are still active, it is not guaranteed that 

alumni are still using them. To bolster future data collection efforts, CNCS could begin implementing 

strategies to maintain up-to-date contact information for new cohorts of AmeriCorps alumni. 

The first step of so-called panel maintenance efforts would be a request for AmeriCorps members to 

provide multiple alternate contacts upon enrollment and/or upon program exit. These contacts should be 

family members or close friends who would be expected to be familiar with the member’s whereabouts in 

the future. AmeriCorps members could also be required to update their contact information as they are 

completing the program. In addition to email addresses, mailing addresses, and phone numbers, 

members could be asked to connect via social media and consent to receive text messages from CNCS. 

Each exiting member could be sent a copy of the electronic CNCS alumni newsletter with an 

encouragement to subscribe and provide their email address. 

The next common step in panel maintenance efforts is to email or mail regular contact information 

update requests to all alumni. These requests can be paired with an incentive to encourage response. 

Prepaid incentives work by activating the norm of reciprocity; recipients are more inclined to respond 
nationalservice.gov 75

because they have already received something in exchange for their expected cooperation, and these 

requests achieve higher response than do those with promised incentives across a variety of modes 

(Cantor, O’Hare, and O’Connor, 2006; Church, 1993; Edwards et al., 2002; Goldstein and Jennings, 2002; 

Singer at al., 1999; Warriner et al., 1996; Yammarino, Skinner, and Childers, 1991). In general, research 

suggests that incentives sent along with a survey invitation are more cost-effective than incentives 

promised upon survey completion, which are in turn more effective than lottery incentives (Shettle and 

Mooney, 1999). 

Because OMB is unlikely to approve a monetary incentive for contact information updates or for actual 

survey efforts, CNCS could instead include a small and creative nonmonetary incentive with a mailed 

letter. Low-cost, lightweight AmeriCorps-branded items such as patches, magnets, window stickers, or 

sheets of personalized return address labels could be useful pre-incentives. Higher-value or bulkier 

AmeriCorps-branded items, such as t-shirts, backpacks, or water bottles, could be offered either to all 

respondents or by lottery. If alumni do not reply to contact update requests, CNCS can follow up with the 

alternate contacts provided at enrollment or at exit. 

Recommendations for Next Steps Based on Findings 

The 2016 AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes Survey effort provided a wealth of information on the perceived 

impacts of national service on range of outcomes important to alumni’s current communities. CNCS has 

multiple descriptive studies that suggest positive impacts of national service on AmeriCorps members 

and their civic engagement and contributions to society as a whole. Some of the strongest impacts were 

seen among former NCCC members, with significant differences in pre-service scores on cultural 

competency and sense of community compared to ASN and VISTA disappearing in the higher postservice scores on those same scales. CNCS might explore the characteristics of NCCC program design to 

identify the specific factors contributing to the positive experience and positive changes NCCC members 

are reporting post-service. 

While the 2016 survey effort achieved enough responses to produce meaningful estimates of desired 

outcomes for the AmeriCorps alumni population, the strength of the evidence is limited by the selfreported and descriptive nature of the data collection effort. CNCS might explore more rigorous studies, 

involving pre- and post-service surveys or including a comparison group, for example those who applied 

to AmeriCorps but did not end up serving as members. 

CNCS may also want to review and compare the educational and employment outcome data gathered by 

the 2016 survey and by the National Student Clearinghouse and planned U.S. Census Longitudinal 

Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) administrative data matches. Based on the Abt team’s 

experience with the 2016 survey and the NSC match completed earlier this year, at least a portion of the 

outcome data of interest can be obtained via an administrative data match for a small fraction of the cost 

of a survey. The survey, of course, did gather far more information on other outcomes and is flexible 

enough – within burden constraints – to allow for more in-depth data collection on education outcomes 

that might simply not exist in administrative datasets. However, if CNCS is interested in basic 

information on educational enrollment, degree attainment and fields of study, administrative data 

matches are relatively affordable to pursue year after year. 
nationalservice.gov 76

Given the limitations of each kind of data collection effort, the Abt team recommends that CNCS continue 

to build the evidence base using a range of methods to document the impacts of national service on 

AmeriCorps members, the communities in which they serve, and the communities in which they later 

reside. These impacts are proving to be significant and important for the health of civic society and our 

country as a whole. 
nationalservice.gov 77

REFERENCES 

Academic Innovations (2001). Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS): Final 

Report Available. Retrieved from http://www.academicinnovations.com/report.html 

Achieve (2012). Understanding the Skills in the Common Core State Standards. Retrieved from 

http://www.achieve.org/files/Understanding-Skills-CCSS.pdf 

American Association for Public Opinion Research (9th ed.). (2016). Standard Definitions: Final 

Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for Surveys. Oakbrook Terrace, IL. 

Bertoni, N., Burkey, A., Caldaro, M., Keeter, S., DiSogra, C., & McGeeney, K. (2015). Advance Postcard 

Mailing Improves Web Panel Survey Participation. Paper presented at the annual conference of the 

American Association for Public Opinion Research, Hollywood, FL. 

Boyle, T., Heyworth, J., Landrigan, J., Mina, R., & Fritschi, L. (2012). The Effect of Lottery Scratch Tickets 

and Donation Offers on Response Fraction: A Study and Meta-Analysis. Field Methods, 24, 112-132. 

Brennan, M., Seymour, P., & Gendall, P. (1993). The Effect of a Monetary Incentive on Mail Survey 

Response Rates: New Data. Marketing Bulletin, 4, 43-52.

Cantor, D., O’Hare, B. C., & O’Connor, K. S. (2nd ed.) (2006). The Use of Incentives to Reduce Nonresponse 

in Random Digit Dial Telephone Surveys. In J.M. Lepkowski, C. Tucker, J.M. Brick, E.D. de Leeuw, L. 

Japec, P.J. Lavrakas, M.W. Link, and R.L. Sangster (Eds.) Advances in Telephone Survey Methodology. 

471-498.

Career Technical Education (CTE) (2012). The Common Career Technical Core (CCTC). National 

Association of State Directors of Career Technical Education Consortium/National Career Technical 

Education Foundation, Retrieved from http://www.careertech.org/CCTC. 

Church, A. H. (1993). Estimating the Effect of Incentives on Mail Survey Response Rates: A MetaAnalysis. Public Opinion Quarterly. 5, 62-79. 

Common Core State Standards Initiative (2016). Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/read-thestandards/ 

Conley, D. T. Council of Chief State School Officers (2014). The Common Core State Standards: Insight 

into Their Development and Purpose. Retrieved from 

http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/2014/CCSS_Insight_Into_Development_2014.pdf 

Corporation for National and Community Service (2015a). Request for Quote (RFQ): Expert Consultants –

New Methods for Assessing AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes. Washington, DC. 

Corporation for National and Community Service (2015b). AmeriCorps Alumni Outcomes: Technical 

Memo. Corporation for National and Community Service. Washington, DC. 

Corporation for National and Community Service, Office of Research and Policy Development (2008a). 

Improving Lives and Communities: Perspectives on 40 Years of VISTA Service. Washington, DC. 

Corporation for National and Community Service, Office of Research and Policy Development (2008b). 

Still Serving: Measuring the Eight-Year Impact of AmeriCorps on Alumni, Washington, DC. 

Crawford, S. D., McCabe, S. E., Saltz, B., Boyd, C. J., Freisthler, B., & Paschall, M. J. (2004). Gaining 

Respondent Cooperation in College Web-Based Alcohol Surveys: Findings from Experiments at Two 
nationalservice.gov 78

Universities. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public 

Opinion Research, Phoenix, AZ.

De Leeuw, E., Callegaro, M., Hox, J., Korendijk, E., & Lensvelt-Mulders, G. (2007). The Influence of 

Advance Letters on Response in Telephone Surveys: A Meta-Analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71, 

413-443.

Dillman, D., Smyth, J., & Christian, L. M. (3rd ed.) (2009). Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design 

Method. 

Dykema, J., Stevenson, J., Klein, L., Kim, Y., & Day, B. (2012). Effects of E-Mailed Versus Mailed 

Invitations and Incentives on Response Rates, Data Quality, and Costs in a Web Survey of University 

Faculty. Social Science Computer Review, 31, 359-370.

Edwards, P., Roberts, I., Clarke, M., DiGuiseppi, C., Pratap, S.,Wentz, R., & Kwan, I. (2002). Increasing 

Response Rates to Postal Questionnaires: Systematic Review. British Medical Journal, 324, 1183-1185.

Ennis, M.R. (2008). Competency Models: A Review of the Literature and The Role of the Employment and 

Training Administration (ETA). Retrieved from 

http://www.careeronestop.org/CompetencyModel/Info_Documents/OPDRLiteratureReview.pdf 

Furse, D. H. & Stewart, D.W. (1982). Monetary Incentives versus Promised Contribution to Charity: New 

Evidence on Mail Survey Response. Journal of Marketing Research, 19, 375-380.

Goldstein, K. M. & Jennings, M. K. (2002). The Effect of Advance Letters on Cooperation in a List Sample 

Telephone Survey. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66, 608-617. 

Harmon, M. A., Westin, E.C., & Levin, K. Y. (2005). Does Type of Pre-Notification Affect Web Survey 

Response Rates? Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Association for Public 

Opinion Research, Miami, FL.

Hubbard, R. & Little, E.L. (1988). Promised Contributions to Charity and Mail Survey Responses: 

Replication with Extension. Public Opinion Quarterly, 52, 223-230. 

Kaplowitz, M. D., Hadlock, T. D, & Levine, R. (2004). A Comparison of Web and Mail Survey Response 

Rates. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68, 94-101. 

Kohut, A., Keeter, S., Doherty, C., Dimock, M., & Christian, L. (2012). Assessing the Representativeness of 

Public Opinion Surveys. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center. 

Lin, I. & Schaeffer, N. C. (1995). Using Survey Participants to Estimate the Effect of Nonparticipation. 

Public Opinion Quarterly, 59, 236-258. 

Link, M.W. & Mokdad, A. (2005). Advance Letters as a Means of Improving Respondent Cooperation in 

Random Digit Dial Studies: A Multistate Experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 69, 572-587. 

National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) (2013). Job Outlook: The Candidate 

Skills/Qualities Employers Want. Retrieved from http://naceweb.org/s10022013/job-outlook-skillsquality.aspx

Office of Management and Budget (2006). Standards and Guidelines for Statistical Surveys. Washington, 

D.C. 
nationalservice.gov 79

Olson, L., Schneiderman, M., & Armstrong, R. V. (1993). Increasing Physician Response Rates without 

Biasing Survey Results. Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section, American Statistical 

Association, Alexandria, VA. 1036-41. 

Pedersen, M. J. & Nielsen, C. V. (2014). Improving Survey Response Rates in Online Panels: Effects of 

Low-Cost Incentives and Cost-Free Text Appeal Interventions. Social Science Computer Review. Online 

early release, December 17. Retrieved from 

http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/12/17/0894439314563916.abstract

Robertson, D. H., & Bellenger, D. N. (1978). A New Method of Increasing Mail Survey Responses: 

Contributions to Charity. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 632-633.

Schaeffer, D. R., & Dillman, D. A. (1998). Development of a Standard E-Mail Methodology: Results of an 

Experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62, 378-397. 

Shettle, C., & Mooney, G. (1999). Monetary Incentives in U.S. Government Surveys. Journal of Official 

Statistics, 15, 231-250. 

Singer, E., Van Hoewyk, J., Gebler, N., Raghunathan, T., & McGonagle, K. (1999). The Effect of Incentives 

on Response Rates in Interviewer-Mediated Surveys. Journal of Official Statistics, 15, 217-230. 

Singer, E. (2002). The Use of Incentives to Reduce Nonresponse in Household Surveys. In R. M. Groves, 

D. A. Dillman, J. L., Eltinge, & R. J. A. Little (Eds.) Survey Nonresponse (pp. 163-178). New York: John 

Wiley and Sons. 

Skinner, S. J., Ferrell, O. C., & Pride, W. M. (1984). Personal and Impersonal Incentives in Mail Surveys: 

Immediate versus Delayed Inducements. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 12, 106-114. 

U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA). U.S. Department of 

Education, National Center For Education Statistics by Act, Inc. (2000). The Secretary’s Commission 

on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS). Workplace Essential Skills: Resources Related to the SCANS 

Competencies and Foundation Skills. Retrieved from 

http://wdr.doleta.gov/opr/fulltext/document.cfm?docn=6147 

U.S. Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration (ETA) (2016). Industry Competency 

Initiative. Competency Model Clearinghouse. Retrieved from 

http://www.careeronestop.org/CompetencyModel/pyramid_definition.aspx 

U.S. Department of Labor (1991). The Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS). 

What Work Requires of Schools: A SCANS Report for America 2000. Retrieved from 

http://wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf 

Warriner, K., Goyder, J., Gjertsen, H., Hohner, P., & McSpurren, K. (1996). Charities, No; Lotteries, No; 

Cash, Yes: Main Effects and Interactions in a Canadian Incentives Experiment. Public Opinion 

Quarterly, 60, 542-562. 

Workforce Data Quality Campaign (2016). Industry Skill Gaps. Retrieved from 

http://www.workforcedqc.org/state-solutions/industry-skills-gaps

Yammarino, F. J., Skinner, S. J., & Childers, T. L. (1991). Understanding Mail Survey Behavior: A MetaAnalysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 613-639.