United States Government Accountability Office

GAO Testimony 

Before the Subcommittee on Oversight, 

Committee on Ways and Means, House of 

Representatives 

HURRICANES KATRINA 

AND RITA 

Provision of Charitable 

Assistance 

Statement of Cynthia Fagnoni, Managing Director, 

Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues 

For Release on Delivery

Expected at 3:00 p.m. EST 

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

 

GAO-06-297T 
What GAO Found

United States Government Accountability Office

Why GAO Did This Study

Highlights

Accountability Integrity Reliability

December 2005

HURRICANES KATRINA AND RITA

Provision of Charitable Assistance 

Highlights of GAO-06-297T, a report to 

House Committee on Ways and Means 

Subcommittee on Oversight 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-06-297T.

To view the full product, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Cynthia 

Fagnoni at (202) 512-7215 or 

fagnonic@gao.gov. 

The devastation and dislocation of

individuals experienced throughout 

the Gulf Coast in Louisiana,

Mississippi, Alabama, and Texas in 

the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and

Rita has raised concern about both 

the charitable sector’s and the 

government’s abilities to effectively 

respond to such disasters. To

strengthen future disaster response 

and recovery operations, the 

government needs to understand 

what went right and what went

wrong, and to apply these lessons. 

The National Response Plan 

outlines the roles of federal 

agencies and charities in response 

to national disasters. Recognizing 

the historically large role of 

charities in responding to disasters, 

the plan included charities as 

signatories and gave them

considerable responsibilities. 

In addition to carrying out the 

responsibilities outlined in the

National Response Plan, charities 

served as partners to the federal 

government in providing both

immediate and long-term 

assistance following Hurricanes 

Katrina and Rita. 

GAO was asked to provide an 

overview of lessons learned from 

charities’ response to previous 

disasters as well as preliminary 

observations about the role of 

charities following the Gulf Coast

hurricanes. As part of our ongoing 

work, GAO will continue to analyze

federal and charitable efforts 

following the hurricanes. 

Following September 11, 2001, GAO reported lessons learned that could 

help charities enhance their response to future disasters. These included 

easing access to aid for eligible individuals, enhancing coordination 

among charities and between charities and the Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA), increasing attention to public education,

and planning for future events. GAO also recommended that FEMA 

convene a working group of charities to coordinate lessons learned 

following September 11. Following the GAO report, seven disaster 

response charities partnering with FEMA formed the Coordinated 

Assistance Network to improve collaboration and facilitate data sharing. 

Following the Gulf Coast hurricanes, charities raised more than $2.5 

billion dollars, according to Indiana University’s Center of Philanthropy, 

with more than half of these funds going to the American Red Cross. 

GAO’s preliminary work shows that these charities have taken steps to 

improve coordination of relief efforts by sharing information through 

daily conference calls and electronic databases. Despite these efforts, 

charities faced some challenges in coordinating service delivery. For 

example, some charities reported that their volunteers needed additional

training to use the databases. 

GAO teams that visited the Gulf Coast region in October 2005 observed 

that in areas where the American Red Cross did not provide services, the 

Salvation Army and smaller organizations–often local churches–were 

able to meet many of the charitable needs of hard-to-reach communities. 

The American Red Cross’s efforts to protect service providers may have 

prohibited it from operating in some of the harder-to-reach areas. 

Additionally, some concerns were raised about smaller charities’ abilities

to provide adequate disaster relief services. 

Charitable distribution center in Harrison County, Mississippi 
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: 

I am pleased to be here today to discuss the role of charitable services in 

response to recent Gulf Coast hurricanes. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita 

caused massive destruction and large-scale disruption of lives in Alabama, 

Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. In response to this destruction, we have 

witnessed heroic efforts by public, private, and nonprofit organizations 

and volunteers. My testimony today will present some of our observations 

regarding the performance of charities in response to these hurricanes. 

These natural disasters have placed strengthening the nation’s emergency

response efforts at the top of the national agenda. Comptroller General 

Walker has stated that GAO will provide support to Congress through 

analysis and evaluation of coordination efforts among federal agencies, 

and between federal agencies and the state, local, private, and nonprofit 

sectors. GAO has conducted several previous reviews of federal actions 

following national disasters, including Hurricane Andrew in 1992 and the 

terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, that will be helpful in evaluating 

the nation’s response to recent hurricanes. We plan to conduct all Katrinarelated work under the Comptroller General’s authority since it is an issue 

of interest to the entire Congress and numerous committees in both 

houses. 

Charities have addressed many short- and long-term needs of the victims 

of recent hurricanes in the Gulf Coast region. Their efforts represent the 

largest disaster response effort in United States history by charitable 

organizations. As charities collect donations to address these needs, 

questions have been raised about how the money will be used and how 

charitable relief efforts will be coordinated. This testimony will discuss 

progress to date in incorporating lessons learned from our review of 

charitable coordination following September 11, and preliminary 

observations about the coordination of charities after the recent 

hurricanes. This testimony is based upon published GAO reports; ongoing 

work; relevant interviews with federal, state, and local government 

officials in states affected by the hurricanes; interviews with charitable 

officials and national experts; and data on total hurricane-related 

donations to charities from Indiana University’s Center on Philanthropy. 

In summary, we learned from our work following the September 11 

attacks that charities could take steps to make it easier for survivors of 

disasters to get the help they need, improve coordination among charities 

and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), better educate 

the public about charities’ roles in disaster recovery, and plan for 

responding to future disasters. Following our report, seven charities 

formed a network to share information electronically about aid recipients 

Page 1 GAO-06-297T 
and services provided, improve coordination, and ease access to aid. The

group worked in partnership with FEMA to develop a database to share 

information between agencies. In a little more than 3 months, charities 

have raised more than $2.5 billion to assist in hurricane relief and recovery 

efforts. In addition, charities have taken other steps to improve 

coordination following the Gulf Coast hurricanes. Charities shared 

information through meetings at the American Red Cross headquarters, 

daily conference calls, and electronic databases that allowed multiple 

organizations to access information about services provided to hurricane 

victims. Despite these efforts, some charities raised concerns about the 

usefulness of the conference calls and electronic databases for sharing 

information. For example, some charities said that daily conference calls 

after Katrina included too many organizations and did not provide the 

information they needed. There were also problems with providing 

charitable services to victims in some hard-to-reach areas. GAO teams in 

the field reported that the American Red Cross did not provide relief in 

certain areas because of safety policies. In areas where the American Red 

Cross did not operate, GAO teams observed that other charities, such as 

the Salvation Army and smaller charities—often local churches—provided 

relief services. Although smaller organizations provided needed charitable 

services in the Gulf Coast region, some concerns have been raised about

their ability to provide adequate services to victims. We will be reviewing 

this issue in more detail over the next several months. GAO is currently 

engaged in ongoing work on the coordination of charitable efforts in 

response to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and will further examine how 

effectively charities coordinated their responses to recent hurricanes. 

Charities are organizations established to serve broad public purposes, 

such as the needs of the poor or distressed and other social welfare issues. 

The Internal Revenue Service reported that for 2002, 501(c)(3) 

organizations, which include charities, had total assets of over $1.7 trillion. 

In 2004, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recognized 820,000 charities, 

accounting for about 90 percent of 501(c)(3) organizations.1

 Charities can 

include organizations with missions such as helping the poor, advancing 

religion, educating the public, or providing disaster relief services. 

Although the federal government indirectly subsidizes charities through 

their tax-exempt status and by allowing individuals to deduct charitable 

contributions from their income taxes, the federal government has a fairly

Background 

 1

 This estimate based on data from the IRS, with modifications by the National Center for 

Charitable Statistics (NCCS) at the Urban Institute. NCSS excluded foreign and 

governmental organizations from the data. 

Page 2 GAO-06-297T 
limited role in monitoring charities. States provide the primary oversight 

of charities through their attorneys general and charity offices. 

Charities have historically played a large role in the nation’s response to 

disasters. For example, after the September 11 attacks, 35 of the nation’s 

larger charities—including the American Red Cross and the Salvation 

Army—collected almost $2.7 billion to provide food, shelter, mental health

services, and other types of aid. 

Charities’ roles in responding to disasters can vary. Some charities, 

including the American Red Cross and the Salvation Army, are equipped to 

arrive at a disaster scene and provide immediate mass care, including 

food, shelter, and clothing, and in some circumstances, emergency 

financial assistance to affected persons. Other charities focus on providing 

longer-term assistance, such as job training, scholarships, or mental health

counseling. In addition, new charities may form after disasters to address 

specific needs, such as the charities established after the September 11 

attacks to serve survivors of restaurant workers and firefighters. 

Charities’ Response to 

National Disasters 

National Response Plan The U.S. government’s National Response Plan provides a single, 

comprehensive framework for the federal response to domestic incidents, 

such as natural disasters and terrorist attacks. The plan provides the 

structure and mechanisms for the coordination of federal support to states 

and localities. Major cabinet and other federal agencies are signatories to 

the plan, along with the American Red Cross and the National Voluntary 

Organizations Active in Disaster (National VOAD), a national charity 

umbrella organization. The American Red Cross and National VOAD are 

the only nongovernmental organizations that signed the Plan. In December 

2004, the Department of Homeland Security released the plan, which was 

developed at the request of President Bush. The plan incorporates and 

replaces several previous plans for disaster management, including the 

Federal Response Plan, which was originally signed in 1992. One of the 

ways the plan changed the Federal Response Plan was by not naming 

charities active in disaster relief other than the American Red Cross, but 

instead incorporating them under the umbrella organization, National 

VOAD. 

The plan designates 15 Emergency Support Functions, each identifying a 

specific disaster response need as well as organizations that have key 

roles in helping meet those needs. The sixth Emergency Support Function, 

the function most relevant to charities involved in disaster relief, creates a 

Page 3 GAO-06-297T 
working group of key federal agencies and charitable organizations to 

address 

• mass care, including sheltering, feeding, and emergency first aid; 

• housing, both short- and long-term; and 

• human services, such as counseling, processing of benefits, and 

identifying support for persons with special needs. 

As a direct service provider, the American Red Cross feeds and shelters 

victims of disasters. In addition to fulfilling this role, the American Red 

Cross is responsible for coordinating federal efforts to address mass care, 

housing, and human services under Emergency Support Function 6 with 

FEMA. The American Red Cross is the only charity to serve as a primary 

agency under any Emergency Support Function. The plan gives the 

American Red Cross responsibility for coordinating federal mass care 

assistance in support of state and local efforts. The American Red Cross 

also has responsibilities under other Emergency Support Functions, such 

as providing counseling services and working with the federal government

to distribute ice and water. FEMA’s responsibilities include convening 

regular meetings with key agencies and coordinating the transition of 

service delivery from mass care operations to long-term recovery 

activities, among other responsibilities. 

National VOAD, a membership organization composed of approximately 

40 charities that provide services following disasters, is designated as a

support agency under Emergency Support Function 6, but it does not 

provide direct services to victims.2

 Rather, National VOAD is responsible 

for sharing information with its member organizations regarding the 

severity of the disaster, needs identified, and actions taken to address 

these needs.

 2

 For a list of National VOAD members, see appendix I. 

Page 4 GAO-06-297T 
Following September 11, GAO reported several lessons learned that could 

help charities enhance their response to future disasters.3

 These included 

easing access to aid for eligible individuals, enhancing coordination among

charities and between charities and FEMA, increasing attention to public 

education, and planning for future events. Further, GAO recommended 

that FEMA convene a working group to encourage charities involved in

disaster response to integrate these lessons learned from the September 11 

attacks. Following our report, seven of the largest disaster response 

charities, in partnership with FEMA, formed the Coordinated Assistance 

Network (CAN) to ease collaboration and facilitate data sharing. While the 

network databases are still largely in a pilot phase, both government and 

charity representatives have praised the potential of the network’s 

databases to improve collaboration. 

Following September 

11, GAO Reported 

That More Effective 

Collaboration Could 

Enhance Charities’ 

Contributions in 

Disasters 

Lessons Learned from 

September 11 Could 

Improve Charities’

Response to Future 

Disasters 

• Easing access to aid for those eligible: We reported that charities 

could help survivors find out what assistance is available and ease their 

access to that aid through a central, easy-to-access clearinghouse of 

public and private assistance. We also suggested offering eligible 

survivors a case manager, as was done in New York City and in

Washington, D.C., following September 11 to help to identify gaps in 

service and provide assistance over the long term. 

• Enhancing coordination among charities and with FEMA: We also

found that private and public agencies could improve service delivery 

by coordinating, collaborating, sharing information with each other, 

and understanding each other’s roles and responsibilities. Collaborative 

working relationships are critical to the success of other strategies to 

ease access to aid or identify service gaps, such as creating a

streamlined application process or a database of families of those 

killed and injured. 

• Increasing attention to public education: After September 11, we 

reported that charities could better educate the public about the 

disaster recovery services they provide and ensure accountability by 

more fully informing the public about how they are using donations. 

Charities could improve transparency by taking steps when collecting 

funds to more clearly specify the purposes of the funds raised, the 

different categories of people they plan to assist, the services they plan

to provide, and how long the charity plans to provide assistance. 

• Planning for future events: Further, we reported that planning for 

how charities will respond to future disasters could aid the recovery 

 3

 GAO, September 11: More Effective Collaboration Could Enhance Charitable 

Organizations’ Contributions in Disasters, GAO-03-259 (Washington, D.C.: Dec. 19, 2002). 

Page 5 GAO-06-297T 
process for individuals and communities. Although each disaster 

situation is unique, it could be useful for charities to develop an 

assistance plan to inform the public and guide the charities’ fundraising 

efforts. In addition, state and local emergency preparedness efforts 

could explicitly address the role of charities and charitable aid in future 

events. 

Charities Formed National 

Network to Improve 

Coordination 

GAO recommended that FEMA convene a working group to encourage 

charities involved in disaster response to integrate lessons learned from 

the September 11 attacks. After our report, FEMA encouraged charities to

form a working group to share information following disasters, which 

became the Coordinated Assistance Network. The seven charities that 

formed CAN are the Alliance of Information and Referral Services, the 

American Red Cross, National VOAD, the Salvation Army, 9/11 United 

Services Group, Safe Horizon, and the United Way of America. The group 

worked in partnership with FEMA to develop a database to share 

information between agencies. 

The CAN network addressed several of the lessons learned that GAO 

identified. To ease access to aid for those eligible, the network is designed

to share client data, such as previous addresses, employment information, 

and FEMA identification numbers, between charities. CAN is intended to 

ensure that victims need only explain their circumstances once, rather 

than repeatedly to different service providers. To enhance coordination 

among charities and with FEMA, the CAN network is designed to make 

charities more aware of the services provided by one another and identify

any gaps or redundancies in services. Last, to plan for future events, the 

CAN network intends to build partnerships or working relationships 

among disaster response charities before disasters strike. While the CAN 

network databases are still largely in pilot phase, both government and 

charity representatives have praised the database’s potential to improve 

collaboration and noted that it functioned well following the disasters, 

considering that it was not fully developed. 

Page 6 GAO-06-297T 
Following the hurricanes, charities have raised more than $2.5 billion to 

assist in hurricane relief and recovery efforts. Many of the charities 

responding to the disaster have taken steps to coordinate with one another 

and with FEMA and other government agencies. For example, charities 

have shared information through daily conference calls and through 

electronic databases that allowed multiple organizations to access 

information about services provided to hurricane victims. Some charity 

representatives we spoke with praised the potential of these systems for 

sharing information, but also raised concerns that using these systems 

could be difficult at times. Charities also experienced problems in 

providing services to victims in some hard-to-reach areas. GAO teams that 

visited the Gulf Coast region in October 2005 observed that in areas where 

the American Red Cross did not operate, other charities, such as the 

Salvation Army and smaller charities—often local churches—provided 

relief services. Although smaller organizations helped fill the gaps in 

charitable services in the Gulf Coast region, some concerns have been 

raised about their ability to provide adequate services to victims. 

Charities have raised more than $2.5 billion in cash donations in response 

to the Gulf Coast hurricanes, according to the Center on Philanthropy at 

Indiana University.4

 The center notes that this number is a low estimate, 

since it does not include direct giving to individuals, giving to smaller 

charities, or in-kind donations. As of November 18, the American Red 

Cross had raised more than $1.5 billion, more than half of all dollars 

raised. The Salvation Army raised the second-highest amount, $270 

million, about 18 percent of the amount raised by the American Red Cross. 

The Bush-Clinton Katrina Fund and Catholic Charities were the nextlargest fund raisers, each raising about $100 million. 

Preliminary 

Observations of 

Charitable 

Organizations’ 

Operations Following 

the Gulf Coast 

Hurricanes 

Charities Have Raised 

More than $2.5 Billion 

Following the Gulf Coast 

Hurricanes 

Charities Took Steps to 

Improve Coordination but 

Experienced Some 

Challenges 

Charities operating in the Gulf Coast region following the hurricanes 

coordinated services through the convening of major national disaster 

relief organizations at the American Red Cross headquarters, daily 

conference calls organized by National VOAD, and databases established 

by CAN. The usefulness of the daily conference calls, as well as the CAN 

databases, was questioned by some charity representatives.

In the weeks following Hurricane Katrina, the American Red Cross 

organized a national operations center with representatives from FEMA 

 4

 This sum is as of November 18, 2005. 

Page 7 GAO-06-297T 
and several major national charities, including the Southern Baptist 

Convention and the Salvation Army, at its headquarters in Washington, 

D.C. Because of the scale of the hurricane disaster and the large response 

needed, this was the first time the American Red Cross coordinated this 

type of national operations center following a disaster. This working group 

helped the major charities coordinate services on the ground by allowing 

for face-to-face interaction and ongoing communication, according to 

charity representatives and FEMA officials. 

To help fulfill its information-sharing role under Emergency Support 

Function 6, National VOAD organized daily conference calls with FEMA 

and other federal government representatives and its member

organizations operating in the Gulf Coast region. National VOAD also 

invited nonmember charitable organizations that were providing relief to

hurricane victims to participate in these calls, which sometimes included 

more than 40 organizations at once. During these calls, both the federal 

government and charities were able to provide information and answer 

questions about services provided, needs identified, and the organizations’ 

abilities to meet these needs. Representatives from charitable 

organizations told us that these calls were an effective way to coordinate 

the delivery of supplies among charities and help identify those regions 

that were most in need of charitable services. 

Charities were also able to share information through CAN databases. 

Following the hurricane disasters, CAN created a Web-based shelter 

registry that provided information about emergency shelters operating in 

the Gulf Coast region, including their capacity and operating status. CAN 

also activated the database of victim information, which at the time was 

being tested in six pilot communities. More than 40 charities–all of whom 

must sign CAN participation agreements, including the American Red 

Cross, the Salvation Army, and the United Way of America–were able to

access this database and input information about the services they 

provided to individual clients, according to CAN representatives. Charities 

could share information about these clients, who were required to sign 

privacy releases, through the Web-based database, thus reducing service 

duplication and the need for victims to give the same information to 

multiple organizations. 

Although charity representatives we interviewed reinforced the 

importance of the conference calls and the CAN databases, they also 

raised concerns about the usefulness of these systems. For example, some 

representatives were concerned the conference calls had too many 

participants. Because 40 or more charities might be participating in any 

one call, the calls often ran long or dealt with issues that may not have 

Page 8 GAO-06-297T 
been of interest to the whole group, according to some charity officials. 

Additionally, charity representatives told us that call participants 

sometimes provided information that turned out to be inaccurate. 

Charity officials we spoke with were supportive of CAN and its mission, 

but they raised several concerns about the usefulness of its databases 

following the hurricane disasters. One concern that we heard from a few 

charities was that the CAN case management system is still in its 

developmental stages and was therefore not ready to be activated on such

a large scale. Many volunteers had not received sufficient training on the

system, and some of the technological glitches had not been completely 

resolved, according to charity representatives. In addition, representatives 

told us that the shelter database, which was developed soon after the 

hurricanes and had not been previously tested, may not have been ready 

for widespread use. In addition, some officials said that after Katrina there 

was neither electricity nor Internet access in certain locations, and as a 

result, the CAN databases could not always be used. Some officials stated 

that they needed to collect information in writing at the time of the 

disaster and then input the data into the system once they had Internet 

access–a task that was time-consuming and diverted resources from other 

needed areas. CAN officials responded that the CAN databases were 

created primarily for long-term recovery efforts, which would take place 

after electricity and Internet access were restored, rather than for shortterm relief. 

Charity representatives also told us that daily conference calls and 

electronic databases helped with coordination efforts, but these systems 

were not as important to coordination efforts as pre-existing relationships. 

Several of the charities we spoke with stated that in order for charities to 

function efficiently following a disaster, they must have some sort of 

established working relationship with the other charities involved in 

disaster relief efforts. One charity representative told us that it is difficult 

to make introductions in the chaos of a disaster. He stressed that charities 

that operate in disasters should have memorandums of understanding 

signed before a disaster strikes–a practice used by many charities–so that 

they can immediately coordinate efforts in a disaster situation. 

Charities Struggled to 

Balance Access to Services 

with Concerns Regarding 

Safety of Service Providers 

and Victims 

GAO teams that visited the Gulf Coast in October 2005 observed that the 

American Red Cross did not provide relief in certain areas because of 

safety policies; and thus, other charities, such as the Salvation Army and 

smaller charities, often helped to meet the needs of those areas. The 

American Red Cross told us that with the American Society for Civil 

Engineers and FEMA, it had previously developed policies intended to 

Page 9 GAO-06-297T 
protect the safety of service providers and victims following a disaster. 

These policies include not establishing shelters in areas that may become

flooded during a disaster or in structures that strong winds may 

compromise. However, victims remained in areas where the American Red 

Cross would not establish shelters. Further, where the American Red 

Cross was able to establish shelters, the needs of victims sometimes 

exceeded the capacity of the American Red Cross, as this represented the 

largest response effort in American Red Cross history. GAO teams in 

Mississippi observed that the Salvation Army and smaller charities, such 

as local church organizations, filled many of the needs for volunteer 

services that the American Red Cross did not meet. Additionally, GAO 

teams estimated that in the Birmingham, Alabama, area, a significant 

portion of the approximately 7,000 evacuees were being cared for and 

sometimes being housed by local churches and their members. 

Although smaller organizations provided needed charitable services in the 

Gulf Coast region, some concerns have been raised about the 

organizations’ abilities to provide adequate services to victims. Some 

officials told us that the smaller organizations helped meet important 

needs, but many of the organizations had never operated in a disaster 

situation and may not have completely understood the situation. For 

example, officials told us that some of the small charities that placed 

children who were separated from their parents in homes did not retain 

sufficient information about which children were placed where. This made 

it difficult to locate missing children. Other officials told us that some of 

the smaller organizations that tried to establish “tent cities” to house 

evacuees were not prepared to provide the water, sanitation, and 

electricity these types of shelters require. 

In closing, the devastation of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita once again 

challenged federal, state, and local governments and charitable

organizations’ abilities to provide large-scale aid to hundreds of thousands 

of survivors. It also provided a critical opportunity to assess how the 

nation’s charities have incorporated lessons learned from responding to 

the September 11 tragedy. 

Our report on charitable organizations’ contributions after September 11 

identified several lessons learned and made important recommendations 

for improving the delivery of charitable services after disasters. GAO’s 

ongoing work on the coordination of charitable efforts in response to 

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita will examine how these recommendations 

have been implemented and how effectively charities coordinated in 

response to recent hurricanes. Specifically, this upcoming report will 

address questions regarding the amount of money charities have raised to

Page 10 GAO-06-297T 
assist people affected by the hurricanes and how these funds have been 

used, how well charities are meeting their responsibilities under the 

National Response Plan, how well charities are coordinating their relief 

efforts, how people affected by the hurricanes have accessed charitable 

services and relief supplies and the challenges they encountered in dealing 

with charities, and what charities are doing to guard against fraud and 

abuse. This report will be released next year. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to respond 

to any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have

at this time. 

Cindy Fagnoni (202)512-7215, fagnonic@gao.gov.

Individuals making key contributions to this testimony included Andrew 

Sherrill, Tamara Fucile, Mallory Barg Bulman, Scott Spicer, Rachael 

Valliere, Walter Vance, Richard Burkard, Bill Jenkins, and Norm Rabkin. 

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

Page 11 GAO-06-297T 
Appendix I 

Members of National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster 

Adventist Community Services 

America’s Second Harvest 

American Baptist Men 

American Radio Relay League 

American Red Cross 

Ananda Marga Universal Relief Team

Catholic Charities USA 

Center for International Disaster Information 

Christian Disaster Response International 

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee 

Church of the Brethren 

Church World Service 

Convoy of Hope 

Disaster Psychiatry Outreach 

Episcopal Relief and Development 

Friends Disaster Service, Inc. 

The Humane Society of the United States 

International Aid 

International Critical Incident Stress Foundation

International Relief Friendship Foundation 

Lutheran Disaster Response 

Mennonite Disaster Service 

Mercy Medical Airlift 

National Emergency Response Teams 

National Organization for Victim Assistance 

Nazarene Disaster Response 

Northwest Medical Teams International 

The Points of Light Foundation 

Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) 

REACT International, Inc. 

The Salvation Army 

Society of St. Vincent de Paul 

Southern Baptist Convention 

United Church of Christ 

United Jewish Communities 

United Methodist Committee on Relief 

United Way of America 

Volunteers of America 

World Vision 

(130542) Page 1 GAO-06-297T 
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

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

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

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

reproduce this material separately. 
GAO’s Mission The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; 

and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help

Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s 

commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost

is through GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 

newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. To

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, go 

to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to Updates.” 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. 

A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of 

Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 

more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders 

should be sent to: 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud,

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER