U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

78–867 PDF 2002

S. HRG. 107–409

REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CORPORATION FOR

NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

HEARING

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,

LABOR, AND PENSIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

EXAMINING PROPOSED LEGISLATION AUTHORIZING FUNDS FOR THE

INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM OF LIBRARY SERVICES ACT

APRIL 9, 2002

Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

(

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

TOM HARKIN, Iowa

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland

JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico

PAUL D. WELLSTONE, Minnesota

PATTY MURRAY, Washington

JACK REED, Rhode Island

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York

JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire

BILL FRIST, Tennessee

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming

TIM HUTCHINSON, Arkansas

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama

MIKE DeWINE, Ohio

J. MICHAEL MYERS, Staff Director and Chief Counsel

TOWNSEND LANGE MCNITT, Minority Staff Director

(II)

CONTENTS

STATEMENTS

TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 2002

Page

Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts ... 1

Gregg, Hon. Judd, a U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire ................ 2

Mikulski, Hon. Barbara A., a U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland ............ 3

Lenkowsky, Leslie, Chief Executive Officer, Corporation For National and

Community Service .............................................................................................. 6

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9

(III)

(1)

REAUTHORIZATION OF THE CORPORATION

FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 2002

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS,

Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 o’clock a.m., in

room SD–430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Edward M.

Kennedy (chairman of the committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Kennedy, Mikulski, Jeffords, Wellstone, and

Gregg.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR KENNEDY

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning. We will come to order.

Today’s hearing is about one of the greatest strengths of the

American people—our willingness to lend a helping hand to our

neighbors, our communities, our Nation, and our world.

We have welcomed and aided refugees. We have joined the Peace

Corps. We have volunteered at soup kitchens, places of worship,

community centers, and schools.

Now, with September 11, that great spirit of volunteerism is stirring in Americans once again. We saw ordinary Americans risk

their lives to help others. And no citizen could experience that tragic day without a renewed commitment to country, to community, to

family.

That is why today’s hearing is so important. It is about our Government’s programs to provide Americans with ways to express our

common spirit through voluntary service. Our challenge today is to

match the demand for service by our citizens with meaningful opportunities to make a difference in people’s lives.

But in many ways, we are still missing the mark. A recent study

by Robert Putnam at Harvard University found that interest in

service has risen in recent months, but only one in seven Americans is volunteering regularly—the same level of service as a decade ago.

Clearly, we must do more to make Americans aware of service

opportunities. A citizen’s first encounter when wanting to serve

should not be a confusing Federal bureaucracy. We should look at

ways to create easy pathways so that every American can serve.

It is now almost a decade since Congress created the Corporation

for National Service to enhance opportunities for all Americans to

contribute to their communities by actively engaging in local service programs. Every week, I have the privilege of reading with a

2

student in Washington at the Brent School in a program that my

colleague and friend, Senator Jeffords, brought to the District, Everybody Wins. I have seen her impressive progress during the last

5 years, and I know firsthand that those who engage in community

service gain as much as they give.

The Corporation for National Service has greatly expanded opportunities to serve for people of all ages. Since 1996, over 150,000

adults have committed a year of service through AmeriCorps.

These Corps members have tutored and mentored students, rebuilt

communities, and improved the lives of people of all ages.

And AmeriCorps is just part of the success story. Nearly 300,000

talented senior citizens have contributed over 125 million hours of

service, giving back to the communities that they helped to build

over their lifetimes.

One of the most impressive projects of all is the Learn and Serve

program. The Corporation supports programs for more than 1.5

million students to integrate community service into the academic

curriculum. According to the Learning in Deed study conducted by

the Glenn Commission and the Kellogg Foundation earlier this

year, service learning helps students to develop an enduring sense

of civic and social responsibility, improves student engagement in

schools, and can lead to improved achievement.

We know that lifelong habits of service have to begin at an early

age. Young children who see the positive difference that they can

make in their communities will want to continue to make that difference throughout their lives.

Since 1995, the appropriations for Learn and Serve have re- mained at $43 million. We need to expand this vital program so

that every school that wants to begin a program can get the technical assistance that it needs.

I am encouraged that the President has called on Americans of

every generation to serve their communities. I commend him for

making service to our communities and to our country a priority

in his administration.

The programs created by the Corporation for National Service

are key avenues of service available to all Americans through the

State commissions, groups such as City Year or Public Allies that

are funded directly by the Corporation, America’s Promise, and the

Points of Light Foundation. These programs have gained impressive community and corporate support and created new opportunities to serve. Let us build on that support and take service to the

next level.

I recognize my friend and colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Gregg.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GREGG

Senator GREGG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate you holding this hearing, and I want to join you in

supporting the emphasis which the President has placed on service,

public service and community service, in his administration and

bringing forward this concept of the USA Freedom Corps.

The initiative, in my opinion, is exactly right for our times. After

the events of September 11, I think that as a Nation, we appreciate

even more the significance of involvement with our fellow citizens,

3

and the President is putting his imprimatur and his commitment

behind dramatically expanding the efforts of public service, something that I think is absolutely appropriate.

I hope that as we hold these hearings and look at this initiative

that we will look beyond what the President has proposed in fact.

In my opinion, I think there are other opportunities out there

which could give people, especially in our inner-city communities

who may not have too many avenues and options, more avenues

and options through the use of community service tied into the rewards and benefits which will give them a better opportunity to

participate in the American dream.

So I do hope that we will take a look at expanding the initiatives

put forward and creating an even more dynamic effort in the area

of drawing people into community service.

So again I congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing, and I especially congratulate the President and the administration and the witnesses today who have been involved in this for

quite a while for promoting this initiative.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like to turn to my friend and colleague,

the Senator from Maryland, who has been as strong a champion as

we have had in this institution in terms of voluntary service and

she has been enormously involved in the shaping of the original

legislation and has followed it closely, has studied it well, and has

been strongly committed during a time when the resolve of many

others was flagging. We always benefit from her guidance, and in

the area of voluntary service, if we could persuade her to say a

word, we would be very, very grateful.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MIKULSKI

Senator MIKULSKI. I have been persuaded, Senator Kennedy, and

I want to thank you for your generous words and also for your

steadfastness in this issue.

Dr. Lenkowsky, I really want to welcome you to this committee,

and I look forward to working with you both as the authorizer and

then as the appropriator for the Corporation for National and Community Service.

You come with an excellent background, and you come with a

whole series of recommendations to make based on your long history in this issue and your commitment to the issue.

As you know, and as Senator Kennedy said, I was one of the social architects of the original legislation, but I believe we should

not be wedded to the past. I want to thank President Bush for presenting his views to us and his guidance and his principles. We

want to work with him. What I would like to do is work on a bipartisan basis to see how we can take community service to the next

level and how it can be an important tool for the 21st century.

In order to get there, we want to know what the President’s vision is. I would like us to be able to review the original mission

and intent of community service and look at lessons learned so that

we can look ahead to the challenges that we are going to be facing.

My goals in this hearing are threefold—first, to listen to what

the President has recommended; second, to look at the lessons

learned from our national service experience—did we accomplish

our goals and objectives; what are our evaluation plans in place so

4

we can know how well we have done, where we have done well,

what are the potholes, and what are some of the ideas that might

just need to be evaluated; and third, to really create a road map

to guide us in terms of this new legislation.

We have certainly come a long way since 1989 when I introduced

the National and Community Service Act to establish this Corporation and to create a series of demonstration projects that involve

what we know became AmeriCorps.

Senator Kennedy and I worked with President Bush I in 1990 to

pass the National Community Service Act to include an

AmeriCorps like program, providing vouchers for full- and parttime community service so that it could go to reducing student debt

or job training. We took it to the next level in 1993 with the Community Service Trust Act.

When we created this legislation, it was not to be another social

program. It was to be a social invention, hopefully to create a social

movement on community service. We were deeply disturbed in the

mid-eighties that young people were losing the habits of the heart

that made our Nation so great, when neighbor helped neighbor. We

wanted to create a new ethic around community service and instill

these habits of the heart, and at the same time address the troubling situation of the cost of higher education, either by reducing

student debt or empowering people to help themselves.

When we created national service, and we created it around

those national goals. It has been difficult. It has been very difficult.

What we focused on was the quality, the innovation, and whether

we could sustain it. And quite frankly, the other party—and I am

so pleased that the President is engaged—has never embraced this.

It has been ridiculed. It has been diminished, questioning why do

we have to pay people to volunteer, and so on.

But with Dr. Lendowsky’s leadership and experience, the President’s vision, and our longstanding experience, I think we can really work together and take national service to where it needs to go

in the 21st century.

So we look forward to making sure this is not again another social program but that we create opportunities of empowerment and

maybe new ways of social glue in our society.

So I extend my hand to you in friendship and collegiality and

look forward to working with you on this.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Mikulski.

We want to welcome Les Lenkowsky to our hearing today. He

has been an important part of the Corporation since the beginning,

first as a board member and now CEO. We are fortunate to have

someone with your expertise and interest. We enjoyed having the

chance to talk with you yesterday and look forward to your testimony and congratulate you on your willingness to undertake this

very important endeavor.

Before we begin I have statements from Senators Edwards and

Clinton.

[The prepared statements of Senators Edwards and Clinton follow:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR EDWARDS

Thanks to Dr. Lenkowsky for coming here today.

5

I want to praise the Administration for its support of national

service. For a long time, Dr. Lenkowsky was one of a small group

of Republicans who believed in AmeriCorps. It is great to see that

the program now has strong bipartisan support.

I do want to highlight one serious concern about the proposals

offered by the Administration today. While the support for expanding service opportunities for adults is admirable, the Administration has not proposed any new opportunities to the kids in high

school who want to give back to their communities. In fact, if I read

the Administration’s budget correctly (see page 1088), its proposal

actually slightly cuts the ‘‘Learn and Serve’’ programs that serve

kids.

In my view, this is a mistake. If we are going to inspire Americans to serve their communities throughout their lives, we have to

start working with them while they are young.

I would go even further. Service to the community ought to be

more than just another afterschool activity, like basketball or photography. Service should be a part of every child’s schooling, as

much as math or science or anything else.

Based on that simple philosophy, I plan to introduce in the next

week or so the School Service Act of 2002. 1 appreciate Senator

Kennedy’s interest in this proposal and Senator Clinton’s support.

I also want to thank Rep. Harold Ford in the House who plans to

introduce a companion bill, and especially thank all the educators

who have worked with us on this proposal, particularly at home in

North Carolina. I hope we in this chamber will be able to work together, Republicans and Democrats, to make this bill become law.

The proposal is very simple: Say to a limited number of states

and cities-if you will make sure that all of the students in your

schools engage in high-quality service and servicelearning before

graduation, we in Washington will support your efforts.

The service can be based in the classroom. It can be based in an

afterschool program. It can be based in a summer program. And it

can be directed or supervised by AmeriCorps members who are

leaders and coordinators.

All that we ask is that you ensure two things:

First: real service with real benefits to communities. The Corporation’s own studies show that a dollar invested in a good service

effort produces benefits worth over four dollars. We need to keep

that up.

Second: we want service that means something to young people,

service that students reflect on and talk about with each other. We

want kids seeing these experiences not as another chore, but as an

exciting initiation into long lives of active citizenship. And we know

service is oftenjust that. Kids who serve grow up to volunteer more

and to vote more throughout their lives.

Finally, our bill will hold these programs to high standards and

require measurable success.

Let me stress: I don’t think we should require any state or city

to do anything. Nor should this program operate nationwide. My

proposal is that for the select group of states and school districts

that are ready, we ought to make sure every child has the opportunity and the responsibility to engage in service. Here in Congress, it is our responsibility to give those opportunities for service

6

to our young people. When we do, our country will be richly rewarded in the years and decades to come.

Thank you.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR CLINTON

Thank you Mr. Chairman for convening this hearing on this critical topic—national and community service in our nation. September 11 taught us some amazing lessons about the generosity of the

human spirit and the depths to which our fellow citizens are willing to go when we are in need. I was profoundly moved by what

I witnessed in New York and I know that we have a unique opportunity today to build upon that generosity and sense of community

by providing more opportunities for all Americans to give back.

When we first envisioned AmeriCorps back in 1993, few of us

could have imagined what it has become today. More than 50,000

energetic people volunteer each year—a total of 250,000 since my

husband signed the bill into law. These special people who devote

years of their lives to helping others are driven to do because early

in their lives—through the influence of parents and teachers—they

are taught the value of service.

That is why I support a terrific bill that my colleague, Senator

Edwards, has developed. This bill, the School Service Act, will promote universal community service among high school students,

which will promote a lifetime of service among all of our young people.

One particular group of young people that I am eager to involve

in community service activities are young people coming out of the

foster care system in service opportunities. These children have

often witnessed firsthand the difficulties of living in poverty and in

abusive domestic situations. Their compassion could be particularly

meaningful to others facing similar situations and I look forward

to working with all of you to increase opportunities for this population to serve.

I applaud President Bush’s commitment to national service by

expanding the number of volunteers by 25,000. This is a tremendously worthwhile goal, which will impact hundreds of thousands

more Americans through the spillover effects of community service.

I look forward to working with you Dr. Lenkowsky and with all of

my colleagues on the HELP Committee on achieving this goal.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF LESLIE LENKOWSKY, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, Senator

Gregg, Senator Mikulski.

I am privileged to come before you this morning to present President Bush’s principles for a new Citizen Service Act that would improve and enhance the programs of the Corporation for National

and Community Service.

Since the Corporation was created in 1993, it has accomplished

a great deal, but to better help build a culture of citizenship, service, and responsibility, we must use the lessons of the past, as Senator Mikulski has just indicated, to strengthen the quality of the

7

Corporation’s efforts and assist more Americans to serve their

neighbors, their communities, and their country.

In my prepared testimony which I would like to submit for the

record, I have outlined what the Corporation has achieved since it

began and what we have learned about where we need to improve.

This morning, President Bush is announcing the principles that we

believe should guide reforms of the Corporation’s programs,

AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and Serve America. I would

like to submit these to you as well and briefly summarize them.

The President’s principles have four major objectives. The first is

to support and encourage greater engagement of citizens in volunteering. In AmeriCorps, we would propose to do this by statutorily requiring all members to focus on generating additional

unstipended volunteers; improving the education award, such as by

eliminating tax on it and allowing it to be transferred to younger

family members or even 2Ts; testing new approaches that might

give would-be members a wider range of places in which they could

serve; and encouraging growth and greater private backing for successful AmeriCorps programs such as Teach for America and City

Year.

We would also reduce the age and income restrictions that disqualify too many older Americans from Senior Corps, create a special program to connect veterans with youth, and eliminate barriers

to participation in all of our programs by people with disabilities.

Finally, we would urge Congress to amend the Higher Education

Act to require every college and university to increase over several

years the percentage of Federal work-study funds devoted to community service to 50 percent as part of a more comprehensive effort

to enhance service learning among all of our young people.

Our second goal is to make Federal support for service more responsive to State and local needs. We would like to give States

more authority to select AmeriCorps programs than they have

today, as well as greater flexibility, within reasonable limits, to allocate funds for administrative uses.

We want to see communities have more leeway for developing

Senior Corps programs that will appeal to the baby boomers who

are on the verge of retirement, including by offering transferable

Silver Scholarships to those who have made substantial commitments of time.

And we propose to consolidate and modify Learn and Serve programs so that they can better address barriers to high-quality service learning programs, such as the lack of teacher training.

Without jeopardizing our hard-won management improvements

which produced our second consecutive clean audit opinion for fiscal year 2001, we believe that with appropriate authority, we can

do more to simplify administrative requirements and ease the burden of our programs on State and local communities as well as the

charities at which our members serve.

At the same time, the third objective of our principles is to make

the Corporation’s programs more accountable and effective. We propose a statutory requirement that all AmeriCorps, Senior Corps,

and Learn and Serve programs establish performance goals, develop corrective plans if they fail to meet these goals, and lose part

or all of their Federal support if corrections are not made.

8

We would also like to write into law the successful agreement we

have had with Congress to contain the average cost of AmeriCorps.

One reason the agreement has been successful is that the Corporation was able to develop some lower-cost, high-impact ways of

serving in AmeriCorps, such as the education- award-only version,

in which our members receive no Federal living allowance.

We would like the authority to move these from the test phase,

where we are limited in how many positions we can support, into

the general AmeriCorps mix. We are also interested in using the

National Civilian Community Corps model, which is now wholly

funded by the Federal Government, as a basis for partnerships

with public agencies and nonprofits that would primarily work on

public safety, public health, and emergency response efforts.

Last but not least, our fourth goal is to provide greater assistance to secular and faith-based community organizations. This has

always been a priority for the Corporation’s programs, especially

VISTA. By making some modest changes, such as in the rules governing how its members are selected and placed, we believe we can

make VISTA even more helpful to groups on the front lines of helping the poor and needy. With proper authority, we can also do a

better job of ensuring that all the Corporation’s programs do what

VISTA has long been committed to doing—helping nonprofits mobilize the resources, including modern technology, that they need to

be sustainable and effective.

The President’s budget for fiscal year 2003 proposes increasing

AmeriCorps by 25,000 members and Senior Corps by 100,000. We

request that this committee authorize the appropriations necessary

to reach these ambitious targets. While our existing legislation, together with the management improvements we have made in recent years, would enable the Corporation to achieve these goals, we

believe that the changes the President is calling for will produce

more volunteers and more help for nonprofit organizations for each

Government dollar spent.

We greatly appreciate the interest that members of this committee have had in the Corporation’s programs over the years and

know that many of you have ideas about what needs to be done to

improve them. We look forward to working with you to translate

these ideas and the principles the President has articulated today

into legislation that will put the Corporation on a strong bipartisan

footing for its second decade and beyond.

The time for doing so could not be better. Since September 11,

Americans of all ages and backgrounds have even more come to

recognize that this is a country worth not only defending but serving. According to one recent survey, 81 percent of young adults cutting across all demographic groups and political affiliations say

they would like to have a chance for a full year of national and

community service. Since the President’s State of the Union Address in which he called for Americans to serve and created the

USA Freedom Corps, applications for AmeriCorps are twice what

they were a year earlier. Interest in Senior Corps has risen even

more. And a blue ribbon committee chaired by former Senator John

Glenn has just called upon the Nation’s schools to invest more

heavily in service learning.

9

By improving and enhancing its programs, this committee will

enable the Corporation to respond more effectively to a public that

wants to serve; and if, together with our Volunteer Centers, United

Ways, and many other private groups, we are successful, we will

do a better job of helping people in need and, perhaps more importantly, strengthen the spirit of civic responsibility on which the

health of American democracy rests.

Thank you very much. I would be glad to take your questions at

this point.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Lenkowsky follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LESLIE LENKOWSKY

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to

discuss the views of the Administration concerning the reauthorization of national

and community service legislation—the National and Community Service Act of

1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973.

This is my first public opportunity to appear before, you, Mr. Chairman and the

other Members of the Committee, since you confirmed my nomination by President

Bush to be the Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service. Prior to that, this Committee confirmed me to three consecutive appointments to the Corporation’s Board of Directors and to the Board of its predecessor organization. Thank you for these opportunities.

Most importantly, this is an extraordinary moment in the history of our country

and the Agency I head. Since the terrible events of September 11th, we have seen

expressions of patriotism in tile United States unlike any that I can remember in

my lifetime. At a tragically high price, all of us have again come to realize how precious our freedoms are and why it is important for all of us to accept the responsibilities of citizenship in order to preserve them.

To make this a lasting change in our civic consciousness, President Bush has

called on all Americans to give at least two years of their lives in service to their

country. As the President has said, we can build a stronger nation and fight terrorism by making a commitment to service in our own communities, whether that be

tutoring a child, volunteering at a hospital, or participating in a neighborhood crime

watch.

Most of our nation’s civic work is being done without the aid of the Federal Government. That is as it should be, since the Federal Government is not the source

of this civic spirit. At the same time, the Federal Government can do a better job

in helping to support and encourage it where I can.

Therefore, through an Executive Order, the President established the USA Freedom Corps, which will build on existing Federal programs that engage citizens in

service, as well as create new opportunities related to homeland security and meeting other critical needs.

The USA Freedom Corps initially will have three major components, which will

be administered separately but coordinated through a White House council. It includes an improved and enhanced set of programs supported through the Corporation for National and Community Service, which is the direct concern of this committee. Specifically, the Administration has proposed providing additional community-based service opportunities and leveraging thousands of additional volunteers

by adding 25,000 new AmeriCorps members and 100,000 new volunteers in senior

service, and by removing current barriers to service, AmeriCorps and Senior Corps

participants who assist nonprofit organizations and public agencies in the areas of

public safety, public health, and disaster relief and preparedness will work closely

with Citizen Corps, through the coordinating efforts of the USA Freedom Corps

Council.

The Corporation’s programs—AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and Serve

America—will support the President’s call to service by helping to provide full-time

and part-time opportunities for Americans to serve at all stages of their lives, from

when they are elementary-school students through their retirement years. We will

also work closely with our nation’s many worthwhile charities, not only in helping

them accomplish their missions, including providing security for our homeland, but

also in helping them recruit and manage additional volunteers.

As part of the announcement of the USA Freedom Corps, the Administration indicated its intent to work closely with the Congress on a bill that will reform and extend the Corporation’s programs and authorities. The Administration’s reforms for

10

a Citizen Service Act of 2002 were outlined, in the USA Freedom Corp policy book

released on January 30.

For the Corporation to play the role envisioned by the President under the USA

Freedom Corps, we need to make AmeriCorps, Senior Corps, and Learn and Serve

America more responsive to state and local needs, more accountable for results,

more adept at leveraging private resources, and more effective in assisting hardpressed charities, including faith-based and community organizations. I’d like to describe these three programs briefly and explain why we are proposing reforms.

AMERICORPS

AmeriCorps engages 50,000 Americans in intensive, results-oriented service each

year, AmeriCorps members mobilize, manage, and train volunteers to assist nonprofit groups and public agencies across the country. The members, and the volunteers they help organize, teach children to read, make neighborhoods safer, and help

build affordable homes for low-income families, among many other activities. When

a new class of members enrolls this fall, more than 250,000 Americans 18 and older

will have participated in AmeriCorps since it was created in 1993 through amendments to the National and Community Service Act of 1990.

There are three main components to AmeriCorps: 1) AmeriCorps—State and National, which provides grants to states and national charitable organizations to support members in local charities and nonprofit groups across the country; 2)

AmeriCorps—VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America), which focuses on helping

poor people overcome poverty and assisting community and faith-based organizations in meeting the needs of low-income neighborhoods; and 3) AmeriCorps—NCCC

(National Civilian Community Corps), a ten-month, full-time residential service program for men and women that combines the best practices of civilian service with

the best aspects of military service, including leadership and team building.

The President proposes to increase the annual level of 50,000 AmeriCorps members to 75,OO0 in 2003. The new AmeriCorps participants will generate at least

75,000 additional volunteers to work with the nation’s nonprofits.

As the Congress contemplates this proposed increase, I think it is important to

explain how AmeriCorps functions, and how it can be improved.

First, most AmeriCorps members serve with nonprofit and community organizations like Habitat for Humanity, Teach for America, the American Red Cross, Boys

and Girls Clubs, neighborhood watch organizations, community action agencies,

local faith-based organizations, and many others. In the majority of cases, these organizations, not the Federal Government, select and manage the members who

serve with them, The members assist those organizations in meeting community

needs.

Second, AmariCorps is decentralized—that is, it gives a significant amount of

power and control to states and local authorities. State commissions on national and

community service, led by citizen volunteers appointed by Governors, select or nominate most of the projects in which AmeriCorps members serve, based on their assessment of local needs.

Third, AmeriCorps, has both full-time and part-time members. Slightly more than

half of the individuals in these programs serve full time and receive a modest living

allowance in order to be able to serve. The other half serve part time and generally

do not receive any living allowance from Corporation resources. Upon successful

completion of service, both types of AmeriCorps members receive an education

award, available for seven years, to help finance college or pay back student loans.

At the end of this year, the first AmeriCorps class will have used about 72 percent

of the education award amounts that were earned.

Fourth, the Federal Government, states, local communities and the private sector

share funding for AmeriCorps members. There are various statutory provisions that

mandate such cost sharing.

Since it was created in 1993, AmeriCorps has compiled an impressive list of accomplishments. Members have helped recruit and supervise additional volunteers

for nonprofit organizations; they have tutored and mentored disadvantaged children;

they have established or expanded neighborhood safety programs; and they have

helped communities rebuild after dozens of natural disasters and emergencies—including the September 11th terrorist attacks—in more than 30 states. Although

evaluation studies are not always of the highest quality, project reports have consistently shown that AmeriCorps members are meeting community needs in education, health and human services, public safety, and the environment.

At the same time, the program has had its share of challenges and problems over

the last several years. Many in Congress have documented those challenges and

problems and rightfully told us to do better. Members of Congress have identified

11

the need to refocus the program and create greater efficiency and accountability. As

a result, AmeriCorps has tightened its management, reduced its per-member costs

from early-year highs, adopted tough rules on political activity, and cut off grantees

that violated them. We intend to continue strengthening our management and personnel systems, change some of the ways our programs operate, and take additional

steps to insure that each government dollar is used more effectively, For example,

upon becoming the Chief Executive Officer, I established a new Department of Research and Policy Development, which reports directly to the Chief Executive Officer, specifically for the purpose of strengthening accountability.

But may of the changes we envision to make our programs more efficient, effective, and responsive to local needs cannot take place without legislative, authority.

I would like to bring forward some ideas for reform identified by the Administration,

Members of Congress, the national and community service field, Corporation board

members, service members, and professional staff.

States, communities, and nonprofit organizations need greater flexibility. For example, community and faith-based organizations have told us that the rules and requirements for receiving a grant often are too complex and costly. States have told

us that we can do even more to devolve decision making, particularly on grant selection, to the State level.

Nonprofit groups often find our program confusing because rules are not consistent across different types of AmeriCorps programs. For example, Members of one

program cannot seek part-time employment or schooling during their term of service, while members of another AmeriCorps program can. Moreover, most (but not

all) AmeriCorps programs prohibit members from developing resources, performing

routine administrative tasks, and engage in other activities that help nonprofit organizations increase their capacity to carry out their service mission. Unfortunately,

that is precisely the kind of help that small grassroots charities are interested in

receiving, and we need to support them while continuing strong prohibitions on the

use of support for any political activities.

Legislative reforms can also help with accountability. Early in the Corporation’s

history, the agency was not aggressive enough about holding grantees accountable

for achieving results. Failure to meet goals did not have immediate and direct consequences. To be effective, the organizations with which we work must understand

that failure to meet performance goals will have consequences. Although there is

much that can be done administratively in this area, the statute can make this expectation permanent and more forceful.

Currently, some of our programs are recruiting many additional volunteers for

each government dollar spent; others are not. Our explicit goal should be to produce

more volunteers for each government dollar spent. We should limit what the Federal

Government can spend on average per member, put into practice more low-cost approaches to using members, and encourage more private support. When evaluating

what we fund, we should recognize that a fundamental strength of AmeriCorps is

to help mobilize and manage volunteers for our nation’s charities.

Sustainability is another goal that we should make more explicit. Currently, most

AmeriCorps members (though not VISTA’s) are restricted by statute from mobilizing

resources and building the service capacity of the organizations with which they

serve. We should set resource mobilization as a fundamental purpose of AmeriCorps

and increase the types of support that AmeriCorps members can provide.

We Should Also implement new ways to support and expand programs that are

effective. One such way is a ‘‘challenge grant,’’ which would provide Corporation

funds to organizations that raise new private money. The challenge grants would

be used specifically to expand service and volunteering. For example, a successful

program such as Teach for America, which recruits and trains recent college graduates to work as teachers in underserved communities, could increase its private

support, in part by demonstrating to donors how private contributions would be

‘‘matched’’ by government funds. Such approaches would increase the flow of private

dollars to such organizations and allow them to become sustainable with non-Federal resources.

Another effective program model that should be expanded is AmeriCorps—NCCC,

which is able to dispatch teams of members on short notice to help deal with natural disasters and other emergencies. For example, NCCC teams from across the

country were dispatched to Pier 94 in New York after the September 11th attack

to provide assistance to victims’ families through the Red Cross, and several teams

helped operate an overflow homeless shelter in Salt Lake City during the recent

Olympic Games. We should use this as a model for other programs—including those

operated by public agencies and nonprofits—that support public safety, public

health, and emergency response efforts.

12

We also need to reform some of the benefits we offer. Many AmeriCorps members

have been disappointed because they have found the education award to be less valuable than they had believed it to be. Currently, the awards are taxable. Although

many AmeriCorps members are eligible for education tax credits and deductions

that fully offset any tax liability not all members qualify. We look forward to working with Congress to exempt the award from taxation and to provide greater flexibility in its use.

Finally, the Corporation’s Board and I want more opportunity to test new approaches in AmeriCorps. Currently, members ran serve only in organizations that

have a grant from or an agreement with the Federal Government. We should explore new relationships with nonprofit organizations that will provide greater flexibility for individuals to do their service at the organizations of their choice.

SENIOR CORPS

The Corporation for National and Community Service administers Senior Corps,

which provides opportunities for more than 500,000 older Americans to serve in

their communities. Senior Corps consists of three major-programs: the Retired and

Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP), the Foster Grandparent Program (FGP), and the

Senior Companion Program (SCP).

President Bush spoke about expanding senior-service programs during the Presidential campaign in 2000, and he put forth several new ideas that would attract

more seniors to service. In the 2003 budget, the President is proposing to expand

this effort by supporting an additional 100,000 seniors in service.

RSVP, by far the largest Senior Corps program, matches older Americans who are

willing to help meet local needs With opportunities to serve in their communities.

RSVP volunteers choose how and where they want to serve, and they determine how

many hours a week they serve. RSVP volunteers provide a wide range of important

services such as tutoring youth, responding to natural disasters, serving as citizen

patrols for local police departments, teaching parenting skills to teen parents, getting children immunized, and mentoring troubled youth.

Foster Grandparents provide valuable aid to children and youth with exceptional

needs. Foster Grandparents serve in schools, hospitals, drug treatment centers, correctional institutions, and Head Start and day care centers, Foster Grandparents

help abused and neglected children, mentor troubled teenagers and young mothers,

and care for premature infants and children with physical disabilities.

Senior Companions provide assistance to frail, homebound individuals, most of

them elderly. These clients have difficulties with daily living tasks, and Senior Companions help them retain their dignity and independence.

These programs date back to the 1960s and were created as much to provide support for, and supplement the incomes of the elderly as they were to foster continued

civic engagement. In fact, participants in the Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion programs have to pass a ‘‘means test’’ to participate. They also have to be

60 years old, instead of the age eligibility of 55 required for RSVP. As a result,

many people who want to serve are disqualified either because their incomes are

too high or because they are too young—and many clients who need such services

are denied them.

For example, approximately 60 percent of program directors in the Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion programs say they are having problems recruiting

participants. About 70 percent of both Foster Grandparent and Senior Companion

grantees reported turning away people because their incomes were too high. At the

same time, 95 percent of Senior Companion projects reported having client waiting

lists, and 67 percent said those lists have increased over the past year. For children

in need of a Foster Grandparent, and for frail elderly, people in need of a companion

to buy groceries or take care of other necessities, our programs’ inability to fill slots

is a very serious matter.

As we look to the future—and to a rapidly expanding population of seniors interested in helping to meet community needs—we need to update and modernize our

programs. We need to create new roles, opportunities, and institutions that are

more flexible than they have been in the past. We need to provide additional incentives for seniors to serve, such as allowiug them to earn scholarship awards that

can be transferred to their grandchildren or other designated individuals. These efforts should build on the best of the Corporation’s experience with our programs and

incorporate emerging knowledge about the preferences, education, and capacities of

the coming wave of retirees.

We also must have greater accountability in our system of support for senior

projects, and a greater focus on achieving measurable results. Since 1996, we have

implemented what’s known as ‘‘programming for impact,’’ through which senior volVerDate 11-MAY-2000 14:04 Jun 11, 2002 Jkt 990100 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 78867 SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
13

unteer projects demonstrate how they deliver benefits to the communities they serve

and help address high-priority local needs. Traditionally, senior volunteerism had,

been more concerned with the benefits realized by the seniors themselves. As we

move ahead, we need to ensure that grantees meet specific program objectives and

accountability standards.

The Administration’s reforms will strengthen the senior service programs administered by the Federal Government. They will also ensure that older Americans will

have expanded opportunities to serve in their communities, including supporting the

efforts of public organizations charged with public safety, health, and emergency

preparedness.

LEARN AND SERVE AMERICA

Learn and Serve America provides grants to schools, colleges, and community

groups to link academic studies to community service. Through such programs

across the country supported by Learn and Serve America, more than 1.5 million

students in kindergarten through college gain a deeper insight into their studies,

develop problem-solving and other skills, and learn the habits of good citizenship

while also helping to improve their communities.

Service-learning and community service tied to education have experienced rapid

growth over the past decade. A 1999 U.S. Department of Education study found that

32 percent of all public schools included service-learning as part of their curriculum,

including nearly half of all high schools, and that 57 percent of all public, schools

organized community service activities for their students. This growth is significant

when compared to a similar study conducted in 1984 that found that only 9 percent

of all high schools offered service-learning, and that only 27 percent of all high

schools offered some type of community service.

These programs are, critically important if we are to instill the ethic of a lifetime

of service and civic involvement in a rising generation of Americans. And schools

at all levels should seize on the President’s call to service to look for ways to integrate service and education.

But as we look to reauthorize Federal programs that support service and servicelearning at our nation’s schools and colleges, we believe we need to reexamine the

purpose of Federal support at the elementary and secondary education level. We

must make sure that funds are spent to improve the quality of these programs

through teacher development and other means. We must make sure that the programs allow for the practice of civic skills and lead to the development of active,

responsible citizens.

As with the recent changes to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of

1965 that were made by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, we must add more

accountability to the system of support for service-learning. Grantees should have

specific program objectives and accountability requirements. The Corporation should

have authority to: 1) establish performance measures for each grantee; 2) require

corrective plans for those not meeting goals; and 3) reduce or terminate grants if

corrections are not made.

At the higher education level, we propose to increase the service goals for the Federal Work-Study Program—a popular form of financial aid initiated in the 1960s

that currently reaches nearly a million students a year. Among the program’s statutory purposes is ‘‘to encourage students receiving Federal student financial aid to

participate in community service activities that will benefit the nation and engender

in the students a sense of social responsibility and commitment to the community.’’

Over the years, a significant amount of work-study has been devoted to such oncampus tasks as staffing academic departments, processing admissions applications,

and filing away library books. According to a 2000 study, about 40% of FWS students were employed as clerks or office workers. This same study notes that 3⁄4 of

FWS students selected their own jobs but it was unclear that they were offered options to do community service. Indeed, the national average of such funds devoted

to community-serving activities is about 14%. To be sure, the work-study percentage

devoted to community service is not necessarily reflective of a school’s total commitment to service. For example, at the University of Notre Dame, 75 to 80 percent

of students get involved in community service at some point during their undergraduate years, while the university’s community service commitment under workstudy is very small. But a pattern of minimal commitment to community service

programs under work-study by some of the nation’s best schools appears evident.

It is not just colleges and universities, however, that are lagging. A poll of this

year’s freshmen at four-year colleges who participate in a study conducted by the

American Council on Education and the University of California at Los Angeles

Higher Education Research Institute, found that more than 50 percent said they

14

spent less than 1 hour a week doing volunteer work during their final year of high

school—and that an additional 24 percent volunteered only 1 to 2 hours a week.

That figure is troubling because, while related to educational attainment, service

and citizenship patterns are established at a young age and persist throughout a

person’s lifetime.

Perhaps that explains why, despite the amount of time and relative freedom students have, rates of volunteering among undergraduates are less than those of the

population as a whole. According to the National Post-Secondary Student Aid Survey, in the 1999-2000 academic year 34.6 percent of all undergraduates participated

in voluntary community service the previous year. That is fully 10 percentage points

less than the national average as measured by the Independent Sector. Even taking

into account the nontraditional student, with greater responsibility for family and

work, the number of hours volunteered by the traditional undergraduate at fouryear institutions is less then the average reported by the Independent Sector. Although college graduates are more likely then those who do not attend college to

volunteer as adults, increasing student volunteering would likely produce even higher rates of adult volunteering in the future.

Improving these rates will not be easy. Those who have worked with volunteers

know that it takes more than motivation to get someone to serve; it also requires

asking and creating meaningful opportunities for people to participate. September

11th may have given many more Americans the desire to become active citizens,

and President Bush has asked all of us to act on that desire. But whether we really

do commit to service will depend heavily on the efforts of all of us in positions of

leadership—whether in government, in colleges and universities, in voluntary associations, and in student groups—to enlist our fellow citizens to take responsibility

for our communities.

We hope that college and university officials will work with us to increase the percentage of Federal work-study funds devoted to community service.

MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION

All of us involved with national and community service—the Corporation’s Board,

its previous CEOs, the Congress, State Commissions, and programs across the country—have recognized the management and administrative challenges of running the

Agency over the last decade. While more remains to be done, the organization has

made significant progress over the last couple of years.

More specifically, fiscal year 2000 was a landmark year for the Corporation in

that for the first time in its history, it received an unqualified opinion on its financial statements. This achievement resulted from a commitment to strong management control and accountability for financial resources. I’m pleased to report that

the 2001 audit showed that our progress continues, as we received a ‘‘clean opinion’’

for the second year in a row. Perhaps more important, the number of operational

areas deemed to be materially weak was reduced to zero. Not that long ago, we were

cited for 10 material weaknesses.

The Corporation, in other words, has reached the point where it is on solid financial ground. But our management and administrative work, is not done. In general,

the Congress has provided the tools and support necessary for the Corporation to

achieve management improvements, and I would like to thank this Committee for

its efforts. We have additional ideas that are intended to strengthen the ability of

the Corporation, States, and communities to inspire people to serve and help them

find ways to improve their neighborhoods.

Finally, in support of tbe President’s call to service, we ask that the Corporation’s

reauthorization bill reauthorize and update existing provisions of law that support

the Points of Light Foundation and America’s Promise: The Alliance for Youth.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. We are clearly at an opportune moment in the history of Federal support for service. I look forward to working with

you and with the other Members of Congress to pass reforms and extend national

service legislation this year. I am available to address any questions that the Committee may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

This is very ambitious, but we like to believe this committee is

up to the challenge.

I remember very well being at the 25th anniversary of the Peace

Corps and sitting at the table with the first volunteers and asking

them how they became involved. They all gave virtually the same

answer, and that was that this was the first time anybody had

15

asked them to do something for others—paraphrased in different

ways, but it was a very, very powerful message.

The way that I read what the President is talking about is how

to create more of those opportunities. People want to be able to volunteer. We should not limit this just to those who are financially

well off. The motivation for service is there for people with limited

resources as well as those who have substantial resources.

As I understand it, we are going to give that opportunity to as

many different citizens as we can. Building on the senior service

programs which have been in effect, actually, since the early 1960’s

we can create new opportunities. In Fall River, MA seniors work

to keep neighborhood libraries and museums open, escorting children through there and helping them to learn. They get $2.65 an

hour—but that is precious to them, and it is really important to the

community. So we want to try to do as much as we possibly can,

and then we want to make sure that those are good programs and

we want to evaluate them.

At the time that we passed the legislation, for the Corporation,

as Senator Mikulski pointed out, we brought into the program the

Points of Light Foundation into the program. Now the Points of

Light Foundation is operating and has their own board. We also

have America’s Promise, Colin Powell’s program. As I understand

it, although you can explain that to me, we are now adding the

Freedom Corps, and at least a good part of that is going to be out

of FEMA. We need a clearer idea of how all these Corps are going

to function.

One thing that the previous administration tried to do was to get

each of the Cabinet offices to develop programs within the Cabinet

agencies, and they had varying success depending on whether they

were really interested, but some efforts were very important and

very successful. We need to know how FEMA will operate.

I am just trying to get a handle on how this overall structure is

going to work. We have spent time, not as successfully as some

would have liked, trying to bring programs together, consolidate

different programs, consolidate administration, use resources in

terms of the objectives, and we want to try to work with you on

this, but we want to get some idea and understanding about how

these boards will work, how they will interact, and how we are

going to avoid the kind of inevitable struggle that I imagine will

come along between them.

I would be interested in how you look at this—and I do not want

to spend a lot of time on it, but I would like to hear you out on

it.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Thank you, Senator.

It has been a bit confusing, we know. I would like to say sometimes that we have a corps identity crisis going on. The Freedom

Corps is a Cabinet-level organization. It is a White House organization that will indeed do the kind of consolidation that you are talking about. If you think of it as an equivalent in some ways to the

National Security Council or the National Economic Council, that

would be pretty close to the mark. It would be a group of people

at the Cabinet level plus agencies like mine represented on it that

will meet to coordinate all the work that goes on within the Federal Government related to volunteering and creating opportuniVerDate 11-MAY-2000 14:04 Jun 11, 2002 Jkt 990100 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 78867 SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
16

ties. The President has in fact already directed the members of the

Cabinet to inventory their own programs preparatory to identifying

ways by which other Cabinet departments can effectively promote

volunteering and service.

So we will be working closely with the Freedom Corps. The Freedom Corps does not change any of our legislative authority or my

responsibility as the CEO of the Corporation for National and Community Service but gives us enormous opportunities to work more

closely with other Cabinet agencies, with the Peace Corps, and

with the collection of volunteer groups that are grouped under Citizens Corps and will be focusing exclusively on homeland security

tasks.

The Points of Light Foundation is currently authorized within

our statute, and we are recommending as part of the President’s

principles that America’s Promise be so authorized as well. Both of

these organizations have unique status in terms of their relationship to our mission.

I mentioned in my opening statement the Volunteer Centers.

These are wonderful organizations. There are over 500 of them in

every community. They are a kind of switchboard, so if you are new

to a community and want to find a way to get involved, you could

call up the Volunteer Center, and that is what they help you do.

They work closely with colleges and universities as well to place

students in service.

One of the principal roles of the Points of Light Foundation is to

work with, coordinate, and help enhance the activities of those Volunteer Centers, so we feel that it is very fitting for us to have a

close relationship with them.

With America’s Promise, one of the five promises of that organization is to give young people opportunities to give something back

so that young people are not just the objectives of attention, but

they can contribute in a constructive way to their society. We feel

this is very important as well for healthy youth development; it

again fits very closely with our core mission of helping people find

opportunities to serve. So we feel that having a good, close relationship with that organization as well will be an asset for us to

achieve our mission of promoting greater civic engagement.

The CHAIRMAN. We welcome the opportunity to go through and

have a better sense. The Corporation now, as I understand, is

under the Freedom Corps; is that right?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. That is correct. We are a component.

The CHAIRMAN. How is the Freedom Corps established—is the

President going to name those members?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It is an executive order, and the President has

already identified a number of Cabinet members plus independent

agency heads such as myself and the head of the Peace Corps as

members of it.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me just mention quickly a couple of issues.

One is the work-study program. As you know, the work-study program is targeted generally—the only eligible children are students

identified by colleges as financially needy. The average income for

participants, at U-Mass Boston is $18,000. They have to spend a

certain amount of their work study money, 7 percent—it is not a

lot—doing community service work. We looked at this over a period

17

of time as far as increasing that requirement, and there are a number of issues raised, including whether we are just going to have

the neediest students in the schools involved in community service,

or whether it is going to include the class generally so we are not

bifurcating the class. That is number one. Second, the colleges

themselves are going to have to undertake the program, so they are

wondering whether they are going to get support for the development of these programs so they will have high-quality programs,

particularly among the smaller colleges, and there are many smaller, independent colleges in our part of the country.

Your thoughts?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. We are very sensitive to that. As you know,

Senator, I am a former college professor, and I do appreciate how

valuable the existing Federal work-study program is for students

and for the schools they attend.

We want to work with colleges and universities to build a culture

of service, citizenship, and responsibility on every campus. Federal

work-study in our view is one tool for that but by no means the

only tool. We think that some of our AmeriCorps education award

programs can be more effectively utilized at colleges and universities. We think that traditional service programs can also be used,

as well as other things.

We have had some very promising discussions going on since the

President’s proposal with the head of the Independent Colleges Association, David Warren, with the president of Tufts University,

and with several others. I think everybody shares the goal of trying

to get more college students. I frankly would like to see as close

to 100 percent as possible engaged in service through one means

or another.

With regard specifically to the work-study program, we do think

that students ought to have an option to decide whether they

would like to do their volunteering on campus or tutor, as you are

doing, or mentor or other things off-campus.

A recent study done for the Department of Education showed

that close to 80 percent of Federal work-study students did not

know that if they wished to do so, they could use their Federal

work-study funds in the America Reads program, which is a tutoring program that helps children gain in reading—something that

I know is very important in light of the bill that we just passed

and this committee helped to enact.

So we would like to see Federal work-study students have that

option, but we agree completely with you that service should be an

expectation for all students, not just for those who receive Federal

work-study.

The CHAIRMAN. In Massachusetts, we had the highest percentage

of volunteerism in schools of any State. California has always been

a leader in volunteerism but we managed to make them second

place. Tufts University has helped Massachusetts lead the Nation.

Their former President, John Di Biaggio was an enthusiastic supporter. I have been to his conferences. He was a strong believer,

and he has had a very important and powerful impact and his successor Dr. Bacon seeks to continue Tufts’ commitment and I think

we can learn a good deal from this institution.

Senator Gregg?

18

Senator GREGG. Thank you.

Dr. Lenkowsky, you certainly outlined a whole series of legislative changes as part of the President’s initiative. Are you going to

send us up some language or a package which reflects those?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. We would be glad to provide language if you

would like to see it, Senator. We thought we would send up principles at this point so that we could work with you, but if you

would like to see us translate some of those principles into language, we would be glad to do so.

Senator GREGG. Well, ‘‘The memo does control the meeting,’’ to

quote Dr. Kissinger, so I think language might be helpful.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Thank you.

Senator GREGG. This Silver Certificate is a new concept. As I understand it, somebody who works in the Senior Service Corps can

work a certain number of hours or commit a certain number of

hours to public service and earn a certain amount of academic credits or college credits which can then be passed on their grandchildren?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It would be similar to the education award that

we have in AmeriCorps, although at a smaller value. I think the

proposal we have in our budget is $1,000. So if you commit a significant amount of time over the course of a year, you would earn

a Silver Scholarship that could be passed along to 2T; it could be

put in a Coverdell IRA for education purposes for a child or grandchild. It is a way of recognizing the contributions of seniors to service, particularly those seniors who wish to commit a fairly substantial amount of time.

Senator GREGG. And that would have to flow to a relative?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Not necessarily. It could be set up so that if you

were tutoring somebody, as many of our Foster Grandparents do

and R.S.V.P. people, you could make that scholarship available to

the person that you were tutoring or mentoring. Again, you would

want to set it up in an education IRA or something like that.

Senator GREGG. Do you have a cost assigned to this yet?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It is in the budget. It is a fairly modest cost.

We can get you that number.

Senator GREGG. It sounds like a very creative idea.

You said something in your testimony that I found interesting

and that was that, I believe, 87 percent of the people in high school

said they would be willing to give a year of public service.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. That is 81 percent of people between the ages

of 15 and 25. This was a new poll done for a center at the University of Maryland.

Senator GREGG. And have you or your organization given any

thought to how you would create a year of public service that was

universal?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Well, we have certainly talked a lot about

AmeriCorps, and AmeriCorps of course does provide a service opportunity that is close to full-time if people want to do this, or you

could do it half-time for a year or even up to 2 years.

Right now, the President is proposing an increase in the number

of AmeriCorps positions from 50,000 to 75,000. We feel this is a

step in the right direction.

19

We are fortunate in this country in having a lot of opportunities

for people to serve. Not everybody has to serve in AmeriCorps, but

obviously, we think that our program is a very important way by

which we can respond to that interest. Even at 75,000, of course,

there may be an even greater demand than we can fulfill at that

number, but we want to proceed cautiously in expanding the program so that we do not create the kinds of management problems

that we have had in the past.

Senator GREGG. And of course, 81 percent of the population

would be millions.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It would be indeed. It is really very heartening.

Senator GREGG. But there is nothing on the drawing board to address that.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Not directly from us, but we think we are moving in that direction. We think that by creating opportunities—one

thing, for example, that AmeriCorps members will be doing under

our proposals is that their assignments will require them to engage

other people in volunteering, people who might not be volunteering

full-time but would be volunteering a few hours a week. We call

this ‘‘volunteer leveraging,’’ and one great example of it is what

happens with AmeriCorps members at Habitat for Humanity. Our

members at Habitat do not replace volunteers who are building

houses, but they come in early, they get the site ready, they help

recruit volunteers; they do all the things so that when the volunteers come up to build that house on a Thursday or a Friday and

spend the weekend doing it, they have a very positive experience

that has two very good effects—one, we are engaging and responding to those people who want to serve, but two, when people volunteer and have a good experience volunteering, it is a good bet they

will be back again.

Senator GREGG. City Year is part of AmeriCorps, isn’t it?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It is indeed.

Senator GREGG. Job Corps, however, is not involved in any of

this discussion.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Job Corps is not part of our program; I believe

it is part of the Department of Labor.

Senator GREGG. But it is not part of the USA Freedom Corps discussion, either?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. No, sir. The Department of Labor is a member

of the Freedom Corps Council, and they may be thinking of ways

to use Job Corps in relation to this, but I am not privy to those

discussions.

Senator GREGG. Well, then, you are the wrong person to ask that

question of. I am interested in how we can develop a program that

is more targeted on urban areas that are inner city and disadvantaged, where kids in high schools who are identified as having potential but are trapped in violence and drugs would have the opportunity to go into a service program for a year, which would give

them some footing and would also give them a future and give

them something toward their education when they got out.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. We actually do have a lot of those programs already within AmeriCorps. One out of five AmeriCorps members report that their parents receive food stamps. So we are reaching

that age group.

20

One of my aides just visited a program called Improved Solutions

for Urban Systems in Dayton, OH. It is a charter school that serves

at-risk young people, 300 of them right now. It is very successful.

They are thinking of expanding to Cincinnati and Columbus. These

are young people who have dropped out, in a way, of the existing

high schools. They are enrolled in this program, they are earning

their GED. They all become AmeriCorps members when they turn

17, which is our age limit, so they could start earning that education award, and they are receiving training in things like computer technology, construction activities. They are putting the

training to use while they are going to school; it is service learning,

and it is a very successful program. In fact, it was called to my attention originally by someone who had not been exactly a fan of

AmeriCorps but had seen this program in action and said, ‘‘This is

really great; I did not know you were doing this.’’ Well, we have lots of programs like that already, and certainly

one of the President’s principles is to increase support for community-based organizations, and I think that is where we will get

even more and get more young people involved that way.

Senator GREGG. Well, at some other time, I would like to follow

up on that. I would be very interested in further initiatives like

that.

The CHAIRMAN. Before leaving that issue, take a look at young

people in urban and rural areas who are prepared to work, say,

four summers so that they will have the opportunity to go on to

college; so it is not just waiting until they graduate from high

school, and do community service at least they can begin to work,

and if they do it and stay in school, something might be out there

at the end. We have some ideas—— Mr. LENKOWSKY. Summer is a great unutilized resource—I say

this as a professor. We always know that things drop off in the

summer, and to keep high school students or junior high school

students engaged actively in the summer has many positive effects.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Mikulski?

Senator MIKULSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to return to the questions raised by Senator Kennedy related to Freedom Corps, AmeriCorps, and the Corporation for National and Community Service and so on.

Senator Kennedy said this lacks clarity, and he felt confused. I

felt confused. And quite frankly, if Kennedy and Mikulski are confused about national service, America is confused about it, because

we have been so involved in it.

As I understand it, the Freedom Corps is a council of other corps;

is that right?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. And Cabinet agencies, yes, Senator.

Senator MIKULSKI. OK—and Cabinet, or independent, like

FEMA.

Then the question becomes FEMA is involved, HHS is involved—

and I am not going into the merits of the program, although I have

some flashing yellow lights around them. So the question is do all

of those programs need to be authorized—the Medical Reserve

Corps, the Volunteers in Police Service Program, a doubling of the

Neighborhood Watch, which I did not even know was a Federal

program, the tripling of the Community Emergency Response—do

21

they all have to be authorized, and then they will be funded separately?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I cannot really speak to the Citizen Corps; I

think that would probably be better directed to the head of FEMA.

I think most of those already exist. There is a recommendation in

the President’s budget for some additional funding, and I believe

it goes through the HUD-VA Appropriations Subcommittee.

Senator MIKULSKI. What is your role in that? Are you just one

of the guys at the table, or——

Mr. LENKOWSKY. No. We run the Corporation for National and

Community Service which is a second leg of this three-legged stool,

if you will.

Senator MIKULSKI. Who is in charge of this Council?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. There is an assistant to the President named

John Bridgeland, a special assistant to the President, who is executive director of the Council. The President, of course, is the chair

of the Council.

Senator MIKULSKI. I understand that, but here is my question.

Is all the money for all of these corps in the budget?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I believe it is in part of President Bush’s 2003

budget, Senator.

Senator MIKULSKI. And would the head of the Freedom Corps

Council be accountable to Congress in some way so that we could

get a picture of how all this works and operates, or is this like a

Tom Ridge position? [Laughter.] I am not being sarcastic.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. As I am accountable to you and to Congress

generally for everything the Corporation for National and Community Service does, my colleague, the head of the Peace Corps, remains accountable to you and Congress.

Senator MIKULSKI. I understand that, but——

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I think Mr. Bridgeland’s relationship to Congress would, I imagine, be parallel to the relationship of

Condaleezza Rice as assistant to the President in the National Security Council.

Senator MIKULSKI. Well, I think we willneed to come back to this

question, because if we are going to be spending this money, we

need to all be going in the same direction.

Let me return to AmeriCorps, which is central to this. The original goals of AmeriCorps as we established it were around three

deals. First was what I call character-building, meaning the instillation of the habits of the heart, so you not only volunteered to get

the voucher, but you would also embrace the spirit of national service, and you would go on—hopefully, be involved in alumni associations like in the Peace Corps, and you would be a potent leader.

Then, the second was community-building by what you did in the

community; and third was your own empowerment, meaning that

you would learn new skills, and you would learn a way to either

reduce your student debt or pursue higher education either fulltime or part-time, because not everybody can go away to volunteer.

A single mother working for a voucher to go to a community college

could not go away, and someone with high-tech skills in engineering might not want to go away for a year but could work at Habitat

or as a design center/urban renewal person.

22

So here are my questions. First, in the reassessment of national

service, do you feel that the goals continue to be the same, and second, under the framework that the President is proposing, how do

you see those goals continuing to be achieved, or do you feel they

need to be revised?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I think the goals continue to be the same, and

I would actually add a little bit to one of those goals—I think it

is very consistent with it—which is that we ought to use the members of our programs to help build the capacity of local not-for-profit and charitable organizations, because we are always going to be

limited. As Senator Gregg pointed out, there are lots of Americans

who want to serve. We are probably not going to have the programs ever in this agency to respond to all of them, but we have

lots of not-for-profit groups around the United States, and by using

our members who give a significant commitment of their time to

work in these groups, we can strengthen them so that those groups

in turn can engage more people in service.

I certainly think—and as you know, Senator, I have been a board

member not only since the Corporation but going back to the Commission on National and Community Service—and I certainly think

the three goals that you articulated—the citizenship goal, the habits of the heart, giving useful community service and that sense of

ongoing empowerment, a lifetime of developing real skills that you

can take with you as you go into other aspects of your career, remain central, and I think that every one of our efforts here, every

one of the President’s principles, is designed to reinforce those objectives.

Senator MIKULSKI. First of all, I appreciate that, but I am concerned that we are really going to get scattered here—I do not

mean here at the hearing—but with all of the various corps, I

think it is going to get scattered. That is number one.

No. 2, in terms of AmeriCorps, one of the building blocks of the

program is the role of the Governors and that there would be commissions at the gubernatorial level so that we could have some

form of training, some form of accountability, so that people were

not going in different directions with service du jour or current

fads, so that it was focused on public issues that you are so experienced in.

Where do you see this fitting in, and do you see the Governors

then being part of something like Freedom Corps councils?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. No. The Governors——

Senator MIKULSKI. And I do not want to get too wonky here, but

you see what I mean.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I certainly understand and sympathize with

you on this confusion. In terms of our agency, though, as you know,

we have State commissions in each of the 50 States—well, 49; I

think one of the Dakotas is just getting a State commission now.

These are all gubernatorially-appointed commissions. That is how

the Governors get involved.

We are proposing to give more authority to those commissions

and to couple that with accountability. We would like to give them

even stronger incentives to do State planning so that the resources

of the Corporation are devoted to the most pressing State and local

needs as these commissions and therefore the Governors see them.

23

These commissions consist of distinguished citizens in each

State——

Senator MIKULSKI. I want to talk about what they are going to

do; I know who they are.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. The commissions will continue to do what they

are currently doing——

Senator MIKULSKI. They are not, then, going to be a coordinator

for the Freedom Corps, the Neighborhood Watch, and so on?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. No, they are not. There will be another apparatus that FEMA is responsible for that will do that. To the extent

our people will be involved at all, about 30 percent, I am told, of

AmeriCorps and Senior Corps positions in one way or another deal

with public safety, health, and disaster preparedness, and as those

citizen corps, the FEMA-coordinated councils, at the State and local

level develop their plans for responding to disasters or—we hope

they will not occur—future terrorist attacks, part of the assets they

will take into consideration will be people engaged in the Corporation’s programs.

Senator MIKULSKI. Well, again, I think we need a lot more clarity

here. I believe in flexibility and creativity at the local level. I am

also concerned that we could be pursuing the volunteerism du jour

issue—and I am not being critical; I am just raising this as an

issue.

I just want to make two additional points, and I know my time

has expired, and other colleagues are here, but I want to raise two

flashing yellow lights, Dr. Lenkowsky.

First, we as appropriators of national service are being deluged

by national programs for earmarks. We are earmark-deluged by

very worthwhile programs—the YMCA, Teach for America, and

others that I could elaborate on—they are outstanding, and they

are doing a great job. But I am now becoming the authorizer-byproxy, because we have not thought through how the Corporation

is going to be responsive to national organizations who then do

their work at the local level.

So we are really going to look to you for guidance in the appropriations hearing on that and then how to address that.

The second yellow flashing light is with the innovation of how to

use the voucher, I just want to alert you—not warn you; it is not

meant to be a stern word—we are heading toward being a Finance

Committee bill. And I will tell you that if this goes to the Finance

Committee, we are dead, because they have so many other things

ahead of them. The senior voucher to pass on to the grandchildren

will end up in the Finance Committee, and they get very cranky

about anything related to what they view as compensation or a

benefit.

The second issue, of course, is the proposed use of a service

voucher for either health care or a prescription drug benefit. This

committee is absolutely aware that these are compelling national

needs. But we are now very concerned that these proposals seek to

compensate for a lack of national policy on these issues. Do we

really want to use national service where you have to become a volunteer to be able to afford your insulin? I do not know about that.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. That is certainly not the intent, Senator.

24

Senator MIKULSKI. But these are yellow flashing lights, and perhaps you can respond in a wrap-up—I intend to stay here a few

more minutes—but I really do not want to take this bill to the Finance Committee, and I think we are going to need to talk about

it, because it could stall what you want to do.

Senator Kennedy wants to move on a pretty good track, and I am

your appropriator, so we could really have at least, if not the whole

President’s plan, a good down payment this year, and then move

right along next year.

So, know that I want to work with you, but you see my flashing

yellow lights.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I certainly do, Senator, and we are looking forward to talking with you. I am scheduled, I think, along with Mr.

Bridgeland to see you next week, and we can talk more about this

as well as the Freedom Corps.

Let me just say that our intent here is not to use service to compensate for other kinds of public policies. Rather, what we are trying to do is make service as attractive as we possibly can.

I was doing a C-SPAN call-in show one morning, and a woman

called in from Ohio, saying that she was a VISTA member at age

62, and she really felt good about her service, but the education

award that you got at the end of this service was not exactly relevant to her.

Well, one way of making it more relevant is by making it

transferrable; another might be by exploring alternative uses for

the education award.

Another big issue that we have to deal with—and it is the complaint I hear most often from AmeriCorps members—is that our

education award is taxable——

Senator MIKULSKI. Yes. That has been a decade-long thing.

Mr. LENKOWSKY [continuing]. So that you have given 2 years of

your life serving in inner-city communities like Red Hook, NY, really doing great work at community organizing in a community that

has been torn apart by a highway; you go in there, and you put

in 2 years, and most of the members, by the way, come from that

community. And then, at the end of that, when they are trying to

get going in their careers, we say, ‘‘By the way, about 15 percent,

20 percent,’’ whatever it is going to be, ‘‘of your education award,

we are going to tax away.’’ It is not right.

Senator MIKULSKI. Yes. This is going to apply to another conversation. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. I would just mention here, Senator Mikulski,

that one other matter I mentioned to Mr. Lenkowsky yesterday

was the McCain-Bayh 18-18-18 legislation, where you enroll in active duty for 18 months, the reserves for 18 months, and community service for 18 months. There may be some positive elements

here, but that goes basically to the Armed Services Committee. The

Senators feel very strongly about it, both of them, and I have

talked with them about it, and that has very, very profound implications both in terms of recruitment as well as the education provisions, the Montgomery provisions in the armed services that are

available to people in the Guard, and we are obviously interested.

And I am sure that whatever comes out, that will be the first

amendment that will be offered.

25

Obviously, we want to try to the extent we can to deal with all

of these issues. I would just underline, though, what Senator Mikulski said about the issues that will be referred to the Finance

Committee—and we can talk about that at another time.

Senator Jeffords, welcome.

Senator JEFFORDS. Good morning.

This is the first I have heard about this, and I would like to

learn more about it. Being the one in charge of FEMA, I was surprised to see this and not know about it.

Other than that, I certainly want to commend any kind of program which helps in these areas, and I want to learn a little more

about it.

How will the $280 million that the President announced yesterday be administered? From what I read in this morning’s paper,

the new Citizen Corps would be tied to FEMA. Will FEMA or the

Corporation for National Service implement this program?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It will be FEMA, Senator. Again, a lot of the

questions related to Citizen Corps, I would encourage you to direct

to the head of FEMA; this is their portion of it, as I said in an earlier response.

Our relationship to Citizen Corps basically comes about as a result of the fact that about 30 percent of our members are doing

public safety, public health and disaster preparedness, and therefore, as State and local councils inventory the resources that might

be available in the case of an emergency, they will take into account people who are engaged in AmeriCorps or Senior Corps for

the most part.

Senator JEFFORDS. I am obviously interested in FEMA’s role

here. Is it the intent of the administration to use a new Citizens

Corps program in both urban and rural communities, or just in the

urban?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I believe so. I think it is really meant to be a

comprehensive program to safeguard against the great risks that

we now recognize in our country.

Senator JEFFORDS. And what entity will oversee it? Who will

have oversight of the program.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. The Citizens Corps?

Senator JEFFORDS. Yes.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I think that is FEMA.

I hope you have all had a chance to receive—and we had asked

to be brought up to the committee this document, which is the

Freedom Corps booklet that was released after the President’s

State of the Union. This helps a lot, but again, I am sure that Mr.

Bridgeland would be glad to come by with the head of FEMA at

an appropriate time to meet with you and go over this.

We know there is a certain amount of confusion there. It is a

new idea. We think it all works, and from my point of view, it is

a big positive for what we do at the Corporation to be able to work

with a Cabinet-level agency like the Freedom Corps. But obviously,

like a lot of new ideas, it needs to be a little bit clearer and betterexplained.

Senator JEFFORDS. Well, I obviously look forward to learning

more about what the intentions are and what responsibility FEMA

will have.

26

Thank you.

Senator MIKULSKI. If I could, Senator Jeffords, as you know, I

am the appropriator for FEMA, and we are not averse to the President’s suggestions, but it is really confusing, and FEMA has no experience in this. Its experience with volunteerism is the volunteer

fire departments, and that has been outstanding. The President’s

budget request for Citizen Corps programs is for $230 million. A

year and a half ago, that is what we were putting into the Fire

Grant program to help all the volunteer fire departments around

the country.

So you and I need to talk, and maybe even hold a joint roundtable so that we can get it right and sort this out.

Senator JEFFORDS. I agree with you. I think we have to get together, obviously.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I will convey that to Mr. Bridgeland as well.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator WELLSTONE. And I would add to what you all have just

said—I think we just got this this morning.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. That is a different document, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. That brings us to the introduction of my friend

Senator Wellstone.

Senator WELLSTONE. Dr. Lenkowsky, welcome.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Thank you.

Senator WELLSTONE. I would like to raise a concern with you

about service learning. There is not a lot of emphasis or talk about

expanding service learning in this reauthorization the way we are

talking about some of the other programs. Our colleague John

Glenn headed up a really important Commission on Service Learning, and from my 20 years teaching, all of what he says rings true.

You can reverse some of the student disengagement and get students more involved. The whole bringing of the real life context to

the classroom can be magic. The citizen aspects of public education—John Dewey talked about the importance of public education to democracy. Getting students more involved in communities—I have seen it in Minnesota—is just incredible. Mr. Jim

Keilsmeyer in Minnesota is I think one of the really great national

leaders on this.

Overall, it has been just win-win-win. So given the extraordinary, I think, contributions of service learning that I have just

outlined, why not more of an emphasis on the expansion of service

learning by expanding the Learn and Serve program?

Mr. LENKOWSKY. We do have a number of items in our proposals,

Senator, that do address this. First, of course, the whole emphasis

on expanding service among college students, which is symbolized

by the Federal work-study program but goes beyond that, as I had

occasion to say a bit earlier, implies expanding service learning in

higher education.

Like you, I was a college professor, and I used to do service

learning with my students as well, and it is very valuable. I think

that insofar as we are encouraging more colleges and universities

to take service seriously across the board, that is one way that we

are responding to this.

A second way is that when President Bush called on Americans

to devote 4,000 hours of service over their lifetime, he was very

27

careful to indicate that service learning is one kind of activity that

would qualify in his view toward those 4,000 hours.

I had a meeting with Senator Glenn and other members of the

commission at about that time, and I pointed out that this is in

fact a call on all schools to start developing service learning programs to help students fulfill that 4,000 hours.

Also, through the expansion of AmeriCorps, we expect that a

number of AmeriCorps members will participate in various ways in

service learning. And last but by no means least, in our proposals

with regard to Learn and Serve America specifically, we are interested in working with members of this committee in connection

with the current funding we are providing to give more emphasis

on quality improvements in service learning programs.

I was interested to read some of your proposals, Senator, where

you put your finger on exactly the major area where we most need

help, and that is teacher training. Yet the current way that we are

doing business at the Corporation in Learn and Serve America, my

understanding is that we have a great deal of difficulty targeting

some of the funds at whatever level you choose to appropriate them

on teacher training.

So first we need to make this kind of change in how we are allocating the funds, and then we will use that to build, at whatever

level you choose to appropriate, to build in the kind of quality improvements that we think are necessary.

When we started Learn and Serve America, a relatively small

fraction of K-12 schools had service learning programs. Our best

data now suggest the percentage is above one-third. So we have

really had a good impact in terms of seeding. Our view, as with our

other proposals, is the next step is quality.

Senator WELLSTONE. I appreciate your comments, and one piece

that I am certainly hoping will be a part of this is the Hubert

Humphrey—we like that name in Minnesota—Civics Education

Act, and part of that is to bump up the authorization for service

learning, and to expand teacher training through summer institutes.

Summer institutes have been incredibly important and effective.

When you bring people together, and people exchange notes and

renew one another, and it is a big bang for the buck.

Where I think I disagree with you, though—and I am sure Senator Glenn has had this conversation or other members of the commission—is that part of what you are talking about in response to

my question about why not more of an emphasis on Learn and

Serve America, you jumped to the work-study. That is different. I

am talking about K through 12 as well as college. Work-study at

the college level is a whole different concept. First of all, people are

working in work study. That is what they do. That is not the same

thing.

Service learning is sort of a synthesis, as you know, between the

experience, the community work, and the curriculum—do the work,

reflect on the work, learn—and it is rich. In Minnesota, I am in a

school every 2 weeks, and I am telling you it is one of the most

exciting things that I have seen.

So we can work together on this, but I really want to just call

on you as we go forward to really put more of an emphasis on what

28

has been very successful, and I really do not think the work-study

model fulfills that need. The President’s call for citizens to be more

involved is fine, too, but that does not speak directly to what has

been the heart and soul and effectiveness of service learning, especially if we are looking at our public school system.

So I really think we have got to do much better than what we

have here.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. We certainly agree with you, Senator. As I said

a bit earlier, Federal work-study is one of may things that we are

doing. We are in active discussion with colleges and universities

now, not simply about Federal work-study but service learning and

other areas as well. So we think we are in agreement on this, and

we will be making further announcements and further strides as

we go forward, and we certainly look forward to working with you.

We are also very interested in the civics education portion——

Senator WELLSTONE. That is good.

Mr. LENKOWSKY [continuing]. And without saying a lot, we have

had some discussions within the umbrella of the Freedom Corps,

and we can talk a little bit about that, too.

Senator WELLSTONE. I think it is terribly important that we have

good civics education, and everybody learns that they should vote

Democrat. [Laughter.] I am pushing it hard.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. One of the things I am thinking about doing—

I would like to see AmeriCorps members have a basic reading list

that might include things like the Declaration of Independence, the

Constitution, things we can all agree on that really do not create

divisions, and read those while you are in AmeriCorps.

As you and I both know from our experience in the classroom,

a lot of our students have never read the Declaration or the Constitution, and we think that if you are going to be in AmeriCorps,

maybe that is something you should read.

Senator WELLSTONE. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to underscore what Senator Wellstone

said. Service learning has been at the same appropriation level,

$43 million, since 1994. I am familiar with the programs up in my

State, and this is not only the service, but it is also challenging

teachers to make education more relevant to kids in these high

schools. It has been working, particularly in underserved areas. I

can take you to a high school in Springfield, MA, which had a high

dropout rate, a high rate of violence, a high teenage pregnancy

rate, and they started an aggressive service learning program, and

it is now probably the number one high school in Springfield, more

directly related to service learning than anything else.

It is challenging for the schools. They have to try to develop

something that is going to be relevant to students. In Massachusetts, they measure acid rain in a school that I visited recently.

They look at the differences in it during winter and spring, where

it comes from, what are the different products, what causes the poison, what is its impact on the lakes, which fish are dying, what

other water life is dying. They have converted that into a science

program that is the most interesting program, and the kids are

flocking to it. It gets them out into the communities to start improving their environment. They learn about the ponds, they learn

29

about the importance of fresh air, they learn about the value of

things which are relevant to them.

So we want to make sure these are quality programs, but I cannot underline enough that if we have things that are working, they

ought to be strengthened, but I agree that we are starting a lot of

other programs around here, and we are lectured constantly—not

by you, but by others—about how we have got to make sure that

every Head Start child is able to score on three different tests, and

how everything has to be done so that we are not going to waste

resources. So we want to make sure that we are finding out what

programs are working well and follow the administration in supporting those efforts; we are interested in opening up, but we want

to make sure that proven programs that are working effectively are

also going to be strengthened.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. We agree with you on that. I think one thing

we know about those habits of the heart is that they start young,

and if you do not start working on them when they are young, it

is going to be that much harder to do later on in life.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Mikulski?

Senator MIKULSKI. Just to wrap up, because I know there is a

lot more to this conversation, first of all, I am going to ask the administration to really win support for our appropriation on the

usual and customary National Service and AmeriCorps. This has

been flat-funded for over 5 years, and every year in Appropriations,

I have to fight to keep it—and quite frankly, it is the other side

of the aisle. I am not talking about many of my good friends on the

other side of the aisle. And in the House, they hate the program.

Jim Walsh is always zeroing it out, only because if it were coming

over in the appropriation, they would zero it out and put it in another program, and we would lose the $400 million. So we need

support, and we need support in a big way.

The other thing—and Senator Jeffords and I will work on

FEMA—I think there is a question of whether Citizen Corps needs to be authorized. We have been asked to spend $230 million for a

new program in FEMA, Senator, I think you ought to look at the

authorizing and give me guidance in terms of what you would like,

so we can work expeditiously. I want to put this $230 million for Citizen Corps into the framework of an appropriator. The Fire Grant program is a new program

over the last 2 years, the goal of which is to help our fire fighters

pay for the equipment they need, to protect the protector, to provide for their personal safety equipment, and new types of vehicles

and technology. That whole program was authorized at $300 million, and I had to forage for the funding. Now we are asked to

spend $230 million on, quite frankly, an ill-defined Citizen Corps

including $144 million in matching grants to form councils. Well,

the volunteer fire fighters are going to say, ‘‘Senator Mikulski, you

know, we are volunteer fire fighters on our own dime and on our

own time, putting ourselves in the line of fire. Why don’t you just

put this funding into the volunteer fire fighters? We are the volunteers.’’

These are the kinds of questions that they raise. I am not being

prickly about it, but I think there is really a lot to sort out here—

and I know it is not under your jurisdiction, but essentially, it afVerDate 11-MAY-2000 14:04 Jun 11, 2002 Jkt 990100 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 78867 SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
30

fects the whole climate on service, and again, I think we need some

sorting out here.

I am sorry that we are dealing with this in April. We are going

to be marking up our appropriations bill soon so we need to sort

out what is in the Finance Committee, and what is this Cabinetlevel council or agency.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. I know that Mr. Bridgeland is looking forward

to chatting with you next week when we are scheduled to see you

and working on that.

Senator MIKULSKI. Yes, and we will be working that out.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. On the first point you made, again, the real

value of being able to work with the White House on this issue is

that we have had some very productive conversations in the other

Chamber with people who have been fairly critical in the past of

what we have done. I would characterize them as educational. One

of the great things that we do is when you actually get beyond—— Senator MIKULSKI. Is that a nice phrase? [Laughter.]

Mr. LENKOWSKY [continuing]. You get beyond the rhetoric, and

you actually go out there and you see Sister Mary Jonas on the corner of Stanislaus and Koskiusku in Buffalo, and you see VISTAS

coming with food so that she can run a food pantry, you realize

that this is not some Government plot to take over the voluntary

sector but is actually a way in which we here in Washington are

working to strengthen the voluntary sector, to build good habits of

citizenship that will last a lifetime, and to help needy people in our

communities.

Whenever I travel, I go to some of the worst parts of every town,

and I see some of the best people. And what most impresses me

is that our folks, the folks in the programs that you authorize and

appropriate funds for, are out there helping those people. And the

more that people see that, the more they are going to support what

we do.

The CHAIRMAN. Give us that wonderful quote of yours, Dr.

Lenkowsky, that you use in your speeches.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. It is what I said—I go to the worst parts of all

communities, and I see the best people. I went to Little Haiti in

Miami not long ago, and there, we had some VISTAS helping firsttime Haitian home owners whose credit histories begin in Port au

Prince and whose native language is Creole, navigating their way

through the very complicated forms you have to do—and I was

doing it at the time myself—to buy or sell a house. And our VISTAs were not very far-removed socioeconomically from the people

they were helping.

So you really had a win-win; you were building stable communities, you were helping needy people, and our VISTAs were really

getting a sense of what they could do and learning some skills.

Many of them wanted to go on after their VISTA year and get into

credit counseling or real estate brokerage or some of the other

skills. So it is really heartening to see, and I think that as people

go out there and see what we are really doing, some of the preconceptions will drop away.

The CHAIRMAN. We will include in the record at this point a

statement of Senator Bond, as well as others who may wish to submit statements.

31

[The prepared statement of Senator Bond follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR BOND

Thank you, Chairman Kennedy for holding this important hearing on the reauthorization of national and community service legislation. I also welcome Mr. Les Lenkowsky, the new Chief Executive

Officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service

(CNCS). As an appropriator and authorizer of the Corporation, I

am very interested in this issue. I look forward to working with

you, Senator Gregg, and my good colleague and fellow appropriator

Senator Mikulski in developing a bi-partisan reauthorization bill

for CNCS.

Along with the Peace Corps, CNCS plays a vital role in leading

the federal government’s involvement in volunteer activities. Out of

the tragedy of the terrorist attacks of September 11th has come a

public cry for citizens to become involved in public service and help

our communities respond to the new demands of homeland security. The demand for volunteerism is probably at its highest ever

as I have witnessed in my home State of Missouri. As I have traveled across Missouri, I have heard from people in all walks of life

- senior citizens, college graduates, and high school students - who

have told me that they want to serve and help their neighborhoods.

The events of September 11th have generated a new spirit of public

service, compassion, and responsibility. We have a unique opportunity to capture and harness this new spirit and in turn, we can

improve our communities and strengthen the bonds of all Americans in unimaginable ways.

However, the current structure and programs of the Corporation

does not lend itself to meet effectively and efficiently the volunteer

needs of Americans. The Corporation is not getting the ‘‘biggest

bang for the buck.’’ That is why I strongly believe that the Corporation’s programs need fundamental reforms. I believe that it should

perform less ‘‘retail’’ activities and focus more on ‘‘wholesale’’ activities. What do I mean? This means that instead of funding and

training volunteers directly, the Corporation should fund and train

organizations that are experienced and equipped to train volunteers. In other words, the Corporation should ‘‘train the trainers’’

so that it can expand and widen its reach in terms of the number

of volunteers it touches today.

Before closing, I must raise the importance of management and

accountability. For too long, the Corporation has been riddled with

inadequate management systems and ineffective oversight practices and it has been unable to provide performance outcome data

on its programs. Unfortunately, the Corporation’s top management

often ignored or minimized the importance of management and accountability and as a result, the Corporation was unable to meet

fully its mission. Further, management problems have hurt the

Corporation’s credibility on Capitol Hill and made it an easy target

of criticism and budget cuts. I cannot emphasize enough how important it is to ensure that the Corporation is able to demonstrate

that every taxpayer dollar is maximized and spent appropriately.

As the previous Chairman and now Ranking Member of the VAHUD and Independent Agencies Appropriations Subcommittee, I

32

have become intimately knowledgeable about the Corporation’s

long-standing management problems.

I am pleased that the Corporation received a clean opinion on its

fiscal year 2001 financial statements audit with no material weaknesses and I congratulate Mr. Lenkowsky for his leadership. However, we cannot afford to back slide from this important achievement, especially if the responsibilities and functions of the Corporation are expanded as requested by the Administration. I hope that

the Corporation’s leadership continues to keep management a top

priority.

Thank you again Chairman Kennedy for holding this hearing. I

look forward to working on the Corporation’s reauthorization this

year and appreciate your leadership in addressing this important

issue.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Senator Jeffords?

Senator JEFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I just want to add that I want

to make sure we all work together. I am on the Finance Committee

along with Senator Bond, and certainly, all of us who have a say

can be better communicated with than we have been thus far so

we can all work toward making this a very workable program.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

I think you are among friends of volunteerism here, and we want

to be constructive, and we are positive, and we applaud the President’s focus on this and admire your own strong personal commitment. And we want to make sure that whatever we have is going

to really work, and we are very eager to work with you. I think you

will find that you have a very positive response from members of

the committee to help make some sense about some of these concerns.

Thank you very, very much.

Mr. LENKOWSKY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee stands adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 11:22 a.m., the committee was adjourned.]

Æ