United States General Accounting Office

GAO Testimony

Before the Committee on Labor and Human Resources,

U.S. Senate

For Release on Delivery

Expected at

9:30 a.m. EST,

Tuesday,

May 21, 1996

NATIONAL SERVICE

PROGRAMS

AmeriCorps*USA—FirstYear Experience and Recent

Program Initiatives

Statement for the Record of Cornelia M. Blanchette

Associate Director

Education and Employment Issues

Health, Education, and Human Services Division

G O A

years

1921 - 1996

GAO/T-HEHS-96-146

National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee:

We are pleased to be able to provide this statement for the record to assist

the Committee in its oversight responsibilities for the Corporation for

National and Community Service (the Corporation).

The Congress created the Corporation in 1993 to administer national

service programs and the national service trust, which pays for

participants’ education awards. For fiscal year 1996, the Corporation’s

budget totaled about $600 million. Among the programs the Corporation

administers is AmeriCorps, the largest national and community service

program since the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s. For fiscal year

1996, the Congress appropriated $215 million for AmeriCorps grants. The

President has requested $261 million for fiscal year 1997.

The statement presents information on the AmeriCorps*USA

program—the largest of the Corporation’s programs. First, it highlights the

major points contained in our report on AmeriCorps*USA issued last

August.1

 The report focused on the total amount of resources made

available from all funding streams to support AmeriCorps*USA in its first

year of operation (1994-95), expressed on a per-participant and

per-service-hour basis. The report also provided comparative information

on the resources available to programs administered by nonfederal and

federal entities, and cited examples of program benefits. Second, it

highlights some of the recent legislative, budgetary, and programmatic

changes in AmeriCorps*USA that have occurred since we testified before

the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations last October.

The information contained in my statement was based on data from

several sources. We held extensive meetings with Corporation officials;

examined legislation establishing the Corporation and national service

programs; and reviewed Corporation program policies, guidance, and

program evaluation plans. We also examined grant files for all grantees’

programs that, according to the Corporation, received funds from fiscal

year 1994 appropriations. Each file typically included the application

submitted by the AmeriCorps*USA grantee, the grant award amount, and

matching contributions proposed and budgeted by the grantee. Because

the grant files did not contain detailed information on the source of

matching contributions, we constructed a random sample of 80 of the 284

nonfederal grantees to collect resource and participant enrollment

1

National Service Programs: AmeriCorps*USA—Early Program Resource and Benefit Information

(GAO/HEHS-95-222, Aug. 29, 1995).

Page 1 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

information.2 Finally, we visited seven AmeriCorps*USA grantees’

programs that represented a mix of characteristics, such as mission and

scale, to gain insight into program operations, actual sources of funds, and

program benefits. We also met again recently with Corporation officials to

determine what initiatives they have undertaken to improve the cost and

performance of AmeriCorps since last October.

In summary, total resources available for AmeriCorps*USA programs for

program year 1994-95 included more than the Corporation’s

appropriations. Over one-third of the financial resources available for

AmeriCorps*USA grantees’ programs came from sources outside the

Corporation, mostly from other federal agencies and state and local

governments. Total resources available per AmeriCorps*USA participant

averaged $26,654, of which about $17,600 came from the Corporation,

$3,200 from non-Corporation federal sources, and $4,000 from state and

local governments. The remaining amount, roughly $1,800, came from the

private sector. Resources available per participant were lower for

programs run by nonfederal organizations than for programs operated by

federal agencies. Total resources available to AmeriCorps*USA grantees’

programs equaled about $16 per service hour. These figures represent

resources available for all program expenses and are not the hourly wages

for participants.

While we did not try to quantify the benefits of the program, our review of

activities at the seven program sites visited indicated that a variety of

initiatives have been undertaken to support AmeriCorps*USA’s goals. The

legislation establishing AmeriCorps*USA authorizes grantees’ programs to

help communities address unmet human, educational, environmental, and

public safety needs. At the grantees’ sites we visited, we found that the

projects had been designed to strengthen communities, develop civic

responsibility, and expand educational opportunities for program

participants and others.

Since our October testimony, the Congress and the Corporation have

taken steps intended to lower AmeriCorps’s cost to the federal

government. For example, the Congress recently prohibited federal

agencies from receiving AmeriCorps grants. In another example, the

Corporation, through its grant award guidelines, now requires higher

matching contributions from grantees for certain program costs, such as

2

Because there were only 13 federal agency grantees, we were able to collect resource information

from all of them.

Page 2 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

staff salaries and project supplies and equipment. These changes and

several others only affect programs for the 1996-97 program year.

Background With the National and Community Service Trust Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-82),

the Congress created the largest national and community service program

since the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s. AmeriCorps*USA

allows participants to earn education awards to help pay for

postsecondary education in exchange for performing community service

that matches priorities established by the Corporation. Participants earn

an education award of $4,725 for full-time service or half of that amount

for part-time service. A minimum of 1,700 hours of service within a year is

required to earn the full $4,725 award. The Corporation requires that

programs devote some portion, but no more than 20 percent, of

participants’ service hours to nondirect service activities, such as training

or studying for the equivalent of a high school diploma. To earn a part-time

award, a participant must perform 900 hours of community service within

2 years (or within 3 years in the case of participants who are full-time

college students). Individuals can serve more than two terms; however,

they can only receive two education awards. The awards, which are held

in trust by the U.S. Treasury, are paid directly to qualified postsecondary

institutions or student loan lenders and must be used within 7 years after

service is completed.

In addition to the education award, AmeriCorps*USA participants receive

a living allowance stipend that is at least equal to, but no more than

double, the average annual living allowance received by Volunteers in

Service to America (VISTA) participants—about $7,640 for full-time

participants in fiscal year 1994. Additional benefits include health

insurance and child care assistance for participants who need them.

Individuals can join a national service program before, during, or after

postsecondary education. A participant must be a citizen, a national, or a

lawful permanent resident of the United States. A participant must also be

a high school graduate, agree to earn the equivalent of a high school

diploma before receiving an education award, or be granted a waiver by

the program. Selection of participants is not based on financial need.

In its fiscal year 1994 appropriations, the Corporation anticipated fielding

about 18,350 full- and part-time AmeriCorps*USA participants. The

Corporation’s budget for AmeriCorps*USA grants and national service

education awards was about $249 million in fiscal year 1994. The

Page 3 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

Corporation used about $149 million of its fiscal year 1994 appropriations

to make about 300 grants to nonprofit organizations and federal, state, and

local government agencies to operate AmeriCorps*USA programs.

Grant recipients use grant funds to pay up to 85 percent of the cost of

participants’ living allowances and benefits (up to 100 percent of child

care expenses) and up to 75 percent of other program costs, including

participant training, education, and uniforms; staff salaries, travel,

transportation, supplies, and equipment; and program evaluation and

administrative costs. Grants are based in part on the number of

participants the program estimates it will enroll during the year. If

participants leave the program during the year, the Corporation may either

allow the program to redirect participant stipend and benefit funds to

other program expenses or take back any unused portion of the grant.

To ensure that federal Corporation dollars are used to leverage other

resources for program support, grantees must also obtain support from

non-Corporation sources to help pay for the program. This support, which

can be cash or in-kind contributions, may come from other federal sources

as well as state and local governments, and private sources. In-kind

contributions include personnel to manage AmeriCorps*USA programs as

well as to supervise and train participants; office facilities and supplies;

and materials and equipment needed in the course of conducting national

service projects.

Consistent with AmeriCorps’s enacting legislation, some federal agencies

received grants during the initial 2 program years to support

AmeriCorps*USA participants who performed work furthering the

agencies’ missions. Federal agency grantees could use their own resources

in addition to the Corporation grant to integrate national service more

fully into their mission work.

AmeriCorps*USA

Primarily Supported

by Public Resources

In its first program year, AmeriCorps*USA relied heavily on public

support. The Corporation’s appropriations accounted for almost

two-thirds of resources available for AmeriCorps*USA grantees. When

Corporation appropriations were combined with resources from other

federal agencies and state and local governments, the public sector

provided about 88 percent of the $351 million in total program resources

available. Federal resources accounted for 74 percent (about

$260 million), while state and local government contributions made up 14

percent ($50 million). Private cash and in-kind contributions constituted

Page 4 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

the smallest share of resources, amounting to about 12 percent (or about

$41 million).

Most of the Corporation’s funding for AmeriCorps*USA projects went to

providing operating grants and education awards. Of the Corporation’s

funding, 61 percent financed operating grants. Slightly over one-quarter

supported participants’ education awards, while the remainder went

toward Corporation program management and administration.

Most of the matching contributions AmeriCorps*USA programs received

came from public as opposed to private sources. About 69 percent of all

matching resources came from either a federal or a state or local

government source, with the split between cash and in-kind contributions

being about 43 percent (about $57 million) and 26 percent (about

$34 million), respectively. The remaining 31 percent of matching resources

were from private sources, with cash and in-kind contributions accounting

for 17 percent (about $23 million) and 14 percent (about $18 million),

respectively.

In calculating resources available on a per-participant and

per-service-hour basis (see table 1), we found that the average from all

sources per AmeriCorps*USA participant was about $26,654 (excluding

in-kind contributions from private sources). This amounted to about $16

per service hour or about $20 per direct service hour, assuming 20 percent

of the 1,700 hours of total service was nondirect service time.3

 These

figures represent resources available for all program expenses and are not

the equivalent of annual salaries or hourly wages for participants.

3

In establishing the national service program, the Congress wanted participants to engage in activities

that benefit communities (direct service) and the program participants themselves (nondirect service).

Direct service activities include those that address unmet human, educational, environmental, or

public safety needs. Nondirect service activities include training participants to carry out national

service projects and assisting them in making the transition to other educational and career

opportunities after they complete national service.

Page 5 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

Table 1: Per-Participant and

Per-Service-Hour Resources Available

for AmeriCorps*USA, by Source

Source of contribution

Resources available

Per FTE

Per

service

hour

Per direct

service

hour

Corporation for National and Community Service

Resources $17,629 $10.37 $12.96

Other federal

Cash 2,247 1.32 1.65

In-kind 930 0.55 0.68

State and local governmenta

Cash 2,272 1.34 1.67

In-kind 1,756 1.03 1.29

Private

Cash 1,819 1.07 1.34

Total $26,654 $15.68 $19.60

Notes: Items may not sum to totals because of rounding.

We calculated available resources per participant on a full-time-equivalent (FTE) basis.

aState and local contributors included state and city departments, such as police forces and

school systems, and public 2- and 4-year postsecondary institutions.

It is important not to equate our funding information with cost data.

Because most AmeriCorps*USA programs were still implementing their

first year of operations, actual cost could not be determined. Funding and

in-kind contributions from sources other than the Corporation were

reported to us in May 1995 as resources already received or those that

program directors were certain of receiving by the end of their current

operating year. Therefore, actual resource and expenditure levels could be

higher or lower than indicated by the estimates reported to us.

Federal Agency

Programs Are Most

Resource Intensive

We found significant differences in levels of resources available for

nonfederal versus federal programs (see table 2). On average,

AmeriCorps*USA programs operated by nonprofit organizations and state

and local agencies received about $25,800 in cash and in-kind

contributions per participant. In contrast, programs sponsored by federal

agencies received about $31,000 in cash and in-kind contributions per

participant—about 20 percent more than programs administered by

nonfederal grantees. In addition, federal agencies relied far more on

non-Corporation federal resources than their counterparts. On average,

Page 6 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

federal agency grantees had about $15,500 in cash and in-kind

contributions available per participant from federal sources other than the

Corporation. Non-Corporation federal funds accounted for about

50 percent of total resources available to federal grantees.4

 Nonfederal

AmeriCorps*USA grantees received resources of less than $800 per

participant from non-Corporation federal sources, or about 3 percent of

their total resources. The appendix contains more detailed program

resource information by sponsoring agency.

Table 2: Comparison of Resources

Available for Federal and Nonfederal

AmeriCorps*USA Programs

Source of contribution

Nonfederal

program

resources

Federal

program

resources

All

program

resources

Corporation for National and Community Service

Resources $18,602 $12,665 $17,629

Other federal

Cash 493 11,187 2,247

In-kind 261 4,338 930

State and local government

Cash 2,607 564 2,272

In-kind 1,880 1,126 1,756

Private

Cash 1,953 1,136 1,819

Total $25,797 $31,017 $26,654

Note: Items may not sum to totals because of rounding.

Program Initiatives

Support the Varied

Goals of

AmeriCorps*USA

In its mission statement, the Corporation had identified several objectives

that spanned a wide range of accomplishments, from very tangible results

to those much harder to quantify. During our site visits, we observed local

programs helping communities. AmeriCorps*USA has also sponsored an

evaluation of its own that summarized results at a sample of programs

during their first 5 months of operation and identified diverse

achievements related to each service area.

Meeting Unmet Needs One of AmeriCorps*USA’s objectives was to help the nation meet its

unmet human, educational, environmental, and public safety needs, or as

the Corporation states it, “getting things done.” In our visits, we observed

4

Almost all of the non-Corporation federal cash and in-kind contributions came from the sponsoring

federal agencies themselves.

Page 7 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

participants renovating inner-city housing, assisting teachers in elementary

schools, maintaining and reestablishing native vegetation in a flood

control area, analyzing neighborhood crime statistics to better target

prevention measures, and developing a program in a community food bank

for people with special dietary needs.

Strengthening

Communities

AmeriCorps’s legislation identified renewing the spirit of community as an

objective, and the program’s mission includes “strengthening the ties that

bind us together as a people.” We observed several projects focused on

rebuilding communities. For example, a multifamily house being

renovated was formerly a congregating spot for drug dealers. Program

officials believe that after completion, it will encourage other

neighborhood improvements. Another team built a community farm

market and renovated a municipal stadium, both of which a town official

said will continue to provide economic and social benefits to the

community.

Another way to meet this objective was to have participants with diverse

backgrounds working together. Participants of several programs we

visited spanned a wide age range, from teenagers to retirees. Teams also

showed diversity in educational, economic, and ethnic backgrounds.

Participants said that a valuable aspect of the program was working with

others with different backgrounds and benefiting from their strengths.

Fostering Responsibility Another of AmeriCorps*USA’s program objectives was to foster civic

responsibility. We saw evidence of this at programs such as one where

participants devoted half of each Friday to working on community service

projects they devised and carried out independently. Participants at

another program, in which they organized meetings to establish

relationships between at-risk youth and elderly people, commented that

this work had taught them how to organize programs, experience they

believed would be helpful as they took on roles in their communities.

Training periods included conflict resolution techniques and team-building

skills.

Expanding Opportunities Both the AmeriCorps legislation and the Corporation’s mission identified

expanding opportunities as an objective. In practice, individuals who

participate in national service have their educational opportunities

expanded by the education awards, which help them pursue higher

Page 8 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

education or job training. At the sites we visited, participants indicated

that the education award was an important part of their decision to

participate in AmeriCorps*USA. Programs also supported participants in

obtaining high school diplomas or the equivalent. According to

Corporation regulations, a full-time participant who does not have a high

school diploma or its equivalent generally must agree to earn one or the

other before using the education award. In one program, a general

equivalency diploma (GED) candidate was receiving classroom instruction

and individual tutoring. She had recently passed the preliminary GED test

after failing the GED test five times. After doing some extra preparation for

the math portion, she will take the actual GED test again. A larger program

that recruited at-risk youth, most of whom do not have high school

diplomas, provided classroom instruction related to the service that

participants performed, such as a construction-based math curriculum.

Program officials said most of the participants are enrolled in high school

equivalency courses and that at least five have already passed the GED test.

We also saw programs that offer participants the chance to get

postsecondary academic credit. One such program, affiliated with a

private college, offered participants the option of pursuing an

environmental studies curriculum through which they can earn up to six

upper-level credits at a reduced tuition. Half of the participants have

chosen to do so. A second program allowed participants to earn 36 credit

hours toward an associate’s degree in the natural sciences through their

service, which can lead to state certification as an environmental

restoration technician.

Initiatives to Reduce

AmeriCorps Costs

Since we reported on the program last October, both the Congress and the

Corporation have implemented measures aimed at lowering AmeriCorps’s

cost. On the legislative side, the Congress mandated new funding

restrictions for the Corporation. On the programmatic side, the

Corporation, after consulting with Members of Congress, has revised its

grant guidelines. These new measures will only affect programs receiving

grants for the upcoming 1996-97 program year.

Legislative Mandates In addition to reducing AmeriCorps grant funding by $4 million (from

$219 million in fiscal year 1995 to $215 million in fiscal year 1996), the 1996

fiscal year appropriations act (P.L. 104-134) put into place requirements

for the 1996-97 AmeriCorps program year. One requirement renders

Page 9 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

federal agencies ineligible to receive AmeriCorps grants.5 The law also

requires that to the maximum extent possible, the Corporation

(1) increase the amount of matching contributions provided by the private

sector and (2) reduce the total federal cost per participant in AmeriCorps

programs. As part of the fiscal year 1996 appropriations act, the Congress

also mandated that GAO further study the Corporation’s operations. We

expect to complete our study by the end of this fiscal year.

Corporation Initiatives In recent months, the Corporation has worked with Members of Congress

to identify ways to reduce AmeriCorps’s program costs. Subsequently, the

Corporation has revised its grant application guidelines for programs

receiving funding in the upcoming 1996-97 program year. For example, in

response to congressional concerns over the cost of mandating the

purchase and use of uniforms, the AmeriCorps*USA uniform package

(t-shirt, sweatshirt, button, and so on) is no longer a program requirement.

The Corporation also has directed grantees exceeding a program year

1995-96 cost per participant of $13,800 to reduce their proposed program

year 1996-97 per-participant costs by an overall average of 10 percent.6

 The

Corporation has also increased the grantee’s share of total program

operating costs from 25 to 33 percent for grants awarded for the 1996-97

program year.7

 The Corporation’s revised grant guidelines also seek to

reduce costs by encouraging a program requesting increased funding to

add additional participants, thereby reducing its cost per participant. The

guidelines also encourage programs to seek additional funding only for

education awards.

Concluding Remarks In summary, I would like to reemphasize what our AmeriCorps*USA

review addressed. We determined, on a national scale, the total amount of

resources available to AmeriCorps*USA programs to—in the

5

The Corporation’s new grant guidelines, however, do allow local nonfederal programs that were

formerly subgrantees of federal agency AmeriCorps grants to reapply for a 1-year renewal grant for

program year 1996-97.

6

The Corporation, in its 1996 guidelines, calculates the “per member cost” as the total Corporation

grant award divided by the number of full-time equivalent AmeriCorps participants. The $13,800

per-participant figure is a baseline amount of Corporation funding and excludes the $4,725 education

award and Corporation overhead.

7

Program operating costs include training and education of AmeriCorps participants, program staff

salaries, supplies and equipment, and evaluation costs. Program operating costs exclude AmeriCorps

participant support costs (stipend per full-time participant of at least $7,945 for program year 1996-97

and health insurance for each participant), child care costs, and an education award of $4,725. These

costs can be covered, either fully (for education awards and child care) or up to 85 percent (for

participant support), with Corporation funds.

Page 10 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
National Service Programs:

AmeriCorps*USA—First-Year Experience

and Recent Program Initiatives

Corporation’s words—“get things done.” Total resources available means

many things. It means cash and in-kind contributions that pay participants’

living allowances, social security taxes, health insurance, child care, and

the education awards they earn in exchange for their service. It means

resources available to pay local program staff who manage operations and

supervise staff; to pay rent for office space and purchase supplies; to pay

for travel and transportation for program staff and participants; and to pay

for materials needed to conduct national service projects. It means

resources available to pay for planning grants used to design and formalize

future national service programs. And it means resources available to pay

for the staff and operations of the Corporation for National and

Community Service.

Our objective was not to draw conclusions about whether

AmeriCorps*USA was cost-effective. Rather, it was to gather information

on the total amount of resources available to AmeriCorps*USA programs

nationwide and to provide this information by resource stream—that is, by

federal, state, and local government and private sources. Though not

precise cost data, this information illustrated the funding levels that may

be needed to support new program endeavors of similar scale in the

future. It also indicated the degree of partnership between the public and

private sectors.

Since we completed our review, the Congress and the Corporation have

undertaken a number of measures that are intended to reduce the costs of

AmeriCorps. Because many of these initiatives will not take effect until the

upcoming 1996-97 program year, it is too early to determine their impact.

Madam Chairman, that concludes my statement for the record.

Contributors For more information about this testimony, please call Wayne B. Upshaw

at (202) 512-7006 or Carol L. Patey at (617) 565-7575. Other major

contributors to this testimony included C. Jeff Appel, Nancy K.

Kintner-Meyer, and James W. Spaulding.

Page 11 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
Appendix 

Resources Available for AmeriCorps*USA

Programs Sponsored by Federal Agencies

Other resources

Resources available

Federal agency grantee:

AmeriCorps*USA program

Corporation

award

(adjusted)

Other

federal State/local

Private

cash

Number of

FTEs

Per

participant

Per

service

hour

Per direct

service

hour

Agriculture:

AmeriCorps/USDA $2,467,281 $21,156,957 $979,355 $740,250 1131.5 $29,186 $17.17 $21.46

Defense/Navy: Seaborne

Conservation Corps 650,226 2,166,338 0 0 47.0 66,715 39.24 49.06

Energy: Salmon Corps 792,718 1,375,325 0 105,410 72.0 38,363 22.57 28.21

Environmental Protection

Agency: Improving

Disadvantaged

Neighborhoods 1,427,335 1,083,947 351,425 106,705 92.0 39,064 22.98 28.72

Health and Human

Services/Agency for

Children and Families:

FamilyServe 506,667 393,482 82,958 50 50.0 26,450 15.56 19.45

Health and Human

Services/ Administration on

Developmental Disabilities:

ADD Corps 669,300 242,868 232,508 191,536 34.5 45,519 26.78 33.47

Health and Human

Services/Health Resources

and Services

Administration: HRSA

Model Health Service Corps 777,833 346,047 157,315 67,191 58.5 29,837 17.55 21.94

Interior: Interior

AmeriCorps*USA Program 1,149,467 1,776,914 67,315 720,000 155.0 30,747 18.09 22.61

Justice: JustServe 1,277,183 1,670,000 1,227,236 0 172.5 30,987 18.23 22.78

Labor: AmeriCorps/Youth

Fair Chance 542,623 299,320 0 0 50.5 23,459 13.80 17.25

National Endowment for the

Arts: Writers Corps 379,198 194,984 10,000 155,000 35.5 27,610 16.24 20.30

National Institute for

Literacy: Literacy*

AmeriCorps 737,847 29,600 34,700 160,913 62.5 22,196 13.06 16.32

Neighborhood

Reinvestment Corporation:

NeighborWorks

Community Corps 0 566,000 144,500 30,000 28.0 33,234 19.55 24.44

Transportation: National

Service Initiative 270,250 420,099 182,696 56,397 42.0 28,917 17.01 21.26

Veterans Affairs:

Collaboration for Homeless

Veterans 423,077 159,450 0 0 22.0 33,266 19.57 24.46

Total $12,071,004 $31,881,332 $3,470,008 $2,333,452 2,053.5 $31,017a $18.25b $22.81c

(Table notes on next page)

Page 12 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
Appendix 

Resources Available for AmeriCorps*USA

Programs Sponsored by Federal Agencies

Note: Items may not sum to totals because of rounding.

aThis figure is the sum of (1) Corporation award (adjusted), other federal contributions, state and

local government contributions, and private cash, for all federal agencies together, divided by

number of FTEs for all federal agencies, plus (2) an education stipend of $4,725 per FTE, plus

(3) Corporation overhead of $2,062 per FTE. It is not an average of the individual agency figures.

bThis represents the resources per participant divided by 1,700 service hours. It is not an average

of the individual agency figures.

cThis represents the resources per participant divided by 1,360 direct service hours. It is not an

average of the individual agency figures.

(104856) Page 13 GAO/T-HEHS-96-146
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the

following address, accompanied by a check or money order

made out to the Superintendent of Documents, when

necessary. VISA and MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address

are discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 6015

Gaithersburg, MD 20884-6015

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 

or by using fax number (301) 258-4066, or TDD (301) 413-0006.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any

list from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a

touchtone phone. A recorded menu will provide information on

how to obtain these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET,

send an e-mail message with "info" in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at:

http://www.gao.gov

PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. G100