MEASURING 

PERFORMANCE

The Corporation for 

National and 

Community Service 

Faces Challenges 

Demonstrating 

Outcomes

Report to Congressional Committees

February 2012

GAO-12-310

United States Government Accountability Office

GAO
Page i GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Letter 1 

Appendix I Briefing Slides 7

Appendix II List of CNCS Grantees Interviewed 33

Appendix III Reported Legal Constraints on Holding Senior Corps Grantees 

Accountable 34

Appendix IV Comments from the Corporation for National and 

Community Service 35

Appendix V GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 36

Related GAO Products 37

Abbreviations

CNCS Corporation for National and Community Service

NCCC National Civilian Community Corps 

VISTA AmeriCorps Volunteers in Service to America

Contents
Page ii GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

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

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

United States Government Accountability Office

Washington, DC 20548

February 17, 2012

The Honorable Tom Harkin

Chairman

The Honorable Michael B. Enzi

Ranking Member

Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions

United States Senate

The Honorable John Kline

Chairman

The Honorable George Miller

Ranking Member

Committee on Education and the Workforce

House of Representatives

It is important for federal agencies—and their grantees—to demonstrate 

the impact of their work and ensure the efficient use of their resources. 

This becomes even more important during times of fiscal stress and tight 

budget constraints as Congress makes difficult funding choices. In fiscal 

year 2011, Congress appropriated approximately $1 billion for the 

Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS)—the federal 

agency responsible for administering the country’s national service 

programs—to carry out a variety of federally funded programs, such as 

AmeriCorps. Through these programs, CNCS provides grants to more 

than 70,000 volunteer organizations to address a range of community 

challenges through service activities such as tutoring children, responding 

to natural disasters, or helping seniors to live independently. In 2009, the 

Serve America Act made substantial changes to CNCS’s mission, 

including giving CNCS new areas of emphasis, such as working with 

veterans, and directing it to focus more on performance evaluation and

cost-effectiveness.1 The Serve America Act also mandated that we 

perform a series of reviews relating to program effectiveness with respect 

to CNCS’s performance measures.2

 

1

Pub. L. No. 111-13, §§ 1101(6), 1302, and 1607, 123 Stat. 1460, 1463, 1485, 1532.

2 Id. at § 1712, 123 Stat. 1460, 1551.

 
 

Page 2 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

In 2010, we reported that the performance measures from CNCS’s 

previous strategic plan were poorly aligned with its strategic goals and did 

not demonstrate the results of its work.3

To answer the first question, we examined agency strategic planning and 

grant-making documents and budget data to better understand how 

CNCS allocates funding to service activities that are covered by its 

performance measures. We also interviewed CNCS officials to obtain 

information about CNCS’s grant-making policies and the service activities 

that it funds. We also made adjustments to the programs’ budgets to 

remove certain administrative expenses identified by CNCS such as 

health care stipends and child care assistance for the AmeriCorps 

Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) program. Many of these costs 

are beyond the control of programs and should not be directly linked to 

the program’s performance. We discussed these adjustments with 

agency budget officials and they concurred with our approach. To answer 

the second question, we conducted site visits and phone interviews with a 

total of 20 grantees, including 3 state service commissions.

Given that CNCS is in the 

process of implementing its new strategic plan and performance 

measures, we examined the following key questions: (1) To what extent 

does CNCS fund service activities that are covered by its performance 

measures? (2) What key challenges, if any, affect the ability of CNCS and 

its grantees to measure performance?

4 (For a list of 

the grantees we interviewed, see app. II.) We selected these grantees 

because they are geographically diverse and cover both urban and rural 

locations, provide representation among CNCS’s main programs5

 

3

GAO, Performance Measurement: Better Alignment to Strategic Goals and Data 

Verification Needed at the Corporation for National and Community Service, 

and 

program focus areas, and reflect varying levels of success in measuring 

their performance. We conducted site visits with grantees in three 

states—California, Maryland, and Texas—as well as in the District of 

Columbia. The remaining interviews were conducted by phone. During 

our interviews, we used interview protocols with a standard set of 

questions about grantees’ experiences measuring performance and any 

GAO-10-886

(Washington, D.C.: July 28, 2010).

4

State service commissions are responsible for allocating CNCS’s funding to AmeriCorps 

state programs and monitoring program activities.

5

These main programs include AmeriCorps State and National, VISTA, National Civilian 

Community Corps (NCCC), and Senior Corps.
 

Page 3 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

challenges they encountered in the process. The results of our site visits 

and phone interviews with these 20 grantees cannot be generalized. 

Furthermore, we also met with CNCS officials to identify performance 

measurement challenges and reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, 

and agency documents.

We conducted this performance audit from April 2011 to February 2012 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives.

We briefed your staff on the results of our analysis on January 11, 2012, 

and this report formally conveys the information provided during that 

briefing. See appendix I for the briefing slides that were presented on that 

date. In summary, we reported the following findings:

• CNCS officials expect that most grantees from its main programs will 

adopt at least 1 of the agency’s 16 agency-wide performance 

measures. Specifically, officials told us that AmeriCorps State and 

National and VISTA grantees will adopt at least 1 of CNCS’s 

performance measures by fiscal year 2012, and Senior Corps 

grantees will adopt at least 1 measure by fiscal year 2013. However, 

officials also said that they plan to fund some activities that do not fall 

under the performance measures, particularly activities that meet local 

needs and/or are innovative. For example, CNCS has funded 

grantees in the state of Washington to carry out gang violence 

prevention activities to address this community challenge. This could 

present challenges for CNCS as it balances accountability, using its 

performance measures to assess the impact of grantees’ service 

activities, with flexibility, allowing grantees to take on projects that 

meet local needs. CNCS may find it difficult to demonstrate the 

effectiveness of its service activities that fall outside its performance 

measures. Additionally, CNCS faces challenges using its performance 

measures to promote accountability among its Senior Corps grantees, 

as legal restrictions make it difficult for CNCS to remove funding from 

grantees that consistently fail to meet their performance targets, and 

these restrictions include some requirements for Senior Corps 

programs that do not apply to CNCS’s other programs. These 

restrictions can make it more difficult to hold these grantees 

accountable for performance. (For additional information on these 
 

Page 4 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

legal restrictions, see app. III.) Specifically, officials told us that failure 

to meet performance targets is not a sufficient reason to re-compete a 

Senior Corps grant, and that it is very difficult to terminate a grant for 

poor performance. At the time of our review, CNCS officials told us 

that they have not yet sought statutory changes to address these legal 

constraints. 

• Grantees we interviewed reported performance measurement 

challenges in four general areas that may hamper CNCS’s ability to 

measure its impact: understanding and applying CNCS’s performance 

requirements, developing data collection approaches, collecting data, 

and reporting data. For example, one grantee told us that CNCS’s 

guidance was too broad, and as a result, it had a difficult time 

understanding how to match its program work to the agency’s 

performance measurement requirements. With regard to developing 

data collection approaches, one grantee working with elementary and 

high school students reported difficulties designing an approach that 

would allow the program to collect and measure changes in student 

behavior and knowledge to demonstrate their impact. Grantees with 

multiple worksites and limited staff capacity pointed to challenges 

collecting performance data across worksites. Finally, grantees 

commented that it was challenging to report their performance data 

through eGrants, CNCS’s computer system. CNCS has taken some 

steps to address these challenges; however, many of these steps are 

in the early implementation stages.

As CNCS looks for better ways to demonstrate its impact to Congress 

and the American public, it will be critical for the agency to hold grantees 

accountable for meeting performance targets. To provide other options for 

CNCS to hold Senior Corps grantees accountable for performance, we 

recommended that the Chief Executive Officer of CNCS take action to 

seek statutory changes, as appropriate, that would allow it to re-compete 

Senior Corps grants if the agency has determined current grant recipients 

do not meet agency performance measures, or financial management or 

other requirements.

We provided a draft of this report to officials at CNCS for review and 

comment. In response, CNCS provided written comments, which are 

reproduced in appendix IV. Overall, CNCS agreed with our findings, and 

consistent with our recommendation, the agency said it planned to seek 

statutory changes to address the legal constraints on Senior Corps’ ability 

to introduce competition into those programs. In CNCS’s Congressional 

Budget Justification for fiscal year 2013, released February 13, 2012, 
 

Page 5 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

CNCS set forth the statutory changes it is seeking to address these legal 

constraints on the Senior Corps programs. If enacted, these changes 

would remove most of the constraints that currently prevent CNCS from 

holding Senior Corps grantees accountable for meeting performance 

targets. Improved accountability could enable CNCS to more fully 

demonstrate its impact.

In addition, CNCS provided us with technical comments, which we 

incorporated as appropriate. Notably, in its technical comments, CNCS 

said it continues to make progress aligning appropriate performance 

measures for its major programs. Specifically, it said that NCCC will be 

reporting on some of CNCS’s 16 agency-wide performance measures 

that will capture its service work, including its activities related to disaster 

response. This should enable CNCS to better align NCCC’s activities to 

the agency’s goals.

With reference to our findings on CNCS’s performance measures, CNCS 

said in its technical comments that it plans to measure performance of 

service activities not aligned to its key strategic goals and will require 

grantees to submit their programs’ specific performance data in progress 

reports to the agency. While it is important to measure performance and 

report on performance for all its service activities, the diversity of these 

activities may make gathering, combining, and presenting robust and 

consistent performance information difficult and lead to challenges 

demonstrating the overall impact of CNCS’s efforts. Thus, as emphasized 

in this review and our previous work, it will remain critical for CNCS to 

focus its performance measures on the vital few that align with its 

strategic goals.6

 

6

See GAO-10-243. 
 

Page 6 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

We are sending this report to CNCS, appropriate congressional 

committees, and other interested parties. In addition, the report will be 

available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov. If you or 

your staff have any questions about this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-7215 or scottg@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff who made key contributions to this report are 

listed in appendix V.

George A. Scott

Director, Education, Workforce and

Income Security Issues
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 7 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Appendix I: Briefing Slides

1

Measuring Performance: The Corporation 

for National and Community Service Faces 

Challenges Demonstrating Outcomes

Briefing to Congressional Committees

January 11, 2012
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 8 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Overview

• Introduction

• Research Objectives

• Scope and Methodology

• Summary of Findings

• Background

• Findings

• Conclusions 

2
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 9 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

3

Introduction

• In constrained budget environments, it is increasingly important for federal 

agencies – and their grantees – to demonstrate the impact of their work and ensure the efficient use of their resources.

• In fiscal year 2011, Congress appropriated approximately $1 billion for the 

Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) to administer a 

variety of volunteer and national service programs. 

• The Serve America Act mandated GAO to perform a series of reviews 

relating to program effectiveness with respect to CNCS’s performance 

measures. This work is our second review.1

• Our previous work found that CNCS’s performance measures aligned 

poorly with its strategic goals and did not demonstrate the results of its 

work.2

• At the time of our review, CNCS had developed a new strategic plan for 

fiscal years 2011-2015, which included new areas of responsibility identified by the Serve America Act (Pub. L. No. 111-13) and new performance measures.

1Pub. L. No. 111-13, § 1712, 123 Stat. 1460, 1551 (2009). 

2GAO, Performance Measurement: Better Alignment to Strategic Goals and Data Verification Needed at the Corporation for National and Community Service, GAO-10-886 (Washington, D.C.: July 28, 2010).
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 10 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

4

Research Objectives

• Objective 1: To what extent does CNCS fund service 

activities that are covered by its performance measures? 

• Objective 2: What key challenges, if any, affect the ability of 

CNCS and its grantees to measure performance?

GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 11 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

5

Scope and Methodology

• To examine the extent to which CNCS funds service 

activities that are covered by its performance measures, we:

• Examined agency strategic planning and grant-making 

documents and budget data.

• Interviewed CNCS officials to obtain information about 

CNCS’s grant-making policies and the service activities 

that it funds.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 12 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

6

Scope and Methodology

• To examine the challenges that may affect CNCS’s ability to 

measure performance, we:

• Conducted site visits and phone interviews with 20 grantees,3

including state commissions, that represented CNCS’s main 

programs and focus areas, various geographical locations, 

and varying level of success with measuring performance. 

The information obtained cannot be generalized.

• Reviewed relevant federal laws, regulations, and agency 

documents, and interviewed CNCS officials to identify 

performance-related challenges.

3 For the purposes of this study, we are using the term “grantee” in general to describe both CNCS grantees and sponsors—those organizations that 

receive AmeriCorps Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) volunteers. We did not include National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC) worksites in 

our interviews.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 13 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

7

Scope and Methodology

• We conducted this performance audit from April 2011 to 

February 2012 in accordance with generally accepted 

government auditing standards. Those standards require 

that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, 

appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We 

believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable 

basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit 

objectives.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 14 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

8

Summary of Findings

• CNCS officials expect that most grantees from its main programs will adopt at least one of the 

agency’s 16 performance measures. 

• Officials told us that AmeriCorps State and National and AmeriCorps VISTA grantees will 

adopt at least one of CNCS’s performance measures by fiscal year 2012, and Senior 

Corps grantees will adopt at least one measure by fiscal year 2013. 

• However, CNCS faces difficulties balancing the need to measure the outcomes of its 

activities with providing flexibility for its programs to meet local needs. 

• Further, CNCS is limited in its ability to promote accountability among its Senior Corps 

grantees, as statutory restrictions make it difficult to remove funding from grantees that 

consistently fail to meet performance targets. However, officials told us that they have not 

yet sought statutory changes to address these restrictions.

• CNCS may also face challenges reporting its impact due to several grantee-related performance 

measurement challenges, such as collecting performance data from partnering worksites.

• CNCS has taken steps to address grantees’ performance measurement concerns; 

however, many of these efforts are in the early implementation stages.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 15 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

9

Four Programs Accounted for 90 Percent of CNCS’s Budget 

for Volunteer Service Activities in Fiscal Year 2011 

CNCS’s Fiscal Year 2011 Budget for Volunteer Service Activities, by Program, in Millions

Source: GAO analysis of CNCS budget data. 

Note: Excludes administrative costs and education awards to volunteers.

Background
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 16 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Background

The 16 Agency-Wide Performance Measures in CNCS’s Fiscal 

Year 2011- 2015 Strategic Plan Will Gauge Progress Toward Its 

Four Goals

Source: GAO analysis of CNCS’s FY 2011-2015 strategic plan. 4 CNCS’s strategic plan includes other performance measures, but they are not agency-wide. 

10

• Performance measures help agencies 

gauge their progress toward achieving 

their goals. 

• CNCS officials told us that these 16 

agency-wide performance measures 

reflect CNCS’s priorities.4

• Officials plan to use them to 

demonstrate how CNCS uses its 

resources to fund service activities that 

contribute to its four goals. 
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 17 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Nine of the 16 Agency-Wide Performance Measures Are in 

Goal 1, Divided into 6 Focus Areas

11

Background

Source: GAO analysis of CNCS’s FY 2011-2015 strategic plan.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 18 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

12

CNCS Expects That Most Grantees Will Adopt at 

Least One of its Performance Measures

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• In fiscal year 2012, CNCS officials said they expect most AmeriCorps State 

and National and VISTA grantees to adopt at least one of CNCS’s 16 

performance measures voluntarily. 

• Officials said that “adopting” CNCS’s performance measures means 

that grantees choose one or more of the 16 measures that relate to 

their work, even if they do not cover all their service activities. 

• Officials told us that grantees will generally be expected to measure 

both the outputs and the final outcomes of their service activities. For 

example, the number of students who complete the program is an 

output, while improved academic performance is an outcome.

• Beginning in fiscal year 2013, CNCS officials also said that they expect to 

require Senior Corps grantees to adopt at least one of the16 performance 

measures. They did not estimate a time frame for requiring other grantees 

to adopt them.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 19 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

13

CNCS Will Fund Some Service Activities That Do 

Not Align With its Performance Measures

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• CNCS officials told us that they expect to fund some AmeriCorps State 

and National grantees that do not adopt CNCS’s performance 

measures, but whose work is innovative or meets local needs.

• Some service activities that may meet local needs, such as 

preventing gang violence or teen pregnancies, do not clearly fit 

within CNCS’s 16 performance measures.

• AmeriCorps state formula grantees are overseen by state service 

commissions,5 which have the authority to decide whether to require 

grantees to use CNCS’s performance measures.

5 State service commissions provide CNCS funding to AmeriCorps state formula grantees in their states through 

annual grant competitions. In addition, the Commissions manage, monitor and evaluate these grantees.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 20 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

14

CNCS Will Fund Some Service Activities That Do 

Not Align With its Performance Measures

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• CNCS officials anticipate that some grantees that adopt CNCS’s 

performance measures will not use them for all the work they do, because 

some of their service activities do not align with the measures. 

• For example, officials expect that some Senior Corps grantees will use 

CNCS’s performance measures for about 25 to 50 percent of their 

service activities.

• Additionally, Senior Corps and NCCC officials told us they are legally 

required to fund some service activities that fall outside the 16 agency-wide 

performance measures, such as providing respite to caregivers of 

homebound seniors.

• NCCC officials also plan to continue to use more general performance 

measures, rather than specific targets, for some of their work in order to 

retain flexibility for NCCC members to respond to disasters.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 21 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

15

CNCS Faces Challenges Balancing Performance 

Accountability with Flexibility

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• According to CNCS officials, it is difficult to hold grantees accountable 

for measuring their activities’ effectiveness without compromising 

grantees’ flexibility to tailor their program activities to local needs.

• Officials said they seek to promote accountability by using the 16 

performance measures to assess the impact of grantees’ work.

• However, officials also told us that they wanted to preserve 

grantees’ flexibility to meet local needs, even if those needs fall 

outside the performance measures.

• This is consistent with our previous findings that other federal grant 

making programs face similar challenges, because grant features that 

encourage performance accountability can limit grantee flexibility.6

6 GAO, Grants Management: Enhancing Performance Accountability Provisions Could Lead to Better Results,

GAO-06-1046 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 29, 2006).
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 22 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

16

CNCS Faces Challenges Balancing Performance 

Accountability with Flexibility

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• CNCS officials told us they are currently exploring ways to measure the 

performance of service activities that are not covered under the 16 agency-wide 

performance measures.

• As previously noted, CNCS plans to focus on its 16 agency-wide 

performance measures. However, the strategic plan contains other 

measures that CNCS may use to assess the activities of individual 

initiatives or programs. For example, among other measures, CNCS plans 

to collect:

• the percent of economically disadvantaged individuals receiving 

employment-related assistance.

• the number of uninsured and economically disadvantaged individuals 

connected to or utilizing health care services. 

• However, the diversity of these activities may make gathering, combining, 

and presenting robust and consistent performance information difficult, 

leading to challenges demonstrating the overall outcomes of these efforts. 
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 23 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

17

CNCS Faces Challenges Holding Its Senior Corps 

Grantees Accountable For Performance Targets

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• Senior Corps programs—Senior Companion, Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP), and 

Foster Grandparent—are longstanding programs that exist to connect older Americans to service 

opportunities.

• Officials told us that some of the volunteer organizations they fund have been grantees for several 

decades.

• CNCS faces legal obstacles to reducing funding for Senior Corps grantees that persistently do not 

meet their performance targets.

• Even though CNCS officials told us that they will require Senior Corps grantees to adopt at least 

one of the 16 agency-wide performance measures by 2013, they commented that without a 

change in statutory authority, it can be very difficult to remove a Senior Corps grantee for poor 

performance alone.

• Specifically, officials told us that performance alone is not sufficient reason to re-compete a 

Senior Corps grant, if the grantee is otherwise complying with the terms of the grant contract. 

• CNCS officials said that they have not yet sought statutory changes to address these difficulties.

• See appendix III for additional information on the legal obstacles that affect competition in the Senior 

Corps programs.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 24 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

18

CNCS Faces Challenges Holding Its Senior Corps 

Grantees Accountable For Performance Targets

Objective 1: Adopting Performance Measures

• CNCS can utilize non-financial means to help grantees 

meet their performance targets, such as providing public 

recognition or increased oversight.7

• For example, CNCS increases its on-site compliance 

reviews of Senior Corps grantees that do not meet their 

performance targets.

• However, if non-financial methods fail to improve grantee 

performance, CNCS’s ability to use its performance 

measures to promote accountability is potentially limited 

due to difficulties offering these grants for re-competition.

7 For more information about financial and non-financial options for holding grantees accountable for performance, 

see GAO-06-1046.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 25 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

19

Several Grantee-Related Performance Measurement 

Challenges Could Hamper CNCS’s Ability to Measure Its 

Impact

• Grantees we interviewed 

reported performance 

measurement challenges 

in four areas (see figure).

• CNCS has taken steps to 

address grantees’ 

challenges; however, 

many of its efforts are in 

the early implementation 

stages.

Objective 2: Performance Measurement Challenges

Source: GAO analysis.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 26 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Grantees Faced Challenges Understanding and Applying 

Performance Information Communicated by CNCS

• Grantees we interviewed reported:

• The information provided by CNCS 

was too broad and lacked specific 

examples related to their work.

• Overcoming the learning curve to 

understanding CNCS’s performance 

requirements was challenging.

• Since we met with these grantees, the 

AmeriCorps and VISTA programs have 

updated their guidance, and CNCS 

officials expect to do the same for their 

other key programs. 

Source: GAO analysis.

Objective 2: Understanding and Applying CNCS 

Performance Requirements

20
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 27 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Grantees Faced Challenges Developing Approaches to Collect 

Performance Data 

• Grantees we interviewed reported 

challenges developing data collection 

approaches that: 

• Measure the work performed by 

volunteers.

• Link program activities with 

outcomes to show impact. 

• CNCS is developing a performance 

measurement training curriculum, which 

may include information on developing 

appropriate data collection approaches. 

(Expected completion Sept. 2012.)

Source: GAO analysis.

Objective 2: Developing Data Collection Approaches

21
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 28 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Grantees Faced Challenges Collecting Performance Data from 

Worksites

• Grantees we interviewed reported 

challenges with the lack of:

• Staff capacity or resources to collect 

data from multiple worksites.

• Technology, such as a computer 

system, that could help them avoid 

manual entry of data.

• CNCS is revamping its resource center 

and has plans to examine grantees’ data 

collection needs and identify possible 

support the agency can provide. 

Source: GAO analysis.

Objective 2: Collecting Data

22
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 29 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

23

Grantees Faced Challenges Tracking Participants and 

Reporting Meaningful Outcomes to Show Their Impact

• Grantees we interviewed reported 

challenges:

• Following up with some past 

program participants, 

particularly those at-risk 

populations.

• Identifying outcomes within 

CNCS’s one-year reporting 

framework.

• CNCS has provided individualized 

technical assistance through state 

service commissions and its state 

offices.8

Objective 2: Reporting Data

Source: GAO analysis.

8CNCS state offices are responsible for overseeing and providing assistance to Senior Corps and VISTA grantees. 
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 30 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

24

Grantees Faced Challenges Reporting Performance Data 

Through CNCS’s eGrants Computer System

• Grantees we interviewed also 

reported challenges:

• Accessing the eGrants system, 

CNCS’s electronic web-based 

system that grantees use to 

report performance data.

• Navigating through eGrants.

• CNCS has updated its eGrants 

performance measurement module 

for AmeriCorps, and plans to develop 

a module that can be used across all 

programs by summer 2012. 

Objective 2: Reporting data

Source: GAO analysis.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 31 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

25

Conclusions

• CNCS faces difficulties in striking a balance between providing grantees with the flexibility 

to meet local needs and holding them accountable for performance.

• Currently, not all of the work CNCS funds can be assessed under its performance 

measures. CNCS will face difficulties demonstrating the results of this portion of its 

work.

• Additionally, CNCS’s ability to use performance information to promote accountability 

among Senior Corps grantees may be limited, due to statutory restrictions that make 

it difficult to remove funding from persistently poor performers.

• At the time of our review, CNCS had not yet sought statutory changes to address these restrictions.

• CNCS has taken some steps to address grantee-related performance challenges, but 

many of its efforts are in the early stages. Thus, it is unclear to what extent these efforts 

will fully address grantees’ challenges.

• As CNCS moves forward, it will be critical for the agency to continue to monitor its efforts 

and the experiences of its grantees to ensure it is able to obtain meaningful performance 

information to demonstrate its impact to Congress and the American public.
Appendix I: Briefing Slides

Page 32 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

26

GAO on the Web

Web site: http://www.gao.gov/

Contact

Chuck Young, Managing Director, Public Affairs, youngc1@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800, U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room 7149, Washington, D.C. 20548

Copyright

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

protection in the United States. The published product may be reproduced and 

distributed in its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, 

because this work may contain copyrighted images or other material, 

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

reproduce this material separately. 
Appendix II: List of CNCS Grantees 

Interviewed

Page 33 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

CNCS grantee State CNCS program Focus area

Amarillo Independent School District 

a

TX AmeriCorps State Education

AmeriCorps Red Cross Florida Gulf 

Coast

FL AmeriCorps State Healthy Futures

Veterans and Military Families

Disaster Services

Baltimore City Health Department MD Senior Corps/ RSVP Disaster Services 

Education

Healthy Futures

California Volunteers CA State Service Commission Disaster Services

Economic Opportunity

Education

Environmental Stewardship

Healthy Futures

Veterans and Military Families

City of Oakland Office Department of 

Human Services

CA Senior Corps/ Foster Grandparent and 

Senior Companion

Education

Healthy Futures

Conservation Corps North Bay CA AmeriCorps State Environmental Stewardship

Council of Churches of the Ozarks MO Senior Corps/ RSVP Education

Healthy futures

Montana Prevention Resource Center MT AmeriCorps VISTA Healthy Futures 

Veterans and Military Families

Department of Veterans Affairs CA AmeriCorps State Veterans and Military Families

Serving America’s Farmworkers 

Everywhere (SAFE) AmeriCorps

DC AmeriCorps National Healthy Futures

Maryland Conservation Corps MD AmeriCorps State Environmental Stewardship

Maryland Governor’s Office on 

Service and Volunteerism

MD State Service Commission Economic Opportunity

Education

Environmental Stewardship

Healthy Futures 

OneStar Foundation TX State Service Commission Education

Disaster Services

Panhandle Community Services TX Senior Corps/ RSVP Healthy Futures

Disaster Services

Education

Rural Action, Inc. OH AmeriCorps State Environmental Stewardship

Texas Department of Aging and 

Disability Services 

TX Senior Corps/ Foster Grandparent Program Education

Texas Homeless Network TX AmeriCorps VISTA Economic Opportunity

United Planning Organization DC Senior Corps/ Foster Grandparent Program Education

United Way of the Bay Area CA AmeriCorps VISTA Economic Opportunity

Coach Across America– Up2Us NY AmeriCorps National Healthy Futures

Source: GAO analysis of data from 20 CNCS grantees.

a

Appendix II: List of CNCS Grantees 

Interviewed

These focus areas were used by grantees at the time of our interviews, which were conducted from 

July 2011 to September 2011.
Appendix III: Reported Legal Constraints on 

Holding Senior Corps Grantees Accountable

Page 34 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Statutory 

section

Programs 

affected Description of legal constraint

42 U.S.C. 

§ 5001(e)

Retired and Senior 

Volunteer Program 

(a Senior Corps 

program)

Beginning in fiscal year 2013, the competitive 

process to determine Retired and Senior Volunteer 

Program (RSVP) grantees must ensure that the 

number of volunteers in specific geographic areas 

will remain at least at the previous level, and a 

similar distribution of programs must be 

maintained. Additionally, beginning in 2013 the 

competitive process must ensure that “every effort” 

is made to minimize the disruption to volunteers.

42 U.S.C. 

§ 5001(i)

Retired and Senior 

Volunteer Program 

(a Senior Corps 

program)

CNCS is required to continue funding RSVP 

programs that fail to meet performance measures 

for up to 12 months if a competition does not result 

in a new grantee.

42 U.S.C. 

§ 5027(a)(2)

All Senior Corps 

programs

Funding reductions resulting from insufficient 

appropriations must be applied pro rata to all 

Senior Corps grants. (This pro rata requirement 

applies regardless of the grantees’ performance.) 

42 U.S.C. 

§ 5052(a)

Programs under 

the Domestic 

Volunteer Service 

Act of 1973, which 

includes Senior 

Corps programs

If CNCS wants to deny an application for refunding, 

the grantee must be given (1) at least 75 days 

notice of the possibility of such denial and the 

grounds for the denial, and (2) an opportunity to 

show cause why such action should not be taken. 

If the grantee’s application is denied for 

noncompliance with the grant or contract terms, the 

grantee must be given an opportunity for an 

informal hearing before an impartial hearing officer 

who has been agreed to by the grantee and CNCS.

If CNCS wants to terminate funding for 

noncompliance with grant or contract terms, the 

grantee must be given reasonable notice and 

opportunity for a full and fair hearing.

42 U.S.C. 

§ 12639(l) 

and (m)

All CNCS 

programs, 

including Senior 

Corps programs

If a grantee is failing to meet performance levels, 

CNCS must develop a corrective action plan and 

establish a period of correction for the grantee. For 

these low-performing grantees, CNCS must require 

the grantee to submit quarterly progress reports. In 

addition, if such a grantee has been receiving 

funding for less than 3 years, CNCS is required to 

provide technical assistance to address the 

performance problems. Termination or funding 

reduction of a grantee occurs only if the grantee 

continues to fail to meet performance measures 

after such a period of correction.

Source: CNCS officials, as confirmed by GAO review of relevant federal laws.

Appendix III: Reported Legal Constraints on 

Holding Senior Corps Grantees Accountable
Appendix IV: Comments from the Corporation 

for National and Community Service

Page 35 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Appendix IV: Comments from the 

Corporation for National and Community 

Service
Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments

Page 36 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

George A. Scott, Director, (202) 512-7215, scottg@gao.gov 

In addition to the contact listed above, Bill Keller (Assistant Director), 

James Bennett, Susannah Compton, Elizabeth Curda, Alex Galuten, 

Kirsten Lauber, Sheila McCoy, Erin McLaughlin, Brittni Milam, and 

Ashanta Williams made key contributions to this report.

Appendix V: GAO Contacts and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact

Acknowledgments 
Related GAO Products

Page 37 GAO-12-310 CNCS Strategic Planning

Performance Measurement: Better Alignment to Strategic Goals and Data 

Verification Needed at the Corporation for National and Community 

Service. GAO-10-886. Washington, D.C.: July 28, 2010.

Grants Management: Enhancing Performance Accountability Provisions 

Could Lead to Better Results. GAO-06-1046. Washington, D.C.: 

September 29, 2006.

Corporation for National and Community Service: Better Internal 

Control and Revised Practices Would Improve the Management of 

AmeriCorps and the National Service Trust. GAO-04-225. Washington, 

DC.: January 16, 2004. 

Corporation for National and Community Service: Preliminary 

Observations on the National Service Trust and AmeriCorps. 

GAO-03-642T. Washington, D.C.: April 10, 2003.

National Service Programs: Two AmeriCorps Programs’ Funding and 

Benefits. GAO/HEHS-00-33. Washington, D.C.: February 15, 2000.

Grant Programs: Design Features Shape Flexibility, Accountability, and

Performance Information. GAO/GGD-98-137. Washington, D.C.: 

June 22, 1998. 

The Results Act: An Evaluator’s Guide to Assessing Agency Annual 

Performance Plans. GAO/GGD-10.1.20. Washington, D.C.: April 1, 1998.

National Service Programs: Role of State Commissions in Implementing 

the AmeriCorps Program. GAO/HEHS-97-49. Washington, D.C.: 

February 20, 1997.

Related GAO Products

(131073) (131073)
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

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

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO’s commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability.

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

cost is through GAO’s website (www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, 

GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, 

go to www.gao.gov and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact:

Website: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

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

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

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

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs

Please Print on Recycled Paper.