This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-10-886 
entitled 'Performance Measurement: Better Alignment to Strategic Goals 
and Data Verification Needed at the Corporation for National and 
Community Service' which was released on July 28, 2010. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. 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. 

Report to Congressional Committees: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
GAO: 

July 2010: 

Performance Measurement: 

Better Alignment to Strategic Goals and Data Verification Needed at 
the Corporation for National and Community Service: 

GAO-10-886: 

Contents: 

Letter: 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides: 

Appendix II: Comments from the Corporation for National & Community 
Service: 

Appendix III: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

Abbreviations: 

ASN: AmeriCorps State and National: 

CNCS: Corporation for National and Community Service: 

IG: Office of the Inspector General: 

[End of section] 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

July 28, 2010: 

Congressional Committees: 

The Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) promotes 
volunteering and civic engagement through a variety of federally 
funded programs, such as AmeriCorps. In 2009, Congress passed the 
Serve America Act (Pub. L. No. 111-13), which made substantial changes 
to CNCS' mission. The Act authorized an increase in the number of 
service opportunities administered by CNCS, from 88,000 in 2010 to 
250,000 by 2017; created new programs; and directed CNCS to focus more 
on evaluating its programs' performance to ensure cost-effectiveness 
and the effective use of volunteers, among other factors. To assist 
the Congress in its oversight role, GAO reviewed: (1) To what extent 
do the corporation's current performance measures align with the 
corporation's strategic goals? (2) To what extent do the corporation's 
performance measures provide a reliable way to assess progress in 
achieving the corporation's strategic goals? and (3)What progress has 
the corporation made in developing new performance measures for each 
of its national service programs? 

We briefed your staff on the results of our analysis on June 25, 2010, 
and this report formally conveys the information provided during that 
briefing. See appendix I for the briefing slides. In summary, we 
reported the following findings: 

* The performance measures CNCS currently uses are poorly aligned with 
its three strategic goals because they do not reflect the four 
characteristics GAO has identified for sound sets of performance 
measures. Specifically, the current performance measures (1) do not 
demonstrate results, (2) are not limited to the vital few measures, 
(3) do not respond to multiple priorities, and (4) are not linked to 
the responsible programs. For example, with regard to demonstrating 
results, CNCS' performance measures require that data be collected on 
the number of clients served, rather than the collective results of 
the service provided. In addition, promising practices in measuring 
performance focus on outcomes, such as benefits to Congress and the 
American taxpayer, but CNCS' current performance measures instead 
track outputs, the direct product of program activities, not outcomes. 
Further, although the number of performance measures has increased 
over the past decade, the 13 performance measures CNCS currently uses 
do not cover all of the strategic goals. Moreover, the current 
performance measures do not respond to multiple priorities in that 
they do not consider key factors such as cost-effectiveness and 
quality of service. Instead, they are focused on measuring outputs 
such as the number of participants and recipients served. Finally, it 
is not clear which program or programs are responsible for achieving 
the results. 

* Weaknesses in CNCS' processes for verifying performance data raise 
concerns about the reliability of the self-reported data CNCS receives 
from grantees. CNCS relies heavily on self-reported performance data 
from its grantees, but it conducts limited reviews of those data. 
Senior CNCS officials raised concerns with its processes for ensuring 
the reliability of performance data in several areas. For example, 
according to senior officials, the guidance CNCS provides grantees on 
reporting performance data does not provide instructions for uniformly 
verifying or validating those data; the protocols CNCS uses during 
monitoring visits do not include steps to systematically verify and 
validate grantees' performance data; and CNCS' compliance officers are 
not required to test the accuracy of performance data submitted by 
grantees, including grantees assessed as high risk. In addition, 
recent audits have identified concerns about the reliability of CNCS' 
grantee performance data. 

* CNCS is developing a new 5 year strategic plan with performance 
measures that focus on measuring the results for its programs. CNCS 
officials are planning to finalize and approve the new strategic plan, 
including new performance measures, in October 2010. In the interim, 
the AmeriCorps State and National (ASN) program has begun pilot 
testing new performance measures with some grantees, but the results 
from this pilot will not be available until 2011. These new 
performance measures focus more on outcomes, such as the number of 
students with improved academic performance who received mentoring or 
other services from ASN participants and the number of youth whom ASN 
members served who demonstrated a decrease in substance abuse, arrest, 
or gang involvement. CNCS officials are planning to incorporate 
outcome-based performance measures, similar to those being tested, 
into the new 5 year strategic plan. 

Although CNCS is making progress developing new performance measures 
as part of the new 5 year strategic plan, officials will face several 
challenges in developing its new 5 year plan--a period of great 
expansion for the corporation. For example, CNCS must develop 
performance measures that accommodate the differences among its 
programs and focus on outcomes so that they can be used to better 
inform strategic decision making. 

* First, given the breadth of activities undertaken by CNCS' grantees 
and sponsoring organizations, it will be challenging for the 
corporation to determine the most important areas for achievement 
through service and create strategic goals that effectively reflect 
them. 

* Second, in addition to CNCS' five major programs, the Serve America 
Act creates a number of new programs for the corporation to implement 
and oversee over the next 5 years. It will be challenging to evaluate 
and distill the differences among existing and those new programs into 
a few vital CNCS performance measures that focus on outcomes and can 
be used to better inform strategic decision making. 

* Third, the Serve America Act authorizes a near-tripling of new 
service opportunities over the period covered by the new strategic 
plan. It has been a challenge for the corporation to ensure it has an 
effective and uniform system to verify and validate data submitted by 
grantees with its current membership caseload, and it could have three 
times as many by 2017. CNCS will not be able to reliably assess its 
own performance in meeting its goals if the data submitted by its 
grantees and sponsoring organizations are not accurate. 

Accordingly, as CNCS continues to make progress developing new 
performance measures, we recommend that the Chief Executive Officer of 
CNCS: 

* determine the most important areas for service and create strategic 
goals that effectively reflect them; and: 

* create an effective and uniform system to verify and validate 
performance data submitted by grantees. 

To answer the first research objective, we examined the strategic 
goals and performance measures CNCS is currently using in its 2006-
2010 Strategic Plan. We analyzed these goals and performance measures 
using an assessment guide we developed in 1998 and have used to assess 
strategic plans in a number of federal agencies;[Footnote 1] we did 
not analyze the measures used by individual programs at CNCS. We also 
met with relevant agency officials to discuss performance measures and 
strategic goals and initiatives, and reviewed relevant CNCS 
documentation. To answer the second objective, we reviewed relevant 
reports by the Office of the Inspector General (IG) and held 
discussions with IG officials. In addition, we met with oversight and 
monitoring officials and program directors to discuss the processes 
used by CNCS to verify the accuracy and reliability of performance 
data and we reviewed CNCS' monitoring protocols. We did not test the 
rigor of the processes used by CNCS or test the data submitted by 
grantees for accuracy and reliability. Finally, to respond to the 
third research objective, we interviewed CNCS management officials and 
reviewed documentation pertaining to the development of the new 
strategic plan and performance measures which are being developed in 
response to the Serve America Act. 

We conducted this performance audit from December 2009 to July 2010, 
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 provided a draft of this report to officials at CNCS for review and 
comment. In its comments, CNCS officials agreed with our findings and 
said that the corporation is committed to developing a strategic plan 
that will align with the intent of the Serve America Act, the 
administration's priorities, and input from stakeholders. The 
strategic planning process will include the development of appropriate 
performance measures. Officials also noted that it in the process of 
improving its strategy for validating program outcomes and cost 
effectiveness. CNCS comments are reproduced in appendix II. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Corporation for National 
and Community Service, appropriate congressional committees, and other 
interested parties. In addition, the report will be available at no 
charge on GAO's Web site at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Please 
contact me at (202) 512-7215 if you have any questions about this 
report. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional Relations and 
Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this report. 

Signed by: 

George A. Scott: 
Director, Education, Workforce and Income Security Issues: 

List of Congressional Committees: 

The Honorable Daniel K. Inouye: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Thad Cochran: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable Tom Harkin: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Michael B. Enzi: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions: 
United States Senate: 

The Honorable David R. Obey: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable Jerry Lewis Ranking Member: 
Committee on Appropriations: 
House of Representatives: 

The Honorable George Miller: 
Chairman: 
The Honorable John P. Kline: 
Ranking Member: 
Committee on Education and Labor: 
House of Representatives: 

[End of section] 

Appendix I: Briefing Slides: 

Performance Measurement: 

Better Alignment to Strategic Goals and Data Verification Needed at 
the Corporation for National and Community Service: 

Briefing Overview: 

Performance Management at The Corporation for National and Community 
Service (CNCS): 
* Background; 
* Research Objectives; 
* Summary of Findings; 
* Scope and Methodology; 
* Findings; 
* Conclusions and Recommendations. 

Background: 

CNCS Promotes Civic Engagement: 

CNCS promotes volunteering and civic engagement through a variety of 
federally-funded programs: 

Congressional Appropriation: 

Corporation for National and Community Service: 
* AmeriCorps VISTA: 
- Sponsoring organizations; 
* AmeriCorps State & National: 
- Grantees; 
* AmeriCorps NCCC: 
- NCCC members and project sponsors; 
* Senior Corps: 
- Grantees; 
* Learn & Serve America: 
- Grantees. 

Grantees and members use CNCS funding for community service projects. 

CNCS Administers Five Main Programs to Promote Community Service: 

Five programs accounted for two-thirds of the $1.1 billion CNCS budget 
in FY 2010: 

* AmeriCorps State and National — is the largest CNCS program, and 
provides grants to nonprofit, public, and other organizations to 
engage Americans of all backgrounds to volunteer to address community 
needs. 

* AmeriCorps National Civilian Community Corps (NCCC) — a residential, 
team-based program providing leadership and service opportunities for 
young people that addresses national and community needs in all 50 
states. 

* AmeriCorps Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) — provides full-
time volunteers to community organizations to help create and expand 
antipoverty programs. 

* Learn and Serve America — awards grants to engage students in 
service-learning activities that link academic achievement and 
community service. 

* Senior Corps — helps fund a network of about 1,200 organizations 
sponsoring over 1,300 projects that tap the experience, skills, and 
talents of Americans 55 and older to meet community needs. 

CNCS Measures the Performance of Its Programs toward Three Strategic 
Goals: 

Goal 1: 
Meet Critical Needs in Local Communities through Service. 
Services provided by participants in CNCS programs help meet a broad 
range of the nation's educational, environmental, and other human 
needs. 

Goal 2: 
Strengthen the Capacity of Communities to Engage Citizens. 
All CNCS programs help nonprofit organizations, public agencies, 
educational institutions, and volunteer connector organizations to 
build their capacity to engage citizens in service and strengthen the 
community's ability to meet local needs. 

Goal 3: 		
Engage Americans in a Lifetime of Volunteering and Service. 	
CNCS helps to create an ethic of responsibility and citizenship by 
providing meaningful service opportunities for individuals of all ages 
and backgrounds. 

CNCS Currently Uses 13 Individual Performance Measures: 

Percentage of AmeriCorps volunteers who continue to serve after their 
term. 

Number of volunteers supported by CNCS-sponsored programs. 

Number of children and youth from disadvantaged circumstances serving 
in CNCS programs. 

Number of children of prisoners mentored through CNCS programs. 

Number of children and youth from disadvantaged circumstances mentored 
through CNCS programs. 

Number of college students serving through CNCS programs. 

Number of colleges and universities matching AmeriCorps education 
award. 

Number receiving disaster-preparedness information or training from 
CNCS programs. 

Number of CNCS program participants trained and available for disaster 
response. 

Number of CNCS program participants certified in disaster-related 
training. 

Number of recipients of independent living services through CNCS 
programs. 

Percentage of organizations funded by Learn and Serve that have	
adopted at least six key practices to sustain service learning. 

Number of Baby Boomer volunteers generated by CNCS programs. 

The Serve America Act Reauthorized and Expanded the Mission and 
Operation of CNCS: 

The Serve America Act (Pub. L. No. 111-13) made substantial changes to 
CNCS programs, including: 

* Dramatically expanding service opportunities by authorizing an 
increase in the number of AmeriCorps members by 184 percent, from 
88,000 in 2010 to 250,000 by 2017. 

* Creating new programs, including Semester of Service and Youth 
Engagement Zones, that CNCS must implement and oversee. 

* Focusing CNCS more on performance evaluation of programs that 
includes cost-effectiveness and the effective use of volunteers, among 
other factors. 

[End of Background] 

Research objectives: 

What GAO Reviewed: 

In light of the new programs authorized for CNCS by the Serve America 
Act, and the additional emphasis on performance evaluation, GAO 
reviewed: 

(1) To what extent do CNCS' current performance measures align with 
its strategic goals? 

(2) To what extent do CNCS' performance measures provide a reliable 
way to assess progress in achieving its strategic goals? 

(3) What progress has CNCS made in developing new performance measures 
for each of its national service programs? 

[End of Research objectives] 

Summary of Findings: 

* The performance measures CNCS currently uses are aligned poorly with 
its three strategic goals. 

* Weaknesses in CNCS' processes for verifying performance data raise 
concerns about the reliability of the self-reported data CNCS receives 
from grantees. 

* CNCS is developing a new strategic plan with performance measures 
that focus on measuring the results of its programs. 

[End of Summary of Findings] 

Scope and Methodology: 

To answer our research objectives, we: 

* examined the strategic goals and performance measures currently in 
place at CNCS and analyzed these goals and performance measures using 
an assessment guide we developed in 1997 and have used to assess 
strategic plans in a number of federal agencies;[Footnote 2] we did 
not analyze the measures used by individual programs at CNCS; 

* met with relevant agency officials to discuss performance measures 
and strategic goals and initiatives, and reviewed relevant CNCS 
documentation; 

* met with oversight and monitoring officials and program directors to 
discuss the processes used by CNCS to verify the accuracy and 
reliability of performance data and reviewed CNCS' monitoring 
protocols. We did not test the rigor of the processes used by CNCS nor 
the data submitted by grantees for accuracy and reliability; 

* interviewed CNCS management officials and reviewed documentation 
pertaining to the development of the new strategic plan and 
performance measures which are being developed in response to the 
Serve America Act; 

* reviewed relevant work by the CNCS Office of the Inspector General 
(IG) and met with key IG officials to discuss this work; and; 

* conducted this performance audit from December 2009 to July 2010, 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. 

[End of Scope and Methodology] 

Findings: 

Objective 1: Alignment: 

The Performance Measures Used by CNCS Align Poorly with its Three 
Strategic Goals: 

The performance measures used by CNCS align poorly with its three 
strategic goals because the measures do not reflect the four 
characteristics GAO has identified for sound sets of performance 
measures: 

1) Demonstrate Results; 
2) Limited to the Vital Few Measures; 
3) Respond to Multiple Priorities; 
4) Link to Responsible Programs. 

Promising practices in measuring performance focus on outcomes, such 
as benefits to Congress and the American taxpayer. Instead, CNCS' 
current performance measures track outputs — the direct product of 
program activities — based on resources used by programs (inputs) to 
fulfill program goals. 

CNCS Performance Measures Do Not Demonstrate Results: 

Demonstrate Results — performance measures should tell each 
organizational level how well it is achieving its goals. 

This characteristic is not present because 12 of the 13 performance 
measures focus on tracking numbers — or outputs —rather than results, 
or outcomes. 

* For example, CNCS' performance measures require that data be 
collected on the number of clients served, rather than the collective 
results of the service provided. 

* Only one performance measure, "Percentage of AmeriCorps volunteers 
who continue to serve after their term," focuses on demonstrating 
results toward meeting one of CNCS' strategic goals. 

CNCS Performance Measures Are Not Limited to a Vital Few Measures: 

Limited To A Vital Few Measures — the number of performance measures 
for each goal should be limited and should cover key performance 
dimensions. 

This characteristic is not present. Although the number of individual 
performance measures has increased over the past decade in an attempt 
to better measure performance, the 13 performance measures CNCS 
currently uses still do not cover all of the strategic goals. 

* None of the measures currently used by CNCS measure the quality of 
service provided. 

* None measure the extent to which volunteers have met the needs of 
their communities — one of CNCS' three strategic goals. 

CNCS Performance Measures Do Not Respond to Multiple Priorities or 
Link to Responsible Programs: 

Respond To Multiple Priorities — performance measures should strike a 
balance among quality, cost, customer satisfaction, stakeholder 
concerns, and other factors. 

This characteristic is not present because the 13 individual 
performance measures do not strike a balance among key factors. 

* For example, CNCS' current performance measures do not consider such 
factors as cost-effectiveness and quality of service. Instead, they 
are focused on measuring outputs, such as the number of participants 
and recipients served. 

Link To Responsible Programs — performance measures should be linked 
directly to the offices responsible for making programs work. 

This characteristic is not present because it is not clear which 
programs are responsible for achieving the performance measure results. 

* For example only a few individual performance measures, such as the 
"Number of Organizations funded with Learn and Serve grants," are 
clearly connected to individual programs. 

[End of Objective 1] 

Objective 2: Reliability: 

Weaknesses in CNCS' Processes for Verifying Performance Data Raise 
Concerns about the Reliability of Those Data: 

CNCS relies heavily on self-reported performance data from its 
grantees, but it conducts limited reviews of those data. 

Senior CNCS officials identified areas of concern with CNCS'
processes for ensuring the reliability of performance data: 

* The guidance CNCS provides grantees on reporting performance data 
does not provide instructions for uniformly verifying or validating 
those data. 

* The protocols CNCS uses during monitoring visits do not include 
steps to systematically verify and validate grantees' performance data. 

* CNCS' compliance officers are not required to test the accuracy of 
performance data submitted by grantees, including grantees assessed as 
high-risk. 

Recent IG Audits Have Identified Concerns about the Reliability of 
CNCS Performance Data: 

Recent IG audits have also raised concerns about the reliability of 
grantee performance data. For example: 

* A 2009 compliance study of one CNCS grantee found that it did not 
ensure that volunteers accurately reported hours of service or require 
its members to timely submit their member contracts, forms, and 
timesheets. Further, the grantee did not accurately report volunteers' 
hours of service to CNCS. Thus, it is difficult to track the actual 
number of hours served by students serving in the program—a key 
performance measure. 

* A 2008 investigation of another grantee found that a mentoring 
program did not maintain records of the hours of tutoring, as required 
in AmeriCorps grant contracts. Without records of the amount of 
tutoring that took place, it is difficult to determine how many 
disadvantaged children actually received mentoring through tutoring. 

[End of Objective 2] 

Objective 3: Progress on creating new performance measures: 

CNCS Is Making Progress Developing Outcome-based Performance Measures: 

The CNCS Board of Directors is working with CNCS management officials 
to develop a new 5 year strategic plan, for FY 2011-2015: 

November 2009: 
CNCS Board began discussing strategic goals and performance measures 
for new strategic plan. 

December 2009: 
CNCS officials started drafting new strategic goals and performance 
measures. 

February 2010: 
Board held retreat to discuss progress made on drafting of strategic 
goals and performance measures. 

March 2010: 
New CEO and management team created new timeline for developing 
strategic plan and performance goals and measures. 

April-July, 2010: 
CNCS gathered input from internal and external stakeholders on 
strategic plan and performance goals and measures. 

August 2010: 
CNCS plans to submit draft strategic plan to OMB for comment. 

October 2010: 
Board plans to vote on final strategic plan. 

CNCS Is Currently Pilot Testing New Performance Measures with One 
Program: 

The AmeriCorps State and National (ASN) program has begun pilot 
testing new performance measures with some grantees, but results from 
this testing will not be available until 2011. 

These new performance measures focus more on outcomes. For example, 
CNCS is asking grantees to measure the: 

* number of students with improved academic performance who
receive mentoring or other services from ASN participants, 

* number of youth whom ASN members serve who demonstrate a decrease in 
substance abuse, arrest, or gang involvement. 

According to a senior ASN official, the pilot will be deemed 
successful if grantees can design new projects or adapt current 
projects to deploy participants in pursuit of these new performance 
measures and collect the data necessary to determine whether grantees 
have met their goals. 

CNCS officials are planning to incorporate outcome-based performance
measures, similar to those being tested, into the new strategic plan. 

[End of Objective 3] 

[End of Findings] 

Conclusions: 

Although CNCS is making progress developing new performance measures 
as part of its new 5 year strategic plan, as the corporation moves 
forward, officials face several challenges, including: 

* determining the most important areas for achievement through 
service, and creating strategic goals that effectively reflect them, 

* evaluating and distilling the differences among CNCS programs into a 
few vital CNCS-wide performance measures that focus on outcomes and 
can be used to better inform strategic decision making, and, 

* working with grantees and monitoring staff to create an effective 
and uniform system to verify and validate performance data submitted 
by grantees. 

GAO Recommendations: 

As CNCS continues to make progress developing new performance measures 
as part of the new 5 year strategic plan, we recommend that the Chief 
Executive Officer of CNCS: 

* Determine the most important areas for service and create strategic 
goals that effectively reflect them. 

* Create an effective and uniform system to verify and validate 
performance data submitted by grantees. 

GAO on the Web: 
Web site: [hyperlink, 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. 

[End of Briefing slides section] 

Appendix II: Comments from the Corporation for National & Community 
Service: 

Corporation for National Community Service: 
Senior Corps: 
AmeriCorps: 
Learn and Serve America: 
1201 New York Avenue, NW: 
Washington, DC 20525: 
202-606-5000: 
[hyperlink, http://www.nationalservice.org] 

July 21, 2010: 

Mr. George A. Scott, Director: 
Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Dear Mr. Scott: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Government 
Accountability Office's (GAO) draft report on the Corporation's 2006—
2010 strategic plan (GA0-10-886). GAO's review found that most of the 
performance measures in the Corporation's 2006 strategic plan did not 
align well with its strategic goals and that the process used to 
validate grantee reported data could be improved. The Corporation 
agrees and is committed to developing and implementing a strategic 
plan and verifiable performance measures for 2011—2015 that focus on 
the results and outcomes achieved by its programs. 

To that end, over the past eight months the Corporation's Board of 
Directors has worked extensively on developing the content for the 
2011 — 2015 Strategic Plan. Board Members have been very clear about 
the concepts and ideas that need to be prominently reflected in the 
strategic plan to align with the intent of the Serve America Act, the 
Administration's priorities, and input from stakeholders throughout 
the national service field. With the confirmation of the Corporation's 
Chief Executive Officer (CEO) in February 2010 this process was 
accelerated with the hiring of a Chief Strategy Officer (CSO) and 
establishment of new Strategy Office. The CEO established the role of 
the CSO in order to bring more focused energy to strategy formation 
and performance management. As the CSO, I am leading the strategic 
planning process which includes the development of those vital few 
performance measures that will gauge the agency's success in achieving 
the strategic outcomes specified in the strategic plan. 

The foundation for the strategic plan is the four guiding principles 
outlined by the CEO: 

* Service as a solution: Identifying where service has an important 
role to play, targeting resources to tackle those issues, and better 
demonstrating impact. 

* Expanding opportunities to serve: Connecting with citizens from all 
communities, backgrounds, and perspectives; providing easily 
accessible service opportunities to fit their needs; and engaging them 
in a lifetime of service. 

*Building enduring capacity: Enabling individuals, organizations and 
communities to become more effective at addressing pressing challenges 
and better able to use service as a lasting solution. 

* Embracing innovation: Investing in models that work, finding new 
ways of doing business, and serving as a source of ideas for local 
communities. 

In addition, the plan will more tightly align the Corporation's 
evaluation activities with its strategy. The Corporation is in the 
process of restructuring its evaluation team and developing a long 
term evaluation strategy to validate program outcomes and cost 
effectiveness. 

In June, the Corporation began seeking public input on the strategic 
plan through public meetings, web based technology, and public 
conference calls. Through each vehicle, we look to connect with and 
engage diverse communities. Throughout the process —developing, 
implementing, and evaluating results of the strategic plan — the 
Corporation will continue to engage the public and other stakeholders. 
We look forward to keeping you informed on our continued progress and 
efforts to adopt the best practices of a performance-driven agency. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

Heather Peeler: 
Chief Strategy Officer: 

cc: 
Patrick Corvington, Chief Executive Officer: 
James Siegal, Chief of Staff: 
William Anderson, Chief Financial Officer: 

[End of section] 

Appendix III GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments: 

GAO Contact: 

George A. Scott, 202-512-7215, scottg@gao.gov: 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the individual named above, other GAO staff who made 
key contributions to this report are Bill Keller, Assistant Director; 
Jill Yost, Analyst-in-Charge; Nick Larson; Luann Moy; Elizabeth Curda; 
Jim Rebbe; and James Bennett. 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] GAO, Agencies' Annual Performance Plans under the Results Act: An 
Assessment Guide to Facilitate Congressional Decision making, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD/AIMD-10.1.18] 
(Washington, D.C.: February 1998). 

[2] GAO, Agencies' Annual Performance Plans under the Results Act: An 
Assessment Guide to Facilitate Congressional Decisionmaking, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO/GGD/AIMD10.1.18] 
(Washington, D.C.: February 1998). 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

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 Web site, 
[hyperlink, 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. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: