diff --git "a/data/CHRG-105/CHRG-105hhrg40344.txt" "b/data/CHRG-105/CHRG-105hhrg40344.txt"
new file mode 100644--- /dev/null
+++ "b/data/CHRG-105/CHRG-105hhrg40344.txt"
@@ -0,0 +1,6659 @@
+
+ - DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1998
+
+[House Hearing, 105 Congress]
+[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
+
+
+
+
+ DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND
+ HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
+ INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS
+ FOR 1998
+
+=========================================================================
+
+ HEARINGS
+
+ BEFORE A
+
+ SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
+
+ COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
+
+ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
+
+ ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS
+
+ FIRST SESSION
+ ________
+
+ SUBCOMMITTEE ON VA, HUD, AND INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
+
+ JERRY LEWIS, California, Chairman
+
+TOM DeLAY, Texas LOUIS STOKES, Ohio
+JAMES T. WALSH, New York ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia
+DAVID L. HOBSON, Ohio MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
+JOE KNOLLENBERG, Michigan CARRIE P. MEEK, Florida
+RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New Jersey DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina
+MARK W. NEUMANN, Wisconsin
+ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
+
+ NOTE: Under Committee Rules, Mr. Livingston, as Chairman of the Full
+Committee, and Mr. Obey, as Ranking Minority Member of the Full
+Committee, are authorized to sit as Members of all Subcommittees.
+
+ Frank M. Cushing, Paul E. Thomson, Timothy L. Peterson, and Valerie
+ L. Baldwin, Staff Assistants
+ ________
+
+ PART 4
+ Page
+ Federal Emergency Management Agency.............................. 1
+ Corporation for National and Community Service................... 131
+
+
+
+ ________
+
+ Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
+
+ ________
+
+ U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
+40-344 O WASHINGTON : 1997
+
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+ For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
+ Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office,
+ Washington, DC 20402
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
+
+ BOB LIVINGSTON, Louisiana, Chairman
+
+JOSEPH M. McDADE, Pennsylvania DAVID R. OBEY, Wisconsin
+C. W. BILL YOUNG, Florida SIDNEY R. YATES, Illinois
+RALPH REGULA, Ohio LOUIS STOKES, Ohio
+JERRY LEWIS, California JOHN P. MURTHA, Pennsylvania
+JOHN EDWARD PORTER, Illinois NORMAN D. DICKS, Washington
+HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky MARTIN OLAV SABO, Minnesota
+JOE SKEEN, New Mexico JULIAN C. DIXON, California
+FRANK R. WOLF, Virginia VIC FAZIO, California
+TOM DeLAY, Texas W. G. (BILL) HEFNER, North Carolina
+JIM KOLBE, Arizona STENY H. HOYER, Maryland
+RON PACKARD, California ALAN B. MOLLOHAN, West Virginia
+SONNY CALLAHAN, Alabama MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
+JAMES T. WALSH, New York DAVID E. SKAGGS, Colorado
+CHARLES H. TAYLOR, North Carolina NANCY PELOSI, California
+DAVID L. HOBSON, Ohio PETER J. VISCLOSKY, Indiana
+ERNEST J. ISTOOK, Jr., Oklahoma THOMAS M. FOGLIETTA, Pennsylvania
+HENRY BONILLA, Texas ESTEBAN EDWARD TORRES, California
+JOE KNOLLENBERG, Michigan NITA M. LOWEY, New York
+DAN MILLER, Florida JOSE E. SERRANO, New York
+JAY DICKEY, Arkansas ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut
+JACK KINGSTON, Georgia JAMES P. MORAN, Virginia
+MIKE PARKER, Mississippi JOHN W. OLVER, Massachusetts
+RODNEY P. FRELINGHUYSEN, New Jersey ED PASTOR, Arizona
+ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi CARRIE P. MEEK, Florida
+MICHAEL P. FORBES, New York DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina
+GEORGE R. NETHERCUTT, Jr., Washington CHET EDWARDS, Texas
+MARK W. NEUMANN, Wisconsin
+RANDY ``DUKE'' CUNNINGHAM, California
+TODD TIAHRT, Kansas
+ZACH WAMP, Tennessee
+TOM LATHAM, Iowa
+ANNE M. NORTHUP, Kentucky
+ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
+
+ James W. Dyer, Clerk and Staff Director
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+DEPARTMENTS OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND
+ INDEPENDENT AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 1998
+
+ ----------
+
+ Thursday, March 6, 1997.
+
+ FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
+
+ WITNESSES
+
+JAMES L. WITT, DIRECTOR
+GARY JOHNSON, CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
+
+ Subcommittee's Opening Remarks
+
+ Mr. Lewis. The meeting will come to order.
+ Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Today we will spend
+much of the day taking testimony from the Federal Emergency
+Management Agency, called FEMA. It is the country's emergency
+management agency. We will be discussing their fiscal year 1998
+budget request.
+ For 1998, FEMA is requesting $3,188,235,000, an increase
+of--I see they're calling us. Let's go vote, Lou, and then come
+back. Maybe we can get some of the Members to come back.
+ [Recess.]
+ Mr. Lewis. If the meeting would come back to order, good
+morning again. It is my pleasure to welcome James Lee Witt with
+us one more time, and by way of formal introduction, I will
+talk about his budget, but then have some other remarks before
+we take his testimony.
+ As I have suggested, today we are taking testimony
+regarding the Federal Emergency Management Agency's fiscal year
+1998 budget request, which is an increase of $1,384,679,000
+over the 1997 appropriated level. However, over $2.7 billion of
+the 1998 request is for disaster relief activities; that is,
+responding to disasters that have already taken place in
+various places in America, leaving some $480 million for all
+the other programs. This number is actually a slight reduction
+over the comparable 1997 figure.
+ Testifying on behalf of FEMA today will be its talented--
+and I underline--and very able Director, Mr. James Lee Witt.
+Mr. Witt, you are always welcome to this committee. I invite
+you to introduce your FEMA colleagues who are with you this
+morning and then proceed with your testimony as you wish. Your
+entire testimony will be included in the record.
+ In the meantime, let me step aside and suggest to those in
+the room who don't know that James Lee and I early on had
+conversations, as he was coming to this job, about the fact
+that America does find itself having disasters from time to
+time and place to place.
+ Not so long ago there was a stir in the Appropriations
+Committee about the fact that California had so many disasters,
+and people who chose to live on the coast ought to take care of
+that themselves. Some of us saw fit to suggest that disasters
+are not known to only one State. But, in connection with that,
+historically America has always been a family. We know that one
+is going to come along; we just don't know where. Currently
+we're experiencing that absolutely in a fashion that would
+cause even the most cynical, I hope, to begin to understand.
+ Mr. Witt, before you give your statement, with me today is
+my colleague, Louis Stokes of Ohio, who is in the midst of our
+most current circumstance. I know that he has comments that he
+wishes to make. Again, welcome to the committee.
+ Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Witt, it is always
+a pleasure to welcome you back before our subcommittee. We've
+had you before us on many occasions and have had the
+opportunity on those occasions to discuss some of the most
+serious problems confronting our Nation.
+ This has been quite a week for you. You have been touring
+the damaged areas of Arkansas on Tuesday with the President,
+and touring the flood ravaged Ohio River Valley yesterday with
+the Vice President, so I'm sure, in terms of what you have seen
+in those two places, you will have some good testimony for us
+today relative to that.
+ Obviously, no one yet knows the extent of the recent
+disasters or whether current funding in the Disaster Relief
+Fund will be adequate to address the needs of this year, but I
+hope I speak for all members of this subcommittee when I say
+that we do stand prepared to do what is necessary to help
+reconstruct the lives of those devastated by these recent
+disasters and others.
+ Pursuant to that, I am sure that all the members of the
+subcommittee today will have some very penetrating questions
+regarding those disaster areas, and we appreciate your
+appearance here today so that we can discuss this with you.
+ Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to make this
+opening statement and I yield back my time.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Witt, as I call on you, the vote on the floor was
+unexpected and I presume, and hope, that some other members
+will come along here shortly. In the meantime, some of them may
+be swimming to the hearing. But, one more time, welcome.
+
+ DIRECTOR'S OPENING REMARKS
+
+ Mr. Witt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Congressman Stokes.
+Thank you for your kind words.
+ I am joined today by Gary Johnson, our Chief Financial
+Officer and Barbara Jacobik, our Budget Officer. Together, I
+hope that we can respond to your questions. We also have with
+us our executive management team of Associate Directors, who
+will help answer specific questions, if needed.
+ It seems that we start out each year talking about where I
+have just been, the terrible events I have just seen, and what
+we're working on. Each year we talk about these terrible events
+and the impact that they have, and the fact that we cannot
+forecast when a disaster may happen. That doesn't mean that we
+cannot lessen the impact of an event when it occurs in the
+future. We can make a difference. In 1997 and 1998 we at FEMA
+will suggest a new path that all of us can take to make a
+difference in the future for our country.
+
+ PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION CONCEPT
+
+ We need to get the message across that we can break this
+cycle. As disasters become more and more devastating, we need
+to start raising our own expectations and ask what more can we
+do to make a difference for communities. We need to set higher
+standards in building our communities, and we have made our
+mission of protecting public health and safety a goal with
+individuals and communities as the number one priority. We
+share a goal here, and I think we can do better. I think we all
+know that.
+ We do a great deal now in mitigation. I think everyone
+knows what we have been able to do in mitigation with funds
+authorized by section 404 of the Stafford Act, not only in
+Arnold, MO, but in Memphis, TN, Houston, TX, California, and
+all across our country.
+ But we shouldn't have to wait for these problems to happen.
+We should be able to do something before these events take
+place. Much of our most significant work in reducing the risk
+with mitigation is only targeted after a disaster happens.
+Planning and preparedness work cannot be rewarded under our
+current disaster assistance program. Nature has to force our
+hand.
+ The strong message of what our communities can do to
+strengthen building codes, to make schools and public
+facilities safer, and to lessen the impact of these events, has
+to be heard outside of Washington, D.C., outside of the walls
+of FEMA, and outside of the emergency management community.
+ The idea of reducing risk has to enter the mainstream. No
+one knows better than each of you in this committee room that
+the losses from recent disasters are neither small nor rare.
+That is why we are seeking $50 million in pre-disaster
+mitigation funding to begin this new program.
+ Over the past four years that we have worked together, we
+have seen disaster after disaster, we have responded, and have
+helped communities recover. We have streamlined that response
+process, and we're doing it better than FEMA has ever done it
+before. This is because we have developed a State, local and
+Federal partnership that I think has made a difference. We can
+use that same partnership to establish a pre-disaster
+mitigation program to work with those high-risk communities
+across our country.
+ What I suggest we look at trying to do is start developing
+some pilot projects to identify high-risk communities, go into
+the community as a team, bringing in the business community and
+the insurance industry, and sit down around the table with
+local elected officials in that community and say ``This is
+your risk, a high risk, and we can minimize that risk.''
+ By doing this, we will save disaster dollars. We will save
+taxpayers' dollars. Every mitigation project we have done,
+every dollar we have spent has saved two dollars in future
+losses. It's a wise thing to do, and it just makes good sense.
+It can reduce the risk of people losing their lives and
+eliminate the frustration people go through when they have a
+disaster. It helps communities not only to recover faster, but
+helps lessen the impact of the disaster on their community.
+
+ disasters in midwest
+
+ In Arkansas this week, the tornado went from Arkadelphia,
+all the way to northeast Arkansas in Greene County, along a
+250-mile swath. There were 26 fatalities from that tornado.
+It's going to take a lot to rebuild those communities. Some of
+them were devastated.
+ Yesterday, we were in Ohio, West Virginia and a part of
+Kentucky. Ohio had six fatalities. They've had record floods in
+Ohio, in areas that have never flooded before. In Kentucky,
+there have been 18 fatalities.
+ So, I think we can lessen the loss of life, and lesson the
+impact on individuals and communities by forging that
+partnership with private industry and making a difference for
+communities. We have to start somewhere, and I think we need to
+start now.
+ We have done some good things with mitigation, but it has
+been after the impact of a disaster and as we're rebuilding.
+Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I think this can
+make a difference, and I think this can help cut disaster
+costs.
+ As we continue to streamline our programs and streamline
+FEMA, this is an area that I think will help do more than just
+respond. I think that's the way we need to go, Mr. Chairman.
+ Thank you.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+[Pages 5 - 19--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ NEED FOR EFFICIENT RESPONSE
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you very much, Mr. Witt.
+ I want the members of my committee to know, as well as
+those who have an interest in FEMA's work, that I feel FEMA has
+done almost a phenomenal job in terms of their response to a
+variety and mix of disasters across the country during the time
+that I have been Chairman.
+ There are, Mr. Director, some concerns that I would like to
+communicate to you for the record today. You and I have talked
+a little bit about some of these, but let me be specific.
+ As I look at just the television reports of that horrendous
+damage in Arkansas, the impact of tornadoes, the flooding along
+the Ohio River, certainly the flooding reminds me of the
+flooding that was some 300 miles away from my own district, but
+still in my State of California, not so long ago.
+ As I reviewed some of those circumstances, there is
+absolutely no question that public officials and communities
+alike have been extremely pleased with both the sensitivity and
+the quick response of FEMA in terms of that initial evaluation
+of the impact of these disasters.
+ I am concerned, however, that there are circumstances where
+really the paperwork and follow-up response has gotten in the
+way of building upon some of that public confidence. Frankly, I
+must say, Mr. Witt, it is my personal view, having been so
+extensively exposed to you and your work and your concern, that
+much of the problem I would point to may lie somewhere at the
+second and third level, where some of those personnel haven't
+had a chance to leave Washington and go out and see those
+people and those circumstances.
+ For example, in the flooding that took place in 1995 in
+California, there still are circumstances where we recognized
+the disaster, the President declared it a disaster, there was
+funding to be designated, where the funding has not arrived
+yet. Under those circumstances, the communities are severely
+impacted. There's no doubt about it.
+ When we do have money in the pipeline, there is no doubt,
+and I know that if you were pressing that button, it would have
+happened at another time. So I am very concerned that people
+who care about the agency, who work here in Washington,
+recognize that efficiency is very, very important when you're
+dealing with people in crises.
+
+ LEVEE PROBLEM
+
+ I would like to also mention to you that there is concern
+presently in California relative to those endless miles of
+levees in Northern California, largely on private property,
+that nonetheless were designed by people for flood protection.
+ One of the pieces of our history at home that few people
+remember is that one of the great accomplishments of this
+century involved a kind of bipartisan, nonpartisan effort
+within my State. Then Governor Pat Brown struck a compromise
+that should be remembered by everybody who looks at the
+problems we have in our huge State. He brought Democrats and
+Republicans together, recognizing that flooding in Northern
+California had nothing to do with party, but it certainly led
+to crisis after crisis, year in and year out.
+ At the same time there was another crisis developing in the
+south, and that was the desperate need for the delivery of
+water. The compromise between north and south was to build
+flood protection up north and, indeed, deliver water down
+south.
+ Today, we find ourselves in a circumstance where, if you
+would but look, if you took us back before that flood control
+was done in Northern California, the disaster we had recently
+would have been more than just a disaster. It would have been
+something that no one could contend with.
+ Interestingly enough, members and citizens in Northern
+California today remember the need for flood protection, and
+ofttimes they forget about the need to deliver water down
+south. Thus, we want to tap water to flush the bay or do other
+things besides actually make sure that people are first in
+line.
+ Having said all that, in connection with those levees,
+there currently is a ponding problem up there that many are
+concerned about. There is a need for pumping that could lead to
+a secondary disaster unless we find a solution in connection
+with that. I know you're somewhat aware of it, but I would like
+to hear your comments regarding how we might go about solving
+that problem.
+ Mr. Witt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ The pumping issue in California involves a lot of private
+farmland. There is a lot of water there, and the State and
+Governor Wilson have started doing some pumping for those
+individuals. Some farmers even took it upon themselves to
+repair some of the levees, and have collected a million dollars
+on their own account to help repair some of the private levees
+that protected their farmland.
+ My concerns were--and I asked a team to go out and look
+when they called about the pumping problem--is it going to
+create a problem if we get more rain, and is it going to create
+a problem if the snowmelt is very fast? Is it going to create
+more flooding problems and more levee breaking problems? So I
+asked the Corps of Engineers and our people, to go out with the
+State and look at these areas to make sure that that was not
+going to happen, and to determine if this flooding was or had
+the potential to create a public health problem.
+ The response that I got back was that it was not creating a
+public health problem. The only problem was, and continues to
+be, the fact that the standing water is deteriorating the
+levee.
+ Mr. Lewis. Correct.
+ Mr. Witt. And that's a concern of mine. So the Corps is
+looking at that now to make a determination for us so that I
+can make a decision on whether or not we need to help the
+State, and reimburse them for that pumping.
+ Mr. Lewis. I appreciate that response, and I will want to
+be working with you very closely in connection with those
+developments.
+
+ usgs mapping
+
+ Let me mention an item that I did mention to Katey McGinty,
+who was before us yesterday. As you know, she runs the
+President's Council on Environmental Quality. I understand that
+John Garamendi, who is a Deputy Secretary of the Interior, has
+suggested that FEMA allocate, or be given to allocate, two
+million dollars of funding that would allow USGS to map and do
+some measuring relative to those levees, where we have, as I
+suggested, some 4-6,000 miles of levees, that we don't have
+enough information about.
+ I do know that you have experience with such USGS mapping
+in other parts of the country, and you and I have discussed the
+fact that very little has come from that, in terms of really
+being helpful. It may be that Mr. Garamendi is not aware of the
+current technology that is available to us.
+ The item I discussed with Miss McGinty is the fact that now
+an item that used to be in the black, in the intelligence
+world, is now available and we can talk about it. But using
+radar technology and an appropriate aircraft, we are able to
+fly over areas like this. We can measure strength, et cetera,
+pretty precisely, and do it reasonably.
+ I would suggest that maybe you and I should work together
+on the possible exercising of that technology in terms of these
+levees in Northern California. It could very quickly, as soon
+as we have a pattern of decent weather here, very quickly
+provide tools that could address the very mitigation issues
+that you mentioned in your opening statement.
+ Mr. Witt. Mr. Chairman, I agree with you. The first time
+that we used USGS in this endeavor was in 1993 in the Midwest.
+The report we got was a very nice, detailed report. We also
+used NASA and the CIA imagery satellite shots in the Midwest
+that showed the moisture content in the ground what would
+happen if we got ``x'' amount of rain with that moisture
+content, and exactly where that water would be.
+ So, we have held up on the request for the two million
+dollars they're asking for right now, to make sure we would
+benefit from what this would do to help us resolve future
+problems in levees and future problems in flooding. We're
+looking at that now.
+ Mr. Lewis. There is no question that this could be a very,
+very valuable tool. The potential is very great.
+ In fact, when you look at the aftermath of the Ohio Valley
+circumstance, the same technology may very well fit there.
+Since it's available to us, we ought to begin to exercise it.
+
+ submission of congressional reports
+
+ Let me move on just a little and then turn to my colleague.
+I was going to begin, before we had this most recent sensation
+across the country, I was going to begin by taking a few
+moments--I must say, some within my staff would suggest I
+should chide the Director. Frankly, I will never forget that
+trip we took to Oklahoma City together, just after that
+explosion. There were still bodies in the building.
+ I also know we've had conversations on the 1995 flood that
+hit Santa Barbara and other areas. If that had been in my
+district--the Lord had decided it wouldn't go in that
+direction--we would have had a catastrophe because there was
+tens of billions of dollars of property involved, just with a
+shift in the weather pattern. So I'm not in the chiding
+business here.
+ But at another level within the agency, I might very well
+be. It is very important to the committee's work that people
+help you follow through while you're doing the important work
+that really is your key responsibility.
+ FEMA has developed a well-deserved reputation as the most
+responsive of agencies. That has not always been the case. I
+remind myself and my staff of that all the time.
+ I would be remiss, though, in my responsibilities, Mr.
+Director, as Chairman, if I did not bring to your attention the
+fact that the Agency has missed virtually every report deadline
+and directive that was included in the 1997 appropriations
+bill, and the conference report that accompanied that bill.
+ To be specific, FEMA had a statutory requirement to provide
+a comprehensive report regarding disaster relief expenditures
+within 120 days of enactment of the 1997 Act. We are now, you
+know, somewhat beyond that, 150 days and counting. Only last
+Friday did we receive a draft of that report, and I really
+don't have any idea when the report will be finally delivered.
+ You and I have talked about the fact that I want you out
+there doing what you're doing, but in the meantime, I would
+like to have the message go back in the other direction. Martha
+and others are very good at communicating with us this way, and
+I would like to have them turn around and communicate the other
+way as well.
+ Included in our conference report was a directive to
+provide within 90 days a comprehensive, though not complicated,
+report on certain questions relating to the Urban Search and
+Rescue Program. That report took over 140 days to deliver. I am
+compelled to tell you that, while it was informative, it
+unfortunately did not address all the questions raised by the
+conferees.
+ I am laying this foundation, Mr. Director, to make another
+point that I think is very important as we evaluate your budget
+request.
+ The conferees asked that you include in the fiscal year
+1998 budget justification an activities report of the Disaster
+Resources Board, as well as a comprehensive priority list of
+all your emergency equipment needs, so that you will not be
+forced to operate with obsolete and worn out equipment. We
+thought we could help your agency, and you specifically, by
+having this information. But, of course, it was not even
+mentioned in your budget accounts.
+ There are other examples of monthly reports of disaster
+relief expenditures, a predisaster mitigation spending plan,
+and numerous requests for information that, frankly, seemed to
+go into a black hole somewhere around 500 ``C'' Street,
+Southwest.
+ Mr. Director, I recognize that the Congress is very capable
+of asking for reports and issuing directives within time limits
+which are impossible to achieve, it seems. If we've done that,
+I would hope our relationship is good enough that you will be
+frank and tell me so. And we've done a little of that.
+ Likewise, if circumstances of your normal responsibilities
+make it impossible to meet these various reporting
+requirements, you should not hesitate to write and ask for an
+extension of time. Our intent is not to burden you or your
+staff with paperwork. Rather, we clearly have an obligation to
+spend the people's money in as wise a manner as possible, and
+oversight in this matter is a necessary component of that
+responsibility.
+ Director Witt, I will, of course, allow you time to
+respond, if you so desire. But what I'm mostly looking for,
+however, is your commitment to attempt to be as responsive to
+us as you have been to our mutual clients.
+ Mr. Witt. Mr. Chairman, I have no excuse and take full
+responsibility for those reports. I can assure you that, when
+we leave the hearing today, the reports will be addressed.
+ Mr. Lewis. I do appreciate that. I hear you loud and clear.
+Somebody said ``the buck stops here''. But in the meantime, I
+know that your personnel have to be very proud of the shift in
+image across the country that FEMA enjoys, as well as the work
+they're about. I certainly hope there are those who understand
+that even requests from Congress not responded to can undermine
+a lot of that foundation that is important to all of us.
+
+ disaster obligations
+
+ Moving on now to what this hearing should be about, I have
+numerous questions regarding the disaster relief program. It
+is, of course, well known that the number and cost of declared
+disasters has continued to rise over the last several years.
+Congress has obviously done everything possible to accommodate
+the need for necessary disaster dollars, and I should mention
+that in my first two years as chairman of this subcommittee, we
+have appropriated nearly $7.5 billion in disaster relief, no
+small part of that going to my own State, I might mention.
+ As a result of these large appropriations, coupled with the
+lengthy period of time that it generally takes to obligate
+funds, FEMA has carried huge, unobligated balances from one
+fiscal year to the next. At the beginning of 1996, for example,
+you showed an unobligated balance of $4.2 billion, and for
+1997, that number was $3.1 billion. For 1998, you project that
+number to be just slightly over $100 million, meaning that you
+plan to obligate almost $4.4 billion during fiscal year 1997.
+ While I have some considerable doubts whether certain
+requirements, such as projects associated with the Northridge
+earthquake, will be ready for obligation this year, I have very
+serious doubts as to whether FEMA has the fiscal capability to
+obligate that much money in one fiscal year.
+ Has FEMA ever obligated that much in one year?
+ Mr. Witt. This year, funding for Northridge and other
+disasters that we've been dealing with, is going to be
+obligated and committed this year. A lot of the architectural
+and engineering studies that have been going on in some of
+these projects are now just coming in for approval. There was
+over two hundred million dollars obligated just last month.
+ Mr. Lewis. I must say, Mr. Director, what all this is
+about--and I say this for my colleagues as well--I am
+attempting to lay a foundation here because we will be
+discussing the content of your budget to some extent.
+ I would note for the record that one cannot help but be
+somewhat dismayed that in almost every category of your basic
+budget, where you do the work, where the people are, where the
+equipment is, et cetera, that there are reductions or there's
+mighty ``slim pickins''. I am really, really wondering if, due
+to pressures that involve symbolism about tightening your belt,
+with an agency that deals with crises, if we aren't cutting off
+our nose--you know, to talk to the media, instead of dealing
+with problems that you try to deal with every day. I am
+attempting to move in that direction.
+ Does obligating this much money exceed the ability of your
+agency, or does it impose an extraordinary workload burden?
+ Mr. Witt. I don't think so. I think we can do this with the
+financial management system that Gary has put in place, and
+with the streamlining and changes we've made. We will have to,
+to be able to get the projects rebuilt. It will have to be
+obligated this year.
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, in obligating this much over the course of
+the fiscal year, do you maintain auditors or other overseers to
+make sure problems do not arise?
+ Mr. Witt. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Lewis. Gary, identify yourself.
+ Mr. Johnson. Gary Johnson, Chief Financial Officer.
+ Yes, very much so, Mr. Chairman. We have had our new
+financial management system looked at very, very carefully as
+we're moving forward with full implementation. In fact, this
+year components of the agency will be audited as part of our
+progress towards complying with the Government Management and
+Reform Act that requires financial statements for the entire
+agency. So we are working very closely with auditors and
+they're here for the first time working with us now, that are
+under contract with the Inspector General.
+
+ budget supplemental
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you.
+ For fiscal year 1998, you have requested just over $2.7
+billion for disaster relief. This figure includes a normal
+appropriation of $320 million--you addressed that partly in
+your opening remarks--a supplemental, of sorts, totalling some
+$2.38 billion, and an amount totalling $50 million for pre-
+disaster mitigation efforts.
+ It is my understanding that a supplemental will be coming
+to the Hill shortly that relates to Bosnia, and may involve as
+much as $2.5 billion. Do you anticipate that there is a
+reasonable possibility that there will be some supplemental
+relating to this subject area attached to that?
+ Mr. Witt. We're trying to put the numbers together now and
+work with OMB. We're just addressing it now.
+ Mr. Lewis. I understand that supplemental will likely be
+coming to us some time in April--at least that's what the
+leaders are telling us currently they are pushing for. Targets
+always change around here. Nonetheless, I would hope that you
+would attempt to be ready, and we can talk about that well
+before we get to that point.
+
+ 1998 disaster relief estimates
+
+ Within the narrative of the budget justification, you go to
+great lengths to point out the growing cost of the disaster
+program. Yet your request shows a reduction in virtually every
+single object class activity. Personnel compensation shows a 65
+percent reduction; travel and transportation of persons shows
+an 82 percent reduction; communications shows a 68 percent
+reduction. The list goes on and on.
+ The overall request appears to be nothing more than the
+five-year average of disaster expenditures, not including the
+cost of Northridge, thus leaving me with the distinct
+impression that various object class numbers are developed to
+fit a prefixed total and don't necessarily fit your actual
+experience over the past few years.
+ How do you react to that?
+ Mr. Witt. Of course, FEMA is much smaller than it was in
+1993. Our budget is smaller and our staff is smaller. I can't
+tell you how proud I am of the employees, of their dedication,
+and how hard they work. They have done a great job.
+ We have put in place streamlining efforts, with the
+financial management system, and the new technology we're using
+in the field. Instead of having to open disaster field offices,
+where people stand in line to wait to fill out paper forms, we
+are using computer technology with the inspectors. By
+establishing central processing centers, we have actually gone
+from $60 per application to $14 per application in
+administrative costs. So by reorganizing and streamlining, I
+think we have made a difference in administrative costs. That's
+the goal, to try to streamline, to try to cut the cost of our
+programs, to try to help support the effort in balancing the
+budget, and still do our job and do it well.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Director, I appreciate very much that point,
+and we'll call on Mr. Johnson in a moment to add to that. But I
+do have additional questions on this subject area that I will
+ask you to respond to for the record.
+ The bottom line is this. As we're going about a commitment
+to balance the budget by 2002, the administration has signed
+on, Mr. Stokes and I have kind of signed on--at least the two
+parties have, the two houses have. I think we're serious about
+reexamining all of our programs. Maybe even reducing funding,
+or even eliminating programs that aren't working well or don't
+work at all, is one thing, and reducing the rate of growth is
+another.
+ But where there are critical programs that have a
+demonstrated ability to do the job well, with the increasing
+responsibilities, those are not the programs that I look to
+undermine or perhaps kid ourselves relative to what the
+balanced budget process is all about. I would much prefer to
+call upon those who haven't done their jobs to get serious,
+rather than starve those that are working effectively.
+ So, with that, Mr. Stokes, I appreciate your patience for
+the time that I took. I would be happy to yield to you.
+
+ recent disasters
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Witt, in your opening statement this morning, where you
+referenced predisaster mitigation and that type of approach, I
+was quite impressed because, obviously, we must display much
+more vision with respect to what you refer to in your statement
+as being incredible events which we can never forecast. Of
+course, over the past four years, a little over four years,
+that you've been in office, our Nation has been confronted with
+some very serious disasters. We think of the tornados,
+earthquakes, flooding, bombings, and perhaps other things in
+between.
+ One of the hallmarks of this administration, I think, is
+the manner in which you have had such a rapid response to
+wherever disasters have occurred. You were there, and
+oftentimes taking with you heads of other agencies who had some
+corresponding responsibility relative to that particular
+disaster. You described for us this morning the fatalities that
+have occurred in Arkansas, Kentucky and Ohio.
+ I think it would be helpful to the committee if you would
+take a moment and perhaps give us a brief understanding of
+what, in addition to the fatalities, you actually saw as you
+and the President in one case, and you and the Vice President
+in another, actually viewed these sites. Can you do that for
+us?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir.
+ The first disaster that we responded to recently was in
+Arkansas. As I said, the tornado went from Arkadelphia to
+Greene County, a distance of 250 miles, and anywhere from a
+half a mile to a mile wide in some areas. In the city of
+Arkadelphia, where it hit first, it hit the downtown and
+residential area, and it absolutely devastated that city. It's
+going to take some time to clean up and also to rebuild a lot
+of areas.
+ It has been our experience that a lot of the areas that are
+hit by natural disasters are low-income areas. I don't have the
+answer as to why. A lot of these people in Arkadelphia lived in
+mobile homes. There were 60 mobile homes in this one park.
+Every single one was twisted around each other. There were
+seven fatalities in that city, even though they had adequate
+warning to be able to try to get to safety.
+ In Ohio and Kentucky, and even in Tennessee and Indiana, we
+had flooding. Also a tornado hit Tennessee, where it destroyed
+about 600 homes.
+ What is difficult is the fact that there was a massive
+amount of debris. When you have a flood, you have a massive
+amount of debris simply because that flood water destroys
+everything: the carpet, the floors, the walls, the sheet rock.
+All that has to come out. At the same time, you have all those
+household chemicals that have to be disposed of separately.
+ One lady I talked to in Saline County, Arkansas, had lost
+six members of her family a month ago. Her husband took her
+away for the weekend to help try to relieve some of her stress.
+When they came back, everything they had worked all their life
+for was gone.
+ On top of that, she stepped on a nail before we got there.
+It went through her foot. We were trying to help her get a
+tetanus shot.
+ Another lady had a restaurant. She had worked hard all of
+her life to get the money to put into a restaurant. She was in
+that restaurant by herself when that tornado hit. It just
+absolutely destroyed that whole business. She was underneath
+all the rubble. When the fire and rescue people pulled her out,
+she only had bruises. She can rebuild, but it takes a lot of
+effort to do that. It takes a lot of cooperation from the
+Federal, State and local governments working together to make
+that happen.
+ Any time you have tornados and floods--and I have seen a
+lot--it still breaks my heart to see families disrupted, who
+lose everything they worked all their life for. My point is, we
+can help stop some of that. With mitigation, we can make a
+difference. We can eliminate a lot of that.
+ You know, in the Midwest, in Ohio, you can elevate a home.
+You can retrofit a house or business against an earthquake. You
+can do so much in mitigation that can make a difference for a
+community, and on top of that, it will save lives. That's the
+direction we need to go for the future. It's devastating.
+
+ value of mitigation
+
+ Mr. Stokes. In terms of Ohio, what you saw there, had there
+been any type of attempt early on to build something that would
+guard against this type of thing?
+ Mr. Witt. In Cincinnati, they had a flood wall that was
+built years ago. The flood wall worked in that part of the
+city. Beyond the city, of course, communities were flooded. It
+was the first time they had ever flooded. It was a record flood
+for them.
+ This one gentleman built his house on the hill, the only
+hill in that community, and it still flooded. So because this
+disaster has hit many communities in Ohio and other States, we
+need to look at those communities. We need to see what we need
+to do so that it does not happen to that individual and that
+community again.
+ We did that in the Midwest through the buyout relocation
+program in the 1993 floods. We worked with the State and local
+communities on a voluntary basis, and worked with all the
+Federal agencies to maximize the Federal dollar. We bought out
+over 10,000 pieces of property.
+ What did that do? It created jobs. It was environmentally
+sound because it was good land use management--the land went
+back to the city and county for open land use management
+without anyone building back there again. In 1995, Illinois and
+Missouri had a flood again in some of the same communities, but
+no one lived there and no one got flooded. That's the
+difference we made.
+ Do you remember the little town of Pattonsburg in Missouri,
+you remember Congressman?
+ Mr. Stokes. Yes.
+ Mr. Witt. It had flooded 31 times in its history. The mayor
+took me in his city hall, and he said, ``I want to show you
+something.'' He had elevation marks on the walls inside the
+city hall showing the years and dates that it had flooded. He
+had shelves built above the last flood mark where he could
+stack everything.
+ Governor Carnahan and all of us joined together in a united
+effort, and using the money that you appropriated for us, we
+were able to relocate 18 businesses and 142 residents that will
+never be flooded again. There will never be taxpayers' dollars
+used for disaster costs related to flooding for that town
+again.
+ In California--and you may have heard this story. I've told
+it many times--there was one gentleman on a street in Hollywood
+where every home had major damage or was destroyed from an
+earthquake. This one gentleman in this little house was sitting
+there. We walked in to his front yard, and I said, ``Why didn't
+you have any damage?'' He said, ``I went down and checked out a
+video tape at the library on how to retrofit your house against
+an earthquake.'' It was a FEMA Office of Emergency Services
+video tape produced in partnership with the State.
+ He said, ``I spent a thousand dollars and did the work
+myself.'' He never had a brick loosened, he never had a single
+pane of glass broken. That's what we need to do. That's the
+difference we can make for Ohio in this flood, as well as in
+Kentucky and Indiana.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Director--would you yield for just a moment?
+ Mr. Stokes. Certainly.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Director, I have heard that story before,
+and I want you to know that during the last year my wife and I
+have been involved in remodeling in beautiful downtown
+California. We live near, not very far from the San Andreas
+fault. We got that tape. You know, I'm going to come back to
+you if any of those bricks fall down. [Laughter.]
+
+ drf efficiencies
+
+ Mr. Witt. We have streamlined. We do things differently.
+The things we have done differently have saved money.
+ You know, when we started out at FEMA, we set up a
+processing center every time there was a disaster. Every time
+there was a disaster, we bought new equipment for that disaster
+field office.
+ So we have changed all that now. We have two central
+processing centers for the United States and have cut millions
+of dollars in administrative costs a year.
+ We had between 60 and 80 warehouses and storage facilities
+across the United States. No one knew what the inventory was,
+so we just bought new equipment every time we had a disaster.
+Now we have an equipment inventory, we have a warehouse on the
+West Coast, one in the central United States, and one on the
+East Coast. All the equipment is inventoried.
+ All of the cellular phones, computers and everything come
+back in after a disaster, are refurbished, and then are
+packaged and used again.
+ I think in '96 we saved $12.6 million, wasn't it, Bruce?
+ Mr. Campbell. Yes, $12.6 million in cost avoidance by
+reusing the equipment.
+ Mr. Witt. This is what we've done to streamline.
+ Saving disaster dollars, saving people's lives, and making
+communities disaster resistant are things that we can do.
+ Mr. Lewis. Excuse me, but would you identify yourself for
+the record?
+ Mr. Campbell. Yes, sir. I am Bruce Campbell, Executive
+Associate Director for Operations Support.
+ Mr. Witt. In that flood in California that you had--not
+this last one but the one before--there were 38 counties
+flooded. There was no way that we had enough personnel, State
+or FEMA, to open disaster application centers. We just couldn't
+do it. After working with the State we said okay, we're going
+to use a 1-800 teleregistration number and establish a service
+center to give customer service to those people who need
+information.
+ Do you know what? In that one disaster, in that one single
+flood disaster, we saved $4.6 million by doing it this way.
+ We did a survey after we used the 1-800 number without
+opening application centers, to see how people felt, to see if
+they got good service. Eighty-five percent approved the way we
+did this.
+ So these changes, Mr. Chairman, are what have helped us to
+streamline and make it easier and save money, but we still have
+to go back and do more to save our communities.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you very much, Mr. Stokes.
+ We normally call on members in the order that they arrive
+and go back and forth. Mr. Walsh was here mighty early, but the
+gentleman who helps us in the leadership has several
+conflicting meetings and Mr. Walsh will yield to Mr. Hobson.
+
+ BORROWING AUTHORITY FOR THE FLOOD PROGRAM
+
+ Mr. Hobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Walsh.
+I appreciate it.
+ Director Witt, it's nice to see you. First I want to say
+that I think you're doing a good job. I have had personal
+experience with your agency before the current flooding
+situation, and I think you have brought a fresh image to this
+agency. I want to congratulate you.
+ I have a couple of comments and three or four questions.
+ I grew up in Cincinnati, so I know a little bit about the
+river. I want to tell you one story, that some years ago, when
+I was a young lawyer, I got a job there. In those days, before
+they built Riverfront Stadium, they had parking meters so far
+down on the river landing. Well, not having any money, I
+thought I would park below those meters. I didn't know why they
+only went so far. I parked out there, and I did that for a
+number of months.
+ One day I came back and I had two wheels in the water,
+because that's how fast that water comes up. Even then the
+water came up. I thought, now I know why nobody was parking
+down there. Fortunately, it didn't get all four wheels and I
+got out of there. But that river can come up fast.
+ Mr. Witt. It came up 21 feet in less than 12 hours.
+ Mr. Hobson. It's devastating.
+ I once was in a church in Williamson, WV, and they had
+those marks on the wall. I asked them what they were, and they
+said the waters rise every so often so we just mark the wall
+and leave it there.
+ This is a tough time and I appreciate your going out to
+Ohio and the other states, the administration and you, and
+declaring those counties disaster areas. I represent part of
+Ross County, one of the disaster counties, so I really
+appreciate that.
+ Really, you help little towns, too. Some think that FEMA
+just goes into big towns, but you do a lot in little towns to
+help the people.
+ But with the extreme flooding conditions that we're facing,
+I'm interested in knowing whether FEMA has enough borrowing
+authority for the national flood insurance program.
+ Mr. Witt. Let me address it just a little bit, and then I
+would like to get Spence Perry, who is our Acting Executive
+Administrator for the Flood Insurance Program, to answer more
+specifically.
+ When we started changing what we were doing in FEMA,
+particularly in the flood program, I had a serious concern
+about this. In 1974, we only had $8 billion in policies. By
+1993, we had $254 billion in policies, but still had
+communities that had never joined the flood program. I saw
+across our country floods where people didn't even realize that
+their homeowner's insurance did not cover flood damage.
+ That was a serious problem, because when they had a flood,
+they would call their insurance agent, and he would say,
+``Sorry, you're not covered.'' So we did a marketing campaign,
+Mr. Chairman. You remember we spent that money, and Elaine
+McReynolds the Federal Insurance Administrator, was telling you
+about it at last year's hearing. Now we have $370 billion in
+coverage based on that marketing campaign.
+ So to answer the question about do we have enough borrowing
+authority based on the amount of coverage we had in 1974 or
+even 1993 versus the amount of coverage that we are responsible
+for now, no, we don't. We do not.
+ Spence, do you want to respond?
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Perry, please identify yourself.
+ Mr. Perry. I am Spence Perry, the Executive Administrator
+of the Federal Insurance Administration.
+ The short and comfortable answer to your question, sir, is
+that for the claims we're experiencing right now in the
+Midwest, there will be ample funding to pay the claims. In
+fact, we're anticipating about 3-5,000 claims in the current
+flooding. Very early and preliminary estimates of losses amount
+to $45-50 million, which is consistent with average losses and
+would not involve borrowing. So the present flooding event is
+sufficiently covered.
+
+ need for additional urban search and rescue teams
+
+ Mr. Hobson. The other issue I wanted to talk about--and I
+really appreciate what your staff has done to keep me informed,
+is FEMA's urban search and rescue team program and the
+selection process. As a matter of fact, we're taking a look at
+the one in Ohio's Miami Valley and Wright-Patterson Air Force
+Base.
+ I appreciate your efforts to keep the selection process
+fair and above board, and whatever happens, happens. I think
+that's the real issue. If you lose, you know it's fair and
+nobody has a problem.
+ But I would like for you to comment on the need for
+additional USAR teams, especially the needs in the central part
+of the United States.
+ Mr. Witt. I think it really came to light with the Oklahoma
+City bombing. We had to bring teams in from New York,
+California, and all across the country. They were very good
+teams, and they did a fantastic job.
+ But I think everyone realizes that we would be very limited
+by the number of teams that we would have to respond to a New
+Madrid earthquake or another incident that we may be facing
+besides that. So, geographically, it is just not readily
+accessible by all of our teams; so that was the reason we were
+primarily looking at the midwest.
+
+ emergency equipment replacement
+
+ Mr. Hobson. At some time I would like to know about your
+timing on that decision.
+ I have just two other short questions. Since much of FEMA's
+emergency equipment is obsolete and in need of repair, I join
+the chairman in requesting a list of FEMA's needs in the area
+of emergency response equipment, and I hope you will give him a
+date on when you're going to follow up on that because I think
+it's important.
+ We're trying to help you, because I think and everybody
+else thinks you're doing a good job. We want to help the people
+who are doing a good job, and we're going to help you fight for
+what you need.
+
+ state and local programs
+
+ Lastly, as you know, I have enjoyed a close working
+relationship with Dale Shipley, with the Ohio Emergency
+Management Agency, who I think has done a good job in Ohio, and
+I know he is respected by you and you're respected by those
+people out there in the States. I think it is really important
+that there is this mutual respect.
+ But he and several other emergency managers have expressed
+their concern about the funding level in the State and local
+assistance accounts. Knowing of your background as a State
+director, and what your State is going through now, how do you
+think the States are doing in carrying out their emergency
+management responsibilities, and specifically could you comment
+on the proposed SLA funding levels?
+ Mr. Witt. In `94 and `95, you all were gracious enough to
+give us an additional $4 million in each year to address the
+Emergency Management Assistance requirements in each State. I
+think the States have really come along in the last four years
+and are doing a better job and getting better prepared to do
+their job.
+ What we're trying to do in working with the States now, as
+we are required to do under the GPRA, is show accountability,
+to show where we're going with priorities and goals, and to
+justify our programs.
+ We are working with the States to do self-assessments based
+on program guidance from FEMA, and tying them in with the GPRA
+requirements, to actually establish a baseline from which they
+can assess where they're going and where they need to go.
+They're doing a great job.
+ I saw Dale Shipley yesterday, Congressman. He looked a
+little weary, but other than that, he was fine. Our regional
+director, Michelle Burkett, and the State are working to help
+support those communities.
+ Mr. Hobson. Well, we appreciate what you're doing. It's a
+tough time for you now in Ohio, but from past experience,
+you've done a good job and I'm sure you will in the future.
+ I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and my friend from New York, for
+allowing me this time. I have four hearings going at the same
+time.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Hobson. We appreciate that.
+ Mr. Director, we have a couple of new members to our
+committee down at the end of the table, but at this point--
+ Mr. Hobson. But experienced members, actually.
+
+ hazard mitigation grants
+
+ Mr. Lewis. That's right.
+ At this time it's my privilege to recognize the gentlelady
+from Florida, Miss Carrie Meek. She is a delight to serve with
+on the committee. She, along with the Chairman, have
+experienced disasters in their individual States, but at least
+we're not in the mix of this at home at the moment.
+Nonetheless, I am sure she's pleased to be here with the
+Director, who is doing such a tremendous job.
+ Miss Meek.
+ Ms. Meek. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased to be
+here.
+ Coming from a State that I think is the most frequently
+hurt by hurricanes, and knowing how hard you and FEMA have
+worked to assist us, I really want to say that we appreciate it
+so very much. And how you have also tried to end some of the
+many disasters we have.
+ You understand that any disaster has far-flung
+ramifications after it's over. We still have a few of those
+left. In your working with us, hopefully these things can be
+handled in the quickest manner possible. So I want to thank you
+for that.
+ Our State is very concerned about the way we have funded
+the hazard mitigation programs. My friend and colleague, Mr.
+Hobson, has just alluded to his efforts in that regard. But the
+reading I get on that, having been Chairlady of the State's
+community agency for a while, I am concerned about the time it
+takes to turn around the grants to the States. It takes an
+enormous amount of time, many times up to 42 months, to do
+that.
+ I am sure you must have some sympathy in understanding that
+these States, who so drastically need to do this, so
+drastically need to get their plans together, their strategies
+together, and try to enlist the help of all the agencies, and
+I'm concerned as to whether or not you can slow or cut down on
+that length of time that it takes to expedite that.
+ If you can, what plans have you made so far to do that?
+ Mr. Witt. That's a very good question, and thank you.
+ Joe Meyers, your State director from Florida, is on our
+hazard mitigation committee for the National Emergency
+Management Association. Joe has done an exceptionally good job
+for you in Florida.
+ Streamlining the hazard mitigation grant program was a
+number one priority for me, because I dealt with the mitigation
+program when I was the State director in Arkansas. It took me
+two-and-a-half years to get a project approved. So we have now
+pushed the approval of the hazard mitigation grant proposals
+down to the regions; so they do not have to come to Washington
+and get tied up in time here.
+ We are pushing down to the regions the environmental
+assessments. They work closely with the States from out of the
+regional office so that the project doesn't have to come up
+here to get the environmental assessment done or our review.
+ We are working with the States, as they are developing
+their 409 State-wide mitigation plans that will help them to
+prioritize their mitigation projects before and after a
+disaster, which is going to make a big difference.
+ Also, last year you all were kind enough to support the $3
+million increase for a State mitigation officer in each State.
+This will make a big difference by having someone working full
+time on this. So I think what we're doing with the States now,
+with the mitigation task force we have set up, and by
+streamlining the process, that we will be able to make a
+difference.
+ As we rebuild after a disaster--a bridge, a city hall, or
+courthouse--mitigation needs to be part of that rebuilding
+effort, not two years later. So we are working on that.
+
+ pre-disaster mitigation
+
+ Ms. Meek. Right now is that in your overall budget?
+ Mr. Witt. You mean predisaster mitigation?
+ Ms. Meek. Yes.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Ms. Meek. Shouldn't that be outside of your purview in
+terms of--not outside of your purview, but in order to expedite
+things and to cause things to work better for the States, could
+that be an additional amount of money that I ask my chairman
+for? [Laughter.]
+ I think it would help.
+ Mr. Witt. I agree with you. [Laughter.]
+ This is a new program. The $50 million is a pre-disaster
+program that we're trying to put in place to do the mitigation
+projects before we have another hurricane, before we have
+another flood, or before we have another earthquake. So that's
+what----
+ Mr. Lewis. If the gentlelady would yield, let me mention
+that the Director and I have discussed this subject on a number
+of occasions. While we did put in extra money last year, this
+is relatively a small amount.
+ But just to illustrate your point, the Director came to
+California and spent considerable time with us relative to the
+Northridge earthquake and the impact it had upon very critical
+hospitals in Southern California that should be available in
+the event of an emergency. There were major facilities at UCLA,
+USC, at St. John's, at Cedars of Sinai.
+ The damage due to the earthquake was very severe. Often
+hospitals serve on an ongoing basis the poorest of the poor in
+our community, but in an emergency, you need them. That's when
+the Director first began talking to me in serious ways about
+this mitigation question.
+ He's on top of the disaster problems and the potential, et
+cetera. There's no question that he's in the best position to
+lead us in terms of mitigation. That extra funding is absolute
+consideration and we want to work with you.
+ Mr. Witt. What is really good is the fact that when we have
+a disaster, whether it's a hurricane, flood, earthquake or
+fire, or a man-made disaster, those critical facilities--
+hospitals, schools, fire stations, police stations, EMS
+stations--need to be functioning. They need to be a priority.
+If we have another earthquake out there in California and those
+hospitals are not functioning, many lives are going to be lost.
+A lot of people aren't going to be treated. The same way with a
+hurricane.
+ Most of the time, schools are used for shelters. We need to
+make sure that we will be able to use the schools for shelters,
+and also that firemen can respond. You know, many times in a
+disaster we have seen where fire stations have been reduced to
+rubble, with the trucks underneath the rubble. So those are
+some very sensitive areas that we need to prioritize.
+ Ms. Meek. If I may have one more minute, Mr. Chairman----
+ Mr. Lewis. Go right ahead.
+ Ms. Meek. Is CEQ involved in the process involving the
+mitigation studies? That's the Council on Environmental
+Quality.
+ Mr. Krimm. They're not, no.
+ Ms. Meek. Thank you.
+ Mr. Lewis. Your name?
+ Mr. Krimm. My name is Richard Krimm.
+ Mr. Lewis. I just want to say that Miss Meek comes with
+considerable reputation to our subcommittee. She knows exactly
+when to ask for money, and she only asks for things that are
+desperately needed.
+ Ms. Meek. And very important. [Laughter.]
+ Mr. Lewis. That's right.
+ It is now my pleasure to call upon a colleague from New
+York, who has been a great member of this committee, Jim Walsh.
+
+ State and Local Assistance vs. Pre-disaster Mitigation
+
+ Mr. Walsh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Welcome. Again, let me reiterate what all of my colleagues
+have said. It's unanimous, that you're doing a terrific job and
+we thank you for that. It's very difficult work and we thank
+all the people who work for FEMA, for the good work that they
+do.
+ I look around the table and we have certainly seen the work
+you have done in California recently, down in Miami with the
+hurricane, and my two colleagues from Ohio currently. In my
+first field hearing that I took when I came to Congress was on
+the Agriculture Committee, and I went down to Bill Hefner's
+district in North Carolina for an agriculture disaster. So, you
+know, knock on wood for New York.
+ We have had our problems, and I suspect that all of you
+folks will be there if we have trouble, and I think that's the
+way this works. We have to help each other out along the way.
+ If I could go back to what Congressman Hobson was saying
+about these SLA funds, I received a letter from our New York
+State coordinator, Ed Jacoby, and he asked about Congressman
+Hobson's request for additional funds.
+ How does that SLA fund jibe with the $50 million request
+for predisaster mitigation funds?
+ Mr. Witt. The predisaster mitigation funds will be used to
+help the communities in high-risk areas, as far as minimizing
+the risk in that community. The $3 million that was
+appropriated by Congress last year funds a State hazard
+mitigation officer at a hundred percent funding for the first
+year. That position or that person will be working for the
+State to help identify the high-risk community, so that we can
+spend the $50 million in minimizing the risk in that community.
+All of that $50 million will go down to those high risk
+communities for mitigation projects.
+
+ surplus equipment
+
+ Mr. Walsh. There was a question also that the chairman
+asked to get an idea of your status with equipment, obsolete
+equipment or used equipment that needs to be replaced.
+ We had a mud slide in my district about five or six years
+ago that wreaked havoc in one small little area. Of course, it
+didn't qualify as a national disaster and it fell into a crack
+between a State disaster and a national and local disaster. The
+local community just didn't have the resources to deal with it.
+ In terms of some of this equipment, what would be your
+policy if, for example, you were going to replace cell phones
+or replace whatever equipment you might have, boats, for
+example, that could be used, what would be your policy in terms
+of making that equipment available to local communities, county
+disaster relief agencies and so on?
+ Mr. Witt. What we try to do is, if a State needs the
+support of our mobile emergency response communications
+equipment, then we move all that equipment in to help support
+that State, whether it's cellular phones or computers--whatever
+technology we have.
+ One of the things that has happened over the years is that
+we just don't have funding anymore for equipment used in State
+emergency operations centers, like generators or EIS systems,
+that a State needs.
+ To give you an example, it would probably take $40 million
+a year to start bringing the States' equipment needs up to
+standard.
+ Mr. Walsh. Forty million a year?
+ Mr. Witt. At least that much. We had a request from the
+States for $34 million one year for equipment, and there will
+always be a need to replace that equipment.
+ One of the things that would help the States a great deal
+would be to give them, particularly for fire and emergency
+management, access to Federal surplus property. What they have
+now is access to excess property, that is passed down to the
+State to a warehouse, where you go in and have to buy three
+pieces to make one. It would really help the States a great
+deal, if they could get generators, trucks, tankers, and other
+surplus property. But they can't get past that first stage to
+get to the good property. They get surplus, but no excess.
+ We're looking now to see what we can recommend to do.
+ Mr. Walsh. It would be a real help, because there are a lot
+of disasters that cause just as much difficulty for small
+numbers of people that you can't get resources for.
+ Mr. Witt. Exactly.
+ Mr. Walsh. But they sure are disruptive to people's lives.
+
+ flood insurance requirement
+
+ My last question. For example, with the flooding that's
+being experienced now, it is my understanding that an
+individual who was harmed, family property, would then have to,
+if they had not already, would have to purchase Federal flood
+insurance. Is that correct?
+ Mr. Witt. The 1994 Flood Reform Act that was passed and
+signed by the President limits individuals assistance to one
+time. If they have been flooded, there's a Federal disaster
+declaration, and they do not have flood insurance. They are
+then required to have flood insurance in the future, in order
+to receive Federal assistance.
+ We have implemented this program. If an individual gets
+flooded a second time and does not have flood insurance, then
+we can provide them only temporary housing and other limited
+assistance. Assistance under the individual family grant
+program would not be accessible to them.
+ Mr. Walsh. Does that work the same for hurricane victims
+and earthquake victims?
+ Mr. Witt. The bill only addressed flood because 80 percent
+of our disasters are flood disasters.
+ Mr. Walsh. Eighty percent?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Walsh. Is there any application of that principle for
+earthquake and hurricane victims?
+ Mr. Witt. I don't know. That wasn't in the earthquake
+legislation, was it?
+ Mr. Krimm. No, it was not.
+ Mr. Walsh. Would it make sense?
+ Mr. Witt. I think so. The problem we have in a lot of these
+areas is that if earthquake insurance is available, it is not
+affordable. As far as earthquake insurance is concerned
+particularly in California and even in Arkansas with the New
+Madrid, sometimes insurance is available, but the deductible is
+so high that it's not worth purchasing.
+ In California for example, I think in a lot of the areas
+there, the deductible is $30,000. We have been working a lot
+with the insurance industry to bring them in as a partner, in
+trying to minimize the risk to not only individuals and
+communities, but also to the insurance industry as well. We
+have come a long way with them.
+ I think, by working with the insurance industry in disaster
+prone communities, and by doing mitigation before an event, it
+will cut that risk, and it will allow insurers to offer more
+insurance at affordable rates.
+ Mr. Walsh. Thank you very much.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Walsh.
+ First, Mr. Director, let me take a moment to introduce
+another new member to our subcommittee, a colleague who is
+returning to the House, and I am very pleased to have him join
+our subcommittee, David Price.
+ David, we have a vote on the floor in a few moments. Well,
+it is on right now, and it will be followed by one suspension
+vote, as I understand it. I would suggest that we wait until we
+go vote and come back and you could proceed with your
+questioning there, if that is all right.
+ Mr. Price. Fine.
+
+ california hospital medical center
+
+ Mr. Lewis. In meantime, let me just make a couple points,
+if I could, Mr. Director.
+ I have been working very, very closely with the new
+chairman of the California Democratic Delegation, among the
+House of Representatives, Lucille Roybal-Allard. Ms. Roybal-
+Allard has called me regarding the California Hospital Medical
+Center, CHMC, which was impacted by that earthquake
+circumstance, and there has been an application in process.
+There has been some lack of communication, she suggests. I
+would appreciate it, if you would look into that.
+ Mr. Witt. I would be happy to.
+ Mr. Lewis. Most importantly, that hospital serves a very
+significant pocket of very poor people in the Los Angeles
+region, and if we can be responsive, I would appreciate it.
+ Mr. Witt. Okay.
+
+ Disaster Insurance
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Further, I wanted to mention that, following up
+on Mr. Walsh's line of questioning, as you know, our late
+colleague, Bill Emerson, was very much a leader in attempting
+to work with those insurance companies as well, and his
+legislation would have made an attempt to pool disasters of
+various form, flood and earthquake and tornado and the like, in
+order to truly attempt to have an insurance foundation that
+does reflect that family of America and make these both
+premiums and, in some instances, deductibility, in other
+instances, just availability of coverage feasible.
+ I will be wanting this afternoon to spend some time
+regarding what you think the prospects are for that legislation
+and how this committee might be able to help.
+ So, in the meantime, to accommodate everybody's time and
+especially Mr. Price's time, we will go to the floor and vote
+and then come right back after the suspension begins. So we
+will recess.
+ [Recess.]
+ Mr. Lewis. Let me call our meeting back to order.
+ I apologize to our guests. We had a series of votes. This
+latest vote was unexpected by very many, but indeed, Mr. Price
+has gone up to make a quick vote and he will be right back
+down. We have delayed his questions until we came back away
+from recess, but between now and then, Mr. Stokes, do you have
+any other comments you would like to make?
+ Mr. Stokes. I have a few additional questions. I don't know
+whether we can take them up at this time.
+ Mr. Lewis. Why don't we proceed with whatever, and when Mr.
+Price comes, we will kind of shift gears and let him get in his
+first round.
+ Mr. Stokes. Fine. Do you want me to proceed?
+ Mr. Lewis. I yield to you.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, he is right here.
+ Mr. Stokes. Here he is.
+ Mr. Lewis. I have got to tell you, Lou Stokes is as
+flexible as anybody I know.
+ Mr. Stokes was just going to ask a question while you were
+out, David, but frankly, I think he would prefer to have you
+have your first round. So we will recognize for the first time
+for questioning in our subcommittee, David Price, a colleague
+who has returned, and we welcome you to the subcommittee.
+
+ FEMA's Role in North Carolina Disasters
+
+ Mr. Price. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Mr.
+Director, for your testimony and for your good work year in and
+year out. We have had particular reason in North Carolina to
+appreciate your work this last year, as you well know.
+ During the 12-month period from October 1995 to September
+1996, our State of North Carolina has suffered damage from,
+many presidentially declared, natural disasters.
+ Hurricane Fran, which hit the coast just over 6 months ago,
+was the most destructive storm to ever hit North Carolina.
+ You spent a lot of time in North Carolina in the aftermath
+of Fran, and I am very grateful for the role that you and FEMA
+have continued to play in North Carolina's recovery.
+ I have a letter from North Carolina's director of Emergency
+Management, a letter which detailed FEMA's actions in North
+Carolina and praised the agency for its good work.
+ Mr. Chairman, without objection, I would like to include
+that letter in our hearing record.
+ Mr. Lewis. Without objection.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+[Pages 40 - 41--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ n.c. recovery task force recommendations
+
+ Mr. Price. My questions, Director Witt, have to do with the
+aftermath of this storm and the continuing cleanup that is
+going on.
+ I know you are familiar with North Carolina's Disaster
+Recovery Task Force, the recommendations that that task force
+has made. The group is chaired by Lieutenant Governor Dennis
+Wicker, and it includes cabinet heads and other leading
+citizens. The task force recommendations were issued on
+February 14th. You are familiar with that report.
+ Well, as you know, one of the major reasons that report was
+drafted was to outline what needs to be done immediately to
+avert compounding the problems caused by Hurricane Fran,
+specifically such matters as lasting damage to houses and
+businesses, the clogging of creeks causing flooding, excessive
+dead wood causing forest fires, increased insect activity,
+endangering the public health.
+ Now, I understand very well that the correction of many of
+these problems may not fall within your jurisdiction. I wonder,
+though, as you look at that report and consider your experience
+in the State, do the funding levels requested in that report--
+the estimates as to what it would take to address these needs--
+do those funding levels seem adequate? Do they seem like
+plausible figures?
+ Mr. Witt. I think so. You know, they have done a very
+thorough job in that report, and a good job, I might add. I
+think that Derrick Cameron, among others, who worked on that
+tried to give an honest assessment of the funding levels.
+ Mr. Price. Where should North Carolina be looking for
+resources to address these problems?
+ Mr. Witt. One thing that North Carolina and Florida and
+several of the States that we have worked with and continue to
+work with are looking at is what we can all do together in a
+partnership for long-term recovery. Right now, we are all
+looking at what we need to put together to establish a long-
+term recovery process that would help support reports such as
+North Carolina's.
+ We do not have a long-term recovery program in place. We
+have established some long-term recovery task forces, like the
+one the President put in place after the 1993 Midwest flood
+that involved all of the Federal, State and local agencies, and
+that is important.
+ Mr. Price. So that would be, by definition, an inter-agency
+task force?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Price. That would involve what range of other agencies?
+ Mr. Witt. Well, it involved the Department of Agriculture.
+HUD, the Economic Development Administration in Commerce, FEMA,
+and the Corps of Engineers. It involved most of the agencies
+that had a role and a responsibility in not only the response
+to a disaster, but also the recovery from that disaster. We
+have 28 Federal agencies that participate in the Federal
+Response plan.
+ Mr. Price. Well, in terms of your progress in putting this
+together and getting it working the way you want to do, what
+kind of immediate help does it offer as North Carolina surveys
+the possibility of additional support for our needs?
+ Mr. Witt. Well, I think the immediate answer for North
+Carolina would be to continue to follow up with us and the
+other agencies to come to closure in some of those areas that
+they want to address and which we can help through mitigation,
+particularly like the spraying of the insects, and downed
+timber. Many, many times when you have a hurricane like that,
+or a tornado, an excessive amount of timber hits that ground
+and can't be removed for different reasons. As the dry season
+or summertime comes along, you then have a very high fire risk.
+You can use mitigation to reduce that risk.
+ Mr. Price. Well, as you know, the funding needs that the
+task force has identified do cover a range of agencies.
+ Mr. Witt. Right.
+
+ hazard mitigation funds for north carolina
+
+ Mr. Price. With respect to FEMA, particularly, though,
+there is some mention of possible further help under the Hazard
+Mitigation Grant Program. That is what you are referring to.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Price. What is the potential there?
+ Mr. Witt. It is very good.
+ In 1993, we changed the legislation authorizing hazard
+mitigation assistance from 10 percent of our public assistance
+program to 15 percent of the total cost of that disaster.
+ I am not sure of the numbers. Dick, do you know the numbers
+yet?
+ Mr. Krimm. It is approximately $100 million for North
+Carolina. One of the things that we are interested in doing is
+having some buyouts down there.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes. So there will be about $100 million
+available to North Carolina for hazard mitigation work, which
+will help them.
+ Mr. Price. Well, that is the figure identified in the task
+force report. So that is encouraging.
+ I also appreciate very much your willingness to work with
+the State in identifying other sources of assistance. With a
+storm like this, the impacts last for years and years. We are
+reminded of that in North Carolina every day, and while the
+headlines may go away, the continuing need to follow up in
+these various areas continue. So our State is still in the
+recovery mode, and it is very important for us not to forget
+that, forget the continuing needs.
+ Mr. Witt. It really is because, a lot of times what we see
+in disasters and what happens after the disaster in the
+recovery phase of that disaster, a State or local community
+will have a problem because they don't really know what
+programs are available to them. They don't really know what
+they can look forward to in helping to rebuild a community
+unless they have someone helping them to coordinate that
+effort. That makes a difference.
+ Mr. Price. And you are the agency often in the best
+position to do that----
+ Mr. Witt. And we are trying to make that happen.
+ Mr. Price [continuing]. In working with the State very
+closely.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Price. Mr. Chairman, just one follow-up question which
+has to do with that question of eligibility.
+ Mr. Lewis. Go right ahead.
+
+ pre-disaster mitigation pilot projects
+
+ Mr. Price. You did speak briefly in your testimony of the
+50 million additional dollars you are requesting for a pre-
+disaster mitigation fund to help create the disaster-resistant
+communities, as you put it. Now, if this initiative were to be
+funded, am I correct in assuming that an area that has already
+been hit by a disaster would still be eligible for that
+program?
+ Mr. Witt. If that is an area that is still considered a
+high-risk community, we may want to put them in as pilot
+project, sure. Yes.
+ Any community could be designated a high risk, whether it
+be for hurricane, fire, earthquake, or flood. We will identify
+some communities that could be used as model projects, similar
+to what our flood program does.
+ You know, in the flood program, we have about 18,000
+participating communities or a little more than that now,
+across the United States. By participating in the flood
+program, they are required to build to certain standards in
+that community. We want to do the same thing in a pre-disaster
+mitigation program by working with these States and model local
+communities to establish some standards that would help
+eliminate a risk. The community, working with us and private
+industry, would accept those standards as a means to mitigate
+that risk.
+ Mr. Price. Well, I understand the funding you are
+requesting is limited.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Price. You are talking about a pilot effort.
+ Mr. Witt. It is very limited.
+ Mr. Price. At the same time, I have no doubt that many
+parts of North Carolina would qualify for that high-risk
+designation.
+ Mr. Witt. North Carolina has been devastated.
+ Mr. Price. We have some good empirical evidence of that.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Price. Thank you, sir.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Price, that is another reason we welcome you
+to the subcommittee.
+ Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Stokes. Mr. Chairman, I suppose you are contemplating
+recessing for the noon hour?
+ Mr. Lewis. I am, shortly, but would you prefer to wait?
+ Mr. Stokes. I have a few questions.
+ Mr. Lewis. I think we will proceed a little. I do have kind
+of a crazy conflict here, but nonetheless, I think we will just
+squeeze that schedule a bit.
+
+ snow removal policy
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Witt, last year, we discussed FEMA's assistance for
+snow removal request at some length. Your statement indicates
+the agency has issued proposed regulations, addressing eligible
+costs for snow emergencies. Can you just elaborate on the
+principal features of that proposed rule for us?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir. In the past, FEMA did not have a
+policy, basically, of how we would fund snow removal or snow
+emergency measures. So we did develop a policy and put it in
+place.
+ In a snowstorm, similar to what we had in 1996, or a
+snowstorm similar to what we had in the Midwest where they had
+five blizzards this year and were literally using snow mobiles
+and following power lines as a way to find houses in order to
+help people, it is an extremely disastrous condition. So the
+policy is we will help fund the clearing of emergency routes,
+one lane each way, to help make sure that people can get to
+hospitals, and to make sure people will be able to function.
+ Mr. Stokes. Let me repeat a question to you that I asked
+you last year, and I would like for you to indicate how the
+proposed rule addresses this concern.
+ How do you respond to the observation that under the
+policy, it is the squeaky wheel that gets the grease and the
+fact that communities which actually take care of their own
+local situations are actually penalized under this policy?
+ Mr. Witt. Well, I always try to be very fair, and honest
+about what we do, and whether we determine to make a
+declaration or not.
+ A lot of States have done a better job in assuming the
+responsibility of taking care of their local communities than
+other States. I have to look at it from the sense that is it
+beyond their capability to make sure that the health and safety
+of people's lives are not jeopardized. That is the way I look
+at this, and I try to do it honestly, fairly, and consistently.
+ I think we have been fair. We have turned down a lot of
+declaration requests, as well as approved a lot. I think I have
+been fair in those determinations. I have really tried to be.
+
+ workplace diversity
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Let me go into another subject for a minute
+that you and I have had a great deal of discussion about since
+you have become Director of this Agency, and that is the whole
+question of diversity in terms of employees of this agency.
+ Of course, it is an area where you have been sensitive and
+you have tried to make some changes in this particular agency,
+and I appreciate very much the commitment you have made in this
+respect.
+ Can you just briefly bring us up to date in terms of where
+we are from last year when you reported to our committee?
+ Mr. Witt. At this time, our percentage of minority staff at
+FEMA is about 22 percent. I think we have made great strides in
+changing the diversity of the agency, not only the political
+appointees, but the management and career-ladder positions
+within the agency as well. What has really hurt us in the
+agency is the fact that we have been under a hiring freeze for
+most of the year. It is very difficult under those
+circumstances to change the diversity of an agency, but we have
+made some tremendous strides since you and I talked about this
+4 years ago. It was a priority then, and still is a priority of
+mine to make diversity a part of the agency.
+ Mr. Lewis. Would the gentleman yield?
+ Mr. Stokes. I would be delighted to yield, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Director, we have discussed this on the
+record and off the record.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Lewis. The progress that you have made is impressive,
+the goal here, though, as my colleague and I have discussed in
+many fora, the objective is to have all of our agencies look
+very much like America.
+ Mr. Witt. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Lewis. That sort of progress is important, recognizing
+difficulties of freezes. Your agency is an exception in terms
+of the possibility of redesigning the definition of freeze, but
+in the meantime, we do appreciate your paying attention to it.
+ Mr. Witt. We really have.
+ Pauline Campbell is now the director of our Equal Rights
+office. She is doing a great job there, but she is absolutely
+going to have to have some help in that office. She is making
+proposals now to me on how we can change that so we can better
+address not only grievances, but also the diversity in our
+agency as well.
+
+ minority contracting
+
+ Mr. Stokes. If I have time for additional questions, Mr.
+Chairman, I would just like to follow up with reference to
+minority contracting. Following the 8-percent statutory goals
+set forth in the law, can you give us some idea, some
+indication where we are in terms of that?
+ Mr. Witt. Sure. Gary will, Congressman Stokes, in just a
+moment.
+ I had the opportunity to meet with about 50 minority
+contractors here in Washington. Maxine Waters was gracious
+enough to invite me over to meet with them and to talk with
+them, and I found that a lot of our minority contractors across
+the country, have very little information of how to go about
+the process of bidding on projects. So we are trying to work
+with everyone through our grants management program in Gary's
+office to make sure they have that information.
+ Mr. Stokes. To get the information out.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir.
+ Gary.
+ Mr. Johnson. Mr. Stokes, for fiscal 1996, FEMA exceeded its
+goal for both 8(A), and disadvantaged businesses. Awards to
+subcontracts for small businesses, disadvantaged, and woman-
+owned businesses exceeded our dollar goal by over 100 percent.
+I would be pleased to submit our statistics for the record for
+fiscal year 1996.
+ Mr. Stokes. That is good news, and I appreciate that.
+ I appreciate, Mr. Chairman, our putting that into the
+record and making it a part of this record.
+ Mr. Lewis. We will.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+[Page 47--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ Mr. Stokes. I thank you.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Stokes. You were so gracious on the time. Thank you.
+
+ spending plan for pre-disaster mitigation
+
+ Mr. Lewis. James, I have a couple of relatively
+administrative areas I want to touch on before we break, but we
+will be recessing for a lunch break and come back at 2 o'clock.
+ Let me just touch briefly on the pre-disaster mitigation
+discussion that has gone on before. Unfortunately, there is
+precious little information in the justification as to what you
+plan to do with the $50 million that you and I had discussed,
+although we talked about that on the edges somewhat today.
+ I would mention again in this regard that we are still
+waiting a response to our 1997 Conference Report and to our
+letter of the same-year operating plan dealing with FEMA's
+plans to spend available pre-disaster mitigation funds.
+ First, when can we expect to see your long-term plan in
+connection with that? Second, please give us your thoughts as
+to how the request would be spent.
+ Mr. Witt. I think you can see we are very close to having
+completed a plan on how we would go about identifying
+communities, and how we would develop the Federal, State, and
+local partnership in this effort, including the insurance
+industry.
+ I think you will be very excited about the proposal. I just
+reviewed it myself and I am very excited about it. I will send
+you a letter confirming the date that we can have the report to
+you.
+ What we want to do, as I said earlier, is set up the model
+programs to show what mitigation can do, how it will benefit
+our country as a whole, how it will benefit communities and how
+it is going to save money. Also by working with the insurance
+industry we want to explore the possibility of having lower
+premiums and lower deductible because we are eliminating the
+risk of a community and the risk to the insurance industry, as
+well as the mortgage lending institutions, as you mentioned
+earlier.
+ So this is all going to have an impact on not just Federal,
+but State and local dollars, as well as those in private
+industry as well.
+ Mr. Lewis. I might mention as an aside, as you were
+discussing the squeaky wheel with Mr. Stokes, at another time,
+I will be interested in our having a conversation for the
+record, relative to the propensity for perhaps some out there,
+who maybe haven't done as good a job, to perhaps fall into the
+trap of presuming that, oh, well, since we haven't done a very
+good job and the Government, you know, the sugar daddy has a
+pot there in Washington. I would like to know if your studies
+and analyses see a trend where some of those locations, maybe
+States, actually are developing a pattern of not being as
+responsive to that, which they could do themselves.
+ The mitigation question goes further than just the Federal
+Government's job in that connection as well. So we will talk
+about that at another time, but I am interested in the subject.
+ Urban search and rescue teams. We have talked about that
+before. The biggest hole I see in the country's availability of
+responding to the potential needs lies in the Midwest, middle
+America.
+ You mentioned the New Madrid Fault earlier, and you never
+know when the Lord is going to look in a certain direction. I
+am anxious to hear, by way of your plans, how that process is
+moving forward as well.
+
+ comments from states
+
+ I want to touch on one more item and largely ask you to
+respond for the record, but maybe you would have some specific
+comments as well before we recess.
+ As you would expect, Mr. Director, we often receive
+comments from our States regarding the operation of Federal
+programs, including, of course, comments regarding FEMA.
+ We also, quite often, receive copies of letters sent to you
+to, on the one hand, in your case--I can't say this for every
+agency--in your case, often to thank you, and letters that say
+what have you done for me today or lately.
+ We are aware of such recent correspondence, which outline a
+number of concerns, according to the States. It would be
+suggested that we could improve FEMA's performance if we
+adopted all of their suggestions.
+ Specifically, they suggest, among other things, one, damage
+survey report teams, lack of technical knowledge of basic
+construction or engineering methods and should, thus, be
+upgraded accordingly.
+ Two, the disaster claims process is inappropriately drawn
+out, and documentation requirements are excessive.
+ Three, the appeals process is cumbersome and time-
+consuming.
+ Four, FEMA has made arbitrary and insupportable decisions
+concerning eligible costs.
+ Beyond that, fifth, FEMA has on occasion inappropriately
+applied new policies, retroactively.
+ Sixth, suspensions of work based on appropriate application
+of NEPA compliance has caused further delays in the post-
+disaster process, and that States should be permitted to
+conduct their own environmental assessments, as is permitted by
+other Federal agencies. The latter question is of great
+importance in flooding disasters, I think, especially, but we
+have had this experience in California with fire and earthquake
+as well.
+ Director Witt, as I said, we will have you comment for the
+record in detail, if you will, but any comments that you might
+have as we go to recess, I would appreciate.
+ Mr. Witt. I am really excited about the questions that you
+have received from the States because we have been working with
+the States, and to address the public assistance program, and
+to look at the appeal process.
+ There are three levels of appeal. We don't need three
+levels; we need one appeal. We need to shorten the review
+process. We are looking at the whole public assistance program
+right now and we will come back to Congress with
+recommendations to change legislation so we can streamline the
+program.
+ On the environmental issue, we agree wholeheartedly that it
+needs to be pushed back to the States, and let the States do
+the environmental assessment themselves.
+ We are already addressing all of these things that you
+asked me to address, and hopefully, very shortly, we will have
+some recommendations to Congress to streamline those processes,
+will save money, and allow us to do them much faster and be
+more accountable as well.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you very much, Mr. Director.
+ When we adjourn or recess for the lunch period, you might
+want to notify your people that the room will be secure. So
+anybody who wants to leave materials here is free to do so.
+ When we come back after the lunch break--you know, from
+time to time, you find even the best of friends who find
+themselves looking for other work because they are just worn
+out with what they do, and if it is conceivable that that could
+ever happen to our director, the coming subject that we are
+going to begin with involves long-range weather forecasting.
+ Now, if you are able to really respond to those questions,
+we have very interesting prospects for you, Mr. Director.
+ Mr. Witt. That would be an honor, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. In the meantime, it was good to be with you, and
+we will see you about 2 o'clock.
+ Mr. Witt. All right. Thank you, sir.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you.
+
+ Afternoon Session
+
+ climate forecasting
+
+ Mr. Lewis. The meeting will come back to order.
+ Welcome back, Mr. Director, and, Mr. Frelinghuysen, nice to
+have you with us.
+ I left the director with a promise that the next topic that
+we have in mind, the need to develop or present evidence and
+expertise, in case there are changes in the world--if he can
+answer these questions, then he is obviously in great demand--
+it has to do with long-range weather forecasting.
+ So, James Lee, you are, no doubt, aware that this
+Subcommittee has responsibility for providing a majority of the
+annual appropriations for the United States global change
+research program.
+ One of the early accomplishments of this program involves
+the emergence of new capabilities to forecast climatic
+conditions and climate variability up to a year ahead of time
+for conditions of climate for some regions of the United States
+and for the world.
+ Are you aware of these emerging climate prediction
+capabilities, and does FEMA have any plans to review and adopt
+possible applications of these capabilities to complement some
+of its programs?
+ Mr. Witt. Mr. Chairman, we met a few weeks ago with the
+Vice President, the National Weather Service, and several other
+agencies to discuss exactly what you are talking about related
+to climate change, long-range forecasting, and trying to
+develop programs and budgets with a sense towards what possibly
+may happen in the future.
+ The other agencies are supposed to be coming over to sit
+down with us, because I was very interested in long-range
+forecasts, in light of what we do, particularly in disasters,
+and how we could use that technology to prepare for the future,
+and even for mitigation. So we are going to sit down with them
+because we are very interested.
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, you know, short range, if we look at that
+levee problem in Northern California, and if the pooling is
+eroding some of those levees, we actually can get about, with
+new technology doing the kind of measuring we need to do, and
+one can project the snow pack and additional longer-term
+snowfalls, for example. The implications, obviously, have huge
+potential mitigation possibilities.
+ Mr. Witt. They really do, and we are very interested in it.
+I know I am. We had a very good meeting with them that day.
+
+ budget for equipment updating and replacement
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, we look forward to continuing that.
+ For Fiscal Year 1998, you have proposed an EMPA response, a
+response and recovery budget for just $7,743,000, for a 49
+percent reduction from the 1997 appropriated level. Almost half
+of this reduction is found in the elimination of the $3.4
+million we included in the 1997 bill for replacement of badly
+needed equipment.
+ I must say that that is an interesting and a bit
+disconcerting sort of elimination when you follow up on the
+discussions we had this morning about the need to be able to
+continue the efforts towards efficiency you made.
+ In an item like that, if an administration person somewhere
+had a will, it is the kind of thing that could be line-vetoed.
+You know, the line item business can be--can have an effect,
+besides affecting the balancing-the-budget problem. I would
+hope that you would get somebody in your office to pay
+attention to that sort of consideration because, within your
+agency, this kind of expenditure often might not be understood
+at OMB, but certainly might be understood by somebody who faces
+a flood or an earthquake or other kind of disaster.
+ Although you have included as part of you--1998 request
+some $1.6 million for repair and replacement of equipment,
+surely, this is just kind of the very edge of your real need.
+ Can you give us an idea of what your true needs are for the
+replacement and updating of both equipment and emergency
+vehicles?
+ Mr. Johnson. In 1997, the current estimate is $8.875
+million farmers and that includes the Congressional increase.
+ Mr. Witt. The increase that you gave us for 1997 helps
+replace some of the MERS equipment that we used in Hurricane
+Marilyn in Puerto Rico. It is very old equipment.
+ Mr. Lewis. Yes, but I think you went beyond that.
+ Mr. Witt. That increase is going to help us a great deal. I
+want to make sure that we developed a list of what equipment we
+would be replacing and what we need for MERS--that is our
+mobile emergency response equipment.
+ Mr. Lewis. Right.
+ Mr. Witt. That equipment used to be used in the nuclear
+preparedness area. Now we use the people and the resources in
+disasters. We are doing a study on what we need to do to
+continue to update and improve the communications equipment. We
+are in the process of doing that now.
+ Mr. Lewis. Let me get specific as you try to answer that
+question. The $1.6 million for repair and replacement of
+equipment, did FEMA include a larger request for such vehicles
+and equipment in the original budget submission to OMB?
+ Mr. Witt. No.
+ Mr. Lewis. I am really interested in the request.
+ Mr. Johnson. No. The request level reflects the base.
+ Mr. Lewis. Okay. Would you give us for the record your
+prioritization of the needs that you have out there? If you had
+a wish list, maybe give us some priority line, and I am not
+talking about--I am trying to reflect my comments of this
+morning in that request.
+ We intend to put pressure on the agencies that are not
+doing the job or performing well. We even would terminate some
+programs, and that is a little bit difficult to do in
+Washington, but for the agencies that are doing well, where
+there are real human needs involved, it seems to me we ought to
+rethink the definition of tightening the belt.
+ Do you agree with that, Mr. Stokes, generally, the thought
+that an agency like this is doing so well, it is involving
+human needs? They got basic equipment stuff. They ought to be
+generous to themselves in their thoughts. We are not going to
+balance the budget on their backs. That is for sure.
+
+ assessing priorities
+
+ Mr. Stokes. No, absolutely not, and I think neither the
+public wants to, nor do I think our colleagues want to.
+ Mr. Witt. Mr. Chairman, let me also follow up on this
+because it is very important to me because we have streamlined
+a lot and changed a lot. I have asked all of the associate
+directors to do a resource review within our agency and look at
+each of the directorates.
+ If there is a program in FEMA that is not a priority
+program that is really critically benefits what we do in our
+mission and our role, then there is no reason that we should
+not change that. We are doing those resource reviews of our
+employees and programs, so that we can prioritize what is
+important to the agency and to the mission that we have to the
+country, and get the maximum benefit. That is part of the
+overall assessment that we are doing right now, and hopefully,
+we will have that completed shortly.
+ Mr. Lewis. Before going on, Mr. Director, let me welcome to
+the committee--first of all, you have met Rodney Frelinghuysen.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Lewis. As I indicated, the gentleman from New Jersey is
+a great member of the committee.
+ Mrs. Northup is not a member of the subcommittee, although
+she is a new member of the Appropriations Committee. She also
+just happens to be from beautiful downtown Louisville, KY.
+ I know that you know my colleague, Joe Knollenberg.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Lewis. Normally, what we do is go by order of the
+members who come into the committee. There are relatively few
+exceptions.
+ We asked Mrs. Northup to come to us, if she could, just
+before the break, and if my colleagues would bear with me,
+because Kentucky is in the midst of this and because our
+colleague doesn't serve on the subcommittee, if we would just
+yield her a few moments to have an exchange with the director,
+would that be all right with my colleagues.
+ Mrs. Northup?
+
+ flooding in kentucky
+
+ Mrs. Northup. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much for your
+indulgence, and I will be brief.
+ First of all, I want to thank you, Mr. Witt, for coming to
+Kentucky to assess the damages that have affected so many
+citizens.
+ Right now, there are Red Cross reports that almost 3,000
+families in Kentucky are out of their homes, and that one-third
+of these families are in shelters. So you can tell we very much
+need your services.
+ I would like to invite you and encourage you to come to
+Louisville. Louisville is by far the largest city in the State.
+It is profoundly affected at this time. I know that you weren't
+able to visit there when you were there before, and I would
+really love it if you could make a trip back.
+ The river is higher than it has ever been since 1964. Many,
+many parts of the city have been affected, and have been forced
+to leave their homes.
+ I wonder if you would tell me about your visit and your
+ability to assess the damages so far.
+ Mr. Witt. I talked to Ron Padgett, the State director for
+Kentucky. I believe it was Monday or Tuesday when I talked to
+him about the flood. Our staff has been there working with the
+State of Kentucky, even before the declaration was signed,
+helping to support them.
+ Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana have really been hit hard, and
+I believe the river is going to crest at Louisville today----
+ Mrs. Northup. Yes.
+ Mr. Witt. [continuing]. From my understanding.
+ Mrs. Northup. That is right.
+ Mr. Witt. So the impact is right now. We have already taken
+from Kentucky, I believe a thousand?
+ Mr. Suiter. 1,300.
+ Mr. Witt [continuing]. 1,300 applications for individual
+assistance in Kentucky already since it was declared. That will
+get people's applications in process from the date they call in
+and apply. If they are eligible, then within 5 to 10 days, we
+should have a check to them----
+ Mrs. Northup. Great.
+ Mr. Witt [continuing]. So they can get temporary housing--
+--
+ Mrs. Northup. Right.
+ Mr. Witt [continuing]. For that time.
+
+ location of kentucky disaster field office
+
+ Mrs. Northup. Let me ask you--I was surprised that your
+headquarters is in Lexington, which is pretty far removed from
+where the focus of the damage is. Can you tell me why you
+decided to do that?
+ Mr. Witt. I didn't know that it was decided. What we
+normally do is work with the State office of emergency services
+and then, go to GSA and ask them, ``This is how many square
+feet we need. Can you find us a place to house--?''
+ Mrs. Northup. It did seem rather odd that it would be so
+far out of the center of where the troubles were.
+ Mr. Witt. The disaster field office does not necessarily
+have to be in the area that is affected, and sometimes it is
+good that it is not because you are doing more administrative
+work there than anything.
+ Mrs. Northup. All right.
+ Mr. Witt. You will have service centers set up in other
+areas that have been affected that will have the Federal and
+State agencies inside so that if someone has lost his or her
+driver's license, he or she can go in there and get a driver's
+license, or if he or she needs to talk to the court or FEMA, he
+or she can do it.
+
+ making additional assistance available
+
+ Mrs. Northup. One final question. I know you have a long
+day here. What is the likelihood and the speed in which this
+determination will be made that the other assistance programs
+that are available when FEMA is involved, the infrastructure or
+public assistance and the hazard mitigation assistance? Only
+one part of disaster assistance is available now. Do you
+consider it fairly procedural that the other two assistance
+programs will be made available, and when will that happen?
+ Mr. Witt. Very soon. The State of Kentucky came in with a
+package that was eligible for a presidential declaration for
+individual assistance. As the water goes down, the State and
+FEMA can do the damage assessments on the infrastructure, and
+as that happens, then counties will be added for public
+assistance.
+ Mrs. Northup. But your expectation is those other two
+programs will also be part of the disaster package that is
+available to Kentucky?
+ Mr. Witt. Most likely with the water you have, I am sure it
+probably will be because you have had sewer plants inundated
+and everything.
+ Mrs. Northup. Yes.
+ Mr. Witt. So we know it is going to take a tremendous
+amount of work to get them back up.
+ Mrs. Northup. Mr. Chairman, I do want to tell you that we
+really appreciate FEMA's existence, their fast action in
+Kentucky. It was really so unexpected, this flood. If you had
+been there, it started raining on Friday night, and in 24 hours
+or 30 hours, we had 12 inches of rain. It really turned out to
+go from a rainy day to a disastrous day, and without you, we
+would have really--I don't know how we would cope with the cost
+of this disaster.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mrs. Northup, all day today, beyond the director
+fielding questions and otherwise, on both sides of the aisle,
+there has been praise heaped upon the work that FEMA does. I
+appreciate those comments, and I am pleased to hear you have
+that response.
+ Mr. Director, just in case you haven't had a chance to
+focus, this is Mrs. Northup's district in Jefferson County.
+Virtually, almost her whole district is a disaster area, and
+thus, the urgency of her wanting to be present to express both
+those feelings and the appreciation as well. So she is right in
+the midst of it.
+ Mr. Witt. Also, let me say that I talked to the Vice
+President when we couldn't get down to your area yesterday, and
+I think they are looking at the possibility of going back to
+Ohio and Kentucky on Saturday.
+ Mrs. Northup. Great. We would really appreciate your
+presence there. It has been an incredible flood, and there are
+a lot of people that have lost a great deal. So thank you very
+much.
+ Mr. Lewis. I might mention to you further, Mr. Director,
+just for the record, but also for Anne Northup's edification,
+she early on talked to me about first becoming a member of the
+Appropriations Committee upon her election to Congress, but
+then, the prospect of serving on this committee. You can tell
+by her questioning that she, indeed, would make a contribution
+here. So we may be looking forward to that.
+ Mrs. Northup. It would be wonderful. Thank you very much,
+Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Frelinghuysen?
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Mr. Chairman, I apologize for being
+late, and, Mr. Witt, everything I hear publicly and privately
+is very much in praise of your leadership and the work of the
+people that work with you in FEMA, and I am sure I add on to
+what others have said in previous testimony, but thank you for
+the work that you do.
+ I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
+ Mr. Knollenberg?
+
+ flood mapping
+
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Director.
+ It is good to see you again, Mr. Witt. I, too, add to the
+comments made by my colleagues and others about the work the
+quality of the work you have been doing, not just now,
+particularly now, but in the past years.
+ I am going to go back over a question that I raised the
+last time. I think maybe you referred to your staff on this, if
+I am not mistaken.
+ Mr. Witt. I believe it was Elaine McReynolds.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. It might have been. And is that party in
+the room, or no?
+ Mr. Witt. Well, Mr. Congressman, I hate to tell you this,
+but Elaine got offered another job, and much more money. So she
+left us, and we have the Honorable Spence Perry here with us as
+executive administrator.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. You might recall that I had a situation in
+my own district, and I think the Chairman alluded to the fact
+that this is not a remote or a unique case, but a city called
+Northville, which because of improper flood mapping, had
+several people that complained bitterly about being charged for
+insurance premiums via the flood program, only to find out that
+they were not in a mapped area. They weren't exactly, in fact,
+required. There was no exposure. There was no threat of any
+kind of tributary.
+ Can you tell me what progress has been made? We did
+register a complaint, if you will, a question as to some
+redress for these individuals who were being charged for an
+exposure that did not exist, literally. I don't know if there
+is any interim report or any kind of closure on that situation.
+Maybe somebody here could tell me if that community--I know
+that communities just like it around the country are getting
+any redress on the exposed--the charge for an exposure that did
+not exist. Do you have any response to that?
+ Mr. Witt. Let me answer part of it, and I will call on
+either Dick or Spence.
+ First, we are doing everything we can to get the maps
+updated and remapped so there would not be problems in
+communities like this. In some instances, we have found that
+communities actually are more in the flood elevation or the
+100-year flood plain, and in others, they are not. So we are
+redoing the maps.
+ Dick or Spence?
+ Mr. Krimm. We are looking at revising that. If I could get
+a little more detail on this, I can check it out for you on the
+exact location.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. I think there are other localities beyond
+just Northville, but that was one in particular because the
+complaint was recent at that time, and so we registered it, and
+there was a promise to follow through.
+ Mr. Krimm. We are doing that, and we also have a technical
+advisory committee now that is looking at ways to improve the
+way we do the mapping.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Also, just with respect to the flood
+insurance marketing campaign, I know a year ago, you talked
+about--and we know it is a fact that so many people don't have
+flood insurance.
+ One of the complaints, and I guess it was brought up this
+morning--I was unable to make this meeting because of two
+others, but I think Mr. Walsh brought up the fact that some
+individuals were unfortunately in no position to even obtain
+insurance. Perhaps it was a matter of--and you will have to
+respond to this, but was it a matter of insurance
+representation? I presume it was more rural in the case of Mr.
+Walsh, but I don't know that.
+ What was the reason for their problem with getting access
+to an agent? I used to be one, by the way, and I think I might
+have mentioned that previously, too. We handled every request
+that came to us, and I sold quite a number of flood insurance
+policies.
+ So I don't know what the problem with Mr. Walsh's district
+was, but I have been advised that this came up this morning.
+Can you respond with some reason why they weren't able to get
+information or coverage for their area?
+ Mr. Witt. They can call a 1-800 number here and get that
+information on flood insurance.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Do they know that there is one? I know you
+mentioned that the last time.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes. It is in our advertising campaign, too.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. But do people get that information? Is it
+advertised in a way where most people will become aware?
+ Mr. Witt. We can look at this, but let me also address that
+they could not get insurance.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. I don't know that--that was what was told
+to me. I am taking this secondhand. I wasn't here this morning.
+ Mr. Witt. Let me tell you what happens sometimes
+Congressman. When I was in Arkansas, as a State Director, I
+used to go around to local governments and county meetings, and
+meet with the local legislative body to try to convince them to
+join the flood program. In my own county, when I was the chief
+administrator of that county, I could not even get a resolution
+passed to join the flood program. While in some of the cities
+within the county, the mayors and the city council passed a
+resolution to participate in the flood program, but the rural
+area in the county didn't. Because they did not pass the
+resolution to be in the flood program, insurance was not
+available to those people.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Has the 1-800 number been effective?
+ Mr. Witt. Spence will address that.
+ Mr. Perry. It has been very effective. In the 18 months
+that we have been doing it, our policy base has increased from
+about 2 million policies to 3.7 million, and it is growing as
+we speak.
+ We are working on a national television campaign very
+strongly. In fact, I am speaking to the Professional Insurance
+Agents group on Monday. We have been involved in every major
+insurance agent meeting in the last year, and have an extensive
+program in training and education for agents.
+ We know that at an earlier time, many agents--and I am sure
+you experienced this--had real difficulty with flood insurance.
+It was very complicated, very difficult to write. We have
+greatly simplified the process. Most of the companies now have
+computer software that makes it very easy.
+ So I think that, on balance, our educational and marketing
+campaigns are very successful. We even got members of Congress
+to work with us in their districts. It has been a very, very
+helpful thing.
+
+ subsidized policies
+
+ Mr. Knollenberg. I do know that the improvement in
+simplicity, even prior to my coming here some years back, 5 or
+6 years ago, was getting better toward the end, and I suspect,
+Mr. Chairman, when back in your days as an insurance agent, it
+was nonexistent. They gave you a catalog and sent you off. No
+reference to age here, just experience. Just experience.
+ I don't know if I got out of that or not, but anyhow, I
+wanted to ask a couple of questions, too, about the pre-firm
+versus post-firm and where are we with respect to pre-firm. You
+don't offer those anymore. Well, you do offer them, I guess,
+but aren't we moving into an arena and away from the pre-'74
+kind of situation? So that, there are fewer, I would presume,
+subsidized policies now, by far, than there was some years ago.
+ I know that when I first came here, I discovered some of
+the losses that occurred on the pre-firm side of things, and
+they are immense. Now, tell me, I believe that they have
+cleaned up on that a good bit, and any policy that is offered
+today does have a--there isn't this again and again and again
+planing process, is there? Tell me there isn't.
+ Mr. Perry. It has improved, sir. Our subsidized policies
+are down to about 36 percent of the total; whereas, at one time
+in the early days, it was about 90 percent.
+ We are under a continuing mandate to move towards an
+actuarially based policy base. We have a study underway right
+now with Price Waterhouse to report back to the Congress in the
+spring on the subsidy issue, and I think this is a very
+important issue that the Congress will have to come to terms
+with; that is how much subsidy it wishes to remain in the
+program. There may be some situations where its elimination
+would really not be feasible.
+
+ flood insurance deductible
+
+ Mr. Knollenberg. On the subject of deductibles, do they
+vary across the country?
+ Mr. Witt. In the flood policies?
+ What is the deductible percent? Do you know?
+ Mr. Perry. It varies. I think it is 250 to 500. It can vary
+somewhat.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. That is not mandatory that you have a high
+deductible or intermediate deductible? You can choose? Well,
+clear this up for me because I think--and maybe this testimony
+given to me secondhand was a little rough, but that there were
+deductibles as high as $30,000, in California, I think the
+staff----
+ Mr. Witt. Earthquake insurance.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Earthquake. Okay, that is what I thought.
+So that clears that up. That, I understand, and typically, I
+think it is still a percentage of the face amount, is it not,
+for floods?
+ Mr. Perry. We encourage insurance to value, and certain
+benefits kick in, in terms of replacement cost and that sort of
+thing, and most people do take it.
+
+ working with insurance agents
+
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Do you continue to work with the insurance
+agencies throughout the country? Through the PIA, you
+mentioned.
+ Mr. Perry. Through the PIA. We have our own sort of
+advisory committee, the Flood Insurance Producers Committee,
+which is agent-oriented and represents various groups of agents
+and some individual agents as well, that provide us with
+continuing input and advice on marketing techniques, on things
+they feel would improve matters.
+ They were the source of a lot of the simplification that
+went on.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Just to kind of conclude on this subject,
+it seems to me that great strides have been made in the
+direction of improving them, but I still know that so many
+people--and you are finding it out right now--have no flood
+insurance.
+ Mr. Witt. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Probably live within walking distance or
+earshot or something of your message, but still don't have it.
+ Mr. Lewis. If the gentleman would yield on that point.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Lewis. I shared this with the director in the past in
+personal conversations by way of discussing the rather
+significant change in the way this industry, this agency
+operates since the day I arrived here, which is when Jimmy
+Carter was President, and we have had a couple of others since,
+and of course, this administration, we probably have as fine a
+director as I have experienced.
+ We had a major rainy season out in the countryside. It was
+affecting the Colorado River. One could easily predict what was
+going to happen along the Colorado as it approached a small
+little community known as Needles, California. Not too many
+people know it unless they drive to my State from anywhere in
+the Midwest.
+ Needles was going to have a flood problem, and you could
+not get the agency to respond in any way, shape or form, but we
+had little time.
+ I wasn't in the casualty business, but I was a life agent.
+So I knew a lot of those people out there. I went out to
+Needles personally. We organized the agents. We went door to
+door and passed out FEMA applications for flood insurance, and
+then these people were protected, and those who responded would
+get their check in the mail. It was quite amazing.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Sold this after the flood or before?
+ Mr. Lewis. We weren't selling. You do what you do to
+protect your constituents, and in this case, the insurance was
+available. You could see a flood coming. It is kind of like you
+know it is out there, like you would see the clouds in the sky,
+that long weather prediction. We literally got people to fill
+out applications for Federal insurance that was not available
+elsewhere, and people got protection when the flood came, and
+it was very interesting.
+ I would guess we wouldn't have had to worry about that
+organization now because both the agents are better attuned,
+but the agency certainly is more responsive. It is a more
+interesting transition.
+
+ insurance legislation
+
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Just one final question. What about the--
+last year, I think it was the National Disaster Coalition,
+which was producing a number of coverage for the entire country
+with respect to flood, to earthquake, as an addendum to an
+existing insurance contract, or at least in some fashion, it
+would dovetail or intertwine with existing contracts.
+ Do you have any comments on the support, the help? Do you
+have any pro or con views about the super risk-type situations
+that would be overlaid on top of existing coverages?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir, I do, and the Chairman was asking me
+earlier before we broke for lunch about a similar question from
+Congressman Emerson.
+ It was very interesting. Congressman Emerson and all of us
+worked fairly closely on this I can't remember the month that I
+had the opportunity to come up and sit down with him and his
+staff. We went over this legislation because I was really not
+supportive of this legislation in the context that it was
+written.
+ The industry was working with Treasury to set up excess
+loss contracts, up to $25 billion, that any time that the
+industry had a catastrophic loss like Hurricane Andrew or
+Northridge earthquake that those excess loss contracts would be
+sold.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Reinsurance.
+ Mr. Witt. Reinsurance. That is basically what it is, and
+that part did not bother me.
+ What concerned me more than anything was the fact that no
+one could guarantee to us that that legislation was going to
+provide affordable and available insurance in high-risk areas.
+ So Congressman Emerson and I talked about this, as I was
+very concerned about that. If insurance is available, then it
+is going to have to be affordable or people will not buy it,
+and that concerned me.
+ I was explaining this to the Congressman, and we talked
+about this, and he asked his staff--and I never will forget it.
+He said, ``Is James Lee right about this?,'' and they said,
+``Yes, sir. He is right about this because we have no idea if
+this will make the insurance affordable, and if it will make it
+more available so that people can purchase it,'' and he said,
+``Well, that is not what we are wanting. We want it to be
+affordable and available.''
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Are you speaking of the Emerson bill or--
+--
+ Mr. Witt. I was speaking of the Emerson bill, and I have
+not read the new legislation.
+ The other side of this was that I wanted mitigation to be a
+part of this legislation. So I think what we are going to do
+now--I work with the insurance industry a lot, and we have
+worked out a unique partnership in trying to make a difference
+for our country, and I am very proud of that--is work with the
+administration and with Congress in looking at legislation for
+mitigation.
+ Mr. Lewis. I must say, Joe, if you will yield further, an
+idea has popped in my mind that kind of repeats history.
+ My immediate predecessor involved the Pettis family, a
+very, very fine representative. Jerry Pettis, unfortunately,
+was killed in a personal plane accident, and his widow became a
+member of Congress and a very effective person, and as a result
+of some of his work, she was able to become the point person
+and accomplish some very interesting things that might not have
+been accomplishable by somebody else, and it just occurs to me
+that with that background that we might approach Congresswoman
+JoAnn Emerson and maybe bring some of the agents of the House
+together, as well as other people, and think about a task force
+with the thought of her leading this battle. It could be a very
+interesting development.
+ So note that for the record, and maybe you and I will go
+about that.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. And I do appreciate that, Mr. Chairman,
+and, Mr. Witt, as well. We, again, appreciate the work that you
+do, and the reason for these questions is to get at a better
+product, hopefully that will do more for everybody and clear up
+the question mark in this whole thing.
+ Thank you.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Knollenberg.
+ Mr. Stokes?
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Chairman, I want you to note that those barbs you are
+getting about age come from your side of the table.
+ Mr. Lewis. Certainly after the Needles discussion, I heard
+kind of a rumble over here. It must have been one of my staff.
+It wouldn't have been Mr. Stokes asking about passing out
+campaign fliers with those applications.
+
+ arson
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Mr. Witt, all of the disasters that your agency
+is called upon to respond to are not natural disasters. One of
+those that fall in that category has been the very vicious and
+cowardly act of church burnings in this country, and of course,
+FEMA has been asked to respond to that in some way.
+ Can you tell us about that program?
+ Mr. Witt. Congressman Stokes, the President asked us to
+lead a part of the church arson program dealing with
+prevention. By working with Justice and law enforcement
+agencies, including the Sheriffs Association, the Chiefs of
+Police Association, as well as all of the national fire
+associations, AmeriCorps, and communities, we have put in place
+an arson prevention program.
+ Macon, Georgia, for one, is a pilot project in the
+prevention program. We have reached a lot of communities with
+very limited staff, and very limited funding, and I am very
+proud of what we have done.
+ Carrye, do you want to add anything on the program? I think
+it has been a very successful program, don't you?
+ Ms. Brown. Yes. I am Carrye Brown, and I am the U.S. Fire
+Administrator. The program has been very successful. It
+actually augmented the program that we have at the National
+Fire Academy which trains fire service personnel.
+ Along with the program out of the Director's office, we
+have a very strong community arson program outreach effort,
+which also works through the governors' offices and with local
+officials, as well as the fire service organizations.
+ Mr. Witt. We set up in conjunction with the National Fire
+Academy a 1-800 number that provides information on prevention.
+We also put a packet together, the training tools that a
+community needs to help them in prevention efforts.
+ We have actually gone out in the communities, too.
+ Mr. Stokes. How does your efforts or your program tie into
+the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms where they have a
+line item of church fire investigations where we appropriate
+funding? Do you tie into that at all?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir. We have done this in a joint effort
+with ATF, FBI, and other Federal agencies. We have met many,
+many times on this.
+ ATF does more training with the State fire marshals on the
+investigative side and with local law enforcement on how to
+protect evidence, until someone can investigate it.
+ Mr. Stokes. In terms of your program, is additional money
+needed?
+ Mr. Witt. Well, we are at the point now where this is
+transferred over to the U.S. Fire Administration, where they
+are doing the follow-up on the commitment we have made to the
+communities to provide the information that they need to
+continue the program. So I think we are okay budget-wise, don't
+you, Carrye?
+ Ms. Brown. That is correct. We are able to manage.
+ Mr. Lewis. If you would yield, Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Stokes. Certainly.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Stokes is asking that not for a light
+reason.
+ Mr. Witt. Oh, I know.
+ Mr. Lewis. Indeed, if there is a question to be discussed
+further there between you. Please feel free to get back to us
+for the record.
+ Mr. Witt. We will. We would be happy to.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that.
+ Mr. Witt. What is it, Gary? Did you have something you
+wanted to add?
+ Mr. Johnson. I was just going to indicate to you, Mr.
+Stokes, that in the U.S. Fire Administration's budget, we are
+committing in FY '98 about $1.3 million to continue these
+initiatives and other ongoing arson projects.
+ Mr. Stokes. So do you think that will be adequate for our
+purposes at this time?
+ Mr. Witt. I think so with what we are doing with the
+follow-up.
+ Mr. Stokes. Right.
+ Mr. Witt. I think it will be.
+
+ public assistance appeals
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Director, you indicate on page 8 of your
+statement--you propose eliminating one level of appeal in the
+public assistance program. Can you tell us what you mean by
+that?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir. Congressman Stokes, what we have now is
+a system that takes too long in the review process and the
+appeal process. If a subgrantee wants to appeal because they
+feel like they are not justifiably getting enough money to do
+their project, they go through the first appeal at the regional
+level, then they go through the second appeal at the associate
+director level, then, the third appeal comes to me.
+ By cutting the appeal process down from three to even two
+or one level, it will help the applicants by speeding that
+process up. It will not drag out over 2 years. We have to
+realistically look at this, in that same manner as the public
+assistance program. This is just one part of the many things
+that we are doing to streamline.
+ Mr. Stokes. A statement, Director, also says you are making
+other procedural adjustments that will reduce costs now and in
+the future. Be a little more specific and tell us what you have
+in mind there, what you are referring to, and how much money
+will be saved in that area.
+ Mr. Witt. Let me go through this with you. When a disaster
+is declared and our inspectors go out to a local area--they may
+find 5 miles of road that has been absolutely washed out. Maybe
+there were two bridges on that particular road and five cars.
+Well, in the past, a damage survey report was written for each
+one of the culverts, plus each one of the bridges, plus the
+miles of gravel that were washed off the pavement on the road.
+ So here we've got 15 or 20 damage survey reports for that 5
+miles of road. My point is, let's do one damage survey report
+for that one 5 mile section of road, and keep the red tape
+down.
+ Then, under the review process, the damage survey reports
+come before a joint State team and a joint team from FEMA which
+slows down the review process. That is when the appeal process
+kicks in.
+ Here we go on for months, while we really need to get the
+money in the hands of the local government to build that bridge
+or build that road, so those school busses can run over them.
+That is why we are trying to streamline this now.
+ I think the IG's report, from what we have talked to them
+about points up the fact that we probably will save a
+tremendous amount of money by streamlining simply because we
+are overburdened with administrative costs. This is not what, I
+think, Congress intended us to do, which is to rebuild faster,
+but still be accountable. So those are some of the things we
+are trying to do, but there is a lot more. I could talk to you
+all afternoon about this one.
+ Mr. Stokes. I am sure you could. I am sure you could. That
+is why we wanted to give you a chance to respond in this area.
+ Mr. Chairman, I am ready to move into another area of
+questioning. So I would yield at this time and wait until the
+next round.
+ Mr. Lewis. All right, Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen?
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+
+ funding for the fire academy
+
+ A few minutes ago, a reference was made to the National
+Fire Academy. Mr. Director, you may be surprised to learn that
+the majority of the FEMA questions coming to the committee have
+to do with funding for the National Fire Academy.
+ Based on the number of inquiries, one would expect you or
+we were out to get the fire community, even though they had
+been fully funded over the past few years.
+ For the committee's benefit and the benefit of any of the
+fire community who may be listening to this, can you please
+inform the committee as to the 1998 budget request for the fire
+academy, how it compares to previous years? And for the record,
+please provide a specific and detailed budget for all aspects
+of the fire academy program.
+ Mr. Johnson. The request by----
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Johnson, would you identify yourself?
+ Mr. Johnson. Gary Johnson, chief financial officer,
+Congressman.
+ The request for the National Fire Academy for 1998, in
+total, is $8.443 million. That includes 38 work years, $2.556
+million for salary and expenses and EMPA dollars of $5.887
+million.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. And you will be good enough to provide
+the detail for the committee after the conclusion of this?
+ Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+ National Fire Academy (NFA) Budget
+
+ The National Fire Academy (NFA) budget request for 1998
+includes a total of $8,843,000, of which $2,556,000 is funded
+from the Salaries and Expenses appropriations and $5,887,000 in
+program funds fall under the Emergency Management Planning and
+Assistance appropriation. Plans for the program funds are as
+follows:
+ Develop/revise resident, field, and regional delivery
+courses as well as use of alternate delivery format, evaluate
+the impact of individual courses in NFA curriculum, and
+continue a national needs assessment for NFA curriculum
+planning, and provide materials to the American Council on
+Education for course accreditation. ($1,300,000)
+ Conduct on-campus and off-campus delivery of NFA training
+courses and other specialized training programs: ($3,427,000)
+
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ Number of
+ Delivery programs course Number of Student
+ deliveries students days
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+Resident......................... 184 4,100 39,934
+Field/State weekend.............. 433 13,622 27,324
+Regional......................... 30 750 4,650
+------------------------------------------------------------------------
+
+ Manage the preparation and delivery of the Annual Fallen
+Firefighter Memorial Ceremony and Luminary Service. ($35,000)
+ Continue the management of an interagency agreement to
+print, stock, and disseminate training materials to the
+nation's fire and emergency service personnel. ($125,000)
+ Deliver simulation and training programs and exercises both
+on-site and at remote sites nationwide. ($1,000,000)
+
+ disaster loan program
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. In June of last year, the General
+Accounting Office delivered a report to our committee and to
+Chairman Lewis' counterpart, Senator Bond, regarding a
+community disaster loan program operated by FEMA. The primary
+finding of this report indicated that some of the $100 million
+loaned to the communities through this program, only $3 million
+had been paid back, while $7 million in principal and interest
+had, consistent with law, been forgiven.
+ Perhaps more important, the GAO concluded that there was a
+very high likelihood that most of the remaining loan balance of
+$93 million would also be partially or fully canceled.
+ I should hasten to add that most, if not all, of these
+loans were made prior to your arrival, Director Witt.
+ Mr. Witt. Yes.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Would you please enlighten the committee
+on, first, why this program was created, how it was meant to
+work, and how it has worked in actuality?
+ Mr. Witt. Congressman, of course, I wasn't here when the
+program was created, so it would be difficult for me to tell
+you, but I will sure try to find out for you.
+ Let me say this about the community disaster loans. A good
+example of that program is in the Virgin Islands where
+Hurricane Hugo came through and a community disaster loan was
+given to the Virgin Islands at that time.
+ Eighty-nine million dollars. Very little has been
+collected, and we are in the process of looking at forgiving
+that loan or some portion of it.
+ A community disaster loan was given in Hurricane Andrew for
+Miami and also Homestead. I believe Miami has been forgiven. We
+have been working with Congresswoman Meek on Homestead, and I
+have met with the Homestead officials. Price Waterhouse is
+relooking at that one to see if it is repayable by Homestead.
+ What happens is that after the first 3 years following a
+disaster, if the local government does not have the capability
+to repay the loan, then there are adjustments made for the
+community.
+ Congress just authorized us over $100 million for the
+Virgin Islands for Hurricane Marilyn. Is it a program that, as
+a loan program, is good? I personally don't think so.
+ If you are going to administer a program like this, then
+let it be a grant program if they can't pay the money back. Why
+spend all the money we are having to spend administratively to
+support these loans and to have accounting firms go in and do
+audits of the cities or governments that are getting the loans
+if they are not being repaid?
+ Also, we have a cost share or State share loan that can be
+provided to a State or local government that can't meet its
+cost share. If there is going to be a loan program like this,
+maybe we need to look at an economic development-type program
+through EDA or Commerce or even SBA, but for FEMA to be in the
+loan business and following up on loans is very difficult.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Absent a legislative fix, I will ask you
+to comment on what you think might be within the realm of
+possibility. Could you provide the committee at some point in
+time with a specific plan to have to deal with whatever the
+outstanding loans are?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, I sure can.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. From your perspective, it appears to
+make some sense that we need something else either to abolish
+this program or to come up with some other alternative, and
+would you be good enough to suggest some possible alternatives?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you very much.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+ Community Disaster Loan Program (CDLP)
+
+ Our recent cost-cutting panel recommended the repeal of
+this section (Section 417 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster
+Relief and Emergency Assistance Act). FEMA intends to submit
+legislation that would accomplish that repeal.
+ Further detailed information on the CDLP is contained in an
+answer to a question for the record by Chairman Lewis.
+
+ csepp
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Relative to the chemical stockpile
+through a relationship with the Department of Defense,
+specifically the Army, FEMA has been participating in the
+chemical stockpile emergency preparedness program. I am aware
+that relationships in this partnership have been strained of
+late and that there has been much interest on the part by some
+in Congress to make the changes necessary to make this program
+operate differently.
+ Could you shed some light on this matter, please, and let
+us know where the program stands today, and where you expect it
+will be in 6 to 12 months?
+ Mr. Witt. The chemical stockpile program, to me, is a very,
+very important program, particularly around the eight arsenals
+that we have in the United States. What is really important is
+the fact that those communities around those arsenals need to
+have protection, particularly when we are getting rid of that
+stockpile of old agent-type weapons.
+ I have been involved in that program for a long time as a
+State director, and now as FEMA director. I have also been
+involved with meeting with Mr. Decker from the Army. I have
+also recently gone over and met with Secretary Togo West about
+this program because of my concern and the way the program is
+going.
+ I have voiced my feelings to the Secretary and to Mr.
+Decker, about what changes I thought should be made to
+streamline this program, to cut administrative cost, and to
+make it a program that is good for the local governments that
+are in this program.
+ Secretary West has been very receptive, and we are doing
+some follow-up meetings to see what we can do to make the
+program less burdensome at the Washington level, and work
+through our performance partnership agreement process that we
+have with the State and local government. I think it would work
+better. I think it would work smoother. We do our job very well
+with local government; they are our true partners, whatever the
+program is. If we can't streamline, and make it a program that
+is really good for our States, counties, and cities around the
+arsenals, then I would be willing to pull FEMA out of that
+program and let DOD run it.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. You will let us know if you feel--and
+Congress may feel inclined itself--if there is something
+Congress should do legislatively, if you would be good enough?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir, I would be happy to.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Would you please continue to keep this
+committee informed on a regular basis on what is happening?
+ Mr. Witt. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you very much.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. If the gentleman would allow me for just a
+moment to follow up on that very briefly.
+ I think the director is making a very significant point
+here. While local communities are truly the Federal
+Government's partner in disaster circumstances, it is very
+clear that FEMA is, in an emergency, a response organization.
+They don't want to be a local bank, and they don't want to be
+in the long-term lending or collection business.
+ Mr. Witt. That is right.
+
+ disaster loans
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Already, they are cutting back on personnel at
+levels that are unacceptable to me at this point, but beyond
+that, some of these activities take away from the capability to
+respond.
+ So let me just make the point, and it is not by way of
+casting aspersions in any direction, but within the
+justifications, there is a listing of some cities that I would
+just--or communities who requested loans or received loans. The
+U.S. Virgin Islands, $50,100,000, and you add on interest of
+the accrued loans, a total of $70 million. The U.S. Virgin
+Islands, I mentioned. Homestead City, Florida--somewhere, I
+heard Homestead--$10,325,000. Along with interest, that becomes
+$12,500,000. Florida City, Florida, about a $1,200,000. The
+City of Miami, two loans coming up to above $10 million. Kuai
+in Hawaii, a total of $11,500,000-plus. American Samoa, a total
+of $11,500,000.
+ No principal or interest payments have been made on those
+loans. They represent about 90 percent of the loans
+outstanding. Applications for most of them have been made for
+cancellation of the loans. It virtually becomes a grant
+program, presuming, and most people are anticipating that
+significant levels of those will be forgiven.
+ We find ourselves in a circumstance where we are
+exercising, as the Director so clearly put it, an
+administrative process that may be just a bit of Washington
+silliness. I think we together need to rethink that whole
+process. I hope that our Committee will be willing to and that
+others in the Congress will consider the point as well. So
+thank you very much.
+
+ dod as a partner
+
+ Mr. Witt. Mr. Chairman, let me also add, not about the
+chemical stockpile program, but about DOD. DOD has been a true
+partner with us and has worked very, very hard with us in
+everything that we have done in preparedness and response to
+national disasters, and I want to make sure that it is
+understood that there are a lot of things that we could not do
+without DOD. They have been a really good partner.
+
+ performance agreements
+
+ Mr. Lewis. The gentlelady from Florida.
+ Ms. Meek. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Witt, I understand that after the National Performance
+Review, FEMA initiated a Performance Partnership Agreement
+process. You may have discussed that when I was out of the
+room. Will you please outline this process for the committee,
+and after which, tell us if it has had any positive effect on
+the States' capabilities to work within this area?
+ Mr. Witt. We started the process last year. The reason we
+put it in place was that the old CCA process that FEMA used as
+a funding tool down at the State emergency management was a
+process that I felt did not really, truly help the States to
+develop the programs against the risks they faced. It was more
+like, ``you will do this training and this training,'' and
+``you will have a 4-year exercise program,'' and ``this is the
+exercise that you will have this year and that year,'' and it
+was dictated from the State down to the local government's
+emergency management organization.
+ Now, I have seen this. I have been there, and they would
+say, ``okay, local emergency manager, have you done this?'' and
+they would say, ``yes.'' This is by phone, and they would check
+that box, and ``so have you done this,'' and they would check
+that box.
+ The CCA was a funding mechanism that didn't really bring
+the State's capability up to meet the risk that each State
+faced. Each State has a different set of risks.
+ So what we tried to do by establishing Performance
+Partnership Agreements was to give the States the flexibility
+to design their programs against the risks they faced in that
+State. It really has helped, and it is making a difference.
+ So, in each year, I think it is improving.
+ Ms. Meek. So are you going to be able to measure the
+capability with reference to the criteria which you have just
+mentioned?
+ Mr. Witt. In conjunction with the States and our staff at
+FEMA, we are developing a program for the States to establish a
+baseline, which they have never had, of where they are in
+relation to our GPRA goals, and what they need to be
+accountable for those goals. Through the regions they will
+actually see what they are achieving toward the goals that they
+are trying to reach. I think it is going to be very successful.
+ Ms. Meek. Thank you.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+
+ mitigation programs
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you very much, Ms. Meek.
+ Mr. Director, a few questions will pretty much complete
+what I want us to do for the record today, or at least here in
+this meeting, but going back briefly to mitigation programs, as
+you noted in your budget justification, FEMA's mitigation
+programs are essentially supported through two funding streams.
+One is direct Federal appropriations, and the other is through
+reimbursement from the National Flood Insurance Fund, paid for
+by flood policyholder fees.
+ As I understand it, beginning in 1997, you will initiate a
+75/25 cost share arrangement for grants to the States which
+come through the direct appropriation.
+ Could you please explain in some detail why you are
+instituting this cost share for EMPA mitigation grants and what
+you hope to accomplish?
+ Mr. Witt. The mitigation program.
+ Mr. Lewis. One more time.
+ Mr. Witt. The mitigation program, Mr. Chairman, was a 50/50
+cost share.
+ Mr. Lewis. Correct.
+ Mr. Witt. If you have a disaster, and you have to match a
+25-percent cost share and still spend the monies that you need
+to respond and recover it is very difficult for a State or
+local government to come up with a 50/50 cost share to do a
+mitigation project.
+ We found a lot of the States and local communities and
+subgrantees affected by disasters were not using the mitigation
+dollars because they couldn't afford the cost share.
+ So we have changed it to 75/25, in order to have mitigation
+projects. So, why are we doing it? Because it is going to save
+all of us money in the future by mitigating against those
+future losses.
+ Mr. Lewis. I appreciate that response.
+ Do you make similar grants to States for activities which
+are flood-related?
+ Mr. Witt. Through the flood fund.
+ How much monies do we have in that, Dick?
+ Mr. Krimm. In mitigation?
+ Mr. Lewis. Yes.
+ Mr. Krimm. In 1997, we have a $12.5 million for mitigation
+grants. We were authorized $20 million.
+ Mr. Lewis. Have you discussed the obvious question
+following that last series about cost sharing? Have you
+discussed the feasibility of cost sharing in that category as
+well, like the 25 percent?
+ Mr. Witt. 75/25.
+ Mr. Lewis. I would be interested in a discussion regarding
+that.
+ Mr. Witt. Okay.
+ Mr. Lewis. I am intrigued that in this mitigation activity,
+your overall budget has continued to go up for each of the last
+three fiscal years. Nevertheless, the budgets for earthquake
+hazard reduction, the hurricane and dam safety programs, and
+the State hazard mitigation program have all remained level,
+while only the flood plain management program has increased.
+ It would appear that this particular program has increased
+only because collections and/or rates for policyholders have
+increased over this period. In other words, the flood
+mitigation expenditure may not necessarily reflect the true
+need, while the other mitigation programs have borne the brunt
+of efforts to reduce expenditures. Am I on the right track
+here, or is there something I am missing?
+ Mr. Witt. The flood mitigation grant program was
+established because of the 1994 flood reform act, which
+required that we implement a program at the regional level,
+State level, and Federal level.
+ You appropriated money to increase the hurricane program
+because we had a national hurricane program that was $896,000
+in 1993. When I brought that to the committee's attention, the
+Congress helped us to increase that.
+ Mr. Johnson. The request for the hurricane program is
+$5.896 million.
+ Mr. Witt. $5.896 million. My goal was to try to get to $10
+million at some point for the national hurricane program.
+ However, the increase helped States do assessments,
+improved their response, and identified emergency routes.
+ Mr. Lewis. Would you provide more detail for the record? I
+am interested in knowing what you would estimate the true need
+is for these mitigation programs, including the flood program
+and how much is drawn down on the flood insurance fund for
+these mitigation programs which could otherwise, perhaps, go to
+repay outstanding borrowing or reduce rates.
+ Mr. Johnson. The current fee that we expect to collect and
+spend on our mitigation programs and our salary expenses for
+the mitigation people that work on that, as well as in the
+Federal Insurance Administration is $100,074,000, Mr. Chairman.
+
+ flood insurance rates
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Okay. Thank you.
+ While I am on this subject of flood insurance, your flood
+insurance fund appropriation language provides for your ability
+to increase annual flood rates. Do you anticipate raising these
+rates either in 1997 or 1998?
+ Mr. Witt. Some.
+ Mr. Lewis. Can you give me some idea of what level?
+ Mr. Perry. Mr. Chairman, there is a range around 7 to 10
+percent, depending on location. Plus, in some cases, an
+additional $75 increased cost of construction fee. This year,
+we do have a waiver on the standard 10 percent cap on premium
+increases to accommodate this.
+ Mr. Lewis. The 7 to 10 percent probably reflects your
+reality check as it relates to more difficult areas.
+ Ms. Perry. Yes, sir. They are actuarially based, and we can
+provide you with a full listing of those for the record.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+ Flood Insurance Rates
+
+ FEMA's main rate changes for FY 1997 are the following:
+ 13% increase in rates for subsidized policies.
+ 9% increase in rates for Standard Policies in zones B, C,
+and X.
+ 13% increase in rates for Preferred Risk Policies in zones
+B, C, and X.
+ 2-10% increases in other various categories.
+ These increases include consideration of standard flood
+insurance experience and the introduction of the new coverage
+for Increased Cost of Compliance authorized by the National
+Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Reform Act of 1994. The Act
+allowed for exceeding the 10% premium increase restriction in
+providing that coverage.
+ For FY 1998, FEMA rate changes have not been determined at
+this time. Any changes will depend on the review of rates and
+underwriting experience to be conducted later this summer. FEMA
+conducts an annual rate review to ensure that the rates are
+sufficient to pay losses arising from the historical average
+loss year. To the extent that a higher-than-average loss year
+serves to raise the historical average, it may require some
+increase in rates. However, any possible increase will not be
+related to the need to borrow.
+
+ flood losses and collections
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Okay. In 1996, you experienced loss and loss
+adjustment expenses, which were higher than expected, and made
+collections which were lower than expected. What were the
+factors behind these losses and reduced collections?
+ Mr. Lewis. Please speak up. The recorder would appreciate
+you speaking up.
+ Mr. Perry. Our primary problem has been extraordinarily
+high losses over the last 3 years, frankly. Our experience has
+been no different from that of the private sector, and of
+course, this has resulted in the borrowing that you have seen
+in our balance sheet and the request for increased borrowing
+authority which you all very graciously approved last fall.
+This gave us an extra $500 million, which gives us a more
+comfortable pad to get us through the next few months.
+ Frankly, the program is not actuarially based in full. We
+mentioned earlier that over a third of our policies do enjoy
+some form of subsidy, and in high-loss situations, high-loss
+years, we are going to have deficits that we will have to cover
+with borrowing which we hope to repay in the out-years when we
+have better loss experiences.
+ We have done this in the past. We can't make a definite
+scenario as to our ability to repay in the future. We run some
+very informal ones, and depending on what our experience is in
+the out-years, it is anywhere from 25 to 75 percent that we can
+repay in full what we borrowed thus far.
+ Mr. Lewis. I have an additional follow-on question. In
+part, I think you have answered it at least for me, but what
+have you done or what has happened in the marketplace that
+should prevent this similar result in 1997 or 1998? Now,
+separate from praying, I am interested.
+ Mr. Perry. Well, we do a lot of that on a non-
+denominational basis.
+ Mr. Lewis. Hopefully.
+ Mr. Perry. Frankly, we are working through our marketing
+program to begin to spread our losses into less hazardous
+areas.
+ Earlier someone made the observation that people have no
+risk of loss, and our view is that virtually every American has
+at least some risk of loss from flood. If you live in a non-
+hazardous area, you can buy flood insurance from us at a very,
+very favorable rate, and we are beginning to try to sell those
+policies. As we spread our risk, our hope is down the road that
+even if we have a high-loss year, the risk will be sufficiently
+spread that we won't have these really horrible losses that we
+have the last 3 years.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you.
+
+ cost share for state and local grants
+
+ Under preparedness, training, and exercises in the EMPA
+account, you proposed a 1998 budget of just under $125 million,
+a slight reduction from the 1997 level. The bulk of these
+funds, or some $109 million in 1998, would go to State and
+local assistance grants. In 1996, the committee expressed its
+desire that FEMA cost-share these grants on a 50/50 basis,
+which I understand you have done.
+ Yet, now we hear this has posed a peculiar hardship on the
+States. Does that fit in with the area of discussion we had?
+Let's discuss it one more time, briefly.
+ Mr. Witt. Of course, it was recommended in the report that
+we continue a 50/50 cost share. I strongly feel that we should
+go to a 75/25 cost-share to make the States better equipped.
+The States could build stronger emergency management programs,
+and even purchase equipment that they so desperately need. I
+think in the out-years, that favorable cost share will benefit
+all of us more in future dollars.
+
+ budget for preparedness, training and exercises
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Let's discuss that further as time goes forward
+for the record as well.
+ While your aforementioned EMPA budget for preparedness,
+training, and exercises shows a reduction of just over $4
+million, your salaries and expense budget for the same activity
+shows a drop of nearly $7.5 million from the 1997 level. That
+amounts to a 27 percent reduction. Why are you proposing such a
+dramatic reduction and personnel compensation, and
+specifically, what impacts will such a reduction have upon your
+training programs?
+ Mr. Witt. Well, of course, the thing to remember is that we
+are streamlining the administrative side of programs to put
+more emphasis on our customers.
+ Mr. Johnson. The reduction that you are talking about in
+salary and expenses, is, in fact, reflecting a redistribution
+of personnel assets for Mount Weather to implement the working
+capital fund that you folks so graciously authorized last year.
+The dollars that were in PT&E for Mount Weather have been
+redistributed back to the users.
+ Mr. Lewis. That kind of elaboration is very helpful, and I
+was going to ask you to do some of that for the record. In
+fact, outside of maybe some closing remarks, the rest of the
+questions that I have, Mr. Director, can be handled in the
+record, and I would urge you to do that and recognize that
+other members may have questions for the record as well.
+ Mr. Stokes?
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+
+ disaster projections
+
+ Mr. Director, I think we all recognize that estimating the
+cost of natural disasters is just a very imprecise art, but it
+strikes me that the aspect of estimating when funds will be
+needed may be even more difficult than estimating how much is
+needed.
+ I think the experience of the Loma Prieta earthquake and
+the Northridge earthquake bear this out. Billions of dollars
+were estimated to be needed and were appropriated in both
+cases, but years later, we are still paying for those disasters
+and many others.
+ Parenthetically, I might add, this situation is not
+entirely detrimental because, to the extent that unallocated
+money remains in the disaster relief fund, it can be used for
+other emergencies, although it might have originally been
+requested in response to another need.
+ What is the agency doing to try to develop better
+estimates, not only in how much funding is needed, but when it
+is needed?
+ Mr. Witt. First of all, I think that we now have in place
+the financial management system that can give you good data, on
+what we have used and help determine what we will need.
+ I am very excited about what Gary has been able to put in
+place because, before, if you remember, Congressman Stokes, we
+couldn't even give you a balance; so it was very difficult when
+Congress said, ``well, how much money do you have in your
+disaster fund?''
+ Mr. Stokes. Right.
+ Mr. Witt. So now the fund has been reconciled, Gary, do you
+want to tell them how we reconciled and what we have done on
+that?
+ Mr. Johnson. Mr. Stokes, I will tell you that this has been
+one of the biggest challenges I have faced. Back in 1993 when
+Director Witt asked me to try this position, his number-one
+objective was to put in a financial management system that
+complied with the CFO Act requirements and the joint financial
+management improvement program.
+ You were very supportive of us in providing some dollars,
+and in fiscal 1994 we were the only agency in the Federal
+Government to procure a financial management system.
+ It took us a year to get ready to begin to implement it, in
+fiscal year '96. It probably was not the best year to do that,
+I might add, just because of the shutdowns and so forth. You'd
+like to have continuity. However, we worked through that. The
+system is working very well.
+ With respect to the disaster relief fund--this is where I
+think the director was coming from--we had data on our old
+financial management system. We did not want to load old
+unreconciled data onto the new system for obvious reasons.
+ Last year, through the good work of my staff, we for the
+first time in the history of the disaster relief fund,
+reconciled over $18 billion of activity and transactions.
+ I think my colleagues in the IG's office were pretty much
+astounded by the magnitude by the activity as well. They did
+agree that we had balances to move forward within the beginning
+of FY 1997.
+ We still have, as you would expect, difficulties that we
+encounter in bringing up a new system, particularly the
+interfaces with some of our older systems. We are attacking
+those right now.
+ Director Witt mentioned, and it is in direct response to
+your question, projections and projected cost data. This is one
+of the areas that we have recently been trying to nail down,
+and make sure it interfaces well. This is the data that not
+only we need, but you also need to feel comfortable with
+requirements.
+ I think the most difficult part of this whole business is
+not knowing what Mother Nature will deal to us over what period
+of time. It is difficult for us right now to get a factor for
+seasonality and so forth. As a result--and I know both your
+staff and OMB's have talked to us about trying to look at a way
+other than using averages. We have adopted for our projection
+purposes the 5-year average obligations less Northridge.
+Northridge, because of its size was, we felt, an outlier. I
+hope it is always an outlier, and we never see anything like
+that again.
+ Interestingly enough, when we adopt that methodology, our
+actual obligation rates have, in fact, exceeded that average
+adjusted for each year, and last year was a very good example.
+Our obligations, less Northridge, exceeded what we projected by
+about $300 million, Mr. Stokes.
+ We would sure love to figure out a way to project what
+Mother Nature is going to deal to us in any given year.
+
+ remaining requirements from ca earthquakes
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Can you tell us what remaining requirements on
+the disaster relief fund are expected due to Loma Prieta and
+the Northridge?
+ Mr. Johnson. Yes, sir. If you can just bear with me.
+ Mr. Lewis. Please don't ask him about the Ohio River yet.
+ Mr. Stokes. No. It is a little too early for that.
+ Mr. Johnson. You asked for the requirements for Loma Prieta
+earthquake, Mr. Stokes. The overall projected cost we have is
+about $895 million. We have remaining costs out there of about
+$62 million. So we are about to finish that one off, we
+believe.
+ With respect to the Northridge earthquake disaster, our
+current projected total cost for that disaster--and you will
+see why we hope it is always an outlier--approaches $7.8
+billion, and we have what we believe right now approximately
+$2.6 billion of remaining requirements.
+ Mr. Stokes. I think we can be pleased----
+ Mr. Lewis. I am glad you asked that question.
+
+ counter terrorism funds
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Obviously, you have come in great ways in terms
+of being able to manage this particular area of budget.
+ FEMA received $15 million in 1997 for the President's anti-
+terrorism initiative, and he is requesting an additional $6.3
+million in 1998 for that purpose. What has the agency done to
+date with the 1997 funding, and what are the specific
+requirements intended to be funded in the 1998 request?
+ Mr. Johnson. The overall figure is $15 million for 1997,
+Mr. Stokes. That breaks down, of course, into $3 million in our
+salaries and expense appropriation and $12 million, in our EMPA
+appropriation.
+ If you will, I would like to give you just the totals
+broken down by categories. Of that $15 million total, we are
+planning to spend $5.6 million for consequence management
+planning and coordination activities; that is, the Federal
+planning side of reviewing how the Federal agencies interface
+with each other in dealing with these unique circumstances.
+ We plan on spending $3.973 million for basically State and
+local training and working this program down to the local
+level. Of that $4.0 million, $2.3 million is going to the
+States. In fact, it is already in their hands.
+ We are planning to spend $2.8 million on personnel and
+protective measures, measures to ensure the security of FEMA
+personnel not only here in headquarters, but throughout the
+Nation; and then we are also proposing--and we actually are in
+the process of doing this--spending $2.595 million of which
+$2.5 million will be going to the fire service community for
+fire training programs related to terrorism.
+
+ legislative authority for pre-disaster mitigation
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Mr. Director, you highlighted that the $50
+million included in FEMA's 1998 budget request for pre-disaster
+mitigation programs. Does this legislation require any
+additional legislative authority?
+ Mr. Witt. It may later, yes, sir.
+ Mr. Stokes. I would think the probabilities are that you
+are going to have to ask Congress for some legislation,
+particularly if you have any major features of this type of
+legislation.
+ Mr. Johnson. Mr. Stokes, you are correct. This is a
+legislative proposal. We want to expend that $50 million should
+you appropriate it.
+ Mr. Lewis. Please talk to us about that, if you would.
+ Mr. Johnson. Yes.
+ Mr. Stokes. Mr. Chairman, I have a number of other
+questions which I will be glad to submit for the record, but I
+do want to take just a moment, once again, to say how
+refreshing it is to me as a member of this Subcommittee and one
+who has sat here many years and dealt with this particular
+agency to see the enormous professionalism that you have
+brought to this job.
+ I think it is comforting for people throughout the country
+to know that we have this type of conscientious concern about
+natural and manmade disasters from an agency of this type. I
+just want you to know that I am very appreciative of the work
+that you do.
+ Mr. Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Ms. Meek?
+ Ms. Meek. I just want to say that I, too, am very grateful,
+number one, to be on this Subcommittee and to be able to face
+the people who help us face our problems throughout the
+country, most noticeably has been FEMA's efforts.
+ Even when they did not have all the resources to do the
+things, they made a consortium of Federal agencies and
+delivered. It was difficult because to deal with one Federal
+agency is difficult enough, and to have the number that FEMA
+pulled together to try to help, I think it's magnificent, and
+we want to thank you.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Ms. Meek.
+
+ Closing Remarks
+
+ Mr. Director, let me make some closing remarks, and then I
+will yield the table to you, and we will close this. Our work,
+at least for today, is done.
+ I wanted to take a special moment to express my personal
+appreciation for the very serious attention and time that you
+gave to the matter of the hospitals in the Los Angeles region
+that were so seriously damaged by that Northridge Earthquake.
+ St. John's and Mount Sinai are very appreciative. USC is
+very appreciative, and indeed, UCLA is very appreciative. I
+can't tell you how much your personal attention played a role
+in bringing those items to fruitful conclusion.
+ There do remain in connection with that a piece of that
+$2.6 billion outstanding, items that are very, very important
+to the major institutions who are involved, USC and UCLA, that
+relate not to the emergency circumstance, but rather one of the
+President's highest priorities, that is, the President has time
+and time again talked about the need to make sure that we have
+available the best for educational excellence that we can
+possibly develop in the country.
+ These institutions reflect much of that and much of their
+educational capacity potentially could be affected by the
+results of disastrous impact upon those other parts of the
+institution. So that is kind of the next page, and I think you
+know that I do have a propensity to pay a little attention to
+these things. So I just do want you to know that it is on my
+worksheet for the year ahead, but you have been extremely
+sensitive and helpful, and the Agency has as well, and I want
+you to know that.
+ We have, Director Witt, tornado damage in Arkansas before
+us, floods in Ohio and Kentucky and Indiana and Tennessee and
+West Virginia. The Ohio River, as you have heard from every
+source, is peaking, cresting at its highest point since 1994.
+We don't know what might happen in connection with any
+additional water in the region.
+ Northern California is still struggling from the recent
+past. We have discussed all of those things today. I know that
+your professional staff is doing all they can to be responsive.
+ As we outline that circumstance across the country, anybody
+who cares at all, especially about the people who were
+affected, but as well as institutions, clearly it makes the
+point that these problems are America's problems, and as a
+family, we do as we have in the past. We do in this Committee
+try to come together.
+ It is very important that you recognize that we insist that
+these issues have--get out of the mix of some of the extreme
+debates around here, but rather see us working together
+separate from party consideration to make sure that we are
+helping those people out there who truly do have a serious
+need.
+ The future will unfold in the weeks and months ahead, but
+we know for certain that the Federal Emergency Management
+Agency will not only be before us in the near future, next
+month maybe--hope not, but indeed, in the near future and
+certainly next year, and with that, not only will they be
+before us, they will be responsive as well.
+ So we appreciate very much your work and appreciate your
+being with us today, and I will yield to you for any closing
+remarks you might have.
+ Mr. Witt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of this
+committee for your past support and your kind words today. All
+of us appreciate it very much.
+ As you said, Mr. Chairman, a disaster in any State is our
+Nation's disaster, and we all work together in a bipartisan
+way, as a neighbor helping neighbor to support the effort to
+bring those people and that community back to where they should
+be and need to be to get their lives started again.
+ We are facing something in the next few months that is
+going to be very difficult, not only in California, but in the
+Midwest States because they have over 200 percent snowfall
+above their normal average. In fact, I'm going to South Dakota
+Saturday to look at their snow peak. This is resulting in
+tremendous flooding potential. So we are trying to prepare to
+get ready for this.
+ There are several States that are going to be involved with
+potentially serious damage. We want to be prepared and want the
+States to be prepared. We are working with them every day.
+ Also, I want everyone to realize that FEMA is a small
+agency. We have a tremendous responsibility and a very
+important mission, and I am very, very happy to tell you that
+we probably have the most dedicated employees of any agency. I
+am so proud of them because they have gone through a lot over
+the last years, a lot of changes and freezes. They have stepped
+up to the plate and met those challenges that we faced.
+ I just want you to know that I am extremely proud of them,
+but we thank you for your support, and we will be there.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Witt.
+ I must say that at the beginning stages of this Congress,
+we are hearing a lot about why aren't there more bills on the
+floor, et cetera, et cetera. I repeat often these days that I
+can't help but recall two years ago when everybody was
+screaming at us about having too much on the floor, too fast,
+but you can tell by the committee today, people coming in and
+out--I mean, our entire committee wanted to be here every
+moment, for they are very proud of the work this Agency is
+doing.
+ There are meetings in the National Security Committee that
+conflict. There are meetings and hearings relative to
+immigration questions that conflict, et cetera, but you should
+know that the message that is being delivered from this side,
+without any question, is a reflection of the interest as well
+as the admiration of our entire Committee, including those who
+had some of those conflicts.
+ So, with that, the committee will be adjourned until next
+Tuesday, March 11th at 10:00 a.m.
+ Thank you, Mr. Director.
+ [Questions for the record follow:]
+
+[Pages 77 - 130--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ Tuesday, March 11, 1997.
+
+ CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE
+
+ WITNESS
+
+HARRIS WOFFORD, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
+
+ Introductory Remarks
+
+ Mr. Lewis. We'll have the meeting come to order.
+ I want to welcome all of you to this hearing, especially
+Harris Wofford, my friend, who has really gone that extra mile
+to attempt to communicate with both Lou Stokes and myself about
+not only programming and how it's operating, but new ideas that
+are in the fore.
+ Senator, I want you to know that Rodney Frelinghuysen is,
+by far, the most attentive on my side of the aisle, and even
+with great conflict, he seems to show up most of the time. At
+this point, the Appropriations Committee process is one of
+Members having conflicting meetings on almost every occasion,
+so this morning it is no exception, as you can tell by the
+general attendance.
+ Our purpose today is to get a feel for where your agency
+would take itself under your leadership.
+ In the meantime, I want to mention to all who are present
+that my colleague, Louis Stokes, is in conflict as well this
+morning. The Secretary of Education is before another committee
+that Lou tries to be in attendance at as frequently as he can,
+so we are going to go, by way of introductory remarks, by me,
+ask Lou to do the same, and then, after your remarks, we will
+go directly to Lou Stokes for questioning. Then he will have to
+leave for another committee meeting.
+ We are in the process of oversight of a number of
+commissions and agencies before this subcommittee. The
+pressures within this committee are extremely difficult. I
+think most in attendance know that we are involved with such
+issues as veterans' medical care and the public housing
+programs in our bill. NASA is here, EPA is here, as well as a
+number of science related programs like the National Science
+Foundation, and all of those dollars are competing with one
+another. And there's no exception here. So we look at
+adjustments that involve increased spending with great care and
+we hope to have ongoing dialogue beyond this meeting.
+ Senator, so that you know for the record, when you make
+your remarks, we urge you to summarize as best you can. Your
+entire statement will be in the record. In the meantime,
+welcome to you and to your colleagues.
+ Mr. Stokes, I call upon you for any introductory remarks
+you might have.
+ Mr. Stokes. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, I'm
+going to defer any welcoming remarks as such, other than to say
+to Senator Wofford it's always a pleasure to have him come back
+and share with us some of the work AmeriCorps is involved in. I
+have had a chance to see some of it out in my own congressional
+district, but we want to know, of course, about what's
+happening nationally. So it is a pleasure to have you here
+again, and I look forward to your presentation.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
+ Senator Wofford, it is very important that we not just get
+some sense from you as to those portions of the work of
+AmeriCorps, the Corporation for National Service that has
+worked out there, but your thoughts about those elements of
+your program that do reflect an adjustment upwards in your
+budget, for that draws the greatest attention about here. As
+you know, especially on the House floor, the Members are
+somewhat intent in looking at some of those adjustments.
+ Senator, please present your remarks for the record and,
+from there, we look forward to hearing from you.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Chairman, Congressman Stokes and
+Congressman Frelinghuysen, I am delighted to be back here. I
+understand the pressures you're under and, in some sense, I'm
+happy I'm on the other side of the table now pressing you,
+instead of being pressed. And I'm doing it in a cause, of
+course, that I believe in and want to make the case for, as
+appropriate, particularly for the America Reads initiative. I
+appreciate your interest and past support, and I look forward
+to working with you and your colleagues on this committee.
+
+ budget request
+
+ Our fiscal year 1998 budget, as you know, requests $546
+million, which would support approximately 29,500 AmeriCorps
+members through the grant program, and 1,600 members in the
+National Civilian Community Corps, which is the only part of
+this which we run. The rest of it is run by local or national
+nonprofits. Our request includes $53 million also for the Learn
+and Serve America programs, and $6 million for the Points of
+Light Foundation, initiated by President Bush.
+ The Points of Light Foundation is our special partner in
+initiating and helping President Clinton and President Bush to
+organize the coming Presidents', plural, Presidents' Summit for
+America's Future that's going to be chaired by General Colin
+Powell, to start at least a three-year campaign to try to turn
+the tide for children and youth through civic action and
+citizens service.
+
+ overview
+
+ I want to make three points here today. First, that we
+think the record is piling up, that national service works,
+that it's a proven way to leverage volunteers and to help
+communities solve some of our most critical problems, and
+particularly problems of children and youth.
+ The senior programs that are a part of our Corporation, and
+VISTA, have proven themselves by how they worked and what they
+did, and we believe that is happening with the new work of
+AmeriCorps members as Learn and Serve student volunteers.
+ Second, we are committed to achieving the highest levels of
+integrity and efficiency, and have taken major steps to cut
+costs. We are also making an all out effort to develop a sound
+financial management system.
+ Third--is the America Reads initiative. I certainly
+wouldn't want to be in competition with Secretary Riley, who is
+also making the case for the America Reads initiative. As I
+will explain, we are partners, though we have two separate
+tracks, each standing on its own merits and are being
+legislatively proposed differently.
+
+ national service accomplishments
+
+ As you know, very few programs have received the level of
+scrutiny that AmeriCorps has in these past three years. The
+conclusion, from the evaluation reports that have been
+submitted to you over the years, including some interesting
+ones this year, is that there is a lot of evidence that has
+piled up that, through the experiences of communities across
+America--that national service is working, that it is a problem
+solver, dealing with some of our toughest problems in this
+country: literacy, education, crime, drugs, homelessness. And
+it's reflected in the quite extraordinary support from a wide
+range of governors of both parties.
+ My written statement goes into some detail, with a certain
+amount of emphasis on projects that are in the districts of the
+members of this committee. But that same point could be made
+for members of any committee in Congress. The test of
+AmeriCorps and our other programs is what you find is really
+happening in your districts. I really warmly encourage members
+of this committee, and all Members of Congress, to visit
+projects in their districts. That's the one way to understand
+what is happening. It's hard to get a real sense of what
+AmeriCorps is because it's doing so many different things, but
+it has a thrust and a focus that you can only see when you meet
+the members, see what they're doing, and talk to the nonprofit
+organizations that find this people power a tremendous new
+contribution to their own work.
+
+ National Service in Education
+
+ But nowhere is AmeriCorps having a greater effect than in
+education. More than half and up to two-thirds of all
+AmeriCorps members work with children and youth. They tutor,
+they teach, they mentor, run after school programs, summer
+programs. They teach drug prevention, anti-gang efforts, create
+safe havens, and they, on an increasingly large scale, are
+organizing students to serve. Here in the District of Columbia
+we have met the request of the school system, which has a
+requirement of 75 hours of community service to graduate, to
+help students to do citizenship in order to learn citizenship.
+ We are offering AmeriCorps, or AmeriCorpsVISTA, service
+learning coordinators to each of the 18 high schools, to help
+make that a more effective program, to coach, consult, put the
+students into the best programs. And we're doing that in
+districts all around the country.
+
+ disaster relief
+
+ From forest fires in Idaho to earthquakes in California, to
+floods all over the United States, AmeriCorps members,
+specially trained in disaster relief--a lot of that in
+partnership with the Red Cross--have moved in fast and stayed
+for the duration in 17 disasters in the last few years.
+ James Lee Witt called AmeriCorps one of the country's most
+valuable programs, and he worked with us to set up a formal
+partnership in which trained service participants are on call.
+Right now, AmeriCorpsNCCC, the National Civilian Community
+Corps, teams are assisting the Red Cross in the tornado damaged
+areas of Arkansas. VISTA's senior corps of volunteers, members
+from our AmeriCorps rapid response corps, with the American Red
+Cross, are on the job in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky,
+working with FEMA to help flood victims.
+
+ Leveraging Volunteers
+
+ A key to understanding the cost effectiveness of AmeriCorps
+is the degree to which it leverages volunteers. It recruits, it
+organizes, it leads volunteers. Because most AmeriCorps members
+serve full time every day often, as a cadre of leaders, they
+help the nonprofits multiply the number of volunteers that they
+can use effectively, and they actually recruit those
+volunteers. That's part of the case for the role of the America
+Reads initiative. An outside evaluator found that each
+AmeriCorps member recruited, trained and supervised an average
+of 12 unpaid volunteers.
+
+ Demographics of AmeriCorps Members
+
+ National service provides an opportunity for Americans of
+all backgrounds to work together to get things done. It
+reflects the racial diversity of our communities. One in two
+AmeriCorps members are white. Nearly one in three is African-
+American. One in six is Hispanic. In California, the Hispanic
+ratio is one in four.
+ AmeriCorps is living up also to its GI Bill promise of
+expanding educational opportunity, especially to those from
+America's hard-working middle class, as a way to serve your way
+through college, instead of going either on loan to loan or
+with grants not tied to service.
+ Last year about 70 percent of AmeriCorps members came from
+households with incomes of less than $40,000. So far, the
+national service trust has made more than 26,000 payments,
+totalling about $44 million to over 6,000 educational and
+lending entities.
+
+ Reinvented Government
+
+ The Corporation is an example of reinvented government. It
+is locally based. I want Members to realize that more than 430
+AmeriCorps grants go to local nonprofit groups, schools,
+colleges, universities, faith-based organizations, and a
+thousand such organizations through VISTA, and the Learn and
+Serve programs. These local programs recruit, select,
+administer, and they determine what kind of service should be
+performed.
+ Our programs are based on competition. Those that don't
+perform get eliminated. Since AmeriCorps began, 70 programs
+were not renewed for additional funding.
+ It's built-in nonpartisan. State commissions, which make
+two-thirds of the AmeriCorps grants, are appointed by
+governors. By law, they have to be balanced with Democrats and
+Republicans. By the way, three-fifths of the governors are
+Republicans, which is part of the built-in nonpartisanship, if
+you want to call it that----
+ Mr. Lewis. I beg your pardon, but you don't need to do
+that. [Laughter.]
+ Mr. Wofford. The rest of the grants go to national,
+nonpartisan and nonprofit organizations, also by competition.
+ It's results-driven. We, in the State commissions, require
+every program in which AmeriCorps members serve to design
+annual objectives and track the progress throughout the year.
+
+ Cutting Costs and Improving Efficiency
+
+ We are cost conscious and cost effective. We have
+eliminated grants to Federal agencies which ran local community
+programs. They weren't working in a Federal department as
+bureaucrats; they were out in the field in some of the most
+grassroots field programs. But to simplify procedures and
+respond to congressional concerns, we have completely
+eliminated the Federal grant program in which Federal agencies
+developed programs for AmeriCorps members.
+ We have raised the local program's match from 25 percent to
+33 percent for the programs, and many local programs go well
+beyond that. We have expanded the number of education awards
+only--an idea that Senator Grassley pressed for, and which we
+like--by which the Corporation provides the $4,725 educational
+voucher after a year of service, or half of that for half-time
+service. The nonprofits, the religious organizations, colleges
+and others, provide the rest of the cost.
+ We have already approved and have in operation 2,000 of
+these assignments, including a new partnership with the Boys
+and Girls Clubs of America, to support 800 AmeriCorps members
+on those terms of only the education award. We have now
+approximately 5,000 requests for these awards.
+ Since I last appeared before you, we have moved forward
+with an ambitious plan for notching down AmeriCorps' costs. We
+are reducing the average cost per member to $17,000 in the
+program year just beginning, '97-98; $16,000 in '98-99, and
+$15,000 per member in 1999-2000. That includes all our costs:
+the Corporation's share of the living allowance, the education
+award, if used, the health care plan, the other costs of
+recruitment and training, program support, and assistance to
+State commissions.
+
+ Financial Management
+
+ The handling of the Corporation's financial management
+problems, that were described in my written testimony and in
+many other reports you have received in the last year,
+demonstrates our commitment to improvement and to reform. My
+top priority, shared fully by the Corporation's board of
+directors is getting our financial house in good order. Under
+the leadership of our new Chief Financial Officer, Donna
+Cunninghame, we are making steady progress toward producing
+auditable books and correcting deficiencies, some of which we
+inherited from three decades of the Action agency, whose
+systems, and problems were incorporated into the Corporation.
+ Our goal is a sound financial management system that makes
+auditable financial statements a routine operation.
+
+ america reads
+
+ The demonstrated success of national service in tutoring
+and literacy, and the recruiting of unpaid volunteers, is what
+led President Clinton to give national service a major role in
+the America Reads initiative. The American Reads initiative is
+to be a national campaign, locally run by local literacy
+programs and school districts, to reach the goal that every
+American child learns to read by the end of grade 3, and will
+be tested on it in grade 4, with an agreed-upon national test.
+ Our '98 fiscal year budget request, with an increase of
+$146 million, targeted to the America Reads challenge, is
+funded within the President's plans for a balanced budget. A
+complete legislative program is going to be presented to
+Congress in April.
+ Government won't do this. Government has a role, but it's
+going to be essentially a challenge to citizens and to local
+groups. I was in Houston when they launched the ``Houston
+Reads'' program about three weeks ago. Barbara Bush keynoted it
+and I closed it. They had an all day working session of the
+literacy groups in and around Houston. They focused on the
+target of 20,000 extra tutors for Houston to reach that goal.
+ Barbara Bush commended the President on the goal, but said
+a mother's instinct made her note that six months before the
+President did, the Governor of Texas, named Bush, had said that
+the clearest and most profound goal for the State of Texas is
+that every child reads by grade 3.
+ Under this plan at least one million extra volunteer tutors
+will be recruited, organized, and trained by community based
+organizations for in-school, after school, weekend programs,
+summer programs, in the empty hours, to move to give the extra
+assistance that the teachers desperately need.
+ In the first place, for those one million tutors, we hope
+very much that many of our senior volunteers, under the
+jurisdiction of another committee, the RSVP program and the
+Foster Grandparents, will play a part.
+ Our college and high school Learn and Serve programs are
+expected to play a part. We have proved that 11th and 12th
+graders can become very effective tutors of second graders, at
+almost no cost, and that will be one of the resources. But the
+President is asking for 11,000 new AmeriCorps members, to be
+the recruiters and the organizers of this army of one million
+tutors; a locally run army.
+ America Reads is built on the track record with programs
+like the AmeriCorps for Math and Literacy in San Bernadino,
+where 18 AmeriCorps members teach reading and math to
+elementary students in an after school program for latchkey
+kids with great success. That program was studied, among others
+in a group, and found to be returning $2.60 for every dollar
+invested.
+
+ reauthorization of the national service acts
+
+ Let me conclude. There is the matter of reauthorization. We
+are now operating under the authority of the General Education
+Provisions Act, which will expire next October. I have met with
+Chairman Goodling and members of the House Committee on
+Education and the Work Force, to begin the formal
+reauthorization process, and we are scheduled to meet with
+their Senate counterparts shortly. I look forward to working
+with you and your colleagues to draw on our strengths and
+overcome our weaknesses, and make necessary mid-course
+corrections.
+
+ conclusion
+
+ If the era of big government is over, the era of big
+citizens had better begin. I have made the case in significant
+respects that we're an example of reinventing government. I
+think an even more important case for all of us is to find the
+ways and means to reinvent and reignite citizenship, because
+our problems are mounting. They're not going away. We believe
+the programs of the Corporation can make a significant
+contribution to solving those problems and developing great
+citizens and more effective citizen action that our country
+calls for.
+ Thank you.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+[Pages 138 - 231--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Senator Wofford.
+ As I indicated, I am going to call on my colleague, Lou
+Stokes, first. But before we go to that, you did introduce
+Donna Cunninghame. I meant to ask you to introduce others that
+may be appropriate as we go through with the questions, or you
+may want to do that at this point. It's your choice.
+ Mr. Wofford. I'll do it as we go along.
+ Mr. Lewis. All right.
+ Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
+you taking me out of order and permitting me to do this so that
+I can get over to the Labor HHS subcommittee.
+
+ america reads
+
+ Of course, as Senator Wofford mentioned, I will be
+questioning the Secretary of Education over there, and I
+probably will talk with him extensively about the America Reads
+program. So let me start with a question or two relative to
+that program, Senator.
+ As I understand the situation, included in the $549 million
+request before this subcommittee for the Corporation is $162
+million for America Reads. In addition, funding for the
+Domestic Volunteer Service Act in the Labor Health and Human
+Services bill, where I will be going in just a moment or two,
+adds another $38 million, for a total Corporation funding of
+$200 million. Is that correct?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes, sir.
+ Mr. Stokes. Now, is it correct that there's another $265
+million in the Department of Education's budget, bringing the
+Government-wide America Reads initiative to nearly half a
+billion dollars?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes. I believe that's accurate.
+ Mr. Stokes. Let me just play devil's advocate here for a
+moment. And I certainly applaud the President's goal of
+teaching every child to read by grade 3. Obviously, there is a
+great need for a program of this sort because we have young
+people graduating from high school in some parts of the country
+who cannot read the diploma that they're given on stage.
+ I'm wondering, however, if we're now spending billions upon
+billions of dollars, the local, State and Federal Government,
+and we have not been able to produce students who can read
+well, tell me how this program is going to change that.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, Congressman Stokes, we got to the moon,
+which people had dreamed of for years, because a President set
+a goal and a commitment that the Nation accepted, that we were
+going to find the ways and means to get to the moon. And we
+cracked the physical atom with a commitment getting the atom
+cracked and beat Hitler.
+ I think the goal of seeing that every American reads by
+grade 3 is in the same category. There is plenty of evidence--
+every educator I have talked to says that the child that comes
+out of grade 3 functionally illiterate--that the odds are
+overwhelmingly against that child succeeding. The odds are that
+that child is heading into disaster, of not being able to get a
+good job, heading into unemployment, the streets, crime and
+welfare, and early death.
+ Setting the goal itself is important. If you set it, then
+how do you do it? A lot of people worked to develop the
+estimate that you need one million extra tutors. Houston went
+into the study and came up with the first goal of 20,000
+extras; Waco, TX, one thousand. The Governor of California
+estimates they need 250,000 mentors working with young children
+and set the goal for that.
+ The educational organizations and teachers I know say that
+when 40 percent of the fourth graders are so far behind their
+reading level that they're going to be a burden on not only
+themselves but others in the class, we have a real crisis.
+ The one million tutors are going to be used by programs
+that really work. There will also be some new programs started.
+We already know how San Francisco State has developed a whole
+new program, to use college work study students from that
+campus in connection with the school district for this America
+Reads goal. We have 81 college and university presidents on a
+group that is trying to get 100,000 college work study
+students, approximately 10 hours a week, to be the extra tutors
+that we need.
+ The AmeriCorps participation in this is to help organize,
+community by community, working with local nonprofit literacy
+programs and school districts, those extra tutors, and help to
+effectively utilize them when they're there. As you look at it
+in both committees, the Education Department's contribution to
+this is going to be very important. It has several facets to
+it, largest of which is to provide additional reading
+specialists to the literacy programs around the country. In
+order to use the extra tutors you have got to have a cadre of
+reading specialists that know how to train them expertly--we'll
+have some AmeriCorps members that can do that. But the reading
+specialist is, I think, the major contribution of the Education
+Department's funds.
+ Mr. Stokes. In light of the fact that you put this
+increased emphasis on this area of your budget, that one out of
+three of your dollars is going for the America Reads program,
+are you restricting any other parts of your budget that was
+funded in the past?
+ Mr. Wofford. I think one out of four of our dollars, if we
+got the extra $200 million through both committees, would be
+for America Reads. We've got several thousand AmeriCorps
+members today that are in literacy programs. A great many of
+them are working with elementary school children.
+ A year before this we set Children and Youth and such
+programs as a high priority of the Corporation. We expect right
+now that our programs through the State commissions are going
+to produce this very year, before any new funds come, an
+increasing number of AmeriCorps members in reading programs
+around the country. Many, many cities have already launched
+these.
+ All of the new money--and it's not shifting other
+resources--would be in the America Reads initiative.
+
+ legislative proposals to america reads
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Senator, how about your legislative proposals
+relative to America Reads. When do you anticipate that will be
+submitted to the Congress?
+ Mr. Wofford. I believe by the end of this month a bill will
+be coming up to Congress. We're all working very hard on it.
+ Mr. Stoke. One other question, and then I will submit the
+balance of my questions for the record.
+ Mr. Lewis. Fine, Mr. Stokes.
+
+ diversity in program
+
+ Mr. Stokes. Senator, you mentioned in your presentation
+this morning, with a great deal of emphasis, your concern
+relative to diversity within your programs. I certainly applaud
+you for the emphasis you demonstrated on it.
+ One of my concerns, however, with this Corporation, as I
+have with other agencies of our government, is how we reflect
+diversity at the top of that agency. As I look here this
+morning with the group that accompanies you, I don't see any
+African-American females, I don't see any Hispanics. I see two
+African-American males.
+ How do you reflect this diversity at the top of this
+Corporation?
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, the head of AmeriCorps's main grant
+program is meeting out in Kansas City today. She is Hispanic,
+Latina. I believe Diana Algra is in Kansas City today to meet
+with all the chairs of our State commissions.
+ I saw Fred Peters behind me. He is not an African-American
+woman, but----
+ [Laughter.]
+ Mr. Wofford. He is a distinguished retired Army officer,
+who has played a major role in shaping the National Civilian
+Community Corps, which is the one program we run.
+ General Andrew Chambers has been appointed to head the
+NCCC. Knowing your interest, I have a list for you of where we
+stand on this. I'm not satisfied with it, but I think at least
+one major appointment about to be made will please you.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
+ My colleague, Mr. Stokes, and I are very much together and
+concerned about this issue, and our objective is to have our
+commissions and our agencies reflect very much the mix of
+America.
+ Also, within constituencies there are constituencies, and I
+note with great interest that it is very obvious that two
+groups have impacted Mr. Stokes. The African-American females
+are obviously communicating a bit directly with him, and also
+Lucille Roybal-Allard is having some impact on me, which is
+very healthy in and of itself.
+ We are making progress in most of our agencies, and we look
+forward to--we will get into a lot more specifics in terms of
+questions for the record, about percentages, et cetera, and
+what is actually happening out there.
+ Mr. Stokes. Could we put this in the record, Mr. Chairman?
+ Mr. Lewis. Sure.
+ Mr. Stokes. Let me thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the
+courtesy extended to me. I appreciate it.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Stokes.
+ Mr. Wofford. I thank you for your continued interest in
+that. We all need fire held to our feet.
+ Mr. Stokes. I hope you continue working on that. This
+agency ought to be a model for the other agencies, not an
+agency where I even have to raise this question. It's
+embarrassing to even have to talk to an agency of this sort
+about an issue of this type.
+ Mr. Wofford. I agree.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Stokes, I might mention we are scheduled to
+have the Corporation for National Service with us until noon,
+and we had scheduled a couple of hours this afternoon. I'm not
+sure--depending on the participation here--whether we will go
+into the afternoon session or not. So we will be communicating
+with you. We could get our work done by noon is what I'm
+suggesting. If that's the case, we will submit questions for
+the record for other members who weren't able to attend.
+ Mr. Stokes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
+Senator.
+
+ budget request
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator Wofford, the Corporation for National
+Service is requesting $549 million, roughly a little more than
+a two million differential from what you said for the record,
+and I believe that reflects the IG's----
+ Mr. Wofford. The Inspector General, $2.5 million.
+ Mr. Lewis. Correct. So it's $549 million, and 212 FTEs for
+fiscal year 1998, an increase of $146,500,000. That is, in the
+world of our whole bit of work, not a lot of money, but it is a
+36 percent increase in this agency.
+ You may recall that in the rescission process in 1995,
+looking at national service, we in this committee decided that
+we could not be responsive to the President's request for
+additional funding, which was considerable, because the program
+did not have a comprehensive evaluation and we thought we
+should see some of that before we went forward. Frankly, we
+were being gentle in connection with that and little did we
+know that we would find ourselves on the floor, where we had
+made some adjustments in veterans' programs--an amendment came
+to us on the floor that just kind of swapped the increase with
+available moneys for national service, replacing those programs
+for veterans. So the competition in this subcommittee is very
+real, and we have got to be realistic about where we might end
+up in this process.
+ There is a long time between now and conference, so we will
+have ongoing discussions. But I just wanted to remind all of us
+for the record that there is a long process here, not just a
+single step.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Chairman, being aware of that, I just want
+to reemphasize that the case for an expansion this year stands
+or falls on the America Reads initiative, and whether Congress
+and the country joins the President in a commitment to that
+goal and to that program.
+ Mr. Lewis. We'll get to that in some depth in my
+questioning.
+ Beyond that increase, in addition, $260,300,000 and 362
+FTEs are requested for the Corporation in the Labor HHS bill.
+Now, this brings the total 1998 request for the Corporation to
+$809,300,000, and 574 FTEs.
+ The new thrust for the Corporation, as we have already
+begun to discuss, in 1998 is the America Reads challenge, a
+national effort to build a citizen army of one million
+volunteer tutors to make sure every child can read well and
+independently by the end of the third grade.
+ Let's take a few moments and talk about that portion of
+your legislative proposal. Your statement indicates that this
+legislation for this initiative will be sent to Congress later
+this month.
+
+ legislative authority on america reads
+
+ Briefly explain what additional legislative authority is
+required for the Corporation and the Department of Education to
+implement this proposed program.
+ Mr. Wofford. On our side, the authority to engage
+AmeriCorps members in elementary literacy programs is not only
+there but it's been one of our priorities for some time. The
+reason we think we are ready for that expansion, is that
+AmeriCorps members can do it, have been doing it successfully.
+ We don't need an authorization. We need appropriations to
+expand our work in literacy. The Department of Education has a
+different procedural and legislative situation. I think they do
+need authority for certain things.
+ Mr. Lewis. You would be running this program, and I know
+the Department might want to style a special approach. But I'm
+curious about this question.
+ Why is the Department of Education's part of the initiative
+being proposed as mandatory, as opposed to discretionary? This
+is really a discretionary-type program.
+ Mr. Wofford. We are asking for discretionary funds under
+our budget.
+ Mr. Lewis. Why is the Department doing the other?
+ Mr. Wofford. It did not seem to be feasible for us to,
+granted the situation you just described, to be proposing that
+it be on the mandatory track, because it's fitting directly
+into things we're already doing.
+ We will be playing the lead role in figuring out how to get
+the extra 11,000 AmeriCorps members, but the bill that will be
+coming up will propose a State structure, in which there is a
+joint process between the State Department of Education and the
+State Commission on National Service. It's a joint education/
+corporation effort at the Federal level to plan how to do this.
+We are working very closely with them.
+ The leading specialists are very vital to the program. If
+the Education Department is not able to offer funds to State
+and local literacy programs, to add those reading specialists,
+it will greatly hamper the chance of making this the kind of
+success it could be. It would mean that all those local
+programs have to somehow, assemble and pay for the reading
+specialists.
+ If we want to jump start this, we have got to do the two
+things that are being asked, the reading specialist and some
+other steps that the Education Department is prepared to take,
+and the extra AmeriCorps members.
+ Mr. Lewis. It strikes me that if they got the funding, that
+they could do it on a voluntary or discretionary basis, if they
+did. Labor HHS is the other subcommittee, like my own, that is
+under the greatest pressure in their whole panoply of
+responsibilities, in terms of discretionary moneys. So new
+moneys necessarily have to be looked at very carefully.
+ I am sure over there they will ask you the same question.
+At least it's my intention to suggest to John that he take a
+hard look at that question.
+
+ department of education funding for america reads
+
+ Let's look at the other side of the coin. Why did the
+administration not request all the funds for America Reads
+under the Department of Education, especially if the education
+part is to be authorized and scored as mandatory?
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Chairman, I was giving a full tribute to
+the importance of the role the Education Department will play
+in this. If you talk to the people who are on the ground
+organizing, they very, very much want a key leading part of
+that to be an expansion of AmeriCorps members serving in their
+literacy programs they already have. That's what we're in the
+business of doing.
+ If we are to try to be the organizers of one million
+volunteer tutors, including many from our own programs--the
+senior programs, the college and high school service learning
+programs--it would be most natural that we would be the ones to
+lead that effort.
+ Mr. Lewis. I suggested that we're looking at the other side
+of the coin when we're talking about Education doing this job.
+The back side of the coin would be AmeriCorps has volunteers
+who presumably are talented and educated people, who could be
+trained pretty quickly, in terms of reading skills.
+ It is clear that the established education system isn't
+doing it, according to this quest for a new program, so why not
+AmeriCorps? They say we ought to be doing it, and forget about
+the Department of Education.
+
+ service learning program
+
+ Mr. Wofford. I want you to know that there are pilot
+programs that are ready to do what a pilot ought to do, which
+is ignite a furnace. There are 11th and 12th graders in 20
+Philadelphia schools who now for three years, through our
+Service Learning program have provided some reading specialists
+to train the teachers of 11th and 12th grade students on how to
+train their students to be tutors of second grade students. The
+11th and 12th grade teachers themselves need an initial
+training on how you train people to be tutors of second
+graders, because it's not their field.
+ But those teachers say it has had an enormous effect on how
+those 11th and 12th graders--many of them at-risk kids in
+Philadelphia--have raised their own reading levels by two and
+three grades by being tutors of second graders, three
+afternoons a week for two hours, one on one.
+ The teachers I have talked to say that kind of
+individualized attention to the most at-risk kids in their
+class, who just not making is saving their own classes, so they
+can go forward with the students who can make it. It is turning
+around many of those second graders who love those 11th and
+12th grade kids that are tutoring them in the empty hours,
+where they would be the latchkey kids. It works. It costs very
+little.
+ I see the America Reads initiative as spreading things like
+that. We're going to contribute to the initiative all the
+programs we know that work and ought to be spread. Together,
+with the reading specialists, I think we can, in short order,
+in collaboration with the local programs, have something that
+moves us towards achieving that goal.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you for that.
+ Let's look at different authorization and funding scenarios
+for just a moment.
+
+ with no education funding
+
+ What happens if the Education part is not authorized? Would
+it make much sense to fund the Corporation's part of the
+proposal--i.e., finding the volunteer tutors--if there were no
+Education funding for reading specialists and materials to
+train those tutors?
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, if I haven't already, I want to make
+clear that I think the joint venture, the joint initiative and
+the joint plans, make tremendous sense. I have confidence that
+what is----
+ Mr. Lewis. You've made that clear. It's the ``what if''
+that is----
+ Mr. Wofford. ``What if'', I already said that----
+ Mr. Lewis. You know the odds are pretty good that that
+could be where we end up.
+ Mr. Wofford. Local programs will be greatly hampered in
+moving as fast as they want to move. That Houston Reads
+initiative is very much hoping they will get some reading
+specialists through that part of the plan. However, if the
+Education part is not funded we are ready and able for a major
+expansion of AmeriCorps to help--achieve the goal.
+ I think there are 20 cities that have declared the goal,
+Boston Reads, Baltimore Reads, Houston. I have been, I think,
+in a dozen of the cities that are launching plans to achieve
+these goals. It's not just President Clinton pulling this out
+of the air. Thank god, I would say, that he has helped the
+Nation see that this is a goal we ought to commit ourselves to.
+ It has percolated up from education and the school
+districts and their problems. We're ready to expand in that
+area. It's an area that we proved we can work in.
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator, some of our other agencies have been
+very responsive to their participation in this commitment that
+is now the President's commitment. It's the commitment of both
+Houses and both parties to move towards balancing our budget
+between now and 2002.
+ I mention NASA just because they've been very, very
+responsive. By attrition, they have reduced thousands of jobs,
+and at the same time, by applying business principles to their
+operation, they have been able to move forward, in many ways
+more effectively than before.
+ Indeed, they recognize there are very difficult and tight
+circumstances, and they brought to us a number of reprogramming
+requests.
+ Presuming that you reevaluated a lot of your programming,
+and know that some of it has worked very well, and probably
+some of it hasn't worked at all--you know, reapplying dollars
+is very much a part of this process.
+ So, if the Corporation's part of the program were funded,
+but additional authorizing legislation is not enacted, how
+would the operation of the program differ from what is being
+proposed? As I understand it, the proposed legislation would
+set up two pots of money for AmeriCorps grants--one for America
+Reads and one for the regular program that you have been
+running, correct?
+
+ state commission on national service
+
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes. The joint venture at the State level will
+use our delivery system, which is the State Commissions on
+National Service that make the AmeriCorps grants, appointed by
+governors. We are meeting with the chairs of all those State
+commissions in Kansas City this very day and tomorrow.
+ Those State commissions would work with the State education
+agencies in those States, The State education agencies are
+already represented on our State commissions, by statute. The
+partnership is already there.
+ It is true that instead of just the State commission making
+the grant decisions, the grant decisions would be made jointly.
+I anticipate that when you get actually to the partnership at
+the State level, there will be the division of labor that you
+see between the Department and our Corporation here. The
+reading specialists will go through the Education Department.
+ The structure that will emerge will be that the State
+Education Department representatives will look to the State
+Commission for the major part in how they would do the grants
+for the AmeriCorps members.
+ Mr. Lewis. We're still, though, in the ``what if''
+business, because looking out there, I have to at least
+conclude that, until the bill gets through both bodies, in an
+area where we're talking about a mandatory program that's
+likely to expand over time, I can see a very critical eye
+looking at that, even though it's not our responsibility.
+ What happens if there is no legislation? Does the
+Corporation have authority to separate out funds for a separate
+America Reads program, or would any additional funds just go
+toward the regular program? Do you have the authority?
+
+ state commissions and literacy programs
+
+ Mr. Wofford. I believe we would have the authority. I know
+we have the authority to say that the Reads initiative would be
+our top priority for any new money going to the State
+commissions. Then it would be up to the State commissions to
+decide which literacy programs would get those AmeriCorps
+members.
+ Mr. Lewis. Absent additional authorizing legislation, and
+an increase in the Corporations 1998 appropriation, would you
+try to operate an America Reads program out of whatever funding
+level the Corporation was provided?
+ Mr. Wofford. Part of the problem for AmeriCorps and the
+National Service Corporation is that, by and large, with the
+exception of the National Civilian Community Corps, which we do
+run, we don't run these programs. I had to change our language
+in which--and I see there's a little residue of it still in my
+written testimony--in which we talk about AmeriCorps programs.
+It's been misleading to Congress and the public.
+
+ americorps program
+
+ There are Habitat programs using AmeriCorps. There is the
+Texas Literacy Corps using AmeriCorps members. AmeriCorps
+members serve in those programs.
+ We don't intend to run an America Reads program anywhere.
+We intend to supply AmeriCorps members to local or State
+literacy America Reads programs that are formed by school
+districts or colleges and universities, or programs just
+focused on literacy, which we already have many. They are using
+AmeriCorps members in literacy programs, including adult
+illiteracy programs and family illiteracy programs.
+ Mr. Lewis. I'm concerned about my taking more time in
+asking questions, even though I have a series I would like to
+get to.
+ Normally in the first round we call upon our colleagues in
+the order in which they have arrived and go from there. So, it
+is my pleasure to call on my colleague, Rodney Frelinghuysen,
+for some questions.
+
+ funding under department of education
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
+follow up on the question that the Chair asked earlier relative
+to why the Administration did not request all the funds for
+America Reads under the Department of Education. What is your
+understanding as to why DOE did not?
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, if in fact, as the planners both locally
+and nationally seem to agree and I believe, the extra volunteer
+tutors are needed, and AmeriCorps members are a vital parts of
+that organizing of those million volunteer tutors.
+ I do not know that it makes sense to take programs that we
+administer, and our state commissions run, and say now they are
+going to be run by the state departments of education. Because
+it is not going to be run by the federal Department of
+Education. It is a state or local program, and we are in the
+business of doing it right now on a very large scale in
+proportion to our number of 25,000 AmeriCorps members.
+ The largest group of people supported by the Federal
+Government that are working right now with elementary kids that
+are in this case very distressed or have major disabilities are
+our Foster Grandparents.
+ We have ties to the colleges and universities through our
+college and university service learning programs, to their
+volunteer programs. And the America Reads plan assumes 100,000
+college work-study students would be assigned to local
+programs, using money already existing.
+ The places where the work-study students non-paid
+volunteers best used, have been best used is where AmeriCorps
+members are able to help organize the college volunteer efforts
+in a focused way. Why would it make sense to have another
+department, which is not in the business of doing any of those
+things, administering them?
+
+ broader expansion into literacy issue
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. But everyone will agree that literacy is
+critical, that we have far too many children and adults that
+are illiterate. It would seem to me that it would be entirely
+within the purview of the Department of Education, as a matter
+of national policy, to be structuring programs to address it.
+And I would assume that they probably have a multitude of
+programs already that address these issues.
+ I think it is a wonderful national goal. I have a lot of
+town meetings, and I often ask people what they think of
+various agencies, how they work. If people even know you
+exist--and in some cases there are people who give you very
+high marks--they have a real question about why you are having
+a broader expansion into this literacy issue.
+ Many of them tell me--my citizens and their teachers who
+appear at these town meetings--that the Department of Education
+ought to be doing these things.
+ Mr. Wofford. You start with the reasonable assumption that
+the Department of Education is doing them. America Reads will
+stand or fall on how a local community, a local school
+district, a local set of literacy programs, figures out how to
+do it. Neither the Education Department nor we run those
+programs.
+ I suppose the most direct federal participation is in
+Headstart, the expansion of which is pertinent to achieving the
+goal of everybody reading by grade three. It may not be true in
+your district or in your experience, but in many, many of the
+communities that are already moving to achieve the goal of
+getting young people to read by grade three, they are turning
+to the AmeriCorps members. And these will presumably be in most
+cases either college graduates, or have some college.
+
+ existing school system
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Well, you know, I know the players. Most
+of us in this room have served in local government. I was a
+chairman of the RSVP group in my county for 12 years. I have
+had a good relationship with Headstart.
+ And it seems to me that while AmeriCorps may have a good
+track record in some ways, you are sort of--not you, but the
+Administration is basically sort of superimposing on an already
+highly bureaucratic structure a whole new initiative, with very
+admirable national goals, which are to address illiteracy for
+both children and adults, but most particularly for children.
+ And many of my constituents and many members that I talk to
+on both sides of the aisle say, ``Well, what does it say about
+our existing school system? Is it not working?'' I mean, those
+who are most qualified to teach reading and the basics, is that
+not why they are employed by our various school districts? What
+is your general feeling about those who raise this issue? I
+think it is the critical issue.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, my experience is that there are no more
+ardent champions of finding the way to get the extra volunteer
+tutors who are trained and dedicated and will work in a
+sustained fashion--not just hit-and-run, come-and-go--than
+teachers.
+ I have been in 30 states visiting our programs. Close to
+two-thirds of our programs are in education. A high proportion
+are dealing with after-school tutoring and literacy programs,
+Saturday programs, evening programs.
+ Every teacher I have talked to that is faced with the
+reading challenge says that a high proportion of his or her
+classes in the most challenged schools have students that
+cannot be coped with in the class. Or if they coped with them,
+they could not take the rest of the class on, because they come
+into the third grade or the second grade basically illiterate.
+And those teachers desperately need people who will work one-
+on-one in individualized attention.
+ All the studies show that the breakthroughs for the kids,
+at risk for the disaster of illiteracy--functional illiteracy
+for most of their lives--come from the extra attention; One
+thing that can be added to what the school systems, and
+particularly the most challenged schools, are facing is this
+leadership in the non-school hours. It may take place in
+school. It may take place in boys' and girls' clubs or in
+``Ys''.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. But in reality, a lot of these programs
+already exist. Some of your volunteers, your paid volunteers
+and others, are involved in these programs already. So you are
+basically adding to an already existing system? I mean, there
+are after-school programs, there are Headstart programs, in
+most congressional districts around the nation. And I think we
+all agree that those are critical programs.
+ Some teachers may say, ``Well, you give us the resources.
+We can provide a higher level of teaching that relates to
+giving children the appreciation of reading.''
+ Mr. Wofford. I am sure many teachers would like a lower
+student-teacher ratio and help in bringing that about. But I
+have not found any teacher in a year-and-a-half visiting our
+education programs, who, does not say that the one-on-one
+assistance they are getting both actually during the school day
+and after the school day in the non-school hours, is of
+enormous assistance.
+ You and I may differ in the degree to which we think there
+is a crisis here. If 40 percent of the--
+
+ skills of work-study students
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. No, I do not think we disagree on that.
+I think there is a national crisis, and I do think in some way
+it reflects very negatively on the existing system. I think
+there is an absolute national crisis. It may have something to
+do with either a lack of parents, or two parents, or the
+imposition of television in our everyday lives.
+ You know, I think it is a worthy national goal. I have some
+questions as to whether you ought to be in the forefront of it,
+versus the Department of Education. And I do worry about the
+whole notion of training a cadre of people. I mean, the most
+highly-skilled workforce relative to literacy is already
+employed by most school boards. You are talking about bringing
+in work-study students in colleges.
+ I mean, what are their skills, and how would they measure
+up against those men and women who have devoted their lives to
+these very goals and objectives?
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, my loss of words is related to the
+overwhelming feeling that, however good all the programs are
+that now exist, they are tremendously inadequate to meet this
+problem.
+ The work-study students are key to this. The aim for half
+of the new work-study jobs that Congress appropriated October
+1st that goes into effect in July--The President has asked and
+has the backing of the American Council on Education and most
+of the major educational organizations, and 81 college and
+university presidents are actively recruiting their fellow
+colleges and universities to get half of those 200,000 new
+work-study assignments, which average about ten hours a week,
+is that they will be placed in slots to support the reading
+initiative, initiatives of local communities.
+ Almost everyone agrees that if you could get--instead of
+volunteers that may come or not come for these after-school
+programs--a committed ten-hour-a-week work-study student who is
+working his way through college and have that student trained,
+you would have a great resource.
+ I am talking about all the good programs that you are
+referring to that want to be able to build up to a bigger
+scale. And we have been in the business of showing how it can
+be done. At George Washington University right now here in
+Washington there are full-time AmeriCorps members who are
+helping to organize the part-time students of George Washington
+University to work in the District's school system as tutors.
+And it works.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
+ Mr. Knollenberg?
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Yes. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
+ And Senator, welcome. I wanted to first thank you again for
+coming by last week and giving myself and my staff some of your
+personal time on this thing. We have talked, as you know, a
+number of times. And we had a connection with former Governor
+Romney, and prior to his death he in fact met with you a day or
+two before, and he met with me I think a day or two before. So
+we have that commonality of experience.
+ I think the questions that my colleagues raised about
+whether this should be your thrust are legitimate questions. It
+is not a reflection on you individually, but it is a question
+about, are we creating something here that in fact goes beyond
+what we really should? Should we be utilizing some existing
+structure, rather than bringing on a new role for you and your
+operation?
+
+ americorps structure
+
+ Let me ask some basic questions so I understand the
+AmeriCorps structure, and as an individual how I would, for
+example, get into AmeriCorps. I want to ask you, how many
+individuals now are serving in AmeriCorps?
+ Mr. Wofford. About 24,000, 25,000.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. How much do these people make? We have
+heard I know some questions or some statements about that. I
+know the GAO estimates the number is higher. I think some of
+our colleagues feel it is in the range of 25,000, 26,000,
+27,000. What is the actual amount per individual that it does
+cost?
+ Mr. Wofford. Those are two important different questions:
+How much do the AmeriCorps members get, what do they get, and
+what does the whole program cost?
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Right.
+ Mr. Wofford. The AmeriCorps members, with a few
+exceptions--And Congress permits a professional corps in which
+we have a teacher corps of about 800 members. We do not pay
+their stipends, but the school systems pay. And they get more
+than the standard.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. So you have two levels? This is what you
+are saying?
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, Congress had one provision for a
+professional corps. Actually, our own costs are less for that
+program because the school systems, the Alliance for Catholic
+Education, for example----
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Yes, what level is that on? Cost, I am
+talking about.
+
+ volunteer allowance level
+
+ Mr. Wofford. There could be different levels for the
+professional teachers' programs, depending on what the school
+system or a university wants to pay as a stipend. No program
+can by law pay more than $15,000 to a corps member, but almost
+no corps member gets paid $15,000.
+ The standard for 95 percent is the Vista poverty-level
+allowance. It has been $7,600. Now next year they will get a
+little over $8,000, $160 a week. They then get a health care
+plan for about $1,000, if they do not already have one.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. About $1,000?
+ Mr. Wofford. About $1,000, if they do not have one. And
+then they get, after a year of full-time service, a voucher for
+$4,725.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. What is the average age of these members?
+ Mr. Wofford. I think, rather than average age, in my
+written testimony there is----
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Well, take out of that picture now--You
+have talked about the more professional category. I am talking
+about the non-teacher element. That is what I am really after.
+ Mr. Wofford. There is 26 percent under 21; 53 percent, 22
+to 29.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. So they are in that very category?
+ Mr. Wofford. In the written testimony, are charts. And of
+educational attainment, 8 percent have less than high school; 8
+percent have graduate degrees; 20 percent have high-school
+diplomas but have not gone to college.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Twenty percent?
+ Mr. Wofford. Twenty percent. Thirty-six percent either have
+a two-year degree or some college. And 28 percent graduated
+from college.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Let me ask you this question, now.
+ Mr. Wofford. So 72 percent have had some college.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. You know, when we talked on Thursday, I
+gave an example of a charitable organization that had better
+results with unpaid volunteers than with those from AmeriCorps
+who are paid. And I believe your response was that, in your
+opinion--and you used the word ``leverage,'' I think--that in
+your opinion, with those involved in the AmeriCorps system, the
+best use of those people was to use them as levers to get to
+others.
+
+ role of tutors to teachers
+
+ Now, here is my question. With respect to the Reads
+Program, it almost seems to me like--and tell me if I am
+wrong--we are using kids to teach teachers. Is that right?
+ Mr. Wofford. No. You said to tell you if you were wrong.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Fine.
+ Mr. Wofford. I respectfully submit that you are wrong.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Okay. Then let me just clarify one thing.
+The AmeriCorps members are the ones that do the teaching to the
+tutors; is that not true? Explain it.
+ Mr. Wofford. Some might do that, but by and large that is
+not the assumption for the AmeriCorps members.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Your kids have to be taught, too. The
+AmeriCorps members have to be taught, in order to be able to
+teach the teachers, I would think.
+ Mr. Wofford. I am assuming that a great proportion of the
+AmeriCorps members who are recruited by local programs, college
+and university or literacy programs, will be either some
+college or college graduates. They may do some tutoring
+themselves, but their assignment is to be the organizers for
+the volunteer tutors. That means helping to recruit them,
+helping to be ready.
+ One of the greatest problems schools have when volunteers
+come into the schools is to know how to use them. Some of the
+best programs we have are right in schools and they are
+organized with teachers' help but with AmeriCorps members
+running the after-school math or literacy programs.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. So the AmeriCorps members do not really do
+the heart of the program during the day? It is after hours? Is
+that the idea?
+ Mr. Wofford. No, in many, many cases the AmeriCorps members
+we now have are actually running programs in-school for one-to-
+one attention during school hours for kids that cannot cope in
+class. But the main thrust is the after-school hours.
+ But the proposal for America Reads is that the additional
+AmeriCorps members would be the organizers, the recruiters, the
+leaders, the cadre that would locally--not at some national
+level--operate these things.
+ But your colleague, George Romney, had a thesis which is
+responsive to your first concern.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. He was very, very much in the direction of
+the volunteer. It was not the paid volunteer, though. You will
+agree with that?
+ Mr. Wofford. No, no, I once again respectfully disagree.
+When I got appointed to this, the first call I got was from
+George Romney, who said, ``But I want to make sure that we work
+together on what I believe is the twin engine that can crack
+the atom of civic power,'' he said. ``The twin engine of
+unpaid, occasional, large-scale volunteering and full-time
+national service.''
+ And he said, ``I am going to come down every week,'' and he
+did it for three weeks to see colleagues on my side of the
+aisle, to convince them that you needed full-time national
+service in order to get millions of unpaid volunteers. Unpaid
+volunteers without infrastructure----
+ Mr. Knollenberg. I know. We talked about that. Let me go
+into a couple of things, though, because as much as I believe
+in his orientation to volunteerism--and I think yours is, too--
+we are not trying to create, though, a bureaucracy here,
+another level of government that enlarges. You know, this
+budget went up some $200 million this time over the last time.
+ Let me ask you, we had in here last week, I think it was,
+or two weeks ago, somebody from the Selective Service
+Administration. They were testifying. They mentioned that you
+have an agreement with them to promote AmeriCorps. How does
+that work?
+
+ selective service agreement
+
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, it is a very simple agreement.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Well, what do they say? What do they do?
+How do they promote it?
+ Mr. Wofford. Oh, I wish I had it with you. As far as I
+know, it is essentially one thing, which is a card.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Making them aware? Is that it?
+ Mr. Wofford. They send out a little card to every
+registrant in Selective Service in this country. And they have
+added to the card a little box that says, ``Are you interested
+in volunteering in national service?''
+ Mr. Knollenberg. I see.
+ Mr. Wofford. And one check. Here is the card.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. So it is just one question? That is the
+promotion?
+ Mr. Wofford. This is what it says. It says, ``Serve
+America. Find out how you can serve your country right now,
+U.S. Armed Forces. For information on U.S. Armed Forces, visit
+your local recruiter, or call 1-800--'' etcetera. ``AmeriCorps:
+Want to make a difference in America's communities? You can do
+civilian service through AmeriCorps. Call 1-800--''
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Would you provide that for the record?
+ Mr. Lewis. We do have it in our record.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. You have it in the record?
+ Mr. Lewis. In case you need it in supply, we do have it.
+[Laughter]
+ Mr. Wofford. I'll keep it in my pocket.
+
+ auditing process
+
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Let me go on to another question. And you
+and I discussed this the other day. It has to do with the
+auditing process. I know that the answer that you gave me was
+pretty much along the line that the auditing has been
+challenged, GAO has challenged it, and certainly there is a
+letter that I have here that was produced subsequent to our
+conversation, that has to do with the auditing troubles that
+continue at AmeriCorps.
+ And as much as I know you said that some agencies do not or
+have not produced a record, either, that is auditable, I do not
+know that that is entirely excusable, because a lot of agencies
+have, and they continue to do so.
+ This letter of yesterday--and I am sure you have seen it--
+goes on to talk about----
+ Mr. Wofford. From whom, sir?
+ Mr. Knollenberg. From the IG, and this is dated March 10.
+It says, ``Yesterday, the inspector general of the Corporation
+for National Service released another in a series of troubling
+reports about the financial conditions of the President's
+premier program, AmeriCorps. This time, Peat-Marwick found that
+CNS had failed to maintain adequate management controls and
+records.''
+ So the internal record keeping or record structure
+apparently was not there for them to produce anything but a
+negative or a challenging statement.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Knollenberg, just for the record, that is
+not a letter from our Inspector General, I believe; is it?
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Luise Jordan.
+ Mr. Wofford. The letter is?
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Inspector General. You have to look at it.
+ Mr. Wofford. What you read is from her letter?
+ Mr. Knollenberg. This was sent to you from her.
+ Mr. Wofford. Not what you read, though.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. I read exactly what I read.
+ Mr. Wofford. You read Peat----
+ Mr. Knollenberg. It is right here in the first paragraph. I
+will read it for you again. I can take it out of the first
+paragraph. It says that, ``The corporations internal records
+were not adequate to ensure complete and accurate financial
+statements.'' It says it plainly.
+ Mr. Wofford. That is accurate.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Yes, I did use the top, but the frank fact
+is that it was pulled out of the first paragraph. So I just
+think that it is something that should be mentioned. And, yes,
+there are agencies that do not produce auditable records, but
+they should. And most of them do.
+ And so, as you head into a program of expansion, there
+ought to be some real analysis and assessment of what has taken
+place previously. And the organization has only been there a
+short time, I know, but we should have, I think, more accurate
+information to reflect from so that we can draw some
+conclusions about the adequacy of this new program, the new
+add-on, the Reads program. No one would question, as my
+colleagues have not, the adequacy of that situation.
+ But I do think that there ought to be a movement in the
+direction of providing, let us say, a little more information,
+so that the internal records are updated and made available so
+that we can read them and reflect upon them in some meaningful
+way.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Knollenberg, you understate my view about
+this. I said in my testimony that the highest priority for me
+and for our Board of Directors is seeing that we have a sound
+management control system and that we have auditable
+statements. I do not find the fact that our statements, like a
+number of other government agencies, are not satisfactorily
+auditable yet, acceptable at all.
+ You need to understand that we are a new agency. When the
+Corporation for National Service was created, several programs
+of the old Action agency--the senior programs, Vista, and the
+whole Action financial system--were combined with the small new
+Office of National Service into a new corporation.
+ The first audit only one month into AmeriCorps; the rest of
+it was the old programs. Rightly or wrongly, the corporation
+decided that it would build its financial systems on the Action
+agency system. The problems we have now go back in some cases
+three decades of the systems of the Action agency.
+
+ arthur anderson's audit recommendations
+
+ Our new chief financial officer--There was some difficulty
+in getting one when the government was closed and our
+appropriations were at zero and I was seeking to find the best
+chief financial officer. But in due course we found her, and
+she has been at work since mid-fall, late October, in an all-
+out program to meet the 99 recommendations of the Arthur
+Andersen audit. And we are well on the way. By June I think
+that the great majority of those deficiencies will have been
+corrected. I share totally your concern.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. They stated there were 99, and that all
+but two would be resolved. That seems like a tall order. I wish
+you well. If that can be realized, fine. But it is a bit too
+much for this guy to accept on the surface.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, Arthur Andersen confirmed I think that
+we have resolved 28 of them. And since then many more we
+believe, satisfactorily resolved. I am meeting with our board
+tomorrow. There is nothing our board feels more strongly about
+than this, too.
+ Mr. Lewis. If I can interpose there, Ms. Cunninghame has
+indicated to us that of those 99 she expects that all of those
+will be corrected except for two, or at least will be in the
+process of implementation. And ``the process of
+implementation'' is the question mark.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. That does not mean that these will be
+done, I guess is what I am saying.
+ Mr. Lewis. Correct. That is right. That is right.
+ Mr. Knollenberg. Yes. Thank you.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Chairman, there were the two questions Mr.
+Knollenberg asked.
+ Mr. Lewis. Please respond to that.
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes.
+ Mr. Lewis. And then we have got to move on to Mr. Walsh,
+sir.
+ Mr. Wofford. On how much the corps members get. And one of
+your colleagues just very recently said the GAO has reported
+that the average AmeriCorps volunteer receives $26,000. The GAO
+never, never, in any way whatsoever, reported that, or in any
+way suggested that AmeriCorps volunteer members were getting
+more than the standard amount that I told.
+ They estimated our own average cost, from the corporation's
+appropriations, at a little under $18,000 per member. The
+$26,000 figure has nothing to do with what corps members get.
+It is their estimate of the total resources that were in the
+projects they studied, applied to those projects. It is the
+total resources; not what our corporation is paying.
+ And I ask you to help us on this misinformation because, if
+you are one of 24,000, 25,000 AmeriCorps members living on $160
+a week, hoping to have a voucher that will give you $4,725 to
+pay off your college loan or to go to college, and you hear in
+the evening news that somebody is saying, ``They are being paid
+$26,000,'' I think you can imagine sort of the blow to the
+spirit when they think they are serving their country.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you.
+ Mr. Walsh, welcome, and we yield to you.
+ Mr. Walsh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Senator, good to see you.
+ Mr. Wofford. Thank you, sir.
+
+ national service trust
+
+ Mr. Walsh. There was one budget question here, and that is
+the line-item for National Service Trust, $59 million to $100
+million. What is that for?
+ Mr. Wofford. That is the money that we are putting into the
+trust to account for the educational vouchers that will be owed
+the number of corps members that we estimate will be entitled
+to them.
+ Mr. Walsh. So at the time of completing their service,
+these are the funds that they would get for their tuition?
+ Mr. Wofford. It is about twice what the readjustment
+allowance from the Peace Corps was, I think. It is a voucher
+that during seven years they have a right, if they get admitted
+to a college or they have a college loan, to pull down. The
+money never goes to the corps member. It goes to either the
+university or to the lending institution.
+ Mr. Walsh. All right. So this is anticipating an increase
+in the number of volunteers two years out, basically?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes.
+ Mr. Walsh. OK.
+ Mr. Wofford. We also are asking for $10 million. That is
+the one other increase, I believe, other than the America Reads
+initiative. Ten million dollars for the National Service
+Scholars program, we would match out of the trust fund $500 for
+$500 in local community funds put up by civic organizations or
+corporations for each high school in the country.
+ Mr. Walsh. I would like to focus a little bit on the
+volunteers, and just briefly revisit this issue of cost per
+volunteer. The Peace Corps has enjoyed strong support on
+Capitol Hill for a long, long time. AmeriCorps is not quite
+there, yet. But I think it needs to be said, what would you
+estimate the costs for a Peace Corps volunteer, per volunteer,
+versus AmeriCorps?
+ Mr. Wofford. Substantially more. I do not want to be unfair
+to the Peace Corps.
+ Mr. Walsh. Which is more?
+ Mr. Wofford. The Peace Corps is substantially more than
+AmeriCorps, I think you will find. And the Army is twice. For
+an enlisted man, the Army is two or three times, probably, what
+AmeriCorps is.
+ I cannot give you today out of my head the average cost of
+the Peace Corps.
+
+ peace corps cost per volunteer
+
+ Mr. Walsh. The Peace Corps cost per volunteer versus
+AmeriCorps cost.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, we do not actually use the word
+``volunteer.'' The President does, but we do not use it for
+AmeriCorps members. Shriver was bold enough with the Peace
+Corps, since there were not a lot of unpaid volunteer non-
+profits around, to call them Peace Corps volunteers.
+ Mr. Walsh. Well, I think the issue has been made, why would
+you be paying volunteers? We have been doing it for years in
+the Peace Corps.
+ Mr. Wofford. And in the Army.
+ Mr. Walsh. Well, let us keep them out for a second. I just
+want to try to keep it as much as we can apples-to-apples,
+here, AmeriCorps versus Peace Corps.
+ Mr. Wofford. Domestic Peace Corps and overseas Peace Corps.
+AmeriCorps is the domestic Peace Corps.
+ Mr. Walsh. Right.
+ Mr. Wofford. And your Peace Corps was the overseas Peace
+Corps.
+ Mr. Walsh. What is the difference in cost per volunteer?
+ Mr. Wofford. I cannot speak for--The AmeriCorps cost per
+corps member is now going down to $17,000 per corps members,
+and down to $15,000 three years from now, per corps member
+total cost.
+ Mr. Walsh. Do you have a ballpark on what Peace Corps
+volunteers get?
+ Mr. Wofford. My colleagues are saying around $40,000, but I
+do not know. They think that is accurate. I really do not want
+to advance that.
+ Mr. Walsh. Just a ballpark figure.
+ Mr. Wofford. My colleague, Mark Geren, needs to speak for
+that.
+ Mr. Walsh. Right. I understand. But I am just trying to get
+an idea.
+ Mr. Wofford. No, the Peace Corps has the overseas costs of
+travel.
+ Mr. Walsh. True.
+ Mr. Wofford. And in our day, we had doctors over there.
+ Mr. Walsh. The cost of living tends to be a lot lower over
+there, too.
+ Mr. Wofford. I don't know if in your day there were doctors
+in the Peace Corps staff overseas.
+ Mr. Walsh. There were.
+ Mr. Wofford. The Peace Corps selects the volunteers,
+deploys them, terminates them.
+ Mr. Walsh. Right.
+ Mr. Wofford. We give grants to Habitat or to Red Cross, and
+they select the corps members and they deploy them.
+
+ selection of members
+
+ Mr. Walsh. Okay, that gets to my next question on the
+volunteers. Does the National Service Corporation select and
+select out its members?
+ Mr. Wofford. Only the National Civilian Community Corps, of
+about 1,000 now, which we hope to grow to 1,600.
+ Mr. Walsh. So these 24,000, 25,000 members--You call them
+members?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes.
+ Mr. Walsh. You do not select them, and you do not select
+them out in case there is a problem?
+ Mr. Wofford. No. Habitat for Humanity likes to select its
+corps members from its outstanding college volunteers in
+Habitat, and that is their preference.
+
+ completion of activity
+
+ Mr. Walsh. Have you had now in the years that you have been
+in business members complete their activity, get their tuition
+payment? And how many of those are there right now?
+ Mr. Wofford. Twenty-six thousand have drawn down their
+vouchers, out of probably 44,000.
+ Mr. Walsh. They have completed?
+ Mr. Wofford. Forty-four thousand, I believe it is, have
+completed their service, of whom maybe 5,000 are second-year?
+ Mr. Walsh. Well, what I am trying to get at here is, what
+is their experience after they leave this service? What
+percentage of them are taking the voucher, and what percent of
+them are actively involved in going to school, if they had not
+completed their school, and that sort of thing?
+ Mr. Wofford. I would like for my colleague, Gary Kowalczyk,
+who is behind me, to comment on this, because he was I think
+correcting what I said about 26,000 payments.
+ How many vouchers?
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Kowalczyk?
+ Mr. Kowalczyk. Yes. Mr. Chairman, we have brought more
+detailed information for the record about this. In general, the
+first-year graduates, over half have begun to either pay off
+loans or use that to go on to school. And they have seven years
+to do this. Second-year class, it is obviously less than half,
+because that has just been completed. And we would expect that
+number to grow, as well, over time. But we will provide
+specific information on the numbers for the record.
+
+ Education Award Usage
+
+ As of February 26, 1997, 58 percent of the AmeriCorps
+members who earned education awards supported with funds from
+the 1994-1995 program year had used all or part of their
+education awards. The National Service Trust had made payments
+totaling $26,029,709.20 for these awards.
+ As of February 26, 1997, 38 percent of the AmeriCorps
+members who earned education awards supported with funds from
+the 1995-1996 program year had used all or part of their
+education awards. The National Service Trust had made payments
+totaling $18,597,452.88 for these awards.
+ As of February 26, 1997, the National Service Trust had
+made at a total of 30,216 payments.
+ AmeriCorps members have seven years from the end of their
+service to use their education awards. These figures do not
+include AmeriCorps members who were not enrolled in the
+National Service Trust, such as members of AmeriCorps*NCCC and
+AmeriCorps*VISTA who took a cash end-of-term payment in lieu of
+participating in the National Service Trust.
+
+ Mr. Walsh. So everyone that completes their two years of
+activity----
+ Mr. Wofford. No, it is one year in AmeriCorps for $4,725.
+And you can stay a second year, unlike the Peace Corps.
+ Mr. Walsh. OK.
+ Mr. Wofford. But many--about 10-plus percent--are staying a
+second year.
+ Mr. Walsh. OK.
+ Mr. Wofford. Are being asked to stay.
+ Mr. Walsh. So, I mean, is there some determination at the
+end of this year whether they have met their obligations, or do
+they, just by virtue of the fact that they have been on the
+payroll for a year, meet their obligation?
+ Mr. Wofford. The organization that supervises, administers,
+selects them, has to certify that they finished a satisfactory
+full year, 1,700 hours of service.
+ Mr. Walsh. Any figures on what percent do not complete from
+start to finish satisfactorily?
+ Mr. Wofford. There is currently in the GAO study of the
+state National Service Commission structure and how the state
+commissions are operating. GAO studied programs in seven
+states, some 24 programs. They focused more than is
+representative of the corps as a whole on programs that are in
+the Youth Service Corps variety, which have a high proportion
+of at-risk kids and non-high-school graduates.
+ And in their report it is 39 percent, I believe they said.
+I want to emphasize--as did GAO--that these 24 programs out of
+430 were not designed to be a representative sample. They did
+their best to visit some diverse projects.
+
+ completion rate
+
+ Mr. Walsh. These would be the ones that would have the most
+problems with retaining people and getting them to complete
+their service?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes. I want to just make one very crucial
+point so you will understand this when you read the report.
+They said that 39 percent of those projects, it appeared to
+them, were not finishing the full year. Twenty percent of that
+39 had left for what was in the category of the organization's
+supervisor called compelling personal reasons. If you view the
+completion rate as excluding that, their estimate of those
+programs would be 22 percent.
+ But what I really have to stress is, if you look at the
+chart on the educational programs, the high proportion of the
+Conservation and Service Corps--which I believe in and as
+Secretary of Labor and Industry in Pennsylvania supported--are
+with at-risk kids.
+ Two of the key projects that they looked at were comprised
+almost entirely of drop-outs. Also, one was almost entirely
+Latino, and one was entirely African-American. Only 8 percent
+of AmeriCorps' members have less than a high-school degree.
+ The program that they viewed, for example, as an example of
+a high attrition rate, is the Casa Verde program. It is one
+that has been awarded by the Peter Drucker Foundation as one of
+outstanding innovation. It is supported by the Austin
+community. They have taken the most at-risk kids. Thirteen of
+their first 65 left to take good jobs. In those programs, that
+is not a failure. That is a success, because they are on the
+spectrum that is closer to job training.
+ On the other hand if the Alliance for Catholic Education,
+which supplies teachers for two years in hard-pressed Catholic
+schools in the South had a 10 percent drop-out rate it would be
+a major problem. I understand that they only had one person in
+their first year drop out to become a priest.
+ So average figures are just extraordinarily misleading. The
+project in Alexandria was considered to have a 95-percent
+attrition rate because we agreed, their having started in
+December, there would be only a two-thirds of a year program.
+In those calculations they are listed as having 95 percent
+attrition. We are following the attrition rate very carefully.
+ But National Service has so many different varieties that
+you have to look at each kind. And in a program which is a
+last-chance program for at-risk kids--which is about 15 percent
+maybe of our programs, 10 percent of our drop-outs--if they get
+a few people going on to college and if they get a lot going
+into work, that is a success.
+ Mr. Walsh. My Peace Corps training started with about 55
+individuals, and at the end of a two-year period, there were
+about 24 who completed the two years. I don't know if that's
+typical.
+ Mr. Wofford. The Peace Corps, I believe, by their
+testimony, has 29 percent not using their two years, plus, I
+believe, 80 percent who during the training period overseas
+dropped out, so that it brings it up to something like 30
+percent.
+ The Army's attrition rate is 35 percent. Two-year public
+colleges is 47 percent, and four-year public colleges is one-
+third. But again, that's a broad brush.
+
+ measureable objectives
+
+ Mr. Walsh. What I'm trying to do--and I think my colleagues
+have asked the right questions about the program--I'm trying to
+get an idea from a volunteer's perspective. Because I think
+certainly a big part of this program was to take advantage of
+the altruism of youth and to channel kids who otherwise didn't
+have a channel to go to be positive and productive citizens.
+That's what I'm trying to get at.
+ How can you measure, quantitatively and qualitatively, how
+these kids are doing after they complete their service? Do you
+have a measurement, or do you----
+ Mr. Wofford. We're expanding and taking more seriously that
+whole process. But from the very beginning, the Corporation has
+done more than any program I know to try to insist that every
+project have measurable objectives and tracking of whether
+those measurable objectives are achieved, and preferably,
+quantifiable objectives.
+ We've got an extraordinary amount of information on that.
+ Mr. Walsh. I think it would help you up here.
+
+ california conservation corps
+
+ Mr. Wofford. Sure, it would. But, you know, one of the
+things that isn't recognized is the degree to which many, many
+of the programs that became part of the AmeriCorps program were
+programs that had percolated up for many years. One of the
+largest is the California Conservation Corps that has been
+thriving through Democratic and Republican Governors.
+ I was in the Back Country Trail project there, where they
+take the very at-risk kids for an extraordinarily demanding
+five months in the back country. They work as hard as anybody I
+have ever seen. Over a period of more than ten years, where
+they've been doing this, they have had an amazing success
+record that they have documented. Something like two-thirds of
+the park staff of the back country Yosemite are veterans of the
+California Conservation Corps.
+ We have about 30 of the conservation corps that were formed
+long before AmeriCorps came along. They are a part of
+AmeriCorps and have long track records. They're able to--they
+go to their legislatures in California and elsewhere--and give
+the track record of how they've turned lives around of many of
+the young people.
+
+ Vista Literacy Corps
+
+ Mr. Walsh. I think that's helpful.
+ I have a number of other questions, Mr. Chairman, and
+obviously, we have limited time and I won't ask them, but I
+will submit them. They relate to VISTA, the VISTA Literacy
+Corps, and this effort toward the goal of reading by the third
+grade. I would like to ask some questions about that.
+ Mr. Wofford. Remember that VISTA, of the 24,000 AmeriCorps
+members, 4,000 to 5,000 of them are VISTAs.
+ Mr. Walsh. Is all of VISTA's budget in your budget?
+ Mr. Wofford. Not in your budget, but it's in our budget. We
+get money from the two committees, and VISTA is in Labor-HHS.
+Though the item called VISTA Literacy Corps was dropped, it was
+dropped with a clear understanding that the VISTA work in
+literacy would be continued. It's a very, very vital part of
+VISTA, and it is VISTA's track record over many years in
+literacy work that, in part, we're building on in the America
+Reads initiative.
+ Mr. Walsh. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Walsh.
+ Senator Wofford, one of the points I want to make, as loud
+and clear as I possibly can, is that, in new programs like
+those that are part of AmeriCorps' work, it is very difficult
+to measure relatively early on. But I'm absolutely convinced
+that one of the problems of the past is that, in programs
+across government--I'm not speaking of your program, but across
+government--because the pattern for a long, long time was what
+did we get last year and how much will we give them this year
+in addition to that, there was very, very little serious
+oversight or measure.
+ I am convinced that that which we do not measure, in terms
+of dollars available, you get no results from those that is
+meaningful out there. Surely there are exceptions, like kids
+living in the countryside and so on. But being able to justify
+competitive appropriations becomes very real when we're moving
+towards balancing the budget.
+ So, you know, if you think this questioning has been
+reasonably tough--I remember just yesterday you told me I hope
+you spend a little more time than you spent in the other body.
+Well, this is what ``more time'' does. [Laughter.]
+ Mr. Wofford. And I appreciate it greatly.
+ Mr. Lewis. But, in turn, if you think this is a problem,
+you saw us on the floor in the last Congress, and we hope we're
+not late in the evening when we get to discussions regarding
+AmeriCorps.
+ But, having said that, the questions are going to be mighty
+tough. For example--and I want those who give you back-up
+support to listen to this, because we need this kind of
+information for our record, so that we can be better prepared
+as we go forward.
+ You indicated that a significant percentage of those
+volunteers are at the $8,000 level, that they can go up to a
+maximum----
+ Mr. Wofford. Almost all.
+ Mr. Lewis. They can go up to a maximum of 15, but a high
+percentage. Let's assume that. Let's take just that ``almost
+all'' who are at the $8,000 level.
+ The testimony so far has indicated that those who graduated
+so far, who have gone through the two-year program, who have
+begun to draw down tuition grants, represent approximately 50
+percent. So let's say we take just the 47-25, not assume
+increasing numbers over seven years, and you cut that in half.
+Then the $8,000 grant does become, factually, at least,
+roughly, a $10,350 grant, at least, if you presume the draw
+down.
+
+ Health Insurance Coverage
+
+ Then you add to that, I don't know what percentage of
+volunteers in that first class who drew down or had received
+health insurance. Can you give me a percentage?
+ Mr. Wofford. I would guess three-fourths or more.
+(Conferring.) Excuse me. It's much less.
+ Mr. Lewis. Do you see what I'm getting at, though? There's
+a very real number, if you're willing to----
+ Mr. Wofford. No, we generally estimate that the total
+benefits to Corpsmembers are in the range of--assuming they
+draw down the education voucher--$13,000. But of the living
+allowance, the $8,000, the local program has 15 percent.
+ Mr. Lewis. As you know, we're going to be trying to get----
+ Mr. Wofford. Thirty-three percent of program support, but
+15 percent of----
+ Mr. Lewis. I can hear one of my people who is very
+concerned that maybe there's a lack of really careful
+accounting here. Let's say a colleague like Todd Tiahrt might
+very well say, ``Look, we're cutting back tens of millions of
+dollars for housing programs that work, and people may not have
+adequate housing because of a program that we now are having
+difficulty measuring.'' When he starts doing that, then you
+start turning heads. You know, we need some help here, and it
+has to be hard-nosed dollar accounting.
+ There is roughly a $2,000 overhead cost per volunteer, I
+gather. We need to get pretty specific in terms of the way we
+measure that, so that we aren't blindsided as we go through
+this.
+ Back to America Reads. I'm not going to spend much more
+time on it because we have a number of questions I would ask
+for the record. But, indeed, it's important that you help us
+with this as well.
+
+ Education System
+
+ A lot of the questions we have, which suggest there is a
+need at the Federal level to go out to school districts and
+find those school districts that are concerned about getting
+some help with better teaching kids to read, in some way
+training people who come in on a volunteer basis to help better
+teach people to read. Many would argue that that suggests that
+the Department of Education, one more time, demonstrates it's
+an abject failure, or clearly, the Department of Education,
+among other things, was going to deal with basic literacy, and
+one of the major components to basic literacy questions
+involves reading questions.
+ I think you generally agree with what I have just kind of
+outlined.
+ Mr. Wofford. Respectfully, I disagree.
+ Mr. Lewis. Tell me what you disagree with.
+ Mr. Wofford. I've been indoctrinated to believe that the
+education system is run by local school districts, not by the
+Federal Department of Education.
+ Mr. Lewis. Then what's the role of the Department of
+Education?
+ Mr. Wofford. I hope the Department of Education can play a
+catalytic and leading role in sometimes setting goals, like the
+need by grade 3----
+ Mr. Lewis. Since we're not learning to read, they haven't
+gotten there, right?
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, they don't run the programs locally.
+ Mr. Lewis. You don't run the programs, either.
+ Mr. Wofford. You don't want them to. I will not----
+ Mr. Lewis. You will not, right?
+ Mr. Wofford. No, but we are in a different--we are adding
+some people.
+ Mr. Lewis. What I'm really doing is just asking you to back
+up a little bit.
+ One of the major items that caused me, somewhere in the
+past, to say ``Hey, maybe there's a need for the Department of
+Education because there are a lot of major elements that relate
+to the whole question of literacy in many a school district,
+that ain't gittin' there.'' So maybe some advice and counsel,
+maybe some training ideas and maybe some stimulation would be
+good.
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes.
+ Mr. Lewis. We're a long ways down the path and we don't see
+any measurable results in terms of the Department of
+Education's action in those areas. Indeed, that is one of the
+items. The fact that there has not been progress is one of the
+items that caused me to say, ``Well, maybe we ought to at least
+consider what National Service is proposing here.''
+ I'm frustrated like you are, that kids are not learning to
+read out there, and we've got good classroom teachers who are
+supposed to be doing it, and we all say the local schools ought
+to be running these programs.
+ You know, there's a very small circle here that causes us
+to end up biting our tail if we're not careful.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Chairman, I wish I could adequately rise
+to the occasion of making a defense of what I think are very
+good, effective and creative things that the Department of
+Education in recent years has done on the literacy matter. From
+Families First, to Read Right Now, the programs I have seen
+around the country where it's being done well, one of which is
+Houston--which you've heard enough about this morning----
+ Mr. Lewis. I've heard a lot from you.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, you've heard a lot from me, but in
+Houston I found great appreciation for the role of the
+Department of Education in helping with their literacy
+programs.
+ From the people who are on the front line of literacy, I
+have almost invariably found respect for what the Department of
+Education has done in recent years to find the best practices,
+to give extra support. But it's only a small amount of support
+in a huge education system run by States, but most of all local
+school districts.
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator, I want you to know that I went on a
+local school board many, many years ago, and I went on that
+school board because I knew my kids, when they first went to
+our elementary school, couldn't learn in buildings like that.
+And boy, did they learn, in portable buildings, because there
+was a classroom principal who supported good teachers and
+insisted that parents be involved.
+ It goes right down to that. If we don't have principals who
+are willing to accept these volunteers, then the principals who
+are accepting them will be just adding on to the good work
+they're doing and average poor kids won't do very well. That's
+really kind of the heart of my concern.
+ That is not our committee's responsibility. I chose not to
+be on the Ed and Labor Committee, and even that subcommittee,
+so we're going to have to leave that with John and have him do
+his good work. But I have many questions like that for the
+record that I would like to have you address, if you will,
+because they will be a spillover to the other committee and we
+intend to share some of this input with them.
+
+ Paid Volunteers
+
+ What we're about here is one of the fundamental questions:
+is there not just an appropriate, but is there an effective
+Federal role that will help stimulate what we believe that
+States and local governments ought to be doing in the first
+place?
+ I think it's very important that we recognize that
+volunteers can only do so much, but the public is out there
+right now asking some pretty fundamental questions, as to how
+much are we paying these volunteers. There used to be a
+government in the world where we kind of worried about changing
+the definition of things, that we know as a standard thing, and
+now we've got volunteers who are paid. Boy, I'm telling you,
+the debate on the floor is going to dwell on that and dwell on
+that, and we'll keep trying to answer the question.
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Chairman, let me state that because of the
+confusion between paid volunteers and unpaid occasional
+volunteers, we don't, in fact, use the word ``volunteers''.
+George Romney's point was you can't get--except for some very
+few and very wealthy people and very religiously dedicated
+people--full-time service unless you give a living allowance.
+The Peace Corps is full-time service. AmeriCorps is three-
+fourths plus full-time service.
+ If you believe there's a real need for full-time service by
+a range of citizens, particularly young people in this society,
+you have to give some kind of living allowance. Now, what our
+Education Only award is doing is saying to Boys and Girls
+Clubs, where we are going to have 800, ``we're only going to
+give you the education GI Bill-like award. You figure out what
+the minimum living allowance is.'' A group of evangelical
+ministers is planning a service corps of several thousand
+people and they think $6,000 a year, plus putting up people in
+church basements, will be the way to do the living allowance.
+But the case for full-time service is crucial to whether
+$12,000 or $13,000 for the full-time service of a young person
+is worth it.
+ Mr. Lewis. I hate to interrupt you, but I want to move on
+to the Summit. But before we do that, I would like to call on
+my friend, Rodney Frelinghuysen, for some additional questions.
+
+ Budget Request
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ On the surface of it, you're asking, as I understand it,
+for a 36 percent increase over your previous budget amount?
+ Mr. Wofford. We're asking for an increase for--yes, for
+11,000 members for the reading initiative.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Somewhat akin to what I was asking
+earlier, there seems to be some unease--and it's on both sides
+of the aisle--about obviously our primary obligation is to
+balance the budget by the year 2002, and people often ask that
+we look at increases.
+ If this is the number one priority, why can't you rearrange
+your programs within the amount of money we gave you last year,
+or have a lesser increase in order to achieve your objectives?
+ Mr. Wofford. We did, a year ago, at my suggestion, but with
+the full support of our board, before the President had set
+this goal, we decided that the priority we would urge on all
+the State Commissions is problems of children and youth, and
+especially educational programs. That is already our priority.
+ The Summit that Mr. Lewis is going to ask about is going to
+even more clearly set goals for the five things that young
+people need, and I think our Corporation is going to try to
+arrange our priorities to do more.
+ If there is to be a national campaign to achieve the goal
+of reading at grade three, the estimate is you need 11,000 new
+tutor coordinators, organizers, etc. That we could not do on
+our own without additional appropriations.
+
+ the summit on america's future
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Do you anticipate the Summit is going to
+ratchet up the demands for dollars over and above what you're
+requesting here?
+ Mr. Wofford. The Summit is very dedicated. All of us that
+are organizing it, and General Powell most particularly, are
+seeing that it not be an occasion for focusing on Federal
+policy or Federal dollars, but that it be focused on how you
+crack the atom of civic power in communities and States. So no.
+
+ america reads outyear budget
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. I think you made reference to it in your
+opening statement, but what is the outyear budget for the
+America Reads initiative?
+ Mr. Wofford. The outyear budget for the whole initiative is
+$2.5 billion. Susan Stroud, my chief counselor on this, she
+says $200 a million a year for five years for us, and $1.5
+billion for the Department of Education over five years.
+
+ carryover funds
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. For the last two years you have had
+carryover funds of $276.8 million, and that was for fiscal year
+1997, and $226 million for fiscal year 1997. Can you tell me
+why you have rather large carryover funds?
+ Mr. Wofford. If you would permit me, I would like Mr.
+Kowalczyk to comment on that.
+ Mr. Kowalczyk. In the appropriations bill there is a
+restriction on when the amounts of money become available to
+the Corporation. A great majority of it does not become
+available until September 1 of the year that it is
+appropriated. For example, even in our 1997 appropriation, a
+great majority of the moneys are not available until September.
+So the carryover you see reflects the timing of our grant
+obligations. We can't make most of those grant awards until
+September. Some of them carry into October and November, and
+when they do, we report them to you as carryover but, in fact,
+they are for programs that begin in the fall and winter of this
+year.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. So to get a clearer picture of exactly
+how much money we're dealing with here, where do the carryover
+funds figure into your overall budget proposal?
+ Mr. Kowalczyk. We would like to see greater flexibility in
+the timing of those moneys. We have asked for two-year
+availability, but in the past that has been an outlay concern
+for the Committee and for the Congress. We have worked
+cooperatively to come up with an amount that represents
+reasonable need up until September of that year, with other
+moneys becoming available after September.
+ It is not an instance of having a need and money and not
+being able to address the need. It's simply a question of the
+committees making available the resources to us after September
+1 of the year. There is only a 30-day window there to record
+that obligation during that period. A large amount of that
+obligation actually gets recorded in the following year.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. So, translating that into English--and
+I'm sure that's a full and proper explanation--what does it all
+mean relative to your overall budget request?
+ We have obviously set some of these parameters, but what
+does it do to your overall bottom line?
+ Mr. Kowalczyk. We provide to the Committee amounts on a
+comparable basis each year. So the $200 million that we are
+seeking represents an increase above the prior year amounts
+that were available. The timing of the obligation is simply a
+matter of when the moneys become available to us. It doesn't
+represent differences in programs.
+ The $200 million is the correct figure and the amount
+before this Committee is the amount that Senator Wofford has
+testified to.
+ Mr. Wofford. The timing is feasible, if that's convenient
+to the Congress and the budget officers, because increasingly
+our programs are on an academic year. The programs can start in
+the fall without hurting our grant-making process.
+
+ grant-making process
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. I want to focus for a minute on the
+whole grant-making process. I'm staggered when I look over some
+of the IG's report and audit reports on the number of just the
+Federal agencies that you deal with here.
+ Have you quantified what----
+ Mr. Wofford. Which are you referring to?
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. I'm referring to the report of--the
+statement of record of Cornelia Blanchette, Associate Director,
+Education and Employment Issues, Health, Education and Human
+Services Division, from last May.
+ I'm not being adversarial, but I'm wondering--and I'll give
+you a copy of this. She lists in her submittals here the
+Federal agency grantees in the AmeriCorps USA program, and just
+about any Federal department one has ever heard of, and a few
+that I've never heard of, you have some sort of relationship
+to.
+ How do you quantify--You know, what are the carrying costs
+of our relationships with all these agencies? I know some of
+them feed money into the purposes of your program and they work
+with you, but I just wonder whether someone has actually done
+an analysis of what all the administrative paperwork is just
+relative to the Federal grantees.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, there are no more Federal grantees. That
+was ended last year.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. So this list here----
+ Mr. Wofford. I don't know the list you're referring to.
+[Examining.]
+ We're going to need to get back to you and see what this is
+about.
+ The Federal grants in which we made to the Department of
+Agriculture for rural programs they initiated was one in
+response to the President's request to Federal agencies to see
+whether, they could use AmeriCorps members in local programs.
+ We had some wonderful programs. Some of our best rural
+programs were local programs initiated by the Department of
+Agriculture. Some of the best conservation programs were
+initiated by the Department of Interior.
+ It became unexplainable to Congress and the public why one
+agency would give grants to another, and it has been described
+as AmeriCorps members working as bureaucrats in the Department
+of Agriculture, where they were among the most grassroots
+programs we had.
+ Nevertheless, we concluded that it was not a fight that was
+worth continuing and we lost some of the very best rural
+programs, conservation programs, that we had. But there are no
+grants to Federal agencies any more.
+ I would have to study what the document is that you gave
+me. But our grants with Federal agencies have been ended. There
+are none any more.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. So there are no Federal grantees. I
+wasn't trying to raise an issue that you dealt with. I just
+wondered whether there are any Federal grantees out there.
+ Mr. Lewis. Would you evaluate that and respond for the
+record?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes, we will.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. It was attached with some materials
+from, I guess, the GAO.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+[Page 262--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. How many contracts do we have with
+private and how many contracts do we have with what might be
+classified as public agencies, nonprofit agencies?
+ Mr. Wofford. AmeriCorps has some 430 grantees. Two-thirds
+of them are grants made by the State Commissions. The great
+majority of the grantees are nonprofit organizations, and we
+can give you a full list of the organizations.
+
+ administrative costs on grants
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. I'm more interested, obviously, in the
+overall statistics. I just wondered what the cost of doing
+business with these grantees is. If you take ``x'' university
+or Head Start, whether, in fact, you've done sort of a study as
+to what it costs in terms of the administrative paperwork.
+ Mr. Wofford. Head Start, for years, has VISTA members and
+there is very little paperwork with VISTA. There's no money
+that goes with it. It's just a VISTA that gets assigned to the
+Head Start program.
+ The grant program, which is what AmeriCorps, other than
+VISTA, is about, the highest cost projects are under $18,000
+per grant. The average of the State grants is $12,388. Our
+national nonprofit direct grant program--by the way, we have
+caps on what the grants can be--is a little lower than the
+amount I just gave you. I have the amount of grants to every
+one of our grantees here with me.
+ We have agreed that our average cost per AmeriCorps
+member--we agreed with Senator Grassley and, beyond that, we
+put it into our Act last year--we are going to reduce the
+average cost from $18,000, where we began, to $17- to $16- to
+$15- by the year 1999-2000.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Senator, I have some questions relative
+to actually how you're going to accomplish that, but I just
+want to focus once again, if that list isn't part of the
+record, then----
+ Mr. Lewis. It will be.
+ [The information follows:]
+
+
+
+[Pages 264 - 276--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+
+
+ inspector general's findings
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. When the IG issues reports relative to
+the National Center for Family Literacy, the ARC of the United
+States, the home instruction program for preschool youngsters,
+the Northwest Service Academy, the Greater Miami Service Corps,
+the Blackfeet Nation, and they make some critical comments
+about the way money is spent, what literally happens as a
+result of those findings and recommendations?
+ Mr. Wofford. The Inspector General's reports have been of
+tremendous use in finding things that are wrong in the agency,
+but mostly in the programs that they look into around the
+country. Some 70 of our grants were not renewed, either by the
+State Commissions or by us, if they were national nonprofits.
+The IG reports have been very valuable in finding programs that
+should not be renewed, and in some cases programs where some
+action had to be taken.
+ You listed at least one such that I'm aware of.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. So Members of Congress who might review
+such a list--and I have looked through at least the materials I
+have been provided. This is from reports issued during the
+period April 1, '96, through September 30th of last year. All
+of those recommendations have been addressed and those problems
+have been rectified?
+ Mr. Wofford. We're working at it, and we have taken very
+strong action in many cases. There has been crucial aspects of
+information.
+ We have now a very strong working relationship between our
+Chief Financial Officer and the Inspector General. That is a
+vital part of keeping us----
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. It may, indeed, I am sure, be a fraction
+of your overall grantees, but I do think it's one of those
+things that people throw up as a reason to express some concern
+and some doubt.
+
+ decentralized system
+
+ Mr. Wofford. Mr. Frelinghuysen, one of the things that I
+hope people will keep in mind is that, unlike the Peace Corps,
+which I administered in Africa, which was responsible for its
+programs, every part of it, from beginning to end, this is an
+extraordinarily decentralized system. This year we have taken
+even further steps so that the State formula grants we are not
+second guessing. We evaluate, we seek to take action if there's
+something wrong. But we are really devolving to the governor-
+appointed State Commissions the decisions.
+ In fairness to the State Commissions, the people who are
+really responsible for the programs--it is Millard Fuller's
+habitat for humanity program--that administers the AmeriCorps
+members. Our grantees have been very responsive to our
+evaluations or to the IG's investigations. But we don't run
+these programs. So this is a reinvented, very decentralized
+public/private partnership.
+
+ improving efficiency
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. You made some comments on page 13 of
+your testimony which are in line with your comments. You say
+here, ``Over the last year, the Corporation has made many other
+changes to improve our efficiency. We have made improvements to
+our grant review process and increased the control the
+Governors' Commissions on National Service have over program
+decisions.''
+ Why have you done that? I'm sure it's a good idea, but why
+have you done it?
+ Mr. Wofford. As Congress set up this Act, you did not go
+the route--you did not do it the way Sargent Shriver and the
+Peace Corps would have done it. Instead, you set up a system in
+which every Governor was asked to form a State Commission. You
+originally divided funding into three parts: population
+formula, competitive grants, which had to go through two
+hurdles to get decision making to the Federal level, and then
+national nonprofits.
+ We are now not having the formula grants, go through a
+review process at the state level and a second one in
+Washington. The Speaker has often said he recognizes the need
+for millions of volunteers and for some full-time service
+people, but he doesn't like the Federal Government calling the
+signals. One of the ways you don't call the signals is say the
+signals should be called by State Commissions.
+
+ current cap on individual grants
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Going back--and you may have indirectly
+commented on it in your responses to me--you testified on a
+number of occasions to the whole issue of bringing the costs
+down from $17,000 in the current year, to $16,000 in '98, and
+then a lesser figure in '99.
+ How are you actually doing it? How are you actually going
+to accomplish those objectives, given, let's say, your plans to
+spend more money and embrace, obviously, a lot more people into
+your overall system for good purposes?
+ Mr. Wofford. What is our current cap on individual grants?
+[Conferring.] We've got about a three-way mechanism of
+enforcement. The State Commissions are given a budget that they
+can't go beyond, and that budget is an average budgeted cost
+for their grants.
+ Mr. Lewis. Whoever is responding should identify himself so
+the recorder can get it.
+ Mr. Wofford. We have an average cost. All together, their
+grants have to fit the average budgeted cost of $17,000. That
+includes the education awards and $2,000 for their overhead and
+our overhead in training and programming. It's about $10,000 as
+the guidelines to the State Commissions for what they have to
+average.
+ Now, they can go above the $10,000 in a grant, as I pointed
+out to you. The highest grant this year that State Commissions
+have made is $17,629. They can go above the average. The
+programs that were above our overall average were required to
+reduce by ten percent this year, but the State Commissions have
+to stay within that budget. We have control of the national
+direct one-third, to stay within our budgeted overall cost. And
+we're going to do it.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. So, come hell or high water, you're
+going to do it?
+ Mr. Wofford. We're going to do it.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. With the States taking their
+responsibilities, and your portion that you have direct
+responsibility for.
+ Mr. Wofford. And it gives them an incentive to lean toward
+the programs that have shown how they can do it more cost
+effectively. We have some very good programs where the grants
+are in the $7,000 to 8,000 or $9,000 level, and now, with the
+educational awards only, States can use that to keep within our
+budgeted costs.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you for your responses.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Frelinghuysen, thank you for your questions,
+and also, for your presence.
+
+ national service scholarship
+
+ Before going to the question of the Summit for America's
+Future, where we have a number of questions to be asked, I
+would like to dwell for just a moment on an item that you and I
+discussed yesterday in my own office that related to a
+scholarship that would be a National Service scholarship for
+every high school in the country.
+ $10 million has been designated to cover that prospect,
+with $500 per scholarship coming from the National Service
+Program and to be matched evenly by some local or community
+effort, and you indicated to me that there are people like the
+Kiwanas Club and the Rotary Club and others who are anxious for
+this kind of input and participation, and all of us can
+understand why they would like to supplement their scholarship
+provisions with something coming from the Federal Government;
+in this case, National Service.
+ In that proposal, do you suggest that there should be
+required participation in National Service after receiving such
+a scholarship?
+ Mr. Wofford. No. The scholarship is for outstanding
+volunteer unpaid service that the student will have done while
+in high school.
+ Mr. Lewis. It would be non-National-Service-related,
+likely, anyway.
+ Mr. Wofford. They might be part of a service learning
+program in the school that encouraged students to volunteer,
+but it would be for volunteer service they have done in the
+community.
+ The civic clubs--the Lions and the Elks and the Rotary and
+others--have been part of helping to plan this. A large number
+of those civic clubs nationally have conveyed a lot of
+enthusiasm about this and said that they have been giving merit
+scholarships to many students and that they like the idea of
+now giving service scholarships. This is a kind of jump-start
+for something that some of them wished they had started
+earlier, and we expect a great response from them in both
+matching the money and in helping to pick the outstanding
+students and give their own name to the scholarship.
+ Mr. Lewis. Is there any such grant program, service-related
+or otherwise, academically related that is provided with jump-
+start kinds of monies coming from the Department of Education
+to local high schools?
+ Mr. Wofford. I don't know of any like that. Do you know
+of----
+ Mr. Lewis. I don't know of any, and this is not really the
+appropriate committee.
+ Mr. Wofford. No, I know.
+ Mr. Lewis. But I raised the question for pretty obvious
+reasons.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, we were surprised with how few of this
+kind of scholarships are actually being offered anywhere.
+ Prudential has quite an extraordinary excellent program
+that gets local nominations, but it does it at the State and
+national level. Boys and Girls Clubs give about a dozen maybe
+each year from around the country, but the idea of this is that
+every high school in America would have at least one
+outstanding citizen service student, a volunteer service
+scholarship winner announced at graduation or whenever they
+wanted to announce it.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Frelinghuysen, I am just going to throw an
+item out here. For you and I are of a basic background and
+style, probably one of the individuals who would question
+seriously, probably didn't necessarily think that the
+Department of Education idea was automatically a bad idea.
+Whether we should have voted that way in the past or now is now
+being questioned by many of us, only because we are trying to
+measure results and trying to find where the results lie.
+
+ educational awards
+
+ Having said all that, you suggest in your testimony, one
+more time before we get to the President's summit--you
+suggested that the Corporation has been encouraged to expand
+significantly the number of educational awards, and that is
+separate from scholarship awards, but rather, educational
+awards, and there is a $10-million item there, where we are
+providing awards for people, encouraging them to expand their
+own or extend their own education.
+ Mr. Wofford. What is the $10 million?
+ Mr. Lewis. It is $9.5 million, actually. It is 2,000
+recipients.
+ Mr. Wofford. Oh, I see. Excuse me.
+ The first experiment----
+ Mr. Lewis. Correct.
+ Mr. Wofford [continuing]. Expansion of a little pilot
+program----
+ Mr. Lewis. Right.
+ Mr. Wofford [continuing]. Was for 2,000 education awards,
+which is a little less than $10,000, $10 million, but we expect
+that. The reason the $10 million seemed small is we, with
+agreement with----
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, you are going immediately to my question.
+That is, the cost is a little less than $10 million for the
+2,000, and your statement indicates an expansion to 3,000
+additional awards, and I am not sure where that money comes
+from.
+ Mr. Wofford. It is not additional money.
+ Mr. Lewis. It says 3,000 additional awards. Am I wrong on
+that?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes, but those, in fact, bring down our costs
+because instead of the average grant of--well, we are not
+talking about the National Service Scholars Program anymore.
+ Mr. Lewis. No, we are not.
+ Mr. Wofford. We are talking about the ed-only awards,
+right?
+ Mr. Lewis. That is right.
+ If you add 3,000----
+ Mr. Wofford. Out of the AmeriCorps regular appropriation
+for 24,000 AmeriCorps members, the education----
+ Mr. Lewis. Only.
+ Mr. Wofford. The education only would be an investment of
+only $4,725, or maybe $4,725 with $1,000 bonus for
+administration. It, therefore, brings down our costs. It does
+not add to them.
+ In other words, a State commission has so much money to
+give out in AmeriCorps grants, if it gives out grants at only
+$5,000 instead of at $10,000, it lowers its costs. It enables
+it to have more AmeriCorps members, but the same money, no
+additional money.
+ Mr. Lewis. Maybe what I will have you do is have staff
+focus on this series of questions so that we can complete that
+for the record, but it did remind me of an aside that I was
+going to ask, and then I decided, well, don't be so cynical,
+please don't ask that, but maybe it would be an interesting
+project to have volunteers, a small number of volunteers poll
+for us not just the State education departments, maybe even the
+individual school districts, and then take the Department of
+Education total expenditure budget and say if you would have
+the Department of Education or we will divide this up and send
+you by e-mail a check for your proportionate share. I wonder
+what their responses would be.
+ Mr. Wofford. I think you are trying to put me up against
+Secretary Riley----
+ Mr. Lewis. No, no, no.
+ Mr. Wofford [continuing]. In that other committee.
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator, you have demonstrated clearly that you
+have had enough experience in this business that you are not
+going to suggest that somebody else shouldn't exist. That is a
+dangerous business, but nonetheless, it is a legitimate line,
+and I am sure that probably there are volunteers who would like
+to volunteer for that project, but nonetheless, moving to the--
+--
+
+ three types of funding
+
+ Mr. Wofford. I think it might clarify to you if I said that
+there are three types of funding, roughly. There is the Vista
+of old----
+ Mr. Lewis. Yes.
+ Mr. Wofford [continuing]. Which is just the living
+allowance----
+ Mr. Lewis. Right.
+ Mr. Wofford [continuing]. And they don't get any
+administrative money for their projects.
+ There is the standard AmeriCorps new grant which was living
+allowance plus education award plus administrative program
+money to those local programs----
+ Mr. Lewis. And health insurance, if requested.
+ Mr. Wofford [continuing]. Which got us up to 17-, 18-,
+$19,000.
+ The education award would be a third mode which would be
+just the $5,000.
+ Mr. Lewis. Correct, correct.
+ Mr. Wofford. So there would be gradations on the spectrum,
+but a State commission would have the flexibility to look at
+those three models and put together its own package in their
+own State staying within budget.
+ Mr. Lewis. When you have a broad spectrum of proposed
+programs in an already reasonable comprehensive program with a
+lot of baggage, without very clearly outlined means of
+measuring results, that leaves off from the major questions out
+here in difficult appropriations years where people have great
+difficulty, especially late at night, justifying on the floor
+over it. ``You are doing what?''
+ But in the meantime, I would like to move just for a
+moment. We do have additional questions here that are follow-up
+and clarification, if you would help us with those, but I would
+like to get us at least for a short time--and frankly, Rod, I
+am not sure what your own schedule is, but I am thinking about
+pursuing this just for a little while and maybe concluding our
+sessions. Are you up for that?
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Absolutely.
+ Mr. Lewis. All right. I think maybe it would be helpful to
+you as well as to our conflicting schedules.
+
+ presidents' summit for america's future
+
+ On January 24, 1997, the Presidents' Summit for America's
+Future was announced by President Clinton and former President
+Bush.
+ The summit which will be held on April 27 through 29 in
+Philadelphia is aimed at bringing America to a new level of
+commitment to volunteer service, especially targeting the
+Nation's young people.
+ Former Presidents and First Ladies have agreed to
+participate in the summit. President Clinton and former
+President Bush will serve as honorary co-chairs of the summit.
+Colin Powell will serve as general chairman, and Henry Cisneros
+will serve as vice chairman.
+ Funding for the summit is to be provided by nonprofit
+organizations and businesses.
+ What are the roles of the Corporation and the Points of
+Light Foundation in this effort? First question.
+ Mr. Wofford. George Romney, just before he died, came to
+see Bob Goodwin, the head of the Points of Light Foundation,
+and me to say, ``I have this dream of a summit of all the
+living Presidents.'' The recorder needs to make sure it is
+``Presidents,'' plural, the apostrophe after the ``s,'' to show
+that its service is nonpartisan, to show that you need a
+strategy for service, to take a quantum leap in civic action to
+show that you can deal with critical problems, particularly of
+young people.
+ The board of the Corporation and the board of the Points of
+Light Foundation agreed to sponsor this kind of a summit. We
+went to President Bush and to President Clinton, and both
+agreed.
+ It was harder to get General Powell to agree, He is ready
+to put a great part of his life for the next three years or
+five years into this if he can be convinced it will turn the
+tide for millions of young people heading into disaster now. He
+says that, ``If you take five goals that every child ought to
+have, that every parent wants their own children to have, and
+design a strategy and use the summit as a start-up, a kickoff
+for a campaign to see that every child in an American family
+has those five goals, I'll throw my life into it.''
+ They are a tutor, a mentor, a coach, a caring adult in the
+life of every child that doesn't have one in their family or
+needs one; safe places in which there are structured,
+challenging non-school-hour activities for the latch-key world
+of kids and others; three, a healthy start, immunization and
+incentive behavior--good incentives for healthy behavior,
+against drugs, fourth, effective education that gets people to
+read and gives them experience in school-to-work and workforce,
+so they will be productive workers and good citizens; and
+fifth, that every young person will be asked to serve to give
+back, not just be served. The summit is organized around those
+five goals.
+ The General, who is chairing it, wants to have measurable
+targets for each goal. One of the targets might well be the 1
+million volunteer tutors. Summit organizers already know they
+want at least 1 million mentors added to Big Brothers, Big
+Sisters, and all the other mentoring programs.
+ We are in the process of seeking commitments from
+corporations and organizations coming to the summit. What is
+the role of our two organizations and the corporation? We were
+the initiators of it. A joint committee of our two boards is
+the Steering Committee, headed by Ray Chambers, who is the
+first head of the Points of Light Foundation.
+ We now have a chairman who is very actively chairing it in
+General Powell. Summit organizers are intending a post-summit
+campaign toward those five goals. We will not as a corporation,
+as a Government entity, be part of that organizational
+structure because that will be an independent sector-organized
+campaign chaired by General Powell, AmeriCorps, our service
+learning programs, our senior programs, are right now
+interested in all five of those goals, and if there is an
+effort to get far greater support for action at the local level
+toward those goals, we will want to do our part to actively
+show that citizens service in the various forms supported by
+the corporation can be part of the strategy to reach those
+goals.
+
+ corporation's goals
+
+ Mr. Lewis. You have very efficiently taken my next
+question, which is, as I understand it, the summit's goal is to
+mobilize millions of citizens and thousands of organizations
+from all sectors in order to ensure that all our youth have
+access to fundamental resources that can help them lead
+healthy, fulfilling, and productive lives. The goals of the
+summit are consistent with the Corporation's mission, aren't
+they?
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes. The Corporation, under the Act, is
+supposed to try to engage people of all ages to serve. Our
+Senior Corps' statement of purpose are very close to what the
+summit's goals are. The mission of AmeriCorps is set in the
+statute, and own strategic plan embodies all of those goals.
+ Mr. Lewis. Okay. I thought your answer would be yes, but--
+--
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes, yes.
+ Mr. Lewis [continuing]. In fact----
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes.
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator, in fact, I am sure that some people
+would say--perish the thought anybody on the floor would
+suggest this, but some people would say that this is a better
+method of stimulating volunteerism than the Corporation. What
+would you say to statements like that, presuming that you put
+on your other hat and you actually kind of step down?
+ My House would not like that. Let's say that you decide to
+shift the hats and you are actually on the House floor and
+somebody made such a statement. What would you say in response
+on the floor?
+ Mr. Wofford. I don't think I have privilege of the House
+floor.
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, in the meantime.
+ Mr. Wofford. No. Excuse me. I might. Who knows? You have
+very generous traditions, very generous tradition as shown
+especially by the weekend of civility up in Pennsylvania.
+ I would go back to George Romney's argument which not only
+do I share, but I am in this job not because I like something
+called the Corporation for National Service or any one of its
+particular programs, but because many years of my life have
+been devoted to cracking the atom of civic power to show that
+you can actually solve problems, that volunteerism is not a box
+where people do good--but are not taken seriously and are
+thought to be out on the periphery--but that the combination of
+the leadership of the sectors of our society with citizen
+action, the twin engines of full-time service and millions of
+unpaid volunteers can actually achieve goals. I would like
+those like the Speaker, who says he wants every American to
+work one day a month as a volunteer, to think through how that
+could be organized without a large cadre of full-time people
+arranging the Habitat houses, the construction, the site, ready
+to give leadership when the unpaid volunteers come.
+ Same with tutoring. You can't flood into a school
+occasional unpaid volunteers if there is not an infrastructure,
+a structure there, and the programs of our Corporation, I
+think, can be very useful. They are not the only ones.
+ The Jesuit Volunteer Corps, the Lutheran Volunteer Corps,
+for example, give full-time service, and they will be able to
+get our educational-only awards now, without going through all
+the grant-making process that the AmeriCorps system has
+generally had in the beginning. I think the summit offers an
+historic opportunity to show that service by the different
+sectors of our society, including the volunteer sector, can get
+things done that need to be done.
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator, do you envision that any new or
+additional Federal funds would be needed to address the
+concerns that are likely to be developed at the summit?
+ Mr. Wofford. I think, Mr. Chairman, with the job ahead to
+make the case for 11,000 additional corps members to achieve
+one of the goals of the summit, the extra volunteer tutors, is
+a big enough challenge for me in the foreseeable future.
+ Mr. Lewis. You are going to wait until after the summit,
+then.
+ Mr. Wofford. Big enough challenge for the foreseeable
+future.
+ Mr. Lewis. All right. I expected that response, but in the
+meantime--and I understand it.
+
+ aguirve international evaluation
+
+ Senator Wofford, in your general statement, there is
+mention of the 1996 independent evaluation of the AmeriCorps
+program by Aguirve International, headed by President Ford's
+Commission of Education.
+ Of course, some things done in the AmeriCorps program, I
+guess with a variety and mix of backgrounds, levels of pay, et
+cetera, it is not a simple thing to measure. Nonetheless, the
+programs obviously, as I have stated and you have stated, need
+to be measured.
+ What are the three most significant findings of the Aguirve
+evaluation?
+ Mr. Wofford. Our director of Evaluation is here, Lance
+Potter, and I think he could state that better than I.
+ Mr. Lewis. Mr. Potter, would you identify yourself for the
+record?
+ Mr. Potter. Yes. My name is Lance Potter. I am director of
+Evaluation for the Corporation for National Service.
+ First, let me say that this----
+ Mr. Lewis. I am sure you have got a dozen, but we are
+looking for three.
+ Mr. Potter. Let me say that the study being done by Aguirve
+International is continuing, and it is a very rigorous study of
+a random sample of AmeriCorps programs.
+ Mr. Wofford. Originally about 10 percent?
+ Mr. Potter. It is a little more than 10 percent.
+ They have found that the impacts of AmeriCorps are
+substantial. First one of the key findings is every single
+program they visit is producing tangible, demonstrable impacts
+in their community. They are all getting things done, which in
+and of itself is an unusual and significant note.
+ I think one of the most significant areas related to what
+Senator Wofford is speaking about is in the area of community
+strengthening and developing relationships in communities.
+ AmeriCorps has been, I think, exceptionally successful. The
+number of partnerships that AmeriCorps programs have developed
+among nonprofit organizations in their communities, their
+ability to essentially find more sufficient ways of bringing
+large groups of people together working on community problems
+has been cited over and over again as remarkable, in
+communities.
+ AmeriCorps is also having, I think, very significant
+effects on the members themselves. The information that we are
+collecting suggests that being in AmeriCorps can change
+people's lives; that the people who serve are overwhelmingly
+positive about their experience. They indicate in great, great
+numbers that it has increased their intention to continue
+school, has increased their intention to volunteer in the
+future, and has significantly, in ways not dissimilar from the
+Peace Corps, broadened their perspective on the role of
+citizenship and their part in society.
+ That is it in a nutshell.
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Potter. Probably, you should
+extend in responding to this next question as well. Have there
+been other independent evaluations of the AmeriCorps program
+during the past year?
+ Mr. Potter. There have.
+ Mr. Lewis. Okay. And if so, can you give us an idea, maybe
+off the top--but also for the record--what their significant
+findings were, separate from the Aguirve evaluation?
+ Mr. Potter. Well, there are a couple of things I could
+point to. Let me say that benefit cost studies are an area
+where more independent research or research independent of the
+Corporation entirely have been funded. Those have shown pretty
+consistently $1.60 to $2.40 of return for every dollar
+invested, every Federal taxpayer dollar invested.
+ We will release a study this summer. I expect it will be in
+that range as well. The other independent studies have focused
+more on implementation of AmeriCorps than on its impacts to
+date. As you noted earlier, it is very difficult midway through
+the third year of a program to assess impact, and most of the
+other studies have implementation issues.
+ Mr. Wofford. Service learning has had a very significant
+study done.
+ Mr. Lewis. You will appreciate that one of the reasons for
+probing is because I note with interest the complexity of
+programs as they are developing and moving forward. The
+measurement of those programs and their complexity is very
+important to us when competitive dollars are a reality, and I
+am really interested in your moving as quickly as you can to
+the results side and being as firm as possible, for it adds to
+credibility rather than otherwise, and these programs--all of
+our programs in this bill are being challenged on the floor,
+and for all the right reasons, I might add.
+ Mr. Wofford. The amount of money is smaller, but maybe
+Susan Stroud or Lance Potter--Susan Stroud, counsel and senior
+adviser on Education who is running our Learn and Service
+Program, would speak on the major study that has been done on
+service learning, or Lance, whoever is----
+
+ evaluation of program through studies
+
+ Mr. Potter. I will continue. I want to mention to the
+chairman that the corporation is very aggressive, in fact, its
+use of total dollars to evaluate its own programs. At the
+present time, you know there are 14 studies underway. A great
+majority of them are aimed at the very purposes to which you
+refer.
+ The study that Senator Wofford made reference to is of
+higher education programs and showed significant impacts on a
+very wide range of variables for the young people serving in
+these programs. They are relatively low-intensity programs by
+the standards of, AmeriCorps. A study that we are now reviewing
+on K-through-12 programs engaged in service learning, will also
+be of great interest.
+ Mr. Lewis. One more question, and then I will turn to my
+colleague. This is pretty simple.
+
+ alliance for catholic education
+
+ On page 3 of the statement, there is mention of a Learn and
+Service America, a higher education grant with the Alliance for
+Catholic Education, ACE, in a number of cities in the Southern
+States.
+ You indicated that ACE and the University of Notre Dame are
+matching every Corporation dollar with $13. Do you believe this
+effort would exist without the AmeriCorps grant?
+ Mr. Wofford. I believe that the Notre Dame colleagues who
+came to say that the AmeriCorps program had inspired them to
+think about how to do this would say that the assistance in
+AmeriCorps was the stimulus to their being invented in this
+respect. I think Father Hesburgh, who brought them to see me
+quite a while ago when they were first incubating the idea,
+would say exactly that.
+ Mr. Lewis. Okay. I have a number of questions like that,
+that are relatively straightforward, but in some ways, help us
+evaluate from various angles that I will submit for the record.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Just a couple of other questions. On
+page 13 of your February 1997 submission to Congress, your
+larger fiscal year 1999 budget estimate----
+ Mr. Wofford. Which page?
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Page 13.
+ You say here, ``AmeriCorps grant programs''--this is in the
+center of page 13--``are not entitlements. No program is
+guaranteed funding, and all programs must compete at either the
+State or national level.'' Can we talk for a few minutes about
+the different programs that are funded?
+ Then, on page 17, you talk about the fact that, and I
+quote, ``In fiscal year 1997, as another year, there is no
+precise methodology to predict the number of programs that will
+receive funding through the various funding streams. The
+reason, of course, is that most grants, including renewals, are
+made on a competitive basis,'' and then, below, you basically
+outline what you anticipate will be the number of programs
+under the State Formula Program, under the State Competitive
+Program, under the National Direct Program and under the set-
+aside.
+ Aren't you basically giving us a pretty good forecast of
+what will be the eventual number of grantees?
+ Mr. Wofford. Right now, the----
+
+ state formula and state competitive programs
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. It is fairly specific on page 17, under
+the State Formula Programs, the State Competitive Programs.
+This is in the center of page 17 of that same booklet.
+ Mr. Wofford. The statute provides that one-third of the
+grants go by State formula. It provides that one-third go
+through this competitive formula. I believe I am right. It is
+in the statute. One-third goes to National Direct on which a
+cap was set that we hope very much will be removed because it
+is greatly diminishing the ability for the major national
+nonprofits, like Boys and Girls Clubs and Habitat for Humanity
+and Red Cross to have multi-State programs. They don't want to
+have to go through many different State commissions in that
+whole process.
+ I can't predict how many State grants there will be because
+they will just----
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Your document appeared to have already
+made some of those projections.
+ Mr. Wofford. This is an estimate based on the past track
+record. We could see larger programs in National Direct or
+smaller ones at the State level, but we have to have some basis
+for planning.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. The reason I ask is that----
+ Mr. Wofford. Oh, I see. Excuse me. I didn't read your last
+sentence that caused your question.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Yes.
+ Mr. Wofford. In each case, they would say, this is an
+estimate that is based on the past track record.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. All of us here have served in local
+government, and I do know that the issue always comes up that
+sometimes groups, nonprofits, with the best of motives, the
+finest records of achievement often consider that they own a
+particular contract or a right to provide a service.
+ I take you at your word that when there were some
+identifiable problems with the IG that you have weeded out some
+of the bad players.
+ Mr. Wofford. That is not saying they were not renewed, not
+necessarily all for that reason.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Some of the points in there, and I won't
+read them into the record, but they are in obviously some
+record somewhere, some of the things that did occur appeared to
+me to mirror some of the things that the CETA program had a
+number of years ago and other job employment programs had, and
+I just want to have a higher level of assurance that when there
+are identifiable problems that those agencies that have
+problems will weed it out and not somewhat protect it just
+because of, let's say their power and prominence in the
+community.
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes, to that with all my conviction.
+ For the first time now, the State chairs of these
+commissions are meeting. We have worked very actively with the
+State executive directors to share that responsibility. In many
+cases, the State commissions have been the ones closer to the
+ground who have taken the action.
+ Sometimes we, through our evaluation system, learned about
+it, or our inspector general did, but the State commissions
+have been very responsive.
+ May I also add that we have two occasions when this happens
+routinely. Each of these three-year projected grants has to be
+renewed each year, and in that renewal process, there is a
+review. Then, at the end of three years, they have to recompete
+with any other new applicants for the pot of State money or for
+the National Directs, and we are just at the stage of
+recompetition, because it is the third year, for most of our
+AmeriCorps programs.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Well, I appreciate that clarification.
+Thank you, Senator.
+ Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
+
+ proposed legislative package
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Thank you, Mr. Frelinghuysen.
+ Mr. Wofford, just a couple more questions, really for the
+record or really for this record. The specific authorization of
+the Corporation expired at the end of the fiscal year 1996.
+There was general authority in the 1993 Authorization Act to
+extend the Corporation for an additional year until the end of
+1997. When do you anticipate that the administration's proposed
+legislative package will be sent up to Congress?
+ Mr. Wofford. We are meeting with Chairman Goodling and
+Chairman Jeffords, on both sides of Congress, to agree upon a
+schedule. We very much want serious and successful
+consideration of reauthorization.
+ How soon we will actually put in a bill or proposed
+changes, I am not prepared to say that until I have at least
+had my session with Senator Jeffords.
+ Mr. Lewis. Senator, I think you can appreciate this. I am a
+little disconcerted by general authorization extensions that
+essentially rationalize the delaying of work on the part of
+authorizing committees who, in turn, love to point to the
+Appropriations Committee, for they are constantly getting in
+the authorizing business.
+ Frankly, we are interested in appropriating and evaluating
+dollars, et cetera, rather than doing that other work.
+ When I last year suggested to my staff, my chief of staff
+on this subcommittee, that perhaps this go-around we would
+not--would not appropriate any money for any program that was
+not reauthorized, not just extended, but reauthorized, he kind
+of turned white and said, ``Do you have any idea of how much of
+your bill would not be spending any money?'' It is a huge
+percentage, but it is not healthy for any of us.
+ Mr. Wofford. I agree with that.
+
+ gender chart
+
+ Mr. Lewis. A curiosity in your charts has caused me to
+scratch my head, and I guess it would cause others. It is that
+chart that relates to percent of members who happen to be male
+and happen to be female, your gender chart. At this moment, it
+appears the pattern is taking us rather quickly to 68 percent
+and above who happen to be of a gentle gender.
+ I am really curious about that pattern, and I am wondering
+if you have any idea as to why that is occurring. I am sure
+your recruitment does not involve just reaching for women. Can
+you explain?
+ Mr. Wofford. We are curious. We are exploring why. We have
+had focus groups. We have got some very good minds working on
+it.
+ Our National Civilian Community Corps, in which we are
+directly responsible for recruiting and selection, is trying to
+figure out how we reverse this pattern to get a balance.
+ Apparently, the Peace Corps, I believe I have learned, has
+gone over to a majority of women. In my day, it was one-third
+women, and we were working very hard to get women in it.
+ There is a tendency for men to be appealed to more by the
+Back County Trail Project of the California Conservation Corps.
+I would say that was two-thirds men when I visited them.
+ The strenuous programs I would think would appeal to women
+as much as to men, the same way I would think the challenge of
+being a tutor----
+ Mr. Lewis. Not the women I know.
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, if my wife had seen the beauty and the
+excitement there, she would have loved it.
+ On the other side, as you know, the service industry,
+teaching, for example, has had a predominance of women, and
+two-thirds of our--more than half, going on two-thirds of our
+assignments are in education, which may be a factor.
+ Our new public affairs ads are specifically targeted to
+men.
+ Mr. Lewis. I don't know what the experience of the Peace
+Corps has been. I wonder if the gender breakdown follows these
+patterns or not. We may as an aside ask that question to see if
+we can conclude----
+ Mr. Wofford. I know the proportion of women has greatly
+increased from the first years of the Peace Corps. Just what it
+is now, I don't know.
+ Mr. Lewis. I will pursue that, just because it is----
+ Mr. Wofford. Well, we are pursuing it, also. We are
+pursuing the challenge here to keep a balance. The balance is
+much better.
+ Mr. Lewis. I did have some additional questions relative to
+a number of reports that are emanating from the inspector
+general's office, but the specific area of interest related to
+the auditability of the trust fund, but frankly, their
+information came to us just last night. So we haven't really
+had a chance to look.
+ I might mention for the record an item that is relatively
+new for this committee, and I hope we can send this to other
+committees.
+
+ partnership with inspector general
+
+ I have become very impressed with the potential of our
+forming an effective partnership with our IG's around. I am
+very concerned, for example, at housing programs across the
+country and what may be happening in urban America, and the
+IG's have done their work, but their reports have kind of, in
+some way, fallen off the cliff at HUD. We intend in a very
+positive way to ask the IG's to help the committee, especially,
+and in connection with your program, looking at some of those
+other analyses that are being done and getting their
+independent-for-Congress input, I think, could be valuable to
+us as go forward.
+ Mr. Wofford. We do, too, with her reports, and on the
+National Service trust, the problems that that exploration of
+an audit developed in the report that we sent to you. Those
+problems are like the problems of the '99 recommendations. It
+is the same organization, and it had the same problems, and we
+are going to be scrubbing those numbers in the education trust
+to the very best of our ability and with the utmost concern and
+priority.
+ Mr. Lewis. Ms. Cunningham and others, I am sure, will be
+pleased to hear that this will be probably the last time for
+the record that we suggested our problems relate to Vista and
+Action and others, but rather, Service Corps had a little time
+in the saddle here.
+ Mr. Wofford. Yes, indeed.
+ Mr. Lewis. All the problems will be Service Corps' problems
+from this point forward, National Service Corps' problems.
+ Mr. Wofford. And that trust, except insofar as you could
+pin it on the structures and the systems that were inherited,
+it is on the Corporation's watch, of course.
+ Mr. Lewis. Right. We do have additional questions for the
+record, largely from those members who have had conflicting
+circumstances. I would ask my staff to notify the other members
+that we are concluding our hearings for this go-around at
+least, and if they do have questions, to submit them for the
+record.
+ In the meantime, Mr. Frelinghuysen, do you have an
+additional question or comment?
+
+ district of columbia nccc deployment site
+
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Just for the record, what is the present
+deployment site for the District for the National Civilian
+Community Corps (NCCC)? The budget request will cover the cost
+of making the current District of Columbia NCCC deployment site
+a permanent campus.
+ Mr. Wofford. Fred Peters, the head of the NCCC, would you
+state your plans about the site in or near the District?
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Mr. Peters? Is that Fred?
+ Mr. Peters. Fred.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. Thank you.
+ Mr. Peters. We have got a temporary site in the District.
+At this time, it is located at Fort Belvoir, Virginia. We do
+work in the District. The idea was to find a place where we
+could house corps members that would not be of great cost to
+us. We have an arrangement with the Department of Defense that
+allows us to utilize military installations, if they are
+available.
+ They are located in old World War II buildings, a temporary
+arrangement. We rotate teams of 10 to 12 corps members, and
+there are 55 total.
+ Next year, what the budget reflects is that that will
+become a permanent campus, and raise that 55 to 100. We have
+got many things that we would like to do in the District, and
+as you know well the many compelling needs in the District.
+ We are trying to find a location in the Washington area
+that will house that 100 people, and we have got the Department
+of Defense helping us. The intent is to raise that number to
+100 corps members here in the District, and they will do work
+in the District of Columbia, the State of Virginia, and Western
+Virginia.
+ Mr. Frelinghuysen. We have how many of these campuses
+nationally?
+
+ nationwide campuses
+
+ Mr. Peters. We have now five campuses. We have one at Perry
+Point, Maryland that is located at a VA hospital. It is a small
+one, 55, 60 corps members. In Charleston, South Carolina, that
+is about 265. We have got Denver, Colorado, an old Air Force
+base, Lowery Air Force base, and then San Diego, California.
+ Mr. Wofford. I think we would maybe like to put in the
+record an account of what we are doing in the District of
+Columbia, including the NCCC, if we could add that to the
+record.
+
+[Pages 292 - 311--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, I would appreciate your broadening that
+addition in the record to include this comment.
+
+ conclusion
+
+ I wouldn't want to close this session without mentioning
+the rather phenomenal session that the House of Representatives
+had in Hershey, Pennsylvania last weekend. Virtually, all the
+members who are in attendance today participated in that
+weekend session, and it was one of the more positive and
+stimulating and exciting activities that I have been involved
+in, in the many, many years I have been involved in public
+affairs, about 220 members of the House coming together,
+reflecting a whole spectrum of members, but committing
+themselves to dialogue, rather than some of the shrilled lack
+of dialogue that we have seen by way of C-SPAN for some time
+now. It is a very positive development that needs to be
+extended in many ways.
+ Some, including myself, were heard to say that small steps
+at bipartisanship and nonpartisanship are much better than
+gigantic steps that fail, and one of the elements that came
+forward is a ``small step.'' It involves the Speaker's vision
+of a shining city on the Hill; that the Nation's Capital is
+going to be the Nation's Capital whether we improve upon its
+condition or not, but, indeed, if all of us decide to come
+together on this one and insist that the Nation's Capital be a
+place that we all can be proud of, and indeed, beginning with
+the citizens who live in the District, a place that is safe,
+where the schools function well, where the children compete in
+all other brackets of education as they already compete in
+their music skills, the orchestra for young people where
+parents are involved, that is worldwide recognized and renown,
+it can be done in the District, a small step towards seeing
+what nonpartisanship and working together can do.
+ I would commend it to the National Service Corps. There is
+going to be a lot of action here in the next several months and
+I think several years that bode very well for attempting to
+extend what could eventually be judged only as rhetoric at
+Hershey. I have the hope that it is a lot more than that.
+ So we have gone through this process today and gave you
+more than, I gather, what happened in the other body, but
+probably more than you really wanted.
+ Mr. Wofford. No, no. I can't say how much we appreciate
+these hours and the concern and the questions. It has been
+wonderful.
+ Mr. Lewis. Well, it is a pleasure to be with you, and we
+look forward to working with you all. Thank you for coming.
+ The meeting is adjourned.
+
+[Pages 313 - 605--The official Committee record contains additional material here.]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ W I T N E S S E S
+
+ ----------
+ Page
+Johnson, Gary.................................................... 1
+Witt, J. L....................................................... 1
+Wofford, Harris.................................................. 131
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+ I N D E X
+
+ ----------
+
+ Federal Emergency Management Agency
+
+Assistance to State of Kentucky:
+ Page
+ Flooding in Kentucky......................................... 53
+ Location of Kentucky Disaster Field Office................... 53
+ Making Additional Assistance Available....................... 54
+Assistance to State of North Carolina:
+ FEMA's Role in North Carolina Disasters...................... 39
+ Hazard Mitigation Funds for North Carolina................... 43
+ N.C. Recovery Task Force Recommendations..................... 42
+Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program:
+ CSEPP........................................................ 65
+ DoD as a Partner............................................. 67
+Climate Forecasting.............................................. 50
+Closing Remarks.................................................. 75
+Counter-Terrorism Funds.......................................... 73
+Director's Opening Remarks....................................... 2
+Disaster Assistance:
+ 1998 Disaster Relief Estimates............................... 24
+ Budget Supplemental.......................................... 25
+ California Hospital Medical Center........................... 38
+ Disasters in Midwest......................................... 4
+ Disaster Insurance........................................... 38
+ Disaster Obligations......................................... 24
+ Disaster Projections......................................... 72
+ DRF Efficiencies............................................. 29
+ Levee Problems............................................... 20
+ Need for Efficient Response.................................. 20
+ Public Assistance Appeals.................................... 62
+ Recent Disasters............................................. 26
+ Remaining Requirements from California Earthquakes........... 73
+ Snow Removal Policy.......................................... 44
+Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program:
+ Disaster Loans............................................... 66
+ Disaster Loan Program........................................ 64
+Emergency Equipment:
+ Budget for Equipment Updating and Replacement................ 51
+ Emergency Equipment Replacement.............................. 32
+ Surplus Equipment............................................ 36
+Executive Direction:
+ Assessing Priorities......................................... 52
+ Minority Contracting......................................... 46
+ Submission of Congressional Reports.......................... 22
+ Workplace Diversity.......................................... 45
+Fiscal Year 1998 Budget Request.................................. 130
+Flood Program:
+ Borrowing Authority for the Flood Program.................... 30
+ Flood Insurance Deductible................................... 58
+ Flood Insurance Rates........................................ 69
+ Flood Insurance Requirements................................. 36
+ Flood Losses and Collections................................. 70
+ Flood Mapping................................................ 55
+ Insurance Legislation........................................ 59
+ Marketing of Flood Insurance................................. 56
+ Subsidized Policies.......................................... 57
+ Working with Insurance Agents................................ 58
+Mitigation:
+ Hazard Mitigation Grants..................................... 33
+ Mitigation Programs.......................................... 68
+ Value of Mitigation.......................................... 28
+Need for Additional Urban Search and Rescue Teams................ 31
+Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program:
+ Pre-Disaster Mitigation...................................... 34
+ Pre-Disaster Mitigation Concept.............................. 3
+ Pre-Disaster Mitigation Pilot Projects....................... 44
+ Legislative Authority for Pre-Disaster Mitigation............ 74
+ Spending Plan for Pre-Disaster Mitigation.................... 48
+State and Local Assistance:
+ Budget for Preparedness, Training and Exercises.............. 71
+ Comments from States......................................... 49
+ Cost Share for State and Local Grants........................ 71
+ Performance Agreements....................................... 67
+ State and Local Assistance vs. Pre-Disaster Mitigation....... 35
+ State and Local Programs..................................... 32
+Subcommittee's Opening Remarks................................... 2
+U.S. Fire Administration:
+ Arson........................................................ 61
+ Funding for the Fire Academy................................. 63
+U.S.G.S. Mapping................................................. 22
+
+ Corporation for National and Community Service
+
+Accomplishments of National Service.............................. 133
+Administrative Costs on Grants................................... 263
+Alliance for Catholic Education--Notre Dame...................... 286
+America Reads........................................136, 232, 321, 337
+ Broader Expansion into Literacy.............................. 240
+ Budget....................................................... 259
+ Department of Education Funding.......................237, 238, 240
+ Legislative Authority........................................ 236
+ Legislative Proposals........................................ 233
+ Literacy and Existing School Systems..................241, 256, 313
+ Role of Tutors to Teachers................................... 245
+ Skills of Work-Study Students................................ 242
+ State Commissions on National Service........................ 239
+AmeriCorps Cash Award............................................ 341
+AmeriCorps Member Stipend......................................244, 335
+AmeriCorps Recruitment........................................... 341
+AmeriCorps Structure............................................. 243
+AmeriCorps* National Programs for 1996........................... 264
+AmeriCorps* NCCC District of Columbia Deployment Site............ 291
+AmeriCorps* NCCC Expansion....................................... 342
+AmeriCorps* NCCC Nationwide Campuses............................. 291
+AmeriCorps*State Formula and State Competitive Programs.......... 287
+AmeriCorps*State Programs for 1996............................... 266
+AmeriCorps*VISTA Literacy Corps.................................. 254
+Audit Process.................................................... 246
+Audit Recommendations from Arthur Andersen....................... 248
+Budget Estimate.................................................. 159
+Budget Request............................................132, 235, 258
+California Conservation Corps.................................... 253
+Carryover Funds.................................................. 259
+Competition for AmeriCorps....................................... 340
+Completion Rate of AmeriCorps Members..........................251, 252
+Conclusion....................................................... 312
+Cost Per Peace Corps Volunteer................................... 249
+Cutting Costs and Improving Efficiency..........135, 250, 278, 317, 333
+Decentralized System of National Service......................... 277
+Demographics of AmeriCorps Members...................134, 153, 289, 324
+Disaster Relief.................................................. 134
+District of Columbia National Service Projects................... 292
+Diversity in Agency.............................................. 234
+Education and National Service................................... 133
+Education Award Usage............................................ 251
+Elimination of AmeriCorps Grants to Federal Agencies...........260, 262
+Evaluation by Aguirre International.............................. 284
+Evaluation of Program Through Studies............................ 286
+Financial Management......................................135, 316, 333
+Grant-Making Process...........................................260, 318
+Health Insurance for AmeriCorp Members.........................255, 335
+Inspector General's Findings..................................... 277
+Leveraging Volunteers............................................ 134
+Matching Funds................................................... 317
+Measurable Outcomes.............................................. 253
+National Service Scholars......................................279, 315
+National Service Scholars and Education Awards................... 280
+National Service Trust........................................... 249
+``Paid Volunteers'' Misnomer..................................... 257
+Partnership with Inspector General............................... 290
+Partnership with States.......................................... 335
+Presidents' Summit on America's Future.........................258, 282
+ Corporation for National Service Involvement................. 283
+Prohibition on Political Activity................................ 337
+Questions for the Record......................................... 313
+Reauthorization of the National Service Acts...................137, 288
+Reinvented Government............................................ 134
+Selection of AmeriCorps Members.................................. 250
+Selective Service Agreement with AmeriCorps...................... 246
+Service-Learning Program......................................... 237
+Three Types of Funding........................................... 281
+Training and Technical Assistance................................ 319
+Welfare Reform and National Service.............................. 324
+Written Testimony................................................ 138
+
+
+