STATEMENT OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RSVP DIRECTORS

  ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE KENNEDY SERVE AMERICA ACT

I am [Insert Name, Title, Program] and am appearing today as a representative of the National Association of RSVP Directors, a national membership association representing RSVP Directors across the country.  We are particularly concerned that when implementing the part of the Act that governs the introduction of competition into the RSVP program, the Corporation follow both the spirit and the letter of the Act.

I want to reiterate some basic facts about RSVP to emphasize its current state as well as its potential. As you know, for the last 38 years RSVP has worked with a wide network of more than 65,000 nonprofit organizations to provide seniors with meaningful volunteer opportunities through which to meet the needs in their communities.  Approximately 430,000 seniors  -- including a growing number of “baby boomers” – volunteer annually in RSVP at an average federal cost of less than $140 per volunteer. In addition, RSVP raised $52 million, or 46 percent of grant funds in 2007, far exceeding the required 30 percent match.  

RSVP programs already deliver extraordinarily high quality volunteer opportunities.  In two recent studies, the Corporation for National and Community Service reported that last year RSVP volunteers mentored an estimated 34,000 children and that from 2004 to 2006, RSVP volunteers increased the number of children of prisoners mentored by 75 percent. RSVP has increased the number of baby boomers in the program and provides those volunteers with activities that make use of their skills.  Baby boomers in RSVP volunteer over 100 hours more than counterparts who are not and virtually all of RSVP baby boomers who recruit/coordinate other volunteers are likely to continue in the program. 

No other system provides so many opportunities at so low a cost. If the nation is to make a commitment to helping baby boomers volunteer in, and serve, their communities RSVP must be part of that commitment.  

In implementing competition, we remind you that RSVP is not like AmeriCorps in which volunteers serve for a defined period of time. For many RSVP volunteers, their service starts upon retirement and continues until they are no longer able to volunteer.  Their loyalty is to RSVP, but it is also to their communities. The Corporation cannot ensure that seniors currently volunteering will continue to volunteer when, because of competition, their programs move across town or into the next county.  Seniors who have devoted years to their communities could suddenly and painfully be robbed of the chance to serve their neighbors.  Nor can it ensure that sponsors who contribute millions of dollars to match the federal investment will continue to support those programs when they leave their community.

When RSVP leaves an area, it leaves behind nonprofits that are less able to deliver services. Starting from scratch will set back new programs several years because it takes years to develop the volunteer opportunities and the financial backing essential to operate a high quality program.

Competition may disrupt the lives of senior volunteers and weaken, rather than strengthen RSVP. It may disrupt the lives of hundreds of thousands of seniors, result in the loss of millions of dollars in community support for RSVP, and reduce the ability of local nonprofits to provide needed services in communities across the nation, precisely when those services are most needed.

The NARSVPD Association has had one goal throughout this reauthorization process: to introduce competition while doing everything we can to protect volunteers, minimize disruption to their volunteer service, and provide for an open and transparent process that recognizes the need to hear from all stakeholders and ensures that their perspectives are heard. 

Now, we want to work with you to ensure that we have achieved that goal. In this statement we focus on the implementation of competition, the design of that process, other opportunities for Senior Corps involvement in Corporation activities.

Introduction of Competition

The bill requires the Corporation for National and Community Service to promulgate regulations not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of the Serve America Act, or October 2011.  We strongly urge the Corporation to take its time in implementing the time line so as to allow all participants to prepare for the rulemaking process.  Proceeding deliberately at the outset should minimize problems down the road so that we get it right the first time.

We expect this public process to involve such stakeholders as program directors, volunteers, partner organizations, and beneficiaries of volunteers’ service.  We hope the Corporation will follow the model it used to promulgate regulations affecting AmeriCorps in 2005, including regional hearings so that all interested parties have the opportunity to participate.

It is our understanding, based on extensive discussions, with Hill staff that as long as RSVP programs meet their performance measures, they will not compete until 2016. That is, that in 2013, only those programs that have not met their performance measures will compete.  In 2013, the Corporation has the option to renew the grants of those programs meeting their performance measures for another three years.  We expect the Corporation to exercise that option as the general rule.  The goal is to evaluate programs and ensure that they provide high quality volunteer opportunities and meet community needs, not burden them unnecessarily.

Implementation

The statute also requires the Corporation to “consult with the directors of programs receiving grants under this section during the development and implementation of the competitive process.”   In a Floor Statement delivered before enactment of the Serve America Act, Senators Enzi and Mikulski emphasized their bi-partisan position that “there is a lot of on-the-ground expertise within the community of RSVP directors, and we expect the Corporation will listen to their recommendations, the recommendations of the National Association of RSVP Directors, and involve representatives from these communities in the peer review process.”   Consistent with the charge from Senators Enzi and Mikulski, we expect the Corporation to consult with RSVP program directors who are members of the National Association of RSVP Directors.

The Corporation will evaluate RSVP programs based on a series of performance measures.  For each year preceding 2014, the Corporation may, after consulting with program directors, determine that a particular performance measure is “operationally problematic” and may, in consultation with program directors, eliminate or modify that performance measure. The evaluation is to be shared with the program and is “(B) to be used as the basis for program improvement, and for the provision of training and technical assistance.”

We urge the Corporation to conduct these evaluations in as efficient and cost-effective way as possible, by for example, using existing performance measures and outcomes in the evaluation rather than requiring new ones. The goal should be to evaluate programs, not burden them unnecessarily.  These evaluations are to be conducted by review teams that should include program directors who are members of the NARSVPD because they are the most “knowledgeable about programs assisted under this section.”

Programs that do not measure up are to receive training and technical assistance from the Corporation.  We fully expect programs that find themselves in this situation will seek assistance from the Corporation and we expect the Corporation to make such assistance available upon request.  As we see it, the goal of this process should be to ensure that every program is as good as it can be rather than to punish some programs. The point of program evaluation is to ensure that they provide high quality volunteer opportunities and meet community needs, not burden them unnecessarily.

Indeed, not later than 6 months after the date of enactment, the Corporation is to develop and disseminate an on-line resource guide which is to include “(1) examples of high-performing programs; (2) corrective actions for underperforming programs; and (3) examples of meaningful outcome-based performance measures, outcomes, and criteria that capture a program’s mission and priorities.”   

 

Again, quoting Senator Mikulski, “[And] it is also important to note that we have directed the Corporation to make available an online resource guide. This resource guide will spell out the Corporation's expectations for high performing programs, provide examples of best practices, and help demystify the meaningful outcome measures that we expect to be applied to these programs. “ 

Nevertheless, we understand that some programs may fall short, even after help has been provided.  Those programs should be competed.  If no successor appears, the Corporation will continue that program for 12 months in order to minimize disruption to volunteers and the disruption of services to the community.

RSVP programs must hold up our end and deliver the best possible volunteer opportunities to seniors so that they, in turn, can have the greatest impact on their communities.  But, the Corporation also has responsibilities that it must meet. 

Again, quoting Senator Mikulski, “While this bill requires that RSVP programs undergo evaluations to gauge their performance levels, it also includes requirements for the Corporation to provide technical assistance to those programs that are struggling. It is important that as these organizations work to improve their performance they are able to obtain the support that they need from the Corporation to be successful. We have built in sufficient time so that the process is not rushed, and the legislation also ensures that every effort be made to minimize disruption to the volunteers and the communities they serve.”

 Intergenerational Programs 

We do not believe that language that merely encourages intergenerational components in AmeriCorps programs goes far enough.  We suggest that this language be interpreted not only to cover individuals, but senior corps programs. That is, for example, enabling an AmeriCorps program to use its funds to engage with an RSVP program rather than simply recruiting individual older adults.  We believe that this interpretation is consistent with Congressional intent and could result in interesting intergenerational programs that will also bring different streams of service closer together.

 State Offices 

While we appreciate that the Serve America Act requires input and consultation from Corporation employees, State Commissions, State educational Agencies, and other interested stakeholders before “executing any assignment of authority,” we are concerned that this language is too vague.  We urge the Corporation to define a public and transparent process to use before any such assignment is made.  In order not to impede the Corporation’s work, we suggest that the process be time limited. 

Conclusion 

I would be remiss, however, if I did not comment on the Administration’s FY2010 budget request.  During the debate on the Serve America Act, the Statement of Administration Policy stated that the introduction of competition “would better position the program for expansion” and that “competition will improve the quality of service opportunities for seniors while introducing greater accountability and innovation.”  That is, that the Administration would grow the RSVP program if the Congress included competition in the Serve America Act.

We are disappointed that the Administration does not adequately fulfill this commitment.  With some 70 million baby boomers expected to retire in the coming decades we will need RSVP to provide them with meaningful opportunities to serve their communities.  With almost 430,000 volunteers in 741 programs across the country, it is the only national infrastructure we have capable of performing this important job at comparatively low cost.  

Thank you for the opportunity to present our views to you.  The NARSVP Directors looks forward to working with you as the Kennedy Serve America Act ushers in a new era of service.