The (A) case (1739.0) focuses on the early years of the program in the 1990s that a definitive statement – based on interviews with those who worked authorizing legislation – the program is designed and structured and how it financed won Congressional approval, including the political reasons for steering some AmeriCorps grants to large, multi-state “national direct payments” Organizations like Teach for America, and other small, local organizations by state “Service Commission … Read More »

The (A) case (1739.0) focuses on the early years of the program in the 1990s that a definitive statement – based on interviews with those who worked authorizing legislation – the program is designed and structured and how it won Congressional approval, including the political reasons for steering some AmeriCorps grants to large, multi-state “national direct payments” Organizations like Teach for America, and other small, local organizations by government “service fees” financed. Ultimately, the case narrows its focus on public finance management how a special trust fund, paid out of the education awards for AmeriCorps members finance. The case raises the question of how the National Service Education Trustthe mismanagement of those 2002-2003 budget crisis that finance the entire programin a way that benefits both regulatory but not overly expensive spark. In combination with the beginning of the (B) case, this case can discuss models for the financing of a variety of public benefits, including those analogs as state pension social security schemes such as the U.S. approach to the estimation. HKS case number 1,739.0
«Hide

from
Howard Husock,
Mark H. Moore
25 pages.
Release date: 01 March 2004. Prod #: HKS480-PDF-ENG
The AmeriCorps Budget Crisis of 2003 (A): Why the National Service Movement Given cuts and how they responded HBR case solution

[related_post themes="flat"]