Order Code RS21168
Updated August 2, 2006
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS WebFebruary 4, 2008
The Peace Corps: Current Issues
Curt Tarnoff
Specialist in Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division
Summary
As it prepares authorization and State/Foreign Operations appropriations legislation in
2006
in 2008, Congress will consider the FY2007FY2009 level of funding for the Peace Corps and
related issues. This report will be updated as events warrant.
Generally viewed positively by the public and widely supported in Congress, the
Peace Corps, the U.S. agency that provides volunteer skills internationally, has drawn
congressional attention in recent years largely due to two issues — a Presidential initiative
2002 Presidential
initiative to significantly expand the size of the agencyvolunteer force and reports in 2003-2004
raising concerns regarding the
safety and security of volunteers. Both issues stimulated
legislative action with bills
being approved by House or Senate. However, these
legislative efforts died with the 108th
Congress, and the only issue of note to emerge in 2005 concerned the relationship
between the Peace Corps and the U.S. military. In 2006, the 109th Congress will consider Congress. In 2007, the 110th Congress is considering
the President’s annual funding request for the Peace Corps and new authorization
legislation.
Background
Founded in 1961, the Peace Corps has sought to meet its legislative mandate of
promoting world peace and friendship by sending American volunteers to serve at the
grassroots level in villages and towns in all corners of the globe. Living and working with
ordinary people, volunteers have contributed in a variety of capacities — such as teachers,
forestersenvironmental specialists, health promoters, and small business advisers — to improving
the lives of those
they serve and helping others understand American culture. They also
seek to share their
understanding of other countries with Americans back home through
efforts like the Paul
D. Coverdell World Wise School program, which links serving
volunteers with U.S.
elementary school classrooms. To date, more than 182187,000 Peace
Corps volunteers have
served in 138139 countries. About 7,8108,079 volunteers currently serve in 75 nations. On July
25, 2006, President Bush nominated
74 nations, the highest number since 1970. Ronald A. Tschetter, a former volunteer, to succeed
Gaddi Vasquez as the new Peace is
the current Peace Corps Director.
In addition to its basic two-year tour of duty, the Peace Corps introduced in 1996 a
Crisis Corps, drawing on former volunteers to provide short-term (up to six months)
emergency and humanitarian assistance at the community level with NGOs, relief, and
CRS-2
other development organizations. Hundreds of Crisis Corps volunteers have served in 40
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress
CRS-2
countries, including post-tsunami Thailand and Sri Lanka. In September 2005, Crisis
Corps volunteers were deployed to assist Hurricane Katrina relief, the first time in Peace
Corps history that volunteers were used domestically. To date, roughly 272 volunteers
have begun assignments on the Gulf Coast.
Congressional Actions
Appropriations. The FY2006 Foreign Operations appropriations (P.L. 109-102,
H.R. 3057), signed into law on November 14, 2005, provides $322 million for the Peace
Corps. Following a one percent across-the-board rescission, the actual Peace Corps
appropriation is $318.8 million. This final appropriation is about $26.2 million less than
the President’s $345 million request and $1.4 million more than the FY2005
appropriation.
In early February, the Administration presented its FY2007 foreign operations budget
request to Congress. It provides $336.7 million for the Peace Corps, $17.9 million more
than the FY2006 appropriation — a 6% increase. On June 9, the House approved a
FY2007 foreign operations bill, H.R. 5522 (H.Rept. 109-486), providing $324.587
million for the Peace Corps, $5.8 million more than the previous year but $12.1 million
less than the Administration request. On July 10, the Senate Appropriations Committee
reported its version of the bill (S.Rept. 109-277), providing $318.780 million, the same
as in FY2006 and $17.9 million below the request.
Authorization. Despite repeated efforts during the previous four years, Congress
adjourned in December 2005 without enacting a new Peace Corps authorization. On
April 6, 2005, the Senate began, but did not complete, consideration of S. 600 (S.Rept.
109-35), the State Department authorization, which contained language authorizing
appropriations for the Peace Corps in FY2006 at $345 million, the Administration request
level for that year, and “such sums as may be necessary” for FY2007.
More comprehensive bills approved by the Senate in 2002 (both S. 2667 and S. 12)
and by the House in 2003 (H.R. 1950) would have authorized appropriations that would
double the size of the Peace Corps as well as institute a wide range of reforms and new
programs.
Peace Corps and the U.S. Military. In 2005, a program approved by Congress
several years ago raised serious concerns, particularly in the community of former
volunteers, that the line traditionally drawn between U.S. defense and foreign policy and
the work of the Peace Corps may be crossed. The National Call to Service Program,
initiated in the FY2003 Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 107-314), allowed the Defense
Department to offer recruits the opportunity to meet the latter part of their eight-year
military obligation by serving in the Peace Corps or other national service program. Some
argued that any perceived identification of the Peace Corps with the U.S. military might
negatively impact acceptance of the program abroad and endanger the lives of volunteers.
The Peace Corps responded by saying that nothing in the way the agency recruits or treats
volunteers had changed as a result of the legislation. The Peace Corps said it was under
no obligation to accept the new military applicants. It further noted that both retired
military and Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) had joined the Peace Corps in the past, and
the only unusual thing that had been, and would continue to be, required, was a
commitment from DOD that the volunteer would not be called up for duty during his
CRS-3
volunteer service unless there is a national emergency. In FY2005, seven retired and IRR
military personnel entered the Peace Corps, none under the new program which was not
expected to see its first volunteer applicants until 2007, at the earliest.
The issue was viewed by many in the context of the long-standing policy and
practice barring the Peace Corps and volunteers from any relationship with the
intelligence community. Since the 1960s, a clear separation was felt to be necessary to
insure the safety of volunteers who might otherwise be targets of suspicion in developing
countries. In fact, leading up to the January 2003 termination of its Russia program, some
Russian officials periodically insinuated that volunteers were spies. Opponents of the
National Call to Service Program, while acknowledging its good intentions, feared the
“formal linkage” of the military with the Peace Corps that the legislation appeared to
establish would create similar incidents. Language removing the Peace Corps from the
program was adopted in the Department of Defense Authorization for FY2006 (H.R.
1815), approved by Congress in December 2005.
Safety and Security Legislation. Because they live and work at the grassroots
level in developing countries, Peace Corps volunteers appear to many Americans to be
especially vulnerable to crime. Even before September 11, their safety and security had
been a prime concern of the Peace Corps. The threat of anti-American terrorism has
increased those concerns. In late 2003, the Dayton (Ohio) Daily News ran a series of
reports highlighting — many former volunteers say exaggerating — the dangers
potentially faced by volunteers, and suggested that the agency was failing in its obligation
to provide adequate security.
Following hearings held by the House International Relations Committee, the House
approved H.R. 4060 on June 1, 2004. The Health, Safety, and Security of Peace Corps
Volunteers Act of 2004 (H.Rept. 108-481) sought to address some security concerns by
statutorily establishing the already-existing Office of Safety and Security in the Peace
Corps and creating an Ombudsman position to handle volunteer complaints. The bill also
required reports on screening procedures used to determine the psychological fitness of
those seeking to serve as volunteers, and a report on the “five year rule” that limits the
length of Peace Corps staff employment and which is regarded as one reason for high staff
turnover and loss of institutional memory on safety and security issues. Although the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee also held hearings on the issue, no safety and
security legislation was approved in the Senate in 2004.
In its report on H.R. 3057 (H.Rept. 109-152), the FY2006 Foreign Operations bill,
the House Appropriations Committee recognized an improvement in safety and security
efforts of the Peace Corps in recent years. It also called for the agency to create a global
volunteer mapping system tracking volunteer locations in its emergency response system.
Issues for Congress
Expansion Initiative. In his State of the Union speech to Congress on January 29,
2002, President Bush announced a proposal to double the size of the Peace Corps within
five years from its January 2002 level of about 7,000, bringing it closer than it has been
in decades to its 1966 peak of 15,556.
CRS-4
However, by 2005, with three years of insufficient appropriations, it had become
clear that the original Administration plan to double the size of the Peace Corps over five
years would not be met. Meeting that goal would have meant a significant increase in its
budget over the same period, presumably to be maintained for years thereafter. By
FY2007, the Peace Corps appropriation was expected to be $485 million — more than
$200 million greater than FY2002. While the various House- and Senate-approved
authorization bills would have met or slightly surpassed the Administration proposal,
Congress has had to weigh whether sufficient funds were available vis-a-vis other foreign
aid priorities — such as HIV/AIDS, terrorism, and child survival — to warrant
appropriating the amounts requested by the Administration. Despite the apparent
popularity of the Peace Corps, constraints on spending combined with the pull of other
priorities undermined the rapid expansion plan. In early 2005, with an FY2006 request
$98 million below its own original expansion budget plan and a newly stated goal in its
budget justification document of 8,000 volunteers by the end of FY2008, the
Administration appeared to have abandoned the initiative.
Table 1. Peace Corps Budget: FY2002-FY2007
Fiscal Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
275
317
359
401
345
336.7 (485)
Appropriation ($ mil)
278.7
295.1
308.2
317.4
318.8
—
Total Volunteers
6,636
7,533
7,733
7,810
(13,600)
(14,000)
Request ($ mil)
Source: Peace Corps and CRS. FY2002 figure includes $3.9 million Emergency Response Fund transfer.
FY2002-FY2006 figures reflect across-the-board rescissions. Figures in parentheses are original expansion
request. Total volunteers are number at end of the fiscal year and, for FY2006 forward, anticipated number
if expansion appropriation had been met. Under original expansion initiative, FY2003 volunteer number
target was 8,200; FY2004 target was 10,000; FY2005 target was 12,000.
From the beginning, the expansion initiative ran into resistance. In providing only
$285 million for the Peace Corps in its FY2003 appropriations legislation, Senate
appropriators noted in report language (S.Rept. 107-219) that the expansion plan was
“overly-ambitious,” suggesting it may have to be drawn out over more than five years.
In each year from FY2003 to FY2006, Congress appropriated funds $22 million, $51
million, $84 million, and $26.2 million, respectively, below the Administration request.
Despite these shortfalls in funding, Congress has appeared supportive of continued
expansion. The FY2005 foreign operations statement of managers called for the
establishment of new Peace Corps programs in Cambodia and other locations in Asia.
Program and Management Issues. In considering the expansion initiative,
Members of Congress appear to have been concerned that even an increase in size of the
Peace Corps more modest than that originally envisioned might exacerbate existing
weaknesses or create strains in its operations. Both House and Senate legislation in the
108th Congress stressed the importance to Peace Corps’ effectiveness of improved
strategic planning and H.R. 4060, the House bill that addressed security issues, called for
a report on the extent to which work assignments are well-developed and volunteers are
suitable for them. No matter the outcome of the expansion effort, Congress is likely to
continue to pay particular attention to how the agency addresses recruitment,
programming, and support of volunteers.
CRS-5
The recruitment of volunteers with appropriate skills and willingness to live in
unfamiliar and sometimes uncomfortable conditions is essential to the overall mission of
the Peace Corps. A substantial spike in applicants and those expressing interest in
applying since September 11 has made it easier for the Peace Corps to meet its
recruitment goals. In FY2004, 148,216 people expressed an interest in the Peace Corps
(up from 94,463 in FY2001), 13,249 actually applied (8,897 in FY2001), and 3,811
became trainees (3,191 in FY2001). The agency, however, while adept at recruiting
generalists and providing them with sufficient training to carry out useful assignments,
has not emphasized the provision of highly skilled professionals, such as doctors,
agronomists, or engineers, which, many argue, more accurately reflects the current needs
of developing countries. Weighed against this view is the belief that the Peace Corps is
an agency of public diplomacy as much as it is a development organization, and personal
interaction, and demonstration of U.S. values is as important as providing technical
expertise. To accommodate more highly skilled personnel, the Peace Corps might have
to change many existing practices, including methods of recruitment, training,
programming, and perhaps even terms of service.
Congressional Actions
Appropriations. On February 5, 2007, the Administration presented its FY2008
foreign operations budget request to Congress, providing $333.5 million for the Peace
Corps, a $13.9 million or 4% increase over the FY2007-appropriated level. In December
2007, Congress approved H.R. 2764, the FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act,
providing (under the State/Foreign Operations portion, Division J) $333.5 million for the
Peace Corps, $330.8 million following a .81% across-the-board rescission). H.R. 2764
was signed into law (P.L. 110-161) on December 26, 2007.
On February 4, 2008, the Administration requested $343.5 million for the Peace
Corps in its FY2009 budget, a $12.7 million increase and about 4% higher than the
FY2008 level.
Authorization. Despite repeated efforts during the past six years, Congress has not
enacted a new Peace Corps authorization. The last Peace Corps authorization (P.L. 10630), approved in 1999, covered the years FY2000 to FY2003. Comprehensive bills
approved by the Senate in 2002 (both S. 2667 and S. 12) and by the House in 2003 (H.R.
1950) would have authorized appropriations that would double the size of the Peace
Corps as well as institute a wide range of reforms and new programs. Annual Foreign
Operations appropriations bills routinely waive the requirement of authorization of
foreign aid programs, as the FY2007 continuing resolution measure did in the case of
currently unauthorized foreign aid programs, including the Peace Corps.
The Peace Corps Empowerment Act, S. 732 (Dodd), was introduced on March 1,
2007, and hearings were held by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on July 25,
2007. S. 732 is the most recent effort to authorize appropriations for the Peace Corps and
make substantive changes to the program. It contains provisions that seek to strengthen
the effectiveness of volunteers in the field, provide a larger role for volunteers in the
administration of Peace Corps, and address volunteer personnel and benefit concerns.
Many of these provisions are discussed below.
Issues
Peace Corps Funding. Despite its apparent popularity in Congress and a 2002
expansion initiative by President Bush to double its size within five years, the Peace
Corps has seen only a 22% increase in end of fiscal year volunteer numbers in the past
five years. Meant to raise the number of volunteers from below 7,000 in 2002 to 14,000
in 2007, the initiative would have required an appropriation of about $485 million by
FY2007 — more than $200 million greater than FY2002. In the end, however, Congress
had to weigh whether sufficient funds were available vis-a-vis other foreign aid priorities
(e.g., HIV/AIDS, terrorism, and Afghanistan) to warrant appropriating the amounts sought
by the Administration, and annual expansion funding requests were rejected. The
volunteer level is currently at 8,079.
CRS-3
S. 732 aims for a greatly expanded volunteer force by authorizing appropriations for
the Peace Corps at the following levels — $336 million for FY2008, $380 million for
FY2009, $450 million for FY2010, and $618 million for FY2011. However, according
to the Peace Corps, the proposed authorization legislation would likely mean a further
decrease in volunteer levels in FY2009, because implementation of the legislation’s other
provisions would incur additional costs of between $25 and $30 million, drawing down
funds available for fielding volunteers.
Peace Corps Budget: FY2002-FY2008
Fiscal Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Request ($ mil)
275.0
317.0
359.0
401.0
345.0
336.7
333.5
343.5
Appropriation ($ mil)
278.7
295.1
309.3
317.4
319.9
319.6
330.8
Total Volunteers
6,636
7,533
7,733
7,810
7,749
8,079
—
Source: Peace Corps and CRS.
Note: FY2002-FY2008 figures reflect across-the-board rescissions and transfers from other accounts. Total
volunteers are number at end of the fiscal year.
Small Projects Funding. Peace Corps volunteers generally are employed under
the auspices of a developing country government agency, such as the Ministry of
Education or Agriculture, or a non-governmental organization. In many cases, volunteers
initiate their own small projects to address specific concerns they have identified in their
villages or schools. Some of these projects have been supported through ad hoc efforts
of the volunteer, but over time, more formal spigots of funding have been developed.
Currently, there are two key sources of small-scale funding for Peace Corps
volunteer projects — funds raised for the Peace Corps Partnership Program by the Peace
Corps Office of Private Sector Initiatives (OPSI) and funds provided through an
agreement with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Volunteers do
not have the authority to accept funds on behalf of the agency but can solicit funds from
family and friends accepted through OPSI. In the last seven years, Peace Corps volunteers
received, on average, 1,114 grants each year, worth a total of $2.0 million in USAID
funds annually (roughly $1,795 per grant). In FY2006, OPSI raised $1.4 million and
supported projects that individually averaged $2,952 in value.
Projects take a variety of forms. According to the Peace Corps, a $619 grant for a
village fish farm in Bolivia funded construction of a chain link fence, the cleaning of
excessive algae from the pool, and introduction of 250 fish. A $4,241 grant at a Thailand
health clinic provided a ground-floor addition to ease access for senior citizens and the
disabled.
S. 732 would enhance volunteer effectiveness in the field by providing volunteers
with increased access to funding for these project activities. It authorizes 1% of the
agency’s own appropriations in each fiscal year to be allocated for such purposes. Each
award of seed funds would be limited to $1,000. In opposition, the Peace Corps argues
that its introduction as a source of project income would possibly change the local
CRS-4
perception of the volunteer as someone working with the community to learn how to
obtain its own funding sources to one that sees the volunteer as a source of cash.1
Third Goal. S. 732 also provides support to returned volunteer efforts to meet the
so-called “Third Goal” of the Peace Corps Act — promoting understanding of other
peoples on the part of the American people — by authorizing the Peace Corps to award
grants to returned volunteers for educational and other programs meeting that goal. The
bill authorizes $10 million each year for this purpose.
Currently, Peace Corps sponsors several Third Goal activities, funded in total at
about $2 million in FY2007. These include the Coverdell World Wide Schools Program
noted above; the Peace Corps Fellows Program, through which more than 4,000 returned
volunteers have served as interns in high-need urban or rural U.S. communities; and the
annual Peace Corps Week, in which thousands of returned volunteers visit schools and
libraries around the country to present their Peace Corps experience.
Volunteer Administration. S. 732 would enhance the role volunteers play in
program design and implementation, including site selection, training curriculum, and the
quality and hiring of senior Peace Corps country personnel, by requiring the establishment
of a mechanism at the country level for soliciting the views of volunteers on these issues.
Further, a Volunteer Advisory Committee would be established in each country to make
recommendations to senior personnel.
Currently, according to the Peace Corps, volunteers play a role in site selection by
providing feedback on site safety, project success, and counterpart effectiveness.
Volunteers are encouraged through interaction with senior staff to share their views. In
addition, all posts have a Volunteer Advisory Committee. The Peace Corps argues that
to legislatively require such committees would trigger the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (FACA) and associated burdensome administrative requirements.
Medical Screening. S. 732 requires a number of personnel and administrative
actions that might benefit volunteers. Among these are requirements to reform the
medical screening process to make guidelines more transparent to prospective volunteers.
Both applicants and health-care providers have reportedly found the guidelines confusing.
Further, the bill would make Peace Corps provide full reimbursement for medical tests
required of volunteers and applicants. Currently, applicants are provided only partial
costs. According to the Peace Corps, this provision would cost the agency as much as $10
million each year, versus $1 million in current costs.
Recruitment, Programming, and Support. A continual concern for Congress
over the years has been how the Peace Corps addresses recruitment, programming, and
support of volunteers.
The recruitment of volunteers with appropriate skills and willingness to live in
unfamiliar and sometimes uncomfortable conditions is essential to the overall mission of
the Peace Corps. A substantial spike in applicants and those expressing interest in
1
Testimony of Ronald Tschetter to Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on
Western Hemisphere, Peace Corps, and Narcotics Affairs, July 25, 2007.
CRS-5
applying since September 11, 2001, has made it easier for the Peace Corps to meet its
recruitment goals. In FY2006, 12,242 applied to be volunteers (8,897 in FY2001), 5,148
were invited to join, and 4,095 became trainees (3,191 in FY2001). The agency, however,
while adept at recruiting generalists and providing them with sufficient training to carry
out useful assignments, has not emphasized the provision of highly skilled professionals,
such as doctors, agronomists, or engineers, which, many argue, more accurately reflects
the current needs of developing countries. Weighed against this view is the belief that the
Peace Corps is an agency of public diplomacy as much as it is a development
organization, and personal interaction and demonstration of U.S. values is as important
as providing technical expertise. To accommodate more highly skilled personnel, some
say the Peace Corps might have to change many existing practices, including methods of
recruitment, training, programming, and perhaps even terms of service. However, in its
Mexico program, launched in 2004, the Peace Corps has been able to provide more
specialized technical volunteers offering skills in water and environmental engineering.
S. 732 addresses one aspect of this issue by requiring the doubling by end of 2009
of the number of volunteers with at least five years relevant work experience. It also
requires the creation in the next three years of at least 20 sector-specific programs in at
least 20 different countries for which volunteers with five years relevant work experience
would be a requirement. In response, the Peace Corps argues that relevant work
experience is a subjective term, and it would be burdensome both financially and
administratively to set up such a “demonstration” program without causing problems for
the regular Peace Corps program. Director Tschetter has made an objective of increasing
the number of volunteers aged 50 and older, which, some would argue, might lead to
more relevant work-experienced volunteers. Currently, less than 6% of volunteers are 50
or older. To encourage applications by older people, S. 732 would require Peace Corps
to try to get active retiree health plans suspended while volunteers are serving.
The Peace Corps has been criticized in the past for providing inadequate
programming and support of volunteers. This view was reflected in a 1990 Government
Accountability Office (GAO) investigation (Peace Corps: Meeting the Challenges of the
1990s, May 1990, NSIAD-90-122). It noted that some volunteers had little or nothing to
do or had spent six or more months developing their own assignments, without benefit
of site visits by Peace Corps staff. The GAO attributed the programming problem to a
failure of planning, evaluation, and monitoring systems. Since then, the Peace Corps
maintains that it has addressed these weaknesses with systematic approaches to project
development, annual project reviews, and increased opportunities for site visits and
volunteer feedback.
However, incidentsvolunteer anecdotal accounts suggesting poor
programming and staff support
still occur, although their frequency and depth is not known, and, one
known. According to former Peace Corps Director Mark Schneider, the 2006 volunteer
survey found that between 16% and 28% of volunteers were dissatisfied with regard to
site selection, job assignment, and administrative support. One sign of volunteer
dissatisfaction — the attrition rate — remains arguably high at 30.5% (2002).
Security Issues. Among the concerns raised regarding Peace Corps security are
that crimes against volunteers have increased. The Dayton Daily News articles that ran
in the fall of 2003 assert that the Peace Corps is sending volunteers to places “far more
dangerous” than it admits publicly, does not warn volunteers about criminal incidents, and
does not supply adequate security training or supervision. It suggests that Peace Corps
staff ignore volunteer concerns and provide insufficient support to volunteers who have
experienced crime. The GAO has issued two reports since 2002 addressing security
issues. While noting improvements by Peace Corps in its more recent report, the GAO
has suggested that “some unevenness” in compliance with safety procedures mandated
by Peace Corps headquarters likely remains.1
Statistics kept by the Peace Corps, varying from year to year and by type of assault,
may be selectively interpreted. Both in absolute terms and when viewed in the context
of incidents per 1,000 volunteer years to account for the rise in number of volunteers in
1
Government Accountability Office, Peace Corps: Initiatives for Addressing Safety and Security
Challenges Hold Promise, but Progress Should be Assessed, GAO-02-818, July 2002, and Peace
Corps: Status of Initiatives to Improve Volunteer Safety and Security, GAO-04-600T, March 24,
2004.
CRS-6
this period, they show a large increase in the number of aggravated assaults from 57 in
1993 (9 per 1,000 volunteer years) to 102 in 1999 (16 per 1,000 volunteer years) and then
a leveling-off to 87 cases (14 per 1,000 volunteer years) in 2002. Reports of rape rose
from 10 incidents in 1993 (3.1 per 1,000 female volunteer years) to a peak of 20 (5.3 per
1,000 female volunteer years) in 1997. Rape events in absolute terms decreased by 40%
between 1997 and 2002 to 12 (3.2 per 1,000 female volunteer years). However the
numbers are viewed, the GAO points out that, since the number of events is small, there
may be some question as to whether the apparent trends are significant.
resignation rate — has improved in recent years, however, with
8.8% resigning in FY2006 versus 9.8% in FY2001.2
Security Issues. Because they live and work at the grassroots level in developing
countries, Peace Corps volunteers appear to many Americans to be especially vulnerable
to crime. Even before September 11, 2001, their safety and security had been a prime
2
Testimony of Mark Schneider to Senate Foreign Relations Committee, July 25, 2007; and Peace
Corps Congressional Budget Justification FY2008, p. 218.
CRS-6
concern of the Peace Corps. The threat of anti-American terrorism has increased those
concerns.
These fears were further raised in 2003 when the Dayton (Ohio) Daily News ran a
series of reports highlighting — many former volunteers say exaggerating — the dangers
potentially faced by volunteers, and suggested that the agency was failing in its obligation
to provide adequate security. As a result, congressional hearings were held and legislation
was approved by the House (H.R. 4060, June 2004) that sought to address some security
concerns.
Safety statistics kept by the Peace Corps, both in absolute terms and when viewed
in the context of incidents per 1,000 volunteer years to account for the rise in number of
volunteers in this period, vary from year to year. Aggravated assaults went from 57 in
1993 (9 per 1,000 volunteer years) to 102 in 1999 (16 per 1,000 volunteer years) and then
leveled-off to 87 cases (14 per 1,000 volunteer years) in 2002. There were 87 events in
2005 (12 per 1,000). Reports of rape rose from 10 incidents in 1993 (3.1 per 1,000
female volunteer years) to a peak of 20 (5.3 per 1,000 female volunteer years) in 1997,
and decreased to 12 in 2002 (3.2 per 1,000 female volunteer years). There were 16
reported rapes in 2005 (3.9 per 1,000). However the numbers are viewed, since the
number of events is small, there may be some question as to whether apparent trends are
significant. These statistics also reflect volunteer reporting rates, which likely produce
undercounting, and they do not demonstrate whether volunteers are any more or less
susceptible to assault than Americans living in New York or Des Moines. When surveyed
in 2003, 862006, 88% of volunteers reported that they felt usually or very safe where they lived.23
In general, the Peace Corps says that it gives the safety and security of its volunteers
the highest priority. It has been particularly concerned in recent years with threats of
terrorism, crime, and civil strife, and has responded by upgrading communications, testing
emergency action plans, and other security measures. Before establishing a new country
program, the Peace Corps considers a number of criteria, including the presence of a
stable government and effective law enforcement and the absence of anti-American acts
of terror in the operational area. Evacuations and closure of Evacuations and closure of
missions to insure the wellbeingwell-being of volunteers in cases of political instability and civil
unrest have constrained the
growth of the Peace Corps. In the past ten years, volunteers
have been evacuated from
at least 27 countries for these reasons, including three
attributed to the events of
September 11 — Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, and the Kyrgyz
Republic (they have since
returned to the latter two countries).
Under the Administration’s expansion proposal, the Peace Corps was expected to
enter Afghanistan and other Islamic countries where they do not currently serve. At this
time, 20% of all volunteers are serving in countries with Muslim populations of over
40%. In general, the Peace Corps has argued that the close interpersonal relationship
between volunteers and members of their host country community helps to make them
safe. However, despite the appeal of returned to the latter two countries). Despite the appeal of
using Peace Corps volunteers to convey U.S. culture
and values directly to the grassroots
of Islamic countries, many of these countries of U.S.
foreign policy interest might be
considered unsafe for Americans over the foreseeable
future. Conferees on the FY2002 foreign operations bill, while supporting the concept
of Peace Corps entry into Muslim countries, noted their key concern was volunteer safety.
Although the Administration announced in 2002 that the goal “will be to deploy ...
volunteers to Afghanistan as quickly as possible,” it also noted that all decisions regarding
new country entry “will be made in a manner consistent with the safety and security of
volunteers.” The Peace Corps has not yet entered Afghanistan.
2
Peace Corps 2006 Congressional Budget Justification, p. 223 future. Nonetheless, it should be
noted that 20% of all volunteers, at this time, are serving in 15 countries with Muslim
populations of over 40%. In general, the Peace Corps has argued that the close
interpersonal relationship between volunteers and members of their host country
community helps to make them safe.
3
Peace Corps, The Safety of the Volunteer 2005; and Peace Corps FY2008 Congressional Budget
Justification, p. 214.